Reply 1

Hypothesis testing involves using statistics by analysts or researchers to determine the strength or weakness of an assumption on a resident’s parameter (Shreffler & Huecker, 2020). On the other hand, a confidence interval is a measure of statistics that offer a range of values, upper and lower limits, that can be plausible to a particular population. Confidence intervals use CI to show the upper and lower limit; hence a 90% CI would indicate that if that research undertaking can be done for up to 100 times, the valid values will be 90 (Shreffler & Huecker, 2020). Also, a confidence interval will only show the aptitude of analysis to come up with accurate results, and this can only happen if many intervals are assessed. Notably, the CI width is affected by factors like standard errors and the number of selected participants. Therefore, having a significant CI would indicate that a small sample size was taken. With these two measures of statistics, more evidence on a particular hypothesis is presented. One can develop a research hypothesis, and the confidence interval determines the inclusion or exclusion of significant values in medicine (Shreffler & Huecker, 2020).

In a hospital, doctors decided to test the effectiveness of two medicines, drug A and drug B. The hypothesis was that drug A was much more effective than drug B. The healthcare professionals then undertook to assess this hypothesis’s truthfulness by researching on patient’s response to these two medications. In 4.2 days, those who took drug A indicated much faster healing than those who took drug B, with p= 0.009. hence, (95% CI: 1.9-7.8). This means that drug A was more effective than drug B; thus, the hypothesis stands, and also, with the big CI range, the results can be extrapolated to a larger population.

References

Shreffler, J., & Huecker, M. R. (2020). Hypothesis Testing, P Values, Confidence Intervals, and Significance. In StatPearls [Internet]. StatPearls Publishing.

Reply 2

As defined by Ambrose (2018):

• Hypothesis: A testable statement of a relationship; an epidemiologic hypothesis is the relationship is between the exposure (person, time, and/or place) and the occurrence of a disease or condition.
• Confidence Interval (CI): The range of values around the statistic within a population parameter, at a specific parameter. The 95% confidence interval is the specified probability (Ambrose, 2018).

Hypothesis testing and confidence intervals are used together in health care research by making a hypothesis is made of what it thought to happen because of past experience and then the confidence interval is tested with specific parameters and the estimation that it will happen within a certain percentage if tested over and over again, usually within 95%. The larger the sample, the narrower the results should be as there should be less room for error.

Some examples are (1) testing how fast one medication works in comparison to another, (2) susceptibility of lifestyle depending on family history, or (3) the chances of having a hereditary disease.

1. From Shreffler & Huecker (2020):

Individuals who were prescribed Drug 23 had no symptoms after three days, which was

significantly faster than individuals who were prescribed Drug 22; there was a mean difference between the two groups of days to the recovery of 4.2 days (95% CI: 1.9 – 7.8). Reporting both hypothesis and CI, individuals who were prescribed Drug 23 had no symptoms after three days, which was significantly faster than individuals who were prescribed Drug 22, p = 0.009. There was a mean difference between the two groups of days to the recovery.

1. There are several variabilities with obesity, but one is family history. “A child with one obese parent has a 50 percent chance of being obese. When both parents are obese, their children have an 80 percent chance of obesity” (Benioff Children’s Hospital, n.d.). Researchers can take one part of their hypothesis to determine the main factor, but this should be a survey that measures multiple factors like food consumption types, physical activity, or family history to name a few. The probability could differ from one community to the next.

An example that could be used within my work would be (3) a family concern of getting schizophrenia because their loved one has it. A study was done to show the probability of getting schizophrenia with a family member who has it within the psych hospital. Statistics from schizophrena.com (n.d.):

• One parent – 10% chance (1% in general population)
• Both parents – approx. 40% chance

Many patients within the psych hospital have schizophrenia along with other disorders (bipolar, depression) that can exacerbate their symptoms of schizophrenia. Clozaril is a commonly used drug to help treat/manage schizophrenia and researchers test the effectiveness by using bloodwork to measure ANC on a specific schedule; statistics can be found at: https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2010/019758s062lbl.pdf.

Reference

• Ambrose, J. (2018). Applied statistics for health care.Retrieved from https://lc.gcumedia.com/hlt362v/applied-statistics-for-health-care/v1.1/
• Shreffler, J. & Huecker, M. R. (2020). Hypothesis Testing, P Values, Confidence Intervals, and Significance. [Updated 2020 May 6]. In: StatPearls [Internet]. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; Retrieved from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK557421/
• com. (n.d.) Frequently asked questions and answers – from sons/daughters. Retrieved from http://schizophrenia.com/family/FAQoffspring.htm#:~:text=While%20this%20may%20be%20true,risk%20in%20the%20general%20population).

Write two to three well-developed paragraphs (450–500 words) using APA formatting, integrating two evidence-based resources to include clinical practice guidelines as well as the course textbook. (Do not use lay press Internet sites).

Include the following in your initial post:

1. Explanation of the pathophysiology of the diagnosis.
2. Description of the drug category: Overview of use/action.
3. Analysis of the specific agents:
   • Pharmacokinetics/pharmacotherapeutics, adverse drug reactions, interactions, monitoring, patient education

   Please choose two diagnoses from the following list:

   • Migraine
   • Seizure Disorder
   • Alzheimer’s Disease
   • Bell’s Palsy
   • Insomnia
4. For each of the two diagnoses you choose, select two drug categories used for treatment.
5. For each of the two drug categories, choose two specific pharmacological agents.

Course Text book :

 Woo, Terri Moser and Robinson, Marylou V. (2020). Pharmacotherapeutics for Advanced Practice Nurse Prescribers. (5th ed.) Philadelphia, PA: F.A. Davis Company. 

