Discussion: Weighing the Evidence Essay
When conducting original research, the final step researchers must complete is weighing the evidence and interpreting the meanings of their data, statistics, and analyses. This is the culmination of the research process in which all of the research methods and designs can be synthesized into a meaningful conclusion. In this stage, researchers should formulate explanations for what their data indicates, determine whether the data answers their initial research question, identify areas of uncertainty, and consider directions for further research.
In this Discussion, you focus on one of the research articles that you identified for Part 2 of the Course Project (Literature Review). You then explore the process of how the researchers generated conclusions based on their data, consider other possible interpretations of their data, and formulate ideas for further research.Discussion: Weighing the Evidence Essay
To prepare:
Review this week’s Learning Resources, focusing on how researchers find meaning in their data and generate sound conclusions. Pay particular attention to Table 2 in the article, “Study Design in Medical Research.”
Revisit the 5 articles that you identified in Part 2 of the Course Project. Select one to consider for the purpose of this Discussion.
Read sections of the chosen article where the data is presented, analyzed, and interpreted for meaning. What reasoning process did the researchers use to formulate their conclusions? What explanation did they give to support their conclusions? Were there any weaknesses in their analysis or conclusions?
Consider possible alternate conclusions that the researchers could have drawn based on their data.
Examine the findings that the article presents and consider how well they addressed the researcher’s initial question(s). What additional research could be done to build on these findings and gain a fuller understanding of the question?
Discuss an APA citation and brief summary of the research article that you selected. Describe the data and the results of any statistical tests or analyses presented in the article. Explain how the researchers formulated their conclusion, any weaknesses in their analysis or conclusions, and offer at least one alternate interpretation of their data. Propose at least one additional research study that could be done to further investigate this research topic.
Weighing the Evidence-Congestive Heart Failure and Readmission Prevention
Introduction
For the purpose of this assignment, the evidence summarized is for the study done by Chamberlain et al., (2018) titled “Determining 30-day readmission risk for heart failure patients: the Readmission after Heart Failure scale”. The data and results of the statistical tests, an alternative interpretation of data, research conclusions, the weaknesses of the study and recommendations for future research based on the study findings will be discussed.Discussion: Weighing the Evidence Essay
Description of Data and Results of Statistical Tests
Chamberlain et al., (2018) used discharge data from the state’s inpatient database by extracting data of 642,448 patients from NewYork and California and 365, 359 patients from Florida. Essential clinical and demographic data that was extracted includes race, presence of non-cardiac comorbidities, readmission for CHF, length of stay in hospital, and age. The SAS statistical software was used to analyze data through Chi-square tests and logistic binary regression.
How the Researchers Formulated Their Conclusion
Based on the researchers’ findings, it was concluded that factors such as income, anemia, drug abuse, race, age amongst other comorbidities increased the risk of readmission. When this information is presented on a RAHF scale, it is possible to accurately predict the likelihood of a patient with heart failure to be readmitted in hospital based on clinical and demographic factors (Chamberlain et al., 2018) During discharge, nurses can utilize this knowledge to predict a patient’s readmission risk and ensure that care is coordinated through discharge planning where instructions o medications, counseling and instructions for follow-up are given.
Weaknesses Mentioned In Their Analysis and Conclusions
A major weakness highlighted by Chamberlain et al., (2018) is that since the data that was used was from the SID of four states in the US, defining all-cause readmissions is likely to limit the ability of generalizing the findings to other populations across the globe. This can be explained by the fact that the reasons for readmissions in other populations may be totally different to those in the US.
Recommendations for Further Research
Further studies should focus on how to prevent outpatient mortalities, long-term follow-up and late complications that are likely to occur in heart failure patients who have previously been readmitted. This will further improve the understanding of the major causes of CHF readmissions.
References
Chamberlain R, Sond J, Mahendraraj K, Lau C & Siracuse B. (2018). Determining 30-day readmission risk for heart failure patients: the Readmission After Heart Failure scale. International Journal of General Medicine. 2018(11), 127–141.
Masri A, Althouse A, McKibben J, Thomas B, Mathier M, Ramani R, Teuteberg J, Marroquin, Lee J, Suresh R & Mulukutla M. (2018). Outcomes of Heart Failure Admissions under Observation versus Short Inpatient Stay. Journal of the American Heart Association. 2018(7).
Shan D, Finder J, Dichoso D & Lewis P. (2014). Interventions to prevent heart failure readmissions: The rationale for nurse-led heart failure programs. Journal of Nursing Education and Practice. 4(11).
Wan T, Terry A, Conn E, McKee B, Tregerman R & Barbaro S. (2017). Strategies to Modify the Risk of Heart Failure Readmission. Health Serv Res Manag Epidemiol. 2017(4).
Ziaeian B & Fonarow G. (2016). The Prevention of Hospital Readmissions in Heart Failure. Prog Cardiovasc Dis. 58(4), 379–385.Discussion: Weighing the Evidence Essay