How do you discuss research findings?

How do you discuss research findings?

Discussing your findings

1. DO: Provide context and explain why people should care. DON’T: Simply rehash your results.
2. DO: Emphasize the positive. DON’T: Exaggerate.
3. DO: Look toward the future. DON’T: End with it.

How would you apply research findings to your practice?

Steps in promoting the uptake of research findings

1. Determine that there is an appreciable gap between research findings and practice.
2. Define the appropriate message (for example, the information to be used)
3. Decide which processes need to be altered.

What is the importance of research findings?

The purpose of research is to inform action. Thus, your study should seek to contextualize its findings within the larger body of research. Research must always be of high quality in order to produce knowledge that is applicable outside of the research setting.

What is best research evidence?

Systematic Reviews and Meta Analyses Well done systematic reviews, with or without an included meta-analysis, are generally considered to provide the best evidence for all question types as they are based on the findings of multiple studies that were identified in comprehensive, systematic literature searches.

What are the 3 components of evidence-based practice?

This definition of EBM requires integration of three major components for medical decision making: 1) the best external evidence, 2) individual practitioner’s clinical expertise, and 3) patients’ preference.

What are the four components of evidence informed care?

… “McMaster Group” of Canadian physicians who developed the contemporary EBP model stated that it has four component parts (Sackett, Rosenberg, Muir Gray, Haynes, & Richardson, 1996): (1) the current clinical circumstances of the client, (2) the best relevant research evidence, (3) the client’s values and preferences …

What are the components of evidence informed practice?

Evidence-based practice includes the integration of best available evidence, clinical expertise, and patient values and circumstances related to patient and client management, practice management, and health policy decision-making. All three elements are equally important.

What is internal and external evidence?

External evidence includes systematic reviews, randomized control trials, best practice, and clinical practice guidelines that support a change in clinical practice. Internal evidence includes health care institution based quality improvement projects, outcome management initiatives, and clinical expertise.

What is the level of evidence in a research study?

Levels of evidence (sometimes called hierarchy of evidence) are assigned to studies based on the methodological quality of their design, validity, and applicability to patient care. These decisions gives the “grade (or strength) of recommendation.”

What is hierarchy of evidence in research?

A hierarchy of evidence (or levels of evidence) is a heuristic used to rank the relative strength of results obtained from scientific research. There is broad agreement on the relative strength of large-scale, epidemiological studies. More than 80 different hierarchies have been proposed for assessing medical evidence.

What are the types of evidence in research?

Types of Evidence

• systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials;
• randomized controlled trials;
• systematic reviews of nonrandomized or cohort studies;
• cohort studies;
• case control studies;
• case series;
• case report;
• ideas, editorials, opinions;

Where is qualitative research in the hierarchy of evidence?

At the apex of the hierarchy are the ideal, well-developed qualitative studies. These studies often build on earlier studies, commencing with a comprehensive literature review, which provides the conceptual framework for initial data collection.

What is the highest level of data findings How is evidence appraised?

When searching for evidence-based information, one should select the highest level of evidence possible–systematic reviews or meta-analysis. Systematic reviews, meta-analysis, and critically-appraised topics/articles have all gone through an evaluation process: they have been “filtered”.