DNP 820 Compare statistical and clinical significance

Grand Canyon University DNP 820 Compare statistical and clinical significance-Step-By-Step Guide

This guide will demonstrate how to complete the Grand Canyon University DNP 820 Compare statistical and clinical significance assignment based on general principles of academic writing. Here, we will show you the A, B, Cs of completing an academic paper, irrespective of the instructions. After guiding you through what to do, the guide will leave one or two sample essays at the end to highlight the various sections discussed below.

How to Research and Prepare for DNP 820 Compare statistical and clinical significance                           

Whether one passes or fails an academic assignment such as the Grand Canyon University DNP 820 Compare statistical and clinical significance depends on the preparation done beforehand. The first thing to do once you receive an assignment is to quickly skim through the requirements. Once that is done, start going through the instructions one by one to clearly understand what the instructor wants. The most important thing here is to understand the required format—whether it is APA, MLA, Chicago, etc.

After understanding the requirements of the paper, the next phase is to gather relevant materials. The first place to start the research process is the weekly resources. Go through the resources provided in the instructions to determine which ones fit the assignment. After reviewing the provided resources, use the university library to search for additional resources. After gathering sufficient and necessary resources, you are now ready to start drafting your paper.

How to Write the Introduction for DNP 820 Compare statistical and clinical significance                         

The introduction for the Grand Canyon University DNP 820 Compare statistical and clinical significance is where you tell the instructor what your paper will encompass. In three to four statements, highlight the important points that will form the basis of your paper. Here, you can include statistics to show the importance of the topic you will be discussing. At the end of the introduction, write a clear purpose statement outlining what exactly will be contained in the paper. This statement will start with “The purpose of this paper…” and then proceed to outline the various sections of the instructions.

How to Write the Body for DNP 820 Compare statistical and clinical significance                         

After the introduction, move into the main part of the DNP 820 Compare statistical and clinical significance assignment, which is the body. Given that the paper you will be writing is not experimental, the way you organize the headings and subheadings of your paper is critically important. In some cases, you might have to use more subheadings to properly organize the assignment. The organization will depend on the rubric provided. Carefully examine the rubric, as it will contain all the detailed requirements of the assignment. Sometimes, the rubric will have information that the normal instructions lack.

Another important factor to consider at this point is how to do citations. In-text citations are fundamental as they support the arguments and points you make in the paper. At this point, the resources gathered at the beginning will come in handy. Integrating the ideas of the authors with your own will ensure that you produce a comprehensive paper. Also, follow the given citation format. In most cases, APA 7 is the preferred format for nursing assignments.

How to Write the Conclusion for DNP 820 Compare statistical and clinical significance                         

After completing the main sections, write the conclusion of your paper. The conclusion is a summary of the main points you made in your paper. However, you need to rewrite the points and not simply copy and paste them. By restating the points from each subheading, you will provide a nuanced overview of the assignment to the reader.

How to Format the References List for DNP 820 Compare statistical and clinical significance                           

The very last part of your paper involves listing the sources used in your paper. These sources should be listed in alphabetical order and double-spaced. Additionally, use a hanging indent for each source that appears in this list. Lastly, only the sources cited within the body of the paper should appear here.

Stuck? Let Us Help You

Completing assignments can sometimes be overwhelming, especially with the multitude of academic and personal responsibilities you may have. If you find yourself stuck or unsure at any point in the process, don’t hesitate to reach out for professional assistance. Our assignment writing services are designed to help you achieve your academic goals with ease. 

Our team of experienced writers is well-versed in academic writing and familiar with the specific requirements of the DNP 820 Compare statistical and clinical significance assignment. We can provide you with personalized support, ensuring your assignment is well-researched, properly formatted, and thoroughly edited. Get a feel of the quality we guarantee – ORDER NOW. 

