Trusted by 2+ million users,
1000+ happy students everyday
1000+ happy students everyday
Showing pages 1 to 3 of 10 pages
PART 1:DEVELOPMENT OF PICO AND SEARCH STRATEGY PLAN, ANDEVIDENCE OFAPPLICATION IN DATABASE SEARCH1. Define your PICO (O) elementsPerson/Population//Problem:Student or workersIntervention/Interest:Standing desksComparison/Control:Sitting desksOutcome:ConcentrationOther:Health2. Develop your PICO(O) questione.g. For the working professionals, (P) does sit-stand work station (I), compared to sedentary mode (C) iseffective in increasing concentration (O) during working hours (O)?3. Identify main and alternate search termsPopulationInterventionComparison(not commonly used inactual database searchstrategy)Outcome(not commonly used inactual database searchstrategy)OtherMain search term:Students orworkersMain search term:Standing desksMain search term:Sitting desksMain search term:ConcentrationMain search term:HealthAlternativesearch terms:employeesStaffsAlternativesearch terms:HighadjustableAlternative searchterms:StandarddesksAlternativesearch terms:focusAlternativesearch terms:wellbeing
PART 2a: APPRAISAL OF YOUR TWO ARTICLES – Randomised controlledtrial1. Did the trial address a clearly focused issue?YesNoCan’t tellJustify your answer:The aim of the article is to article is to examine the effect of the sitting Vs. standing position (via sit-stand desk) on thecognitive performance under workplace setting. So in order to address the focused issue that is cognitive performanceof workplace sample, the study recruited 36 employees from the University of Tasmania (aged between 22 to 62years) with a male: female ratio of 26 females and 10 males. All the selected group of participants were has their wondistinct professional roles and identified their work significantly as desk-based job (sitting) and has no previousexposure to sit-stand desks. Thus the trial is clearly focused over a specific target group of population which alignswith the scope of the research aim.Consider: An issue can be ‘focused’ In terms ofThe population studiedThe intervention givenThe comparator givenThe outcomes considered2. Was the assignment of participants to treatments randomised?YesNoCan’t tellJustify your answer:Of total 36 participants selected, there was no selection bias. This is because, out of 36 participants 10 were male and26 were female between the age group of 22 to 66 years. Among this 86.% were full-time employees and 13.9% werepart-time employee. The IQ score were both average and/or better. The baseline assessment of IQ or intellectualcapacity was tested via Wechsler Test of Ault Reading (WTAR). This helped in establishing validity and reliability ofthe research without encountering any chances of selection bias.ConsiderHow was this carried out, somemethodsmay produce broken allocationconcealmentWas the allocation concealed fromresearchers?3. Were all patients, health workers and study personnel blinded?NoCan’t tellJustify your answer:The participants of the study were not blinded. This inability of successfully implement the blinding procedure over theexperimental condition might have resulted in the generation of the biased test performance.ConsiderHealth workers could be; clinicians, nursesetcStudy personnel – especially outcomeassessorsRandomised Controlled TrialAppraisal Tool
4. Were the groups similar at the start of the trial?YesNoCan’t tellJustify your answer:The groups were similar at the start of the trail. The study generally tested the effect of sitting and standing on thecognitive performance of same group of working professionals. However, since the population was selected randomlythey differed by age, sex and workplace experience. But the amalgamation of the traits of the focused group wassame. This helped the researcher to non-biased response.Consider:Other factors that might affect the outcome such as age, sex, social class, researchers and participants?5. Aside from the experimental interventionwere the groups treated equally?YesNoCan’t tellJustify your answer:All the participants were tested for their IQ level via WTAR and were also screened to detect the clinical level ofanxiety or depression which may hamper the cognitive performance. This assessment was based on Hospital anxietyand Depression Scale (HADS). The self-reported levels of workplace activity were generated via employingOccupational Sitting and Physical Activity Questionnaire (OSPAQ).However, 52.8% of the participants reported a 30-minutes of physical activity for 5 days per week and this might leadto the generation of biased response.6. Were all of the participants who entered the trial properly accounted for at itsconclusion?Justify your answer:Yes. The trial was not stopped early and was conducted till the pre-scheduled time. Patients were randomly assignedto one of the two conditions that is either standing or sitting during the first week of testing. The overall conditionpattern assignment was comprehensively counter-balanced.Consider:Was the trial stoppedearly?Were patients analysed in the groups towhichthey wererandomised?7. How large was the treatment effect?Justify your answer:The primary outcome of the study is the measured of the cognitive performance. For the measurement of the cognitiveability of the participants MANOVAs were conducted. MANOVAs were used to measure information processingspeed, attention, working memory and overall work performance. The measurement of the cognitive performancerevealed that there is no significant change in the work-based performance while standing. Thus the primary outcomewas clearly specified and results of the statistical analysis were tabulated in an ordered manner. There are also validevidences in the discussion section for the selective reporting of the outcomes.ConsiderWhat outcomes were measured?Is the primary outcome clearly specified?What results were found for each outcome?Is there evidence of selective reportingofoutcomes?8. How precise was the estimate of the treatment effect?