NURS FPX 9902 Assessment 5 Reflection

Name

Capella university

NURS-FPX 9902 Nursing Doctoral Project 2

Prof. Name

Date

Reflection

Hello, I am… As this course reaches its conclusion, I find it valuable to pause and reflect on the progression of my doctoral project and the meaningful experiences I’ve gained along the way. Reflection acts as a powerful mechanism for evaluating both accomplishments and challenges, while also highlighting opportunities for growth. This process helps sharpen critical thinking and problem-solving abilities, offering important insights into the direction of the project and my development as a researcher. Through this virtual check-in, I aim to thoughtfully examine these reflections, assess my progress, gain clarity on my work, and develop effective strategies for continuous improvement.

Improvement Opportunities Related to Literature Synthesis

While constructing the literature synthesis for the PICOT question addressing interventions for COPD, I recognized the value of employing a detailed and structured approach to the literature search process. Utilizing comprehensive search techniques with appropriate keywords and MeSH terms allowed me to identify a broad selection of sources, including peer-reviewed studies, systematic reviews, and official publications.

I enhanced this strategy by manually reviewing the reference lists of selected articles to avoid missing relevant studies (Golder et al., 2019). Applying specific inclusion and exclusion criteria helped refine the initial collection of articles, ultimately narrowing it down to 33 that met the eligibility standards. These studies, representing a variety of research methodologies, contributed to a well-rounded and substantial evidence base addressing the research question (Costal et al., 2021).

NURS FPX 9902 Assessment 5 Reflection

Throughout the synthesis process, I encountered both successes and obstacles. On the positive side, I was able to identify consistent themes, research trends, and knowledge gaps across the selected literature, which highlighted areas for potential future investigation. A detailed examination of each article provided insight into the beneficial outcomes associated with telehealth interventions for COPD patients. Nonetheless, certain challenges emerged, including the presence of small sample sizes and methodological flaws in some studies, necessitating cautious interpretation of results.

Additionally, the large volume of gathered data required careful organization and synthesis to ensure clarity and coherence (Riccio et al., 2020). Moving ahead, improvements can be made in strengthening my critical appraisal abilities for evaluating the quality and rigor of evidence, thoroughly examining potential biases and limitations, incorporating additional sources such as gray literature and publications in other languages for a broader perspective, and ensuring the collected information is systematically synthesized. Improving these areas will deepen the quality assessment of evidence and enrich the review process (Messerschmidt et al., 2022).

Support of Project and Practice Decisions

The comprehensive review of literature has been foundational in supporting decisions related to both my project and clinical practice. Through an extensive literature review, researchers and healthcare professionals can access an existing body of evidence, understand the current landscape of research, and identify significant knowledge gaps (Li et al., 2019).

The insights drawn from this review informed key decisions in my project, including the selection of appropriate interventions and the formulation of research methodologies, ensuring alignment with the most current evidence. Moreover, literature reviews offer critical guidance for clinical decision-making by identifying effective interventions, potential risks, and areas in need of further inquiry. This process equips healthcare providers with evidence-based information to enhance patient care and bridge the gap between academic research and clinical practice (Brice & Almond, 2020).

Specifically, in my project focused on literature searching and synthesis, the literature review provided essential context for selecting articles, establishing eligibility criteria, and identifying primary themes and intervention outcomes related to telehealth and nutritional strategies for COPD management. It also aided in recognizing methodological limitations, thus supporting more critical evaluation and interpretation of the findings.

Improvement Opportunities Related to Collaboration

Reflecting on collaborative efforts and associated experiences at my project site, I benefited greatly from a dynamic, supportive, and interactive environment that significantly contributed to the advancement of my doctoral work. Collaborating with healthcare professionals, researchers, and stakeholders allowed for the exchange of diverse ideas and perspectives, enriching the project’s overall quality. Regular meetings, discussions, and feedback sessions offered valuable insights on efficient search techniques, reference list searches, and the consideration of challenges like limited sample sizes and study designs.

These collaborative interactions enhanced my critical appraisal skills and informed my approach to the literature synthesis. Constructive feedback and the collective expertise of the team cultivated creativity, innovation, and a shared commitment to the project’s success.

