This essay aims to critique a journal article titled: Invasive and surgical procedures in pre-hospital care: what is the need? When critiquing an article it is necessary to explore strengths and limitations of the study (Jirojwong et al., 2014). Both will be presented using Bellini & Rumrill (1999) tool to critique the article.
Title
American Psychological Association (APA, 2009) suggests that title of an article should typically be 10-12 words and should use descriptive terms and phrases that accurately highlight core content of paper. Donley (2012) suggest that good research question should be clear and focused. Although the article title is within suggested word count (11 words) it is not clear of what exactly is being explored. Title of
…show more content…
Most scientific journals require researchers to be in possession of ethical approval (Kallet, 2004). The article has no mention of ethical considerations or ethics committee approval. It is important to relate to content of the article at this point due to use of patient medical data. Article lacks acknowledgement of patient consent for data collected for clinical purposes to be used in research. World Health Organisation (WHO, 2006) stresses that consent in human subject research is paramount. Health Research Authority (2018) states that patient data obtained without consent should be consulted with Confidentiality Advisory …show more content…
Discussion within critiqued article appears somehow confusing. Aveyard (2014) contrasts discussion section between qualitative method, where main findings are discuses straight after results, and quantitative methods, where separate section is used within discussion section to discuss the results. Critiques article papers to ignore both styles, mixing current and previous findings making it difficult to understand how results relate to the research question. One of the strengths of the result section is direct link between current study contracted with previous findings. The authors identify limitation of the study as lack of feedback on patients’ outcome. Although limitation of study should be stated researchers should emphasise broader implications of the study (Schimel, 2012). Failure to clarify implications and failure to acknowledge strengths of the study result in lack of context in line with findings (Aveyard, 2014). Within the article several limitations can be observed not identified by the researchers. For instance, authors point at lack of ‘high-pressure ventilation system’ which could impact the results of the study and issues obtaining evidence from pre-hospital care. Aveyard (2014) also suggest acknowledgment of issues arising during literature review to further clarify limitations of the
Additionally, the clinical staff has shown very low level of confidence in the RR documentation on observation chart. Lack of time, laziness, lack of training and knowledge and unawareness of the importance of the respiratory assessment are main reasons to neglect this important aspect of nursing as stated in this study (Philip, Richardson, & Cohen,
Southam’s practice, beginning with the Code’s number 1 rule, “The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential.” Other rules under the Nuremberg Code were broken as well, however all of these egregious behaviors of researchers, more so than just Southam, have influenced the tight research protocols in place today. As Dr. Hardy shared information on research protocols, she consistently referred back to a strict system of regulations that, at times, may seem a little extreme. The alternative, a system permitting researchers like Southam, would be a far harder bullet to bite. In the end, I am glad these systems are in place to try to ensure a trust between patients and
“The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) of 1996 made it illegal to gain access to personal medical information for any reasons other than health care delivery, operations, and reimbursements” (Shi & Singh, 2008, p. 166). “HIPAA legislation mandated strict controls on the transfer of personally identifiable health data between two entities, provisions for disclosure of protected information, and criminal penalties for violation” (Clayton 2001). “HIPAA also has privacy requirements that govern disclosure of patient protected health information (PHI) placed in the medical record by physicians, nurses, and other health care providers” (Buck, 2011). Always remember conversations about a patient’s health care or treatment is a violation of HIPAA. “All PHI is included in the privacy requirements for example: the patient’s past, present or future physical or mental health or condition; the provision of health care to the individual, or the past, present, or future payment for the provision of health care to the individual, and that identifies the individual or for which there is a reasonable basis to believe it can be used to identify the individual” (Buck, 2011). Other identifiable health information would be the patient’s name, address, birth date and Social Security Number (Keomouangchanh, 2011). (Word count 197)
Introduction During the process of research, professionals collect data or identifiable private information through intervention or interaction. While this is a vital part of the scientific and medical fields, every precaution must be taken by researchers to protect the participants' rights. Ethics, outlined by the Belmont report; requirements, described by the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS); and regulations, laid out by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) are verified by an Institutional Review Board (IRB). This procedure ensures that all human rights are safeguarded during the entire research process. The Institutional Review Board The IRB is an administrative body which has been established to make sure research participants' rights are protected.
