My Blog

Tag: Clinical Nursing & Patient Care

  • [Solved] Tiff week 7

    ✓ Verified Academic Solution Available

    Executive Solution Overview

    Tiff week 7 – 2 years ago **files (2)** – ## PresentationNU760-8H.pptx – Presentation927641204.pptx **## PresentationNU760-8H.pptx** Enhancing Compliance with USPSTF Preventive Screening Guidelines Tiffany Williams NU760-8H 4/5/2025 Problem Statement and Aim Statement Problem Statement: Inconsistent…

    Instant Solution Download

    $6.99

    Immediate access to the full model answer, formatted citations, and rubric breakdown.

    Need a Fresh Custom Paper?

    Have this question answered from scratch according to your specific instructions and deadline.

    Order on TutorsGallery →

    Assignment Prompt & Instructions

    Tiff week 7

    – 2 years ago

    **files (2)**

    – ## PresentationNU760-8H.pptx

    – Presentation927641204.pptx

    **## PresentationNU760-8H.pptx**

    Enhancing Compliance with USPSTF Preventive Screening Guidelines

    Tiffany Williams

    NU760-8H

    4/5/2025

    Problem Statement and Aim Statement

    Problem Statement:

    Inconsistent adherence to USPSTF guidelines for cardiovascular risk factor screenings in a primary care clinic.

    Leads to delayed diagnoses and preventable complications (e.g., stroke, heart attack).

    Aim Statement:

    Increase compliance with USPSTF screening recommendations from 65% to 90% within six months.

    Interventions: Standardized screening protocols, staff education, and EHR reminders.

    The problem stems from a gap in evidence-based practice, where only 65% of eligible patients receive timely screenings for cardiovascular risk factors like hypertension and hyperlipidemia (Barry et al., 2023). This non-compliance exacerbates health disparities, particularly among underserved populations. The aim statement targets a 25% improvement by integrating systematic interventions. Standardized protocols will reduce variability in provider practices, while EHR reminders will address forgetfulness during patient visits. Staff education ensures alignment with USPSTF guidelines, fostering a culture of accountability. This approach aligns with the Institute for Healthcare Improvement’s (IHI) goals of reducing preventable harm through structured processes (Roberti et al., 2025). The 90% benchmark reflects organizational quality metrics and mirrors successful outcomes in similar settings (Manandi et al., 2023).

    2

    Range of Potential Strategies/Interventions

    Literature-Supported Strategies:

    EHR Clinical Decision Support (CDS):

    Automated reminders for overdue screenings (Davidson et al., 2022).

    Proven to increase screening rates by 20–30% in primary care.

    Provider Education Workshops:

    Interactive sessions on USPSTF guidelines (Guirguis-Blake et al., 2023).

    Patient Outreach Programs:

    Text/email reminders for preventive care appointments.

    Gaps in Literature:

    Limited studies on cost-effectiveness of multicomponent interventions in rural clinics.

    Existing literature highlights EHR-based tools as the most scalable intervention, with studies showing significant improvements in screening adherence (Davidson et al., 2022). However, standalone EHR reminders may lack impact without provider buy-in, underscoring the need for education (Guirguis-Blake et al., 2023). Patient engagement strategies, though promising, are less studied in low-resource settings. Manandi et al. (2023) note that multicomponent interventions (e.g., EHR + education) yield the highest compliance rates but require robust infrastructure. Notably, no studies addressed sociocultural barriers in underserved populations, suggesting a need for tailored solutions. This gap informed the selection of a hybrid approach combining EHR optimization with team training.

    3

    Selected Strategy: PDSA Cycle

    Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) Framework:

    Plan: Develop screening protocols and EHR reminder templates.

    Do: Pilot with 2–3 providers over 4 weeks.

    Study: Analyze screening rates and staff feedback.

    Act: Scale successful interventions clinic-wide.

    Why PDSA?

    Iterative testing minimizes disruption (Roberti et al., 2025).

    Aligns with IHI’s evidence-based improvement models.

    The PDSA cycle was used because it is flexible and a proven success in primary care (Roberti et al., 2025). The "Plan" phase involves collaboration with IT to create EHR alerts using patient age/risk factors. In "Do," technical or workflow barriers are found through small-scale testing. The "Study" step uses clinic performance measures and surveys of staff to refine interventions iteratively to make them usable. For example, in the event of neglecting reminders, additional modules of education will be added. Finally, "Act" implements all provider changes through practice, and monthly auditing to ensure sustainability. This solution meets the clinic's resource constraints yet still manages within the 6-month time frame (Manandi et al., 2023).

    4

    Rationale for PDSA Selection

    Clinic-Specific Fit:

    Limited resources favor incremental changes over costly system overhauls.

    High staff turnover necessitates simple, replicable processes.

    Evidence Base:

    PDSA improved screening rates by 22% in similar settings (Manandi et al., 2023).

    The PDSA cycle's incremental nature minimizes resistance to change, a consideration that is critical with the clinic's heterogeneous group of providers. The cycle's nature allows for rapid revision—crucial in a high-volume setting where workflows vary. There is proof of PDSA success in cardiovascular risk factor management, with a goal achievement rate of 68% when supported by adequate staffing (Manandi et al., 2023). In addition, the model's emphasis on data-driven decision-making aligns with the electronic health record capacity of the clinic, with results that are measurable. The strategy also addresses USPSTF's call for "system-level changes" to eliminate guideline-practice disparities (Davidson et al., 2022).

    5

    Key Stakeholders in Implementation

    Providers: Order screenings and engage in education.

    IT Team: Configure EHR reminders and run reports.

    Nursing Staff: Execute point-of-care screenings.

    Clinic Leadership: Allocate time/resources for training.

    Successful operationalization requires multidisciplinary effort. Providers need to drive the process, with IT providing easy-to-use EHR tools (e.g., pop-up reminders with single-click ordering options). Nursing staff, often the first to interact with patients, will receive training on streamlined workflows to avoid delays. Clinic leadership’s role includes approving protected time for PDSA reviews and celebrating milestones to sustain motivation. For example, monthly feedback sessions will address challenges like alert fatigue. This team-based approach mirrors IHI’s "whole-system" philosophy, where shared accountability drives improvement (Roberti et al., 2025).

    6

    References

    Barry, M. J., Wolff, T. A., Pbert, L., Davidson, K. W., Fan, T. M., Krist, A. H., … & Nicholson, W. K. (2023). Putting evidence into practice: an update on the US Preventive Services Task Force methods for developing recommendations for preventive services. The Annals of Family Medicine, 21(2), 165-171.
    [https://scholar.google.com/scholar?output=instlink&q=info:EhtTAj4EDo4J:scholar.google.com/&hl=en&as_sdt=0,5&scillfp=1814592995208635009&oi=lle](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?output=instlink&q=info:EhtTAj4EDo4J:scholar.google.com/&hl=en&as_sdt=0,5&scillfp=1814592995208635009&oi=lle)

    Davidson, K. W., Barry, M. J., Mangione, C. M., Cabana, M., Chelmow, D., Coker, T. R., … & US Preventive Services Task Force. (2022). Aspirin use to prevent cardiovascular disease: US Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. Jama, 327(16), 1577-1584.
    [https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/articlepdf/2791399/jama_davidson_2022_us_220007_1650466044.25397.pdf](https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/articlepdf/2791399/jama_davidson_2022_us_220007_1650466044.25397.pdf)

    Guirguis-Blake, J. M., Evans, C. V., Coppola, E. L., Redmond, N., & Perdue, L. A. (2023). Screening for lipid disorders in children and adolescents: updated evidence report and systematic review for the US Preventive Services Task Force. Jama, 330(3), 261-274.
    [https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2807281](https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2807281)

    Manandi, D., Tu, Q., Hafiz, N., Raeside, R., Redfern, J., & Hyun, K. (2023). The evaluation of the Plan–Do–Study–Act cycles for a healthcare quality improvement intervention in primary care. Australian Journal of Primary Health, 30(1), NULL-NULL.
    [https://www.publish.csiro.au/py/pdf/PY23123](https://www.publish.csiro.au/py/pdf/PY23123)

    Roberti, J., Jorro-Barón, F., Ini, N., Guglielmino, M., Rodríguez, A. P., Echave, C., … & Alonso, J. P. (2025). Improving Antibiotic Use in Argentine Pediatric Hospitals: A Process Evaluation Using Normalization Process Theory. Pediatric Quality & Safety, 10(1), e788.
    [https://journals.lww.com/pqs/_layouts/15/oaks.journals/downloadpdf.aspx?an=01949578-202501000-00010](https://journals.lww.com/pqs/_layouts/15/oaks.journals/downloadpdf.aspx?an=01949578-202501000-00010)

    ## image1.jpeg

    ## image2.jpeg

    ## image3.jpeg

    ## image4.png

    ## image5.jpeg

    ## image6.jpeg

    ## image7.jpeg

    **Presentation927641204.pptx**

    This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/presentation927641204-pptx-10261993)

    **Presentation927641204.pptx**

    This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/presentation927641204-pptx-10261993)

    **## PresentationNU760-8H.pptx**

    Enhancing Compliance with USPSTF Preventive Screening Guidelines

    Tiffany Williams

    NU760-8H

    4/5/2025

    Problem Statement and Aim Statement

    Problem Statement:

    Inconsistent adherence to USPSTF guidelines for cardiovascular risk factor screenings in a primary care clinic.

