Week 5 Discussion-5
docx
keyboard_arrow_up
School
South University, Savannah *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
6101
Subject
Health Science
Date
Nov 24, 2024
Type
docx
Pages
6
Uploaded by canitopololo
1.
What is the relationship between alcohol and breast
cancer?
Alcohol consumption and its association with breast cancer risk has
been extensively studied, but uncertainties remain on the nature of
this relationship (Islami et al., 2021). Quantitative research provides
an effective approach to analyzing this link through rigorous
statistical analysis of data from a large sample. While this
methodology has limitations in capturing subjective perspectives, it
can offer valuable insights by identifying patterns and correlations.
This article will examine considerations in using quantitative methods
to investigate the alcohol-breast cancer relationship.
Quantitative Research Design
Quantitative research systematically collects and analyzes numerical
data using statistical techniques (Queirós et al., 2017). It helps
studying trends across larger populations. However, it is limited in
supplying in-depth understanding of individual experiences.
Quantitative methods could help elucidate the alcohol-breast cancer
relationship by enabling hypothesis testing, identification of
associations, and generalization. But qualitative data is also needed
to explore individuals’ beliefs and behaviors.
Benefits of Quantitative Research
Quantitative research allows examination of the alcohol-breast
cancer relationship using data from many participants, ensuring a
robust dataset for statistical analysis (Queirós et al., 2017). This
helps identifying potential causal links and generalizing findings.
Statistical power to detect effects is enhanced with sufficient sample
size. However, self-reported data on alcohol consumption may be
prone to inaccuracy.
Relevant Quantitative Approaches
Several quantitative designs can be applied to the alcohol-breast
cancer research question. Cross-sectional analysis can efficiently
provide prevalence snapshots, while case-control studies compare
alcohol use between women with and without breast cancer (Islami et
al., 2021). Cohort studies follow groups over time to directly assess
how alcohol impacts cancer risk. Randomized trials ethically cannot
manipulate alcohol intake. Each approach has pros and cons to
consider.
Selecting a Quantitative Design
The research question and aims should guide design selection (Islami
et al., 2021). If exploring prevalence, a cross-sectional survey may
suffice. Case-control studies offer retrospective investigation of the
alcohol-cancer association. Cohort studies require long-term follow up
but supply stronger causal evidence. Sample size, duration, and
resources must be weighed in selecting an optimal quantitative
approach.
Strengths of Quantitative Research
Major strengths of quantitative methodology include statistical power
from large samples and ability to identify correlations (Queirós et al.,
2017). This enables detecting predictive relationships between
alcohol and breast cancer. Standardized data collection facilitates
reliable measurement and group comparisons. Resulting data
patterns can inform public health education and policy efforts.
Limitations of Quantitative Research
Quantitative approaches have less utility capturing personal
narratives and contexts (Queirós et al., 2017). They rely on self-
reporting, which can introduce inaccuracies about socially
undesirable behaviors like heavy drinking. While associations can be
found, quantitative studies alone cannot prove causality. Combined
with qualitative data, quantitative findings can supply more robust
evidence.
Conclusion
Carefully designed quantitative research is valuable for investigating
patterns in the alcohol-breast cancer relationship. But integration
with qualitative data is needed to fully illuminate this complex issue.
With thoughtful methodology and a multifaceted approach, research
can guide risk reduction initiatives seeking to curb the heavy burden
of breast cancer.
2-Importance of studying attitudes towards condoms
among college students
Introduction
Understanding attitudes about condom use between college men and
women is key for promoting sexual health and preventing sexually
transmitted infections (STIs) and unplanned pregnancy. Research
shows gender differences exist in attitudes, highlighting the need for
tailored interventions (Smith et al., 2018). Quantitative designs like
surveys supply an effective approach to measure these variations.
This article discusses using surveys to compare college males’ and
females’ attitudes on condom use.
Quantitative Research Overview
Quantitative research systematically collects numerical data for
statistical analysis (Labaree, 2022). Surveys gathering responses
from many participants offer insights into trends. Limitations include
potential biases and lack of depth. Surveys can efficiently compare
college condom attitudes by gender using validated scales and
statistical testing. But qualitative data is also beneficial.
Survey Design Selection
Among quantitative options, a survey design is best for assessing
gender differences in college condom attitudes. Surveys easily collect
substantial amounts of data using standardized measures (Labaree,
2022). Participants can complete anonymous questionnaires
efficiently online or in-person. Statistics then detect significant
attitude variations between male and female students. Surveys
provide generalizable, reliable quantitative data.
Survey Design Rationale
Surveys allow robust statistical analysis of condom attitude
differences using large, diverse samples (Labaree, 2022).
Standardized questionnaires minimize biases. Many attitudes can be
measured quantitatively including knowledge, self-efficacy, perceived
risks, and intentions. Surveys yield data suitable for showing gender-
specific needs and tailoring sexual health interventions, making them
ideal for this topic.
