Article Analysis 1Points120Rubric Assessment Traits Requires Lopeswrite
Assessment Description
The interpretation of research in health care is essential to decision making. By understanding research, health care providers can identify risk factors, trends, outcomes for treatment, health care costs and best practices. To be effective in evaluating and interpreting research, the reader must first understand how to interpret the findings.
For this assignment:
Search the GCU Library and find three different health care articles that use quantitative research. Do not use articles that appear in the topic Resources or textbook. Complete an article analysis for each using the “Article Analysis 1” template.
Refer to the “Patient Preference and Satisfaction in Hospital-at-Home and Usual Hospital Care for COPD Exacerbations: Results of a Randomised Controlled Trial,” in conjunction with the “Article Analysis Example 1,” for an example of an article analysis.
While APA style is not required for the body of this assignment, solid academic writing is expected, and documentation of sources should be presented using APA formatting guidelines, which can be found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center.
This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.
You are required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite. A link to the LopesWrite technical support articles is located in Class Resources if you need assistance.
Rubric Criteria
Collapse All Rubric CriteriaCollapse All
Three Quantitative Articles
12 points
Criteria Description
Three Quantitative Articles
5. 5: Excellent
12 points
Three articles are presented. All three articles are based on quantitative research.
4. 4: Good
10.2 points
N/A
3. 3: Satisfactory
9 points
Three articles are presented. Of the articles presented, only two articles are based on quantitative research.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory
7.8 points
N/A
1. 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
Fewer than three articles are presented. None of the articles presented use quantitative research.
Article Citation and Permalinka 2
12 points
Criteria Description
Article Citation and Permalinka 2
5. 5: Excellent
12 points
Article citation and permalink are presented. Article citation is accurately presented in APA format. Page numbers are accurate and used in all areas when citing information.
4. 4: Good
10.2 points
Article citation and permalink are presented. Article citation is presented in APA format. Page numbers are used to cite information. There are minor errors.
3. 3: Satisfactory
9 points
Article citation and permalink are presented. Article citation is presented in APA format, but there are errors. Page numbers to cite information are missing, or incorrect, in some areas.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory
7.8 points
Article citation and permalink are presented. There are significant errors. Page numbers are not indicated to cite information, or the page numbers are incorrect.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
Article citation and permalink are omitted.
Broad Topic Area/Title
12 points
Criteria Description
Broad Topic Area/Title
5. 5: Excellent
12 points
Broad topic area and title are fully presented and accurate.
4. 4: Good
10.2 points
Broad topic area and title are presented. There are some minor errors, but the content overall is accurate.
3. 3: Satisfactory
9 points
Broad topic area and title are summarized. There are some minor inaccuracies.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory
7.8 points
Broad topic area and title are referenced but are incomplete.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
Broad topic area and title are omitted.
Independent and Dependent Variables and Type of Data for Variables
12 points
Criteria Description
Independent and Dependent Variables and Type of Data for Variables
5. 5: Excellent
12 points
Variable types and data for variables are presented and accurate.
4. 4: Good
10.2 points
Variable types and data for variables are presented. Minor detail is needed for accuracy.
3. 3: Satisfactory
9 points
Variable types and data for variables are presented. There are inaccuracies.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory
7.8 points
Variable types and data for variables are presented. There are major inaccuracies or omissions.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
Variable types and data for variables are omitted.
Population of Interest for the Study
12 points
Criteria Description
Population of Interest for the Study
5. 5: Excellent
12 points
Population of interest for the study is presented and accurate.
4. 4: Good
10.2 points
Population of interest for the study is presented. Minor detail is needed for accuracy.
3. 3: Satisfactory
9 points
Population of interest for the study is presented. There are inaccuracies.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory
7.8 points
Population of interest for the study is presented. There are major inaccuracies or omissions.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
Population of interest for the study is omitted.
Sample
12 points
Criteria Description
Sample
5. 5: Excellent
12 points
Sample is presented and accurate.
4. 4: Good
10.2 points
Sample is presented. Minor detail is needed for accuracy.