    Leads to delayed diagnoses and preventable complications (e.g., stroke, heart attack).

    Aim Statement:

    Increase compliance with USPSTF screening recommendations from 65% to 90% within six months.

    Interventions: Standardized screening protocols, staff education, and EHR reminders.

    The problem stems from a gap in evidence-based practice, where only 65% of eligible patients receive timely screenings for cardiovascular risk factors like hypertension and hyperlipidemia (Barry et al., 2023). This non-compliance exacerbates health disparities, particularly among underserved populations. The aim statement targets a 25% improvement by integrating systematic interventions. Standardized protocols will reduce variability in provider practices, while EHR reminders will address forgetfulness during patient visits. Staff education ensures alignment with USPSTF guidelines, fostering a culture of accountability. This approach aligns with the Institute for Healthcare Improvement’s (IHI) goals of reducing preventable harm through structured processes (Roberti et al., 2025). The 90% benchmark reflects organizational quality metrics and mirrors successful outcomes in similar settings (Manandi et al., 2023).

    2

    Range of Potential Strategies/Interventions

    Literature-Supported Strategies:

    EHR Clinical Decision Support (CDS):

    Automated reminders for overdue screenings (Davidson et al., 2022).

    Proven to increase screening rates by 20–30% in primary care.

    Provider Education Workshops:

    Interactive sessions on USPSTF guidelines (Guirguis-Blake et al., 2023).

    Patient Outreach Programs:

    Text/email reminders for preventive care appointments.

    Gaps in Literature:

    Limited studies on cost-effectiveness of multicomponent interventions in rural clinics.

    Existing literature highlights EHR-based tools as the most scalable intervention, with studies showing significant improvements in screening adherence (Davidson et al., 2022). However, standalone EHR reminders may lack impact without provider buy-in, underscoring the need for education (Guirguis-Blake et al., 2023). Patient engagement strategies, though promising, are less studied in low-resource settings. Manandi et al. (2023) note that multicomponent interventions (e.g., EHR + education) yield the highest compliance rates but require robust infrastructure. Notably, no studies addressed sociocultural barriers in underserved populations, suggesting a need for tailored solutions. This gap informed the selection of a hybrid approach combining EHR optimization with team training.

    3

    Selected Strategy: PDSA Cycle

    Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) Framework:

    Plan: Develop screening protocols and EHR reminder templates.

    Do: Pilot with 2–3 providers over 4 weeks.

    Study: Analyze screening rates and staff feedback.

    Act: Scale successful interventions clinic-wide.

    Why PDSA?

    Iterative testing minimizes disruption (Roberti et al., 2025).

    Aligns with IHI’s evidence-based improvement models.

    The PDSA cycle was used because it is flexible and a proven success in primary care (Roberti et al., 2025). The "Plan" phase involves collaboration with IT to create EHR alerts using patient age/risk factors. In "Do," technical or workflow barriers are found through small-scale testing. The "Study" step uses clinic performance measures and surveys of staff to refine interventions iteratively to make them usable. For example, in the event of neglecting reminders, additional modules of education will be added. Finally, "Act" implements all provider changes through practice, and monthly auditing to ensure sustainability. This solution meets the clinic's resource constraints yet still manages within the 6-month time frame (Manandi et al., 2023).

    4

    Rationale for PDSA Selection

    Clinic-Specific Fit:

    Limited resources favor incremental changes over costly system overhauls.

    High staff turnover necessitates simple, replicable processes.

    Evidence Base:

    PDSA improved screening rates by 22% in similar settings (Manandi et al., 2023).

    The PDSA cycle's incremental nature minimizes resistance to change, a consideration that is critical with the clinic's heterogeneous group of providers. The cycle's nature allows for rapid revision—crucial in a high-volume setting where workflows vary. There is proof of PDSA success in cardiovascular risk factor management, with a goal achievement rate of 68% when supported by adequate staffing (Manandi et al., 2023). In addition, the model's emphasis on data-driven decision-making aligns with the electronic health record capacity of the clinic, with results that are measurable. The strategy also addresses USPSTF's call for "system-level changes" to eliminate guideline-practice disparities (Davidson et al., 2022).

    5

    Key Stakeholders in Implementation

    Providers: Order screenings and engage in education.

    IT Team: Configure EHR reminders and run reports.

    Nursing Staff: Execute point-of-care screenings.

    Clinic Leadership: Allocate time/resources for training.

    Successful operationalization requires multidisciplinary effort. Providers need to drive the process, with IT providing easy-to-use EHR tools (e.g., pop-up reminders with single-click ordering options). Nursing staff, often the first to interact with patients, will receive training on streamlined workflows to avoid delays. Clinic leadership’s role includes approving protected time for PDSA reviews and celebrating milestones to sustain motivation. For example, monthly feedback sessions will address challenges like alert fatigue. This team-based approach mirrors IHI’s "whole-system" philosophy, where shared accountability drives improvement (Roberti et al., 2025).

    6

    References

    Barry, M. J., Wolff, T. A., Pbert, L., Davidson, K. W., Fan, T. M., Krist, A. H., … & Nicholson, W. K. (2023). Putting evidence into practice: an update on the US Preventive Services Task Force methods for developing recommendations for preventive services. The Annals of Family Medicine, 21(2), 165-171.
    [https://scholar.google.com/scholar?output=instlink&q=info:EhtTAj4EDo4J:scholar.google.com/&hl=en&as_sdt=0,5&scillfp=1814592995208635009&oi=lle](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?output=instlink&q=info:EhtTAj4EDo4J:scholar.google.com/&hl=en&as_sdt=0,5&scillfp=1814592995208635009&oi=lle)

    Davidson, K. W., Barry, M. J., Mangione, C. M., Cabana, M., Chelmow, D., Coker, T. R., … & US Preventive Services Task Force. (2022). Aspirin use to prevent cardiovascular disease: US Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. Jama, 327(16), 1577-1584.
    [https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/articlepdf/2791399/jama_davidson_2022_us_220007_1650466044.25397.pdf](https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/articlepdf/2791399/jama_davidson_2022_us_220007_1650466044.25397.pdf)

    Guirguis-Blake, J. M., Evans, C. V., Coppola, E. L., Redmond, N., & Perdue, L. A. (2023). Screening for lipid disorders in children and adolescents: updated evidence report and systematic review for the US Preventive Services Task Force. Jama, 330(3), 261-274.
    [https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2807281](https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2807281)

    Manandi, D., Tu, Q., Hafiz, N., Raeside, R., Redfern, J., & Hyun, K. (2023). The evaluation of the Plan–Do–Study–Act cycles for a healthcare quality improvement intervention in primary care. Australian Journal of Primary Health, 30(1), NULL-NULL.
    [https://www.publish.csiro.au/py/pdf/PY23123](https://www.publish.csiro.au/py/pdf/PY23123)

    Roberti, J., Jorro-Barón, F., Ini, N., Guglielmino, M., Rodríguez, A. P., Echave, C., … & Alonso, J. P. (2025). Improving Antibiotic Use in Argentine Pediatric Hospitals: A Process Evaluation Using Normalization Process Theory. Pediatric Quality & Safety, 10(1), e788.
    [https://journals.lww.com/pqs/_layouts/15/oaks.journals/downloadpdf.aspx?an=01949578-202501000-00010](https://journals.lww.com/pqs/_layouts/15/oaks.journals/downloadpdf.aspx?an=01949578-202501000-00010)

    ## image1.jpeg

    ## image2.jpeg

    ## image3.jpeg

    ## image4.png

    ## image5.jpeg

    ## image6.jpeg

    ## image7.jpeg

    **Presentation927641204.pptx**

    This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/presentation927641204-pptx-10261993)

    **## PresentationNU760-8H.pptx**

    Enhancing Compliance with USPSTF Preventive Screening Guidelines

    Tiffany Williams

    NU760-8H

    4/5/2025

    Problem Statement and Aim Statement

    Problem Statement:

    Inconsistent adherence to USPSTF guidelines for cardiovascular risk factor screenings in a primary care clinic.

    Leads to delayed diagnoses and preventable complications (e.g., stroke, heart attack).

    Aim Statement:

    Increase compliance with USPSTF screening recommendations from 65% to 90% within six months.

    Interventions: Standardized screening protocols, staff education, and EHR reminders.