Sample Answer for DNP 820 Compare statistical and clinical significance

Re: Topic 5 DQ 1

The nursing practice or clinical problems have the potential of derailing patient outcomes if not solved; as such, research plays a central role in solving issues. When research is undertaken to help solve an identified problem, then the results obtained can either be clinically significant, statistically significant or both. Statistical significance is a case where the findings of the research have a measure that shows that it is highly unlikely that the observed phenomenon happened by chance (Fleishmann & Vaughan, 2019). It, therefore, reflects the extent to which a value falls short or exceeds what is expected. On the other hand, clinical significance refers to a case where a particular intervention or treatment course has genuine and quantifiable impacts (Scott, 2017). Hence, the clinical significance is connected to the research findings’ practical importance.

It is possible for the findings from a project or practice not to be statistically significant but still end up being clinically significant. Such a phenomenon may happen in the case where a project uses small sample sizes, hence underpowered to give an appropriate sample size which can help in detecting the difference between the study groups (Sharma et al.,2021). Even though the difference between the groups may go undetected, the results could still be clinically significant when the treatment results in substantial improvement. In other words, the observed p-value may be larger than the accepted 0.05, but the researcher could still observe notable treatment differences between the study groups.

In some cases, the clinical significance measure can be used to classify outcomes as successful. For instance, in cases where the decision hinges on the practical value or relevance of treatment, then statistical significance should not be part of the initial criterion (Sharma et al., 2021). Confidence intervals are then applied to determine the relevance of the findings to practice. In research involving pain medication, the researcher can use a pain scale to ascertain the extent to which the drug relieves pain.

References

Fleischmann, M., & Vaughan, B. (2019). Commentary: statistical significance and clinical significance-a call to consider patient-reported outcome measures, effect size, confidence interval and minimal clinically important difference (MCID). Journal of Bodywork and Movement Therapies, 23(4), 690-694. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbmt.2019.02.009.

Scott, I. A. (2017). Statistical and clinical significance. Medical Journal of Australia, 207(5), 187–189. https://doi.org/10.5694/mja16.01148

Sharma, H. (2021). Statistical significance or clinical significance? A researcher’s dilemma for appropriate interpretation of research results. Saudi Journal of Anaesthesia, 15(4), 431. https://dx.doi.org/10.4103%2Fsja.sja_158_21

Sample Answer 2 for DNP 820 Compare statistical and clinical significance

Also recognized as practical significance, the clinical significance becomes assigned to a result where a treatment course has objective and quantifiable effects. Moreover, statistical significance undergoes an assignment to a result when an event is unlikely to have occurred by chance (Sharma, 2021). Jacobson-Truax is a standard method of calculating clinical significance. It involves calculating a Reliability Change Index (RCI) (Sharma, 2021). The RCI equals the difference between a participant’s pre-test and post-test scores and encounters division by means of difference presented by the standard error. Statistical significance also involves observing any contrasting differences between groups to distinguish whether outcomes are derived from chance or actuality (Sharma, 2021). These can be groups of workers participating in a workplace health and safety intervention or patients participating in a clinical trial. In research, statistical significance measures the probability that the null hypothesis is accurate compared to the acceptable level of uncertainty regarding the actual answer (Sharma, 2021). In clinical research, statistically significant study results are often clinically meaningful. While statistical significance indicates the reliability of the study results, clinical significance reflects its impact on clinical practice (Sharma, 2021).

While most research focuses on statistical significance, clinicians and clinical researchers should focus on clinically significant changes (Harris et al., 2017). A study outcome can present statistical but not clinically significant, and vice‐versa. Moreover, a study outcome provides more likelihood of occurring should the study be underpowered, and possession of an undersupplied sample size fails to incorporate any observable group differences (Harris et al., 2017). Furthermore, you might fail to detect a significant difference between groups in this scenario. Some statistically significant results may have limited practical significance, and some results that are not statistically significant can lead to practical acceptance of the null hypothesis of no difference (Harris et al., 2017).

An outcome measure assesses a patient’s current status and may provide a score, an interpretation of results, and at times a risk categorization of the patient (Chappuis et al., 2017). Prior to providing any intervention, an outcome measure provides baseline data. Focusing on outcomes helps direct clinical attention towards a single goal—the patient’s health status—rather than specific interventions (Chappuis et al., 2017). In addition, it can promote ‘whole system’ collaboration between different parts of the healthcare system. Evaluating clinical effectiveness and improving future care involves examining several indicators (Chappuis et al., 2017). These include patient safety indicators, patient satisfaction, productivity measurement tools, and clinicians’ effectiveness in supporting people to achieve their best clinical outcomes (Chappuis et al., 2017).

