Fluent Essays

2 pages PH 30004 Assignment Measurement evaluation Points 25 Due October 13, 2021 end of day Purpose and description The purpose of this assignment is to provide you with an opportunity to identify two instruments or measurement processes and identify associated quality criteria or recommend quality criteria Course learning outcomes 4. Define the criteria for evaluating measures in a research study (Concept 10) Assignment requirements This assignment may be completed on a group (2, 3, or 4 people) or individual basis. If turned in as a group assignment – one group member must upload to Canvas, and all group members names must be on the uploaded document. You can opt to do this assignment in a group even if you did not complete the prior research design and/or data gathering assignment(s) as a group. 1. Select one of the following general concerns: health disparities; symptoms of chronic pain; physician prescription or referral behavior; health literacy; substance abuse. You may select something else and make certain you identify it. 2. Using online resources including academic journal articles, organization website and other sources, find two processes used to measure your selected concern. Processes may include an instrument – such as a survey instrument, interview questions, an observation checklist or something else. Provide thorough citation information to allow me to retrieve the resource. You do not have to use any particular citation style for this assignment. You cannot use the article linked in the slideshow for this week. 3. Be certain at least one of the two processes includes a description of psychometric properties or other quality criteria. These include things like: reliability, validity, internal consistency, alpha, factor loadings, interrater reliability, expert/face validity, or pilot testing of survey or interview questions. 4. Identify and describe the properties, processes, or quality criteria identified in association with the source. If your second source has no identified criteria, recommend what might be done to improve the credibility of the instrument. (Hint: pilot testing is one simple process that can be applied to most processes). You may find useful information if you review Chapters 6 and 7 of Social Science Research, found in the Readings Module on Canvas. Please address these items on a single document. The document should be no more than 1 page of single spaced or 2 pages of double-spaced text in length. You may write in paragraph form or present your responses to each item, using the numbering shown above. If you directly quote from a source, please be certain to use quotation marks and show the specific citation information. PH 30004 Fall Semester 2021 Week of October 4 Sequence Review schedule changes Content and assignment due dates Review, recap, and contextualization of content to date Begin measurement and evaluation Innovation in research design (Wed, next week if needed) Schedule - important dates and changes October 8, 2021 – guest speaker KHD Wed, October 13, 2021 – new due date for next assignment Review details on 10/06 October 15, 2021 – no class meeting Fall break October 22, 2021 – Exam 2 (take home) November 12, 2021 – Exam 3 (take home) November 22, 2021 – new due date for assignment December 10, 2021 – final proposal December 17, 10:15 – 12:30 – final exam (take home) Review, recap, contextualization PH research is: examination or study Of hypotheses, premises, or theories, Conducted by scientists, scholars and lay persons, through use of systematic processes or tests to identify discoveries, develop solutions, and derive conclusions That are credible and useful For knowledge and benefit of communities, scientists, academics, professionals and other impacted populations Review, recap, contextualization Definition developed by a content analysis process Process to identify relevant terms: assembling data Clustering similar terms and naming clusters: data analysis via category development or thematic analysis, using provided/ a priori categories Agreement via voting on best terms: interpretation via arriving at consensus based on individual expertise/preferences Transformation of terms into narrative text: presentation of findings Review, recap, contextualization Review of common and useful research designs Trial and experimental designs Useful when comparing a treatment to an alternative Applicable for human science and other interests (e.g., working with samples or non-humans) Difficult to identify and remove other influences; limiting generalizability Efficacy focused so tend to de-emphasize behavioral/individual aspects Field surveys and focus groups Useful to gather data from many responses Can quickly key in on priorities or trends Online survey programs do data analysis (surveys) Difficult to obtain random sample so difficult to generalize Results can be skewed – bots (surveys), groups that attempt to engineer responses (surveys or FGs), dominant individuals (FGs) Review, recap, contextualization Case research or ethnographic methods Can capture in depth detail about best, worst, or middle performing systems or entities Time and labor intensive Generalizability limited to similar contexts Action research More likely to address participant-identified priorities These may differ from researcher priorities In conflict with scholarly or funding aims of research - interest in ongoing improvement rather than specific findings Review, recap, contextualization Secondary data analysis Researcher or funder-driven Incentives to work with and promote some datasets Convenient sometimes instant way to conduct longitudinal/panel research Large, random and/or population-based data Review, recap, contextualization Secondary data analysis Not necessarily likely to address one’s specific interest, requiring revision of research questions or aims Access may be difficult or limited Data are rarely current; typically 18 months or older Systematic reviews, meta-summaries, and meta-analyses are also types of secondary data analysis – data are results of prior research Review, recap, contextualization Priority on most frequent responses Priority on treatments or solutions that are: Convenient or Profit-making or Trendy or Currently among government/agency funding priorities Cost money to carry out Major contributors of published research: Students doing doctoral dissertations Faculty seeking tenure Review, recap, contextualization Research in generaL Short duration projects (10 – 30 weeks) are most appealing Emphasis on problem identification rather than development of solutions Design innovation Aspects of action/community-based research Human science methods Adds innovative processes, i.e., variations on brainstorming Prioritizes sustainability, even circular design Emphasis on development of solutions Review, recap, contextualization Data – qualitative, quantitative, mixed/blended Associated with some designs Field survey – fixed responses Focus group – interview recordings or transcripts Trial – scores or efficacy measures Transformed data Quantitizing – words to categories Mean centering; logarithmic transformations Additional data types can be incorporated into most designs Counter small sample size Address ambiguous results Explain unexpected findings Review, recap, contextualization Research design is the framework for answering your question or addressing your interest Data are the bits of information, assembled within the framework, which undergo processes of compilation, combination, aggregation, transformation, and interpretation to provide an integrated and/or consensus response Design should be focused and adequate to answer the question Data should be sufficient and credible enough to answer the question Data and design should be coherent Schedule - important dates and changes October 8, 2021 – guest speaker KHD Wed, October 13, 2021 – new due date for next assignment Review details on 10/06 No class meeting October 15, 2021 – no class meeting Fall break October 22, 2021 – Exam 2 (take home) November 12, 2021 – Exam 3 (take home) November 22, 2021 – new due date for assignment Measurement Biological/physiological Blood pressure Heart rate Absence/presence of disease Challenges? Consistency Other factors (“white coat” syndrome) False positives, false negatives Interpretation Measurement Knowledge Symptoms Health literacy Challenges? Interpretation, i.e., what constitutes irregular shape or change in appearance? Language – what does “usually” or “often” mean? What is the difference between “agree,” “somewhat agree,” and “strongly agree”? ”Good” health compared to what? Measurement Traits, concepts, constructs and other subjectively defined things Self-report Diagnostic contributions (observation and results of interviews, e.g., intake survey for mental health treatment) Challenges No universally agreed upon definition for complex constructs Many are context-specific Many are individual-specific Many are both context and individual-specific Measurement Standards Measurement Mathematical Reliability Validity Interpretive Saturation Validity Consensus coding Quality Checking entry/checking transcripts Assessment of normality Model fit indices Member checking Interrater reliability Quality efforts during scale development Factor analysis – exploratory and confirmatory Identify all potential items Administer survey Use mathematical/statistical methods to cluster scores Look at clusters and assign a name (similar to thematic analysis) Delphi / expert panels Identify items OR screen and comment on items Add, delete, modify items Rank and score items Approve final instrument or measurement process https://bmcpublichealth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12889-018-5638-8 Examples of several methods used to develop a scale Common methods bias List of issues Remedies Multi-method and multi-trait Comparative case studies Triangulation Multiple analysts