    The problem stems from a gap in evidence-based practice, where only 65% of eligible patients receive timely screenings for cardiovascular risk factors like hypertension and hyperlipidemia (Barry et al., 2023). This non-compliance exacerbates health disparities, particularly among underserved populations. The aim statement targets a 25% improvement by integrating systematic interventions. Standardized protocols will reduce variability in provider practices, while EHR reminders will address forgetfulness during patient visits. Staff education ensures alignment with USPSTF guidelines, fostering a culture of accountability. This approach aligns with the Institute for Healthcare Improvement’s (IHI) goals of reducing preventable harm through structured processes (Roberti et al., 2025). The 90% benchmark reflects organizational quality metrics and mirrors successful outcomes in similar settings (Manandi et al., 2023).

    2

    Range of Potential Strategies/Interventions

    Literature-Supported Strategies:

    EHR Clinical Decision Support (CDS):

    Automated reminders for overdue screenings (Davidson et al., 2022).

    Proven to increase screening rates by 20–30% in primary care.

    Provider Education Workshops:

    Interactive sessions on USPSTF guidelines (Guirguis-Blake et al., 2023).

    Patient Outreach Programs:

    Text/email reminders for preventive care appointments.

    Gaps in Literature:

    Limited studies on cost-effectiveness of multicomponent interventions in rural clinics.

    Existing literature highlights EHR-based tools as the most scalable intervention, with studies showing significant improvements in screening adherence (Davidson et al., 2022). However, standalone EHR reminders may lack impact without provider buy-in, underscoring the need for education (Guirguis-Blake et al., 2023). Patient engagement strategies, though promising, are less studied in low-resource settings. Manandi et al. (2023) note that multicomponent interventions (e.g., EHR + education) yield the highest compliance rates but require robust infrastructure. Notably, no studies addressed sociocultural barriers in underserved populations, suggesting a need for tailored solutions. This gap informed the selection of a hybrid approach combining EHR optimization with team training.

    3

    Selected Strategy: PDSA Cycle

    Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) Framework:

    Plan: Develop screening protocols and EHR reminder templates.

    Do: Pilot with 2–3 providers over 4 weeks.

    Study: Analyze screening rates and staff feedback.

    Act: Scale successful interventions clinic-wide.

    Why PDSA?

    Iterative testing minimizes disruption (Roberti et al., 2025).

    Aligns with IHI’s evidence-based improvement models.

    The PDSA cycle was used because it is flexible and a proven success in primary care (Roberti et al., 2025). The "Plan" phase involves collaboration with IT to create EHR alerts using patient age/risk factors. In "Do," technical or workflow barriers are found through small-scale testing. The "Study" step uses clinic performance measures and surveys of staff to refine interventions iteratively to make them usable. For example, in the event of neglecting reminders, additional modules of education will be added. Finally, "Act" implements all provider changes through practice, and monthly auditing to ensure sustainability. This solution meets the clinic's resource constraints yet still manages within the 6-month time frame (Manandi et al., 2023).

    4

    Rationale for PDSA Selection

    Clinic-Specific Fit:

    Limited resources favor incremental changes over costly system overhauls.

    High staff turnover necessitates simple, replicable processes.

    Evidence Base:

    PDSA improved screening rates by 22% in similar settings (Manandi et al., 2023).

    The PDSA cycle's incremental nature minimizes resistance to change, a consideration that is critical with the clinic's heterogeneous group of providers. The cycle's nature allows for rapid revision—crucial in a high-volume setting where workflows vary. There is proof of PDSA success in cardiovascular risk factor management, with a goal achievement rate of 68% when supported by adequate staffing (Manandi et al., 2023). In addition, the model's emphasis on data-driven decision-making aligns with the electronic health record capacity of the clinic, with results that are measurable. The strategy also addresses USPSTF's call for "system-level changes" to eliminate guideline-practice disparities (Davidson et al., 2022).

    5

    Key Stakeholders in Implementation

    Providers: Order screenings and engage in education.

    IT Team: Configure EHR reminders and run reports.

    Nursing Staff: Execute point-of-care screenings.

    Clinic Leadership: Allocate time/resources for training.

    Successful operationalization requires multidisciplinary effort. Providers need to drive the process, with IT providing easy-to-use EHR tools (e.g., pop-up reminders with single-click ordering options). Nursing staff, often the first to interact with patients, will receive training on streamlined workflows to avoid delays. Clinic leadership’s role includes approving protected time for PDSA reviews and celebrating milestones to sustain motivation. For example, monthly feedback sessions will address challenges like alert fatigue. This team-based approach mirrors IHI’s "whole-system" philosophy, where shared accountability drives improvement (Roberti et al., 2025).

    6

    References

    Barry, M. J., Wolff, T. A., Pbert, L., Davidson, K. W., Fan, T. M., Krist, A. H., … & Nicholson, W. K. (2023). Putting evidence into practice: an update on the US Preventive Services Task Force methods for developing recommendations for preventive services. The Annals of Family Medicine, 21(2), 165-171.
    [https://scholar.google.com/scholar?output=instlink&q=info:EhtTAj4EDo4J:scholar.google.com/&hl=en&as_sdt=0,5&scillfp=1814592995208635009&oi=lle](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?output=instlink&q=info:EhtTAj4EDo4J:scholar.google.com/&hl=en&as_sdt=0,5&scillfp=1814592995208635009&oi=lle)

    Davidson, K. W., Barry, M. J., Mangione, C. M., Cabana, M., Chelmow, D., Coker, T. R., … & US Preventive Services Task Force. (2022). Aspirin use to prevent cardiovascular disease: US Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. Jama, 327(16), 1577-1584.
    [https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/articlepdf/2791399/jama_davidson_2022_us_220007_1650466044.25397.pdf](https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/articlepdf/2791399/jama_davidson_2022_us_220007_1650466044.25397.pdf)

    Guirguis-Blake, J. M., Evans, C. V., Coppola, E. L., Redmond, N., & Perdue, L. A. (2023). Screening for lipid disorders in children and adolescents: updated evidence report and systematic review for the US Preventive Services Task Force. Jama, 330(3), 261-274.
    [https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2807281](https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2807281)

    Manandi, D., Tu, Q., Hafiz, N., Raeside, R., Redfern, J., & Hyun, K. (2023). The evaluation of the Plan–Do–Study–Act cycles for a healthcare quality improvement intervention in primary care. Australian Journal of Primary Health, 30(1), NULL-NULL.
    [https://www.publish.csiro.au/py/pdf/PY23123](https://www.publish.csiro.au/py/pdf/PY23123)

    Roberti, J., Jorro-Barón, F., Ini, N., Guglielmino, M., Rodríguez, A. P., Echave, C., … & Alonso, J. P. (2025). Improving Antibiotic Use in Argentine Pediatric Hospitals: A Process Evaluation Using Normalization Process Theory. Pediatric Quality & Safety, 10(1), e788.
    [https://journals.lww.com/pqs/_layouts/15/oaks.journals/downloadpdf.aspx?an=01949578-202501000-00010](https://journals.lww.com/pqs/_layouts/15/oaks.journals/downloadpdf.aspx?an=01949578-202501000-00010)

    ## image1.jpeg

    ## image2.jpeg

    ## image3.jpeg

    ## image4.png

    ## image5.jpeg

    ## image6.jpeg

    ## image7.jpeg

    **Presentation927641204.pptx**

    This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/presentation927641204-pptx-10261993)

  • [Solved] Probabilities & Lotteries sta 2023

    ✓ Verified Academic Solution Available

    Executive Solution Overview

    If people understood the mathematics involving probabilities and lotteries, as you now do, do you think they would continue to spend hundreds of dollars per year on lottery tickets? Explain your answer and respond to at least 2 of your classmates *post should be at least 200 words/numbers or a comb…

    Instant Solution Download

    $6.99

    Immediate access to the full model answer, formatted citations, and rubric breakdown.

    Need a Fresh Custom Paper?

    Have this question answered from scratch according to your specific instructions and deadline.

    Order on TutorsGallery →

    Assignment Prompt & Instructions

    If people understood the mathematics involving probabilities and lotteries, as you now do, do you think they would continue to spend hundreds of dollars per year on lottery tickets? Explain your answer and respond to at least 2 of your classmates

    *post should be at least 200 words/numbers or a combination of both

    **current APA style, reference proper citations

    **price firm ** Need Turnit report

    – 2 years ago

  • [Solved] ppt theory

    ✓ Verified Academic Solution Available

    Executive Solution Overview

    – [\ \ ppttheoryrubric.png](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/ppttheoryrubric-png "ppttheoryrubric.png") – [\ \ ppttheory.png](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/ppttheory-png "ppttheory.png") – 2 years ago

    Instant Solution Download

    $6.99

    Immediate access to the full model answer, formatted citations, and rubric breakdown.

    Need a Fresh Custom Paper?

    Have this question answered from scratch according to your specific instructions and deadline.

