Nt1330 Unit 3 Assignment 1 Search Strategy

What are your past experiences of being a staff member: I've been Helper, Mod , Admin and even Owner on different servers in the timeline of 3 years. And mostly on Faction servers. Not on hcf yet, but you need to start somewhere :D

Analyze and critically appraise evidence-based literature to support the solution to the identified problem. A minimum of (5) articles must be identified. This may include guidelines from the National Guideline Clearinghouse, Joanna Briggs Institute, or a review from the Cochrane Database of Systematic Review.

The purpose of a systematic review is to attempt to find, evaluate and synthesize high quality research relevant to the research question. A systematic review uses carefully developed data collection and sampling procedures that are put in place in advance as a protocol. (Polit, 2012). A systematic review must contain the following: a clear inclusion and exclusion criteria, an explicit search strategy, systematic coding and analysis of included studies, and a meta-analysis if possible. (Hemingway & Brereton, 2009). Systematic reviews are conducted by nurse researchers to avoid reaching incorrect or misleading conclusions that

Please list the references and clinical resources that you use in your review of this document. These references should support any clinical or extensive revisions or additions that you make. Aside from known common best practices, references are required. We reserve the right to request additional references. References and resources used:

It synthesizes the results of various primary studies by using strategies that reduces biases and random errors. These reviews follow a strict scientific design and provide consistent estimates about the effects of interventions, therefore, conclusions are defensible. Systematic reviews shows where knowledge is lacking and can be used to guide future research. These reviews are usually carried out in the areas of clinical tests such as diagnostic, screening and prognostic; public health interventions; economic evaluations; adverse effects and how and why interventions work. Cochrane reviews are systematic reviews undertaken by Cochrane Collaboration members, aims to help people to make well-informed decisions about healthcare by preparing, maintaining, and promoting the accessibility of systematic reviews of the effects of healthcare

The study was a systematic review of scientific papers selected by a search of the SciELO, Cochrane, MEDLINE, and LILACS-BIREME databases. Among the 2169 articles found, 12 studies proved relevant to the issue and presented an evidence strength rating of B. No publications rated evidence strength A. Seven of the studies analyzed were prospective cohorts and 5 were cross-sectional studies.

There are some limitations to this literature review. One limitation is some of these studies may be outdated being that they are from the 1990s (i.e: Dulit et. al, 1990; Miller et. al, 1993; and Dougherty et. al, 1999). Another limitation is some of the studies were not randomized samples (i.e: Miller et. al, 1993 and Tragesser et. al, 2013). If samples are not random this could mean the results are bias.

Systematic reviews allow researchers to to determine the best research evidence to address a health care situation. In disease management and casemanagement specialities, the clincial guidelines for managing chronic health conditions are developed from Systemic reviews ( Groves, et al., 2013). Meta- analysis involves the use of results from previous studies; it involves quasi-experimental and experimental studies and stastical analysis are applied to provide the most desired evidence for an intervention, whiles Meta synthesis uses qualitative studies which main focus is interpretation of a specific study for use as evidenced research (Groves, et al., 2013). Lasty, mixed methods systematic review involves the utilization of independent studies which are conducted through narrative and invloves both quantitative and qualitative methods(Groves, et al.,

The topic in this systematic review is clearly defined in the abstract & the introduction. Yes, the search for studies and other evidence was comprehensive and unbiased as it was able to be. Strict criteria were followed as described in Figure 1.

As a single descriptive study, this research study stands at the lower end of the continuum regarding strength of research evidence, however, this does not deem the findings useless. Although, the findings observed may not be immediately applied to clinical procedures and interventions it still brings light to a phenomenon within clinical practice. According to Grove et al. (2015) “descriptive studies often provide initial knowledge, which serves as a basis for generating quasi-experimental and outcomes studies” (p. 25). With the new insight gained through the study, future studies could be done to see if this finding could be manipulated and replicated to produce stronger

Both clinicians who are enquiring clinical questions and researchers who are conducting in-depth searches for systematic reviews come across a few

Please list the references and clinical resources that you use in your review of this document. These references should support any clinical or extensive revisions or additions that you make. If your edits are based on your own clinical experience or opinion, please indicate this. References and resources used:

Question one of Module two asks us to look at what type of study a therapist should use when initially looking to answer a clinical question. The therapist should first look to the highest level of evidence, which is a systematic review of randomized controlled trials. Systematic reviews look at the research of several studies in order to draw a conclusion. A systematic review of randomized controlled trials is the highest level of evidence, because it is effective in reducing the potential bias and random errors of an individual study. While the advantages of a systematic review may be to reduce bias and random error, there are also a few disadvantages to this particular practice. For instance, the process of creating a systematic review is

In achieving the best results for this literature review the CASP tools used were the qualitative check list and the systematic review list because the use of the Cochrane systematic review can make sense of a quantitative review when looking for literature. This tool is best used when looking at intervention and producing results in health-based human health care and evidence-based care in health care resources (Cochrane online, 2016). The researcher used other terms like Boolean to refer to a system that allows searching using the words AND, NOT and OR and in so doing managed to come up with the articles that inform this study.

Publication Bias was presented using the funnel plot of precision by log odds ratio. All meta-analysis were conducted using Comprehensive Meta-Analysis (CMA) is a software package Version 2.