NR 505 Week 3 Quantitative Research Collaboration Café
Chamberlain University NR 505 Week 3 Quantitative Research Collaboration Café– Step-By-Step Guide
This guide will demonstrate how to complete the Chamberlain University NR 505 Week 3 Quantitative Research Collaboration Café 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 NR 505 Week 3 Quantitative Research Collaboration Café
Whether one passes or fails an academic assignment such as the Chamberlain University NR 505 Week 3 Quantitative Research Collaboration Café 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 NR 505 Week 3 Quantitative Research Collaboration Café
The introduction for the Chamberlain University NR 505 Week 3 Quantitative Research Collaboration Café 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.
Need a high-quality paper urgently?
We can deliver within hours.
How to Write the Body for NR 505 Week 3 Quantitative Research Collaboration Café
After the introduction, move into the main part of the NR 505 Week 3 Quantitative Research Collaboration Café 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 NR 505 Week 3 Quantitative Research Collaboration Café
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 NR 505 Week 3 Quantitative Research Collaboration Café
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 NR 505 Week 3 Quantitative Research Collaboration Café 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 NR 505 Week 3 Quantitative Research Collaboration Café
PICOT Question: For females diagnosed with PCOS, how does the initiation of daily inositol supplementation affect insulin resistance evidenced by H1AC in comparison to PCOS females who utilize metformin within 12 months?
Article Website:
Article Reference:
Zhao, H., Xing, C., Zhang, J., & He, B. (2021). Comparative efficacy of oral insulin sensitizers metformin, thiazolidinediones, inositol, and berberine in improving endocrine and metabolic profiles in women with PCOS: a network meta-analysis. Reproductive health, 18(1), 1-12.
Description of the purpose
The purpose of this quantitative research is to determine if the improvement of insulin resistance in PCOS can be achieved by the implementation of comparing various insulin sensitizers including inositol and the effects on endocrine and metabolic profiles in women with PCOS.
Explanation of research design
The randomized controlled trial was composed of 1079 patients. These patients were divided into comparing PCOS patients utilizing inositol in comparison to metformin. The age ranged from women of 14-49 years of age diagnosed with PCOS. The trial was conducted and patients were followed for 12 weeks while measuring desired outcomes from the predefined categories of menstruation, hyperandrogenism, metabolism and insulin resistance. Within the study, they were focused on their lab result evaluation and emphasizing the parameters of total testosterone, sex hormone-binding globulin, androstenedione, glucolipid metabolism, fasting glucose, fasting insulin, homeostatic assessment of insulin resistance, lipids, total cholesterol, and BMI.
Discussion of sample
The sample was performed by 1079 women ages 14-49 that are diagnosed with PCOS. They used the PICO framework to identify relevant trials that support their research findings. Combinations of treatment such as metformin, thiazolidinediones, and inositol were implemented in order to identify the best medication or supplement that best supports reducing insulin resistance and other negative side effects of being diagnosed with PCOS. Out of the 1079 patients involved in the sample, 5 trials of 142 women were being evaluated with using inositol, 19 trials were conducted with 455 women with metformin, 10 trials with 280 regarding thiazolidinediones, 3 trials with 89 women utilizing metformin and thiazolidinediones, 1 trial of 26 women implemented berberine and 70 women used metformin and berberine in one trial while the remaining were the control group.
ALSO READ:
NR 505 Week 5: Data Collection
NR 505 Week 6: Statistical and Clinical Significance
NR 505 Week 7: Exploring Research Results
NR 505 Week 8: Future Use of Evidence-Based Practice
The various treatment regimens were compared simultaneously using a pairwise meta-analysis. Pairwise meta-analysis is a method that pools evidence from randomized controlled trials that compare multiple interventions. In order to compare multiple interventions to each other, the estimates calculated were pooled estimates of mean differences or odd ratios with 95% confidence intervals. Outside of calculations, Stata software was also used to examine any research bias. As for network inconsistency, they were evaluated using node-splitting method and inconsistency models. The data that was being collected in order to determine effectiveness of treatment regimens were menstrual frequency, hyperandrogenism, obesity, glycometabolism, and lipid levels.
