NURS 5052/NURS 6052: ESSENTIALS OF EVIDENCE-BASED PRACTICE – Discussion 6 (Grading Rubic and Media Attached)

Discussion: Validity in Quantitative Research Designs

Validity in research refers to the extent researchers can be confident that the cause and effect they identify in their research are in fact causal relationships. If there is low validity in a study, it usually means that the research design is flawed and the results will be of little or no value. Four different aspects of validity should be considered when reviewing a research design: statistical conclusion validity, internal validity, construct validity, and external validity. In this Discussion, you consider the importance of each of these aspects in judging the validity of quantitative research.

To prepare:

Review the information in Chapter 10 of the course text on rigor and validity.

Read the method section of one of the following quasi-experimental studies (also located in this week’s Learning Resources). Identify at least one potential concern that could be raised about the study’s internal validity.

Metheny, N. A., Davis-Jackson, J., & Stewart, B. J. (2010). Effectiveness of an aspiration risk-reduction protocol. Nursing Research, 59(1), 18–25.

Padula, C. A., Hughes, C., & Baumhover, L. (2009). Impact of a nurse-driven mobility protocol on functional decline in hospitalized older adults. Journal of Nursing Care Quality, 24(4), 325–331.

Yuan, S., Chou, M., Hwu, L., Chang, Y., Hsu, W., & Kuo, H. (2009). An intervention program to promote health-related physical fitness in nurses. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 18(10), 1,404–1,411.

Consider strategies that could be used to strengthen the study’s internal validity and how this would impact the three other types of validity.

Think about the consequences of an advanced practice nurse neglecting to consider the validity of a research study when reviewing the research for potential use in developing an evidence-based practice.

Post the title of the study that you selected and your analysis of the potential concerns that could be raised about the study’s internal validity. Propose recommendations to strengthen the internal validity and assess the effect your changes could have with regard to the other three types of validity. Discuss the dangers of failing to consider the validity of a research study.

Read a selection of your colleagues’ responses.

Respond to at least two of your colleagues in one or more of the following ways:

Ask a probing question, substantiated with additional background information, and evidence. Share an insight from having read your colleagues’ postings, synthesizing the information to provide new perspectives.

Offer and support an alternative perspective using readings from the classroom or from your own review of the literature in the Walden Library.

Validate an idea with your own experience and additional sources.

Make a suggestion based on additional evidence drawn from readings or after synthesizing multiple postings.

Expand on your colleagues’ postings by providing additional insights or contrasting perspectives based on readings and evidence.

Please use the below link for template formatting:

http://academicguides.waldenu.edu/writingcenter/templates

Required Readings

Polit, D. F., & Beck, C. T. (2017). Nursing research: Generating and assessing evidence for nursing practice (10th ed.). Philadelphia, PA: Wolters Kluwer.

Chapter 10, “Rigor and Validity in Quantitative Research”

This chapter introduces the concept of validity in research and describes the different types of validity that must be addressed. Key threats to validity are also explored.

Chapter 11, “Specific Types of Quantitative Research”

This chapter focuses on the specific types of quantitative research that can be selected. The focus is on the purpose of the research rather than the research design. These include such approaches as clinical trials, evaluation research, health services and outcomes research, needs assessments, or replication studies.

Cantrell, M. A. (2011). Demystifying the research process: Understanding a descriptive comparative research design. Pediatric Nursing, 37(4), 188–189.