Health & Medical researchers orientation And Evaluation Question

SOLUTION AT Academic Writers Bay

Phase 3-Evaluation of a research study (Due by WEEK 9) In phase 3 we will examine a research study titled: “Translating evidence to practice in the health professions: a randomized trial of Twitter vs Facebook” As future advance practice clinicians, how are you going to translate your evidence into the health field? Your assignment for phase three is to read the attached article and analyze it based on its merit by answering the following questions: 123456- Has the author formulated an appropriate research question based on the problem/issue? Is the research question clearly defined in terms of its cope and relevance? What is the author’s orientation towards the research problem/issue- is it critical analysis or interpretation based? How does this article contribute to your understanding of possible research modalities and methods? What are the strengths, limitation of the study? Which Essentials do you see represented in this article and why? This paper should follow APA rules for grammar and citations. It should be 5- 6 pages in length. Cohesiveness 12.5% Ties together information from all sources. Paper flows from one issue to the next with no headings. Author’s writing demonstrates an understanding of the relationship among material obtained from all sources Mostly, it ties together information from all sources. Paper flows with only some disjointedness. The author’s writing demonstrates an understanding of the relationship among material obtained from all sources. Spelling and Grammar 12.5% Minimal spelling Some spelling and/or grammar and or grammar mistakes mistakes. Sources 12.5% Over 5 current sources, of which at least 3 are peer-review journal articles or scholarly books. Sources include both general background sources and specialized sources. Special-interest sources and popular literature and acknowledged as such if they are cited. All web sites utilized are authoritative. 5 current sources, of which at least 2 are peer-review journal articles or scholarly books. All web sites utilized are authoritative. Sometimes ties together information from all sources. Paper does not flow. Disjointedness is apparent. The author’s writing does not demonstrate an understanding of the relationship among material obtained from all sources. Noticeable spelling and grammar mistakes. Fewer than 5 current sources or fewer than 2 of 5 are peerreviewed journal articles or scholarly books. All web sites utilized are credible. It does not tie together information. Paper does not flow and appears to be created from disparate issues. Headings are necessary to link concepts. Writing does not demonstrate understanding any relationship An unacceptable number of spelling and/or grammar mistakes Fewer than 5 current sources or fewer than 2 of 5 are peerreviewed journal articles or scholarly books. Not all web sites utilized are credible, and/or sources are not current. Citations 12.5% Cites all data obtained from other sources. APA citation style is used in both text and bibliography Cites most data obtained from other sources. APA citation style is used in both text and bibliography. Cites some data obtained from other sources. Citation style is inconsistent or incorrect. Does not cite sources. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, 24(2), 2017, 403–408 doi: 10.1093/jamia/ocw085 Advance Access Publication Date: 29 June 2016 Brief Communication Brief Communication Translating evidence to practice in the health professions: a randomized trial of Twitter vs Facebook Jacqueline Tunnecliff,1 John Weiner,2 James E Gaida,3 Jennifer L Keating,1 Prue Morgan,1 Dragan Ilic,2 Lyn Clearihan,4 David Davies,5 Sivalal Sadasivan,6 Patitapaban Mohanty,7 Shankar Ganesh,7 John Reynolds,2 and Stephen Maloney1 1 Department of Physiotherapy, Monash University, Frankston, Australia, 2Department of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia, 3Discipline of Physiotherapy and University of Canberra Research Institute for Sport and Exercise (UCRISE), University of Canberra, Canberra, Australia, 4School of Primary Health, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia, 5Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, United Kingdom, 6JC School of Medicine & Health Sciences, Monash University Malaysia and 7Swami Vivekanand National Institute of Rehabilitation Training and Research, Odisha, India Correspondence to Associate Professor Stephen Maloney, Department of Physiotherapy, Monash University, PO Box 527, Frankston, 3199, Victoria, Australia; [email protected] Received 7 October 2015; Revised 21 April 2016; Accepted 30 April 2016 ABSTRACT Objective: Our objective was to compare the change in research informed knowledge of health professionals and their intended practice following exposure to research information delivered by either Twitter or Facebook. Methods: This open label comparative design study randomized health professional clinicians to receive “practice points” on tendinopathy management via Twitter or Facebook. Evaluated outcomes included knowledge change and self-reported changes to clinical practice. Results: Four hundred and ninety-four participants were randomized to 1 of 2 groups and 317 responders analyzed. Both groups demonstrated improvements in knowledge and reported changes to clinical practice. There was no statistical difference between groups for the outcomes of knowledge change (P ¼ .728), changes to clinical practice (P ¼ .11) or the increased use of research information (P ¼ .89). Practice points were shared more by the Twitter group (P

CLICK HERE TO GET A PROFESSIONAL WRITER TO WORK ON THIS PAPER AND OTHER SIMILAR PAPERS

CLICK THE BUTTON TO MAKE YOUR ORDER

error: Content is protected !!