COHP 450 Midterm Article Critique

Source
The source of the article is the American Journal of Infectious Disease is an
Association for professionals in Infection Control and Epidemiology. The
article uses evidence to prove that healthcare workers cannot be treated as
an extension of an organization based on the fact that they have their own
thoughts, beliefs and knowledge about vaccinations. Pub-med database was
used to validate the article which showed it did not indicate that it was peerreviewed. According to Blessing and Forister (2011) CINAHL is a large
database that provides links to professional journals (p.101). The validity of
the study was documented in the article showing that there were 240 sample
participants who were included in the online analysis. The authors, Dr. Anat
Gesser- Edelsburg Ph. D ,is the head of Health Promotion Department t at the
School of Public Health, and Nathan Walker is a professor of infectious
disease and epidemiology and ,Dr. Manfred S. Green is Department of
epidemiology and preventative Medicine at the Tel Avi University.
Purpose
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the risk perceptions and attitudes
of healthcare workers vs the general public towards vaccinations. The
background information did support the need for the study based on a risk
group which may impact the analysis of the study. Rationale included that
the health care workers were front line in bridging the gap between the
healthcare system and the public, identifying risk groups could help identify
what the barriers are. According to Blessing & Forister (2011) this answers
why the study was done, the importance of the study and the purpose it
served (p .257).
Design
The sample design used a Google Doc online software using a non-probability
stratified sampling which does not involve random sampling. The population
compared the public to the healthcare professionals perspective regarding
vaccinations. The level of evidence was Level 1 as it was obtained by a using a nonrandomized control group. The evidence presented was of High quality and had
adequate controls, sample size and reference to evidence (p.90). According to
Blessings (2012) research design is the plan, protocol, format and parameters of the
research article (p.276).The cause and effects were proven to be true and these
findings could be transferred from a sample population to an entire population
based on the results of the study (p.90). The test does have a measurable

component and has a purpose designed to answer the questions we are seeking
(p.115).

Results

The results of the study were not represented by the investigators through
the use of tables and graphs, only through numbers which made it hard to
identify what the results actually are without a summary. According to
Blessing & Forister (2014) Generally, the results of a study are easily
comprehended when displayed as graphs and tables and are often described
in the body of the text and do not stand alone (p. 201).The results are clear
that in healthcare professionals have a higher level of support of vaccines
than that of other groups but did not indicate any significant difference than
that of the public. This answers the question that the healthcare providers
base their decisions on analytical notions rather than experience. The results
do seem valid.

Conclusion /Impact on medicine/practice

According to researchers ,the conclusion of the study found that healthcare

professional act and behave as the general public mixing emotion, intuition
and analytical analysis but support vaccinations more than the general
public which creates bias in the study. According to Blessing & Forister
2012), To strengthen the research results and findings, modifications in the
study may be needed based on the outcomes (p. 216).
In my current practice the results of this study can be useful because it
revealed that education is needed for the medical community regarding
vaccinations to decrease barriers they may have in regard to vaccine so that
the public can be better educated about this subject. Healthcare workers
must also be a part of the planning process and be involved to decrease the
fear and build a positive perception in our own field towards vaccinations so
that we can better help the community understand and explain the benefits.

References:
Blessing, J.D., & Forister J.G. (2011). Introduction to Research and Medical
Literature for Health Professionals. (3rd Ed.). Burlington, MA: Jones &
Bartlett Learning

Gresser-Edelsburg, A., Walter, N., Green, M. (2014) Health care workers part
of the system or part of the public? Ambivalent risk perception in
health care workers. American Journal of Infection Control. Elsevier.
Newhouse, R.P., Dearholt, S.L., Poe, S.S., Pugh, L.C., & White, K.M. (nd). John
Hopkins Evidence-Based Practice: Model and Guidelines. The Institute
of John Hopkins Nursing.