answer in 2 paragraph to this post. APA, reference and citation need it.
The existing instrument used to address my research will be a numerical scale from 1 through 7. This is a measurement tool of assigning numbers to perception in general from bad perception to good perception. In my research study we are assigning the numbers as response choices for the nurses to determine their perception of the interprofessional nursing rounds. The description of this scale is that it will be a survey and include response choices of 1 is no benefit at all through 7 which would represent extremely beneficial. In other words, the response choices would be 1,2,3,4,5,6 or 7 with a choice to circle one number in each question. Descriptive statistical analysis using an excel spreadsheet with numbers and calculating percentages will be used to generate the data. According to our text this is an example of indirect measurement. This type of technique would be an example of an ordinal level of measurement since it constitutes a ranking system (Gray, Grove & Sutherland, 2017).
My study will be formulated from the quantitative literature review titled, Intensive care nurses’ perceptions of inter specialty trauma nursing rounds to improve trauma patient care – A quality improvement project. The study used a survey technique that was handed out by an independent person in order not to draw bias and was an anonymous form. The evaluation was conducted with questions regarding nurses’ perception of the interprofessional rounds ranging with a response from one to seven (Jennings & Mitchell, 2017). This study will provide the framework for my survey questions and data collection.
Gray, J., Grove, S. & Sutherland, S. (2017). Burns & Grove’s the Practice of Nursing
Research: Appraisal, Synthesis, and Generation of Evidence (8th ed.). St. Louis, MO: Elsevier.
Jennings, F. & Mitchell, M. (2017). Intensive care nurses’ perceptions of inter specialty
trauma nursing rounds to improve trauma patient care-A quality improvement project. Intensive and Critical Care Nursing, 40, 35-43. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.iccn.2017.01.002