    Order on TutorsGallery →

    Assignment Prompt & Instructions

    – [\
    \
    ppttheoryrubric.png](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/ppttheoryrubric-png "ppttheoryrubric.png")
    – [\
    \
    ppttheory.png](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/ppttheory-png "ppttheory.png")

    – 2 years ago

  • [Solved] Nursing week 7 sinature assignment

    ✓ Verified Academic Solution Available

    Executive Solution Overview

    **Discussion Prompt:** Analyse, interpret, and discuss with professional language supporting your findings. Provide specific examples to support your points. – 2 years ago

    Instant Solution Download

    $6.99

    Immediate access to the full model answer, formatted citations, and rubric breakdown.

    Need a Fresh Custom Paper?

    Have this question answered from scratch according to your specific instructions and deadline.

    Order on TutorsGallery →

    Assignment Prompt & Instructions

    **Discussion Prompt:**

    Analyse, interpret, and discuss with professional language supporting your findings. Provide specific examples to support your points.

    – 2 years ago

  • [Solved] nur512-week 6

    ✓ Verified Academic Solution Available

    Executive Solution Overview

    Based on your textbook reading, discuss the process of Advanced Practice Nurse (APN) business planning from a system approach. **Submission Instructions:** Your initial post should be at least 500 words, formatted and cited in current APA style with support from at least 2 academic sources. textbook…

    Instant Solution Download

    $6.99

    Immediate access to the full model answer, formatted citations, and rubric breakdown.

    Need a Fresh Custom Paper?

    Have this question answered from scratch according to your specific instructions and deadline.

    Order on TutorsGallery →

    Assignment Prompt & Instructions

    Based on your textbook reading, discuss the process of Advanced Practice Nurse (APN) business planning from a system approach.

    **Submission Instructions:**

    Your initial post should be at least 500 words, formatted and cited in current APA style with support from at least 2 academic sources.

    textbook:  Tracy, M.F., O'Grady, E.T., & Phillips, S.J. (2023). Hamric and Hanson's Advanced practice nursing: An

    integrative approach (7th ed.). Elsevier. ISBN: 9780323777117, e-text: 9780323777124

    – 2 years ago

  • [Solved] NPI – 6

    ✓ Verified Academic Solution Available

    Executive Solution Overview

    See attached. At least 1 page 12 point font double spaced times new roman. Due 4/15 or 4/16/2025 – 2 years ago **files (1)** – ## NPINumber.docx **## NPINumber.docx** NPI Number Describe briefly how and when you will obtain an advanced practice nursing NPI number for Medicare billing as a nurse prac…

    Instant Solution Download

    $6.99

    Immediate access to the full model answer, formatted citations, and rubric breakdown.

    Need a Fresh Custom Paper?

    Have this question answered from scratch according to your specific instructions and deadline.

    Order on TutorsGallery →

    Assignment Prompt & Instructions

    See attached. At least 1 page 12 point font double spaced times new roman. Due 4/15 or 4/16/2025

    – 2 years ago

    **files (1)**

    – ## NPINumber.docx

    **## NPINumber.docx**

    NPI Number

    Describe briefly how and when you will obtain an advanced practice nursing NPI number for Medicare billing as a nurse practitioner through the National Plan & Provider Enumeration System (NPPES), using resources like
    [https://nppes.cms.hhs.gov/#/.](https://nppes.cms.hhs.gov/)

    Additionally, share a brief synopsis of your specific state's licensing/certificate requirements for APRN prescribing, such as a furnishing license, DEA, or prescription authority, and clarify if collaborating physician review is needed to co-prescribe or review APRN prescriptions.

    Lastly, discuss briefly a specific certification or license add-on relevant to your hopeful area of practice, explaining its importance. For example, this could be a DMV/DOT certificate, a buprenorphine waiver, an aesthetic skill, or death certification training. The discussed skill or certification must be within the scope of an NP and outside the scope of an RN. Discuss steps needed to obtain the certification or skill, cost, and any renewal requirements.

    State: Florida

    Specific certification: Hormone Replacement Therapy (HRT)

    **## NPINumber.docx**

    NPI Number

    Describe briefly how and when you will obtain an advanced practice nursing NPI number for Medicare billing as a nurse practitioner through the National Plan & Provider Enumeration System (NPPES), using resources like
    [https://nppes.cms.hhs.gov/#/.](https://nppes.cms.hhs.gov/)

    Additionally, share a brief synopsis of your specific state's licensing/certificate requirements for APRN prescribing, such as a furnishing license, DEA, or prescription authority, and clarify if collaborating physician review is needed to co-prescribe or review APRN prescriptions.

    Lastly, discuss briefly a specific certification or license add-on relevant to your hopeful area of practice, explaining its importance. For example, this could be a DMV/DOT certificate, a buprenorphine waiver, an aesthetic skill, or death certification training. The discussed skill or certification must be within the scope of an NP and outside the scope of an RN. Discuss steps needed to obtain the certification or skill, cost, and any renewal requirements.

    State: Florida

    Specific certification: Hormone Replacement Therapy (HRT)

  • [Solved] Literature review

    ✓ Verified Academic Solution Available

    Executive Solution Overview

    In-depth study guidance and analytical solution covering Literature review.

    Instant Solution Download

    $6.99

    Immediate access to the full model answer, formatted citations, and rubric breakdown.

    Need a Fresh Custom Paper?

    Have this question answered from scratch according to your specific instructions and deadline.

    Order on TutorsGallery →

    Assignment Prompt & Instructions

    Full assignment prompt and step-by-step guidance are included in the downloadable solution file.

  • [Solved] The opioid epidemic in the United States

    ✓ Verified Academic Solution Available

    Executive Solution Overview

    In-depth study guidance and analytical solution covering The opioid epidemic in the United States.

    Instant Solution Download

    $6.99

    Immediate access to the full model answer, formatted citations, and rubric breakdown.

    Need a Fresh Custom Paper?

    Have this question answered from scratch according to your specific instructions and deadline.

    Order on TutorsGallery →

    Assignment Prompt & Instructions

    Full assignment prompt and step-by-step guidance are included in the downloadable solution file.

  • [Solved] WK 8 DIS EPID

    ✓ Verified Academic Solution Available

    Executive Solution Overview

    – 2 years ago **files (6)** – ## WK8DISEPID.docx – Seidler_et_al-2020-Cochrane_Database_of_Systematic_Reviews.pdf – MetaAnalysis.pdf – ORIGINALARTICLE.pdf – intervention.pdf – annurev-psych-010418-102803.pdf **## WK8DISEPID.docx** Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses ![A person in white protec…

    Instant Solution Download

    $6.99

    Immediate access to the full model answer, formatted citations, and rubric breakdown.

    Need a Fresh Custom Paper?

    Have this question answered from scratch according to your specific instructions and deadline.

    Order on TutorsGallery →

    Assignment Prompt & Instructions

    – 2 years ago

    **files (6)**

    – ## WK8DISEPID.docx

    – Seidler_et_al-2020-Cochrane_Database_of_Systematic_Reviews.pdf
    – MetaAnalysis.pdf
    – ORIGINALARTICLE.pdf
    – intervention.pdf
    – annurev-psych-010418-102803.pdf

    **## WK8DISEPID.docx**

    Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses

    ![A person in white protective suit and goggles looking at a computer AI-generated content may be incorrect.](https://www.sweetstudy.com/questions/wk-8-dis-epid)

    Systematic reviews are an umbrella term for a number of different review designs, all with specific goals (e.g., identify scope of available research or gaps, reduce bias, statistically combine and analyze results from multiple studies). They differ from basic literature review articles that qualitatively summarize the literature on a topic and do not necessarily have inclusion or exclusion criteria.

    Epidemiological meta-analyses are quantitative types of systematic reviews, in which summary measures of exposure–outcome associations are calculated based on the results of a selection of existing studies. In other words, a meta-analysis statistically combines the results from multiple studies, with the goal of calculating more precise measures, increasing sample size, or reducing bias in the combined results. The goal of meta-analysis is to obtain a more robust understanding of the relationship between an exposure and a health outcome than could be obtained from a single study. While meta-analyses are considered to be strong research designs because of their formal, statistical characteristics, they are not without weakness or critics. For instance, existing studies included in a meta-analysis may have strengths and limitations of their own.

    For this Discussion, you examine the validity and strengths and limitations of systematic reviews and meta-analyses in epidemiological research.

    Resources

    Be sure to review the Learning Resources before completing this activity.
    Click the weekly resources link to access the resources.

