(240)-343-2585 info@essaymerit.com

Week 3 Discussion 1: Identifying Research Gaps by Interviewing an Expert Clinician NU 631 Week 3 Discussion 1 Identifying Research Gaps by Interviewing an Expert Clinician Week 3 Discussion 1: Identifying Research Gaps by Interviewing an Expert Clinician My interviewee is a master’s prepared nurse with fourteen years of experience in psychiatric care. After going through all the information that she shared during the interview, I identified three themes that evoked my interest and curiosity and provided food for thought in terms of determining a potential evidence-based practice (EBP), quality improvement (QI), or novel research project. First, an interviewed practitioner believes that there are several gaps in mental health care that can benefit from further research. In her opinion, there is room for exploring new approaches to managing post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), traumatic brain injury (TBI), and substance use. When studying the literature discussing research priorities and the gaps in evidence synthesis, I learned that the topics related to treatment of substance use, TBI, PTSD, anxiety, bipolar disorder, and depression call for further research and evidence synthesis (Hempel et al., 2019). Second, the interviewee believes that social determinants of mental health should be addressed to more effectively treat psychiatric conditions and reduce their prevalence. In this regard, I found to be interesting an article by Qin and Hsieh (2020) where the authors discuss the barriers associated with treatment gaps in mental healthcare. These barriers include stigma, high costs, inadequate resources, low treatment effectiveness, and insufficient use of technology (Qin & Hsieh, 2020). The third gap identified by the interviewee is inadequate attention to mental health promotion and prevention of psychiatric conditions. This point evoked my particular interest. Compton and Shim (2020) explain that the concepts of primary, secondary, and tertiary prevention are relevant and applicable in psychiatry. Despite learning about the aforementioned gaps in research and practice, I still find it challenging to select a topic for a research proposal. I realize that the topic of interest should researchable and realistically manageable within the framework of a QI, EBP, or research project. References Hempel, S., Gore, K., & Belsher, B. (2019). Identifying research gaps and prioritizing psychological health evidence synthesis needs. Medical Care, 57(10 S3), S259-S264. doi: 10.1097/MLR.0000000000001175 Compton, M.T., & Shim, R.S. (2020). Mental illness prevention and mental health promotion: When, who, and how. Psychiatric Services, 71(9), 981-983. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ps.201900374 Qin, X., & Hsieh, C.R. (2020). Understanding and addressing the treatment gap in mental healthcare: Economic perspectives and evidence from China. INQUIRY: The Journal of Health Care Organization, Provision, and Financing, 57, 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1177/0046958020950566   Week 3 Discussion 1: Identifying Research Gaps by Interviewing an Expert Clinician Value: 100 points Due: Create your initial post by Day 3, and reply to at least two of your peers by Day 7. Grading Category: Discussions Note: In this type of discussion, you will not see the responses of your peers until after you have posted your own initial post. Introduction You should have met with an expert clinician who works and/or studies in your chosen research area of interest (for example, masters or doctoral-prepared nurse, MD, PsyD, PhD, PA). This person might be a colleague or peer where you are currently employed, a local hospital or other organization, an author of a research paper you read, or someone you found during an Internet search. You could have met with this person in person, using Zoom, or over the phone, but your conversation must be a verbal discussion that lasts approximately 20 to 30 minutes. During the interview, you should have asked the expert: what gaps in knowledge in the science they believe exist; their recommendations they have for you to conduct research to figure out how to fill these gaps; what gaps in knowledge in the science they believe exist. Other questions asked should have included: What recommendations do they have for you to explore these knowledge gaps? What articles and journals do they recommend for you to read? Which organizations would be relevant for you to join and participate in that relates to your clinical research area of interest? What tips do they have for being a clinician researcher in nursing research? Initial Post After completing your interview, please respond to the following: Write a 250– to 300–word summary of what you learned from the interview. Write a reflection on how the interview will help guide you in your research as you are thinking about an EBP, QI, or novel