What is your research question? Have you decided to change it at all? And, if you have, how do I know that the way in which this question is formulated is appropriate to conduct a literature review with a systematic approach?
Original Question: With a new leader in power, how will the structure of American Healthcare change? Is it possible or even plausible for the US to shift to Universal Healthcare as most countries have?
Revision 1: What changes or adaptations can policymakers create to ensure universal coverage for all American citizens?
Current Question: What changes or adaptations can policymakers create to ensure quality, affordable health coverage for all American citizens?
The definitions still remain pretty much the same...
policymakers --> anyone in the healthcare field that can create a change within policy and law
affordable health coverage --> access to care not be overwhelming/fits the needs based on parties/not excessive/ focus on riding wastes rather than eliminating access
ALL AMERICAN CITIZENS --> no loopholes, no non insured citizens, EVERYONE
Also, I changed the way I searched for things... (Below)
List the source in APA;
o Tell me what kind of source it is;
o Explain exactly how that kind of source is relevant to your research question;
o Speculate how the source will be used in the results section of your literature review;
o Add one interesting thing you found out by working with the source.
You still need an approximately five minute audio in which you detail all research-related decisions that occurred that week, plus pictures that snapshot significant moment of your research process.
Article #6
Paul, H. (1957). Public Health Administration in the United States and England—Baltimore and Birmingham Compared. American Journal of Public Health and the Nations Health, 47(11 Pt 1), 1399–1404.
Cross-sectional studies compare different groups with a similar variable. This study allows readers to determine for themselves if one group's ideas are better than the other or if ideas from both can be combined. Specific to my research question, it took an existing universal care system and compared it to a current US system to see if the US would benefit from a specific type of Universal Health Care. Cross-sectional studies are also able to assess causation and association. Particularly in this study, I could identify public opinions with types of care to see if there was an association. This is an article that I go back and forth upon using and I may want to consider replacing it in the synthesis/matrix, not just because it is dated but because I don't know if the information is very strong in its results or if it would serve any true value to my argument. The book does state however that relevant research does not have to be current! However, I just do not know yet if I feel that this study will add to my overall goal and represent my question fully as the study concluded that it was difficult to compare the two based on differences of peoples/needs. If I do use it though, I will use it to show a working universal system to show that it is possible to create one to fit societal needs. One interesting thing I found in this study was that the US knows more about English Healthcare than England knows about the US.
Article #7
Shaffer, E. R. (2003). Universal Coverage and Public Health: New State Studies. American Journal of Public Health, 93(1), 109–111.
This study is practice literature. It is relevant to my research because it analyzes current systems from expert views and methods. It is also an analysis that took place in California and contains relevant information about the US systems. I will definitely be using this article because it takes information from an area with the highest amount of uninsured individuals to apply it to healthcare reform. It has a higher ration of strengths to weaknesses and it details HOW to improve the system based on US current findings. One interesting thing I found in this study was that California, a majority democratic area (those who favor UHC) was the state with the highest amount of uninsured. I also found interesting that the article stressed the need for reform to focus first on education and outreach programs.
Article #8
Shi, L. (2000). Type of health insurance and the quality of primary care experience. American Journal of Public Health, 90(12), 1848–1855.
This is a case-control study published in 2000. Case-control studies again allows readers to compare different groups and analyze findings. This study allowed me to examine the association between type of insurance and quality of care between insured people and uninsured people. This study directly relates to my research question to show the differences in care. I speculate that I will use this studies findings to outline the need for policy revisions and the lack of equality in healthcare. One interesting thing I found in this study was that it demonstrated how providers level of care changes depending on insurance statuses, which I think is somewhat unfair. This demonstration of the quality of care changing depending on "financial status" is exactly why I chose my research question.
Article #9
Prentice, J. C., Pebley, A. R., & Sastry, N. (2005). Immigration Status and Health Insurance Coverage: Who Gains? Who Loses? American Journal of Public Health, 95(1), 109–116. http://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2003.028514
This is a cross-sectional study. This kind of source is relevant to MY research because it examines different groups and compares their insurance status. My research is based on equality in care and this outlines the lack thereof. I imagine using this source as well to outline the current system failing to provide for ALL citizens. I also think I can use it to show how to improve care to immigrants, which make up a fairly decent percentage of the total uninsured. The one thing I found interesting in this study was that the researchers actually conducted interviews in Spanish to those who spoke it.
Article #10
Bodenheimer, T. (2003). The Movement for Universal Health Insurance: Finding Common Ground. American Journal of Public Health, 93(1), 112–115.
This is an example of policy literature. This kind of source is directly related and relevant to my research as my question is policy based. It proposes a reform by discussing prior policies and current stakeholders. It focuses on merging beliefs of opposing views on the current system to develop a more plausible, better system. I imagine I will use this article to show just how policymakers can change the system to better fit the needs of all. One interesting thing I found in this study was that it included a call for action urging those to pay attention to legislation and vote. I also found interesting the fact that employers were made to provide healthcare to their employees in 1971 by an act created by President Nixon.
Anything else interesting happen?
My research question keeps changing to fit my needs and better fit my actual research. I also changed how I was searching for articles.
No comments:
Post a Comment