Practice What You Preach: Why You Should Have Advance Directives

2.50
Hdl Handle:
http://hdl.handle.net/10755/148843
Type:
Presentation
Title:
Practice What You Preach: Why You Should Have Advance Directives
Abstract:
Practice What You Preach: Why You Should Have Advance Directives
Conference Sponsor:Sigma Theta Tau International
Conference Year:2007
Author:Biedrzycki, Barbara Anne, RN, CRNP, AOCN
P.I. Institution Name:Johns Hopkins University
Title:Nurse practitioner
[Scientific session research presentation] Data and experience were obtained through an exploratory, cross-sectional research design using a mailed survey data collection method to examine the factors related to the decision regarding participation in a cancer clinical trial. Skepticism was prevalent during the research planning phase, as the targeted sample was patients with advanced pancreatic and colorectal cancer. Colleagues, professors and the Intuitional Review Board were doubtful that patients would respond to the one-time mailing of 11 research tools that included 181 items in total. Potential subjects for this study were sent an invitation to participate in this study along with a self-addressed, stamped postcard to return if they are not interested in participating. If the postcard is returned, no further contact will be made. If the postcard is not received within two weeks, the survey was mailed to the subject's home.  It is estimated that these instruments will take approximately 45 minutes to complete. The packet included a stamped self-addressed envelope for the return of the survey. If the research instruments were not returned within two weeks, the potential subject was called to assure that the surveys were received. If the surveys were not received or if the surveys were misplaced, the investigator offered to mail an additional set of surveys to the potential participant's home. Potential subjects who indicated that they were not interested in participating were not contacted again. Upon receipt of the completed surveys, subjects were compensated for their time with a $20.00 gift certificate. Strategies from the Dillman Method were used as well as other plans that stimulated the response rate. While mailed surveys are an economical approach to collecting data, pre-planning is the key to obtaining an adequate response rate.
Repository Posting Date:
26-Oct-2011
Date of Publication:
17-Oct-2011
Sponsors:
Sigma Theta Tau International

Full metadata record

DC FieldValue Language
dc.typePresentationen_GB
dc.titlePractice What You Preach: Why You Should Have Advance Directivesen_GB
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10755/148843-
dc.description.abstract<table><tr><td colspan="2" class="item-title">Practice What You Preach: Why You Should Have Advance Directives</td></tr><tr class="item-sponsor"><td class="label">Conference Sponsor:</td><td class="value">Sigma Theta Tau International</td></tr><tr class="item-year"><td class="label">Conference Year:</td><td class="value">2007</td></tr><tr class="item-author"><td class="label">Author:</td><td class="value">Biedrzycki, Barbara Anne, RN, CRNP, AOCN</td></tr><tr class="item-institute"><td class="label">P.I. Institution Name:</td><td class="value">Johns Hopkins University</td></tr><tr class="item-author-title"><td class="label">Title:</td><td class="value">Nurse practitioner</td></tr><tr class="item-email"><td class="label">Email:</td><td class="value">NPBiedrzycki@aol.com</td></tr><tr><td colspan="2" class="item-abstract">[Scientific session research presentation] Data and experience were obtained through an exploratory, cross-sectional research design using a mailed survey data collection method to examine the factors related to the decision regarding participation in a cancer clinical trial. Skepticism was prevalent during the research planning phase, as the targeted sample was patients with advanced pancreatic and colorectal cancer. Colleagues, professors and the Intuitional Review Board were doubtful that patients would respond to the one-time mailing of 11 research tools that included 181 items in total. Potential subjects for this study were sent an invitation to participate in this study along with a self-addressed, stamped postcard to return if they are not interested in participating. If the postcard is returned, no further contact will be made. If the postcard is not received within two weeks, the survey was mailed to the subject's home.&nbsp; It is estimated that these instruments will take approximately 45 minutes to complete. The packet included a stamped self-addressed envelope for the return of the survey. If the research instruments were not returned within two weeks, the potential subject was called to assure that the surveys were received. If the surveys were not received or if the surveys were misplaced, the investigator offered to mail an additional set of surveys to the potential participant's home. Potential subjects who indicated that they were not interested in participating were not contacted again. Upon receipt of the completed surveys, subjects were compensated for their time with a $20.00 gift certificate. Strategies from the Dillman Method were used as well as other plans that stimulated the response rate. While mailed surveys are an economical approach to collecting data, pre-planning is the key to obtaining an adequate response rate.</td></tr></table>en_GB
dc.date.available2011-10-26T09:51:35Z-
dc.date.issued2011-10-17en_GB
dc.date.accessioned2011-10-26T09:51:35Z-
dc.description.sponsorshipSigma Theta Tau Internationalen_GB
All Items in this repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.