Chamberlain College Social Media for Health Promotion in Diabetes Article Critique (Great English is a must!! No grammar errors!) (Make sure that both the

Chamberlain College Social Media for Health Promotion in Diabetes Article Critique (Great English is a must!! No grammar errors!)

(Make sure that both the Appendix and the paper are delivered)

(The article is provided in pdf)

(No Limit, Double Spaced,Apa Format)

——————————–

Subject of the paper: The Picot Question chosen: With adults living in Escambia County, FL. zip codes 32501, 32505, and 32535, what is the effect of holding a diabetic screening and diabetic education booth in comparison to publicizing a diabetic wellness forum using social media on increasing public knowledge and prevention of diabetes to be completed in 18 weeks?

Requirement: With new information continually emerging, professional nurses must be equipped to critique scholarly literature and discern its value for practice. Select one current, quantitative scholarly nursing article related to your PICOT question and determine its strengths, limitations, and potential application.

Complete the Johns Hopkins Nursing Evidence Based Practice Appendix E Evidence Appraisal Tool. Once you’ve completed the tool, use your own words to summarize your appraisal of the article. Include the following:

Description of the purpose
Explanation of research design
Discussion of sample
Description of data collection methods
Summary of findings
Strengths of the study (minimum of 1)
Limitations of the study (minimum of 1)
Recommendations regarding potential application for future practice that are insightful and appropriate.

Attach the article to your post, in addition to including the full reference for the article in your post.

During the week, read a minimum of two articles posted by peers and add your thoughts about whether you feel their article would support an EBP change.

Other information: No plagiarism, No grammar errors. Briefly stated, you will have to complete the appendix based on the article provided and write the paper which contains all the information listed in the requirement. I am also attaching my previous week task which might help you.

Format:

APA Format
No plagiarism is accepted
Only academic resources should be used, no older than 5 years old
Adhere to the requested number of words/pages
No Grammar errors ( refunds will be asked for incoherent/ full of grammar errors papers)

*** The work will be checked for plagiarism through Turnitin by the professor. It is essential for everything to be free of plagiarism otherwise sanctions will be imposed***

