Get a 10 % discount on an order above $ 100!
HLT 540 Week 3 Discussions 1, 2 Papers
HLT 540 Week 3 Discussions 1, 2 Papers
HLT 540 Grand Canyon Week 3 Discussion 1
Discuss why other designs are frequently used and the circumstances that may require the use of one given that there is evidence to support the use of an experimental and control group design.
HLT 540 Grand Canyon Week 3 Discussion 2
Discuss your understanding of the concept of internal validity in a research study, and the impacts of several errors or biases that can reduce the study’s validity.HLT 540 Week 3 Discussions 1, 2 Papers
HLT 540 Week 3 Assignment 1 Coyne and Messina Articles, Part 1 Analysis Recent
1) In a paper (1,000-1,250 words), compare and contrast the major elements of the reports by Coyne et al. and Messina et al., listed in the Module 2 Readings.
2) Complete the “Coyne and Messina Articles Analysis.” Study the information in the right-side column related to the Coyne, et al. study, which identifies the required elements as found in the reading. Complete the information for the Messina et al. article by identifying the required elements from the article.
3) Prepare this assignment according to the APA guidelines found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center. An abstract is not required.
4) This assignment uses a grading rubric. Instructors will be using the rubric to grade the assignment; therefore, students should review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the assignment criteria and expectations for successful completion of the assignment.
Coyne and Messina Articles Analysis
As an example guideline, review the study components in the left-side column of the table below. Read the study by Messina et al., and build the data in the right-side column with the key components in that study.
Coyne: Do size and ownership type make a difference in the efficiency and cost results of hospitals in Washington state? (Highlight p.164, second column, starting 15 lines from bottom to seven lines from bottom.)
How did the research question emerge from the review of literature in the article?
Built on an earlier study by Coyne on performance differences between multi-facility systems and independent hospitals using two cost measures. Cited studies that used a range of variables to measure differences in hospital performance, and noted that prior findings have been inconclusive in regard to hospital size, although economies of scale were found.
Hospital size and hospital ownership structure.
Efficiency measures – continuous variables.
Cost measures – continuous variables.
Quantitative vs. Qualitative
Method of sample selection
Experimental vs. control group?
Reliable and valid data instruments?
Picked all hospitals in state, except investor owned hospitals.
Used data that are commonly used to measure hospital efficiency and performance with high degrees of accuracy (reliable), and data that are historically used and make sense to other hospital users (valid).
What statistics were used?
Two-way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA)
Did the researchers’ conclusions make sense, did they answer the research question, and did they appear to flow from the review of the literature?
Did they explore control of extraneous variables?
They concluded that size and ownership type make a difference in reported levels of efficiency. Not for profits seem to achieve higher performance levels, and medium and large not for profits operate more efficiently than industry average. The same results were found for cost levels, in that size and ownership type do make a difference, with medium sized hospitals reporting lower costs than large or small hospitals.
Yes, when they called for national studies that controlled for case mix, scope of services, and payer mix, all of which could have affected the results in this study in an unmeasured way.