Download presentation
Presentation is loading. Please wait.
Published byKarin Grant Modified over 8 years ago
1
Week Three
3
Key questions: ◦ Will there be an intervention? ◦ What specific design will be used? Broad design options: ◦ Experimental (randomized control trial) ◦ Quasi-experimental (controlled trial without randomization) ◦ Nonexperimental (observational study)
4
Key question: ◦ What type of comparisons will be made to illuminate relationships? Some design options: ◦ Within-subjects design: Same people compared at different times or under different conditions ◦ Between-subjects design: Different people are compared (e.g., men and women)
5
Control over confounds ◦ How will confounding variables be controlled? ◦ Which specific confounding variables will be controlled?
6
Masking/Blinding ◦ From whom will critical information be withheld to avert bias? Time frames ◦ How often will data be collected? ◦ When, relative to other events, will data be collected?
7
Relative Timing ◦ When will information on independent and dependent variables be collected—looking forward or backward in time? Location ◦ Where will the study take place?
8
Many (if not most) quantitative research questions are about causes and effects. Research questions that seek to illuminate causal relationships need to be addressed with appropriate designs.
9
Three key criteria for making causal inferences: The cause must precede the effect in time. There must be a demonstrated empirical relationship between the cause and the effect. The relationship between the presumed cause and effect cannot be explained by a third variable; another factor related to both the presumed cause and effect cannot be the “real” cause.
10
Research designs vary in their ability to support the criteria for causal inference. Experimental designs offer the strongest evidence of whether a cause (an intervention) results in an effect (a desired outcome). ◦ That’s why they are high on evidence hierarchies for questions about causes and effects.
11
Manipulation: The researcher does something to some subjects—introduces an intervention (or treatment). Control: The researcher introduces controls, including the use of a control group counterfactual.
12
Randomization (also called random assignment): The researcher assigns subjects to groups at random. ◦ Typical assignment is to an experimental group or a control group. ◦ The purpose is to make the groups equal with regard to all other factors except receipt of the intervention.
14
Involve an intervention but lack either randomization or control group Two main categories of quasi-experimental designs: ◦ Nonequivalent control group designs Those getting the intervention are compared with a nonrandomized comparison group. ◦ Within-subjects designs One group is studied before and after the intervention.
15
May be easier and more practical than true experiments, but ◦ They make it more difficult to infer causality. ◦ Usually there are several alternative rival hypotheses for results.
16
If there is no intervention, the study is nonexperimental (observational). Not all independent variables (“causes”) of interest to nurse researchers can be experimentally manipulated. ◦ For example, gender cannot ever be manipulated. ◦ Smoking cannot ethically be manipulated.
17
Cause-probing questions (e.g., prognosis or harm/etiology questions) for which manipulation is not possible are typically addressed with a correlational design. A correlation is an association between variables and can be detected through statistical analysis.
18
In a retrospective correlational design, an outcome in the present (e.g., depression) is linked to a hypothesized cause occurring in the past (e.g., having had a miscarriage). One retrospective design is a case–control design in which “cases” (e.g., those with lung cancer) are compared to “controls” (e.g., those without lung cancer) on prior potential causes (e.g., smoking habits).
19
In a prospective correlational design, a potential cause in the present (e.g., experiencing vs. not experiencing a miscarriage) is linked to a hypothesized later outcome (e.g., depression 6 months later). This is called a cohort study by medical researchers. Prospective designs are stronger than retrospective designs in supporting causal inferences—but neither is as strong as experimental designs.
20
Not all research is cause probing. Some research is descriptive (e.g., ascertaining the prevalence of a health problem). Other research is descriptive correlational— the purpose is to describe whether variables are related, without ascribing a cause-and- effect connection.
21
Cross-sectional design—Data are collected at a single point in time. Longitudinal design—Data are collected two or more times over an extended period. ◦ Trend studies ◦ Panel studies ◦ Follow-up studies Longitudinal designs are better at showing patterns of change and at clarifying whether a cause occurred before an effect (outcome).
