Question

what is the research question and does the author justify the importance of the research? what design and methods were used and are they systematic and rigorous? is the study reliable (qualiitative) and are the conclusions reasonable? also what are the strengths and weaknesses. the article is A qualitative study to assess school nurses views on vaccinating 12 and 13 year olds school girls against HPV without parental consent. published july 21, 2009
doi10.1186/1471-2458-9-254

Answer 1

Research is a systematic method of inquiry and finding answers to questions in a logical, orderly, and systematic fashion. The two key components of research are systematic in nature, and it focuses on a question of interest. The development of a (research) plan is commonly seen as an article.

The essential elements of a research plan :

A) Research question/purpose
B) Background
C) Theoretical/Conceptual basis
D) Hypothesis
E) Subjects
F) Design
G) Methods
H) Variables & Measures
I) Statistical analysis
J) Results
K) Implications/Importance

The process in order to reach the research objective are:

1) Topic of interest
2) Research question
3) Research objective

The importance of the research question is to control the direction of all further efforts,

Research Article:

"A qualitative study to assess school nurses views on vaccinating 12 and 13-year-olds schoolgirls against HPV without parental consent"

The National Association of School Nurses defines school nursing as:

A specialized practice of professional nursing that advances the well-being, academic success, and lifelong achievement of students.

School nurses tackle issues such as the physical and emotional health of the students, as well as assist in curriculum creation. A School nurse is an instrumental part of a healthy school environment. As a school nurse, she often is responsible for checking the physical health of new students.

In the present scenario, we are assessing the school nurses view on vaccinating 12 and 13 years old schoolgirls against HPV without parental consent.

Research question/purpose :

The main purpose of the research study is to seek the views of school nurses on vaccinating girls who did not have parental consent., why because Nurses' attitudes were influenced by the young appearance and age of the school year group rather than an individual's level of maturity. They were also confused about the legal guidelines governing consent.

The importance of the study is to provide an opportunity to interview school nurses to ascertain their views on assessing Gillick competence and vaccination of girls whose parents had not given consent.

Design and methods:

The registered nurses working within the NHS school nursing services who had taken part in the study were invited by the research nurse (RS) for a semi-structured interview. In PCT1 four teams of school nurses vaccinated in all secondary schools in their allocated areas. In PCT2, children in all schools were vaccinated by a vaccine team, comprising three school nurses who were helped on the day by the school nurse attached to that particular school. The aim is to interview at least one school nurse from each area team in PCT1 and all nurses on the vaccine team in PCT2. School nurses who assisted the vaccine team in PCT2 were also invited.

Interviews were arranged at a time and place convenient for the school nurse and were recorded using a digital Dictaphone after obtaining written consent. The interview schedule was designed to include concepts referred to in Ajzen's Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB)and related to the discussion of consent.

This framework postulates that actions are motivated by:

a) attitudes and beliefs – in this case, the school nurses' beliefs about the benefits of HPV vaccination;

b) subjective norms – perceptions that colleagues and parents would approve of them vaccinating without parental consent;

c) perceived control of the action – time constraints and the impact of HPV vaccination policies on their work in schools.

This provided a structured set of factors that might explain their intentions to implement vaccination based on the assessment of Gillick competency.

Interviews were transcribed and analyzed using a thematic approach. The interviewer (RS) functioned as the transcriber, verifier, and analyst which allowed for the inclusion of notes on relevant non-verbal actions and clarification of mispronunciation or confusing verbal responses.

Surely, the designs and methods were used in the present study are systematic and rigorous, why because they have conducted the research in a step by step process after getting the consent of each participant and as well as rigorous manner each and every part will.be very thorough and careful manner they have conducted.

Surely the study is reliable, why because they have conducted the study consistently good in quality or performance.

Surely the conclusion of the study is reasonable, why because in the conclusion the researchers are clearly stated that there is an important role for health professionals working with children is to develop the child's decision-making competence. It may be very difficult to provide confidential HPV vaccination to a Gillick competent child in the school setting. Girls who request vaccination following parental refusal may have to be offered vaccination at a different venue where confidentiality and medical follow-up can be assured. In all health settings where HPV vaccination is provided, health workers must have a clearer understanding of the relevant legal and medical guidelines, and follow a structured approach to assessing competency.

Strengths:

*Given more importance and values to the consent(beliefs of participants)

*School nurses' willingness to assess Gillick Competence

*Flexibility

*Sampling focuses on high-value subjects

*Statistically significant

*No software analysis package was used

weakness:

*The research totally shows that is very expensive for different interview methods

*Faced some practical barriers in assessing Gillick Competency

*Hesitant to assess Gillick competence due to confusion about laws and medical guidelines,

* Time-consuming

*Lack of generalization