Mariela Benchmark Research Critique, Report by Scholes

Cite this

Problem statement

There was no prior knowledge of whether people with different levels of metabolic control of type 1 diabetes expressed perceptions about their life and illness in unique ways that could show an apparent gap. The focus here was on the low level of metabolic control and a high level of metabolic control as the distinction between the groups that the study would look at. Research acknowledges that adolescence is a difficult period and dealing with type 1 diabetes at the time complicates the experiences of individuals at this growth stage. Finding out whether there are differences in perceptions can shift the focus of intervention programs for helping adolescents to cope with type 1 diabetes.

Cut 15% OFF your first order
We’ll deliver a custom Endocrinology paper tailored to your requirements with a good discount
Use discount
322 specialists online

The authors established the significance of study by showing that little research has addressed the problem statement. Therefore, the authors are highlighting the lack of information related to differences in perception of young people with type 1 diabetes mellitus. The research mentions that there is no cure for type 1 diabetes mellitus. However, adherence to treatment regimens can improve when young people engage in physical and psychological wellbeing. The statement attaches the reader to the idea that understanding the issue can help improve treatment delivery.

Purpose and research questions

The purpose of the study was to describe the perceptions of young people concerning their lives and illness. The young people identified in the study would be having type 1 diabetes mellitus. With the description, the research would be able to identify any variations in the perceptions presented by young people. The identification would depend on each young person’s information about metabolic control level.

The research questions for the study are as follows. What are the common themes for young people with high and low metabolic control levels in terms of their perceptions of family members, health care providers, and information about diabetes and non-family members? What are the differences that young people with high and low metabolic control levels exhibit in their perceptions of diabetes, parents, and self-care attitudes and activities?

The purpose of the study and the research questions are related because they seek to provide answers to the same question, which will allow health care professionals to handle young people well with different metabolic control levels when administering treatment and other support activities for type 1 diabetes mellitus. However, the research does not explicitly list the research questions, and the reader has to deduce them from the presentation of results, which cover specific items organized in subheadings and tabular presentations.

The study uses the following qualitative methods. It is overall descriptive in its approach to providing answers to the research question and examination of relevant information. It is also part of a larger study seeking to find information about the adaptation of families with their children or adolescents condition of diabetes mellitus. The research collects data from 14 young people who are between age 11 to 22 and who fit the criteria for its study purpose. This ensures that the information collected for the study remains relevant for providing inferences about the study questions and its aim. The study relied on four values of metabolic control levels from each participant and used to differentiate the high group and the low group. It then recorded audio interviews with individual participants who talked freely and sought clarifications for questions or statements from the interviewer from the interviews that the study would develop descriptive statistics before analyzing its data.

The approach to conducting the qualitative study is sufficient as it captures all potential perceptions that young people in the study would have. However, its reliance on self-reporting may have exposed it to response biases from some of its participants (Bowling, 2014). The study should have included another set of interviews with people close to each young people interviewed to determine additional perception information that the young persons may be withholding or unaware of. Nevertheless, the study ensured that all audio recordings transcriptions were verbatim and stored out of reach to prevent tampering. The researchers then identified interview themes and refined them before allowing two additional investigators to go through the process and make suggested improvements to the defined themes. The inclusion of a separate independent analysis at this stage of the research was appropriate for remove any biases that the researchers would have originally made. Independent coding and discussion of differences was also part of the qualitative method used and it contributed to the rigor of the study. Therefore, the qualitative methods used were appropriate for answering the research questions.

On-Time Delivery!
Get your customized and 100% plagiarism-free paper done in as little as 3 hours
Let’s start
322 specialists online

Literature review

The research reviewed literature to provide background information and also to explain and discuss findings in relation to existing knowledge and implications for future research. There was the citation of both qualitative and quantitative studies that are relevant to the focus of the study. The authors also included information from websites covering the research topic and belonging to organizations affiliated with health care professionals and the health care sector. In addition, there was the inclusion of a book as a source of a theory used in the study. They also linked the study to fact sheet information provided by the World Health Organization, which was relevant to the study objectives. The study was published in 2012 and links to several qualitative and quantitative studies that were older than five years at the time. There is selective mention of the reasons for the inclusion, but no explanation of why the older studies are included in the literature review. The study does not provide a separate literature review section and instead covers it together with the background of the study and discussion section of the findings.

Conceptual/theoretical framework

The study does not rely on defined conceptual framework but uses one theory to argue its findings. Therefore, the theory of crisis presented in the study serves as its theoretical framework because it helps to explain the reasons for occurrence of differences in perceptions and the expected reactions of people when they are facing a crisis (Scholes et al., 2013). It links the theory to the way young people are coping with diabetes mellitus as evidenced from the research findings. However, the inclusion of this theory comes in the discussion part of the study. There is no use of a framework or a diagram to serve as basis for the inquiry in the study, only the theory of crisis as described above appears from the study findings.

References

Bowling, A. (2014). Research methods in health: Investigating health and health services (4th ed.). New York, NY: Open University Press.

Scholes, C., Mandleco, B., Roper, S., Dearing, K., Dyches, T., & Freeborn, D. (2013). A qualitative study of young people’s perspectives of living with type 1 diabetes: do perceptions vary by levels of metabolic control? Journal of Advanced Nursing, 69(6), 1235-1247.

Cite this paper

Select style

Reference

NursingBird. (2022, May 2). Mariela Benchmark Research Critique, Report by Scholes. Retrieved from https://nursingbird.com/mariela-benchmark-research-critique-report-by-scholes/

Reference

NursingBird. (2022, May 2). Mariela Benchmark Research Critique, Report by Scholes. https://nursingbird.com/mariela-benchmark-research-critique-report-by-scholes/

Work Cited

"Mariela Benchmark Research Critique, Report by Scholes." NursingBird, 2 May 2022, nursingbird.com/mariela-benchmark-research-critique-report-by-scholes/.

References

NursingBird. (2022) 'Mariela Benchmark Research Critique, Report by Scholes'. 2 May.

References

NursingBird. 2022. "Mariela Benchmark Research Critique, Report by Scholes." May 2, 2022. https://nursingbird.com/mariela-benchmark-research-critique-report-by-scholes/.

1. NursingBird. "Mariela Benchmark Research Critique, Report by Scholes." May 2, 2022. https://nursingbird.com/mariela-benchmark-research-critique-report-by-scholes/.


Bibliography


NursingBird. "Mariela Benchmark Research Critique, Report by Scholes." May 2, 2022. https://nursingbird.com/mariela-benchmark-research-critique-report-by-scholes/.