A way of making each person understand what is being asked of them is to offer them a leaflet explaining that they are consenting to their information being shared and why their consent is needed. Also, another form of consent is implied consent, this is when an individual is unable to explicitly say that they want their information to be shared but their behaviour displays that they are willing for their information to be shared. In the study of Anwar, it is clear to see that his GP did not have any consent off Anwar, the GP just assumed that Anwar would be okay about being referred to the diabetes clinic. Although the doctor did not have any consent off Anwar, the GP passed on the information to the diabetes clinic for Anwar’s safety (The Open University, 2014,
Which is very important for nurses or any medical professional to do in the healthcare profession. Nurses are receiving these patients in their most vulnerable state, nurses are exposed and trusted with the patients’ information to further assist them on providing optimum treatment. Keeping patient’s information private goes back to not just doing what’s morally right but also it also builds that nurse – patient relationship as well. We also have provision three that specifically taps on this issue as well, as it states: “The nurse seeks to protect the health, safety, and rights of patient.” (Nurses Code of Ethics,
The research question is the first and foremost initial step in the research process, because it defines the expected outcomes and drives the project design. So it should be clear and concise once the research question is formulated, the next is defining the terms and concepts used in the research process. A literature review is needed to clarify issues, gives an understanding to the researcher how others have formulated similar research questions and defines concepts.
Ethics refers to the values and customs of a community at a particular point in time. At present, the term ethics is guided by the moral principles that guide our everyday actions. These moral principles guide the researcher into deciding what is ‘right’ or ‘wrong’. The foundation of medical ethics is governed by two philosophical frameworks that are deontology, and utilitarianism. However ultimately the ethics committees need to balance the risks, and benefits for the participants and the community associated with the particular research proposal. This balance is quite important as the well being of participants is at risk.7
When caring for patients it is fundamentally important to have a good selection of up to date evidence Based Practice clinical articles to support research strategies, this allows professionals to assemble the most resent and accurate information known which enables them to make decisions tailored to the individual’s plan of care. It is essential to have clinical expertise and have the involvement from the individual patient, they must have full engagement and incorporation in order to have the accurate evaluation.
Informed consent is a very serious decision a patient has to make when it comes to their health and consenting to procedures that are believed to cure or treat their current health status. It is important to address the effectiveness of the role a physician play in the informed consent process assuring that the patient has given truly informed consent and what safeguards can be put in place to assure the patient is exercising informed consent. Informed consent is based on the fact that the person consenting is a rational individual that is aware of the action to which he/she is consenting. Allen and McNamara (2011) notes that "On the standard understanding, the important elements of informed consent are the provision of information, the voluntariness of the choice and the competence of the chooser to make the choice— so the potential research participant should be provided with information relevant to the decision to participate, they should be able to choose freely about their participation and they should be competent to decide.
The researchers anticipated the study’s purpose and interest at the very beginning, which I believe was helpful. The procedure was described accordingly and the researchers revealed all the significant points of the study. They got into real details about the procedures that they followed during the course of the case study and throughout the study can reader can draw a better conclusion regarding why such methodology was used. The researchers documented the research process and the article is presented with headings identifying different sections that explain how and why they did what they did. These research findings can be applicable outside the study situation.
The accountability and accurateness is also judged taking these regulations as a reference. Writers and publishers need to focus on supporting the formulation of high-quality, accurate and informative scientific publications that make the target audience aware of the clinical and nonclinical developments and the healthcare environment. This can be achieved by following the highest ethical standards for ensuring accurate, timely, high-quality and transparent reporting. Also, the publishers need to acknowledge the need of differentiating legitimate and professional medical writing from the deceitful and unethical practice of
Freedman B. Equipoise and the ethics of clinical research. N Engl J Med. 1987; 317(3): 141-145
In research, there is protected health information (PHI) that could conceivably be exposed, causing one to question to the validity and impartiality of the research. If a consent or waiver form is not signed and research
This profile adheres to the School of Health and Social Care’s guidelines set by Teesside University’s code of conduct in relation to confidentiality and consent. The profile also adheres to the NMC guidelines referring to consent and confidentiality as a real person has not been used; therefore consent did not need to be gained.