HLT 362V Week 5 Article Analysis and Evaluation of Research Ethics Paper
Search the GCU Library and find one new health care article that uses quantitative research. Do not use an article from a previous assignment, or that appears in the topic Resources or textbook.
Complete an article analysis and ethics evaluation of the research using the “Article Analysis and Evaluation of Research Ethics” template. See Chapter 5 of your textbook as needed, for assistance.
While APA style is not required for the body of this assignment, solid academic writing is expected, and documentation of sources should be presented using APA formatting guidelines, which can be found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center.
This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.
You are required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite. A link to the LopesWrite technical support articles is located in Class Resources if you need assistance.
| American Indian / Alaska Native (includes Hispanic) | Asian / Pacific Islander (includes Hispanic) | Black (includes Hispanic) | |
| Year of Diagnosis | Rate per 100,000 | Rate per 100,000 | Rate per 100,000 |
| 2000 | 45.7 | 41.8 | 77.8 |
| 2001 | 47.9 | 41 | 79 |
| 2002 | 44.6 | 40.4 | 75.8 |
| 2003 | 50 | 40.9 | 77.3 |
| 2004 | 51.7 | 40.5 | 75.1 |
| 2005 | 48.7 | 40.2 | 73.7 |
| 2006 | 46.4 | 39.8 | 73.4 |
| 2007 | 43.1 | 38.8 | 71.2 |
| 2008 | 45 | 38.5 | 70.8 |
| 2009 | 40.1 | 39 | 71.6 |
| 2010 | 42.4 | 37 | 67.8 |
| 2011 | 39.6 | 36.6 | 64.1 |
| 2012 | 36.6 | 36.7 | 64.3 |
| 2013 | 39.9 | 36.6 | 60.5 |
| 2014 | 32 | 34 | 61.3 |
| 2015 | 38.7 | 34.4 | 57.4 |
| Hispanic (any race) | White (includes Hispanic) | |
| Rate per 100,000 | Rate per 100,000 | |
| 34.2 | 68.8 | |
| 34.1 | 68.7 | |
| 34.1 | 68 | |
| 34.5 | 67.1 | |
| 35 | 65.8 | |
| 33.8 | 65.9 | |
| 32 | 65.8 | |
| 32.7 | 65.2 | |
| 32.2 | 63.9 | |
| 31.8 | 63.1 | |
| 30.3 | 60.4 | |
| 29.4 | 58.5 | |
| 28.2 | 57.5 | |
| 28.8 | 56.3 | |
| 26.8 | 55.4 | |
| 26 | 53.2 |
HLT 362V Week 5 Article Analysis and Evaluation of Research Ethics Paper Example
Article Analysis and Evaluation of Research Ethics
| Article Citation and Permalink | Zheng, F., Liu, S., Liu, Y., & Deng, L. (2019). Effects of an outpatient diabetes self-management education on patients with type 2 diabetes in China: a randomized controlled trial. Journal Of Diabetes Research, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/1073131 |
| Point | Description |
| Broad Topic Area/Title | Determining the effects of diabetes self-management education (DSME) with type 2 diabetes |
| Problem Statement | The study examines diabetes self-management education and its effectiveness in the management of type 2 diabetes. |
| Purpose Statement | The purpose of the study is to assess the effectiveness of an uncomplicated outpatient diabetes self-management education program. |
| Research Questions | The research seeks to answer the question, “In diabetes type 2 patients, is diabetes self-management education more effective than routine education?” |
| Define Hypothesis | The hypothesis is “Diabetes self-management education and diabetes self-management level in patients with type 2 diabetes.” |
| Identify Dependent and Independent Variables and the Type of Data for the Variables | Independent variable: DSME General education General education plus DSME Dependent variable: Diabetic patient outcomes SDSCA-Summary of Diabetes Self-Care Activities PAIDs (Problem Areas In Diabetes) FBG- fasting blood sugar PGG-postprandial two-hour blood glucose, and HbA1c tests |
| Population of Interest for Study | The population of interest for this study was type 2 diabetes patients from the Cardiovascular Rehabilitation Clinic, Endocrinology Clinic, and Geriatrics Clinic at Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, between 2015 and 2017 |
| Sample | The sample size was n=30, which was randomized into two groups in a ratio of 1:1; hence, the intervention group was n=30, and the control group was n=30 |
| Sampling Method | The participants were randomly selected and randomly assigned to two groups. |
| Identify Data Collection | SDSCA and PAIDs data were collected using self-administered questionnaires with 7-point Likert scales. FBG, PBG, and HbA1c test results were collected from patients’ cubital veins and entered into the RCT report files. |
| Summarize Data Collection Approach | The study used a quantitative data collection approach, including a self-administered questionnaire and observational/naturistic data collection from patients. |
