NR 505 Week 6 Discussion
University:
Chamberlain University
NR 505 Week 6 Discussion
Paper Instructions
Preparing the Assignment
1. Application of Course Knowledge
The student’s initial post contributes unique perspectives or insights gleaned from personal experience or examples from the healthcare field. The student must accurately and fully discuss the topic for the week in addition to providing personal or professional examples. The student must completely answer the entire initial question. Initial post due by Wednesday at 11 59pm MT. You must include two resources in your initial post one from your lesson or weekly reading and one from an outside scholarly source.
2. Engagement in Meaningful Dialogue
The student responds to a student peer and course faculty to further dialogue.
A. Peer Response
The student responds substantively to at least one topic-related post by a student peer. A substantive post adds content or insights or asks a question that will add to the learning experience and/or generate discussion.
- A post of “I agree” with a repeat of the other student’s post does not count as a substantive post. A collection of shallow posts does not equal a substantive post.
- The peer response must occur on a separate day from the initial posting.
- The peer response must occur before Sunday, 11 59 p.m. MT.
- The peer response does not require a scholarly citation and reference unless the information is paraphrased and/or direct quotes are used, in which APA style standards then apply.
B. Faculty Response
The student responds substantively to at least one question by course faculty. The faculty question may be directed to the student, to another student, or to the entire class.
- A post of “I agree” with a repeat of the faculty’s post does not count as a substantive post. A collection of shallow posts does not equal a substantive post.
- The faculty response must occur on a separate day from the initial posting.
- Responses to the faculty member must occur by Sunday, 11 59 p.m. MT.
- This response does not require a scholarly citation and reference unless the information is paraphrased and/or direct quotes are used, in which APA style standards then apply.
3. Integration of Evidence
The student post provides support from a minimum of one scholarly in-text citation with a matching reference AND assigned readings OR online lessons, per discussion topic per week. Two resources total and to count must be an in-text citation.
A. What is a scholarly resource?
A scholarly resource is one that comes from a professional, peer-reviewed publication (e.g., journals and government reports such as those from the FDA or CDC).
- Contains references for sources cited
- Written by a professional or scholar in the field and indicates credentials of the author(s)
- Is no more than 5 years old for clinical or research article
B. What is not considered a scholarly resource?
- Newspaper articles and layperson literature (e.g., Readers Digest, Healthy Life Magazine, Food, and Fitness)
- Information from Wikipedia or any wiki
- Textbooks
- Website homepages
- The weekly lesson
- Articles in healthcare and nursing-oriented trade magazines, such as Nursing Made Incredibly Easy and RNMagazine (Source What is a scholarly article.docx; Created 06/09 CK/CL Revised 02/17/11, 09/02/11 nlh/clm)
C. Can the lesson for the week be used as a scholarly source?
- Information from the weekly lesson can be cited in a posting; however, it is not to be the sole source used in the post.
D. Are resources provided from CU acceptable sources (e.g., the readings for the week)?
- Not as a sole source within the post. The textbook and/or assigned (required) articles for the week can be used, but another outside source must be cited for full credit. Textbooks are not considered scholarly sources for the purpose of discussions.
E. Are websites acceptable as scholarly resources for discussions?
- Yes, if they are documents or data cited from credible websites. Credible websites usually end in .gov or .edu; however, some .org sites that belong to professional associations (e.g., American Heart Association, National League for Nursing, American Diabetes Association) are also considered credible websites. Websites ending with .com are not to be used as scholarly resources
4. Professionalism in Communication
The post presents information in logical, meaningful, and understandable sequence, and is clearly relevant to the discussion topic. Grammar, spelling, and/or punctuation are accurate.
5. Wednesday Participation Requirement
The student provides a substantive response to the graded discussion question(s) or topic(s), posted by the course faculty (not a response to a peer), by Wednesday, 11 59 p.m. MT of each week.
6. Total Participation Requirement
The student provides at least three substantive posts (one to the initial question or topic, one to a student peer, and one to a faculty question) on two different days during the week.
We Work Hard So That You Don’t
We’ll write a 100% plagiarism-free paper in under 1 hour.
Sample Answer
1) Learning about the history of ethics has taught me that there was once a time when people were experimented on in an unethical manner. Some examples of that include the Tuskegee Syphilis Study (by the U.S. Public Health Services in 1932), the Monster Study (by Wendell Johnson in the 1940s), the Milgram experiment (by Stanley Milgram in 1961), the Little Albert experiment (by John Watson and Rosalie Rayner in the 1920s).
The result of these illegal experiments caused mistrust from people in society and promoting an unwillingness to participate in research. One demographic group would be the American Indian and Alaska Native. In 2010 Arizona State University researchers published results without an Arizona tribe’s knowledge or informed consent (Saunkeah et al., 2021). Additional to not receiving informed consent Arizona State also provided biospecimens to secondary researchers in other institutions.
Thankfully scientists have learned from mistakes made in the past. Thankfully since then the government has passed laws to protect the rights of humans in experiments or clinical trials. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services oversees the office for human research protections. The OHRP provides clarification and guidance, develops education programs and materials, maintains regulatory oversight, and provides advice on ethical and regulatory issues in biomedical and behavioral research (OHRP 2023).
Biomedical research can be used for good things as well. The practices that we have in medicine today are because of us studying and learning from the past. We have learned from past experiments what works and what doesn’t work. Research and scientific experiments on humans have advanced our way of treating different diseases and extending life expectancy.
An example of that would be HIV. In the past if a person was diagnosed with HIV, it was a death sentence. They were only living life waiting to die because HIV progresses to AIDS which there is no cure. Now people are living longer with a diagnosis of HIV. People who are on the antiretroviral therapy (ART) keep the virus suppressed and live a long healthy life (HIV.gov 2023).
2) The studies that I found for my PICOT question I found protected the rights of the participants. Every one of my articles they obtained consent for them to participate in the research studies. I think that is because there are regulations that are in place to make sure that there is no harm done to people when they participate in these experiments. At work I have had a few patients who participated in a clinical trial for urination stimulation. Some of them received the actual implant, and others did not. The ones that did not receive the real implant were informed and were given the option to try out the real implant.
I have also taken care of patients who came to the outpatient surgery center and because they made the criteria to participate in a research study they were asked to participate. The ones who said yes received a gift card for doing so, and of course they obtained consent. The few patients that signed up for the experiment seemed very excited to be a part of a study that can help further research that will change peoples’ lives forever.
References
- HIV life expectancy Aging with HIV. HIV.gov. (2023, September 14). https //www.hiv.gov/hiv-basics/living-well-with-hiv/taking-care-of-yourself/aging-with-hiv/
- Office for Human Research Protections (OHRP). (2023, September 29). Office for Human Research Protections. HHS.gov. https //www.hhs.gov/ohrp/index.html# ~ text=OHRP%20provides%20clarification%20and%20guidance,in%20biomedical%20and%20behavioral%20research.
- Saunkeah, B., Beans, J. A., Peercy, M. T., Hiratsuka, V. Y., & Spicer, P. (2021). Extending research protections to tribal communities. The American Journal of Bioethics, 21(10), 5–12. https //doi.org/10.1080/15265161.2020.1865477
We Work Hard So That You Don’t
We’ll write a 100% plagiarism-free paper in under 1 hour