EIP Midterm

exact to necessary level of detail; could author be more specific? are their enough details?

participants are grouped by characteristics (age, gender, time w dx)

complies results from a quantitative and qualitative data collection

uses rich description of themes/subthemes to classify a phenomenon of interest, explain essence of topic through POV

physiognomy: perceiving info through fascial expressions

database search checked reference lists, independent assessment, risk of bias assessment- report independently

regarding own needs and focuses as the center of all things

entails the interrelationships and synthesis of information on which judgment is made utilizing reflection of self-aware

synonymous with scientific method- research believed truth of knowledge was solely determined by empirical science

focused on qualitative study, no numeric data, two independent research, more rigor studies, results show 6 main themes

containing complexities and multiple interrelationships; what factors make this difficult? what are some difficulties?

bias can be present, subjects are pre-selected and therefore internal threat can be evident

qualitative data collection occurs either before or after quantitative data collection

looking at the viewpoint of a social group, believe is more accurate than yours, do not consider alternative perspective

commonly underpins qualitative research design

randomized controlled trial, quasi-experimental study, case series (single intervention), case study (single subject)

commonly uses qualitative and mixed methods research

seeks to create knowledge beyond imposed structural laws - understand politics and social oppression

single subject design, explain in great detail, in-depth understanding of topic, uses participants quotes from interview

quantitative follows: P: population I: intervention of interest C: comparison group/control O: outcome measured

a search tool

database that is more comprehensive and contains scholarly articles from many disciplines

procedures grounded theory, ethnography, phenomenology, narrative research, and even case studies

quantitative research: randomized control, cross-over, pre-test/post-test

group/treatment being manipulated, directly influence by researcher ex) cognitive behavioral therapy

provides the highest internal validity due to randomizations, little bias or confounding

antecedents that convey between groups, naturally occurring in each groups

More evidence comes more knowledge

commonly uses quantitative research design

comparison between groups is lost at this level; outcomes are particular to a single group

database that indexes over 28 million articles from biomedical literature

qualitative follows PEO format: P: population, E: exposure, event, experience, O: outcome of experience

complies testimonies, extract theories from experiences, explain why and how things happen, align w constructivist

skewness is when the curve is in the middle

interpretivism is believing that knowledge is inclusive of making-meaning: rather than solely scientific method

database that conveys purely health sciences and medical topics

contaminants on the independent variable

process begins w/ clinical Q, appraisal evidence, app of evidence considering client wishes/needs, and evaluation

studies large groups with sim lang, explore/describe patterns of behavior, not common in rehabilitation research

author using perspective, book report based on literature not a lot of rigor, usually done by experts, room for biases

selected from a localized group that is easily acceptable

triangulation is used to converse common themes from various sources of data

subjects are randomized into groups, best design to determine causal effects of intervention

instrumentation is how we measure change or response to an intevention

quantitative is intervention studies for the most part

confidence intervals are typically reported at 90-95%

assigned to groups without knowledge of investigators, eliminates bias, key feature of true experiment

outcome measured, pre-selected to monitor the effects of an intervention

WISE Approach: W-wonder, I-investigate, S-speculate, E-evaluate

rigorous study design, submit protocol before to allow for repeat process, identify all possible papers

randomization is lost, little bias is present bc the subjects are identified prior to outcome

case series (group), case study (single subject)

statistical power analysis= having enough participants that results are accurate and not due to randomness/chance/error

focus on important, not trivial, is this the most important problem to consider? which facts are most important?

process of collaborating w patient whether or not info gained applies to the problem or need

qualitative research, looks at theory and experience - not numbers

a nature of study = longitudinal, prospective, retrospective, predictive

commonly underpins mixed-methods research

investigators purposefully select individuals with certain conditions

you dont need to review results and reported statistics of a study because the author's interpretation is always correct

justifiable, not self-serving or one-sided; am i sympathetically representing the viewpoints of others?

quantitative research: descriptive, casual-comparative, cross-sectional, correlational, quasi-experiment

related to the matter at hand, how does it relate to the problem? how does it help us with the issue?

bias can be personal or social

qualitative tends to be close-ended data; quantitative tends to be open-ended data

knowledge is derived from analysis of actions, situations and consequences rather than the sole examination of condition

study will need X # participants to correctly REJECT their NULL hypothesis

interrelationships among basic elements, the pieces fit together

free from errors or distortions, article is true

information that makes a conclusion of a set of facts more apparent

process of determining the quality and usefulness of research found in the literature

research involves true experiments, less rigorous designs - quasi experiments and applied behavior analysis

most aspects of systematic review plus pooled differences combining results - pooled weighted mean difference

critical appraisal is a skill and is developed with practice

encompassing multiple viewpoints; do we need to look at this from a different perspective?

pool combine results, taking results of multiple studies and combine to get more power and stronger evidence

individual patient, few statistics, usually novel care or intervention, may include non-systematic literature review

knowledge is more complex than that which can simply be reduced by facts

single, relatively homogenous group of patients, often with a single intervention tracked over time

formulation of a clear answerable question derived from a patient/clients problem or need

few details, not rigorous, non-systematic, no quality or bias assessment, often no statistical results reported

knowledge is developed and an ongoing need to develop more knowledge, skills and associated professional reasoning

EIP is approach to decision-making that uses best evidence available in conjunction with client choices to decide option

article is understanding and meaning can be grasped

a collection of ideas and facts about a topic

two or more intervention groups, not randomized into groups, subject to confounding

develops themes, uses reflection and experience to develop theory, generally few or no statistical results-ex) interview

lowest level of evidence, common for opinion to be held in high regard, verification is often lacking

process by which the outcome of the intervention is evaluated and skill of the practitioner also evaluated

process of searching for best available research to help answer the clinical question

combination into a single research study

if you do the same search in two different databases, you will get unique results in each

the parts make sense together, no contraindications, does the first paragraph fit with the last?