ESSAY: Nursing Evidence-Based Practice

Nursing -Public Health Evidence-Based Practice

When reviewing the literature and different types of evidence, there are often gaps in the findings. Are such gaps a help or a hindrance when wanting to create a change?

What is the difference between statistically significant evidence and clinically significant evidence? How would each of these findings be used to advance an evidenced-based project?

Discussion questions

ANSWER

Nursing Evidence-Based Practice

Developments of a project are always documented to keep track of the process, expenditure, and future references. The documented literature is always useful during the evaluation of the project, when another firm wants to put the same technique into practice and when changes need to be made to ensure increased efficiency. Analysis of the literature provides the reader with the present field state through the demonstration work that has been performed to the current period (Kabisch et al., 2016). It also allows the reader to create questions and formulate specific interests that can be useful in related research.

Benefits of Research Gaps in Creating Change

Going through literature about specific research findings do not only target the acquisition of ideas to use in a related project, but it also creates a platform to identify research gaps. Research gaps include questions that were not answered, or their coverage was shallow in the research.  They can also include an improper understanding of how perfect a specific instrument can function in certain situations. Research gaps automatically hinder the effectiveness of a project or lead to the general failure of the whole process. Identification of the gaps in research findings is among the essential steps to making improvements in the current projects. They help in the understanding of the main reasons why the project does give the expected outcomes, which creates an opportunity for remedy (Metcalf & Crawford, 2016).  The moment a gap is identified, techniques are thought of that can be useful in addressing the project for better results. Therefore, gaps in fi….

Difference Between Statistically Significant Evidence and Clinically Significant Evidence

Statistically, significant evidence usually involves findings that are not attributed to chance. Statistical significance is the likelihood a relationship between variables is caused by something specific.  It is applied in accepting or rejecting the null hypothesis which that states lack of any form of relationship between measured variables. A set of data is termed statistically significant when it is large enough to represent the sample population under study (Jevsevar, Donnelly, Brown & Cummins, 2015). Statistical significance creates room for researchers to make statistical inferences from the results of the study about the correct value of the people.  Results from the statistical …

On the other hand, clinical significance explains the effectiveness of an intervention. It shows the change a patient shows from the period before to the time after treatment. Analysis of both statistical and clinical significance is essential when making conclusions about research findings. Clinical significance measures the relationship magnitude between the outcome variable and the independent variable (Bogenschutz et al., 2015). Some of the indicators of clinical significance are correlation coefficients, mea…

Statistically significant findings with inadequate levels of clinical significance have meager benefits to healthcare.  Also, clinically significant evidence that does not have statistical significance has its observed size at zero and therefore is a function of chance.  Statistical significance allows an individual to make inferences about the findings of the study but does not enable one to make correct recommendations about the clinical benefits of the outcomes (Jeffery, Hickey, Hider & See, 2016). Researchers in the healthcare field are,…

References

Bogenschutz, M. P., Forcehimes, A. A., Pommy, J. A., Wilcox, C. E., Barbosa, P. C. R., & Strassman, R. J. (2015). Psilocybin-assisted treatment for alcohol dependence: a proof-of-concept study. Journal of psychopharmacology, 29(3), 289-299.

Jeffery, M., Hickey, B. E., Hider, P. N., & See, A. M. (2016). Follow‐up strategies for patients treated for non‐metastatic colorectal cancer. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, (11).

Jevsevar, D., Donnelly, P., Brown, G. A., & Cummins, D. S. (2015). Viscosupplementation for osteoarthritis of the knee: A systematic review of the evidence. JBJS, 97(24), 2047-2060.

Kabisch, N., Frantzeskaki, N., Pauleit, S., Naumann, S., Davis, M., Artmann, M., … & Zaunberger, K. (2016). Nature-based solutions to climate change mitigation and adaptation in urban areas: Perspectives on indicators, knowledge gaps, barriers, and opportunities for action. Ecology and Society, 21(2).

Metcalf, J., & Crawford, K. (2016). Where are human subjects in big data research? The emerging ethics divide. Big Data & Society, 3(1), 2053951716650211.