American Academy of Advertising Conference Proceedings

Unit 7 Worksheet

Student’s Name: Insert Your Name Here

Instructions: Please review this worksheet carefully and complete it before submitting. This worksheet has a logical progression, therefore, you will need to complete it in order, from start to finish, without skipping steps or questions.

Purpose: As a graduate student in the Master of Public Health program, you are trained to think and perform precisely the way you would be expected to as a working public health professional. To this end, this worksheet will help train you to approach a public health topic exactly the way a working public health professional would. This may be much different than what you are used to doing. It is imperative that you fully understand the topics in this worksheet. If you receive point deductions, then you must discuss with the instructor the areas you need to improve, because this worksheet presents the basics from which your graduate studies build upon.

Connecting with “The Literature”

Part 1

To this point in the worksheet, you have identified a public health issue and analyzed its context within the Healthy People. In this third step, you will now explore what professionals call “the literature.” “The Literature” is another way of saying the scholarly work associated with the field. Thus, you will need to demonstrate a basic understanding of scholarly versus non-scholarly sources of information. Answer yes or no the following questions and provide your rationale.

1. Would you trust your physician if he used Wikipedia.com or WebMD.com to diagnose an illness?

a. Yes or No:

b. Your rationale:

2. Are “.com” websites regulated to ensure accurate information?

a. Yes or No:

b. Your rationale:

3. Would you trust to give you objective and unbiased information on abortion, condom use, etc.?

a. Yes or No:

b. Your rationale:

4. Are journalists for news organizations experts on the information they report?

a. Yes or No:

b. Your rationale:

5. Can you trust a blog for expert information?

a. Yes or No:

b. Your rationale:

6. If something was published in 1980 on a health-related topic, is that information still viable today?

a. Yes or No:

b. Your rationale:

[You should have answered “no” to all of these questions. If you do not understand why a particular question is answered as “no,” please contact your instructor or a writing tutor.]

Part 2

In 3, you learned that you should only trust sources that are scholarly and provide academic information. These sources include: peer reviewed journals, authoritative textbooks, “.gov” websites, personal communication with an expert in the field, etc. Do you see a trend here? You should. Each of these sources has ensured accurate information from an expert authority. Also, these sources are not meant for the general public. So, in 100 words, explain how you will distinguish information that is meant for the general public versus information that is meant for public health professionals.

Insert your response here:

Part 3

Now that you understand precisely what “the literature” is and is not, let’s explore one of these sources: the peer-reviewed journal article. Before you obtain a peer-reviewed journal, you will need to understand what “peer-review” means. Therefore, watch this video: http://youtu.be/twogpmM-SfY After watching this video, access the KU Library from KU Campus Main Page. On the library page, look for the “Journals A-Z” directory. Search this directory using the key words “public health.” This will render all Kaplan University’s journals on public health. If needed, get in contact (either via chat or telephone) with a Library for assistance.

List 10 public health peer-reviewed journals that you found:

Part 4

From the list above, locate two peer-reviewed journal articles published in the last 5 years that relates to your HealthyPeople.gov topic area. Using your APA Style Manual, create two reference list entries formatted in APA Style.

Formatted reference #1:

Formatted reference #2:

Part 5

In your own words and no more than 3 sentences, describe what you learned from reference #1?

Insert your information here:

Part 6

In your own words and no more than 3 sentences, describe what you learned from reference #2?

Insert your information here:

Part 7

Describe the overall research approach (in your own words) for reference #1.

Insert your information here:

Part 8

Describe the overall research approach (in your own words) for reference #2.

Insert your information here:

Unit 7 Worksheet

Student’s Name: Insert Your Name Here

Instructions: Please review this worksheet carefully and complete it before submitting. This worksheet has a logical progression, therefore, you will need to complete it in order, from start to finish, without skipping steps or questions.

Purpose: As a graduate student in the Master of Public Health program, you are trained to think and perform precisely the way you would be expected to as a working public health professional. To this end, this worksheet will help train you to approach a public health topic exactly the way a working public health professional would. This may be muchdifferent than what you are used to doing. It is imperative that you fully understand the topics in this worksheet. If you receive point deductions, then you must discuss with the instructor the areas you need to improve, because this worksheet presents the basics from which your graduate studies build upon.

Connecting with “The Literature”

Part 1

To this point in the worksheet, you have identified a public health issue and analyzed its context within the Healthy People. In this third step, you will now explore what professionals call “the literature.” “The Literature” is another way of saying the scholarly work associated with the field. Thus, you will need to demonstrate a basic understanding of scholarly versus non-scholarly sources of information. Answer yes or no the following questions and provide your rationale.