    [**WEEKLY RESOURCES**](https://waldenu.instructure.com/courses/155998/modules/items/6259934)

    [Required Readings](https://waldenu.instructure.com/courses/155998/pages/week-8-learning-resources?module_item_id=6259934)

    · Driscoll, A., Grant, M. J., Carroll, D., Dalton, S., Deaton, C., Jones, I., Lehwaldt, D., McKee, G., Munyombwe, T., & Astin, F. (2018).
    [The effect of nurse-to-patient ratios on nurse-sensitive patient outcomes in acute specialist units: A systematic review and meta-analysisLinks to an external site.](https://go.openathens.net/redirector/waldenu.edu?url=https%3A%2F%2Fjournals.sagepub.com%2Fdoi%2Ffull%2F10.1177%2F1474515117721561).
    _European Journal of Cardiovascular Nursing_,
    _17_(1), 6–22. https://doi.org/10.1177/1474515117721561

    · Seidler, A. L., Hunter, K. E., Cheyne, S., Berlin, J. A., Ghersi, D., & Askie, L. M. (2020).
    [Prospective meta-analyses and Cochrane's role in embracing next-generation methodologiesLinks to an external site.](https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.ED000145).
    _Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews_,
    _10_, ED000145. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.ED000145

    · Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., Shamseer, L., Tetzlaff, J. M., Akl, E. A., Brennan, S. E., Chou, R., Glanville, J., Grimshaw, J. M., Hróbjartsson, A., Lalu, M. M., Li, T., Loder, E. W., Mayo-Wilson, E., McDonald, S., McGuinness, L. A., … Moher, D. (2021).
    [The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviewsLinks to an external site.](https://go.openathens.net/redirector/waldenu.edu?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.sciencedirect.com%2Fscience%2Farticle%2Fpii%2FS0895435621000731%3F).
    _Journal of Clinical Epidemiology_,
    _134_, 178–189. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2021.03.001

    · Haidich, A. B. (2010).
    [Meta-analysis in medical researchLinks to an external site.](https://www.hippokratia.gr/images/PDF/14Sup1/699.pdf).
    _Hippokratia, 14_ (Suppl. 1), 29–37. https://www.hippokratia.gr/images/PDF/14Sup1/699.pdf

    · Melnyk, B. M., Kelly, S. A., Stephens, J., Dhakal, K., McGovern, C., Tucker, S., Hoying, J., McRae, K., Ault, S., Spurlock, E., & Bird, S. B. (2020).
    [Interventions to improve mental health, well-being, physical health, and lifestyle behaviors in physicians and nurses: A systematic reviewLinks to an external site.](https://go.openathens.net/redirector/waldenu.edu?url=https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0890117120920451).
    _American Journal of Health Promotion_,
    _34_(8), 929–941. https://doi.org/10.1177/0890117120920451

    · Siddaway, A. P., Wood, A. M., & Hedges, L. V. (2019).
    [How to do a systematic review: A best practice guide for conducting and reporting narrative reviews, meta-analyses, and meta-synthesesLinks to an external site.](https://go.openathens.net/redirector/waldenu.edu?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.annualreviews.org%2Fdoi%2Fabs%2F10.1146%2Fannurev-psych-010418-102803).
    _Annual Review of Psychology_,
    _70_, 747–770. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-010418-102803

    [Previous](https://waldenu.instructure.com/courses/155998/modules/items/6259927)

    [Next](https://waldenu.instructure.com/courses/155998/modules/items/6259937)

    To prepare:

    · Review the studies and articles provided in the Learning Resources. Consider the strengths and limitations of systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Make sure you are clear on the difference between the two approaches.

    By Day 3 of Week 8

    **Post** a brief summary of your informed opinion regarding the validity of the use of systematic reviews
    **and** meta-analyses in epidemiological research. Include
    **at least two** strengths or limitations of each technique. Provide evidence from
    **at least one** of the articles in the Learning Resources to support and justify your position.

    By Day 6 of Week 8

    **Post** substantive responses to
    **at least two** colleagues
    **on two different days** who expressed a differing view to your own in their initial post. Include information from the Learning Resources in your responses as appropriate. You may expand on your peer’s posting with additional insight and resources about meta-analyses, ask a question to further the Discussion, or offer polite disagreement or critique, supported with evidence. You may also make a suggestion or comment that guides or facilitates the Discussion.

    ## image1.jpeg

    **Seidler_et_al-2020-Cochrane_Database_of_Systematic_Reviews.pdf**

    This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/seidler-et-al-2020-cochrane-database-of-systematic-reviews-pdf)

    **MetaAnalysis.pdf**

    This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/metaanalysis-pdf-10261385)

    **ORIGINALARTICLE.pdf**

    This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/originalarticle-pdf-10261383)

    **intervention.pdf**

    This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/intervention-pdf-10261401)

    **annurev-psych-010418-102803.pdf**

    This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/annurev-psych-010418-102803-pdf)

    **annurev-psych-010418-102803.pdf**

    This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/annurev-psych-010418-102803-pdf)

    **## WK8DISEPID.docx**

    Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses

    ![A person in white protective suit and goggles looking at a computer AI-generated content may be incorrect.](https://www.sweetstudy.com/questions/wk-8-dis-epid)

    Systematic reviews are an umbrella term for a number of different review designs, all with specific goals (e.g., identify scope of available research or gaps, reduce bias, statistically combine and analyze results from multiple studies). They differ from basic literature review articles that qualitatively summarize the literature on a topic and do not necessarily have inclusion or exclusion criteria.

    Epidemiological meta-analyses are quantitative types of systematic reviews, in which summary measures of exposure–outcome associations are calculated based on the results of a selection of existing studies. In other words, a meta-analysis statistically combines the results from multiple studies, with the goal of calculating more precise measures, increasing sample size, or reducing bias in the combined results. The goal of meta-analysis is to obtain a more robust understanding of the relationship between an exposure and a health outcome than could be obtained from a single study. While meta-analyses are considered to be strong research designs because of their formal, statistical characteristics, they are not without weakness or critics. For instance, existing studies included in a meta-analysis may have strengths and limitations of their own.

    For this Discussion, you examine the validity and strengths and limitations of systematic reviews and meta-analyses in epidemiological research.

    Resources

    Be sure to review the Learning Resources before completing this activity.
    Click the weekly resources link to access the resources.

    [**WEEKLY RESOURCES**](https://waldenu.instructure.com/courses/155998/modules/items/6259934)

    [Required Readings](https://waldenu.instructure.com/courses/155998/pages/week-8-learning-resources?module_item_id=6259934)

    · Driscoll, A., Grant, M. J., Carroll, D., Dalton, S., Deaton, C., Jones, I., Lehwaldt, D., McKee, G., Munyombwe, T., & Astin, F. (2018).
    [The effect of nurse-to-patient ratios on nurse-sensitive patient outcomes in acute specialist units: A systematic review and meta-analysisLinks to an external site.](https://go.openathens.net/redirector/waldenu.edu?url=https%3A%2F%2Fjournals.sagepub.com%2Fdoi%2Ffull%2F10.1177%2F1474515117721561).
    _European Journal of Cardiovascular Nursing_,
    _17_(1), 6–22. https://doi.org/10.1177/1474515117721561

    · Seidler, A. L., Hunter, K. E., Cheyne, S., Berlin, J. A., Ghersi, D., & Askie, L. M. (2020).
    [Prospective meta-analyses and Cochrane's role in embracing next-generation methodologiesLinks to an external site.](https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.ED000145).
    _Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews_,
    _10_, ED000145. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.ED000145

    · Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., Shamseer, L., Tetzlaff, J. M., Akl, E. A., Brennan, S. E., Chou, R., Glanville, J., Grimshaw, J. M., Hróbjartsson, A., Lalu, M. M., Li, T., Loder, E. W., Mayo-Wilson, E., McDonald, S., McGuinness, L. A., … Moher, D. (2021).
    [The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviewsLinks to an external site.](https://go.openathens.net/redirector/waldenu.edu?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.sciencedirect.com%2Fscience%2Farticle%2Fpii%2FS0895435621000731%3F).
    _Journal of Clinical Epidemiology_,
    _134_, 178–189. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2021.03.001

    · Haidich, A. B. (2010).
    [Meta-analysis in medical researchLinks to an external site.](https://www.hippokratia.gr/images/PDF/14Sup1/699.pdf).
    _Hippokratia, 14_ (Suppl. 1), 29–37. https://www.hippokratia.gr/images/PDF/14Sup1/699.pdf

    · Melnyk, B. M., Kelly, S. A., Stephens, J., Dhakal, K., McGovern, C., Tucker, S., Hoying, J., McRae, K., Ault, S., Spurlock, E., & Bird, S. B. (2020).
    [Interventions to improve mental health, well-being, physical health, and lifestyle behaviors in physicians and nurses: A systematic reviewLinks to an external site.](https://go.openathens.net/redirector/waldenu.edu?url=https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0890117120920451).
    _American Journal of Health Promotion_,
    _34_(8), 929–941. https://doi.org/10.1177/0890117120920451

    · Siddaway, A. P., Wood, A. M., & Hedges, L. V. (2019).
    [How to do a systematic review: A best practice guide for conducting and reporting narrative reviews, meta-analyses, and meta-synthesesLinks to an external site.](https://go.openathens.net/redirector/waldenu.edu?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.annualreviews.org%2Fdoi%2Fabs%2F10.1146%2Fannurev-psych-010418-102803).
    _Annual Review of Psychology_,
    _70_, 747–770. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-010418-102803

    [Previous](https://waldenu.instructure.com/courses/155998/modules/items/6259927)

    [Next](https://waldenu.instructure.com/courses/155998/modules/items/6259937)

    To prepare:

    · Review the studies and articles provided in the Learning Resources. Consider the strengths and limitations of systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Make sure you are clear on the difference between the two approaches.

