Choice A rationale:

Providing all smoking adolescents in the three high schools with Program A is not a justified action based solely on the effectiveness of Program A in this study. While Program A may have shown better results than Program B in this specific context, it does not necessarily mean it's the most effective program overall. Implementing such a decision without further investigation could be premature and may not consider individual variations and preferences among adolescents.

Choice B rationale:

Investigating the effectiveness of other smoking cessation programs is the most appropriate action. While Program A showed better results in this particular study, it's essential to explore a variety of smoking cessation programs to determine the most effective and suitable options for different individuals. Research should continuously seek to improve interventions and provide evidence-based recommendations.

Choice C rationale:

Replicating the study using adolescents from across the United States may not be the best course of action at this stage. The study was conducted in the American southeast, and its findings may not be directly applicable to adolescents from different regions with potentially varying demographics and smoking behaviors. It would be more appropriate to conduct studies or meta-analyses that examine the effectiveness of smoking cessation programs on a broader scale.

Choice D rationale:

Surveying the adolescents' families to determine how many family members smoke is not directly related to the comparison of the two smoking cessation programs (Program A and Program B). While family influences can be important in smoking cessation, this action does not address the immediate need to determine the most effective program among the two options being compared.

Choice A rationale:

This statement is appropriate for the results section of a research article because it presents a specific statistic (4.5% of men aged 20 and above) related to the research topic (anginal pain). It also includes the source (American Heart Association) and the year (2002), providing clear and concise information about the prevalence of anginal pain in a specific population.

Choice B rationale:

While the statement about screening for anginal pain in individuals over the age of 50 is related to the research topic, it seems more like a recommendation or discussion point rather than a specific result obtained from the study. Such recommendations are typically found in the discussion or conclusion sections of research articles.

Choice C rationale:

Mentioning the number of subjects who volunteered and signed informed consent documents (68 subjects) is important but belongs in the methods section of a research article, not the results section. The results section should focus on the findings and data obtained from the study.

Choice D rationale:

Providing the percentage of subjects who reported experiencing anginal pain (60.3%) is relevant to the research topic, but it lacks context, such as the sample size or any statistical analysis. This type of information is better suited for the results section when accompanied by appropriate details and statistical analysis.

Choice A rationale:

A measurement error does not seem to be the primary issue in this scenario. While improving randomization through a double-blind approach can enhance the study's internal validity, the core problem here is not a measurement error but the introduction of a new walker, which could introduce confounding variables.

Choice B rationale:

While manipulation of the dependent variable can indeed pose a threat to external validity, it is not the primary concern in this case. The primary issue is the potential for confounding due to the introduction of a new walker, which affects the study's internal validity.

Choice C rationale:

This is the correct answer. The introduction of a new walker is an external factor that was not controlled for in the study. It can introduce confounding variables that affect the study's internal validity. Therefore, a threat to internal validity has occurred.

Choice D rationale:

Selection bias is not the primary issue here. The primary concern is the introduction of a new walker affecting the study's internal validity. Selection bias pertains to the process of selecting subjects and does not directly address the impact of the new walker on the study's validity.

Choice A rationale:

The description of snowball sampling does not involve stratified random sampling based on whether women reported having postpartum depression. Snowball sampling relies on initial participants referring or recruiting additional participants who meet the criteria. Stratified sampling is a different sampling method.

Choice B rationale:

This is the correct answer. Snowball sampling involves participants who have experienced postpartum depression volunteering and referring others. It relies on a chain-referral process where participants recruit additional participants, which is typical in qualitative research to identify individuals with specific experiences.

Choice C rationale:

While volunteers did agree to participate, the key aspect of snowball sampling is the referral process, where existing participants refer others who meet the criteria. It is not based solely on volunteers learning about others being interviewed.

Choice D rationale:

Listing postpartum clients sequentially and selecting every 4th client does not describe snowball sampling. This approach is more characteristic of systematic or stratified sampling methods, where participants are selected based on predetermined criteria or a specific sampling interval.

Choice A rationale:

This study design allows for the manipulation of independent and dependent variables. In this case, the independent variable is the type of pain management (PCA-delivered narcotics vs. intermittent IM narcotics), and the dependent variable is the range of motion following joint replacement surgery. The researcher can control and manipulate the type of pain management administered to the participants, making it an experimental study design.

