Discussion: Use of Regression Analysis in Clinical Practice
Regression analysis provides the researcher with an opportunity to predict and explore future outcomes. Whether it is to determine prevention methods, promote opportunities for learning, or propose new treatments, looking towards the future can have a significant impact on patient care and sustained positive patient outcomes.
This week, you will investigate regression analysis, with a focus on linear regression. Linear regression is a statistical technique that is used to “estimate the value of a dependent variable based on the value of an independent variable” (Gray & Grove, 2020). In your Discussion, you will apply your knowledge of this statistical technique to its application in a research study.
Photo Credit: wutzkoh / Adobe Stock
For this Discussion, you will select an article on a study to examine the strengths and weaknesses in the use of linear regression. Consider how you might remedy the weaknesses associated with the application of linear regression and reflect on how the findings of the study that you selected might contribute to various areas of your practice.
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 articles in this week’s Learning Resources and evaluate their use of linear regression. Select one article that interests you to examine more closely in this Discussion.
- Critically analyze the article that you selected and consider the strengths and weaknesses described.
- Reflect on potential remedies to address these weaknesses, and how the findings from this study may contribute to evidence-based practice, the field of nursing, or society in general.
By Day 3 of Week 7
Post a brief description of the article that you selected, providing its correct APA citation. Critically analyze the article by addressing the following questions:
- What are the goals and purposes of the research study that the article describes?
- How is linear or logistic regression used in the study? What are the results of its use?
- What other quantitative and statistical methods could be used to address the research issue discussed in the article?
- What are the strengths and weaknesses of the study?
Then, explain potential remedies to address the weaknesses that you identified for the research article that you selected. Analyze the importance of this study to evidence-based practice, the nursing profession, or society. Be specific and provide examples.
Also Check Out: NURS 8201 Week 6 Assignment: Correlations
By Day 6 of Week 7
Read a selection of your colleagues’ responses and respond to at least two of your colleagues on two different days in one or more of the following ways:
- Ask a probing question, substantiated with additional background information, evidence, or research.
- ·Share an insight from having read your colleagues’ postings, synthesizing the information to provide new perspectives.
- Offer and support an alternative perspective using readings from the classroom or from your own research in the Walden Library.
- Validate an idea with your own experience and additional research.
- Suggest an alternative perspective based on additional evidence drawn from readings or after synthesizing multiple postings.
- Expand on your colleagues’ postings by providing additional insights or contrasting perspectives based on readings and evidence.
Submission and Grading Information
Grading Criteria
To access your rubric:
Week 7 Discussion Rubric
Post by Day 3 of Week 7 and Respond by Day 6 of Week 7
To Participate in this Discussion:
Week 7 Discussion
Name: NURS_8201_Week7_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%) Communication 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%) Communication 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%) Communication 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%) Communication 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_Week7_Discussion_Rubric