    By Day 3 of Week 8

    **Post** a brief summary of your informed opinion regarding the validity of the use of systematic reviews
    **and** meta-analyses in epidemiological research. Include
    **at least two** strengths or limitations of each technique. Provide evidence from
    **at least one** of the articles in the Learning Resources to support and justify your position.

    By Day 6 of Week 8

    **Post** substantive responses to
    **at least two** colleagues
    **on two different days** who expressed a differing view to your own in their initial post. Include information from the Learning Resources in your responses as appropriate. You may expand on your peer’s posting with additional insight and resources about meta-analyses, ask a question to further the Discussion, or offer polite disagreement or critique, supported with evidence. You may also make a suggestion or comment that guides or facilitates the Discussion.

    ## image1.jpeg

    **Seidler_et_al-2020-Cochrane_Database_of_Systematic_Reviews.pdf**

    This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/seidler-et-al-2020-cochrane-database-of-systematic-reviews-pdf)

    **MetaAnalysis.pdf**

    This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/metaanalysis-pdf-10261385)

    **ORIGINALARTICLE.pdf**

    This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/originalarticle-pdf-10261383)

    **intervention.pdf**

    This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/intervention-pdf-10261401)

    **annurev-psych-010418-102803.pdf**

    This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/annurev-psych-010418-102803-pdf)

    **## WK8DISEPID.docx**

    Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses

    ![A person in white protective suit and goggles looking at a computer AI-generated content may be incorrect.](https://www.sweetstudy.com/questions/wk-8-dis-epid)

    Systematic reviews are an umbrella term for a number of different review designs, all with specific goals (e.g., identify scope of available research or gaps, reduce bias, statistically combine and analyze results from multiple studies). They differ from basic literature review articles that qualitatively summarize the literature on a topic and do not necessarily have inclusion or exclusion criteria.

    Epidemiological meta-analyses are quantitative types of systematic reviews, in which summary measures of exposure–outcome associations are calculated based on the results of a selection of existing studies. In other words, a meta-analysis statistically combines the results from multiple studies, with the goal of calculating more precise measures, increasing sample size, or reducing bias in the combined results. The goal of meta-analysis is to obtain a more robust understanding of the relationship between an exposure and a health outcome than could be obtained from a single study. While meta-analyses are considered to be strong research designs because of their formal, statistical characteristics, they are not without weakness or critics. For instance, existing studies included in a meta-analysis may have strengths and limitations of their own.

    For this Discussion, you examine the validity and strengths and limitations of systematic reviews and meta-analyses in epidemiological research.

    Resources

    Be sure to review the Learning Resources before completing this activity.
    Click the weekly resources link to access the resources.

    [**WEEKLY RESOURCES**](https://waldenu.instructure.com/courses/155998/modules/items/6259934)

    [Required Readings](https://waldenu.instructure.com/courses/155998/pages/week-8-learning-resources?module_item_id=6259934)

    · Driscoll, A., Grant, M. J., Carroll, D., Dalton, S., Deaton, C., Jones, I., Lehwaldt, D., McKee, G., Munyombwe, T., & Astin, F. (2018).
    [The effect of nurse-to-patient ratios on nurse-sensitive patient outcomes in acute specialist units: A systematic review and meta-analysisLinks to an external site.](https://go.openathens.net/redirector/waldenu.edu?url=https%3A%2F%2Fjournals.sagepub.com%2Fdoi%2Ffull%2F10.1177%2F1474515117721561).
    _European Journal of Cardiovascular Nursing_,
    _17_(1), 6–22. https://doi.org/10.1177/1474515117721561

    · Seidler, A. L., Hunter, K. E., Cheyne, S., Berlin, J. A., Ghersi, D., & Askie, L. M. (2020).
    [Prospective meta-analyses and Cochrane's role in embracing next-generation methodologiesLinks to an external site.](https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.ED000145).
    _Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews_,
    _10_, ED000145. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.ED000145

    · Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., Shamseer, L., Tetzlaff, J. M., Akl, E. A., Brennan, S. E., Chou, R., Glanville, J., Grimshaw, J. M., Hróbjartsson, A., Lalu, M. M., Li, T., Loder, E. W., Mayo-Wilson, E., McDonald, S., McGuinness, L. A., … Moher, D. (2021).
    [The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviewsLinks to an external site.](https://go.openathens.net/redirector/waldenu.edu?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.sciencedirect.com%2Fscience%2Farticle%2Fpii%2FS0895435621000731%3F).
    _Journal of Clinical Epidemiology_,
    _134_, 178–189. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2021.03.001

    · Haidich, A. B. (2010).
    [Meta-analysis in medical researchLinks to an external site.](https://www.hippokratia.gr/images/PDF/14Sup1/699.pdf).
    _Hippokratia, 14_ (Suppl. 1), 29–37. https://www.hippokratia.gr/images/PDF/14Sup1/699.pdf

    · Melnyk, B. M., Kelly, S. A., Stephens, J., Dhakal, K., McGovern, C., Tucker, S., Hoying, J., McRae, K., Ault, S., Spurlock, E., & Bird, S. B. (2020).
    [Interventions to improve mental health, well-being, physical health, and lifestyle behaviors in physicians and nurses: A systematic reviewLinks to an external site.](https://go.openathens.net/redirector/waldenu.edu?url=https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0890117120920451).
    _American Journal of Health Promotion_,
    _34_(8), 929–941. https://doi.org/10.1177/0890117120920451

    · Siddaway, A. P., Wood, A. M., & Hedges, L. V. (2019).
    [How to do a systematic review: A best practice guide for conducting and reporting narrative reviews, meta-analyses, and meta-synthesesLinks to an external site.](https://go.openathens.net/redirector/waldenu.edu?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.annualreviews.org%2Fdoi%2Fabs%2F10.1146%2Fannurev-psych-010418-102803).
    _Annual Review of Psychology_,
    _70_, 747–770. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-010418-102803

    [Previous](https://waldenu.instructure.com/courses/155998/modules/items/6259927)

    [Next](https://waldenu.instructure.com/courses/155998/modules/items/6259937)

    To prepare:

    · Review the studies and articles provided in the Learning Resources. Consider the strengths and limitations of systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Make sure you are clear on the difference between the two approaches.

    By Day 3 of Week 8

    **Post** a brief summary of your informed opinion regarding the validity of the use of systematic reviews
    **and** meta-analyses in epidemiological research. Include
    **at least two** strengths or limitations of each technique. Provide evidence from
    **at least one** of the articles in the Learning Resources to support and justify your position.

    By Day 6 of Week 8

    **Post** substantive responses to
    **at least two** colleagues
    **on two different days** who expressed a differing view to your own in their initial post. Include information from the Learning Resources in your responses as appropriate. You may expand on your peer’s posting with additional insight and resources about meta-analyses, ask a question to further the Discussion, or offer polite disagreement or critique, supported with evidence. You may also make a suggestion or comment that guides or facilitates the Discussion.

    ## image1.jpeg

    **Seidler_et_al-2020-Cochrane_Database_of_Systematic_Reviews.pdf**

    This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/seidler-et-al-2020-cochrane-database-of-systematic-reviews-pdf)

    **MetaAnalysis.pdf**

    This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/metaanalysis-pdf-10261385)

    **ORIGINALARTICLE.pdf**

    This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/originalarticle-pdf-10261383)

    **intervention.pdf**

    This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/intervention-pdf-10261401)

    **annurev-psych-010418-102803.pdf**

    This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/annurev-psych-010418-102803-pdf)

  • [Solved] Wk 8 Assign Epid

    ✓ Verified Academic Solution Available

    Executive Solution Overview

    – 2 years ago **files (6)** – ## WK8ASSIGNEPID.docx – Seidler_et_al-2020-Cochrane_Database_of_Systematic_Reviews.pdf – MetaAnalysis.pdf – ORIGINALARTICLE.pdf – intervention.pdf – annurev-psych-010418-102803.pdf **## WK8ASSIGNEPID.docx** Meta-Analyses ![A person in a lab coat writing on a compu…

    Instant Solution Download

    $6.99

    Immediate access to the full model answer, formatted citations, and rubric breakdown.

    Need a Fresh Custom Paper?

    Have this question answered from scratch according to your specific instructions and deadline.

    Order on TutorsGallery →

    Assignment Prompt & Instructions

    – 2 years ago

    **files (6)**

    – ## WK8ASSIGNEPID.docx

    – Seidler_et_al-2020-Cochrane_Database_of_Systematic_Reviews.pdf
    – MetaAnalysis.pdf
    – ORIGINALARTICLE.pdf
    – intervention.pdf
    – annurev-psych-010418-102803.pdf

    **## WK8ASSIGNEPID.docx**

    Meta-Analyses

    ![A person in a lab coat writing on a computer AI-generated content may be incorrect.](https://www.sweetstudy.com/questions/wk-8-assign-epid)

    In epidemiology, meta-analyses are becoming a common research design. They are also “the most frequently cited form of clinical research,” and as such are an important type of study for the advanced practice nurse to be familiar with (Haidich, 2010).