22
Controlling external factors ◦ Achieving constancy of conditions ◦ Control over environment, setting, time ◦ Control over intervention via a formal protocol Controlling intrinsic factors ◦ Control over subject characteristics
23
Randomization Subjects as own controls (crossover design) Homogeneity (restricting sample) Matching Statistical control (e.g., analysis of covariance)
24
Statistical conclusion validity—the ability to detect true relationships statistically Internal validity—the extent to which it can be inferred that the independent variable caused or influenced the dependent variable External validity—the generalizability of the observed relationships across samples, settings, or time Construct validity—the degree to which key constructs are adequately captured in the study
25
Low statistical power (e.g., sample too small) Weakly defined “cause”—independent variable not powerful Unreliable implementation of a treatment— low intervention fidelity
26
Temporal ambiguity Selection threat — biases arising from pre- existing differences between groups being compared – This is the single biggest threat to studies that do not use an experimental design. History threat — other events co-occurring with causal factor that could also affect outcomes Maturation threat—processes that result simply from the passage of time Mortality threat—differential loss of participants from different groups – Typically a threat in experimental studies
27
Inadequate sampling of study participants Expectancy effect (Hawthorne effect) makes effects observed in a study unlikely to be replicated in real life. Unfortunately, enhancing internal validity can sometimes have adverse effects on external validity.
29
Research that integrates qualitative and quantitative data and strategies in a single study or coordinated set of studies Advantages ◦ Complementarity—words and numbers, the two languages of human communication ◦ Incrementality—quicker feedback loops between hypothesis generation and testing ◦ Enhanced validity—triangulation strengthens the ability to make inferences
30
Instrument development Hypothesis generation and testing Explication and illustration Theory building and refinement Intervention development
31
Studies that involve an intervention: ◦ Clinical trials ◦ Evaluation research ◦ Nursing intervention research Studies that do not involve an intervention ◦ Outcomes research ◦ Surveys ◦ Secondary analyses ◦ Methodologic research
32
Studies that develop clinical interventions and test their efficacy and effectiveness May be conducted in four phases
33
Phase I: finalizes the intervention (includes efforts to determine dose, assess safety, strengthen the intervention) Phase II: seeks preliminary evidence of effectiveness— a pilot test often using a quasi-experimental design Phase III: fully tests the efficacy of the treatment via a randomized clinical trial (RCT), often in multiple sites; sometimes called an efficacy study Phase IV: focuses on long-term consequences of the intervention and on generalizability; sometimes called an effectiveness study
34
Emphasis on EBP has led to a call for studies that bridge the gap between tightly controlled efficacy studies and subsequent effectiveness studies. Practical clinical trials (or pragmatic clinical trials) are designed to help in making decisions in real-world applications.
35
Examines how well a specific program, practice, procedure, or policy is working Clinical trials are sometimes evaluations of an intervention or program. Some (but not all) evaluations are clinical trials because evaluations can address a variety of questions.
36
Process (implementation) analysis Outcome analysis Impact analysis Cost (economic) analysis
37
Also called an implementation analysis Yields descriptive information about how a program actually functions Often combines qualitative and quantitative information
38
Seeks preliminary evidence about program success Common design: One-group pretest– posttest design
39
Yields information about a program’s net effects Typically uses an experimental or strong quasi-experimental design
40
Also called an economic analysis Assesses monetary consequences of a program—which may affect its ultimate viability Typically done in connection with an impact analysis (or an RCT)
41
Designed to document the quality and effectiveness of health care and nursing services Often focuses on parts of a health care quality model developed by Donabedian; key concepts: ◦ Structure of care (e.g., nursing skill mix) ◦ Processes (e.g., clinical decision-making) ◦ Outcomes (end results of patient care)
42
Typically relies on nonexperimental (correlational) designs Tools include classification systems and taxonomies ◦ Nursing actions and diagnoses (e.g., NANDA) ◦ Nursing interventions (e.g., NIC) ◦ Nurse-sensitive outcomes (e.g., NOC)
43
Obtains information (via self-reports) on the prevalence, distribution, and interrelations of variables in a population Secures information about people’s actions, intentions, knowledge, characteristics, opinions, and attitudes Survey data are used in correlational studies.