Summary of findings
In this study, the best intervention was determined by improving results within each category that was preselected to determine treatment efficacy. According to the meta-analysis menstrual frequency, hyperandrogenism, and glycometabolism were improved the best with inositol treatment. As for obesity and lipid levels, the research showed that there were no significant different. Based of this research’s findings, Inositol is deemed to be the best intervention in restoring regular menses and decreasing H1AC while improving insulin resistance. In comparison with metformin that has numerous side effects, inositol is described to have no side effects.
Strengths of the study
The strength of this study is being able to identify the comparative efficacy and safety of monotherapy versus combination of different oral insulin sensitizers. The strength of the study was being able to provide a comprehensive reference for clinical treatment for women with PCOS.
Limitations of the study
According to this article, this research has three limitations to the study, The first limitations is the very few reports met the criteria of treatment without contraceptives or intervention of ovulation inducing drugs. The second limitation was the different dosages, durations, and sample sizes of the various medications. Lastly, the third limitation was not accounting for the women who may have dropped out or missed a follow-up.
Recommendations regarding potential application for future practice that are insightful and appropriate.
Although, the study did not provide reliable and valid data in regard to identifying the clinical outcome of reducing H1AC in PCOS women implementing inositol, this research has started to find evidence towards the desired outcome. This research was able to identify and start the conversation of utilizing alternative supplements without the negative side effects such as the recommended first line of treatment, metformin.
Sample Answer 2 for NR 505 Week 3 Quantitative Research Collaboration Café
Polycystic Ovary Syndrome (PCOS) is one of the most common causes of female infertility affecting 5 million women in the US (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2022). I have seen many women with PCOS who are often insulin resistant, which increases the risk of type 2 diabetes. Patients with a higher risk of PCOS such as patients with a family history of diabetes usually have a higher level of ALT, AST, and baseline insulin level above 12 μU/mL (Genaazzani et al, 2022). To conclude, patients with a family history of diabetes have a higher risk of liver impairment related to diabetes.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2022, August 12). PCOS (Polycystic Ovary Syndrome) and Diabetes. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. https://www.cdc.gov/diabetes/basics/pcos.htmlLinks to an external site.
Genazzani, Battipaglia, C., Semprini, E., Arnesano, M., Ambrosetti, F., Sponzilli, A., Tomatis, V., & Petrillo, T. (2022). Familial Diabetes in Obese PCOS Predisposes Individuals to Compensatory Hyperinsulinemia and Insulin Resistance (IR) Also for Reduced Hepatic Insulin Extraction (HIE). Endocrines, 3(2), 296–302. https://doi.org/10.3390/endocrines3020024
Sample Answer 3 for NR 505 Week 3 Quantitative Research Collaboration Café
The article I have chosen to write about is called “A nurse practitioner-led telehealth protocol to improve
diabetes outcomes in primary care”
Description of the purpose
Diabetes is a chronic health condition that affects over 30 million people in the United States and accounts for over $300 billion dollars in healthcare expenditure (Momin et al., 2022). Untreated or poorly managed diabetes can lead to serious consequences. Since the COVID-19 pandemic, the use of telehealth has increased rapidly and has caused a 20% decrease in diabetes related health economic burden (Momin et al., 2022). This study aimed to assess a nurse practitioner led, telehealth supported, diabetes management quality improvement initiative to achieve three outcomes: improvement in patients’ HgbA1c, microalbumin, and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), improved patient satisfaction with diabetes management, and increased patient attendance to telehealth visits (Momin et al., 2022).