RUBRIC

Discussion Question Rubric

Note: Scholarly resources are defined as evidence-based practice, peer-reviewed journals; textbook (do not rely solely on your textbook as a reference); and National Standard Guidelines. Review assignment instructions, as this will provide any additional requirements that are not specifically listed on the rubric.

Note: The value of each of the criterion on this rubric represents a point range. (example: 17-0 points)

Discussion Question Rubric – 100 PointsCriteriaExemplary
Exceeds ExpectationsAdvanced
Meets ExpectationsIntermediate
Needs ImprovementNovice
InadequateTotal PointsQuality of Initial PostProvides clear examples supported by course content and references.

Cites three or more references, using at least one new scholarly resource that was not provided in the course materials.

All instruction requirements noted.

40 pointsComponents are accurate and thoroughly represented, with explanations and application of knowledge to include evidence-based practice, ethics, theory, and/or role. Synthesizes course content using course materials and scholarly resources to support importantpoints.

Meets all requirements within the discussion instructions.

Cites two references.

35 pointsComponents are accurate and mostly represented primarily with definitions and summarization. Ideas may be overstated, with minimal contribution to the subject matter. Minimal application to evidence-based practice, theory, or role development. Synthesis of course content is present but missing depth and/or development.

Is missing one component/requirement of the discussion instructions.

Cites one reference, or references do not clearly support content.

Most instruction requirements are noted.

31 pointsAbsent application to evidence-based practice, theory, or role development. Synthesis of course content is superficial.

Demonstrates incomplete understanding of content and/or inadequate preparation.

No references cited.

Missing several instruction requirements.

Submits post late.

27 points40Peer Response PostOffers both supportive and alternative viewpoints to the discussion, using two or more scholarly references per peer post. Post provides additional value to the conversation.

All instruction requirements noted.

40 pointsEvidence of further synthesis of course content. Provides clarification and new information or insight related to the content of the peer’s post.

Response is supported by course content and a minimum of one scholarly reference per each peer post.

All instruction requirements noted.

35 pointsLacks clarification or new information. Scholarly reference supports the content in the peer post without adding new information or insight.

Missing reference from one peer post.

Partially followed instructions regarding number of reply posts.

Most instruction requirements are noted.

31 pointsPost is primarily a summation of peer’s post without further synthesis of course content.

Demonstrates incomplete understanding of content and/or inadequate preparation.

Did not follow instructions regarding number of reply posts.

Missing reference from peer posts.

Missing several instruction requirements.

Submits post late.

27 points40Frequency of DistributionInitial post and peer post(s) made on multiple separate days.

All instruction requirements noted.

10 pointsInitial post and peer post(s) made on multiple separate days.

8 pointsMinimum of two post options (initial and/or peer) made on separate days.

7 pointsAll posts made on same day.

Submission demonstrates inadequate preparation.

No post submitted.

6 points10OrganizationWell-organized content with a clear and complex purpose statement and content argument. Writing is concise with a logical flow of ideas.

5 pointsOrganized content with an informative purpose statement, supportive content, and summary statement. Argument content is developed with minimal issues in content flow.

4 pointsPoor organization and flow of ideas distract from content. Narrative is difficult to follow and frequently causes reader to reread work.

Purpose statement is noted.

3 pointsIllogical flow of ideas. Prose rambles. Purpose statement is unclear or missing.

Demonstrates incomplete understanding of content and/or inadequate preparation.

No purpose statement.

Submits assignment late.

2 points5APA, Grammar, and SpellingCorrect APA formatting with no errors.

The writer correctly identifies reading audience, as demonstrated by appropriate language (avoids jargon and simplifies complex concepts appropriately).

Writing is concise, in active voice, and avoids awkward transitions and overuse of conjunctions.

There are no spelling, punctuation, or word-usage errors.

5 pointsCorrect and consistent APA formatting of references and cites all references used. No more than two unique APA errors.

The writer demonstrates correct usage of formal English language in sentence construction. Variation in sentence structure and word usage promotes readability.

There are minimal to no grammar, punctuation, or word-usage errors.

4 pointsThree to four unique APA formatting errors.

The writer occasionally uses awkward sentence construction or overuses/inappropriately uses complex sentence structure. Problems with word usage (evidence of incorrect use of thesaurus) and punctuation persist, often causing some difficulties with grammar. Some words, transitional phrases, and conjunctions are overused.

Multiple grammar, punctuation, or word usage errors.

3 pointsFive or more unique formatting errors or no attempt to format in APA.

The writer demonstrates limited understanding of formal written language use; writing is colloquial (conforms to spoken language).

The writer struggles with limited vocabulary and has difficulty conveying meaning such that only the broadest, most general messages are presented.

Grammar and punctuation are consistently incorrect. Spelling errors are numerous.

Submits assignment late.

2 points5 

Please write a thank you card/note with the below information. 

a.  The thank-you note needs to say:

 I.  Thank you

 II.  Why you are grateful for receiving this scholarship (especially during this time of covid-19) when people have lost their jobs.

 III.  Why did you enter this field (NURSING)

 IV.  Your first name and expected graduation date

Your postings should be qualitative and provide substantive depth that advances the discussion. Please see the Writing Center for assistance with writing, APA, and online communication.

During this discussion, take some time to consider how you will obtain a sexual history from various special populations, as discussions about sex can be uncomfortable for patients. Discuss how you will help your patient open up to you, ensuring they are comfortable discussing a private issue with you as their healthcare provider. How is caring for a special population patient different from the general population?