NURS FPX 9902 Assessment 5 Reflection

NURS FPX 9902 Assessment 5 Reflection

Student Name

Capella University

NURS-FPX9902 Nursing Doctoral Project 2

Prof. Name

Date

Reflection

Hello, I am… As I approach the culmination of this course, I take a moment to ponder the advancements in my doctoral project and the experiences garnered throughout the duration. Reflection serves as a potent instrument, enabling the assessment of achievements, confrontations with challenges, and identification of areas for enhancement. It fosters the refinement of critical thinking and problem-solving skills, offering profound insights into the trajectory of the project and personal growth as a researcher. This virtual check-in provides an opportunity to delve into these reflections, facilitating discussions on my progress, gaining clarity on the work, and devising strategies for sustained development.

Improvement Opportunities Related to Literature Synthesis

Contemplating the construction of a literature synthesis for the PICOT question concentrated on interventions for COPD, I acknowledge the significance of a meticulous and systematic literature search strategy. Executing an exhaustive search using pertinent keywords and MeSH terms enabled the retrieval of diverse sources, encompassing published research, systematic reviews, and official publications. By supplementing this with manual searches of reference lists, the assurance was made that no pertinent studies were overlooked (Golder et al., 2019). The screening process, grounded in predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria, honed the initial pool of articles, culminating in a final selection of 33 articles meeting the eligibility requirements. These articles, spanning various study designs, contribute to a robust and representative body of evidence, effectively addressing the research question (Costal et al., 2021).

In the course of the literature synthesis, successes and challenges were encountered. Successful aspects involved identifying key themes and trends within selected articles, recognizing knowledge gaps, and pinpointing potential areas for future research. Detailed analysis of each piece of evidence provided an understanding of the positive outcomes of telehealth interventions on the health of COPD patients. However, challenges surfaced as well. Some studies exhibited limited sample sizes or methodological limitations, demanding careful consideration during the analysis and interpretation of evidence.

Additionally, the copious amount of gathered information necessitated meticulous organization and synthesis to ensure a coherent and comprehensive review (Riccio et al., 2020). Moving forward, there are opportunities for improvement in the literature synthesis, including the enhancement of critical appraisal skills for assessing evidence quality and strength, conducting a thorough evaluation of evidence quality to identify biases and limitations, incorporating additional sources such as gray literature and non-English publications for a more comprehensive understanding, and ensuring careful organization and synthesis of gathered information to maintain coherence and comprehensiveness in the review. Augmenting critical appraisal skills will enable a more comprehensive assessment of evidence quality, and including additional sources could provide a broader perspective on the topic (Messerschmidt et al., 2022).

Support of Project and Practice Decisions

The review of literature plays a pivotal role in supporting project and practice decisions. Researchers and healthcare professionals gain access to a plethora of existing knowledge and evidence through a comprehensive literature review. This facilitates an understanding of the current state of research, identification of knowledge gaps, and building upon the existing evidence base (Li et al., 2019). Insights derived from the literature review inform project decisions, such as selecting appropriate interventions or designing research studies, ensuring alignment with the best available evidence. Additionally, the literature review offers valuable guidance for clinical practice decisions, elucidating effective interventions, potential adverse effects, and areas necessitating further investigation. It empowers healthcare professionals to make informed decisions, enhance patient outcomes, and bridge the gap between research and practice (Brice & Almond, 2020).

In my project on literature search and synthesis, the literature review played a critical role in guiding and shaping the entire process. A comprehensive literature review granted access to a wealth of existing knowledge and evidence related to interventions for COPD. The review facilitated an understanding of the current research state, identification of knowledge gaps, and recognition of potential areas for future research. Insights gained from the literature review not only informed the selection of relevant articles but also aided in developing inclusion and exclusion criteria for the screening process. Furthermore, the review provided a deeper understanding of key themes, trends, and the impact of nutritional and telehealth interventions on lung functioning and readmission rates within a specific timeframe. It also assisted in recognizing potential limitations and methodological considerations within the studies, enabling critical analysis and interpretation of the evidence.

Improvement Opportunities Related to Collaboration

Reflecting on collaboration and other relevant work at the project site, I have experienced a dynamic and engaging environment that significantly contributed to the progress of my doctoral project. Collaborating with fellow researchers, healthcare professionals, and stakeholders has proven beneficial in expanding perspectives and refining ideas. Through regular meetings, discussions, and feedback sessions, valuable insights were gained, including effective search strategies, manual searches of reference lists, and awareness of potential challenges posed by limited sample sizes and methodological limitations. These insights enhanced critical appraisal skills and shaped my approach to the literature search and synthesis process. Furthermore, constructive criticism received and the collective expertise of the team fostered creativity, innovation, and a shared sense of purpose, ultimately enhancing the quality of my project.