3. 3: Satisfactory
9 points
Sample is presented. There are inaccuracies.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory
7.8 points
Sample is presented. There are major inaccuracies or omissions.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
Sample is omitted.
Sampling Method
12 points
Criteria Description
Sampling Method
5. 5: Excellent
12 points
Sampling method is presented and accurate.
4. 4: Good
10.2 points
Sampling is presented. Minor detail is needed for accuracy.
3. 3: Satisfactory
9 points
Sampling is presented. There are inaccuracies.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory
7.8 points
Sampling is presented. There are major inaccuracies or omissions.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
Sampling method is omitted.
Descriptive Statistics
12 points
Criteria Description
Descriptive Statistics (mean, median, mode; standard deviation) (Identify examples of descriptive statistics in the article.)
5. 5: Excellent
12 points
Descriptive statistic examples from the article are presented and accurate.
4. 4: Good
10.2 points
3. 3: Satisfactory
9 points
Descriptive statistic examples from the article are presented. There are some very minor inaccuracies or omissions.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory
7.8 points
1. 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
Descriptive statistic examples from the article are omitted. There are major inaccuracies or omissions.
Inferential Statistics (Identify examples of inferential statistics in the article.)
12 points
Criteria Description
Inferential Statistics (Identify examples of inferential statistics in the article.)
5. 5: Excellent
12 points
Inferential statistic examples from the article are presented and accurate.
4. 4: Good
10.2 points
3. 3: Satisfactory
9 points
Inferential statistic examples from the article are presented. There are some very minor inaccuracies or omissions.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory
7.8 points
1. 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
Inferential statistic examples from the article are omitted. There are major inaccuracies or omissions.
Mechanics of Writing
12 points
Criteria Description
Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, and language use)
5. 5: Excellent
12 points
The writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.
4. 4: Good
10.2 points
Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. The writer uses a variety of effective sentence structures and figures of speech.
3. 3: Satisfactory
9 points
Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct and varied sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are employed.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory
7.8 points
Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) or word choice are present. Sentence structure is correct but not varied.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is employed.
Total120 points
Article Analysis 1
Article Citation and Permalink (APA format)
Article 1
Article 2
Article 3
Point
Description
Description
Description
Broad Topic Area/Title
Identify Independent and Dependent Variables and Type of Data for the Variables
Population of Interest for the Study
Sample
Sampling Method
Descriptive Statistics (Mean, Median, Mode; Standard Deviation)
Identify examples of descriptive statistics in the article.
Inferential Statistics
Identify examples of inferential statistics in the article.
First Article
A Quantitative Observational Study of INQUIRY: The Journal of Health Care
Organization, Provision, and Financing
Volume 55: 1–12
© The Author(s) 2018
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/0046958018800906
journals.sagepub.com/home/inq
Physician Influence on Hospital Costs
Herbert Wong, PhD1, Zeynal Karaca, PhD1,
and Teresa B. Gibson, PhD2
Abstract
Physicians serve as the nexus of treatment decision-making in hospitalized patients; however, little empirical evidence describes the influence of individual physicians on hospital costs. In this study, we examine the extent to which hospital costs vary across physicians and physician characteristics. We used all-payer data from 2 states representing 15 237 physicians and 2.5 million hospital visits. Regression analysis and propensity score matching were used to understand the role of observable provider characteristics on hospital costs controlling for patient demographics, socioeconomic characteristics, clinical risk, and hospital characteristics. We used hierarchical models to estimate the amount of variation attributable to physicians. We found that the average cost of hospital inpatient stays registered to female physicians was consistently lower across all empirical specifications when compared with male physicians. We also found a negative association between physicians’ years of experience and the average costs. The average cost of hospital inpatient stays registered to foreign trained physicians was lower than US-trained physicians. We observed sizable variation in average costs of hospital inpatient stays across medical specialties. In addition, we used hierarchical methods and estimated the amount of remaining variation
attributable to physicians and found that it was nonnegligible (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC]: 0.33 in the full sample). Historically, most physicians have been reimbursed separately from hospitals, and our study shows that physicians play a role in influencing hospital costs. Future policies and practices should acknowledge these important dependencies. This study lends further support for alignment of physician and hospital incentives to control costs and improve outcomes.
