Please read through the following examples and critique/comment accordingly.

Submit your answers online ASAP, on or before January 24 Monday 5 pm 1. Given the hypothesis and the conclusion, is the conclusion valid/logical? Why or why not? Hypothesis: A relatn exists between a pregnant womans level of anxiety about the labor and delivery experience and the number of children she has already borne. The study data reveal a negative relatn between anxiety levels and parity does exist. Conclusion: Childbirth experience reduces anxiety The conclusion that childbirth experience reduces anxiety is valid given that hypotheses are stated in the negative to fit statistical analysis tools. The results reveal a negative relationship between anxiety levels and parity, meaning there is a positive relationship between the number of parity and level of anxiety. As such, childbirth experience reduces anxiety. The conclusion is valid because it was able to show the relationship between the variables (a womans level of anxiety and delivery experience and parity). It also shows a logical relationship. 2. Read through the example and comment on the outcome of the study, the manner they stated their findings, interpreted their findings, etc. Harrison, et.al (2004) hypothesized that the stability of a marital relationship would influence the ability of people with multiple sclerosis to accept disability. Consistent with the hypothesis, the researchers found in their longitudinal study of 399 participants (all of whom were married at the onset) that the people who had remained married over the 6-year period had a higher acceptance of their disability at the end of the study than people whose marriages ended through a separation, divorce, or widowhood. A further analysis revealed that the relationship was significant for men, but not for women. The researchers interpretation was that marriage confers psychosocial benefits, a conclusion that they support with evidence from other studies.

 They did not state on how they gathered the data, what tool was used, statistical tools.

3. Read through, analyze, then give your observations/comments: Schultz, et.al.(2003) compared treatments for reducing postoperative nausea and vomiting in gynecologic surgery patients. Subjects were randomly assigned to one of four groups (droperidol and acupressure bands; droperidol and placebo bands; placebo and acupressure bands; placebo drugs and bands). It was hypothesized that fewer women in the combined modality group than in other groups would experience moderate to severe nausea and vomiting

4. Critique the following, is there something wrong? If so, what? Medves and OBrien (2004) conducted a clinical trial to test the hypothesis that thermal stability would be comparable for infants bathed for the 1 time by a parent and for those bathed by a nurse. As predicted, there was no difference in temperature change between newborns bathed by nurses or parents. The researchers provided additional support for concluding that the loss is not associated with who bathes the newborn by indicating that a power analysis had been used to determine sample size needs. They noted that the parents for the 2 groups of infants were comparable demographically at the outset. Also, although the prebath temps of the infants in the 2 grps were significantly different, the researchers used initial temperatures as a covariate to control these differences. Finally, they made an a priori determination that a change in temp of 1degree would be clinically significant; at 4 points in time after the bath, the grp differences in temp were never this large; thus, the differences were clinically insignificant Hehe. I dont see something wrong. I guess they just need to simplify the explanation.
st