research proposal that you will be working on throughout the course. Include at least two scholarly sources to support your summary and reflection. Replies Reply to at least two of your peers. From what each of your peers learned from their clinician expert, what are some helpful tips you might apply to your own clinical research area of interest? What other thoughts do you have to support your peers to continue to explore their clinical research area of interest? Please refer to the Grading Rubric for details on how this activity will be graded. The described expectations meet the passing level of 80%. Students are directed to review the Discussion Grading Rubric for criteria which exceed expectations. Hello Mama, The information your interviewee provided about psychiatric care is a great perspective and approach to mental health. There are limited resources and services for the mental health field. Mental health is more prevalent now with more awareness but continues with a negative stigma. Many mental illnesses such as anxiety, bipolar, depression, paranoia, and eating disorders are increasing in number each year. Progressive action and treatment must continue to be implemented to decrease the number of people affected. Yes, there are many gaps in the mental health system, and as your interviewee stated, it’s essential to examine the social determinants, which are major contributing factors to mental illness. Mama, when exploring your clinical research area of interest, you should evaluate why some of these gaps exist. What are some of the top reasons why it is difficult to manage mental illnesses? Is there a correlation to funding, cost, or does it relate to limited mental health professionals, or is it related to being labeled a stressful burnout profession? One way to improve burnout and decrease staff members developing their own mental illness from work would be having organizations set up also to meet the needs of staff members offering a relief room (Chorna, V., Makhniuk, V., Pshuk, N., Gumeniuk, N., Shevchuk, Y., & Khliestova, S., 2021, p116). Taking mental health breaks within any setting can be beneficial. There are two separate entities; social determinants that lead to mental illness in individuals, then barriers limit the ability to receive care and treatment once an individual is diagnosed. I think some helpful tips that would be useful for my clinical research would be evaluating preventative measures in place or should be implemented to benefit the solution to a problem of interest. According to Breslau, J., Pritam, R., Guarasi, D., Horvitz-Lennon, M., Finnerty, M., Yu, H., & Leckman-Westin, E. (2019), “Qualitative investigations focusing on comparing successful and unsuccessful implementers of the program could provide some answers” (p. 1284). It is essential to understand what types of strategies and ideas have already been implemented regarding a research topic. References Breslau, J., Pritam, R., Guarasi, D., Horvitz-Lennon, M., Finnerty, M., Yu, H., & Leckman-Westin, E. (2019). Predictors of Receipt of Physical Health Services in Mental Health Clinics. Community Mental Health Journal, 55(8), 1279–1287. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10597-019-00399-4 Chorna, V., Makhniuk, V., Pshuk, N., Gumeniuk, N., Shevchuk, Y., & Khliestova, S. (2021). Burnout in Mental Health Professionals and the Measures to Prevent It. Georgian Medical News, 310, 113–118. Posting to the Discussion Forum Select the appropriate Thread. Select Reply. Create your post. Select Post to Forum. NU 631 Week 3 Discussion 1 Identifying Research Gaps by Interviewing an Expert Clinician Click here to ORDER an A++ paper from our Verified MASTERS and DOCTORATE WRITERS:Week 3 Discussion 1: Identifying Research Gaps by Interviewing an Expert Clinician This is a question and answer forum. In order to see other responses to these questions, you must first post your answer. Discussion Question Rubric Note: Scholarly resources are defined as evidence-based practice, peer-reviewed journals; textbook (do not rely solely on your textbook as a reference); and National Standard Guidelines. Review assignment instructions, as this will provide any additional requirements that are not specifically listed on the rubric. Note: The value of each of the criterion on this rubric represents a point range. (example: 17-0 points) Discussion Question Rubric – 100 Points Criteria Exemplary Exceeds Expectations Advanced Meets Expectations Intermediate Needs Improvement Novice Inadequate Total Points Quality of Initial Post Provides clear examples supported by course content and references. Cites three or more references, using at least one new scholarly resource that was not provided in the course materials. All instruction requirements noted. 