The outcomes of these collaborations were significant and impactful. Working alongside experienced professionals granted access to specialized knowledge, resources, and practical wisdom that informed both theoretical understanding and real-world application. The contributions of collaborators shaped my project’s research questions, guided the analysis, and illuminated practice implications. Their input helped address challenges and facilitated meaningful progress in my doctoral work (van Leeuwen & Janssen, 2019).

Despite these successes, future improvements could include fostering stronger interdisciplinary partnerships and promoting cross-disciplinary dialogues. Actively seeking input from professionals across various fields can provide broader insights and enhance the project’s depth. Additionally, optimizing communication strategies and information-sharing practices within the team could improve coordination and productivity (Gallagher & Savage, 2020).

Preconceptions, Assumptions, and Biases

Preconceived notions, assumptions, and biases can subtly shape the way individuals approach and interpret their work. These perspectives, often influenced by personal experiences, cultural background, or societal expectations, frame how information is perceived and data is analyzed. While initial preconceptions can serve as useful reference points, they may unintentionally introduce bias and limit openness to alternative perspectives (Matos et al., 2023).

Recognizing and actively addressing these biases is essential for maintaining objectivity and fairness in academic and clinical work. By critically examining one’s assumptions and seeking diverse viewpoints, researchers can broaden their understanding, minimize hidden biases, and foster a more inclusive and balanced approach. This process enables evidence-based decision-making and strengthens the integrity and quality of outcomes (Hernández-Sellés et al., 2019).

Support from Scholarly and Authoritative Sources

Integrating scholarly and credible sources is critical for validating claims and guiding decision-making, particularly in the management of COPD. Numerous studies support the positive effects of nutritional and telehealth interventions on improving lung function and reducing readmissions in COPD patients within a few months (Jiang et al., 2023). For example, Fan and Zhao (2021) conducted a systematic review highlighting the effectiveness of telehealth in COPD management.

Similarly, Niranjan et al. (2022) demonstrated the benefits of nutritional strategies in enhancing respiratory function and overall patient health. Moreover, widely recognized clinical guidelines such as those by the Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) advocate for incorporating nutritional and telehealth interventions into comprehensive care plans (Vila et al., 2023). Supporting this, Furulund et al. (2021) reported improved lung function outcomes with nutritional interventions, and Cristina et al. (2023) observed decreased hospital readmission rates following telehealth services.

Additionally, Koh et al. (2023) highlighted the long-term value of telehealth interventions in improving COPD patient outcomes and reducing healthcare utilization. These authoritative sources reinforce the credibility of integrating these interventions in clinical practice and inform evidence-based decision-making.

Evaluation of Relevance

Ensuring that sources are relevant and reliable is vital when substantiating research claims and clinical decisions. The CRAAP (Currency, Relevance, Authority, Accuracy, and Purpose) and RADAR (Relevance, Authority, Date, Appearance, and Reason) frameworks serve as effective tools for evaluating information sources (Sye & Thompson, 2023). Applying these criteria ensures the selection of high-quality, up-to-date, and authoritative materials aligned with the research purpose.

Peer-reviewed scholarly articles undergo stringent evaluation processes, ensuring accuracy and credibility, while professional clinical guidelines provide authoritative, expert-backed recommendations. Through careful application of these evaluation tools, researchers can confidently choose sources that offer reliable, applicable, and current information relevant to their research and practice (Sye & Thompson, 2023).

Conclusion

Conducting a systematic and thorough literature review is indispensable for addressing clinical and research questions and making informed decisions. Employing comprehensive search strategies across multiple databases allows for the collection of diverse, high-quality evidence. Integrating this evidence into projects and practice not only strengthens the validity of findings but also ensures alignment with evidence-based standards, ultimately improving healthcare outcomes.

