Information in research is rooted from a process or scientific methodology played out by the researcher. In order to make an evaluation come to fruition of the original hypothesis, there are steps taken in a developed conceptual framework. What is chosen from the researcher or group of researchers initiating the subject or sample will aid in the conceptual framework. Many questions have to be answered according to the criteria before arriving at a valid and reliable conclusion. In an article chosen from a previously collected assignment, the following perspective will attempt to assess the use of its literature in review, ethical considerations, terms of statistical analysis, and what was found through the end concluding references of the study. The form and construction of how the literature of a research study is reviewed, contributes insight to the study being evaluated. The review often tends to summarize the source of information used to conduct the research. In a written study given, the information is often organized to convey to the audience on more certain technical or factual terms.(CSSAC, 2012) The literature review will often re-organize the facts in order to offer text in more simple terms. In the research of the article in context, the literature review used case studies of 800,000 subjects over a four month period. The text published in the study stated that an updated system was needed to establish a computable integration warehouse. This was in suggested original process terms for new electronic records systems. Thus, allowing for an easier statistical evaluation of patients in an already initialized data resource bank. The existing EMR (electronic
Evaluating the Research Process 3
medical records) system was not created for subjected criterion. By developing a more efficient transitional program, mass conducted research could be extracted without any cross referencing. Most published studies have been peer reviewed which is defined as “is the evaluation of creative work or performance by other people in the same field in order to maintain or enhance the quality of the work or performance in that field.” (LINFO) Many professional fields trust peer reviews extensively, including scientific research, computer software development, medical service, and law. In many cases contributing to medicine or law it is legislatively mandated. Otherwise in cases such as software development it just occurs through process. (LINFO) Although there can be bias in peer reviews, they are consistent. When any research study is under construction there is likely a subject, person, group of persons, or sample in question for evaluation. With that there is an ethical stipulation that must be adhered to for the research to be ordained. Specifics on ethics to be considered would be; 1. that all parties involved with the study are well informed of the details and have given consent to be made a part of the study 2. When interviewing subjects use correct and sensitive verbiage in order not cause emotional damage or any physical duress. 3. Make clear of any anonymity in findings 4. Select beneficial subjects not ones that are just easily persuaded 5. If there is an approval board to case the study criteria and results be sure to get all permission required. Approval Boards (IRB) are developed to facilitate the highest standards of conduct in the scope of ethics. The board constitutes directive protocol through objectively approving and reviewing submitted research and requests. Any and all human focus tests must receive approval by the
Evaluating the Research Process 4
federally funded IRB (federal regulations code 45 CFR 46). (AU,2012) 6. Finally use best judgment when conveying or analyzing results. (Driscoll, D., Brizee, A.) Among the patients that were selected for the study, at the Kyoto University Hospital in Japan, all were held in accordance to...