——–

Thank you for your support PICOT Question Worksheet
Name: Christina Blackburn
Please read the assignment guidelines and rubric. Provide answers to the following:
1) Identify and describe one practice-related issue or concern. You may choose
to build on the practice issue you identified in NR500NP/NR501NP. Provide
support for the issue from scholarly nursing sources current within the last 5
years.
The area of interest that I chose for this project is diabetes and would like to see
a practice change occur. Diabetes is listed as one of the top major concerns in my
county and is affecting us globally. In Escambia, FL., between the years 2015 and 2017,
404 residents had died from diabetes which equals to 3,556 years of potential life lost.
In 2016, 13.4% in Escambia versus 11.8% in Florida, majority of the adults were told
they had diabetes. In 2017, there were 17,000 plus emergency room visits related to
diabetes. A health disparity is that Black deaths were twice as high than White deaths.
(Aldridge, et al., 2019) Therefore, I would like to see a practice change occur with
diabetes in Escambia County, FL.
2) Explain why the issue/concern is important to nurse practitioner practice and
the issue’s impact on health outcomes. Provide support for the importance of the
issue from scholarly nursing sources current within the last 5 years.
0320 RB/KK
Educating on diabetes is important to nurse practitioner practice and the impact
on health outcomes. When left untreated, diabetes places individuals at risk for
complications such as hypertension, cardiovascular diseases, limb amputations, renal
failure, neuropathies, and premature death. Like other chronic illnesses, untreated
diabetes can lower an individual’s immunity and place them at risk for opportunistic
infections. This practice issue not only affects my county, it is affecting us globally. It is
expected that the incidence and prevalence of diabetes will affect 417 million people
worldwide by year 2035 (Polonsky & Henry, 2016). About 45% of patients fail to achieve
adequate glycemic control (HbA1C) of 7% (Polonsky & Henry, 2016). Diabetes is a
growing health concern for many healthcare providers across many settings due to the
increase health care costs, high mortality and morbidity rates, and poor medication
compliance (Polonsky & Henry, 2016). There are links to poor medication compliance,
such as access to care in rural areas, high costs and out of pocket expenses, language
barriers, and demographic factors (age, sex, race, income status, education level, etc.).
Every patient is patient specific and should be recognized when providing patient care.
Diabetes is relevant to the nurse practitioner to promote change since it is a growing
health concern globally.
0320 RB/KK
3) Define each element of your PICOT question in one or two sentences.
•
P-Population and problem (What is the nursing practice concern or
problem and whom does it affect?) The nursing practice concern is diabetes
affecting adult individuals in zip codes 32501, 32505, and 32535 in Escambia
County, FL.
•
I–Intervention (What evidence-based solution for the problem would you
like to apply?) I would like to hold a diabetic screening and diabetic education
booth for each zip code at a desirable location 2 days a week for 6 weeks.
•
C–Comparison (What is another solution for the problem? Note that this
is typically the current practice, no intervention at all, or alternative
solutions.) An alternative solution is to promote a diabetic wellness forum via
social media.
•
O–Outcome (Very specifically, how will you know that the intervention
worked? How you will measure the outcome?) I will be able to know which
intervention works if the percentage of the total adult population in zip codes
32501, 32505, and 32535 participated in the diabetic study is higher. For
example, if the total adult population is 24000 and only 9000 participated in
the diabetic screening and education booth, then the answer is 38%. If 15000
participated in the diabetic wellness forum via social media, then the answer
is 63%. I will then know that by promoting a diabetic wellness forum using
social media would target adult individuals with the knowledge and prevention
of diabetes.
•
T–Timeframe (Timeframe involved for the EBP initiative/target date of
completion.) The target date is 18 weeks to complete the project.
0320 RB/KK
Construct your PICOT question in the standard PICOT question format (narrative)
and define each letter separately, such as:
P = Adult individuals living in Escambia County zip code 32501,
32505, 32535
o I = Diabetic screening and diabetic education booth
o C = Diabetic wellness forum via social media
o O = Increase knowledge and prevention of diabetes
o T = 18 weeks
o PICOT Question written in full:
o
With adults living in Escambia County, FL. zip codes 32501, 32505, and 32535,
what is the effect of holding a diabetic screening and diabetic education booth in
comparison to publicizing a diabetic wellness forum using social media on increasing
public knowledge and prevention of diabetes to be completed in 18 weeks?
References
Aldridge, B., Arrington, M., Barron, A., Bailey, N., Bides, P., Clark, J., … Vinci, D. (2019). 2019
Escambia-Santa Rosa Community Health Needs Assessment: A Summary of Key Findings.
Retrieved May 30, 2020, from http://santarosa.floridahealth.gov/programs-andservices/community-health-planning-and-statistics/_documents/chna-19-digital.pdf
Johnston, R. S., Stafford, J., Jongenelis, M. I., Shaw, T., Samsa, H., Costello, E., & Kirby, G.
(2018). Evaluation of a public education campaign to support parents to reduce adolescent
alcohol use. Drug and Alcohol Review, 37(5), 588–598. doi: 10.1111/dar.127038.
Polonsky, William, and Robert Henry. (2016). Poor medication adherence in type 2 diabetes:
recognizing the scope of the problem and its key contributors. Patient Preference and
Adherence, 10, 1299–1307., doi:10.2147/ppa.s106821.
0320 RB/KK
Gabarron et al. BMC Health Services Research (2018) 18:414
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-018-3178-7
STUDY PROTOCOL
Open Access
Social media for health promotion in
diabetes: study protocol for a participatory
public health intervention design
E. Gabarron1* , M. Bradway1,2, L. Fernandez-Luque3, T. Chomutare1, A. H. Hansen4,5, R. Wynn2,6 and E. Årsand1,2
Abstract
Background: Participatory health approaches are increasingly drawing attention among the scientific community,
and could be used for health promotion programmes on diabetes through social media. The main aim of this