    For this Assignment, you will analyze a meta-analysis article and consider the implications of this research design for nursing practice, building on this week’s Discussion.

    **Reference:**
    Haidich, A. B. (2010). Meta-analysis in medical research.
    _Hippokratia, 14_(Suppl. 1), 29–37. https://www.hippokratia.gr/images/PDF/14Sup1/699.pdf

    Resources

    Be sure to review the Learning Resources before completing this activity.
    Click the weekly resources link to access the resources.

    [**WEEKLY RESOURCES**](https://waldenu.instructure.com/courses/155998/modules/items/6259934)

    To prepare:

    · Using the Walden Library, locate a peer-reviewed article that utilizes a meta-analysis design and examines a population health topic that interests you. Your article must be a meta-analysis specifically, not just a systematic review.

    The Assignment:

    In 3 pages, not including title page and references, address the following:

    · Identify your selected article. Explain what characteristics make this a meta-analysis.

    · Were the inclusion and exclusion criteria clearly stated? How were the articles that were included selected? Do you agree with the researchers’ approach? Explain why or why not.

    · Do you agree with the conclusions? Explain why or why not.

    · Explain how you could apply implications from the study to your nursing practice.

    By Day 7 of Week 8

    **Submit** your Assignment.

    submission information

    Before submitting your final assignment, you can check your draft for authenticity. To check your draft, access the
    **Turnitin Drafts** from the
    **Start Here** area.

    1. To submit your completed assignment, save your Assignment as
    **WK8Assgn_LastName_Firstinitial**

    2. Then, click on
    **Start Assignment** near the top of the page.

    3. Next, click on
    **Upload File** and select
    **Submit Assignment** for review.

    Learning Resources

    [Required Readings](https://waldenu.instructure.com/courses/155998/pages/week-8-learning-resources?module_item_id=6259934)

    · Driscoll, A., Grant, M. J., Carroll, D., Dalton, S., Deaton, C., Jones, I., Lehwaldt, D., McKee, G., Munyombwe, T., & Astin, F. (2018).
    [The effect of nurse-to-patient ratios on nurse-sensitive patient outcomes in acute specialist units: A systematic review and meta-analysisLinks to an external site.](https://go.openathens.net/redirector/waldenu.edu?url=https%3A%2F%2Fjournals.sagepub.com%2Fdoi%2Ffull%2F10.1177%2F1474515117721561).
    _European Journal of Cardiovascular Nursing_,
    _17_(1), 6–22. https://doi.org/10.1177/1474515117721561

    · Seidler, A. L., Hunter, K. E., Cheyne, S., Berlin, J. A., Ghersi, D., & Askie, L. M. (2020).
    [Prospective meta-analyses and Cochrane's role in embracing next-generation methodologiesLinks to an external site.](https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.ED000145).
    _Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews_,
    _10_, ED000145. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.ED000145

    · Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., Shamseer, L., Tetzlaff, J. M., Akl, E. A., Brennan, S. E., Chou, R., Glanville, J., Grimshaw, J. M., Hróbjartsson, A., Lalu, M. M., Li, T., Loder, E. W., Mayo-Wilson, E., McDonald, S., McGuinness, L. A., … Moher, D. (2021).
    [The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviewsLinks to an external site.](https://go.openathens.net/redirector/waldenu.edu?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.sciencedirect.com%2Fscience%2Farticle%2Fpii%2FS0895435621000731%3F).
    _Journal of Clinical Epidemiology_,
    _134_, 178–189. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2021.03.001

    · Haidich, A. B. (2010).
    [Meta-analysis in medical researchLinks to an external site.](https://www.hippokratia.gr/images/PDF/14Sup1/699.pdf).
    _Hippokratia, 14_ (Suppl. 1), 29–37. https://www.hippokratia.gr/images/PDF/14Sup1/699.pdf

    · Melnyk, B. M., Kelly, S. A., Stephens, J., Dhakal, K., McGovern, C., Tucker, S., Hoying, J., McRae, K., Ault, S., Spurlock, E., & Bird, S. B. (2020).
    [Interventions to improve mental health, well-being, physical health, and lifestyle behaviors in physicians and nurses: A systematic reviewLinks to an external site.](https://go.openathens.net/redirector/waldenu.edu?url=https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0890117120920451).
    _American Journal of Health Promotion_,
    _34_(8), 929–941. https://doi.org/10.1177/0890117120920451

    · Siddaway, A. P., Wood, A. M., & Hedges, L. V. (2019).
    [How to do a systematic review: A best practice guide for conducting and reporting narrative reviews, meta-analyses, and meta-synthesesLinks to an external site.](https://go.openathens.net/redirector/waldenu.edu?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.annualreviews.org%2Fdoi%2Fabs%2F10.1146%2Fannurev-psych-010418-102803).
    _Annual Review of Psychology_,
    _70_, 747–770. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-010418-102803

    [Previous](https://waldenu.instructure.com/courses/155998/modules/items/6259927)

    [Next](https://waldenu.instructure.com/courses/155998/modules/items/6259937)

    ## image1.jpeg

    **Seidler_et_al-2020-Cochrane_Database_of_Systematic_Reviews.pdf**

    This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/seidler-et-al-2020-cochrane-database-of-systematic-reviews-pdf-10261411)

    **MetaAnalysis.pdf**

    This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/metaanalysis-pdf-10261415)

    **ORIGINALARTICLE.pdf**

    This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/originalarticle-pdf-10261413)

    **intervention.pdf**

    This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/intervention-pdf-10261417)

    **annurev-psych-010418-102803.pdf**

    This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/annurev-psych-010418-102803-pdf-10261419)

    **annurev-psych-010418-102803.pdf**

    This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/annurev-psych-010418-102803-pdf-10261419)

    **## WK8ASSIGNEPID.docx**

    Meta-Analyses

    ![A person in a lab coat writing on a computer AI-generated content may be incorrect.](https://www.sweetstudy.com/questions/wk-8-assign-epid)

    In epidemiology, meta-analyses are becoming a common research design. They are also “the most frequently cited form of clinical research,” and as such are an important type of study for the advanced practice nurse to be familiar with (Haidich, 2010).

    For this Assignment, you will analyze a meta-analysis article and consider the implications of this research design for nursing practice, building on this week’s Discussion.

    **Reference:**
    Haidich, A. B. (2010). Meta-analysis in medical research.
    _Hippokratia, 14_(Suppl. 1), 29–37. https://www.hippokratia.gr/images/PDF/14Sup1/699.pdf

    Resources

    Be sure to review the Learning Resources before completing this activity.
    Click the weekly resources link to access the resources.

    [**WEEKLY RESOURCES**](https://waldenu.instructure.com/courses/155998/modules/items/6259934)

    To prepare:

    · Using the Walden Library, locate a peer-reviewed article that utilizes a meta-analysis design and examines a population health topic that interests you. Your article must be a meta-analysis specifically, not just a systematic review.

    The Assignment:

    In 3 pages, not including title page and references, address the following:

    · Identify your selected article. Explain what characteristics make this a meta-analysis.

    · Were the inclusion and exclusion criteria clearly stated? How were the articles that were included selected? Do you agree with the researchers’ approach? Explain why or why not.

    · Do you agree with the conclusions? Explain why or why not.

    · Explain how you could apply implications from the study to your nursing practice.

    By Day 7 of Week 8

    **Submit** your Assignment.

    submission information

    Before submitting your final assignment, you can check your draft for authenticity. To check your draft, access the
    **Turnitin Drafts** from the
    **Start Here** area.