Keywords
physician practice styles, physician influence, costs, hospital costs, physician characteristics, physicians, inpatients, decision making, observational study, regression analysis
Second Article
To cite this article: Kateřina Glumbíková, Alice Gojová, Michal Burda, Radka Poláková & Pavel
Rusnok (2020) The use of health care services by homeless shelter residents, European Journal
of Social Work, 23:4, 699-710, DOI: 10.1080/13691457.2019.1583639
To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/13691457.2019.1583639
The use of health care services by homeless shelter residents
Kateřina Glumbíkováa, Alice Gojováa, Michal Burdab, Radka Polákováb and Pavel Rusnokb
aDepartment of Social Work, Faculty of Social Studies, University of Ostrava, Ostrava, the Czech Republic; bInstitute
for Research and Applications of Fuzzy Modeling, University of Ostrava, Ostrava, the Czech Republic
ABSTRACT
This submitted article is based on partial data from the Health and Use of
Health Care Services by Shelters Users research, taking advantage of the
sequential synergy of qualitative and quantitative research strategies. The
quantitative research involved 192 respondents, while the qualitative
research involved 30 communication partners. The article aims at finding
out the relationship between selected health characteristics of the shelter
population and their impact on the use of health care services. The article
presents data from the quantitative research that are further illustrated by
qualitative data. The data were analyzed using descriptive statistical
methods, a Fisher’s exact test, a Wilcoxon test and a Proportion Matching
Test. The relationship between mental health and use of health care
services (especially in the case of women) has been proven. Homeless
people who do not use any health care services are, on average, for a longer
period in temporary housing; whereas those who rated their health as more
serious used health care services more frequently. In the conclusion, the
authors present the implications for social work that resulted from the survey.
Third Article
Harries et al. BMC Medical Education (2021) 21:14
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-020-02462-1
Effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on
medical students: a multicenter
quantitative study
Aaron J. Harries1* , Carmen Lee1, Lee Jones2, Robert M. Rodriguez1, John A. Davis2, Megan Boysen-Osborn3,
Kathleen J. Kashima4, N. Kevin Krane5, Guenevere Rae6, Nicholas Kman7, Jodi M. Langsfeld8 and Marianne Juarez1*
Abstract
Background: The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted the United States (US) medical education system with the
necessary, yet unprecedented Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC) national recommendation to
pause all student clinical rotations with in-person patient care. This study is a quantitative analysis investigating the
educational and psychological effects of the pandemic on US medical students and their reactions to the AAMC
recommendation in order to inform medical education policy.
Methods: The authors sent a cross-sectional survey via email to medical students in their clinical training years at
six medical schools during the initial peak phase of the COVID-19 pandemic. Survey questions aimed to evaluate
students’ perceptions of COVID-19’s impact on medical education; ethical obligations during a pandemic; infection
risk; anxiety and burnout; willingness and needed preparations to return to clinical rotations.
Results: Seven hundred forty-one (29.5%) students responded. Nearly all students (93.7%) were not involved in
clinical rotations with in-person patient contact at the time the study was conducted. Reactions to being removed
were mixed, with 75.8% feeling this was appropriate, 34.7% guilty, 33.5% disappointed, and 27.0% relieved.
Most students (74.7%) agreed the pandemic had significantly disrupted their medical education, and believed they
should continue with normal clinical rotations during this pandemic (61.3%). When asked if they would accept the
risk of infection with COVID-19 if they returned to the clinical setting, 83.4% agreed.
Students reported the pandemic had moderate effects on their stress and anxiety levels with 84.1% of respondents
feeling at least somewhat anxious. Adequate personal protective equipment (PPE) (53.5%) was the most important
factor to feel safe returning to clinical rotations, followed by adequate testing for infection (19.3%) and antibody
testing (16.2%).
Conclusions: The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted the education of US medical students in their clinical training
years. The majority of students wanted to return to clinical rotations and were willing to accept the risk of COVID-
19 infection. Students were most concerned with having enough PPE if allowed to return to clinical activities.
Keywords: Undergraduate medical education, COVID-19 pandemic, Medical student anxiety
© The
Example