Explanation of research design
According to the John Hopkins Evidence Appraisal Tool, this study is a level III, nonexperimental study. The study was conducted during a three month time frame and consisted of five interventions: medication management, diet and physical activity, self-management tasks, identification of patient barriers, and monthly goal setting (Momin et al., 2022). An initial, inpatient visit was required with the nurse practitioner to establish a baseline HgbA1c and eGFR and subsequent telehealth visits were conducted between the established nurse practitioner and patient at monthly intervals for a total of three (Momin et al., 2022). During each monthly telehealth appointment, the NP addressed each of the five interventions. 1) The NP questioned the patient’s compliance with their medication regimen, reinforced the importance of medication compliance, and made medication adjustments as necessary (Momin et al., 2022). 2) The NP assessed the patient’s current weight, diet and exercise log, and discussed strategies to improve their regimen as necessary (Momin et al., 2022). 3) The NP discussed the patient’s current foot care routine as well as assessed for any vision or sensory changes noted by the patient (Momin et al., 2022). 4) The NP worked with the patient to establish goals for the next monthly appointment (Momin et al., 2022). 5) The NP discussed potential patient barriers to the interventions and how to overcome them (Momin et al., 2022).
Discussion of sample
Patients at an unspecified primary care practice in Texas were selected via four criteria: current type 2 diabetes diagnosis with a HgbA1c > 7%, internet access with a device capable of audio-video conferencing, 18 years of age and older, and a current patient of the practice (Momin et al, 2022). All thirty participants signed informed consents to being in the study and were given an option to opt out of the study at any point (Momin et al., 2022).
Description of data collection methods
A diabetes laboratory panel which included HgbA1c, microalbumin, and eGFR was collected at the end of the study and compared to their results which were collected at the beginning of the study (Momin et al., 2022). Patient adherence to the interventions was measured via percentage of patients who attended each of the three telehealth visits (Momin et al., 2022). Patient satisfaction was collected via the Telehealth Usability Questionnaire (TUQ) satisfaction survey which consisted of 21 agree/disagree questions rated from 1-7 (Momin et al., 2022).
Summary of findings
Three participants (10%) had an increase in HgbA1c, five participants (17%) had no change in their HgbA1c, and the remaining 22 participants (73%) experienced an improvement in their HgbA1c from their baseline at the start of the study, with 2.3% of these 22 participants dropping their HgbA1c to less than 7 (Momin et al., 2022). For eGFR, 83% of participants experienced an improvement in their eGFR, whereas 10% had no change and 7% experienced a decrease in eGFR (Momin et al., 2022). 57% of patients attended all three monthly telehealth meetings, 36% attended two of the three visits, and 7% only attended one monthly visit, with an overall attrition rate of 16% (5 participants) (Momin et al., 2022).
Strengths of the study (minimum of 1)
Although a minor proportion of the sample population experienced no change or worsening of their HgbA1c and eGFR levels, approximately 75% of participants made an improvement in their HgbA1c and eGFR levels. Also, according to the TUQ survey, a majority of patients expressed satisfaction with the interventions and were pleased with their interactions with the NPs (Momin et al., 2022).
Limitations of the study (minimum of 1)
The small sample size and non-random selection of participants in the study limits its external validity (generalizability). Also, financial complications prevented the collection of microalbumin levels for some patients, rendering the study partially incomplete (Momin et al., 2022).
Recommendations regarding potential applications for future practice that are insightful and appropriate
The findings from the study provide evidence that the use of telehealth with NP provided education measures can improve patients’ self-management of their diabetes. NPs provide valuable assistance for primary care providers in their health education and resource capabilities. As evidenced by the study, NPs provide satisfactory care to patients with diabetes and continue to improve healthcare access to many individuals, particularly in areas with difficult access to healthcare such as rural communities. Also, the use of telehealth for chronic conditions such as diabetes has been shown to be beneficial in promoting positive patient outcomes (Momin et al., 2022). The use of telehealth also helps eliminate certain barriers to access to healthcare such as transportation issues, other medical conditions making it difficult for office visits, and saves time by decreasing time spent in waiting rooms. The findings of this study, however, are difficult to apply to the general population, and further research must be conducted with larger sample sizes and randomization to increase its generalizability.
