no plag no high turn in this is the final I have feedback to upload once I pick a tutor

Image is from https://imperialwriters7.medium.com/research-project-why-limitations-of-the-study-should-come-at-the-end-of-the-project-3282c8c1e36

You have all been during such a great job on your last discussion and I want to share the important of objectively written conclusions. I am going to miss all of you!

Please review this on the course webpage

https://learn.snhu.edu/d2l/le/news/965074/4393704/view

Excerpt from the template - keep black font prompts and remove red font reminders.

Conclusions

Strengths. What are the research studies’ strengths? Are there patterns in regard the strengths for the intervention evaluation?

Limitations. What are the studies’ limitations? Are these patterns of limitations such as research design, methods, and sampling?

Validity and reliabilities. Were the findings and conclusions reliable and valid, such as low LOE scores? Why or why not? Logically support the argument.

Implications. What are the clinical implications of this research on the intervention into the healthcare programming for a hospital or health center? How will it affect the implementation of the intervention in relation to the outcome?

Example of a well written conclusions from the attached integrative review:

Conclusion

Strengths. The strength of these reviews is included in a precise clinical question that is limited to patients with sepsis rather than critically ill patients as a whole. The strength lies in the focus of resuscitation rather than the maintenance of fluid therapy. Studies consisted of inclusions of patients in intensive care units and comprised of follow-up with the National Patient Registry using national patient identification numbers.

Limitations. The patterns of limitations varied between studies reviewed based on population, study size, demographics and control or subgroups being most prevalent. Despite the present gaps and inconsistencies in each study, they were efficient in concluding the result of albumin-containing products versus saline in fluid resuscitation not demonstrating an increase in mortality rates in patients with sepsis.

Validity and Reliability. The results of all studies reviewed deemed reliable and valid as indication of highest level of evidence (LOE). All studies presented with strong level I of evidence excluding Carlsen & Perner, (2011), which consists of LOE II. Studies revealed reliable as confirmation of strong sources, authors, and year published. Studies supported each other with aligning evidence and outcomes in relation to albumin versus saline resuscitation in patients with sepsis.

Implications. The implications of this research reveal that there is no advantage to administering albumin versus saline in the reduction of mortality in sepsis patients. Based off of these conclusions, a sepsis patient can be treated with either available intervention. Factors such as population, demographic, or available access have no determination in which product is administered. However, if economic burden is present, the use of crystalloids should be of first choice due to the cost of albumin-containing products.

Regards,