project is to research how to best use social media to promote healthy lifestyles with and within the Norwegian
population.
Methods: The design of the health promotion intervention (HPI) will be participatory, and will involve both a panel
of healthcare experts and social media users following the Norwegian Diabetes Association. The panel of experts
will agree on the contents by following the Delphi method, and social media users will participate in the definition
of the HPI by expressing their opinions through an adhoc online questionnaire. The agreed contents between both
parties to be used in the HPI will be posted on three social media channels (Facebook, Twitter and Instagram) along
24 months. The 3 months before starting the HPI, and the 3 months after the HPI will be used as control data. The
effect of the HPI will be assessed by comparing formats, frequency, and reactions to the published HPI messages, as
well as comparing potential changes in five support-intended communication behaviours expressed on social media,
and variations in sentiment analysis before vs during and after the HPI.
The HPI’s effect on social media users’ health-related lifestyles, online health behaviours, and satisfaction with the
intervention will be assessed every 6 months through online questionnaires. A separate questionnaire will be used to
assess the panel of experts’ satisfaction and perceptions of the benefits for health professionals of a HPI as this one.
Discussion: The time constraints of today’s medical practice combined with the piling demand of chronic conditions
such as diabetes make any additional request of extra time used by health care professionals a challenge. Social media
channels provide efficient, ubiquitous and user-friendly platforms that can encourage participation, engagement and
action necessary from both those who receive and provide care to make health promotion interventions successful.
Keywords: Diabetes, Health promotion, Health education, Social media, Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Community-based
participatory research
Background
The prevalence of diabetes is substantially increasing
globally. In 2014 it was estimated that 422 million adults
had diabetes, a number around four times higher then
the 108 millions in 1980 [1]. This is a serious and
chronic disease, that can lead to severe complications
and premature death [1]. After the diagnosis has been
confirmed, prevention actions are initiated that aim to
* Correspondence: elia.gabarron@ehealthresearch.no
1
Norwegian Centre for E-health research, University Hospital of North
Norway, Sykehusvegen 23, 9019 Tromsø, Norway
Full list of author information is available at the end of the article
reduce factors that can worsen the health of the affected
and reduce the risk of premature death. These risk factors include tobacco use, an unhealthy diet, physical inactivity and excessive consumption of alcohol, etc. [1, 2].
The adequate education and counselling of patients with
diabetes and their families has been emphasized by the
World Health Organization [1]. These efforts have also
been highlighted by the Norwegian Ministry of Health
and Care Services as a key measure to promote patient
commitment and self-treatment, and to reduce the
development of complications [2]. However, medical
practitioners may not always have the time to provide
© The Author(s). 2018 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0
International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and
reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to
the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver
(http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
Gabarron et al. BMC Health Services Research (2018) 18:414
adequate and detailed answers to questions, or to offer
health education or counselling to patients and their
families during the infrequent and brief consultations
they are allotted.
Social media channels have been proposed as effective
educational tools through which to promote secondary
prevention measures and behaviour change [3–10], and
could also represent an effective platform for answering
questions from patients and their relatives. Social media
channels are powerful outlets for public health promotion due to their cost-effectiveness, precise evaluations
of campaign success, and increased sustainability [11].
By the end of 2016, 2.34 billion users worldwide were
using social media, and it is estimated that there will be
3 billion users by 2020 [12]. In high-connected countries such as Norway, social media are becoming increasingly important to seek out and share health
information [13]. Evidence suggests that nowadays
patients could be seeking and sharing health information on social media [13–19] as an additional resource
to the consultations with their clinicians [20, 21]. However, although much of the health information available
on social media seems to be of reasonably good quality
[19], social media users are subject to risks associated with
misleading or inadequate health information [19, 22].
Public health institutions, healthcare professionals, and
other stakeholders could be more actively participative
in these outlets, not only for answering diabetes patients’
questions, and correcting possible misinformation; but
also taking advantage of the popularity of these channels
to provide relevant health information for people with
diabetes. In this sense, a participatory program in which
the contents of the health promotion are agreed upon
with people affected with diabetes has the potential to
engage the target audience, and therefore to enhance
patients’ wellbeing and satisfaction, and to improve
health outcomes [23]. These participatory health approaches are increasingly drawing attention among the
scientific community [24–27], and could be used for
health promotion programmes on diabetes through
social media.
Methods/design
Aim, design and participants
The main aim of this project is to research how to best
use social media to promote healthy lifestyles with and
within the Norwegian population. Secondary objectives
of the project are:
To analyze health behaviour on social media
To analyze online discussions concerning diabetes
To suggest systems and procedures to improve
usage of social media for the dissemination of health
information
Page 2 of 5
The design of the health promotion intervention
(HPI) will be participatory, and will involve both a
panel of healthcare experts and social media users
from the Norwegian Diabetes Association [28]. On
