Please help with this assignment? Please STRICTLY follow the attached rubric and address ALL topics. Please also use the attached annotated bibliography. Thank you.

Hire our professional essay experts at Gradehunters.net who are available online 24/7 for an essay paper written to a high standard at an affordable cost.


Order a Similar Paper Order a Different Paper

Please help with this assignment? Please STRICTLY follow the attached rubric and address ALL topics. Please also use the attached annotated bibliography. Thank you.

Please help with this assignment? Please STRICTLY follow the attached rubric and address ALL topics. Please also use the attached annotated bibliography. Thank you.
HCM 440 Final Project Guidelines and Rubric Overview Healthcare administrators, managers, and executives are responsible for planning, directing, and coordinating health services at various levels for the populations they serve. Interpreting research is integral to the role of a healthcare professional, especially when conducting a needs assessment for program planning. In this course, you will choose a clinical area of interest related to healthcare administration and create an annotated bibliography. For your final assessment, you will compose an integrated review. In this review, you will discuss the criteria necessary for inclusion or exclusion in the research study, critique the quality of each study, and present a synthesis of the results. This integrated review will address the following course outcomes: Critique ethical issues in healthcare research for their influence on compliance with rules and regulations Evaluate basic research strategies applicable to healthcare settings for informing research proposals Assess the appropriateness of utilizing secondary databases in healthcare research as an alternative to conducting original research Justify the selection of specific data analysis methodology in published healthcare research for informing healthcare research methodology Select healthcare administration issues to research in validating the need for program evaluation Prompt Using the six peer-reviewed literature articles from your annotated bibliography, compose an integrated review that focuses on a clinical issue of interest. Ensure that the topic of this integrated review is viewed from the perspective of a healthcare professional who is looking to validate the need for program evaluation at your hospital, even if your annotated bibliography was not this focused. Specifically, your integrated review should focus on the following critical elements: Abstract Craft a well-drafted abstract. Be sure to adhere to the guidelines from the latest edition of the American Psychological Association’s style guide. Consider the appropriate length for your audience. Introduction State the purpose, aims, or objectives of the integrated review. What do you wish to achieve through the drafting of this review? Be explicit in your answer. Introduce the topic of interest. Why is this topic the focus of the review? What is the research question you are going to focus on? If you were to prepare a research proposal, what would your hypothesis be? Why? What variables are of interest to you? How will these variables help you throughout this integrated review? Be sure to label the types of variables each of these are. Discuss the background and significance of the problem to healthcare administration. Literature Search What keywords and combinations were used in the initial search? Which were the most effective? Explain why these keywords and combinations provided the most useful results. Which databases were searched? Why were these the chosen databases? Assess the characteristics that make these databases the most reliable. Evaluate the inclusion and exclusion criteria for the sample. How did you decide to narrow the search and focus the review? How was the final sample determined? Be sure to include your process. Methodology Analysis What methodology was used in this research? Was it effective for the research question and hypothesis? Why or why not? Consider including improvements for the methodology. What statistical data analyses were employed in these articles? Were they appropriate for the research question and methodology? Why or why not? Evaluate the literature for any gaps that exist. Why do you think these gaps exist? Consider factors such as the location of the research, time the research was conducted, and so on. Evaluate the literature for inconsistencies that exist across the studies. Why do you think these inconsistencies exist? Consider factors such as the location of the research, time the research was conducted, and so on. Synthesis and Interpretation Create an evidence table of your results. Be sure to include the following criteria for each study: Report citation Design Method Sample Data collection Data analysis Validity and reliability Compare and contrast the study findings. Be sure to include pertinent conclusions and statistical findings only. Evaluate the research strategies used in the articles, as applicable to healthcare programs. Was the research design appropriate for the study conducted? Was the statistical analysis employed the best choice for the research questions posed? What ethical issues are pertinent specifically to healthcare research? How can these issues influence the research strategies chosen to investigate clinical topics? Evaluate these research articles and consider how ethical concerns may have limited these clinical investigations. What patterns and trends exist in the research? What generalizations can you draw from the research? If secondary data was utilized, was the source biased or objective? Why? If original research was conducted, do you think the researchers were biased or objective? Why? Be sure to support your answer. Synthesize the main findings of the research articles. What were the hypotheses of the research studies? Did the research add any new