Evidence-based programs and policies in care settings are not unique to specific diseases or circumstances. They are among the necessities for offering quality patient-centered care in any health institution. Among the many situations or diseases in which evidence-based practices can be leveraged is the case of diabetes. Diabetes is an ideal disease that can be managed by employing evidence-based approaches supported by scientific research and studies. A behemoth of research finds that evidence-based diabetes management can advance treatment and advice given to the patient regarding the management of their health, thus reducing diabetes complications and improving their health-related quality of life.
Criteria to Ascertain Credibility of Evidence Resources
Regarding the situations, different criteria will be leveraged when seeking how credible a resource material is. Nonetheless, the following five criteria have proven helpful as a straightforward avenue for ascertaining the credibility and relevance of evidence from resource materials such as journal articles and websites. The primary criterion is authority. Authority in this aspect refers to the resource material’s author (and publisher) and their measure of knowledge, experience, interests, and overall professional credentials. An author of higher authority renders their material highly credible, and vice versa. The second criterion is accuracy. Materials with high credibility are highly accurate; thus, they are high quality and verifiable across all ideas, key arguments, methodology, and written presentations.
The third criterion involves objectivity. The objectivity of a research/resource material is critical if it is to be incorporated into another research or practical circumstance. Objectivity here relates to the values, views, and biases of the resource material as well as that material’s author, publisher, or even research promoter. The level of subjectivity of a material renders it appropriate or not. Highly objective resource material is necessary for practical implementation, while material filled with subjective values or biases will likely not be used.
Another criterion relates to a resource material’s currency. Here, currency involves the measure of how ‘up to date’ a resource material is. In the contemporary age of ever-growing knowledge, there is a constant change or addition to what we knew prior. What was a practical protocol yesterday finds itself updated or wholly changed today. A resource material may be accurate and be written by one of the best authors. However, if it is out of date and does not include crucial developments in the field of interest (for this case, diabetes), its recommendations become challenging to put into practice.
Finally, the last criterion is relevance. A resource material’s relevance relates to the degree to which that material fits the argument or question being explored. A resource material must only be used if its information appropriately matches the argument/question being explored. Failure to which that material does nothing to truly aid or further the research argument to be explored or question to be answered.
Resources Within Context of Chosen Diagnosis
Research conducted by Ellis et al. (2019) finds that their REACH for Control (RFC) intervention for diabetes management has positive preliminary results. This intervention follows an evidence-based approach to managing type 1 diabetes among adolescents. The published article from Ellis et al.’s research is primarily relevant to diabetes management. The article is more accurate with the RFC intervention, even if full-scale testing is needed, showing positive and verifiable results. The article has no particular biases or subjective arguments and is factual and current.
Two other research materials that follow suit for our diabetes case are those of authors Sivapragasam et al. (2022) and Sinclair et al. (2018). Sivapragasam et al. (2022) research has to do with developing a toolkit for evidence-based guidelines implementations in managing diabetes and hypertension. Such a toolkit can be developed through iterative stakeholder engagement and implemented across any primary care system. On the other hand, Sinclair et al. (2018) find that evidence-based care is necessary, especially for older people, and can be crucial in improving their quality of life while reducing complications. In sum, both resource materials are relevant, current, free of bias, and accurate.
Evidence-Based Practice Model
The Johns Hopkins Nursing Model primarily emphasizes a three-step process involving practice question development, evidence collection, and implementation of recommendations found. This model can, for instance, be used as a tool for managing diabetes. Evidence-based research findings on managing diabetes can be incorporated into the model, and the model can be recommended for use across care settings. Incorporating evidence into a model such as the Johns Hopkins Nursing Model is important because such a feat ensures that research findings are fused into patient care. For instance, the findings of the research materials evaluated above can be incorporated into the model and fine-tuned to fit a particular care department or unit tasked with managing diabetic patients. Such fusion of evidence with evidence-practice models is essential, especially if health professionals such as baccalaureate-prepared nurses use available evidence as a core component for decision-making.
References
Ellis, D. A., Carcone, A. I., Naar-King, S., Rajkumar, D., Palmisano, G., & Moltz, K. (2019). Adaptation of an Evidence-Based Diabetes Management Intervention for Delivery in Community Settings: Findings From a Pilot Randomized Effectiveness Trial. Journal of Pediatric Psychology, 44(1), 110–125. https://doi.org/10.1093/jpepsy/jsx144
Sinclair, A. J., Abdelhafiz, A. H., Forbes, A. & Munshi, M. (2018). Evidence-based diabetes care for older people with Type 2 diabetes: a critical review. Diabetic Medicine, 36(4), 399–413. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/dme.13859
Sivapragasam, N., Matchar, D.B., Chhoun, P., Kol, H., Loun, C., Islam, A. M., Ansah, J. & Yi, S. (2022). Developing a toolkit for implementing evidence-based guidelines to manage hypertension and diabetes in Cambodia: a descriptive case study. Health Res Policy Sys 20 (Suppl 1), 109. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12961-022-00912-4
write