  1. Would you trust your physician if he used Wikipedia.com or WebMD.com to diagnose an illness?
    1. Yes or No:  No
    1. Your rationale:  The reason for this is lack of credibility of the sources of information. The information published on these websites is questionable when it comes to quality. Professionals do not write most of the information and this causes one to question the quality and credibility of the information. Furthermore, the websites are not frequently updated and this leaves a lot of gaps and current changes in area not incorporated.
  • Are “.com” websites regulated to ensure accurate information?
    • Yes or No:  No
    • Your rationale: These websites post information on certain aspects and this information is not regulated once posted. The information posted is not updated as it remains in the form it was published the first time. It is also difficult to ascertain the credential of the publisher. Furthermore, the sources or references from which the information is retrieved may not be provided or even if provided they may not be authentic.
  • Would you trust to give you objective and unbiased information on abortion, condom use, etc.?
    • Yes or No:  No
    • Your rationale: The information published may not be fully scrutinized. It includes opinions, views, and perspectives of the contributors. Such information on abortion and condoms cannot be relied upon because they will be skewed in a way to suit the values and the wishes of the catholic organization. The Catholic Church is against abortion and as well, use of condom and therefore, the information will tend to be skewed (Guido, Prete, & Sammarco, 2010). Hence, it is obvious that the information may not be that objective but biased.
  • Are journalists for news organizations experts on the information they report?
    • Yes or No:  no
    • Your rationale: This is because; they cover different aspects or topics on their work. It may not be possible for them to have acquired skills in all these areas. They have only acquired minor training on how to report on these topics. Furthermore, the work of these journalists is to report on the information they have seen. This therefore, means that these journalists are not experts on what they report on.
  • Can you trust a blog for expert information?
    • Yes or No: No
    • Your rationale: The reason is that blogs are opinionated and some of the arguments are not supported with credible sources of information. The author of various blogs may not have requisite skills and expertise in the area or topic under discussion hence not reliable source of information. Furthermore, it is very difficult to establish whether the author is s credible or not (Sojung & Sejung, 2010). With this platform, the person may use or fake names of a professional leading to misleading information. Therefore, blogs are not credible sources of information.
  • If something was published in 1980 on a health-related topic, is that information still viable today?
    • Yes or No:  No
    • Your rationale: New studies have been carried out between 1980 to date and new developments have been realized. Furthermore, due to climate change and population changes and other changes in the environment, new strains of diseases and virus crop up and this requires new approaches to deal with them. Therefore, the information may be outdated and therefore not useful in these modern days (Morton-Owens, 2011).

 [You should have answered “no” to all of these questions. If you do not understand why a particular question is answered as “no,” please contact your instructor or a writing tutor.]

Part 2

In 3, you learned that you should only trust sources that are scholarly and provide academic information. These sources include: peer reviewed journals, authoritative textbooks, “.gov” websites, personal communication with an expert in the field, etc. Do you see a trend here? You should. Each of these sources has ensured accurate information from an expert authority. Also, these sources are not meant for the general public. So, in 100 words, explain how you will distinguish information that is meant for the general public versus information that is meant for public health professionals.

Insert your response here:

There is a noticeable trend in these sources. These sources of information are all from expert authority. The authors have some level of qualification that makes them enhance credibility of the information. The information is also meant for specific target audience. Distinguishing information meant for general public and that meant for public health professionals is distinguished based on various aspects. One of the aspects is the topic or area of study. Information meant for public health professionals covers on health aspects. The language used is also complex and easily understood by the professionals. There are terms used that are only understood by the health professionals. Furthermore, this information is accessed through specific avenues such as credible books, peer-review journals, and personal communication for experts among others.

 Part 3

Now that you understand precisely what “the literature” is and is not, let’s explore one of these sources: the peer-reviewed journal article.After watching this video, access the KU Library from KU Campus Main Page. On the library page, look for the “Journals A-Z” directory. Search this directory using the key words “public health.” This will render all Kaplan University’s journals on public health. If needed, get in contact (either via chat or telephone) with a Library for assistance.

List 10 public health peer-reviewed journals that you found:

