Data Collection/Evaluation of Data

For this paper it has two section as my other papers, each section should have its own reference
page at the end of that section. Also as mentioned in the second section, the writer has to
attached the 2 files chosen as underline in the paper together with this final paper. Note that the
research must be within 5 years old and must be from Canada or U.S this is critical for this
paper. It is also important to use the assigned readings listed below the questions to complete this
paper adding to other reliable materials you will locate.

Data Collection/Evaluation of Data

Section A


  1. Tell me about your encounter with falls?
  2. Do you feel that your caregiver has a huge role in preventing you from falling?
    (Tideiksaar, 2010).
  3. What are some of the measures that you can use to prevent falls?
    Close-ended Likert-type questions
  4. How important is the need to prevent falls among the elderly? (not very important,
    important, extremely important)
  5. Do you think falls are a critical challenge among the elderly? (strongly disagree, agree,
    strongly agree)
  6. Do healthcare institutions have a role in preventing falls? (yes, not sure, no) (Tideiksaar,
    Benefits and limitations of;

Questionnaires are advantaged in that the responses are collected in a standardized
manner, which makes them more objective compared to other forms of interviews. It is also
relatively quicker to gather information through the use of questionnaires (Spetz, 2010).
Potentially, the information required can be gathered from a huge portion of a certain group.
However, this potential is hardly realized since questionnaires’ returns are normally low. It is
worth noting that return rates can be improved dramatically if questionnaires are distributed and
responded to during class time.
However, questionnaires are limited in that since they take place after events, there are
high chances of the participants forgetting about vital issues (Chan, 2010). Since they are
standardized, the participants cannot explain points they might misinterpret in the questions.
Open-ended questions generate huge amounts of data and this requires a lot of time to process as
well as analyze it. The other disadvantage is that respondents are likely to answer superficially
incase the questionnaire requires a lot of time to complete. There are also chances of the
participants not being ready or willing to respond; they may not be willing to reveal the
information or have they notion that they will benefit in no way (Spetz, 2010).
Face-to-face interviews
With these interviews, the person who is completing the questionnaire is known, which
promotes the credibility of the answers being given. The interviews also permit including
respondent groups that may otherwise be omitted among the very old, bedridden, blind, and
illiterate. The major advantage is that the researcher can adapt questions as needed, ensure a
proper comprehension of the responses through rephrasing or repeating the questions, and clarify
doubt. The research also has a benefit of picking up nonverbal cues where any challenges, stress,

or discomfort in the participant is noticed through nervous taping, frowns, and other forms of
body language (Chan, 2010).
The face-to-face interviews are limited in that the participants may feel uneasy about
their responses anonymity as they react face to face. When conducting surveys, face-to-face
interviews impose geographical limitations and immense resources are needed if the surveys are
to be conducted internationally or nationally.



Chan, Z. C. Y. (2010). Clinical research issues in nursing. New York: Nova Science Books.
Spetz, J. (2010). The importance of good data: how the National Sample Survey of Registered
Nurses has been used to improve knowledge and policy. Annual Review of Nursing
Research, 281—18.
Tideiksaar, R. (2010). Falls in older people: Prevention & management. Baltimore: Health
Professions Press.


Section B

Addressing reliability and validity
Study A
In the qualitative study, validity and reliability was promoted by ensuring that the sample
to be analyzed was restricted to the patients that were enrolled in U-01 grant. The participants
who were recruited had more chances of participating in the focus group sessions and had
features relevant to the study’ aim. From the focus group interviews’ tape recordings, extensive
talks were transcribed verbatim amidst relevant response topics. Regardless of the fact that there
was no independent assessment of transcripts by different researchers, the moderator’s and his
assistant’s notes were compared (Onwudiwe et al., 2011).
Study B
In the quantitative study, the review would be conducted based on the Centre for Reviews
and Dissemination (University of York, Centre for Reviews & Dissemination Systematic
Reviews 2009)’s guidelines on quantitative studies. There was a strict adherence to the set
inclusion and exclusion criteria where qualitative studies, case-control studies, cross-sectional
studies, case reports, and case series were excluded. However, there was inclusion of cohort
studies, controlled trials, and randomized controlled trials. This ensures that the objectives of the
study were met (Bagnasco et al., 2014). Another measure that was taken to promote validity
and reliability is that the study design and the instruments used were very specific in measuring
what they were intended to. In addition, the specific databases used were CINAHL, MEDLINE,
PsycINFO, Cochrane Library, and the Cochrane Central Register of controlled trials.
The importance of the nurse understanding the trustworthiness of the research data as
evidence-based clinical decisions are made

Nurses are aware that the decisions they make have significant implications on patient
outcomes. Increasingly, nurses are being required by healthcare policy makers to participate in
the role of making decisions actively. On the same note, nurses are required to incorporate
appraise, and access research evidence in all their clinical decision making as well as
professional judgment. In nursing research, the trustworthiness of the research data constitutes
of confirmability, dependability, transferability and credibility (Lees, 2011).
Evidence-based clinical decisions revolve around evidence-based practice, which echoes
across nursing science, education, and practice. The commitment towards evidence-based
healthcare transformation and quality improvement underscores the significance of redesigning
efficient, safe, and effective care (Morrison et al., 2008). It is worth noting that how trustworthy
a research data is underlies many vital decisions and implementations. This highlights the need
of nurses understanding the trustworthiness of research data and promoting it. This is based on
the fact that the research data is the foundation of making evidence-based clinical decisions in
relation to nursing science, education, practice, which have a great influence on efficient, safe,
and effective care. If the research data is not trustworthy, there are high chances of negative
healthcare outcomes on patients, professionals, and institutions (Tucker, Olson & Frusti, 2009).



Bagnasco, A., Giacomo, P. D., Mora, R. D. R. D., Catania, G., Turci, C., Rocco, G., & Sasso, L.
(2014). Factors influencing self-management in patients with type 2 diabetes: a
quantitative systematic review protocol. Journal of Advanced Nursing 70(1), 187–200.
Lees, C. (2011). Measuring the patient experience. Nurse Researcher, 19(1), 25–28.
Morrison, S., Adamson, C., Nibert, A., & Hsia, S. (2008). HESI exams: an overview of
reliability and validity. Computer, Informatics, Nursing, 26(suppl 5), 39S–45S.
Onwudiwe, N. C., Mullins, C. D., Winston, R. A., Shaya, F. T., Pradel, F. G., Laird, A., &
Saunders, E. (2011). Barriers to Self-Management of Diabetes: A Qualitative Study
among Low-Income Minority Diabetics. Ethnicity & Disease, 21, 27- 32.
Tucker, S., Olson, M., & Frusti, D. (2009). Evidence-Based Practice Self-efficacy Scale:
preliminary reliability and validity. Clinical Nurse Specialist: The Journal For Advanced
Nursing Practice, 23(4), 207-215