Citation |
Design |
Sample size: Adequate? |
Major Variables: Independent and Dependent |
Study findings: Strengths and Weaknesses |
Level of Evidence |
Evidence Synthesis |
1. Bauer, U. E., Briss, P. A., Goodman, R. A., & Bowman, B. A. (2014). Prevention of chronic disease in the 21st century: Elimination of the leading preventable causes of premature death and disability in the USA. Patient Medication Education for Chronic Diseases Essay.The Lancet, 384(9937), 45-52. doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(14)60648-6 |
A qualitative study that evaluates results and other authors’ observations |
The sample size is not stated. However, it can be claimed adequate because all participants had various chronic diseases, which makes a decent diversity among the sample members. |
The Independent variable implies chronic disease in the patients (Bauer, Briss, Goodman, & Bowman, 2014).
The dependent variable is their level of knowledge regarding self-treatment |
Strengths: Identification of many factors impacted by self-treatment.
Weaknesses: Many uncertainties and unmentioned facts as to the treatment of patients. |
Level III |
Although patients were not approached during the study, the importance of collaborative education sessions is evident as only one nurse is not able to provide appropriate knowledge to all his or her patients efficiently (Bauer et al., 2014). |
2. Campbell, D. J., Tonelli, M., Hemmelgarn, B., Mitchell, C., Tsuyuki, R., Ivers, N.,… Manns, B. (2015). Assessing outcomes of enhanced chronic disease care through patient education and a value-based formulary study (ACCESS)—Study protocol for a 2×2 factorial randomized trial. Implementation Science, 11(1), 25-46. doi:10.1186/s13012-016-0491-6 |
A quasi-experimental study that assessed the patients’ knowledge at the end (Campbell et al., 2015). |
4714 people took part in the study. Hence, the results are adequate. |
The Independent variable is the difference in medical adherence (Campbell et al., 2015).
Dependent variable: methods of education and analyses. |
Strengths: an extended sample.
Weaknesses: no weaknesses were identified in the study |
Level IV |
Patient interaction appears to be one of the most important factors in education practices as it helps them remember the learned information much quicker than usual. |
3. Lorig, K. (2015). Chronic disease self-management program: Insights from the eye of the storm. Frontiers in Public Health, 2(1), 36-54. doi:10.3389/fpubh.2014.00253 |
A literature review was performed by the author |
No patients participated in the study because it only implied a literature review. |
The Independent variable is the location of participants (Lorig, 2015). The dependent variable is their implementation of the acquired knowledge. |
Strengths: The provision of useful and unique information that was never discussed before (Lorig, 2015).
Weaknesses: the lack of real-life examples. |
Level IV |
The evidence of the study cannot be claimed relevant because this source is the first one to discuss approaches presented in it (Lorig, 2015). However, this knowledge is useful, and hence, can be implemented in practice. |
4. Hamine, S., Gerth-Guyette, E., Faulx, D., Green, B. B., & Ginsburg, A. S. (2015). Impact of mHealth chronic disease management on treatment adherence and patient outcomes: A systematic review. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 17(2), 52-88. doi:10.2196/jmir.3951 |
The article presents a quantitative study based on survey results. |
According to the authors, sample sizes varied tremendously (from 4 to approximately 710) (Hamine, Gerth-Guyette, Faulx, Green, & Ginsburg, 2015). This example is not adequate due to the sample size’s uncertainty. |
The Independent variable was presented by a wide range of study objectives, methods, and results. In turn, the dependent variable explained what were the benefits of mHealth to the patients. |
Strengths: a prolonged experiment with considerations of previous studies’ results (Hamine et al., 2015).
Weaknesses: no weaknesses were identified in the research. |
Level IV |
The use of m Health is now known all over the world because its efficiency in the education of old people with chronic diseases was confirmed by many European and American scholars. |
5. Sari, N., & Osman, M. (2015). The effects of patient education programs on medication use among asthma and COPD patients: A propensity score matching with a difference-in-difference regression approach. BMC Health Services Research, 15(1), 91-126. Patient Medication Education for Chronic Diseases Essay.doi:10.1186/s12913-015-0998-6 |
“Using Saskatchewan administrative health databases, the impacts of the intervention on use of asthma and COPD medications were estimated for one to four years after the intervention using a difference in difference regression approach” (Sari & Osman, 2015). |
185 individuals with chronic diseases participated in the research, which is adequate |
The Independent variable implies both the use and prices of prescription drugs (Sari & Osman, 2015). The dependent variable implies their appliance by sample members. |
Strengths: focusing on a specific category of patients with chronic diseases (Sari & Osman, 2015).
Weaknesses: no weaknesses were identified in the study. |
Level IV |
The auricle revealed the significance of adherence to appropriate medications by patients with both COPD and asthma (Sari & Osman, 2015). Otherwise, they might have to stay in hospital settings for an extended period. |