Posted: May 15th, 2023

Using the Literature MATRIX
As you read and evaluate your literature there are several different ways to organize your research. One of these ways to organize your work using a “matrix”

matrix.jpg

No, not this, matrix, but the one attached to this discussion (Appendix G).

2017_Appendix_G_Individual_Evidence_Tool

Download 2017_Appendix_G_Individual_Evidence_Tool

This document allows you to compile details about your sources, such as the foundational theories, methodologies, and conclusions; begin to note similarities among the authors, and retrieve citation information for easy insertion within a document.

Instructions:

Instructions:
Conduct a rapid critical analysis of the five (5) articles (use the articles used in discussion 5).
Title the discussion with the PICOT question.
Initial post: Your post should be within a range of 150-200 words and answer the following questions.
Choose one of the research studies in the Matrix table (Appendix G).
Provide a brief overview of what the article was trying to do (i.e., the problem).
What is the type of the study( experimental, cohort, case-study)?
What was the purpose of the study?
Describe the sample (who are the participants, how they were selected). Setting (where it happen).
What is the source of the data? (was a survey, intervention, observation, interviews).
What were the results? (major findings) (look at the discussion, what was learned).
Limitations (who funded the research, was the sample too small).
Peer response: Identify two (2) students that may share a similar question and comment in their literature matrix post. Remmeb
Cite your references APA 7th ed. (not included in the length of the post).
To see rubric, click on the 3-dot menu 3-dot Menu on the top-right side of screen.

_____________________
Discussion: This study aims to investigate the impact of implementing the Columbia Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS) (I) on the early detection of suicidal thoughts and better management in elderly patients with chronic diseases (P), as compared to not implementing the C-SSRS (C) approach. The identification of strong evidence is crucial for effectively addressing PICO questions and providing reliable and generalizable research findings. Strong evidence serves as the foundation for developing interventions that effectively address nursing problems. In this discussion, two high-level evidence articles, John et al. (2020) and Witt et al. (2020), were identified as systematic reviews and meta-analyses, representing Level 1 evidence. Systematic reviews with meta-analyses based on methodologically sound randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and consistent findings are categorized as Level I evidence (Wang et al., 2020). The evidence presented in these articles is highly compelling and provides a satisfactory answer to the PICO question. Moreover, these articles contribute valuable information to the background of the project. Level I evidence articles are designed to minimize systematic errors and biases, providing valid research findings. The effectiveness of C-SSRS in screening and identifying suicidal thoughts at an early stage for prompt treatment is supported by the literature.

References:
John, J. R., Jani, H., Peters, K., Agho, K., & Tannous, W. K. (2020). The effectiveness of patient-centred medical home-based models of care versus standard primary care in chronic disease management: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised and non-randomised controlled trials. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(18), 6886. https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/18/6886

Wang, Z., Ding, R., & Wang, J. (2020). The association between vitamin D status and autism spectrum disorder (ASD): a systematic review and meta-analysis. Nutrients, 13(1), 86. https://www.mdpi.com/2072-6643/13/1/86

Witt, K., Potts, J., Hubers, A., Grunebaum, M. F., Murrough, J. W., Loo, C., … & Hawton, K. (2020). Ketamine for suicidal ideation in adults with psychiatric disorders: a systematic review and meta-analysis of treatment trials. Australian & New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, 54(1), 29-45. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0004867419883341