The outcomes of collaboration at the project site have been substantial and tangible. Working alongside experienced professionals in the field provided access to knowledge, resources, and practical expertise, enriching my understanding of the subject matter and enabling the application of theoretical concepts to real-world situations. Collaborators’ input and contributions have played a pivotal role in shaping my project’s direction, refining research questions, and identifying potential implications for practice. Through their support and guidance, challenges were navigated, obstacles overcome, and meaningful progress achieved in my doctoral journey (van Leeuwen & Janssen, 2019).

As with any collaborative endeavor, there are always opportunities for improvement. Fostering even stronger interdisciplinary collaboration is an area that could benefit from further attention. Actively seeking input from professionals in different fields and engaging in cross-disciplinary discussions can provide a broader perspective and incorporate diverse insights into my project. Additionally, enhancing communication channels and ensuring efficient information sharing within the team can lead to smoother coordination and increased productivity (Gallagher & Savage, 2020).

Preconceptions, Assumptions, Biases

One’s preconceptions, assumptions, or biases can significantly influence how they think about and approach their work. These underlying beliefs and perspectives, often shaped by personal experiences, cultural influences, or societal norms, mold the lens through which one perceives information and interprets data. While these preconceptions can offer a valuable starting point and guide initial thinking, they may inadvertently introduce biases and limit one’s ability to consider alternative viewpoints or embrace new ideas (Matos et al., 2023).

Awareness of these preconceptions and actively challenging them is essential to ensure an open and unbiased approach to work. By critically examining assumptions and seeking diverse perspectives, one can broaden understanding, uncover hidden biases, and foster a more inclusive and comprehensive approach to work. Recognizing and mitigating the influence of preconceptions, assumptions, or prejudices allows for more objective and evidence-based decision-making, leading to more robust outcomes and advancements in the field (Hernández-Sellés et al., 2019).

Support from Scholarly and Authoritative Sources

Integrating support from scholarly and authoritative sources is crucial for strengthening claims and substantiating decision-making in COPD. Research studies have demonstrated the effectiveness of nutritional and telehealth interventions in improving lung functioning and reducing readmission rates in COPD patients within a 2 to 3-month period (Jiang et al., 2023). For instance, a systematic review by Fan and Zhao (2021) found that telehealth

interventions showed promising results in improving COPD management and reducing hospital readmissions. Another study by Niranjan et al. (2022) highlighted the benefits of nutritional interventions in enhancing lung function and overall well-being in COPD patients.

Moreover, authoritative sources such as clinical guidelines also provide valuable guidance for decision-making in COPD management. For example, the Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) guidelines recommend incorporating nutritional interventions and telehealth strategies into comprehensive COPD care (Vila et al., 2023). Additionally, a study by Furulund et al. (2021) found that nutritional interventions significantly improved lung functioning in COPD patients, providing further evidence for their effectiveness. Another study by Cristina et al. (2023) demonstrated the positive impact of telehealth interventions on reducing readmission rates in COPD patients.

Furthermore, a recent study conducted by Koh et al. (2023) demonstrated the long-term benefits of telehealth interventions in improving patient outcomes and reducing healthcare utilization among individuals with COPD. These guidelines serve as a reputable source of evidence-based recommendations and support the use of these interventions in clinical practice. By incorporating citations from scholarly articles and authoritative guidelines, one can strengthen the claims and decisions related to the effectiveness of nutritional and telehealth interventions in improving lung functioning and reducing readmission rates in COPD patients. These sources provide a solid evidence base and contribute to the overall credibility and validity of the project.

Evaluation of Relevance

The relevance of sources to the claims and decisions they support is crucial in ensuring the validity and reliability of the information used. One effective way to assess the relevance of sources is by applying the CRAAP and RADAR tests. The CRAAP test examines the source’s currency, relevance, authority, accuracy, and purpose, while the RADAR test focuses on the information’s relevancy, appearance, date, authority, and reason (Sye & Thompson, 2023). By evaluating these factors, one can determine the suitability of a source for supporting specific claims and decisions in the context of COPD.

For example, scholarly articles published in reputable peer-reviewed journals undergo a rigorous review process, ensuring their authority and accuracy. Clinical guidelines, endorsed by expert panels and professional organizations, carry significant relevance and authority in guiding decision-making. By carefully applying these tests, one can select sources that align with specific claims and decisions, ensuring the information used is current, accurate, reliable, and applicable to the project at hand (Sye & Thompson, 2023).

Conclusion

Conducting a comprehensive literature search is crucial for addressing research questions and making informed decisions. By employing a systematic approach and utilizing relevant databases, researchers can gather a wide range of scholarly and authoritative sources to support their claims and substantiate their decision-making processes. Integrating support from such sources strengthens the validity and credibility of the work, ensuring that evidence-based practices and guidelines are followed.

