Tyra Jackson

Professor Guenzel

ENC 1102-0M31

Final Draft Rhetorical Analysis

April 1, 2019

“Clinical Efficacy”

I realized that technology is greatly influencing clinical data. I began to wonder how

much data validity, accuracy, and reliability is affected. It is very important to have a standard in

the clinical field, valuable consistent results, and to limit any crucial errors. It is a priority to have

the appropriate data research methods within healthcare to follow the standard for clinical

reliability, accuracy, and validity. My source “Critical appraisal and selection of data collection

instruments: A step-by-step guide” by Kathleen N. Dunemn , Carol J. Roehrs, Vicki L. Wilson

highlights the factors involved in clinical research while gaining a conclusion of what is the best

way to gather and interpret information. The article suggests a standard and continues to take a

look into any new developments that is being newly introduced.

The excerpt principles of the step-by-step list that involves Critical Appraisal and

Selection of Data Collection Instruments are established from the tenets of the measurement

theory, literature, and experience of the included authors involved with the schooling/education

and experience/practice research. The article was written by Kathleen N. Dunemn, Carol J.

Roehrs, Vicki L. Wilson supported by the school of nursing within the University of Northern

Colorado in Greeley, Colorado. Kathleen N. Dunemn, PhD, is an associate professor at the

university and has written multiple nursing publications sponsored by the School of Nursing,
University of Northern Colorado. The authors disclosed that there were no conflicts and

competing of interests from the authors.

Within the article is an abstract from the “Journal of Nursing Education and Practice and

the online article provides information for nurse researchers to improve valid data through the

idea of using accurate instruments to collect data. The article has a comprehensive check list to

assist readers to swiftly and appropriately apprise quantitative research collection instruments.

The article’s intended readers consist of people interested in research and interpreting reliable

data. The readers are interested in obtaining information from a nursing point of view of how to

conduct a valid analytical appraisal and selection of data collection instruments. The information

of the article is organized in in a format close to an IMRaD structure without a formal discussion

at the end of the clinical paper. The article’s abstract states how essential it is for nurse

researchers to upheld the most trustworthy data when coordinating research in education and

practice. The direct analytical tone assist to provide a systematically appraisal routine that can be

conducted in a professional manner to support the excerpt’s main goal is to aid nurse researchers

to objectively discuss, weigh information, and make scholar conclusions. After the abstract, the

article continues to describe the information in an introduction suggesting how the article will

improve research and how the data presented in the report is a great standard to follow within

nursing research. Following the introduction, the analysis resumes with the outline of the guide

and the impact it can make. Then the article follows to have individual paragraphs to list each

step of the guide with its own explanation. This provides an easy read for the reader to process

the information communicated with clear understanding. This way of organization is an

advantage for the writers to present information and criticism in a comprehensive manor that the
viewer can enjoy. The article contains graphs to help assist the reader with comprehension of the

material in an unchallenging direct presentation. The graph matches the material in

corresponding paragraphs providing an even more straightforward read the can be comprehended

at a quick rate. The graphs include information on how to complete the listed step leading into

information that will help the reader follow the step such as assessing the instrument

accessibility, historical background, design, measurement, and report. The charts are filled with

just as much data as the paragraphs and presents the information better in my opinion. The charts

are filled with multiple assessments to follow and complete to conduct a reliable decision for the

success an instrument would have for the research in regards to data reliability, accuracy, and

validity. The clinical field has a variety of instruments to assist within research. Instruments can

affect the precision of the data collected. The article sets a standard for obtaining dependable

data.

The article communicates in great detail of conducting quantitative research. I agree with

the article statement of how “each data collection tool selected should undergo a comprehensive

critical appraisal to assess not only the characteristics of reliability and validity, but to also assess

the congruence of the measurement method with the research purpose, question(s), hypotheses,

design, study population, study setting, conceptual and operational definitions of the planned

study variables and the over-all measurement plans.” This statement represents the argument of

the article to educate the readers of significant information in terms of instruments to use for a

procedure to provide appropriate accurate data from a research perspective. The authors

introduce an abstract first to provide a detailed summary of the formal written piece as to why

this article is important to read.