44
Modes of collecting survey data: ◦ Personal (face-to-face) interviews ◦ Telephone interviews ◦ Self-administered questionnaires Distributed by mail or the Internet Personal interviews tend to yield the highest quality data but are very expensive.
45
Advantages ◦ Researchers can collect extensive information fairly quickly. ◦ Can be used with many different populations ◦ Can be cross-sectional or longitudinal ◦ Questions limited only by what people are willing to answer Limitations ◦ Data tend to be fairly superficial. ◦ Better for extensive than intensive inquiry
46
Study that uses previously gathered data to address new questions Can be undertaken with qualitative or quantitative data Cost-effective; data collection is expensive and time-consuming Secondary analyst may not be aware of data quality problems and typically faces “if only” issues (e.g., if only there was a measure of X in the dataset).
47
Studies that focus on the ways of obtaining, organizing, and analyzing data Can involve qualitative or quantitative data Examples: ◦ Developing and testing a new data-collection instrument ◦ Testing the effectiveness of stipends in facilitating recruitment
49
Population ◦ The aggregate of cases in which a researcher is interested Sampling ◦ Selection of a portion of the population (a sample) to represent the entire population Eligibility criteria ◦ The characteristics that define the population Inclusion criteria Exclusion criteria
50
Strata ◦ Subpopulations of a population (e.g., male/female) Target population ◦ The entire population of interest Accessible population ◦ The portion of the target population that is accessible to the researcher, from which a sample is drawn
51
Representative sample ◦ A sample whose key characteristics closely approximate those of the population—a sampling goal in quantitative research More easily achieved with: ◦ Probability sampling ◦ Homogeneous populations ◦ Larger samples
52
Sampling bias ◦ The systematic over- or under-representation of segments of the population on key variables when the sample is not representative Sampling error ◦ Differences between sample values and population values
53
Probability sampling ◦ Involves random selection of elements: each element has an equal, independent chance of being selected Nonprobability sampling ◦ Does not involve selection of elements at random
54
Convenience sampling Snowball (network) sampling Quota sampling Purposive sampling
55
Use of the most conveniently available people ◦ Most widely used approach by quantitative researchers ◦ Most vulnerable to sampling biases
56
Referrals from other people already in a sample ◦ Used to identify people with distinctive characteristics ◦ Used by both quantitative and qualitative researchers
57
Convenience sampling within specified strata of the population ◦ Enhances representativeness of sample ◦ Infrequently used, despite being a fairly easy method of enhancing representativeness
60
Involves taking all of the people from an accessible population who meet the eligibility criteria over a specific time interval, or for a specified sample size ◦ A strong nonprobability approach for “rolling enrollment” type accessible populations ◦ Risk of bias low unless there are seasonal or temporal fluctuations
61
Sample members are hand-picked by researcher to achieve certain goals ◦ Used more often by qualitative than quantitative researchers ◦ Can be used in quantitative studies to select experts or to achieve other goals
62
Simple random sampling Stratified random sampling Cluster (multistage) sampling Systematic sampling
63
Uses a sampling frame – a list of all population elements Involves random selection of elements from the sampling frame ◦ Not to be confused with random assignment to groups in experiments ◦ Cumbersome; not used in large, national surveys
64
Population is first divided into strata, then random selection is done from the stratified sampling frames Enhances representativeness ◦ Can sample proportionately or disproportionately from the strata
65
Successive random sampling of units from larger to smaller units (e.g., states, then zip codes, then households) ◦ Widely used in national surveys ◦ Larger sampling error than in simple random sampling, but more efficient
66
The number of study participants in the final sample ◦ Sample size adequacy is a key determinant of sample quality in quantitative research. ◦ Sample size needs can and should be estimated through power analysis.
Similar presentations
© 2025 SlidePlayer.com. Inc.
All rights reserved.