1
Title
Assessment 3: Critical appraisal of evidence: Exemplar Essay Using Fictious References
Student name: Mary Jo Smith-Jones
Z0001234
HLSC122 Semester 2, 2019
Assessment 3: Scenario 3, Critical appraisal of research study examining bacteria on student’s
mobile phones
Word count: 1200 words
2
Introduction
There is a scarcity of research on the bacterial contamination of mobile phones of health care
workers worldwide (Kent, Marsh, May & XI, 2020, p.5). This should be a concern for health care
workers, as it is accepted practice to allow students, and qualified health care professionals, to
ing their mobile phones to health care settings (Kent et al., XXXXXXXXXXThis paper will critically
appraise one of the few primary research studies on this subject (Tailor, Nikita, Naiker, Naivalu,
& Kumar, 2019) using a set of questions to identify the strengths and weakness of key sections
of the study, namely: authorship, research question, research design, research methods and
lastly limitations and results. In addition, an outline enablers and ba
iers to the adoption of the
study recommendations or findings in relation to a given scenario and clinical question.
PART A – Critical appraisal
Authorship
White XXXXXXXXXXmaintains that an appraisal of research literature should include an appraisal of
the quality of authorship, which may include, “cited credentials, affiliations and known
expertise in the health discipline on the research topic” (p.12). The authorship of the study
eing appraised in this paper (Tailor et al, 2019), comprised four authors who had a Bachelor of
medical laboratory science, and one who was a qualified dentist, affiliated with universities. It
can therefore be concluded that the authorship was a strength of this study, given cited
credentials, qualifications and affiliations.
3
However, a weakness of this study was the omission of a disclosure statement in the study,
indicating that there was no ‘conflict of interest’. A conflict of interest is described by White
(2018, p. 6) as a situation when there are commercial, legal, financial, or any other opposing
interests that may affect the study. Most primary research studies also require a source of
funding (White, p.4). However, in this study, the authors reported a lack of funds, which
educed the efficacy of their data collection (Tailor et al, 2019, p. 101), having to reuse
disposable gloves, which was a weakness of this study.
Research question & Justification
This study (Tailor et al., 2019) sought to identify the “colonisation of microorganisms and the
variety of bacteria present” on the mobile phones of students at a university in Fiji (p XXXXXXXXXXThe
aim was clearly stated and was a very relevant topic, given the scarcity of research on this topic
(Kent et al., 2020, p.5). The justification for the research – found in the ‘introduction’ – was a
weakness of this paper, as discussion was supported by only eight studies, and these were
studies published from 2009 to 2014, rather than close to the date of the study’s publication of
2019. It could be assumed that a thorough search of the literature on the topic – bacterial
contamination of mobile phones – was not undertaken by the authors. But this may not have
een the case, as Reid and Mathers XXXXXXXXXXsuggest, authors are required to delete important
past research literature in the ‘introduction’ sections of their manuscripts, to meet word count
estrictions imposed by journal editors. However, the authors did note three key points in this
section, being: mobile phones are used by health care workers(HCW) in clinical settings; studies
4
have reported that HCWs frequently touch their mobile phones, and seldom clean them; and
argued that their study was filling a gap in the literature, on how contaminated these devices
can be. Thus, the discussion within the introduction section was a strength of this study, as it
was well structured, and demonstrated several solid arguments to support the undertaking of
this study.
Research design
The authors stated that they used a cross-sectional research design, with randomisation (Tailor
et al, 2019, p XXXXXXXXXXA cross-sectional design is described as a quantitative approach, that
samples a population, at a given time, and when used with randomisation for sample selection
educes the risk of sampling or selection bias (White, 2020, p.100). The authors’ choice of a
quantitative approach was appropriate for the study aim, given the need to obtain quantitative
laboratory data, at a specific time in a sample of a population (i.e. undergraduate health
professional students), which is a strength of this study. However, the authors did not explain
their rationale for choosing their design, which is a weakness of the study. Further discussion of
ias will follow in the ‘research methods’ section.
Research methods
With regard to sample selection, a weakness of the study, was the authors’ omission details
elated to selecting the 50 students, such as: what were students studying?, what year level
were they ?, were student names picked from student records?, or did the authors randomly
approach students in the university grounds? In addition, although the authors obtained
informed consent from each student, they failed to mention if the Ethic’s Committee of the Fiji
5
National University approved the study, which is a significant omission. It is surprising that this
study was therefore actually published at all, without a statement indicating this (Jones et al.,
XXXXXXXXXXThe authors though –which is a strength – stated that specimen from 50 mobile phones
were collected and cultured according to a “standard laboratory protocol” (Tailor et al, 2019, p.