| Discuss Data Analysis | The study used SPSS statistical software, version 17.0, and reported the mean and standard deviation to describe the data. The chi-square test was used to evaluate the differences between the data groups. The tests of this study were assessed and compared with data collected at the beginning of the study. |
| Summarize Results of the Study | The results show that the SDSCA, PAID, FBG, PBG, and HbA1c tests changed significantly compared to the results prior to the implementation of this study. The results show that short-term diabetes self-management education can effectively improve self-management, psychological well-being, and glycemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes. |
| Summary of Assumptions and Limitations | The study assumed that patients recruited would remain in the study until its completion. There are various limitations of this study, especially related to the sample. The patients were limited to a particular location and environmental resources (patients in an outpatient clinic are from within a locality), and there were limited statistical tests. In addition, the sample was small, making generalization of the data difficult. |
Ethical Considerations
Ethical considerations in research are vital to ensure that the study results are applicable to the general population. Overall, conflicts of interest, such as funding, should be declared by the study’s authors. Grady (2018) notes that randomized controlled trials are the most commonly used type of study in clinical interventions, and their ethical considerations are thus vast. There are various ethical considerations in sampling.
Participation and informed consent with full disclosure could be ethical considerations in this study. The study participants should not be affected by the study, such as by failing to provide known effective interventions or harming patients (Grady, 2018). The study used single-blinding, and there was a need to disclose enough information for the study and conceal some information for its effective implementation.
Ethical considerations in data collection and analysis entail understanding the patients and the appropriateness of the methods used for collecting and analyzing the identified variables. The data collection methods should also coincide with the objectives/aims of the study. For example, in this study, the researchers collected data such as HbA1c tests directly from the patients and used a self-administered questionnaire for PAIDs.
The researchers also used chi-square to test the inter-group differences. These data collection and analysis methods are pertinent to the study objectives and hypothesis and assist in testing them. In addition, the data collection methods should retain scientific rigor and be reliable; therefore, they were subject to reliability and validity testing before implementation. The Cronbach’s alpha test results for the questionnaires’ internal consistency, assessing their reliability, are included in the study (Zheng et al., 2019).
Zabor et al. (2020) note that ethical considerations in publishing results include selecting appropriate journals, considering the research consumers, and considering the journal’s reputation. The results must also be evaluated and peer-reviewed before publication (Masic et al., 2014). Researchers should ensure the study fulfills all ethical requirements through an internal review by an internal review board. Ethical considerations also ensure the protection of the participants.
References
Grady, C. (2018). Ethical principles in clinical research. In Principles and practice of clinical research (pp. 19–31). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-849905-4.00002-2
Masic, I., Hodzic, A., & Mulic, S. (2014). Ethics in medical research and publication. International Journal Of Preventive Medicine, 5(9), 1073. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4192767/
Zabor, E. C., Kaizer, A. M., & Hobbs, B. P. (2020). Randomized controlled trials. Chest, 158(1), S79-S87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chest.2020.03.013
Zheng, F., Liu, S., Liu, Y., & Deng, L. (2019). Effects of an outpatient diabetes self-management education on patients with type 2 diabetes in China: a randomized controlled trial. Journal Of Diabetes Research, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/1073131
