HLSC122 Inquiry in Health Care Assignment
11 Pages2491 Words111 Views
Australian Catholic University
Inquiry in Health Care (HLSC122)
Added on 2020-04-21
HLSC122 Inquiry in Health Care Assignment
Australian Catholic University
Inquiry in Health Care (HLSC122)
Added on 2020-04-21
ShareRelated Documents
Running head: CRITICAL EVALUATIONTitle page (for all students except those in CANBERRA)Student Name:Unit: HLSC122 Semester 2, 2017Assessment 3: Critical Evaluation of EvidenceWord count: 1771
CRITICAL EVALUATION1IntroductionEvidence based practice is essential because it involves a judicious and explicitsue of current evidences that are best suited to make decisions related to individualpatient care. Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder is a neuro-developmental disorder,characterized by impulsive behaviour and lack of concentration, generally treated withthe use of psycho-stimulants (Melegari et al., 2015). However, recently a large increaseis observed in the proportion of college students who are being involved in drug abuserelated to these psycho-stimulants, in spite of being not being diagnosed with ADHD.Wasim, a student has observed that all his university friends are talking about usingsmart drugs to improve their academic performance in examinations. Although he isaware of the therapeutic role of these drugs in ADHD, he wants to investigate theirprobable role in enhancing academic performance by analysing two articles. The firstarticle will use a qualitative approach to investigate the association between psycho-stimulants and examination performance and the second article will evaluate theassociation between these drugs and executive functioning. Thus, the articles will helpWasim to judge the truthfulness of the claims made by his friends.BodyPART AHildt, E., Lieb, K., & Franke, A. G. (2014). Life context of pharmacological academicperformance enhancement among university students - a qualitative approach.BMC Medical Ethics, 15(1), 23-23. doi:10.1186/1472-6939-15-23Student name/student number
CRITICAL EVALUATION2Authorship- Elisabeth Hildt is a neuroethic expert at the Department ofPhilosophy; Andreas Günter Franke and Klaus Lieb are from the Department ofPsychiatry and Psychotherapy, at the University Medical Centre Mainz (Germany).Klaus Lieb heads the department and Franke is a trainee under his guidance. Thus, allthe three authors were well educated and knowledgeable to conduct the research.There were some contradictions in the academic results that had been achieved and inthe subjective experiences of the study participants. Research Aims- In this study, the primary objective of the authors was toevaluate effects of both prescribed and illicit psycho-stimulant usage on academicperformance enhancement. The authors examined the effects of methylphenidate andamphetamine stimulants on the examination performance of university students. Theexperiences of the participating students were measured with respect to administrationof the drugs. In addition, influence of several factors such as academic and peerpressure, that are thought to increase personal life and academic excellence were alsoassessed (Hildt, Lieb & Franke, 2014).Design- Psycho-stimulant related placards were used to collect students from theUniversity of Mainz campus. Semi-structured, face-to-face interviews were conductedon healthy students who did not report previous history of psychiatric disorders. Theinterview questions were focused on prescribed or illicit intake of stimulants, theirindividual perception on the probable effects of stimulants on academic improvementand the observable negative effects (if any). The interview responses were transcribedverbatim, and systematically analyzed with the help of a qualitative approach.Student name/student number
CRITICAL EVALUATION3Findings- 18 results were analysed for final conclusions out of the 22 interviewsthat had been carried out.Prescribed usage of stimulants was found among 4 students.The rest 14 participants followed illicit usage of the stimulants. The findings suggestedthat stimulants were mainly used prepare for a term paper and facilitate exampreparation, in addition to gaining study time, and pursuing and achieving individualprojects, which were out of their academic domains. The intake was found to beaffected by performance and time pressure. Some of them also reported a motivationincrease, and sleep time reduction after the drug usage. The analysis also showed anincrease in energy for leisure activities on stimulant usage (Spencer, Devilbiss &Berridge, 2015). Thus, it can be deduced that maximising time and boosting motivationwere the 2 most important effects. Strengths and weaknesses- The study had several limitations. One of them wasinclusion of extremely small number of interviews. Although the there were around36,000 registered students in the university, the placards were able to gain thewillingness of only 22 students. The low participation rate can be attributed to stigmarelated to drug abuse. Secondly a selection bias was formed due to exclusion of willingparticipants with reported psychiatric disorders or under the action of prescribedpsychoactive medications, and the type of students who wanted to participate.Moreover, time frame, social desirability and behavioural aspects could have influencedthe spontaneous answers given by the participants. However, the strength can beattributed to the fact that study acted as a starting point for conducting qualitative andquantitative studies in future, which would investigate observable effects of stimulantsStudent name/student number
End of preview
Want to access all the pages? Upload your documents or become a member.
Related Documents
Critical Evaluation of Evidencelg...
|9
|1986
|63
HLSC122 Inquiry in Health Care : Assignmentlg...
|11
|2478
|170
HLSC122 Inquiry in health care: Assignmentlg...
|8
|1987
|263
Nursing Assignment | Health Case Studylg...
|12
|2674
|129
Critical Evaluation of Evidence Essaylg...
|9
|2316
|110
HLSC122 Inquiry in Health Care - Assignmentlg...
|10
|2521
|94