References

Brice, S., & Almond, H. (2020). Health professional digital capabilities frameworks: A scoping review. Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare, 13, 1375–1390. https://doi.org/10.2147/jmdh.s269412

Costal, D., Farré, C., Franch, X., & Quer, C. (2021). Inclusion and exclusion criteria in software engineering tertiary studies. Proceedings of the 15th ACM / IEEE International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement (ESEM). https://doi.org/10.1145/3475716.3484190

Cristina Rezende1, L., Geraldo Ribeiro1, E., Carvalho Parreiras1, L., Assunção Guimarães1, R., Maciel dos Reis1, G., Fernandes Carajá1, A., Batista Franco2, T., Patrícia de Souza Mendes1, L., Maria Augusto1, V., & Lara Silva1, K. (2023). Telehealth and telemedicine in the management of adult patients after hospitalization for COPD exacerbation: A scoping review. Jornal Brasileiro de Pneumologia, e20220067. https://doi.org/10.36416/1806-3756/e20220067

Fan, K., & Zhao, Y. (2021). Mobile health technology: A novel tool in chronic disease management. Intelligent Medicine, 2(1). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.imed.2021.06.003

Furulund, E., Bemanian, M., Berggren, N., Madebo, T., Rivedal, S. H., Lid, T. G., & Fadnes, L. T. (2021). Effects of nutritional interventions in individuals with chronic obstructive lung disease: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials. International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, 16, 3145–3156. https://doi.org/10.2147/COPD.S323736

Gallagher, S. E., & Savage, T. (2020). Challenge-based learning in higher education: An exploratory literature review. Teaching in Higher Education, 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2020.1863354

Golder, S., Peryer, G., & Loke, Y. K. (2019). Overview: Comprehensive and carefully constructed strategies are required when conducting searches for adverse effects data. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 113, 36–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2019.05.019

Hernández-Sellés, N., Pablo-César Muñoz-Carril, & González-Sanmamed, M. (2019). Computer-supported collaborative learning: An analysis of the relationship between interaction, emotional support and online collaborative tools. Computers & Education, 138, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.04.012

Jiang, Y., Nuerdawulieti, B., Chen, Z., Guo, J., Sun, P., Chen, M., & Li, J. (2023). Effectiveness of patient decision aid supported shared decision-making intervention in in-person and virtual hybrid pulmonary rehabilitation in older adults with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: A pilot randomized controlled trial. Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare. https://doi.org/10.1177/1357633×231156631

Koh, J. H., Chong, L. C. Y., Koh, G. C. H., & Tyagi, S. (2023). Telemedical interventions for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease management: Umbrella review. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 25(1), e33185. https://doi.org/10.2196/33185

Li, J., Greenwood, D., & Kassem, M. (2019). Blockchain in the built environment and construction industry: A systematic review, conceptual models and practical use cases. Automation in Construction, 102(1), 288–307. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2019.02.005

Matos, J. F., Piedade, J., Freitas, A., Pedro, N., Dorotea, N., Pedro, A., & Galego, C. (2023). Teaching and learning research methodologies in education: A systematic literature review. Education Sciences, 13(2), 173. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13020173

Messerschmidt, M., Chan, S., Wen, E., & Nanayakkara, S. (2022). Toro: A Web-based tool to search, explore, screen, compare and visualize literature. AIS Electronic Library (AISeL). https://aisel.aisnet.org/sighci2022/13/

Niranjan, V., Tarantino, G., Kumar, J., Stokes, D., O’Connor, R., & O’Regan, A. (2022). The impact of dance interventions on patients with noninfectious pulmonary diseases: A systematic review. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(17), 11115. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph191711115

Riccio, V., Jahangirova, G., Stocco, A., Humbatova, N., Weiss, M., & Tonella, P. (2020). Testing machine learning based

systems: A systematic mapping. Empirical Software Engineering. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10664-020-09881-0

Slettebø, T. (2020). Participant validation: Exploring a contested tool in qualitative research. Qualitative Social Work, 20(5), 147332502096818. https://doi.org/10.1177/1473325020968189

Sye, D., & Thompson, D. S. (2023). Tools, tests, and checklists: The evolution and future of source evaluation frameworks. Journal of New Librarianship, 8, 76. https://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/jnwlibsh8&div=11&id=&page=

van Leeuwen, A., & Janssen, J. (2019). A systematic review of teacher guidance during collaborative learning in primary and secondary education. Educational Research Review, 27(27), 71–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2019.02.001

Vila, M., Rosa Oliveira, V., & Agustí, A. (2023). Telemedicine in the management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: A systematic review. Medicina Clínica (English Edition), 160(8), 355–363. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.medcle.2023.01.008

NURS FPX 9902 Assessment 5 Reflection