Discussion #5

Reliability and Validity

Discuss your individual critical analysis of the posted article with in-text referencing to support your thoughts and ideas. Include an APA-formatted reference list.

Choose one of the posted articles for critique and respond to the following prompts:

1.       Identify the article chosen. Briefly describe the purpose of the study and identify the independent and dependent variables.

2.       Define the operational definition of the variables. Evaluate the operational definitions for clarity.

3.       Describe how data were collected and the instruments used to measure the data. Discuss whether these instruments were appropriate for use in this study.

4.       What steps should researchers take to ensure fidelity in data collection? Analyze what steps were taken by the researchers in this study. 

5.       Was instrument validity addressed? If it was, describe how validity was addressed. If not, discuss how the researchers might have been confident that the instrument was valid.

6.       How does the strength and quality of evidence related to reliability and validity influence the applicability of findings to clinical practice?

7.       What is your cosmic question?

Compassion Fatigue RCT.pdf

3584  |  wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/jan J Adv Nurs. 2020;76:3584–3596.© 2020 John Wiley & Sons Ltd

Received: 2 May 2020  |  Revised: 22 July 2020  |  Accepted: 24 July 2020
DOI: 10.1111/jan.14568

O R I G I N A L R E S E A R C H : C L I N I C A L T R I A L

Effect of a compassion fatigue resiliency program on nurses’
professional quality of life, perceived stress, resilience:
A randomized controlled trial

Tuğba Pehlivan1  | Perihan Güner2

1Koç University Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey
2Istanbul Bilgi University Faculty of Health
Sciences, Istanbul, Turkey

Tuğba Pehlivan, Koç University Hospital,
Istanbul, Turkey.
Email: [email protected]

Funding information
This research received no specific grant
from any funding agency in the public,
commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

Aims: This study aimed to conduct a short- and long-term Compassion Fatigue
Resiliency Program and compare its impact on nurses’ professional quality of life,
perceived stress, and resilience.
Design: The research was conducted between January 2017 January 2019 as a ran-
domized controlled trial.
Methods: The sample comprised 125 oncology–haematology nurses randomly as-
signed to a Experimental I, Experimental II, or control group. The Compassion Fatigue
Resiliency Program was conducted with the nurses as an intervention. Experimental
I received a short-term program (5 hr per day for 2 days, 10 hr in total) while
Experimental II received a long-term one (5 weeks, 2 hr per week, 10 hr in total).
Measurements were obtained during pre- and post-test and at 3-, 6-, and 12-month
follow-ups. Research hypotheses were analysed using multilevel models.
Results: The results of multilevel model analyses showed there was no statistically
significant difference between mean scores for compassion fatigue, burnout, per-
ceived stress, and resilience of nurses in the short- or long-term groups or of those
in the control group. Mean compassion satisfaction scores of nurses in the short- or
long-term groups were significantly higher than those in the control group. Mean
compassion satisfaction scores of nurses in the short- or long-term groups were sig-
nificantly higher than the control group’s pre-test mean after 6 and 12 months.
Conclusion: This study concluded that short- or long-term programs had no influ-
ence on compassion fatigue, burnout, perceived stress, and resilience; however, both
programs positively affected compassion satisfaction. We recommend that further
studies be conducted, which will help determine the effectiveness of new programs.
Impact: Caring for patients with cancer can generate work-related stress that can
negatively affect oncolo