References

Brice, S., & Almond, H. (2020). Health professional digital capabilities frameworks: A scoping review. Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare, 13, 1375–1390. https://doi.org/10.2147/jmdh.s269412

Costal, D., Farré, C., Franch, X., & Quer, C. (2021). Inclusion and exclusion criteria in software engineering tertiary studies. Proceedings of the 15th ACM / IEEE International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement (ESEM). https://doi.org/10.1145/3475716.3484190

Cristina Rezende1, L., Geraldo Ribeiro1, E., Carvalho Parreiras1, L., Assunção Guimarães1, R., Maciel dos Reis1, G., Fernandes Carajá1, A., Batista Franco2, T., Patrícia de Souza Mendes1, L., Maria Augusto1, V., & Lara Silva1, K. (2023). Telehealth and telemedicine in the management of adult patients after hospitalization for COPD exacerbation: A scoping review. Jornal Brasileiro de Pneumologia, e20220067. https://doi.org/10.36416/1806-3756/e20220067

NURS FPX 9902 Assessment 5 Reflection

Fan, K., & Zhao, Y. (2021). Mobile health technology: A novel tool in chronic disease management. Intelligent Medicine, 2(1). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.imed.2021.06.003

Furulund, E., Bemanian, M., Berggren, N., Madebo, T., Rivedal, S. H., Lid, T. G., & Fadnes, L. T. (2021). Effects of nutritional interventions in individuals with chronic obstructive lung disease: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials. International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, 16, 3145–3156. https://doi.org/10.2147/COPD.S323736

Gallagher, S. E., & Savage, T. (2020). Challenge-based learning in higher education: An exploratory literature review. Teaching in Higher Education, 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2020.1863354

Golder, S., Peryer, G., & Loke, Y. K. (2019). Overview: Comprehensive and carefully constructed strategies are required when conducting searches for adverse effects data. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 113, 36–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2019.05.019

Hernández-Sellés, N., Pablo-César Muñoz-Carril, & González-Sanmamed, M. (2019). Computer-supported collaborative learning: An analysis of the relationship between interaction, emotional support and online collaborative tools. Computers & Education, 138, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.04.012

Jiang, Y., Nuerdawulieti, B., Chen, Z., Guo, J., Sun, P., Chen, M., & Li, J. (2023). Effectiveness of patient decision aid supported shared decision-making intervention in in-person and virtual hybrid pulmonary rehabilitation in older adults with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: A pilot randomized controlled trial. Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare. https://doi.org/10.1177/1357633×231156631

Koh, J. H., Chong, L. C. Y., Koh, G. C. H., & Tyagi, S. (2023). Telemedical interventions for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease management: Umbrella review. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 25(1), e33185. https://doi.org/10.2196/33185

NURS FPX 9902 Assessment 5 Reflection

Li, J., Greenwood, D., & Kassem, M. (2019). Blockchain in the built environment and construction industry: A systematic review, conceptual models and practical use cases. Automation in Construction, 102(1), 288–307. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2019.02.005

Matos, J. F., Piedade, J., Freitas, A., Pedro, N., Dorotea, N., Pedro, A., & Galego, C. (2023). Teaching and learning research methodologies in education: A systematic literature review. Education Sciences, 13(2), 173. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13020173

Messerschmidt, M., Chan, S., Wen, E., & Nanayakkara, S. (2022). Toro: A Web-based tool to search, explore, screen, compare and visualize literature. AIS Electronic Library (AISeL). https://aisel.aisnet.org/sighci2022/13/

Niranjan, V., Tarantino, G., Kumar, J., Stokes, D., O’Connor, R., & O’Regan, A. (2022). The impact of dance interventions on patients with noninfectious pulmonary diseases: A systematic review. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(17), 11115. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph191711115

Riccio, V., Jahangirova, G., Stocco, A., Humbatova, N., Weiss, M., & Tonella, P. (2020). Testing machine learning based systems: A systematic mapping. Empirical Software Engineering. [https://doi.org/10.1007/s10664-020-09881-

0](https://doi.org/10.1007/s10664-020-09881-0)

Slettebø, T. (2020). Participant validation: Exploring a contested tool in qualitative research. Qualitative Social Work, 20(5), 147332502096818. https://doi.org/10.1177/1473325020968189

Sye, D., & Thompson, D. S. (2023). Tools, tests, and checklists: The evolution and future of source evaluation frameworks. Journal of New Librarianship, 8, 76. https://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/jnwlibsh8&div=11&id=&page=

van Leeuwen, A., & Janssen, J. (2019). A systematic review of teacher guidance during collaborative learning in primary and secondary education. Educational Research Review, 27(27), 71–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2019.02.001

Vila, M., Rosa Oliveira, V., & Agustí, A. (2023). Telemedicine in the management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: A systematic review. Medicina Clínica (English Edition), 160(8), 355–363. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.medcle.2023.01.008