Reference
Momin, R. P., Kobeissi, M. M., Casarez, R. L., & Khawaja, M. (2022). A nurse practitioner–led telehealth protocol to improve diabetes outcomes in primary care. Journal of the American Association of Nurse Practitioners, 34(10), 1167–1173. https://doi.org/10.1097/jxx.0000000000000759
Sample Answer 4 for NR 505 Week 3 Quantitative Research Collaboration Café
Polycystic Ovary Syndrome (PCOS) is one of the most common causes of female infertility affecting 5 million women in the US (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2022). I have seen many women with PCOS who are often insulin resistant, which increases the risk of type 2 diabetes. Patients with a higher risk of PCOS such as patients with a family history of diabetes usually have a higher level of ALT, AST, and baseline insulin level above 12 μU/mL (Genaazzani et al, 2022). To conclude, patients with a family history of diabetes have a higher risk of liver impairment related to diabetes.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2022, August 12). PCOS (Polycystic Ovary Syndrome) and Diabetes. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. https://www.cdc.gov/diabetes/basics/pcos.htmlLinks to an external site.
Genazzani, Battipaglia, C., Semprini, E., Arnesano, M., Ambrosetti, F., Sponzilli, A., Tomatis, V., & Petrillo, T. (2022). Familial Diabetes in Obese PCOS Predisposes Individuals to Compensatory Hyperinsulinemia and Insulin Resistance (IR) Also for Reduced Hepatic Insulin Extraction (HIE). Endocrines, 3(2), 296–302. https://doi.org/10.3390/endocrines3020024
Sample Answer 5 for NR 505 Week 3 Quantitative Research Collaboration Café
After reviewing this study, I concluded that the purpose of the study was to compare the coefficient of variance (CV) of fasting and postprandial blood glucose (FBG and PPBG) with insulin glargine with neutral protamine Hagedorn (NPH) insulin treatment in patients who are diagnosed with type two diabetes (T2DM) for twelve weeks. These patients are on oral antidiabetic drugs (OADs) that was continued over the twelve weeks period. The primary objective was to calculate the CV of FBG with results from self-monitoring blood glucose. Secondly, to monitor the effects of HbA1c, FBG, hypoglycemic change in bodyweight, final insulin dose and lipid profile.
This was a quantitative randomized controlled trial which was a single center national open-label study.
The criteria to be included in this study was male or female 45 years or younger who was diagnosed with T2DM for at least five years. Patients must have been on an OADs at a continuous stable dose of glibenclamine 2.5 mg and metformin 400 mg two or three tablets daily for the last three months. Hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) between 8 and 11% and body mass index greater than 27 and less than 35 kg/m2, and the patient must be able to do capillary blood glucose (CBG) checks and administer insulin.
Patients with type one diabetes (T1DM), latent autoimmune diabetes, cardiac or renal conditions, pregnant and lactating mothers were excluded from the study. The study population was 21 patients. Patients were given a clinical evaluation to confirm they were eligible for the study. They each received standardized diet instructions and given a mixed meal test. CBG and venous blood samples were monitored to ensure tolerance. Ten were randomly selected for group A with insulin glargine for twelve weeks followed by insulin NPH for an additional twelve weeks. Group B had eleven who would have insulin NPH the first twelve weeks then insulin glargine the last twelve weeks.
Insulins was administered as directed. Patients will monitor their CBG at specific intervals and insulin titrating every three days according to blood glucose levels.
The study revealed there was no significant differences between groups A and B. Insulin dose, FBG and HbA1c had a significant decrease in both groups.
Because there was no significant difference between the independent variables and they both yielded expected results, I would classify this as a moderate strength study. The limitations are most of the data collected was subjective. There was no credible way to of evaluating the accuracy of how and when data was collected. Recommendation for future study would be using an electronic device that will record time and date of data entry (De Mattia et al., 2009).
Reference
De Mattia, G., Laurenti, O., & Moretti, A. (2009). Comparison of glycaemic control in patients with Type 2 diabetes on basal insulin and fixed combination oral antidiabetic treatment: results of a pilot study. Acta Diabetologica, 46(1), 67–73. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00592-008-0078-zLinks to an external site.