NURS 8201 Week 4 Discussion: Levels of Measurement

NURS 8201 Week 4 Discussion: Levels of Measurement

NURS 8201 Week 4 Discussion: Levels of Measurement

Discussion: Levels of Measurement

What is the incidence of blood clots from COVID-19 in females over the age of 35?

The one you just read is an example of a research question. A research question consists of three parts that guide the tools and strategies you will use to examine the issue and seek solutions. The research question is made up of the population or variables, the inquiry, and the issue. The investigation in the aforementioned case is looking into the prevalence of severe COVID-19-related blood clots in a specific demographic. This inquiry can be used to analyze variables, examine factors, and sample populations in order to direct the research.

Photographer: A. Socha (n.d.). Scale and balance quandary [Photo: Pixabay.com]. https://pixabay.com/photos/puzzle-last-part-joining-together-3223922/

During Week 2, you developed a research issue statement based on a topic that interests you or your area of expertise. Based on this research problem statement, you will develop a research question. A research question is a concise, interrogative statement in the present tense that comprises one or more of the study’s important topics or variables (Gray & Grove, 2020). These inquiries frequently serve as a direction for the research and identify the type of study that will be conducted.

Think about your research problem statement as you read this Levels of Measurement Discussion. Through the development of a research question, take into account the independent and dependent variables of your research problem. Consider the advantages and difficulties you might encounter in the statistical analysis of your proposed variables, as well as the probable levels of measurement for your variables and the justification for the labels.

Read Also: NURS 8000 Assignment: Becoming Familiar with DNP Scholarly Project NURS 8000

_{Reference: Gray, J. R., & Grove, S. K. (2020). Burns and Grove’s the practice of nursing research: Appraisal, synthesis, and generation of evidence (9th ed.). Elsevier.}

To Prepare: NURS 8201 Week 4 Discussion: Levels of Measurement

• Review your research problem statement from Week 2 to develop your research question.
• Review the Learning Resources on how to describe variables.
• Consider the levels of measurement for your variables: nominal, ordinal, interval, or ratio.
• After reviewing your research question and considering the levels of measurement, analyze your classification for each variable. What was behind your reasoning for labeling the variables? How might the data be analyzed based on these labels?
• Consider advantages and challenges that you might encounter in the statistical analysis of your proposed variables.

By Day 3 of Week 4

Post your research question and describe the independent and dependent variables. Then, identify the level of measurement of both your independent and dependent variables. Provide a brief rationale for your classification of each variable. Be specific. Explain considerations of analyzing data related to each variable based on its level of measurement. Be sure to include any advantages or challenges that you might encounter in your statistical analysis of each variable and explain why.

By Day 6 of Week 4

Read a selection of your colleagues’ responses and respond to at least two of your colleagues on two different days by noting any discrepancies and/or suggesting alternatives in the levels of measurement and statistical analyses described.

Submission and Grading Information

Grading Criteria

To access your rubric:

Frequency and Descriptive Statistics Discussion: Levels of Measurement rubric

Post by Day 3 of Week 4 and Respond by Day 6 of Week 4

To Participate in this Discussion:

NURS 8201 Week 4 Assignment: Frequency and Descriptive Statistics

Imagine that you have collected data from 100 patients. You have carefully compiled vitals, pain scores, and medications for each of the patients. However, what does all of this data mean? Is your work now done?

How do we make data meaningful? Why must we move beyond the raw data to ensure that data is purposeful?

Descriptive analysis is the analysis of the data to develop meaning. Descriptive analysis provides meaning through showing, describing, and summarizing the data compiled to “reveal characteristics of the sample and to describe study variables” (Gray & Grove, 2020). This allows the researcher to present data in a more meaningful and simplified way.

For this Assignment, summarize your interpretation of the descriptive statistics provided to you in the Week 4 Descriptive Statistics SPSS Output document. You will evaluate each variable in your analysis.

_{Reference: Gray, J. R., & Grove, S. K. (2020). Burns and Grove’s the practice of nursing research: Appraisal, synthesis, and generation of evidence (9th ed.). Elsevier.}

To Prepare:

• Review the Week 4 Descriptive Statistics SPSS Output provided in this week’s Learning Resources.
• Review the Learning Resources on how to interpret descriptive statistics, including how to interpret research outcomes.
• Consider the results presented in the SPSS output and reflect on how you might interpret the frequency distributions and the descriptive statistics presented.

Get help with nursing essay

The Levels of Measurement Assignment: (2–3 pages)

• Summarize your interpretation of the frequency data provided in the output for respondent’s age, highest school grade completed, and family income from prior month.

• Note: A frequency analysis is way of summarizing data by depicting the number of times a data value occurs in the data table or output. It is used to analyze the data set including where the data are concentrated or clustered, the range of values, observation of extreme values, and to determine intervals for analysis that could make sense in categorizing your variable values.

• Summarize your interpretation of the descriptive statistics provided in the output for respondent’s age, highest school grade completed, race and ethnicity, currently employed, and family income from prior month.

• Note: The descriptive analysis includes N (size of your sample), the mean, the median, the standard deviation, the size and spread of your data to determine the variability/variance in your data.

Reminder: The College of Nursing requires that all papers submitted include a title page, introduction, summary, and references. The Sample Paper provided at the Walden Writing Center provides an example of those required elements (available at https://academicguides.waldenu.edu/writingcenter/templates/general#s-lg-box-20293632). All papers submitted must use this formatting.

By Day 7

Submit your NURS 8201 Week 4 Discussion: Levels of Measurement Assignment by Day 7 of Week 4.