Choice B rationale:

Providing logbooks to clients with fibromyalgia to record their actions does not involve manipulation of independent and dependent variables. It is an observational or self-report study design where participants' actions are recorded but not actively manipulated by the researcher.

Choice C rationale:

Conducting interviews with nurse managers about their job satisfaction does not involve manipulation of independent and dependent variables. It is an observational or qualitative study design focused on gathering information and identifying themes but not manipulating variables.

Choice D rationale:

Randomly selecting medical records to identify the frequency of discharges to skilled nursing facilities is an observational study design. It does not involve manipulation of independent and dependent variables but rather the collection of existing data from medical records.

Choice A rationale:

Biased findings best describe the outcome of recalculating statistical computations to align with the researcher's personal belief system. Bias occurs when the researcher consciously or unconsciously manipulates data or statistical analyses to support a particular viewpoint, leading to results that are not objective or impartial. In this scenario, the nurse-researcher's dissatisfaction with the initial results and the recalculated computations suggest a potential bias in favor of their personal beliefs.

Choice B rationale:

Theoretical differentiation is not an appropriate term for describing the outcome of recalculating statistical computations. The term refers to distinguishing between different theoretical concepts or ideas, not the manipulation of data.

Choice C rationale:

Non-parametric data analysis is a statistical approach used when data do not meet the assumptions of parametric tests, such as normal distribution. It does not describe the outcome of bias or manipulation in data analysis.

Choice D rationale:

Secondary analysis typically refers to the re-analysis of existing data for a different research question or purpose. It does not specifically address the issue of bias in data analysis, as described in the scenario.

Choice A rationale:

A significance level of p<.031 is relatively lenient and might result in a higher chance of obtaining statistically significant results by chance. A sample size of 54 subjects is moderate but may not provide the greatest support for the findings.

Choice B rationale:

A significance level of p<.01 is still relatively lenient, and a sample size of 15 subjects is relatively small. While p<.01 is more stringent than p<.031, it does not provide as strong statistical support as the options with lower p-values.

Choice C rationale:

This is the correct answer. A significance level of p<.001 is highly stringent and indicates a very low probability of obtaining the observed results by chance. A sample size of 73 subjects is relatively large, which enhances the reliability of the findings. This combination provides the greatest statistical support for the reported findings.

Choice D rationale:

A significance level of p=.301 is not stringent at all and would likely result in non-significant findings even with a small sample size of 24 subjects. This choice does not provide strong statistical support for the reported findings.

Choice A rationale:

Visiting local hospital waiting rooms and interviewing subjects may provide anecdotal information but may not be representative of the general population's awareness of the nursing shortage. It can be influenced by the specific demographics and characteristics of the people in the waiting rooms.

Choice B rationale:

Listening to a radio talk show host's interview with a nurse recruiter provides information from a specific source and may not represent the views of the general population. It is limited to the opinions and perspectives presented in the interview.

Choice C rationale:

Reading survey results published in a nursing journal about nurses' frustrations with short-staffing provides insights into nurses' perspectives but does not necessarily reflect the awareness of the general population. It is focused on the nursing profession and not the broader public.

Choice D rationale:

Reviewing the Gallup organization's latest public opinion poll on the topic is the most reliable and accurate approach to assess the general population's awareness of the nursing shortage. Gallup polls typically use scientific sampling methods to gather data from a representative sample of the population, making their findings more generalizable and reliable.a

Choice A rationale:

Conclusions in a research report typically summarize the key findings and interpretations of the study. While the statement mentions organizational attributes associated with a professional nursing practice environment, it appears to be background information rather than a study-specific conclusion.

Choice B rationale:

This is the correct answer. The statement pertains to the literature review section of the research report. It introduces and discusses previous research (magnet hospital studies) and their findings related to organizational attributes associated with a professional nursing practice environment. This information sets the context for the study and supports the rationale for the research.

Choice C rationale:

Methodology sections in research reports typically describe the study's design, data collection methods, and statistical analysis procedures. The statement does not belong in this section as it discusses previous research rather than the study's methods.

Choice D rationale:

Findings sections in research reports present the results of the study and the data obtained from the research participants. The statement is not a direct finding of the study but rather background information about prior research.

Choice A rationale:

Cronbach's alpha is a measure of internal consistency, not inter-rater reliability. Inter-rater reliability assesses the degree of agreement between different raters or observers, which is not applicable in this context.