40 points Components are accurate and thoroughly represented, with explanations and application of knowledge to include evidence-based practice, ethics, theory, and/or role. Synthesizes course content using course materials and scholarly resources to support importantpoints. Meets all requirements within the discussion instructions. Cites two references. 35 points Components are accurate and mostly represented primarily with definitions and summarization. Ideas may be overstated, with minimal contribution to the subject matter. Minimal application to evidence-based practice, theory, or role development. Synthesis of course content is present but missing depth and/or development. Is missing one component/requirement of the discussion instructions. Cites one reference, or references do not clearly support content. Most instruction requirements are noted. 31 points Absent application to evidence-based practice, theory, or role development. Synthesis of course content is superficial. Demonstrates incomplete understanding of content and/or inadequate preparation. No references cited. Missing several instruction requirements. Submits post late. 27 points 40 Peer Response Post Offers both supportive and alternative viewpoints to the discussion, using two or more scholarly references per peer post. Post provides additional value to the conversation. All instruction requirements noted. 40 points Evidence of further synthesis of course content. Provides clarification and new information or insight related to the content of the peer’s post. Response is supported by course content and a minimum of one scholarly reference per each peer post. All instruction requirements noted. 35 points Lacks clarification or new information. Scholarly reference supports the content in the peer post without adding new information or insight. Missing reference from one peer post. Partially followed instructions regarding number of reply posts. Most instruction requirements are noted. 31 points Post is primarily a summation of peer’s post without further synthesis of course content. Demonstrates incomplete understanding of content and/or inadequate preparation. Did not follow instructions regarding number of reply posts. Missing reference from peer posts. Missing several instruction requirements. Submits post late. 27 points 40 Frequency of Distribution Initial post and peer post(s) made on multiple separate days. All instruction requirements noted. 10 points Initial post and peer post(s) made on multiple separate days. 8 points Minimum of two post options (initial and/or peer) made on separate days. 7 points All posts made on same day. Submission demonstrates inadequate preparation. No post submitted. 6 points 10 Organization Well-organized content with a clear and complex purpose statement and content argument. Writing is concise with a logical flow of ideas. 5 points Organized content with an informative purpose statement, supportive content, and summary statement. Argument content is developed with minimal issues in content flow. 4 points Poor organization and flow of ideas distract from content. Narrative is difficult to follow and frequently causes reader to reread work. Purpose statement is noted. 3 points Illogical flow of ideas. Prose rambles. Purpose statement is unclear or missing. Demonstrates incomplete understanding of content and/or inadequate preparation. No purpose statement. Submits assignment late. 2 points 5 APA, Grammar, and Spelling Correct APA formatting with no errors. The writer correctly identifies reading audience, as demonstrated by appropriate language (avoids jargon and simplifies complex concepts appropriately). Writing is concise, in active voice, and avoids awkward transitions and overuse of conjunctions. There are no spelling, punctuation, or word-usage errors. 5 points Correct and consistent APA formatting of references and cites all references used. No more than two unique APA errors. The writer demonstrates correct usage of formal English language in sentence construction. Variation in sentence structure and word usage promotes readability. There are minimal to no grammar, punctuation, or word-usage errors. 4 points Three to four unique APA formatting errors. The writer occasionally uses awkward sentence construction or overuses/inappropriately uses complex sentence structure. Problems with word usage (evidence of incorrect use of thesaurus) and punctuation persist, often causing some difficulties with grammar. Some words, transitional phrases, and conjunctions are overused. Multiple grammar, punctuation, or word usage errors. 3 points Five or more unique formatting errors or no attempt to format in APA. The writer demonstrates limited understanding of formal written language use; writing is colloquial (conforms to spoken language). The writer struggles with limited vocabulary and has difficulty conveying meaning such that only the broadest, most general messages are presented. Grammar and punctuation are consistently incorrect. Spelling errors are numerous. Submits assignment late. 2 points 5 Total Points 100   Order Now