Critique of Systematic Research Review (SRR) - Assignment Example

Critique of Systematic Research Review (SRR) Critique of Systematic Research Review (SRR) Relevance of the Nursing Research Problem Addressed In A SRR to Practice Hospitals expect today’s nurse to meet numerous goals that cater to everybody. Nurses ought to demonstrate competency, critical thinking, and kindness. The expectations of today’s nurses are the most relevant in SRR to practice, as stated in Melnyk and Fineout-Overholt’s review (Melnyk and Fineout-Overholt, 2011). The review is correct about the ability of today’s nurses to pinpoint real and likely health issues in their patients, construct plans that hinder or alleviate these issues, and eventually assess the results of their caregiving.

All these responsibilities take place in a time-based and quickly changing environment that frequently only tolerates speed for consideration. Critique of the Levels of Evidence of the Studies Used in the SRR, Specifically the Designs of the Studies Included Levels of evidence explored in Melnyk and Fineout-Overholt’s SRR vary in research designs of the literature used. The SRR utilized evidence from research articles and books. First, reliable applications of evidence-based practices in healthcare frameworks formed a level of evidence.

Nurses in Magnet organizations reported these applications in higher levels. Magnet organizations were the designs of the first research works used by Melnyk and Fineout-Overholt (Melnyk and Fineout-Overholt, 2011). Second, the accessibility of professionals of evidence-based practices was proof of the SRR’s viability. Third, organizational cultures that supported evidence-based practices were proof of the SRR’s flexibility and comprehensiveness. In addition, there were no substantial differences in items associated with the requirements and access to sustenance of evidence-based practices.

Critique of the Clarity with Which the Studies are Presented and Critiqued The clarity that Melnyk and Fineout-Overholt use to present and critique the studies in the SRR is exceptional (Melnyk and Fineout-Overholt, 2011). The researchers provide a discussion of the variances between research designs of study application and models of evidence-based practices. Both ideological variances, as well as the variances in physician competencies required and critiqued. Study models of evidence-based practices used by the writers are debated in differing levels of detail.

For instance, Melnyk and Fineout-Overholt discuss the Iowa Model, Larrabees model, and Kitsons model differently. Description of the Overall Findings of the Studies, As Summarized In the SRR Melnyk and Fineout-Overholt discussed the overall results of the studies in terms of implication. According to Melnyk and Fineout-Overholt, the findings affected nursing managers, leaders, health care managers, trainers, and academics differently (Melnyk and Fineout-Overholt, 2011). This is because these professions are crucial for developing a helpful tradition for evidence-based practices.

Out of this complicated world of nursing is the problem of meeting these expectations using care revolving around effective and dependable scientific proof. This way, nursing can slowly convert into an overall evidence-based profession. Critique of the Conclusions of the SRR, With Implications for Your Current Practice and Future Research The SRR’s conclusion betters the quality of evidence-based practices in relation to healthcare expenditure and patient outcomes. The conclusion mostly stressed the importance of the studies’ findings, offering the time, academic competencies, developing sessions, and resources that staff nurses require the application of evidence-based care (Melnyk and Fineout-Overholt, 2011).

Parts of the conclusion that debate the SRR, the implementation, and distribution of proof are possibly the most helpful in the SRR. This is because they allow nurses to begin reflecting on and attempting to apply evidence-based practices. References Melnyk, B. M., & Fineout-Overholt, E. (2011). Evidence-based Practice in Nursing & Healthcare (Second Ed.). Philadelphia, PA: Wolters Kluwer/Lippincott, Williams, & Wilkins.