Choice B rationale:

This is the correct answer. A Cronbach's alpha value of 0.35 indicates poor internal consistency for the instrument. In other words, the items in the tool do not consistently measure the same underlying construct (pain perception). A low alpha value suggests that the items in the instrument may not be reliably measuring the intended concept and that revision may be necessary to improve the tool's consistency.

Choice C rationale:

The statement "The tool will consistently measure pain perception in clients" is not supported by the low Cronbach's alpha value of 0.35. A low alpha suggests that the tool does not demonstrate consistent measurement of pain perception.

Choice D rationale:

Cronbach's alpha does not provide information about the presence of inverse relationships among items on the scale. It assesses internal consistency, which is about the degree to which items on the scale are interrelated and measure the same construct. A low alpha indicates poor internal consistency but does not specifically indicate the presence of inverse relationships.

Choice A rationale:

Going to various nursing units and talking with nurses on a daily basis is not the first step in initiating a quality improvement project when there is an increase in medication errors. While communication with nursing staff is essential, it should come after data collection and analysis to understand the specific patterns and causes of the errors.

Choice B rationale:

Offering a two-hour educational program about the costs of medication errors is a well-intentioned initiative but may not address the immediate need to understand and address the causes of the increase in errors. Education can be part of a broader quality improvement plan, but it should follow data collection and analysis.

Choice C rationale:

This is the correct answer. Collecting monthly data at the nursing unit level to isolate specific patterns is the first step in addressing the increase in medication errors. It allows the risk management committee to identify when and where errors are occurring, which is crucial for effective problem-solving and quality improvement.

Choice D rationale:

Recommending the purchase of a bar code scanner system is a solution that should be considered after identifying specific patterns and causes of medication errors. It may be a valuable intervention, but it should come later in the quality improvement process.

Choice A rationale:

A retrospective study looks at past data to determine relationships or associations. It is not the best approach for assessing whether admissions of children with gastrointestinal parasitic illnesses increased in the month following a major flood because it relies on historical data.

Choice B rationale:

A case study typically involves an in-depth analysis of a single case or a small number of cases. It is not suitable for assessing trends in admissions following a flood, as it does not provide a comprehensive view of the situation.

Choice C rationale:

This is the correct answer. A prospective study involves the collection of data from a defined population over a specified period, making it suitable for examining trends over time, such as the increase in admissions following a flood. It allows for the collection of data both before and after the flood to determine if there is a significant change.

Choice D rationale:

A needs survey is typically used to assess the needs or preferences of a population and may not be the most appropriate approach for evaluating the impact of a flood on admissions of children with gastrointestinal parasitic illnesses.

Choice A rationale:

The analysis of findings typically comes after the discussion section in a research report. In the analysis section, the researcher presents and interprets the results of the study.

Choice B rationale:

The methodology section should follow the review of the literature as it provides a detailed description of the research methods and design used in the study. Readers need to understand the context and background from the literature review before delving into the methodology.

Choice C rationale:

The discussion section should come after the methodology section. In the discussion, the researcher analyzes and interprets the results, compares them to existing literature, and discusses their implications.

Choice D rationale:

The review of the literature should be the first section of the research report, providing an overview of relevant prior research and setting the context for the study. It helps readers understand the existing knowledge in the field before moving on to the study's methodology, findings, and discussion.

Choice A rationale:

A report of an exploratory study of nurses' attitudes about isolation procedures may provide insights into attitudes but does not specifically address best practices for infection control on a postoperative orthopedic unit.

Choice B rationale:

A meta-analysis of recent studies focused on handwashing techniques may provide valuable information but may not cover the broader range of infection control practices relevant to a postoperative orthopedic unit.

Choice C rationale:

A randomized controlled trial of a new antibiotic awaiting FDA approval is focused on a specific intervention (antibiotic) and may not provide comprehensive information about infection control practices.

Choice D rationale:

This is the correct answer. A systematic review of infection control practices used throughout the 1990s provides a comprehensive overview of practices and guidelines followed during that period. It can help the nurse determine best practices based on a synthesis of existing research and recommendations.

Choice A rationale:

Conducting a survey of the adolescents' feelings before and after using stress reduction techniques allows the nurse to collect qualitative data on the adolescents' subjective experiences. This data can provide insights into their emotional responses, perceptions, and changes in stress levels, addressing the research question about the experience of stress reduction techniques.

