Order Appraising Quantitative Research

December 29, 2022

Order Appraising Quantitative Research

Order Number	636738393092
Type of Project	ESSAY
Writer Level	PHD VERIFIED
Format	APA
Academic Sources	10
Page Count	3-12 PAGES

Instructions/Descriptions

Order Appraising Quantitative Research
Appraising Quantitative Research

Download the Johns Hopkins Research Evidence Appraisal Tool and the Johns Hopkins Individual Evidence Summary Tool. (attached).

Select one of the eight practice problems that burden the overall health of the United States*use as the previous week (substance abuse disorders). Conduct a library search for one quantitative research study addressing this problem. Appraise the quantitative research study using the Johns Hopkins Research Evidence Appraisal Tool.

After appraising and determining the Level of Evidence and Grade of Quality for your selected quantitative study, summarize your findings. Transfer your findings to the Johns Hopkins Individual Evidence Summary Tool. Complete each column including specific details about the quantitative study.

Include your completed Johns Hopkins Individual Evidence Summary Tool and your quantitative research study as an attachment with your initial post. Also, include a permalink for your selected quantitative research study with your initial discussion post. Confirm the link allows access to the full-text study article. Our faculty team will review both your research study and Johns Hopkins Individual Evidence Summary Tool and provide guidance.

Analyze the evidence summary of the selected quantitative research study to address the following.

1- Does the research design answer the research question? Explain your rationale.

2- Were the study sample participants representative? Why or why not?

3- Compare and contrast the study limitations in this study.

4- Based on this evidence summary, would you consider this quantitative research study as support for your selected practice problem? Explain your rationale.

Instructions:

Use an APA 7 style and a minimum of 200 words. Provide support from a minimum of at least three (3) scholarly sources. The scholarly source needs to be: 1) evidence-based, 2) scholarly in nature, 3) Sources should be no more than five years old (published within the last 5 years), and 4) an in-text citation. citations and references are included when information is summarized/synthesized and/or direct quotes are used, in which APA 7 style standards apply.

• Textbooks are not considered scholarly sources.

• Wikipedia, Wikis, .com website,s or blogs should not be used. Search (CINAHL, MEDLINE, PSYCHINFO) Google is not a scientific search engine.

Order Appraising Quantitative Research

RUBRIC

Excellent Quality

95-100%

Introduction

45-41 points

The context and relevance of the issue, as well as a clear description of the study aim, are presented. The history of searches is discussed.

Literature Support

91-84 points

The context and relevance of the issue, as well as a clear description of the study aim, are presented. The history of searches is discussed.

Methodology

58-53 points

With titles for each slide as well as bulleted sections to group relevant information as required, the content is well-organized. Excellent use of typeface, color, images, effects, and so on to improve readability and presenting content. The minimum length criterion of 10 slides/pages is reached.

Average Score

50-85%

40-38 points

More depth/information is required for the context and importance, otherwise the study detail will be unclear. There is no search history information supplied.

83-76 points

There is a review of important theoretical literature, however there is limited integration of research into problem-related ideas. The review is just partly focused and arranged. There is research that both supports and opposes. A summary of the material given is provided. The conclusion may or may not include a biblical integration.

52-49 points

The content is somewhat ordered, but there is no discernible organization. The use of typeface, color, graphics, effects, and so on may sometimes distract from the presenting substance. It is possible that the length criteria will not be reached.

Poor Quality

0-45%

37-1 points

The context and/or importance are lacking. There is no search history information supplied.

75-1 points

There has been an examination of relevant theoretical literature, but still no research concerning problem-related concepts has been synthesized. The review is just somewhat focused and organized. The provided overview of content does not include any supporting or opposing research. The conclusion has no scriptural references.

48-1 points

There is no logical or apparent organizational structure. There is no discernible logical sequence. The use of typeface, color, graphics, effects, and so on often detracts from the presenting substance. It is possible that the length criteria will not be reached.