DISCUSSION: NURS8201 WEEK 11 USING QUALITATIVE AND QUANTITATIVE METHODS TO INFORM EVIDENCE-BASED PRACTICE

DISCUSSION: NURS8201 WEEK 11 USING QUALITATIVE AND QUANTITATIVE METHODS TO INFORM EVIDENCE-BASED PRACTICE

DISCUSSION: NURS8201 WEEK 11 USING QUALITATIVE AND QUANTITATIVE METHODS TO INFORM EVIDENCE-BASED PRACTICE

WEEK 11 DISCUSSION: USING QUALITATIVE AND QUANTITATIVE METHODS TO INFORM EVIDENCE-BASED PRACTICE

Chronic pain affects millions of Americans. Diagnosing, treating, and understanding chronic pain creates many challenges for healthcare. Is the challenge on how to properly diagnose and manage a patient’s pain? Or is the challenge on whether or not to prescribe pain medications given the concerns with addiction as a result of the opioid epidemic?
Consider the questions posed above. How might the use of qualitative and quantitative methods serve to provide answers for researchers regarding the challenges associated with chronic pain? What can qualitative data provide that quantitative data cannot, and vice versa? How might a mixed methods approach fill in the gaps to provide a clearer understanding of the problem and potential solutions?
For this Discussion, reflect on an issue or problem in healthcare that may benefit from a mixed methods approach. Think about the differences between qualitative and quantitative research methods and designs, as well as how these two methods might work well together. Consider how a mixed methods approach supports evidence-based practice.

ORDER A CUSTOMIZED, PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE

Good News For Our New customers. We can write this assignment for you and pay after Delivery. Our Top -rated medical writers will comprehensively review instructions , synthesis external evidence sources(Scholarly) and customize a quality assignment for you. We will also attach a copy of plagiarism report alongside and AI report. Feel free to chat Us

RESOURCES
Be sure to review the Learning Resources before completing this activity.
Click the weekly resources link to access the resources.
WEEKLY RESOURCES
TO PREPARE:
• Review the Learning Resources for this week and consider the differences between qualitative and quantitative research designs and methods.
• Consider an example of a topic or issue in nursing in which both qualitative and quantitative research approaches might be necessary,
• Reflect on how a mixed methods approach lends itself to evidence-based practice.
BY DAY 3 OF WEEK 11
Post an explanation of when it might be most useful to use both qualitative and quantitative approaches or mixed methods to support a research design. Be specific and provide examples. Then, explain whether a combination of qualitative and quantitative approaches are used in systematic reviews to support evidence-based practice. Be specific.
BY DAY 6 OF WEEK 11
Read a selection of your colleagues’ responses and respond to at least two of your colleagues on two different days in one or more of the following ways:
• Ask a probing question, substantiated with additional background information, evidence, or research.
• Share an insight from having read your colleagues’ postings, synthesizing the information to provide new perspectives.
• Offer and support an alternative perspective using readings from the classroom or from your own research in the Walden Library.
• Validate an idea with your own experience and additional research.
• Suggest an alternative perspective based on additional evidence drawn from readings or after synthesizing multiple postings.
• Expand on your colleagues’ postings by providing additional insights or contrasting perspectives based on readings and evidence.
Reply
Mark post as read

WEEK 11: LEARNING RESOURCES
Required Readings
• Gray, J. R., & Grove, S. K. (2020). Burns and Grove’s the practice of nursing research: Appraisal, synthesis, and generation of evidence (9th ed.). Elsevier.
o Chapter 14, “Mixed Methods Research” (pp. 386–409)
o Chapter 19, “Evidence Synthesis and Strategies for Implementing Evidence-Based Practice” (pp. 551–606)
• Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. (2015). Methods guide for effectiveness and comparative effectiveness reviews.Links to an external site. https://effectivehealthcare.ahrq.gov/products/cer-methods-guide/overview/
• Dreyfoos, N. (2020). Evaluating the impact of a depression care management program.Links to an external site. https://scholarworks.seattleu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1007&context=dnp-projects
• Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., Shamseer, L., Tetzlaff, J. M., Akl, E. A., Brennan, S. E., Chou, R., Glanville, J., Grimshaw, J. M., Hróbjartsson, A., Lalu, M. M., Li, T., Loder, E. W., Mayo-Wilson, E., McDonald, S., … & Moher, D. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviewsLinks to an external site.. Systematic Reviews, 10(89), 1–11. doi:10.1186/s13643-021-01626-4
• Siddaway, A. P., Wood, A. M., & Hedges, L. V. (2019). How to do a systematic review: A best practice guide for conducting and reporting narrative reviews, meta-analyses, and meta-synthesesLinks to an external site.. Annual Review of Psychology,Links to an external site. 70, 747–770. doi:10.1146/annurev-psych-010418-102803

ORDER A CUSTOMIZED, PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE

NURS 8201 Week 11 Discussion

The mixed-method research design includes quantitative and qualitative data in the same study. Combining quantitative and qualitative research methods allows the researchers to collect more primary and secondary data for comparison. Besides, the mixed method design increases the range of data, enabling the researcher to discuss a problem in one or two ways. Wasti et al. (2022) explain that the overall aim of the mixed-methods research design is to offer a better and deeper understanding by offering a fuller picture that can improve the description and understanding of the phenomena. The mixed-methods design helps to understand the whole picture, from meanings obtained from interviews or observation to the prevalence of traits in a population obtained from surveys, which add depth and breadth to the study.

 The Mixed-method research design can be employed in nursing and healthcare research owing to the increasing uncertainty and complexity of healthcare delivery. Since it uses quantitative and qualitative data in one study, it can provide stronger inference than using either approach alone (Kajamaa et al., 2020). For instance, a study using a survey questionnaire with a limited number of structured questions can benefit from incorporating qualitative methods like interviews to capture other unexpected facets of the research topic that may be relevant to the problem and help interpret quantitative data.

Systematic reviews normally use a single type of data, either qualitative or quantitative. Nonetheless, some systematic reviews include mixed methods studies to combine data types or study types. Sataloff et al. (2021) explain that mixed method studies are included in systematic reviews when articles that have used quantitative or qualitative data provide a narrow perspective of the topic of study. For instance, including qualitative studies with quantitative ones provides a holistic picture of the knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors of clinicians, patients, or researchers about an intervention.

References

Kajamaa, A., Mattick, K., & de la Croix, A. (2020). How to … do mixed-methods research. The Clinical Teacher, 17(3), 267–271. https://doi.org/10.1111/tct.13145

Sataloff, R. T., Bush, M. L., Chandra, R., Chepeha, D., Rotenberg, B., Fisher, E. W., Goldenberg, D., Hanna, E. Y., Kerschner, J. E., Kraus, D. H., Krouse, J. H., Li, D., Link, M., Lustig, L. R., Selesnick, S. H., Sindwani, R., Smith, R. J., Tysome, J., Weber, P. C., & Welling, D. B. (2021). Systematic and Other Reviews: Criteria and Complexities. Journal of Neurological Surgery. Part B, Skull base, 82(3), 273–276. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0041-1729564

Wasti, S. P., Simkhada, P., van Teijlingen, E. R., Sathian, B., & Banerjee, I. (2022). The Growing Importance of Mixed-Methods Research in Health. Nepal Journal of Epidemiology, 12(1), 1175–1178. https://doi.org/10.3126/nje.v12i1.43633