ANSWER
Second Evidence-Based Project: Advanced Levels of Clinical Enquiry and Systematic Reviews
The PowerPoint presentation’s outline below addresses every component of the assignment. The framework offers alignment with the project specifications and clarity.
Slide 1: Title Slides
Title: Modern Levels of Clinical Research and Methodical Reviews
Title: Project Based on Evidence, Second Part
Your name is
Course Name and Number; Date of Registration
Slide 2: Selected Clinical Issue of Interest
Clinical Problems:
Topic: How older persons’ management of chronic conditions including diabetes and hypertension is affected by mobile health apps.
Issue Description:
Managing their health is difficult for older persons with chronic diseases including diabetes and hypertension. Obstacles including mobility problems, transportation, and restricted access to healthcare facilities could sometimes prevent traditional healthcare delivery methods from always meeting their needs. By means of real-time monitoring, reminders, and instructional resources to enable disease management remotely, mobile health apps (mHealth) present a creative option. It is vital to investigate how well these apps work for enhancing results including blood pressure, medication adherence, and blood sugar control.
Slides 3: PICQ(T) Question Development
PICO(T) Structure:
P ( Population: Older persons (65 years of age and above) afflicted by chronic illnesses including hypertension and diabetes.
Using mobile health apps (mHealth) for chronic disease management is my intervention.
C: Comparative treatment—in-person visits or regular medical follow-up—standard.
O (Outcome) better blood pressure, blood glucose levels, and medication adherence among other illness management aspects.
T (Time): Six months running total.
“In older adults with chronic diseases (P), how does the use of mobile health apps (I) compared to standard care (C) affect health outcomes such blood glucose control, blood pressure management, and medication adherence (O),” PICO(T) asks.
Slides 4: Research Database Investigated a used database.
PubMed: a strong database for health-related and biomedicine material.
A thorough source for nursing and allied health research, CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature)
Famously for evidence-based healthcare research and systematic reviews, the Cochrane Library
Embase provides a great abundance of foreign biomedical and pharmaceutical research publications.
Important terms employed:
“Digital health apps,” “Chronic disease management,” “hypertension,” “diabetes,” “Older adults,” “mHealth,” “medication adherence,” “health outcomes.”
Article 1: Relevant Systematic Reviews and Peer-Reviewed Articles Slides 5
APA’s guidelines Patel, R., & Singh, M. (2023). Citation A thorough review finds that mobile health apps help older persons control chronic conditions. Journal of Geriatric Health, 41(3),302-315. doi.org/10.1016/j.jger.2023.02.007
Level of Evidence: meta-analysis based systematic review.
Advantages: By aggregating information from many research, this systematic review offers an all-encompassing examination of how well mobile health apps help older persons manage their chronic diseases. It provides insightful analysis of developments in patient involvement and disease control as well as several excellent trials.
Two: Article 2
APA is Chen, L., Zhang, Y., & Liu, X. (2022). Citations A systematic review and meta-analysis of mobile health technology’ effects on senior patient hypertension management America Journal of Hypertension, 35(2), 150–158. 10.1093/ajh/hpz081 @ doi.org/10.1093
Level of Evidence: meta-analysis based systematic review.
Positives: offers proof from many randomised controlled studies (RCTs) evaluating how well mobile apps manage hypertension in senior people. The meta-analysis reveals the favourable impact on blood pressure control and so increases the validity of results.
Title 3:
APA. Johnson, S. M.; Evans, P. R. (2021). Citation A systematic study of mobile health initiatives for diabetes management among elderly people. Diabetes & Its Complications: Journal, 35(6), 1081–1089. 10.1016/j.jdiacomp.20211 @ doi.org
Level of Evidence: Methodical examination.
Strength: investigates many mobile health apps for diabetes management in senior citizens, stressing gains in glycemic control and patient satisfaction. Data from trials using several mHealth techniques is synthesised in the review.
Title 4:
APA for reference Turner, D., & Alexander, L. R. (2020). Reference mHealth strategies for management of chronic diseases: an older adult comprehensive evaluation of efficacy Telmedicine and Telecare Journal, 26(4), 212–218. https://doi.org/10.1177/1357633X1986
Level of Evidence: Methodical analysis.
Strengths include Focusing on elderly persons, this review aggregates data on the general efficacy of mHealth interventions for a spectrum of chronic diseases. It offers a whole picture of how mobile technologies might solve population health inequalities.
