399058245-Identification of Issue Significant to Nursing Practice II

docx

School

Daystar University, Machakos *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

10

Subject

Nursing

Date

Nov 24, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

5

Uploaded by CorporalKnowledge9710

Report
1 Identification of Issue Significant to Nursing Practice II Student’s name Institution affiliation Course Name and Number Instructor’s name Assignment Due Date
2 Identification of Issue Significant to Nursing Practice II Discussion Question #1 Assessment Nurses working on capstone project change proposals might greatly benefit from the outstanding academic resources of PubMed and CINAHL, accessible through the GCU Library. Compared to Google Scholar or standard internet searches, these databases provide several clear advantages. The National Library of Medicine's PubMed database, which focuses on biological and clinical literature, offers a wide selection of peer-reviewed publications geared toward healthcare professionals (Williamson & Minter, 2019). On the other hand, CINAHL is tailored for nursing and allied health fields and provides various sources connected to nursing, such as journals and conference proceedings. Due to their high levels of specialization, PubMed and CINAHL, as opposed to Google Scholar or broad internet searches, guarantee that the returned papers are pertinent to nursing practice (Justesen et al., 2021). They only use peer-reviewed information, ensuring the most significant veracity and excellence in the findings. These databases are better sources for nurses looking for evidence-based support for their capstone projects because advanced search options enable specific and tailored information retrieval instead of the more generic and sometimes less trustworthy results from general internet searches. Peer review offers significant benefits over a regular research study or academic article (Morley & Grammer, 2021). In order to guarantee that only top-notch research is published, it serves first and foremost as a stringent quality control procedure. In order to identify biases, errors, or other methodological issues that could otherwise go unnoticed, subject-matter experts who act as peer reviewers evaluate the study's methodology, data analysis, and results. Readers and practitioners might feel more confident in the study due to this inspection, increasing its
3 general validity and trustworthiness. By presenting the study findings to an objective evaluation, peer review also assists in validating the results (Morley & Grammer, 2021). The chance of incorrect or unsubstantiated assertions entering the academic discourse is decreased since it confirms that data back the study's findings and has undergone rigorous analysis. Finally, peer review allows authors to enhance their work before publication by providing helpful criticism. This iterative approach frequently results in more polished, adequately organized, and educational research publications, which is advantageous to writers and the academic community (Morley & Grammer, 2021). In contrast, regular research projects and academic publications could lack this thorough assessment and quality control, thus leading to lower-quality and less trustworthy additions to the body of knowledge. Discussion Question #2Assessment Ethical research refers to the principled and responsible conduct of scientific investigations, guided by moral standards and codes of conduct (Resnik, 2020). It encompasses various principles, such as respect for participants' autonomy, informed consent, privacy protection, honesty, integrity, and the equitable distribution of research benefits and burdens. An example of ethical misconduct is falsifying research data or results. This unethical act undermines the integrity of scientific inquiry, distorts the truth, and can lead to erroneous conclusions, potentially harming individuals relying on accurate information for decision- making. An example of an unethical research study could involve conducting experiments on human subjects without obtaining their informed consent, violating their autonomy and right to make decisions about participation in research (Resnik, 2020). These studies violate basic ethical principles and jeopardize the rights and welfare of participants, underscoring the significance of
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
4 sustaining ethical standards in research to safeguard subjects and preserve the validity of scientific findings.
5 References Justesen, T., Freyberg, J., & Schultz, A. N. (2021). Database selection and data gathering methods in systematic reviews of qualitative research regarding diabetes mellitus-an explorative study. BMC Medical Research Methodology , 21 , 1-12. Morley, C. P., & Grammer, S. (2021). Now more than ever: reflections on the state and importance of peer review. PRiMER: Peer-Review Reports in Medical Education Research , p. 5 . Resnik, D. (2020). What is ethics in research, and why is it important? National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences. Williamson, P. O., & Minter, C. I. (2019). Exploring PubMed as a reliable resource for scholarly communications services—Journal of the Medical Library Association: JMLA , 107 (1), 16.