Resources

Chappuis, V., Araújo, M. G., & Buser, D. (2017). Clinical relevance of dimensional bone and soft tissue alterations post‐extraction in esthetic sites. Periodontology 2000, 73(1), 73-83.

Harris, J. D., Brand, J. C., Cote, M. P., Faucett, S. C., & Dhawan, A. (2017). Research pearls: The significance of statistics and perils of pooling. Part 1: Clinical versus statistical significance. Arthroscopy: The Journal of Arthroscopic & Related Surgery, 33(6), 1102-1112.

Sharma, H. (2021). Statistical significance or clinical significance? A researcher’s dilemma

Sample Answer 3 for DNP 820 Compare statistical and clinical significance

Measures of statistical significance quantify the probability of a study’s results being due to chance. Clinical significance, on the other hand, refers to the magnitude of the actual treatment effect (i.e., the difference between the intervention and control groups, also known as the “treatment effect size”), which will determine whether the results of the trial are likely to impact current medical practice (Ranganathan, P. et al., 2015). The “P” value, frequently used to measure statistical significance, is the probability that the study results are due to chance rather than an actual treatment effect. The conventional cut-off for the “P” value to be considered statistically significant is 0.05 (or 5%). A P < 0.05 implies that the possibility of the results in a study being due to chance is <5% (Ranganathan, P. et al., 2015).  In clinical practice, an impact’s “clinical significance” depends on its implications on existing practice-treatment effect size, which is one of the most critical factors driving treatment decisions. Sharma (2021) suggests that the clinical significance should reflect “the extent of change, whether the change makes a real difference to subject lives, how long the effects last, consumer acceptability, cost-effectiveness, and ease of implementation.” While there are established, traditionally accepted values for statistical significance testing, this is lacking for evaluating clinical significance (Sharma H., 2021). Often, it is the judgment of the clinician (and the patient) that decides whether a result is clinically significant or not.

According to Van Cutsem, E. et al. (2018), statistical significance heavily depends on the study’s sample size; with large sample sizes, even minor treatment effects (clinically inconsequential) can appear statistically significant; therefore, the reader must carefully interpret this “significance.” A study published in the Journal of Clinical Oncology compared overall survival in 569 patients with advanced pancreatic cancer who were randomized to receive erlotinib plus gemcitabine versus gemcitabine alone. Median survival was “significantly” prolonged in the erlotinib/gemcitabine arm (6.24 months vs. 5.91 months, P = 0.038). The P = 0.038 means that there is only a 3.8% chance that this observed difference between the groups occurred by chance (which is less than the traditional cut-off of 5%) and, therefore, statistically significant. In this example, the clinical relevance of this “positive” study is the “treatment effect” or difference in median survival between 6.24 and 5.91 months – a mere ten days, which most oncologists would agree is a clinically irrelevant “improvement” in outcomes, especially when considering the added toxicity and costs involved with the combination. In clinical research, statistically significant study results are often clinically meaningful. While statistical significance indicates the reliability of the study results, clinical significance reflects its impact on clinical practice.

Ranganathan, P., Pramesh, C. S., & Buyse, M. (2015). Common pitfalls in statistical analysis: Clinical versus statistical significance. Perspectives in clinical research, 6(3), 169–170. https://doi.org/10.4103/2229-3485.159943

Sharma H. (2021). Statistical significance or clinical significance? A researcher’s dilemma for appropriate interpretation of research results. Saudi journal of anesthesia, 15(4), 431–434. https://doi.org/10.4103/sja.sja_158_21

Van Cutsem, E., Hidalgo, M., Canon, J. L., Macarulla, T., Bazin, I., Poddubskaya, E., … & Hammel, P. (2018). Phase I/II trial of pimasertib plus gemcitabine in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer. International Journal of Cancer, 143(8), 2053-2064.