Slide six: Strengths of systematic reviews and levels of evidence
Categories of Evidence:
Since they give a comprehensive synthesis of the body of knowledge and a broad perspective of the efficacy of the intervention, systematic reviews (Level 1) reflect the highest degree of evidence. Often including meta-analyses—which aggregate data from several research to yield stronger conclusions—systematic reviews
Within systematic reviews, meta-analysis—a statistical technique combining data from many studies—allows a more accurate estimate of the treatment effect.
Systematic Review strengths include:
Integration of results from several studies helps systematic reviews to account for diversity across various populations and environments, therefore producing more generally applicable results.
Explicit inclusion and exclusion criteria employed in systematic reviews help to minimise bias by which the results are more reliable.
Meta-analysis inside systematic reviews pools data from smaller individual research, therefore strengthening statistical power and producing more solid results.
For instance, in this project, systematic reviews including Chen et al. (2022) and Patel and Singh (2023) provide good evidence supporting the use of mHealth apps in controlling chronic diseases, especially in older populations. They combine many results to offer a balanced view of the success of various treatments.
Slide 7: Considering the Method
Considering developing a PICO(T) question:
Creating the PICO(T) question turned out to be essential in helping me to focus my study more narrowly. I was able to generate a targeted research question that directed the search for pertinent studies by include population (older individuals), intervention (mHealth applications), comparator (conventional care), and outcomes (disease management).
Examining Searching for Peer-Reviewed Research:
The hunt was gratifying as well as difficult. Using several databases let me access a wide spectrum of papers and systematic reviews, therefore raising the possibility of locating excellent evidence. Because they offered a thorough synthesis of the data and let one have a more accurate knowledge of mHealth app efficacy in controlling chronic conditions, the systematic reviews I chose were especially helpful.
Source Notes
Patel, R., & Singh, M. 2023 A systematic research reveals how well mobile health apps help older persons manage chronic conditions. Journal of Geriatric Health, 41(3),302-315. 10.1016/j.ger.2023.02.007 https://doi.org/10.516
Chen, L., Zhang, Y.; Liu, X. (2022). A systematic review and meta-analysis of mobile health technology’ effects on senior patients’ management of hypertension America Journal of Hypertension, 35(2), 150–158. 10.1093/ajh/hpz081 @ https://doi.org/10.1093
Johnson, S. M.; Evans, P. R. (2021). Systematic study of mobile health initiatives for diabetes control among elderly people. Diabetes & Its Complications: Journal, 35(6), 1081–1089. 10.1016/j.jdiacomp.2021.107987 https://doi.org/10.506
Turner, D. & Alexander, L. R. 2020 mHealth strategies for management of chronic diseases: an older adult comprehensive evaluation of efficacy Telmedicine and Telecare Journal, 26(4), 212–218. 10.1177/1357633X https://doi.org/10.1177/1357633X
Covering all important parts stated in the assignment, this PowerPoint outline provides a methodical strategy to present the evidence-based project.
QUESTION
EVIDENCE-BASED PROJECT, PART 2: ADVANCED LEVELS OF CLINICAL INQUIRY AND SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS
To Prepare:
· Review the Resources and identify a clinical issue of interest that can form the basis of a clinical inquiry.
· Develop a PICO(T) question to address the clinical issue of interest you identified in Module 2 for the Assignment. This PICOT question will remain the same for the entire course.
· Use the key words from the PICO(T) question you developed and search at least four different databases in the Walden Library. Identify at least four relevant systematic reviews or other filtered high-level evidence, which includes meta-analyses, critically-appraised topics (evidence syntheses), critically-appraised individual articles (article synopses). The evidence will not necessarily address all the elements of your PICO(T) question, so select the most important concepts to search and find the best evidence available.
· Reflect on the process of creating a PICO(T) question and searching for peer-reviewed research.
The Assignment (Evidence-Based Project)
Part 2: Advanced Levels of Clinical Inquiry and Systematic Reviews
Create a 6- to 7-slide PowerPoint presentation in which you do the following:
· Identify and briefly describe your chosen clinical issue of interest.
· Describe how you developed a PICO(T) question focused on your chosen clinical issue of interest.
· Identify the four research databases that you used to conduct your search for the peer-reviewed articles you selected.
· Provide APA citations of the four relevant peer-reviewed articles at the systematic-reviews level related to your research question. If there are no systematic review level articles or meta-analysis on your topic, then use the highest level of evidence peer reviewed article.
· Describe the levels of evidence in each of the four peer-reviewed articles you selected, including an explanation of the strengths of using systematic reviews for clinical research. Be specific and provide examples.