Research Research

Research

Research

Thisresearch study was conducted to test efficacy of a program thatinvolved nurses sending email reminders to hypertensive patients in abid to prevent or control the cardiovascular risk factors (Cicoliniet al., 2014). This research was done by having a control group ofhypertensive adults who were put under the usual care and theintervention group which had a combination of usual care and nurseled reminder emails to the patients.

InferentialStatistics Critique

Bivariateinferential statistics are included. The inferential statisticsincluded in this study are paired samples t-test for the continuousvariables that are normally distributed. For the continuous variablesthat had non-normal distribution Kruskal-Wallis test was used andchi-square test was used to analyze the dichotomous variables. Thiswas used to test the hypothesis that the use of NRP-e together withthe usual care is more effective than the normal methods of reducingthe risk factors associated with hypertension.

Thestatistical tests used are appropriate for the variables according tothe levels of measurement. For. example, the paired sample t-test andKruskal-Wallis test are used to analyze for variables that have ascale level of measurement that is continuous. The chi-square testwas used to analyze the variables that are the categorical scale ofmeasurement. The study used the statistical tests very well given thelevel of measurement and the hypothesis nature.

Therewere parametric tests involved. The parametric test used here is thepaired samples t-test. This test was appropriate because it was usedto analyze normally distributed continuous variables. Thenon-parametric tests were used which included the Kruskal-Wallis testand the rationale for using it are provided as it was used to analyzecontinuous variables in the study that were not normally distributed.

Theinformation about the hypothesis testing was provided as being that asignificance level of 0.05 was used to determine whether the resultswere significant or not. The information about the estimation ofparameters was clearly given, and they were reported both at baselineand during the follow-ups.

Thereport is excellent as it provides information about the differentstatistical tests used and the rationale behind it. This informationenables the researcher to make a good judgment regarding theappropriateness of the different statistical tests used.

Theresults of the statistical test comparing the difference between theintervention group and the normal care group indicated significantresults. The group that used emails had a statistically significantmore improvement in risk factors like intake of alcohol, smoking ofcigarettes, physical activities and the blood pressure measurementsand others at the level of significance provided. The results givemore information and necessity of the research question. There was asizeable effect.

Therewere also results that were insignificant, which included some riskfactors like salt consumption and fasting blood glucose. The factorsthat undermined these results are either the high improvement in therisk factors for both groups or the lack of improvement for the twogroups. The findings are clearly and well organized and reported.Tables were effectively used to depict the results of various resultsand to make it easier for a person to read and understand theresults.

QuantitativeArticle Critique

Allthe important results regarding the study are discussed by using allthe parameters that were defined in the study. The author of thestudy defines well the limitations of the study. The limitationsinclude the limited resources that meant that they did shortfollow-ups and the sample used was relatively young which averaged 59years. The self-reporting would lead to bias and by sending an emailit cannot be guaranteed that they were read. The differentlimitations were a key threat to the study, and the threats of thelimitations were clearly noted after the definition of eachlimitation. The constraints were taken into account while doing theinterpretation.

Thestudy provided evidence for each interpretation by linking thefindingswiththe results of other researchers. Good explanations were offered foreach interpretation. The study discusses how the findings arerelevant to the clinical practice in trying to reduce the mortalitiesof hypertension. The author also clearly takes into account that theprovision of information might not be lead to the behavioral change.

Aclear distinction between statistical significance and clinicalsignificance is provided. The effect sizes of the treatment were alsoprovided. In general, the researcher does a great job in this studyto find out if the use of reminder program using emails by the nursesdid significantly improve the risk factors associated withhypertension.

References

Cicolini,G., Simonetti, V., Comparcini, D., Celiberti, I., Di Nicola, M.,Capasso, L. M., … &amp Manzoli, L. (2014). Efficacy of a nurse-ledemail reminder program for cardiovascular prevention risk reductionin hypertensive patients: A randomized controlled trial.Internationaljournal of nursing studies,51(6),833-843.