logo

Critical Evaluation of Evidence Word count: Unit: HLSC122 Semester 2, 2017 Assessment 3: Critical Evaluation of Evidence Word count: Introduction

13 Pages3051 Words356 Views
   

Added on  2019-10-31

About This Document

This report will be made on the basis of two research studies that will include the assessment of the possible non-prescription stimulants in terms of increasing the academic performance of university students. This will contain two parts and every part will contain different research. Both types of research will be based on authors that have completed research on relevant topics. The main purpose of this resource is to get knowledge about any rational basis for their conflict of interest in relation to the undertaking of their respective studies and associated evidence-based findings. It will also help in getting knowledge about credibility that should be offered by the researcher if they are using any research that has been conducted in past. 

Critical Evaluation of Evidence Word count: Unit: HLSC122 Semester 2, 2017 Assessment 3: Critical Evaluation of Evidence Word count: Introduction

   Added on 2019-10-31

ShareRelated Documents
Title page (for all students except those in CANBERRA)Student Name:Unit: HLSC122 Semester 2, 2017Assessment 3: Critical Evaluation of EvidenceWord count:Student name/student number
Critical Evaluation of Evidence Word count: Unit: HLSC122 Semester 2, 2017 Assessment 3: Critical Evaluation of Evidence Word count: Introduction_1
IntroductionCritical analysis of two research studies includes the evaluation of the potential of non-prescription stimulants in terms of enhancing the academic performance of the university students. Clinicians and the research community require attaining thorough insight regarding the context as well as causative factors related to the addiction pattern of cognitive stimulants in the students' community. Accordingly, proactive measures for controlling the dependence of students on cognitive enhancers require systematic configuration by the healthcare professionals.Evidence-based research literature describes conflict-of-interest as an individual intent that significantly interferes with the professional judgement thereby leading to the development of mistrust and bias (IOM, 2009). The authors of both research interventions do not exhibit any rational basis for their conflict-of-interest in relation to the undertaking of their respective studiesand associated evidence-based findings. The esteemed researchers possess valid credentials for conducting research interventions in the field of psychology and obtained their projects funding from respective authorized (governmental/non-governmental) agencies. PART AHildt, E., Lieb, K., & Franke, A. G. (2014). Life context of pharmacological academic performance enhancement among university students - a qualitative approach. BMC Medical Ethics, 15(1), 23-23. doi:10.1186/1472-6939-15-23AuthorshipEvidence-based intervention by (Hildt, Lieb, & Franke, 2014) evaluated the context of utilization of psychostimulant drugs by the university students. The authors are affiliated with theDepartment of Philosophy of Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz and Department of Student name/student number
Critical Evaluation of Evidence Word count: Unit: HLSC122 Semester 2, 2017 Assessment 3: Critical Evaluation of Evidence Word count: Introduction_2
Psychiatry and Psychotherapy of the University Medical Centre. The academic profile of the authors makes them eligible for conducting research studies on psychology and human behaviour. Research AimsThe research study by (Hildt, Lieb, & Franke, 2014) evaluated the causative factors attributing to the utilization of psychostimulant drugs by university students for their academic enhancement. Research intervention not only attempted to evaluate the outcomes of these pharmacological interventions on the academic performance of the users, but also explored their subjective experiences and motivational factors leading to the pattern of drug dependence and associated adversities. PopulationUniversity students with overall normal health patternInterventionPsychostimulants and prescription drugsComparisonUniversity students with normal executive functionOutcomesStudents’ experiences, addiction pattern, causative factors and cognitive changesEvidence-based research literature affirms the influence of psychotropic drugs on the cognitive enhancement of adolescents and children affected with executive function disorders (Hosenbocus&Chahal, 2012). Research intervention by (Ryan, et al., 2013) evidentially describes the pattern of relationship between the cognitive scores and mental functionality of individuals in the setting of executive function disorders. The analysis by (Vrecko, 2013) Student name/student number
Critical Evaluation of Evidence Word count: Unit: HLSC122 Semester 2, 2017 Assessment 3: Critical Evaluation of Evidence Word count: Introduction_3
advocates the requirement of evaluating the subjective experiences and emotional states of the users of stimulant medications with the objective of tracking the influence of these drugs on theirpsycho—socio-somatic well-being. DesignHildt, Lieb, and Franke (2014) utilized face-to-face (semi-structured) interview sessions for evaluating the subjective experiences/requirements of 22 healthy students in the context of utilization of psychoactive drugs. The interview sessions subjectively evaluated the causative factors of the psychoactive drug intervention and its self-perceived outcomes (i.e. cognitive and academic enhancement) among the treated students. Semi-structured interview strategy is a method of choice and prevalently deployed by the healthcare professionals in qualitative researchstudies (Jamshed, 2014). The administration of open-ended questions through semi-structured interviews assists the research professionals in recording the subjective responses of the participating candidates. FindingsEvidence-based findings retrieved by (Hildt, Lieb, & Franke, 2014) successfully exploredthe broader perspectives of the non-medical utilization of psychostimulants and prescription drugs in the student community. Causative factors of stimulants utilization attributed to the requirement of acquiring motivation, cognitive coping skills, memory enhancement and maximization of consumption duration among the treated students. Majority of students consumed psychotropic stimulants with the objective of balancing their leisure and study times. The findings of this research intervention systematically comply with the evidence-based notion that signifies the influence of a range of factors on the utilization of psychotropic stimulants by the student community (Zuvekas&Vitiello, 2012). These factors evidentially include, but are not Student name/student number
Critical Evaluation of Evidence Word count: Unit: HLSC122 Semester 2, 2017 Assessment 3: Critical Evaluation of Evidence Word count: Introduction_4

End of preview

Want to access all the pages? Upload your documents or become a member.

Related Documents
HLSC122 Critical Evaluation of Evidence
|11
|2601
|57

Critical Evaluation of Evidence Essay
|9
|2316
|110

HLSC122 Critical Evaluation of Evidence
|11
|2908
|88

Critical Evaluation of Evidence
|9
|1986
|63

HLSC122 Inquiry in Health Care : Assignment
|11
|2478
|170

HLSC122 - Inquiry in health care
|10
|2270
|130