 The source provides a step-by-step guide that provide multiple elements to complete an

appropriate instrument appraisal for instrument selection. The first step suggested is to

“Conceptualize the proposed quantitative research project” by gaining knowledge of the basic

elements of the project. To gain knowledge of the project the article explains the importance of

understanding the problem, reviewing any previous relevant written work, having a design plan

and method while analyzing research objectives and questions. The article continues to

communicate the next step to “Find an existing instrument for the proposed study”, after

determining the elements of the research the next step is to find an instrument that can assist the

key elements found within step one. Once the instrument has been identified the article suggest

to complete a “Critical assessment of the proposed measurement instrument”. This includes the

assessment of the instrument availability, access, purpose, historical background, content,

internal consistency, reliability, and validity, sampling, measurement, and analysis. After gaining

an assessment in step three, the article communicates to continue into step four to have a final

decision of the instrument decided for the interest of the study.

All and all, the source provides an academic perspective of research from an university to

educate the usage of appropriate instruments and accurate procedure. The article communicates

the standard for practice and how to improve the quality of research by educating the right

procedure in a logical way to find the proper data collection method and instruments to have

appropriate data within healthcare to follow the standard for clinical reliability, accuracy, and

validity. The writers of the ‘The Step-By-Step Guide for the Critical Appraisal and Selection of

Data Collection Instruments’ finalized how prior to adopting a data collection instrument,

researchers are prompted to critically examine all of the characteristics and dimensions of the

instrument and follow up with an evaluation. After reading the article, the readers have enough
information to make an educated decision to determine to use or not to use the measurement

instrument for a proposed study. The passage continues to advise researchers that need to modify

an existing previous instrument of an ongoing study, the guidance gathered by the Step-By-Step

Guide provides a substructure for the justification for the modification and as well of suggested

modification for the research. This written piece has provided me with general information of

clinical research that I am using for my dossier.

References:

1. Roehrs, C. and Wilson, V. (2016). Critical appraisal and selection of data collection

instruments: A step-by-step guide. [online] Sciedu.ca. Available at:

http://www.sciedu.ca/journal/index.php/jnep/article/viewFile/10147/6397 [Accessed 4

Feb. 2019].

2. Grove SK, Burns N, Gray JR. The Practice of Nursing Research: Appraisal, Synthesis,

and Generation of Evidence (7th ed). St. Louis, MO: Elsevier Publishers; 2013.

3. Tappen R. Advanced Nursing Research: From Theory to Practice (2nd ed). Burlington,

MA: Jones & Bartlett Learning; 2016.

4. Scholtes VA, Terwee CB, Poolman RW. What Makes a Measurement Instrument Valid

and Reliable? Injury, International Journal of Care for the Injured. 2011; 42: 236-240.

PMid:21145544 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.injury.2010.11.042

5. Davis SL, Morrow AK. Creating usable assessment tools: A step-by-step guide to

instrument design. 2013. Available from: http: //www.docdatabase.net/more-creating-

usable-assessm ent-tools-a-step-by-step-guide-to--1141299.html
6. Stone KS, Frazier SK. Measurement of Physiological Variables Using Biomedical

Instrumentation. In C. F. Waltz, O. L. Strickland & E. R. Lenz (Eds). Measurement in

Nursing and Health Research (4th ed., pp. 335-370). New York, NY: Springer Publishing

Company; 2010. PMid:20579905

7. Fawcett J, Garity J. Evaluating Research for Evidence-Based Nursing Practice.

Philadelphia, PA: F. A. Davis; 2009.

8. Ryan-Wenger NA. Evaluation of measurement precision, accuracy, and error in

biophysical data for clinical research and practice. In C. F. Waltz, O. L. Strickland & E.

R. Lenz (Eds). Measurement in Nursing and Health Research (4th ed., pp. 371-383). New

York, NY: Springer Publishing Company; 2010.

9. Lohr KN, Aaronson NK, Alonso J, et al. Evaluating Quality-ofLife and Health Status

Instruments: Development of Scientific Review Criteria. Clinical Therapeutics. 1996;

18(5): 979-992. http: //dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0149-2918(96)80054-3