    1. To submit your completed assignment, save your Assignment as
    **WK8Assgn_LastName_Firstinitial**

    2. Then, click on
    **Start Assignment** near the top of the page.

    3. Next, click on
    **Upload File** and select
    **Submit Assignment** for review.

    Learning Resources

    [Required Readings](https://waldenu.instructure.com/courses/155998/pages/week-8-learning-resources?module_item_id=6259934)

    · Driscoll, A., Grant, M. J., Carroll, D., Dalton, S., Deaton, C., Jones, I., Lehwaldt, D., McKee, G., Munyombwe, T., & Astin, F. (2018).
    [The effect of nurse-to-patient ratios on nurse-sensitive patient outcomes in acute specialist units: A systematic review and meta-analysisLinks to an external site.](https://go.openathens.net/redirector/waldenu.edu?url=https%3A%2F%2Fjournals.sagepub.com%2Fdoi%2Ffull%2F10.1177%2F1474515117721561).
    _European Journal of Cardiovascular Nursing_,
    _17_(1), 6–22. https://doi.org/10.1177/1474515117721561

    · Seidler, A. L., Hunter, K. E., Cheyne, S., Berlin, J. A., Ghersi, D., & Askie, L. M. (2020).
    [Prospective meta-analyses and Cochrane's role in embracing next-generation methodologiesLinks to an external site.](https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.ED000145).
    _Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews_,
    _10_, ED000145. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.ED000145

    · Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., Shamseer, L., Tetzlaff, J. M., Akl, E. A., Brennan, S. E., Chou, R., Glanville, J., Grimshaw, J. M., Hróbjartsson, A., Lalu, M. M., Li, T., Loder, E. W., Mayo-Wilson, E., McDonald, S., McGuinness, L. A., … Moher, D. (2021).
    [The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviewsLinks to an external site.](https://go.openathens.net/redirector/waldenu.edu?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.sciencedirect.com%2Fscience%2Farticle%2Fpii%2FS0895435621000731%3F).
    _Journal of Clinical Epidemiology_,
    _134_, 178–189. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2021.03.001

    · Haidich, A. B. (2010).
    [Meta-analysis in medical researchLinks to an external site.](https://www.hippokratia.gr/images/PDF/14Sup1/699.pdf).
    _Hippokratia, 14_ (Suppl. 1), 29–37. https://www.hippokratia.gr/images/PDF/14Sup1/699.pdf

    · Melnyk, B. M., Kelly, S. A., Stephens, J., Dhakal, K., McGovern, C., Tucker, S., Hoying, J., McRae, K., Ault, S., Spurlock, E., & Bird, S. B. (2020).
    [Interventions to improve mental health, well-being, physical health, and lifestyle behaviors in physicians and nurses: A systematic reviewLinks to an external site.](https://go.openathens.net/redirector/waldenu.edu?url=https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0890117120920451).
    _American Journal of Health Promotion_,
    _34_(8), 929–941. https://doi.org/10.1177/0890117120920451

    · Siddaway, A. P., Wood, A. M., & Hedges, L. V. (2019).
    [How to do a systematic review: A best practice guide for conducting and reporting narrative reviews, meta-analyses, and meta-synthesesLinks to an external site.](https://go.openathens.net/redirector/waldenu.edu?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.annualreviews.org%2Fdoi%2Fabs%2F10.1146%2Fannurev-psych-010418-102803).
    _Annual Review of Psychology_,
    _70_, 747–770. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-010418-102803

    [Previous](https://waldenu.instructure.com/courses/155998/modules/items/6259927)

    [Next](https://waldenu.instructure.com/courses/155998/modules/items/6259937)

    ## image1.jpeg

    **Seidler_et_al-2020-Cochrane_Database_of_Systematic_Reviews.pdf**

    This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/seidler-et-al-2020-cochrane-database-of-systematic-reviews-pdf-10261411)

    **MetaAnalysis.pdf**

    This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/metaanalysis-pdf-10261415)

    **ORIGINALARTICLE.pdf**

    This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/originalarticle-pdf-10261413)

    **intervention.pdf**

    This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/intervention-pdf-10261417)

    **annurev-psych-010418-102803.pdf**

    This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/annurev-psych-010418-102803-pdf-10261419)

    **## WK8ASSIGNEPID.docx**

    Meta-Analyses

    ![A person in a lab coat writing on a computer AI-generated content may be incorrect.](https://www.sweetstudy.com/questions/wk-8-assign-epid)

    In epidemiology, meta-analyses are becoming a common research design. They are also “the most frequently cited form of clinical research,” and as such are an important type of study for the advanced practice nurse to be familiar with (Haidich, 2010).

    For this Assignment, you will analyze a meta-analysis article and consider the implications of this research design for nursing practice, building on this week’s Discussion.

    **Reference:**
    Haidich, A. B. (2010). Meta-analysis in medical research.
    _Hippokratia, 14_(Suppl. 1), 29–37. https://www.hippokratia.gr/images/PDF/14Sup1/699.pdf

    Resources

    Be sure to review the Learning Resources before completing this activity.
    Click the weekly resources link to access the resources.

    [**WEEKLY RESOURCES**](https://waldenu.instructure.com/courses/155998/modules/items/6259934)

    To prepare:

    · Using the Walden Library, locate a peer-reviewed article that utilizes a meta-analysis design and examines a population health topic that interests you. Your article must be a meta-analysis specifically, not just a systematic review.

    The Assignment:

    In 3 pages, not including title page and references, address the following:

    · Identify your selected article. Explain what characteristics make this a meta-analysis.

    · Were the inclusion and exclusion criteria clearly stated? How were the articles that were included selected? Do you agree with the researchers’ approach? Explain why or why not.

    · Do you agree with the conclusions? Explain why or why not.

    · Explain how you could apply implications from the study to your nursing practice.

    By Day 7 of Week 8

    **Submit** your Assignment.

    submission information

    Before submitting your final assignment, you can check your draft for authenticity. To check your draft, access the
    **Turnitin Drafts** from the
    **Start Here** area.

    1. To submit your completed assignment, save your Assignment as
    **WK8Assgn_LastName_Firstinitial**

    2. Then, click on
    **Start Assignment** near the top of the page.

    3. Next, click on
    **Upload File** and select
    **Submit Assignment** for review.

    Learning Resources

    [Required Readings](https://waldenu.instructure.com/courses/155998/pages/week-8-learning-resources?module_item_id=6259934)

    · Driscoll, A., Grant, M. J., Carroll, D., Dalton, S., Deaton, C., Jones, I., Lehwaldt, D., McKee, G., Munyombwe, T., & Astin, F. (2018).
    [The effect of nurse-to-patient ratios on nurse-sensitive patient outcomes in acute specialist units: A systematic review and meta-analysisLinks to an external site.](https://go.openathens.net/redirector/waldenu.edu?url=https%3A%2F%2Fjournals.sagepub.com%2Fdoi%2Ffull%2F10.1177%2F1474515117721561).
    _European Journal of Cardiovascular Nursing_,
    _17_(1), 6–22. https://doi.org/10.1177/1474515117721561

    · Seidler, A. L., Hunter, K. E., Cheyne, S., Berlin, J. A., Ghersi, D., & Askie, L. M. (2020).
    [Prospective meta-analyses and Cochrane's role in embracing next-generation methodologiesLinks to an external site.](https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.ED000145).
    _Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews_,
    _10_, ED000145. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.ED000145

    · Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., Shamseer, L., Tetzlaff, J. M., Akl, E. A., Brennan, S. E., Chou, R., Glanville, J., Grimshaw, J. M., Hróbjartsson, A., Lalu, M. M., Li, T., Loder, E. W., Mayo-Wilson, E., McDonald, S., McGuinness, L. A., … Moher, D. (2021).
    [The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviewsLinks to an external site.](https://go.openathens.net/redirector/waldenu.edu?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.sciencedirect.com%2Fscience%2Farticle%2Fpii%2FS0895435621000731%3F).
    _Journal of Clinical Epidemiology_,
    _134_, 178–189. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2021.03.001

    · Haidich, A. B. (2010).
    [Meta-analysis in medical researchLinks to an external site.](https://www.hippokratia.gr/images/PDF/14Sup1/699.pdf).
    _Hippokratia, 14_ (Suppl. 1), 29–37. https://www.hippokratia.gr/images/PDF/14Sup1/699.pdf

    · Melnyk, B. M., Kelly, S. A., Stephens, J., Dhakal, K., McGovern, C., Tucker, S., Hoying, J., McRae, K., Ault, S., Spurlock, E., & Bird, S. B. (2020).
    [Interventions to improve mental health, well-being, physical health, and lifestyle behaviors in physicians and nurses: A systematic reviewLinks to an external site.](https://go.openathens.net/redirector/waldenu.edu?url=https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0890117120920451).
    _American Journal of Health Promotion_,
    _34_(8), 929–941. https://doi.org/10.1177/0890117120920451

    · Siddaway, A. P., Wood, A. M., & Hedges, L. V. (2019).
    [How to do a systematic review: A best practice guide for conducting and reporting narrative reviews, meta-analyses, and meta-synthesesLinks to an external site.](https://go.openathens.net/redirector/waldenu.edu?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.annualreviews.org%2Fdoi%2Fabs%2F10.1146%2Fannurev-psych-010418-102803).
    _Annual Review of Psychology_,
    _70_, 747–770. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-010418-102803

    [Previous](https://waldenu.instructure.com/courses/155998/modules/items/6259927)

    [Next](https://waldenu.instructure.com/courses/155998/modules/items/6259937)

    ## image1.jpeg

    **Seidler_et_al-2020-Cochrane_Database_of_Systematic_Reviews.pdf**

    This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/seidler-et-al-2020-cochrane-database-of-systematic-reviews-pdf-10261411)

    **MetaAnalysis.pdf**

    This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/metaanalysis-pdf-10261415)

    **ORIGINALARTICLE.pdf**

    This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/originalarticle-pdf-10261413)

    **intervention.pdf**

    This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/intervention-pdf-10261417)

    **annurev-psych-010418-102803.pdf**

    This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/annurev-psych-010418-102803-pdf-10261419)