  1. Atyia, M., & Williams, J. (2014). Public-private partnership from theory to practice: Walgreens and the Boston Public Health Commission supporting each other before and after the Boston bombings. Journal of Business Continuity & Emergency Planning, 7(3):205-220.
  2. Burris, S.,  Mays, G., Scutchfield, D., & Ibrahim, J. (2012). Moving from Intersection to Integration: Public Health Law Research and Public Health Systems and Services Research. Quarterly, 90(2): 375-408.
  3. Calman, N.,  Hauser, D.,  Lurio, J.,  Wu, W., & Pichardo, M. (2012). Strengthening Public Health and Primary Care Collaboration Through Electronic Health Records. American Journal of Public Health, 102(11): pe13-e18
  4. Dias, C. (2012). The Future of public health services in Europe: Strategic intersection with healthcare services. International Journal of Healthcare Management, 5(2): 69-73.
  5. Friedman, D.,  Parrish, R., & Ross, D. (2013). Electronic Health Records and US Public Health: Current Realities and Future Promise. American Journal of Public Health, 103(9): 1560-1567.
  6. Grant, R. (2014). Bringing Public Health Back Into Public Health Policy Debates. American Journal of Public Health, 104(5): 772-772.
  7. Otto, J.,  Holodniy, M., & DeFraites, R. (2014). Public Health Practice Is Not Research. American Journal of Public Health, 104(4): 596-602.
  8. Tomasallo, C et al., (2014).  Estimating Wisconsin Asthma Prevalence Using Clinical Electronic Health Records and Public Health Data. American Journal of Public Health, 104(1): e65-e73.
  9. Wynn, A., & Moore, K. (2012). Integration of Primary Health Care and Public Health During a Public Health Emergency. American Journal of Public Health, 102(11): e9-e12.
  10. Ye, S. (2014).  Rethinking Public Health: Promoting Public Engagement Through a New Discursive Environment. American Journal of Public Health, 104(1):e6-e13.

Part 4

From the list above, locate two peer-reviewed journal articles published in the last 5 years that relates to your HealthyPeople.gov topic area. Using your APA Style Manual, create two reference list entries formatted in APA Style.

Formatted reference #1:

 Friedman, D., Parrish, R., & Ross, D. (2013). Electronic Health Records and US Public Health: Current Realities and Future Promise. American Journal of Public Health, 103(9): 1560-1567.

Formatted reference #2:

 Caron, R., Hiller, M., & Wyman, W. (2013. Engaging Local Public Health System Partnerships to Educate the Future Public Health Workforce. Journal of Community Health, 38 (2): 268-76.

Part 5

In your own words and no more than 3 sentences, describe what you learned from reference #1?

Insert your information here:

 Electronic health records if well adopted will contribute to greater magnitude in improving the general health of the population in the United States, EHR helps to enhance better understating of the level and distribution of diseases, function and as well being within the population. It is however, important for the users to understand how these EHR are used to enhance and promote quality healthcare.

Part 6

In your own words and no more than 3 sentences, describe what you learned from reference #2?

Insert your information here:

From the reference, I have learned about the need for health practitioners to work together and to teach others on the issues of health to enhance future public health workforce. It is important for the system to put in place   appropriate mechanism that will ensure that skills and knowledge are passed on from public worker to the new one to ensure continuity in the best practices. This will help to promote better health care to the public.

Part 7

Describe the overall research approach (in your own words) for reference #1.

Insert your information here:

In reference, one the approach of the research is deductive as the researchers moves form a general viewpoint to a more specific one. Therefore, it is used to prove the hypothesis that indeed EHR has the capability to impact positively on the health of the general population (Creswell 2010).

Part 8

Describe the overall research approach (in your own words) for reference #2.

Insert your information here:

The research approach in reference two was inductive meaning that the researcher moved from a specific idea to a general one. The researcher is also associated with interprevitism paradigm as the information incorporated includes personal reasoning and valuations (Bryman & Bell 2003).

References

Bryman, A., & Bell, E. (2003). Business Research Methods. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Creswell, J. (2012). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative      and qualitative research. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall

Guido, G.,  Prete, M., & Sammarco, L. (2010). Prototypes versus examples: A new model of        online credibility for commercial websites. Journal of Targeting, Measurement &            Analysis for Marketing, 18(1): 3-16.

Morton-Owens, E. (2011). Editorial and Technological Workflow Tools to Promote Website       Quality. Information Technology & Libraries, 30(3): 91-98.

Sojung K, &  Sejung, M. (2010). The effects of corporate credibility and website reputation on    banner advertising effectiveness: the moderating role of product-website congruency.       American Academy of Advertising Conference Proceedings, p. 29

Looking for Discount?

You'll get a high-quality service, that's for sure.

To welcome you, we give you a 20% discount on your All orders! use code - NWS20

Discount applies to orders from $30
All Rights Reserved, Nursingwritingservice.com
Disclaimer: You will use the product (paper) for legal purposes only and you are not authorized to plagiarize. In addition, neither our website nor any of its affiliates and/or partners shall be liable for any unethical, inappropriate, illegal, or otherwise wrongful use of the Products and/or other written material received from the Website. This includes plagiarism, lawsuits, poor grading, expulsion, academic probation, loss of scholarships / awards / grants/ prizes / titles / positions, failure, suspension, or any other disciplinary or legal actions. Purchasers of Products from the Website are solely responsible for any and all disciplinary actions arising from the improper, unethical, and/or illegal use of such Products.