Hi, need to submit a 1000 words essay on the topic Critiquing a mixed-method study.Download file to see previous pages... Because it allocates money for expensive operations on the elderly. Such a sta

Hi, need to submit a 1000 words essay on the topic Critiquing a mixed-method study.

Because it allocates money for expensive operations on the elderly. Such a statement indeed rises up a lot of comments and touches a lot of conflicting attitudes. For one thing it can easily slip into the political arena. The point is that the statement draws upon an important issue the United States is presently facing, the expense of health care. It makes this point as it draws up another important issue, that of the sanctity of life and one's ultimate responsibility in medical care which is to respect that sanctity. Getting back to the theme, apparently the concern which the article lies upon is one shared among several countries in the western world. A recent World Health Publication revealed that in some countries the health system would not think twice about transplanting a kidney to an elderly person. There was a recent program on the radio in which the South African health care system specifically denied such transplants to older age groups. The point is that there are pre-understandings behind the Goodridge et al article and they definitely lie upon or assume a western system of values. Is this okay? What does this mean? For one thing this means that there is no 'disembodied intellect' as Horsburgh points out. There is no neutrality here that could take in the position of countries outside the Western realm, such as South Africa. But this view doesn't say the study is wrong on in fault. It simply means, as Flemmings points out, one’s knowledge does come from our social interaction and experiences, and, from then stance of this article, these happen to occur in the Western world. The dominant theme in the United States part of this western World happens to be sensitive questions dealing with health care. Hence the main research question would immediately become suspect, as it would recall the political sphere where such confusing issues as 'death panels' were raised. But it is not the United States. The article is based on Canadian experiences. But still, there is a hidden assumption in the article. The assumption is that quality of care can be measureable as significant when one is dying in an intensive care unit and when one is dying of an obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The assumption appears that life can be extended in the case of COPD. Life should, of course, when possible, be extended. It is an assumption that is usually accepted. It is important that this assumption, and if it lies also in the authors, be reflexibly revealed. What would the hypothesis of this article be? Would it be that 'the care needs of people with COPD who die in the ICU' are different from the care needs of people receiving end of life (EOL) care who die in 'critical care settings' without COPD? One cannot be sure. This is a mixed methods study, combining both qualitative and quantitative data. The authors seek to measure the quality of EOL care in the ICU, but have many challenges. One challenge is that the 'ICU patients experience altered cognition and are unable to participate directly in quality of care assessments'. 2. The literature review is concerned with describing the difficult state of the patients. It speaks of how depression, anxiety and other illness contributed to the comorbidity state of the patients, explaining the complexity of the care provided.