Appraising suitable quantitative categories. Punctuation, spelling, and
Appraising research articles is anessential skill that healthcare professionals need to apply to apply the mostrecent and best practice principles. In this paper, I will be appraising thecredibility and integrity for the Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACE) study thatis investigating the potential relationship between causal factors of death inadulthood with childhood abuse and household dysfunctions. CredibilitySigns of credibility were notedthroughout this article. When assessing the authors of the article, they appearto be aptly educated in the medical profession; their credentials/qualificationsand familiar departments they work in are trustworthy for this research topic.
Each of these authors contributed to additional publications, demonstratingexperience. This article is a reputable source, published by a well-knownmedical journal, the American Journal of Preventative Medicine, as apeer-reviewed/academic journal. A concern of credibility amongst this article isthe dated 1998 publication year; a more recent publication article could be morereliable. Scholarliness is addressed in the article,following typical structure of quantitative studies. The article is simple tofollow through clear organization and frequent use of headings that address suitablequantitative categories.
Punctuation, spelling, and grammar were performedcautiously with no errors observed. The authors did make a mistake in the article,as they stated 8,056 members remained in the study after the exclusions wereconcluded then preceded to say 8,506 in the following paragraph. Writers remainedconsistent using appropriate terminology that medical professionals and thegeneral public can understand.
Writers provided a substantial list of 68references, increasing credibility of this article. This article was notassigned a “doi” number; this may be due to being an older article? Theresearch problem is appropriate/significant for its targeted population; it focuseslargely on children and adult populations at risk and particularly healthcareproviders HCP’s. The research topic was promptly identifiable through the titleof the article; the research question was found later in the article. Thewriters intrigued the readers and portrayed the value to their article bydescribing how their study differs from previously published ones. This articleincreases awareness/recognition towards prevention strategies for HCP’s toconsider within their practice; HCP’s can improve the prevalence’s of thesepreventable health issues through early identification of householddysfunctions and childhood abuse. Ethical conduct was followed in the researchprocess by utilizing four different reliable institutions that reviewed andapproved the ACE study. The researchers however, did not address/includeethical principles that they would have used to protect the participantsjustly. IntegrityMethodTheresearch design used was a descriptive non-experimental quantitative design;this approach was appropriate given the sensitivity of the issue, as it wouldbe unethical to expose children to abuse or to instigate members into householddysfunctions; however, this results in a disadvantage due to the researchers’inability to identify with confidence, the definitive causal relationships.
Theheadings integrated throughout the article appear to be correct following thenecessary categories amongst a quantitative design. The dependent variable includesthe risk behavior, health status and disease and the independent variable isthe specific adverse childhood experiences. SampleAn asset of the study was its integritywith its large respondent sample size of 9,508; despite exclusions fromincomplete questionnaires, the size remained large with 8,056.
Sampling methodschosen for this study appear to be convenience and random sampling. Conveniencesampling was used as the researchers selected the nation’s largest medicalcenter for the study; although, it may have been more beneficial if theytargeted more than one clinic/population. Random sampling occurred as the clinic’spopulation has a very broad representation of the U.S population with a varietyof ages, experiences/lifestyles, and reasons for attending.
External validitywas achieved as their large sample size and appropriate sampling methodspromotes generalizability. A type II error was avoided, as the results of thestudy were statistically significant with the absence of the power calculation.Data Collection Thedata collection process was initiated by using standardized questionnaireswithin the clinic.
Researchers extracted medical assessments from theparticipants who were eligible for the study and analyzed particular medicalresults/discoveries. Postal questionnaires were constructed from publishedsurveys to address particular childhood exposures and abuses. Each questionnaireincluded a variety of categories, broadening the selection for exposures/experiencesfor the participants. Face-to-face interviews often have increased responserates in comparison to mailed questionnaires, however this study had a high responserate, avoiding biases inherent in low rates. Utilizing questionnaires seemsappropriate/logical for their quantitative design; mailed questionnaires areless costly and more time effective for all parties and maintains potentialanonymity. The authors ensured safeguards were in place to help preserveaccuracy/integrity by excluding respondents who lacked necessaryinformation/reports from own experiences or incomplete responses. Data AnalysisTableswere distributed throughout the paper, simplifying the data analysis. Safeguardswere used to ensure accuracy/integrity through utilizing the Statistical AnalysisSystem; logistic regression analysis was applied for possible perplexingeffects, and a sensitivity analysis was done to determine whether the exclusionsinfluenced the results.
In Table 4, the confidence interval was 95%, making thealpha-value 0.05. Based on the stated p-value <0.05, proving to bestatistically significant, we can assume the researchers did not reject thenull hypothesis; therefore, avoiding a type I error. MeaningfulCoherence and SincerityInternal and external coherence andsincerity were achieved through answering the research question.
Authorsacknowledged they had potential limitations and may have limited the inferencesregarding causations. Comparisons were made with national surveys discovered asimilar estimate; this was transparent when discussing their underestimates potentiallycausing downward biases and alterations in data. The authors indicated thatthey would be using baseline data, allowing the researchers to place theresearch in a previously known context. The authors were clear with theymanaged challenges and methodological issues throughout the research processand exclusions made. ConclusionIn this paper, I appraised the ACE study’scredibility/integrity by investigating the potential relationship betweencausal factors of death in adulthood with childhood abuse and householddysfunctions.
The findings/results to the research question makes the deductionthat there is a strong causal relationship. In conclusion, the methods usedthroughout the study continues to leave the reader feeling confident in thestudy’s findings and has the ability to recognize when this research problemarises with their patients/clients.