Order ID:89JHGSJE83839 | Style:APA/MLA/Harvard/Chicago | Pages:5-10 |
Instructions:
HLT362 Research Ethics Evaluation
It is common to be asked to evaluate descriptive statistics for data within an organization or for health-care data. The National Cancer Institute collects and distributes patient demographic data every year. Understanding the disparities between the groups based on the obtained data can lead to research, therapeutic alternatives, or patient education for health care practitioners.
Calculate the descriptive statistics for each of the Race/Ethnicity groups using the data from the “National Cancer Institute Data” Excel document. If you need help with developing Excel formulas, consult your textbook and the Topic Materials.
Fill up the blanks with the following descriptive statistics:
Central Tendency Measures: Mean, Median, and Mode
Variance, Standard Deviation, and Range are all measures of variation (a formula is not needed for Range).
Provide a 150-250 word analysis of the descriptive statistics on the spreadsheet once the data has been calculated. This should cover group differences and health consequences.
Although the use of the APA style is not compulsory, good academic writing is anticipated.
A rubric is used in this task. Please study the rubric before beginning the assignment to ensure that you understand the requirements for a successful completion.
RUBRIC |
||||||
Excellent Quality 95-100%
|
Introduction
45-41 points The background and significance of the problem and a clear statement of the research purpose is provided. The search history is mentioned. |
Literature Support 91-84 points The background and significance of the problem and a clear statement of the research purpose is provided. The search history is mentioned. |
Methodology 58-53 points Content is well-organized with headings for each slide and bulleted lists to group related material as needed. Use of font, color, graphics, effects, etc. to enhance readability and presentation content is excellent. Length requirements of 10 slides/pages or less is met. |
|||
Average Score 50-85% |
40-38 points More depth/detail for the background and significance is needed, or the research detail is not clear. No search history information is provided. |
83-76 points Review of relevant theoretical literature is evident, but there is little integration of studies into concepts related to problem. Review is partially focused and organized. Supporting and opposing research are included. Summary of information presented is included. Conclusion may not contain a biblical integration. |
52-49 points Content is somewhat organized, but no structure is apparent. The use of font, color, graphics, effects, etc. is occasionally detracting to the presentation content. Length requirements may not be met. |
|||
Poor Quality 0-45% |
37-1 points The background and/or significance are missing. No search history information is provided. |
75-1 points Review of relevant theoretical literature is evident, but there is no integration of studies into concepts related to problem. Review is partially focused and organized. Supporting and opposing research are not included in the summary of information presented. Conclusion does not contain a biblical integration. |
48-1 points There is no clear or logical organizational structure. No logical sequence is apparent. The use of font, color, graphics, effects etc. is often detracting to the presentation content. Length requirements may not be met |
|||
You Can Also Place the Order at www.collegepaper.us/orders/ordernow or www.crucialessay.com/orders/ordernow
HLT362 Research Ethics Evaluation |
HLT362 Research Ethics Evaluation