106). The reader is left to assume, as medical laboratory scientists, the authors followed
standard practice in collecting and processing swabs taken from the mobile phones. A strength
of the study was the level of detail provided for data collection and data analysis, with the
authors using basic descriptive statistics to analyse the results, which were sufficient, with the
inclusion of large coloured tables and figures to illustrate the findings. Measurement bias –
faulty methods of data collection – was a problem in this study, as the authors stated they did
not follow protocol when swa
ing phones, with regard to use of clean gloves for each phone
(Reid & Mathers, 2016, p.34; Tailor et a., 2019, p.101).
Results and Limitations
120 words (10% of word count)
PART B – Enablers and Ba
iers
240 words (20% of word count)
Your discussion in Part B should refer to the scenario and clinical question.
Conclusion
120 words (10% of word count)
6
References
Jones, B., Smith, J., Barker, J.S., Finn, K., Donn, K., Yebohha, J., Withers, B.M XXXXXXXXXXPutting
esearch into practice: A primer for undergraduate health professional students.
London, UK; Bartlett & Jones.
Kent, S., Marsh, T.R., May, B., & XI, Y XXXXXXXXXXA cross-sectional study of hospital acquired
infections traced to staff attire and equipment. Evidence Based Practice in New
Zealand Health Care, 3(4), XXXXXXXXXXDoi: XXXXXXXXXXghd.345
Reid, V., & Mathers, S XXXXXXXXXXTextbook of health research: Evidence-based practice. New York,
NY: John Wiley & Sons.
Tailor, B., Nikita, N., Naicker, A., Naivalu, T., & Arvind Kumar, R XXXXXXXXXXWhat bacteria are
present on the mobile phones of students? New Zealand Journal of Medical
Laboratory Science, 73(3), 106–110. https:
www.nzimls.org.nz/journals-
ecent,article,,77,333,What+bacteria+are+present+on+the+mobile+phones+of+stu
dents%3F.html
White, E.R XXXXXXXXXXA student handbook of primary research critical appraisal. London, UK:
Elsevier.
https:
www.nzimls.org.nz/journals-recent,article,,77,333,What+bacteria+are+present+on+the+mobile+phones+of+students%3F.html
https:
www.nzimls.org.nz/journals-recent,article,,77,333,What+bacteria+are+present+on+the+mobile+phones+of+students%3F.html
https:
www.nzimls.org.nz/journals-recent,article,,77,333,What+bacteria+are+present+on+the+mobile+phones+of+students%3F.html
HLSC122 Evidence for Practice
Semester 1, 2020
Assessment Task 3
SCENARIO 2: Stress in university students
Chooseya is a first-year international student studying at university in Australia. She recently received her first semester results, which were not good, with a fail in one unit. Chooseya feels that she too stressed and not capable of completing her three-year degree program. A friend of Chooseya’s - Joanne - encourages her to pick herself up emotionally and to continue to peruse her studies. Joanne feels that failing a unit in your first semester of university can be due to many factors. Joanne decides to search for literature on how stress affects academic grades in university students, in an effort to support her friend.
Clinical question
Does stress affect academic performance in university students?
Reference
Frazier, P., Ga
iel, A., Merians, A., & Lust, K. (2019) Understanding stress as an impediment to academic performance. Journal of American College Health, 67(6), XXXXXXXXXXdoi: 10.1080/ XXXXXXXXXX1499649
Here is LEO link to this quantitative study
https:
acu-edu-primo.hosted.exli
isgroup.com/permalink/f/sb9f4f/TN_informaworld_s10_1080_07448481_2018_1499649
HLSC122
Evidence for Practice
Semester 1, 2020
Assessment
Task
3
SCENARIO
2
:
Stress in
university students
Chooseya is a first
-
year international student studying at university in Australia. She recently
eceived her first semester results, which were not good, with a fail in one unit. Chooseya
feels that she
too stressed and
not capable of completing her thre
e
-
year degree program. A
friend of Chooseya’s
-
Joanne
-
encourages her to
pick herself up
emotionally and to
continue to peruse her studies. Joanne feels that failing a unit in your first semester of
university can be due to many factors. Joanne decides t
o search for literature on
how stress
affects academic grades
in university students
,
in an effort to support her friend.
Clinical question
D
oes stress affect academic performance in university students?
Reference
Frazier