Choice B rationale:

The adolescent subjects' glycosylated hemoglobin (A1C) findings for the past year represent quantitative clinical data related to their diabetes management. While important for monitoring health, it does not directly address the research question about the experience of stress reduction techniques.

Choice C rationale:

Videos of the adolescents using stress reduction techniques to assess their behavioral reactions to stress would provide visual data, but it may not capture their subjective experiences or feelings, which are more relevant to the qualitative research question.

Choice D rationale:

Interviews with the adolescents' parents about the children's behavior after learning stress reduction techniques focus on parental perspectives rather than the direct experiences of the adolescents. While this information may be valuable, it does not address the research question regarding the adolescents' experiences of stress reduction techniques.

Choice A rationale:

Clients aged 20 to 30 years is not the independent variable in this research question. It is likely part of the study's population or sample characteristics but not the variable being manipulated or studied.

Choice B rationale:

This is the correct answer. Antipsychotic-induced weight gain is the independent variable in this research question because it represents the factor or condition that the researcher is manipulating or studying to determine its effect on the outcome variable (pain relief when used in conjunction with oral analgesics).

Choice C rationale:

Educational intervention is not the independent variable in this research question. It is the intervention or treatment being applied to the participants and is more likely the dependent variable, as its effectiveness is being assessed.

Choice D rationale:

Diagnosis of schizophrenia is not the independent variable in this research question. It is a participant characteristic that may influence the study's results but is not the variable being manipulated or studied in this context.

Choice A rationale:

Recording vital signs every shift per current hospital-wide policy is a nursing practice guideline but does not necessarily represent the adoption of an evidence-based practice. It may or may not be based on empirical evidence.

Choice B rationale:

Halving the first dose of a narcotic postanesthesia to maintain respiratory effort is a clinical practice that may or may not be evidence-based. It could be a local hospital policy or a customary practice, but it does not specifically describe the adoption of an evidence-based practice.

Choice C rationale:

Bathing dependent clients every other day instead of daily by the staff represents a change in a nursing practice, but it does not necessarily indicate the adoption of an evidence-based practice. Such practices may be based on a variety of factors, including resource allocation and clinical judgment.

Choice D rationale:

Discarding certain antimicrobials after being linked to increased nosocomial infection rates reflects the adoption of an evidence-based practice. This action is based on empirical evidence linking specific antimicrobials to increased infection rates, and the decision to discontinue their use aligns with evidence-based practice principles of incorporating research findings into clinical decision-making.

Choice A rationale:

Interviewing clients to determine if they remembered concepts taught preoperatively does not represent the first step in identifying previous research studies. It focuses on assessing the retention of teaching rather than reviewing existing literature.

Choice B rationale:

Reading full-text articles in nursing journals about designing client teaching sessions is valuable but not the first step in identifying previous research studies. It focuses on teaching session design rather than the literature review process.

Choice C rationale:

Asking orthopedic surgeons about topics to cover preoperatively with clients is a form of expert consultation but does not represent the first step in identifying previous research studies. It involves seeking expert input rather than reviewing existing literature.

Choice D rationale:

This is the correct answer. Reviewing research abstracts on preoperative teaching with a similar client population is typically the first step in conducting a literature review. It allows the nurse to identify relevant research studies that have investigated the effectiveness of preoperative teaching in a similar context.

Choice A rationale:

Interviewing clients to determine if they remembered concepts taught preoperatively does not represent the first step in identifying previous research studies. It focuses on assessing the retention of teaching rather than reviewing existing literature.

Choice B rationale:

Reading full-text articles in nursing journals about designing client teaching sessions is valuable but not the first step in identifying previous research studies. It focuses on teaching session design rather than the literature review process.

Choice C rationale:

Asking orthopedic surgeons about topics to cover preoperatively with clients is a form of expert consultation but does not represent the first step in identifying previous research studies. It involves seeking expert input rather than reviewing existing literature.

Choice D rationale:

This is the correct answer. Reviewing research abstracts on preoperative teaching with a similar client population is typically the first step in conducting a literature review. It allows the nurse to identify relevant research studies that have investigated the effectiveness of preoperative teaching in a similar context.

Choice A rationale:

The outcome in the research question is "pain relief." This represents the primary variable or parameter that the study aims to measure or evaluate.