Survey Design Strengths
Key strengths of using surveys include large sample sizes to enhance
generalizability, standardized administration, and quantitative data
suitable for statistical testing (Labaree, 2022). Surveys efficiently
gather information from many students across backgrounds.
Question consistency allows reliable measurement of condom
attitudes. Statistics can then detect gender variations to inform
sexual health efforts.
Survey Design Weaknesses
Potential weaknesses include self-report biases, inability to capture
nuances, and lack of context behind attitudes (Labaree, 2022). Social
desirability may skew responses. Standard questions miss qualitative
insights. And surveys alone cannot decide causality or individual
experiences shaping attitudes. Mixed methods help offset these
limitations.
Chosen Survey Description
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
A cross-sectional survey will compare condom attitudes using
validated questionnaires administered once online for convenience
and anonymity. Diverse students will be recruited to complete the
survey assessing knowledge, beliefs, barriers, and intentions related
to condom use. Statistics will then identify significant differences
between males and females.
Data Collection and Analysis
Participants will complete the anonymous online survey once.
Demographics and responses will be statistically summarized using
means, standard deviations, and frequencies (Labaree, 2022). Tests
like t-tests and chi-square will decide significant gender variations in
condom attitude scales.
Conclusion
Surveys supply an optimal quantitative design to compare college
condom attitudes by gender. Statistics can detect differences to
guide sexual health efforts. Combined with qualitative data, surveys
yield a more complete understanding. This knowledge contributes to
effective, tailored interventions addressing students’ family planning
needs and STI risks.
3-Is the use of soap and water or alcohol-based rubs
more effective in preventing nosocomial infections?
Introduction
Preventing the spread of infections in healthcare facilities is critical
for patient safety. Proper hand hygiene is the top strategy to reduce
healthcare-associated infections (HAIs) passed between providers,
patients, and environments (CDC, 2020). Both soap and water
handwashing and alcohol-based rubs help eliminate pathogens.
Quantitative research can provide evidence comparing these
techniques’ efficacy for optimal hand hygiene recommendations.
Soap and Water Handwashing
Handwashing with soap and water has long been used in healthcare.
The physical friction helps remove microorganisms, while soap
disrupts pathogen membranes (CDC, 2020). Soap and water are
especially effective against certain gastrointestinal and respiratory
infections. Correct technique involves scrubbing all surfaces of hands
for at least 20 seconds. But accessibility barriers exist to proper
handwashing.
Alcohol-Based Hand Rubs
Alcohol-based hand rubs or sanitizers containing ethanol or
isopropanol have become popular for convenience and broad
antimicrobial activity (CDC, 2020). Alcohol disrupts protein structures
in pathogens quickly killing viruses, bacteria, and fungi. Hand rubs
take less time to use than handwashing. However, technique is still
important to cover all hand surfaces thoroughly when applying rubs.
Quantitative Research Design
A randomized controlled trial provides an optimal quantitative design
to compare handwashing and alcohol rubs for reducing HAIs.
Participants would be assigned to either the handwashing group or
hand rub group. HAI incidence would then be analyzed between
groups to determine the more effective method. This experimental
approach facilitates direct comparison of techniques.
Design Strengths and Weaknesses
This design allows measurable data analysis to identify the best hand
hygiene method. Large sample sizes increase generalizability.
However, confounding variables like compliance rates may influence
outcomes. The design does not capture contextual factors impacting
technique effectiveness either. Still, quantitative data is needed to
guide infection prevention policies.
Prior Research Findings
Previous studies indicate alcohol rubs are as effective as
handwashing for reducing HAIs (Ford, 2018; Kingston et al., 2016).
One hospital study found alcohol rubs were preferred for
convenience, boosting compliance and decreasing pathogen
transmission. More research is still needed comparing techniques
against specific pathogens and within various care settings.
Recommendations
Findings suggest both handwashing and alcohol rubs have merits for
healthcare infection prevention under different circumstances
(Kingston et al., 2016). Multifaceted hygiene approaches are
advocated, emphasizing proper techniques. Healthcare facilities must
also promote hand hygiene adherence through education,
accessibility, and culture changes. Ongoing quantitative research
helps refine evidence-based hygiene guidelines to protect patients.
References:
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2020). Hand hygiene in
healthcare settings. Healthcare Providers: When and how to practice
hand hygiene. Retrieved from [1]
Kingston, L. M., O'Connell, N. H., & Dunne, C. P. (2016). Survey of
attitudes and practices of Irish nursing students towards hand
hygiene, including handrubbing with alcohol-based hand rub. Nurse
education today, 45, 15-21.
Islami, F., Liu, Y., Jemal, A., Zhou, J., Weiderpass, E., Colditz, G., ... &
Weiss, M. (2021). Breastfeeding and breast cancer risk by receptor
subtype: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Annals of Oncology,
32(3), 312-323.
Queirós, A., Faria, D., & Almeida, F. (2017). Strengths and limitations
of qualitative and quantitative research methods. European Journal of
Education Studies, 3(9), 369-387.
Labaree, R. V. (2022). Organizing your social sciences research paper.
University of Southern California
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help