506 In Class Notes
Popular in Course
Popular in Department
This 5 page Reader was uploaded by Jennifer Crooks on Friday January 16, 2015. The Reader belongs to a course at University of Washington taught by a professor in Fall. Since its upload, it has received 68 views.
Reviews for 506 In Class Notes
Please tell me you're going to be posting these awesome notes every week..
Report this Material
What is Karma?
Karma is the currency of StudySoup.
Date Created: 01/16/15
01072015 Been doing research work for 15 years at Building Changes director of learning management evaluation Is an intermediary Works between counties and philanthropy Got there by Starting at recovery centers of king county running clinical trials with substance abuse Ran very rst trial on bepenorphine Also worked at Sound mental health doing clinical work likes the balance between clinical and research She worked with adolescents in group homes trying to transfer back into housing Also worked at school of nursing with adolescents at suicide risk Did clinical interviews with adolescents exhibiting risky behaviors Started at Children s hospital in 05 doing needs assessments and reviewing safety doc Works weekends as a medical social worker Also worked at Casey Family programs doing national studies Lived in Taiwan and Singapore spent some time in Hawaii as well Introductions quotWhat you told mequot We will be more focused on the application of ndings and how to frame these ndings than other classes Review Syllabus and Answer questions Presentations will be geared toward whoever we pull out of hat speci c audience type board of directors clinicians etc Going to prepare our documents in a way that is easily digestible We will go through communication planning Last piece is detailed description of research paper Developing a schema Template to review journal articles in Beginning This is when trying to see whats happening why doing it What is problem what have other people done Something is wrong with current practice Therefore study needs to be done Middle How did researchers look at questions Do they pick quotrightquot participants are we creaming from the toponly getting the best Right variables are we really measuring what we expect to change providing enough time frame Was anyone biasedwas there a biased response response biases Are people reporting to look more favorable End Do these ndingsresults make sense logical worth doing easily replicated costly is the sample so small that they can t replicate anywhere else What was the risk of doing this study Don t forget about our clinical judgment can I implement this in my clinical setting Does it only work in an experiment is there any risk to changing the current practice Political funding changes etc Potential bene ts vs potential risks People don t talk about cost as much but it will make it live or die Group work Address the beginning middle and end of the article Find like 10 questions to ask throughout each journal article we read Please reference journal articles Schema and article due jan 13 Is there a clear de nition of the problem What is the purpose ie according to the researcher Do I care What other research has been done how do they explore the research questions What makes one potential participant better than the other does the methods match the questions What just happened and do I still care Was the study worth itwhat does it all mean 0 Who bene ts from this politically l LDCDNOWU39lbUUNl l What is the study implementation plan Going from nal report back to study development blocking out dates Engaging stakeholders conversation later Bike Rack how long does irb approval take different ways of getting consent 0 Content v method All slides on website IRB process purpose is to protect participants Make sure that research is done ethically and to standards that everybody upholds Because not publishing we don t have to get approval A lot of IRB approval involves risk Three different types of reviews In WA state most often used IRB is WIRB Washington Institutional Review Board Review can cost anywhere from 500lt o Exempt What we fall into Educational practices work done within class excluding working with minors Educational tests survey procedures interview procedures observation of public behavior If location is identi able can put person at risk of various types of harm Existing data researchdemonstration projects conducted by or subject to approval dept or agency heads Program evaluation stuff No signi cant invasionsintrusions on participants Tastefood quality eval And minimal risknonphysically invasive o Expedited Minimal risk present no more than minimal risks to pariticipants 9 different elements in categories 0 Full board If it s not either of the above lncludes clinical trials biomedical trials behavioral research exposure to different types of stressors IRB rst determine whether or not working with human subjects They are trying to determine what is considered research and what is necessary for review Link on slides is to UW IRB website UW IRB meets two times a month so be conscious of when they meet and what they might be taking on 0 Contact the UW IRB SSW HSD contact for minimal risk studies 0 Elizabeth L Falsberg Administrator 0 206 5430098 ext 2921 o falsberguwashingtonedu Other questions call front desk 0 Shirley Stalgis Program Coordinator 0 206 5430098 0 For retroactive contact Elizabeth Falsberg just to make sure UW IRB has timeframe for when the approval is good for They often require you to send them stuff before you can share with anyone Informed Consents Study purpose in a general way 0 Time the survey will take 0 What will they be asked to do Risksdiscomforts Bene ts from participating Con dentiality 0 Risk level minimal risk 0 Who to contact for questions rights adverse events 0 Participation is voluntary 0 Link included on slide for resource Documentation with adults 0 Written consent 0 Legal name consent and date 0 Phone consent 0 Legal name of participant 0 Name of interviewer obtaining consent 0 Signature of interview amp date that consent was obtained 0 Online survey 0 Button says that if they advance that they are consenting to participate Mind Mapping Lots of research around mind mapping helps us learn the material better facilitates understanding Begin with main concept or idea From that o Create branches relates to main topic 0 Sub branches relates to branch Focus on Thoughtful questionnaires o Thoughtful interviewing Reliability amp Validity Reliability Toast example you get the same color toast each time you make toast Different types 0 Interrater reiabiity different people providing the interviews don t end up getting different results Validity Toaster on low brown gives high brown toast Collaborative questionnaire design Engage stakeholders what do they really need How to accurately engage them Only ask questions that you will engage stakeholders with Make sure you are using the questions you ask What will you do with the info 0 Field work 0 Other good questionnaires de nitely borrow other questions Instruments Kipling s Framework 0 What do we want to nd out 0 Why do we want to nd that out 0 When do we need the info 0 How can we get the info 0 Where should we farther the info Forcing a response 0 quotI don t knowquot could reveal poor wording in questions Order of events Bias to left side of response scale You want to have quotStrongly disagreequot on the left side 0 No mention of updown bias Perspective Questions