scholarly information to the existing body of knowledge? Assess whether utilizing secondary data as an alternative to the researchers’ original research would have been a feasible option. If it had been an option, what resource(s) would be the most appropriate to use? What would be some of the strengths and limitations of using secondary data? Assess the literature for any ethical concerns that may be present. Consider things such as conflicts of interest between the researcher and the study sponsors, or the lack of an IRB approval for the study. Conclusion What are the studies’ strengths? Are there patterns in the articles that you chose regarding their strengths? What are the studies’ limitations? Are there patterns in the articles that you chose regarding their limitations? Were the findings and conclusions reliable and valid? Why or why not? Logically support your answers. What are the implications of this research? How will it influence your topic in the overall large picture of healthcare research? Milestones Annotated Bibliography This milestone is due in Module Four. Submit a summary and analysis of six research articles relevant to the research problem that you have chosen. This milestone is graded with the Annotated Bibliography Rubric. Integrated Review The final project is due in Module Eight. Using the six peer-reviewed literature articles from your annotated bibliography, compose an integrated review that focuses on a clinical issue of interest. Ensure that the topic of this integrated review is viewed from the perspective of a healthcare professional who is looking to validate the need for program evaluation at your hospital. Remember to use APA format. This final project is graded with the Final Project Rubric. Final Project Rubric Guidelines for Submission: Submit the integrated review as one complete document, including the title page, abstract, written components, references, and any necessary appendices. The written components of the review (excluding the title page, abstract, references, and appendices) should not exceed 12 pages, double-spaced, with one-inch margins. Be sure to adhere to formatting guidelines from the latest edition of the American Psychological Association (APA) reference manual. Critical Elements Exemplary (100%) Proficient (85%) Needs Improvement (55%) Not Evident (0%) Value Abstract Meets “Proficient” criteria, and abstract is appropriate in length for reader’s audience Crafts well-drafted abstract, adhering to guidelines from the latest edition of the APA style guide Crafts abstract, but abstract is not well drafted or does not adhere to guidelines from the latest edition of the APA style guide Does not craft abstract 2.5 Introduction: Purpose Meets “Proficient” criteria, and purpose, aims, or objectives demonstrate a keen understanding of the integrated review process Explicitly states the purpose, aims, or objectives of the integrated review States the purpose, aims, or objectives of the integrated review, but is not explicit in doing so Does not state the purpose, aims, or objectives of the integrated review 3.8 Introduction: Topic Meets “Proficient” criteria, and explanation is explicitly clear Explains why the topic is the focus of the review Explains why the topic is the focus of the review, but explanation is cursory or weak Does not explain why the topic is the focus of the review 3.8 Introduction: Research Question Meets “Proficient” criteria, and research question demonstrates depth of understanding of chosen topic Introduces the research question and hypothesis, including explanation behind hypothesis Introduces the research question and hypothesis, including explanation behind hypothesis, but explanation is illogical, cursory, or weak Does not introduce the research question and hypothesis 3.8 Introduction: Variables Meets “Proficient” criteria, and chosen variables of interest reflect true understanding of chosen topic of interest Explains labeled variables of interest, including how these variables will be of help throughout the integrated review Explains variables of interest, but variables are not labeled and explanation of how variables will help throughout integrated review is illogical or weak Does not explain variables of interest 3.8 Introduction: Background Meets “Proficient” criteria, and discussion logically links research question to healthcare administration Discusses the background of the problem and significance of the problem to healthcare administration Discusses the background of the problem and discusses significance of the problem, but discussion is not thorough or does not relate significance to healthcare administration Does not discuss the background of the problem and significance of the problem to healthcare administration 3.8 Literature Search: Keywords and Combinations Meets “Proficient” criteria, and explanation for most useful keywords and combinations demonstrates a nuanced understanding of research databases Evaluates which keywords and combinations used in the initial search provided the most useful results, including an explanation for why this is true Evaluates which keywords and combinations provided the most useful results, including an explanation for why this is true, but evaluation is not limited to initial search, or explanation for why this is true is illogical, weak, or cursory Does not evaluate which keywords and combinations used in the initial search provided the most useful results 3.8 Literature Search: Databases Meets “Proficient” criteria, and assessment of characteristics shows keen insight into reliability of research databases Assesses which databases were chosen and what characteristics make them the most reliable Assesses which databases were chosen and what characteristics make them the most reliable, but assessment is illogical, weak, or not comprehensive Does not assess which databases were chosen and what characteristics make them the most reliable 3.8 Literature Search: Inclusion and Exclusion Meets “Proficient” criteria, and process of determining inclusion or exclusion demonstrates ability to logically evaluate research Comprehensively evaluates the inclusion and exclusion criteria for the sample Evaluates the inclusion and exclusion criteria for the sample, but evaluation is not comprehensive Does not evaluate the inclusion and exclusion criteria for the sample 3.8 Methodology Analysis: Methodology Meets “Proficient” criteria and includes improvements for methodology Logically evaluates the efficacy of methodology used in the research articles Evaluates the efficacy of methodology used in the research, but evaluation is illogical Does not evaluate the efficacy of methodology used in the research 3.8 Methodology: Statistical Data Analyses Meets “Proficient” criteria, and explanations for appropriateness of data analyses demonstrate a nuanced understanding of statistical techniques Logically evaluates the appropriateness of the statistical data analyses used in the research articles Evaluates the appropriateness of the statistical data analyses used in the research articles but the evaluation is not logically sound Does not evaluate the appropriateness of the statistical data analyses used in the research articles 3.8 Methodology: Gaps Meets “Proficient” criteria and possible explanations for gaps in literature take into consideration factors such as location and time Comprehensively evaluates the literature for any gaps that exist, including possible explanations for those gaps Evaluates the literature for any gaps that exist, including possible explanations for those gaps, but evaluation is not comprehensive or explanations are illogical or weak Does not evaluate the literature for any gaps that exist 3.8 Methodology: Inconsistencies Meets “Proficient” criteria, and possible explanations for inconsistencies that exist across the studies take into consideration factors such as location and time Comprehensively evaluates the literature for any inconsistencies that exist across the studies, including possible explanations for those inconsistencies Evaluates the literature for any inconsistencies that exist across the studies, including possible explanations for those inconsistencies, but evaluation is not comprehensive or explanations are illogical or weak Does not evaluate the literature for any inconsistencies that exist across the studies 3.8 Synthesis and Interpretation: Evidence Table Meets “Proficient” criteria, and evidence table of results is organized and visually appealing Creates a comprehensive evidence table of results Creates an evidence table of results, but does not include all required components Does not create an evidence table of results 3.8 Synthesis and Interpretation: Compare and Contrast Meets “Proficient” criteria, and comparisons and contrasts of study findings include only significant conclusions and statistically significant findings Compares and contrasts the study findings, including pertinent conclusions and statistical findings only Compares and contrasts the study findings, but includes superfluous information Does not compare and contrast the study findings 3.8 Synthesis and Interpretation: Research Strategies Meets “Proficient” criteria, and evaluation is focused on the appropriateness of the research strategies within healthcare programs Comprehensively evaluates research strategies used in the articles as applicable to a healthcare program Evaluates research strategies used in the articles, but research strategies do not apply to healthcare programs or evaluation is not comprehensive Does not evaluate research strategies used in the articles 3.8 Synthesis and Interpretation: Ethical Issues Meets “Proficient” criteria, and evaluation considers how ethical concerns may have limited clinical investigations specifically in the chosen clinical topic Evaluates research articles for how possible ethical concerns may have limited clinical investigations Evaluates research articles for how possible ethical concerns may have limited clinical investigations, but evaluation is limited, illogical, or weak Does not evaluate research articles for how possible ethical concerns may have limited clinical investigations 3.8 Synthesis and Interpretation: Patterns and Trends Meets “Proficient” criteria, and analysis demonstrates nuanced ability to interpret research findings Analyzes patterns and trends in the research, drawing generalizations from these patterns and trends Analyzes patterns and trends in the research and draws generalizations from these patterns and trends, but analysis is cursory or generalizations are illogical Does not analyze patterns and trends in the research 3.8 Synthesis and Interpretation: Secondary Data Meets “Proficient” criteria, and support for evaluation includes specific examples Evaluates if sources or researchers were biased or objective, with support for answer Evaluates if sources or researchers were biased or objective and supports answer, but evaluation is not complete or support is illogical or weak Does not evaluate if sources or researchers were biased or objective 3.8 Synthesis and Interpretation: Synthesize Meets “Proficient” criteria, and synthesis of articles demonstrates nuanced ability to blend multiple articles to support research question Comprehensively synthesizes the main findings of the research articles Synthesizes the main findings of the research articles, but synthesis is not comprehensive Does not synthesize the main findings of the research articles 3.8 Synthesis and Interpretation: Utilizing Meets “Proficient” criteria, and identification of strengths and limitations to using secondary data considers clinical topics in healthcare administration Assesses whether utilizing secondary data is a feasible alternative to the researchers’ original research, including what resources would be most appropriate to use and the strengths and limitations to using secondary data Assesses