Johns Hopkins Research Evidence Appraisal Tool

Johns Hopkins Research Evidence Appraisal Tool

Most health care industries continue to express their concerns about the rising cases of diabetes, specifically from the population with disabilities. A study conducted by Gillani et al. (2017) about “A qualitative study to explore the perception and behavior of patients towards diabetes management with a physical disability” explores factors that limit physically challenged diabetic patients from complying with medication instructions, how to maintain a healthy lifestyle, as well as self-monitoring practices. The purpose of this paper is to use the Johns Hopkins Research Appraisal Tool to critique the article. Johns Hopkins Research Evidence Appraisal Tool

Part 2: evidence summary

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

This article employed a qualitative research design, which was used to explore the understanding of the participants’ behavior on the way and why individuals always end up responding to the different practices of disease management. Therefore, this method also provides an all-inclusive solution to different questions from various patient-oriented barriers to other problems and concerns that are drug-related (Gillani et al., 2017). Therefore, the employed qualitative interview follows a flexible nature of exploration, which is of much importance and essence to the study team tasked with investigating the perception, knowledge, and barriers to respond.

Between 2016 and 2017, the authors conducted this research in a particular diabetic facility called Penang in Malaysia using diverse settings. It means, when interviewing the participants, researchers considered the language barrier from the three selected ethnic groups (Chinese, Indians, and Malay). All the participants had attained the legal age of 18 years and above. To make the research eligible, researchers selected members with a physical disability such as leg amputee and suffering from diabetes type II Mellitus. Johns Hopkins Research Evidence Appraisal Tool

(Gillani et al., 2017). The recruitment’s performance in the suggestion with the physicians who attend the patients at a diabetic clinic is the 6-months of systematic random sampling. The patients with pregnancy, cancer, cognitive impairment, the inflammatory disorder were excluded. When it came to answering the interview questions, the participants never faced any challenges during the session since the used questions were not had, and little/or no medical jargon was used during the interview.

Additionally, when assessing participant’s habit of self-checking their blood sugar level, findings of this article confirmed that upon asking the participants of their opinion on the preferred method of carrying out records of blood glucose tests, various participants from widowed and divorced as well as those from low socioeconomic statuses went on to deny adapting to telemonitoring and hence preferred manual recording (Gillani et al., 2017). On the other hand, participants from both moderate and high economic status and those married or single indicated positive perception and willingness to adapt to technology-based monitoring. Johns Hopkins Research Evidence Appraisal Tool

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

Since the sample is random, it is representative of the population of interest. The authors clearly distinguish the study sample that type II diabetes adolescents above 18 were to participate in the research. Also, all members were enlisted in the training and research health care firms in Malaysia. However, I think this sample size did not achieve saturation because it seemed insufficient, which I think researchers would attain if they collected participants from other health care facilities in the country.

ORDER A PLAGIARISM FREE PAPER NOW

The study sample represented the needs of the sampled population because diabetic issues raised were used in addressing the management practices that can be used in detecting the behaviors and perceptions of diabetic patients with a physical disability and the better approaches for better health.

Compare and contrast the study limitations in this study.

There were some several limitations associated with this qualitative study:

1. When researchers were responding to participant’s responses, the anthropometric correlation was not performed. Johns Hopkins Research Evidence Appraisal Tool

2. Researchers acknowledged that the research was limited to participants with help-seeking behavior, while participants declined the appointment they had with their practitioners.

3. Researchers could not analyze findings to capture the whole population’s representative since there was not enough money to fund the project.

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

With the evidence supported by different researchers in this article, I would consider it in educating my physically disabled population with diabetes by pinpointing several factors that affect glycemic control and patient adherence to the different treatment plans. It is important for diabetic patients to always follow several care models in order to achieve the target glycemic control, such as complying with medication prescribed, improved medication knowledge of diabetes, dietary modifications, and self-monitoring blood glucose (Gillani et al., 2017).

Geriatrics is one of the critical determinants in implicating the overall accomplishment just as morbidity of the public health efforts compress the morbidity time frame among various individuals. Gillani et al. (2017) say diabetic cases are higher in people with physical disabilities than those without any underlying condition. Diabetic patients are exposed to so many risk factors that would further complicate their health. These factors include but are not limited to depression, neuropathy, cardiovascular diseases, peripheral arterial disease, exercises, and being overweight. Cognitive impairments and physical disability are some of the significant barriers in the achievement of optimal glycemic control, together with medication adherence. Johns Hopkins Research Evidence Appraisal Tool

Another thing that will make me use this qualitative research study is how the authors took time to consider some ethical concerns while recruiting participants in this research study. The critical ethical contemplations that were followed in this examination included guaranteeing that the study members’ data were kept private. Since the personal information would never be revealed, just the figures of such investigations were given with no name, postal districts, or even their ages. Consequently, only a range of the members was utilized soon after they were conceded into such medical facilities or even released, with no further details being offered for the people. Researchers asked the clinical research committee (CRS) to review and approve the research ethics before commencing.

References

Gillani, S. W., Sulaiman, S. A. S., Abdul, M. I. M., & Saad, S. Y. (2017). A qualitative study to explore the perception and behavior of patients towards diabetes management with physical disability. Diabetology & Metabolic Syndrome, 9(1), 58 Johns Hopkins Research Evidence Appraisal Tool