one side, a panel of five healthcare professionals with
an expertise in diabetes and/or patient health education will agree on the contents that will be used for
the health promotion intervention. The panel of
experts will agree on the contents by following the
Delphi method [29, 30].
On the other side, all social media users from the
Norwegian Diabetes Association will be invited to
actively participate in the definition of the HPI by expressing their opinions through an adhoc online questionnaire regarding contents, frequency and format.
The questions included in the questionnaire will be
agreed between researchers, healthcare professionals
and personnel from the Norwegian Diabetes Association. The online questionnaire will be distributed
using LimeSurvey, an open source online survey tool
[31]. Links to the online questionnaire will be posted
on the three social media channels (Facebook, Twitter
and Instagram). The online questionnaire will not
track any information that can identify or trace users.
The questionnaire will include questions regarding
topics of interests, preferred frequency of the messages, preferred format of the information, and preferred social media channels.
The agreed contents to be used in the health promotion intervention (between the panel of experts and
social media users of diabetes groups) will be posted on
the social media channels. These messages will draw on
the Laugh Model [11], a framework that proposes using
social media to change behaviour [11]. Because social
media are attractive platforms through which the intervention can be presented, users are more likely to
engage in them.
Intervention
The HPI is expected to start at the end of 2017, and
last until the end of 2019. The HPI will last
24 months in total, and will be carried out through
the Norwegian Diabetes Association, Diabetesforbundet [28] and other relevant organizations’ social media
channels, with the aim of reaching over all their social media users (over 35,000 by October 2017) [28].
During the first 12 months of the intervention (Phase
I), health messages promoting secondary prevention
measures and behaviour change for diabetes will be
disseminated through the social media channels. In
the following 12 months (Phase II), in addition to the
health messages, the HPI will include an “ask the experts” service, whereby people with diabetes will be
able to send their questions.
Gabarron et al. BMC Health Services Research (2018) 18:414
Control
The 3 months before starting the HPI, and the 3 months
after the HPI will be used as control data. The formats,
frequency, and reactions to the published HPI messages
on the 3 social media channels (Facebook, Twitter, and
Instagram) will be tracked during the 3 months prior
and 3 months after the HPI.
Patterns of users’ online discussions and behaviours
related to diabetes will also be actively monitored for
30 months: 3 months before starting the HPI, during
Phase I, during Phase II, and 3 months after the HPI. All
of the contents tracked on social media will be analysed
according to the Social Support Behaviour Code [32] regarding the five support-intended communication
behaviours: 1) information support, i.e. providing information or advice; 2) esteem support, i.e. communicating
respect and confidence in abilities; 3) network support, i.
e. communicating belonging to a group of persons with
similar concerns or experiences; 4) emotional support, i.
e. communicating love, concern, or empathy; and 5) tangible assistance, i.e. providing, or offering to provide,
goods or services.
Additionally, content sentiment analysis will be carried
out during the whole study (3 months before starting
the HPI, during Phase I, Phase II, and 3 months after
the HPI). Sentiment analysis will involve automatic classification of social media’ comments to the HPI messages
into positive, neutral and negative feelings [33]. Sentiment analysis will be used as outcome to assess the impact of the health promotion intervention.
Outcomes
Primary outcome
The primary outcome is the effect of the participatory
social media health promotion intervention on the reported health-related lifestyles and online health behaviours of people living with diabetes.
Users of diabetes social media groups will be surveyed
through an adhoc questionnaire in order to assess the
HPI’s effect on their health-related lifestyles, and also on
their online health behaviours. The questionnaire will be
distributed before starting the HPI, and every 6 months
during the 24 months of the HPI, i.e. during Phase I,
during Phase II, and at the end of the health promotion
intervention.
A questionnaire will be also distributed to the health
professionals involved in the project, to the panel of
experts, to assess their satisfaction and their perceptions
of the benefits for health professionals of a HPI such as
this one.
Secondary outcomes
Secondary outcomes will be assessed through monitored
contents on the study participants’ social media
Page 3 of 5
channels. These are: 1) identification of positive measures regarding the five support-intended communication behaviours, these behaviours will be identified and
assessed according to the Social Support Behaviour Code
[32]; 2) an increase in positive mood of diabetes patients
during the health promotion intervention, which will be
assessed with automatic classification‘sentiment analyses
tools; and 3) an increase in perceived quality of health
information after the health promotion intervention,
which will be compared with the perceived quality of
health information assessed before the intervention.
Analysis of the results derived from the users’ involvement, the HPI, the monitoring of online health information, and the monitoring of health behaviour will be used
to suggest systems and procedures for the Norwegian
Diabetes Association and other stakeholders to improve
their usage of social media for future health promotion
interventions.
Statistical methods
The opinions of social media users and healthcare professionals revealed by the questionnaires will be analysed
using descriptive statistics. Results will be expressed in
form of frequencies and percentages for each categorical
variables and mean, standard deviation (SD) and 95%
confidence interval (95% CI) for continuous variables. TTests, ANOVA, correlation and Chi-Square analyses will
be performed as well. Descriptive statistics will also be
used to summarize positive and negative mood in sentiment analysis; and also the …
Purchase answer to see full
attachment