whether utilizing secondary data is a feasible alternative to the researchers’ original research, but assessment is not comprehensive Does not assess whether utilizing secondary data is a feasible alternative to the researchers’ original research 3.8 Synthesis and Interpretation: Ethical Concerns Meets “Proficient” criteria, and assessment includes scenarios such as conflicts of interest between the researcher and study sponsor or the lack of an IRB approval for the study Comprehensively assesses the literature for ethical concerns Assesses the literature for ethical concerns, but assessment is not comprehensive Does not assess the literature for ethical concerns 3.8 Conclusion: Strengths Meets “Proficient” criteria, and evaluation of studies’ strengths demonstrates keen ability to read beyond superficial results of research articles Thoroughly evaluates the studies for patterns in strengths Evaluates the studies for patterns in strengths, but evaluation is not thorough Does not evaluate the studies for patterns in strengths 3.8 Conclusion: Limitations Meets “Proficient” criteria, and evaluation of studies’ limitations demonstrates keen ability to read beyond superficial results of research articles Thoroughly evaluates the studies for patterns in limitations Evaluates the studies for patterns in limitations, but evaluation is not thorough Does not evaluate the studies for patterns in limitations 3.8 Conclusion: Findings Meets “Proficient” criteria, and assessment demonstrates nuanced understanding of statistical principles Assesses the findings and conclusions for reliability and validity, logically supporting answers Assesses the findings and conclusions for reliability and validity and supports answers, but assessment is illogical or support is weak or illogical Does not assess the findings and conclusions for reliability and validity 3.8 Conclusion: Implications Meets “Proficient” criteria, and analysis of implications demonstrates a keen understanding of research topic overall Thoroughly analyzes the implications of the research, including how the research will influence the clinical topic in the overall picture of healthcare research Analyzes the implications of the research topic, including how the research topic will influence the clinic topic, but analysis is cursory or weak or does not consider how research fits into the overall picture of healthcare research Does not analyze the implications of the research topic 3.8 Articulation of Response Submission is free of errors related to citations, grammar, spelling, syntax, and organization and is presented in a professional and easy-to-read format Submission has no major errors related to citations, grammar, spelling, syntax, or organization Submission has major errors related to citations, grammar, spelling, syntax, or organization that negatively impact readability and articulation of main ideas Submission has critical errors related to citations, grammar, spelling, syntax, or organization that prevent understanding of ideas 2.5 Earned Total 100%
Please help with this assignment? Please STRICTLY follow the attached rubric and address ALL topics. Please also use the attached annotated bibliography. Thank you.
Running head: BREAST CANCER IN AFRICAN AMERICAN WOMEN 0 Breast Cancer in African American Women Student’s Name Course Name and Number Instructor Name Date Due Annotated Bibliography Tao, L., Gomez, S. L., Keegan, T. H., Kurian, A. W., & Clarke, C. A. (2015). Breast cancer mortality in African-American and non-Hispanic white women by molecular subtype and stage at diagnosis: a population-based study. Cancer Epidemiology and Prevention Biomarkers, 24(7), 1039-1045. Retrieved from http://cebp.aacrjournals.org/content/24/7/1039.short Tao, et al, (2015) research about breast cancer mortality in African American and non-Hispanic whites women by molecular subtypes and stages at diagnosis, A population based study, reveals that African American women experience substantially higher breast cancer morality than non-Hispanic whites women. The study was based on the California cancer registry about 104, 051 African American female. The results after adjustments for patients, tumor and treatments characteristic, the researcher found that there is substantially higher hazards of breast cancer death among African American women in stage II/III HR+ /HER2- . Toa et al, (2015) indicates that there are substantial racial/ethnic disparities among patients with stage II/III HR+ /HER2- and stage III triple-negative breast cancers but not for other subtypes and stages. The research shows barriers for treatment for the target population which in this case is about cancer patient in African American women. This research is important because it gives some green light on the extent of cancer effects in African American population. Reeder-Hayes, K., Hinton, S. P., Meng, K., Carey, L. A., & Dusetzina, S. B. (2016). Disparities in use of human epidermal growth hormone receptor 2–targeted therapy for early-stage breast cancer. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 34(17), 2003.Retrieved from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4966516/ Reeder-Hayes, Hinton, Meng, Carey & Dusetzina, (2016) article on disparities in use of human epidermal growth hormones receptors 2- targeted therapy for early stages breast cancer study conducted through modified Poisson regression analysis to evaluate the independent effects of race on likelihood of receiving trantuzumab by controlling for clinical need, comorbidity and community level socioeconomic status. The results of the study indicate that 56 percent of black women receive trastuzumab while 74 of white women receive the transtuzumab but 25 percent of black women are less likely to uptake of transtuzumab. The cause of this is due to racial disparities that exists, poverty. The barriers for use of the transtuzumab therapy as per the research reveal that it could potentially improve recurrence