Choice B rationale:

The intervention is "guided imagery." This represents the specific intervention or treatment being studied in the research question.

Choice C rationale:

The population is not specified in the question. To make the research question complete, the nurse should specify the target population for whom the study's findings are intended to apply. For example, "Does the use of guided imagery improve pain relief in adult patients with chronic lower back pain?"

Choice D rationale:

The comparison in the research question is "oral analgesics." This represents the comparator or alternative treatment or condition against which the intervention (guided imagery) is being assessed for its effectiveness in providing pain relief.

Choice A rationale:

The review of the literature section provides an overview of existing research and background information related to the study's topic. It does not typically present study findings or results.

Choice B rationale:

The methodology section outlines the research methods, design, and procedures used in the study but does not present the study's actual findings.

Choice C rationale:

This is the correct answer. The sentence, "Distress after a natural disaster was high at 3 months and decreased monthly for a majority of the participants, although one-third of the survivors had higher distress at 13 months than at 3 months," appears in the results section. This section is dedicated to presenting the study's empirical findings and data.

Choice D rationale:

The discussion section is where researchers interpret and discuss the implications of their study's findings. It does not typically present the actual findings or data.

Choice A rationale:

This is the correct answer. A cross-sectional study design involves collecting data from a sample of participants at a single point in time. In this case, the systolic and diastolic blood pressure of each child in one school was measured one time at the end of a school year, making it a cross-sectional study.

Choice B rationale:

A quasi-experimental design typically involves an intervention or treatment, which is not described in this scenario. Quasi-experimental studies also often involve multiple measurements over time.

Choice C rationale:

Comparative studies typically involve comparing two or more groups or conditions but may include multiple measurements over time. The scenario describes a single measurement at the end of the school year.

Choice D rationale:

A prospective study typically involves following participants over time, collecting data at multiple points in the future. This scenario involves a single measurement at one point in time.

Choice A rationale:

Postponing the study for six months would not necessarily resolve the impact of the 9/11 events on the study's participants. It may also introduce other confounding factors related to the delay.

Choice B rationale:

Instructing study subjects to disregard their feelings about 9/11 may not be feasible or effective, as traumatic events can have a lasting impact on individuals' psychological well-being and attitudes.

Choice C rationale:

Abandoning the study due to the 9/11 events may not be necessary, but it is essential to acknowledge and address the potential influence of external events on the study's internal validity.

Choice D rationale:

This is the correct answer. The authors should have reported the 9/11 events as a potential threat to the study's internal validity, as they could have introduced confounding variables or influenced the participants' responses. By acknowledging this, researchers can provide transparency about potential limitations and their efforts to control for them.

Choice B rationale:

Apply for institutional review board (IRB) approval for a study involving human subjects is the most important step before conducting the experimental study. IRB approval is crucial to ensure that the research is conducted ethically, with proper consideration for participant safety and rights. It also assesses the study's design, methods, and consent process to protect participants.

Choice A rationale:

Determining what instruments are available to measure the independent variable is essential but typically follows the IRB approval process. It is part of the research planning and implementation stages.

Choice C rationale:

Obtaining release forms from parents allowing their children to participate in the study is important but is a step that follows IRB approval. Informed consent processes are typically reviewed by the IRB.

Choice D rationale:

Reviewing the literature to determine if other research projects have addressed this issue is valuable but is part of the research planning and background information gathering stage. While it is important, obtaining IRB approval takes precedence as it ensures the ethical conduct of the study.

Choice A rationale:

This question is formulated in a manner that is best answered through a research study. It addresses a cause-and-effect relationship (raising the head of the bed) and its potential impact on an outcome (lower rates of pneumonia). Research can provide empirical evidence to establish or refute this relationship.

Choice B rationale:

The question about removing life support measures without the family's consent for clients with medically futile conditions involves ethical and legal considerations rather than a research study. It pertains to ethical principles and guidelines and may require legal and ethical analysis but may not necessarily involve empirical research.

Choice C rationale:

The question about the first action to take when discovering an unresponsive, non-breathing, and pulseless client is a clinical question that is typically addressed through evidence-based practice guidelines and clinical protocols rather than a research study.

Choice D rationale:

The question about the scope of practice for nurses pulling sheaths from femoral sites following cardiac catheterization is a practice-related question that may involve regulatory and scope of practice guidelines but does not necessarily require a research study.