Nursing Assignment | Health Case Study
12 Pages2674 Words129 Views
Added on 2020-05-01
Nursing Assignment | Health Case Study
Added on 2020-05-01
ShareRelated Documents
1RUNNING HEAD: NURSINGNursingName of the StudentName of the University Author Note
2RUNNING HEAD: NURSINGIntroduction The aim of the assignment is to demonstrate the ability to reflect on the health scenarioin the case study of Wasim. Wasim is a university student, and while using Facebook, he findshis friends talking about purchasing smart drugs. He learns from them these drugs are used toincrease performance in exams. Upon personal investigation, he finds that these drugs areprescribed for conditions like ADHD, which is not diagnosed in any of his friend’s case. Wasimdecided to evaluate evidence pertaining to use of such drugs and find if what his friends areclaiming are true. The objective of the essay is to address the health question developed byWasim and critically evaluate the evidence provided in relation to the question. The essayinitially analyses the quality of the evidence provided followed by the discussion on the factorsinfluencing the implementation of the evidence. The essay highlights the PICO elements andlastly discuses if the evidence aligns with the PICO question. Part A1.Hildt, E., Lieb, K., & Franke, A. G. (2014). Life context of pharmacological academicperformance enhancement among university students–a qualitative approach.BMCmedical ethics,15(1), 23.AuthorshipThe research study by Hildt et al. (2014), involves three authors. Each of the authorsbelongs to the different professional background. The first author is Elisabeth Hildt. She works atIllinois Institute of Technology at centre for Study of Ethics. She works as professor anddirector. She is an expert in neuroscience and especially deals with cognitive studies. Herresearch is based on ethical and philosophical issues in the subject. The second author is Klaus
3RUNNING HEAD: NURSINGLieb, working as professor and director at Mainz University in the Psychiatry and Psychotherapydepartment. The third author of the research study is AndreasGünterFranke also works in thesame department as the second author as a trainee (Hildt et al. 2014). The research has noconflict of interest in regards to authors of paper.The appropriate and sufficient details on authorship are the strength of the study as itindicates the credibility of research. It indicates the readers about the reliability of the research.The research study has considered the ethical issues which also add to the strength of the study(LoBiondo-Wood & Haber, 2017). It can be judged that the authors collaborating in the studyare highly qualified. It can be interpreted that their affiliations and expertise is relevant toconduct the study in the area of smart drugs. Research Aims The aim of the paper is clearly sated which is to investigate the prescription, and illicitstimulants use by the university students for academic performance in a broad context. Theresearch question is not stated. It can be interpreted from the background that the researchquestion is to know if the cognitive enhancement solely represents the use of drugs or its servesany other purpose too. The aims and objectives of the paper justify the need of the study. Since there isinsufficient literature pertaining to use of smart drugs and the real world effects associated withit, the research study aims to address the gap in this area. Other than the academic enhancementthe study also aims to identify additional benefits of smart drugs. It can be considered thestrength of the study. However, lack of clear research question or hypothesis is the weakness of
4RUNNING HEAD: NURSINGthe study. It is because the aim is broad and having specific research question would have beenconvenient for readers (O’Brien et al., 2014). Design The paper uses the qualitative research paradigm. The data collection instrument is toconduct semi-structured interviews in a face-to-face setting. The methodology and the methods used in the study are justified. It is the strength of thestudy. According to Mertens (2014), qualitative interviews are appropriate in order to explore theperceptions of the participants and interaction with the stimulants for enhancing the academicperformance (Brannen, 2017). Semi-structured interviews used for data collection is justified asit provides insights of the student’s opinions and beliefs of using stimulants. It is the strength ofthe research paper.The participants of the study are students of MainzUniversity who are recruitedanonymously via email. These participants have been confirmed to take prescription or illicit(psycho-) stimulants. A total of 18 participants were chosen. The participant's size is justified asa qualitative interview is time-consuming method. It is not possible to consider large sample size.There is a chance of potential bias with the participant's self-selection process (McCusker &Gunaydin, 2015). This may be considered the weakness of the study.Findings The findings reveal that cognitive enhancement does not solely represent the intake ofstimulants for better academic results. The other benefits of stimulants found include leading anactive life, well balancing the academics and other liabilities, effective time management, cope
End of preview
Want to access all the pages? Upload your documents or become a member.
Related Documents
Evidence Based Practice in Nursing Essaylg...
|11
|2617
|362
The Essay on Case Scenario of Wasimlg...
|12
|2968
|139
Clinical Practice Issue Essaylg...
|10
|2506
|225
Critical Evaluation of Evidencelg...
|9
|1986
|63
HLSC122 Inquiry in Health Care Assignmentlg...
|11
|2491
|111
Critical Evaluation of Evidence Essaylg...
|9
|2316
|110