and survival outcomes among minority women. The monoclonal antibody transtuzumab has changed the treatments paradigm and prognosis of human epidermal growth factors receptors 2(HER2) – Positive breast cancer. Richardson, L. C. (2016). Patterns and trends in age-specific black-white differences in breast cancer incidence and mortality–United States, 1999–2014. MMWR. Morbidity and mortality weekly report, 65.Retrieved from https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/65/wr/mm6540a1.htm Richardson, (2016) research on pattern and trend in age specific black white difference in breast cancer incidence and mortality in united states, 1999-2014. The author’s research reveals that black women continued to have the highest cancer for morality rate with death decreasing among whites. The CDC report suggests that improvement in follow up of abnormal screening tests and treatments for breast cancer for black women could address racial disparities. Large scale federal initiative have provided a novel opportunity to address racial disparities in breast cancer subtypes and beyond at the molecular level. Advances in understanding breast cancer subtypes have improved awareness that black women are more likely to be diagnosed with triple negative breast cancer which has improved the likelihood that they receive the appropriate treatments based on their cancer types 4. The initiative determines the genetic variations that increases risk for aggressive breast cancer so that tailored intervention and treatment plan can be developed. Chollet-Hinton, L., Anders, C. K., Tse, C. K., Bell, M. B., Yang, Y. C., Carey, L. A., … & Troester, M. A. (2016). Breast cancer biologic and etiologic heterogeneity by young age and menopausal status in the Carolina Breast Cancer Study: a case-control study. Breast Cancer Research, 18(1), 79.Retrived from https://breast-cancer-research.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13058-016-0736-y Chollet-Hinton, Et al., (2016) research on breast cancer biologic and etiologic heterogenetic by young age and menopausal status in the Carolina breast cancer study shows that young onset of breast cancer is associated with worse prognosis and higher mortality. The breast cancer risk factors is contributed by distinct tumors biology and distinct ages at onset but that understanding of the relationship is limited by representation of young women in epidemiologic studies. The results of the case study reveal that the premenopausal and postmenopausal strata younger women had more aggressive disease which includes higher stage, hormone receptor negative. Diseases as well as increased frequency of basal like subtypes, lymph node positivity and larger tumors. The higher waist to hip ratio was associated with reduced breast cancer risk among young women but with elevated risk among older women. In conclusion, the authors found that age is key predictors of breast cancer biologic and etiologic heterogeneity and may be a stronger determinant of heterogeneity than menopausal status. Marshall, J. K., Mbah, O. M., Ford, J. G., Phelan-Emrick, D., Ahmed, S., Bone, L., … & Brown, Q. (2016). Effect of patient navigation on breast cancer screening among African American Medicare beneficiaries: a randomized controlled trial. Journal of general internal medicine, 31(1), 68-76. Retrieved from https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11606-015-3484-2 Marshall, et al., (2018) article about effects of patient navigation on breast cancer screening among African American Medicare beneficiaries shows that there is evidence of patient navigation improves breast cancer screening rates but there is limited of its efficacy on African American older adults women. The cancer prevention and treatment demonstration (CPTD) was randomized controlled trial and women in the intervention group had significant higher odds up to date on mammography screening at the end of the follow up period as compared to women in the control group. The intervention was stronger for women who were not up to date with mammography screening at enrollment. The research suggested that the intervention should be channeled to women who are not up to date with mammography screening at enrollment. Lack of mammography screening and later diagnosis has been found as key contributors of the healthcare disparities and there is need for intervention that addresses racial and ethnic screening disparities. Thomson, Z. O., & Reeves, M. M. (2017). Can weight gain be prevented in women receiving treatment for breast cancer? A systematic review of intervention studies. Obesity reviews, 18(11), 1364-1373. Retrieved from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/obr.12591 Thomson & Reeves, (2017) article about whether women receiving breast cancer treatments can gain weight. Based on the article obesity and weight gain have been associated with poor disease specific and health related outcomes in women with breast cancer. The trial based on dietary intervention with or without physical activity with a focus on weight gain prevention during treatment for breast cancer was reviewed. The results of the five comparisons with control group, two reported significant difference in weight change between group and ongoing trial will still provide evidence on long term outcomes, cost effectiveness and blood markers. In conclusion, authors found that weight gain can be prevented in women with breast cancer undergoing chemotherapy. This article is important because it shows cost benefit of the cancer treatment and prevention in preventing other illness. For example, in the process of chemotherapy, women are not able to add weight which means that there is no likelihood of adding weight.

Writerbay.net

Everyone needs a little help with academic work from time to time. Hire the best essay writing professionals working for us today!

Get a 15% discount for your first order


Order a Similar Paper Order a Different Paper