Submission and Grading Information

To submit your completed Assignment for review and grading, do the following:

• Please save your Assignment using the naming convention “WK4Assgn+last name+first initial.(extension)” as the name.
• Click the Week 4 Assignment Rubric to review the Grading Criteria for the Assignment.
• Click the Week 4 Assignment link. You will also be able to “View Rubric” for grading criteria from this area.
• Next, from the Attach File area, click on the Browse My Computer button. Find the document you saved as “WK4Assgn+last name+first initial.(extension)” and click Open.
• If applicable: From the Plagiarism Tools area, click the checkbox for I agree to submit my paper(s) to the Global Reference Database.
• Click on the Submit button to complete your submission.

Grading Criteria

To access your rubric:

Check Your Assignment Draft for Authenticity

To check your Assignment draft for authenticity:

Submit your Week 4 Assignment draft and review the originality report.

Top nursing paper writers on hand to assist you with assignment : NURS 8201 Week 4 Discussion: Levels of Measurement

Submit Your Assignment by Day 7 of Week 4

To participate in this NURS 8201 Week 4 Discussion: Levels of Measurement Assignment

NURS_8201_Week4_Levels of Measurement Discussion_Rubric

		Excellent 90–100	Good 80–89	Fair 70–79	Poor 0–69
Main Posting: Response to the Discussion question is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources.		40 (40%) – 44 (44%) Thoroughly responds to the Discussion question(s). Is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources. No less than 75% of post has exceptional depth and breadth. Supported by at least three current credible sources.	35 (35%) – 39 (39%) Responds to most of the Discussion question(s). Is somewhat reflective with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module. 50% of the post has exceptional depth and breadth. Supported by at least three credible references.	31 (31%) – 34 (34%) Responds to some of the Discussion question(s). One to two criteria are not addressed or are superficially addressed. Is somewhat lacking reflection and critical analysis and synthesis. Somewhat represents knowledge gained from the course readings for the module. Cited with fewer than two credible references.	0 (0%) – 30 (30%) Does not respond to the Discussion question(s). Lacks depth or superficially addresses criteria. Lacks reflection and critical analysis and synthesis. Does not represent knowledge gained from the course readings for the module. Contains only one or no credible references.
Main Posting: Writing		6 (6%) – 6 (6%) Written clearly and concisely. Contains no grammatical or spelling errors. Adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.	5 (5%) – 5 (5%) Written concisely. May contain one to two grammatical or spelling errors. Adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.	4 (4%) – 4 (4%) Written somewhat concisely. May contain more than two spelling or grammatical errors. Contains some APA formatting errors.	0 (0%) – 3 (3%) Not written clearly or concisely. Contains more than two spelling or grammatical errors. Does not adhere to current APA manual writing rules and style.
Main Posting: Timely and full participation		9 (9%) – 10 (10%) Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation. Posts main Discussion by due date.	8 (8%) – 8 (8%) Meets requirements for full participation. Posts main Discussion by due date.	7 (7%) – 7 (7%) Posts main Discussion by due date.	0 (0%) – 6 (6%) Does not meet requirements for full participation. Does not post main Discussion by due date.
First Response: Post to colleague’s main post that is reflective and justified with credible sources.		9 (9%) – 9 (9%) Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings. Responds to questions posed by faculty. The use of scholarly sources to support ideas demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.	8 (8%) – 8 (8%) Response has some depth and may exhibit critical thinking or application to practice setting.	7 (7%) – 7 (7%) Response is on topic and may have some depth.	0 (0%) – 6 (6%) Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.
First Response: Writing		6 (6%) – 6 (6%) is professional and respectful to colleagues. Response to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed. Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources. Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.	5 (5%) – 5 (5%) is mostly professional and respectful to colleagues. Response to faculty questions are mostly answered, if posed. Provides opinions and ideas that are supported by few credible sources. Response is written in standard, edited English.	4 (4%) – 4 (4%) Response posed in the Discussion may lack effective professional communication. Response to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed. Few or no credible sources are cited.	0 (0%) – 3 (3%) Responses posted in the Discussion lack effective communication. Response to faculty questions are missing. No credible sources are cited.
First Response: Timely and full participation		5 (5%) – 5 (5%) Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation. Posts by due date.	4 (4%) – 4 (4%) Meets requirements for full participation. Posts by due date.	3 (3%) – 3 (3%) Posts by due date.	0 (0%) – 2 (2%) Does not meet requirements for full participation. Does not post by due date.
Second Response: Post to colleague’s main post that is reflective and justified with credible sources.		9 (9%) – 9 (9%) Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings. Responds to questions posed by faculty. The use of scholarly sources to support ideas demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.	8 (8%) – 8 (8%) Response has some depth and may exhibit critical thinking or application to practice setting.	7 (7%) – 7 (7%) Response is on topic and may have some depth.	0 (0%) – 6 (6%) Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.
Second Response: Writing		6 (6%) – 6 (6%) is professional and respectful to colleagues. Response to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed. Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources. Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.	5 (5%) – 5 (5%) is mostly professional and respectful to colleagues. Response to faculty questions are mostly answered, if posed. Provides opinions and ideas that are supported by few credible sources. Response is written in standard, edited English.	4 (4%) – 4 (4%) Response posed in the Discussion may lack effective professional communication. Response to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed. Few or no credible sources are cited.	0 (0%) – 3 (3%) Responses posted in the Discussion lack effective communication. Response to faculty questions are missing. No credible sources are cited.
Second Response: Timely and full participation		5 (5%) – 5 (5%) Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation. Posts by due date.	4 (4%) – 4 (4%) Meets requirements for full participation. Posts by due date.	3 (3%) – 3 (3%) Posts by due date.	0 (0%) – 2 (2%) Does not meet requirements for full participation. Does not post by due date.
Total Points: 100

Name: NURS_8201_Week4_Discussion_Rubric