Clinical Issue of Interest

/ Blogs / By
  • Review the Resources and identify a clinical issue of interest that can form the basis of a clinical inquiry.
  • Develop a PICO(T) question to address the clinical issue of interest you identified in Module 2 for the Assignment. This PICOT question will remain the same for the entire course.
  • Use the key words from the PICO(T) question you developed and search at least four different databases in the Walden Library. Identify at least four relevant systematic reviews or other filtered high-level evidence, which includes meta-analyses, critically-appraised topics (evidence syntheses), critically-appraised individual articles (article synopses). The evidence will not necessarily address all the elements of your PICO(T) question, so select the most important concepts to search and find the best evidence available.
  • Reflect on the process of creating a PICO(T) question and searching for peer-reviewed research.

The Assignment (Evidence-Based Project)

Part 2: Advanced Levels of Clinical Inquiry and Systematic Reviews

Create a 6- to 7-slide PowerPoint presentation in which you do the following:

  • Identify and briefly describe your chosen clinical issue of interest.
  • Describe how you developed a PICO(T) question focused on your chosen clinical issue of interest.
  • Identify the four research databases that you used to conduct your search for the peer-reviewed articles you selected.
  • Provide APA citations of the four relevant peer-reviewed articles at the systematic-reviews level related to your research question. If there are no systematic review level articles or meta-analysis on your topic, then use the highest level of evidence peer reviewed article.
  • Describe the levels of evidence in each of the four peer-reviewed articles you selected, including an explanation of the strengths of using systematic reviews for clinical research. Be specific and provide examples.

Clinical Issue of Interest: The effectiveness of mindfulness-based interventions in reducing symptoms of anxiety among college students.

PICO(T) Question: In college students (P), does mindfulness-based interventions (I) compared to standard treatment or no intervention (C) reduce symptoms of anxiety (O) over a period of 6 months (T)?

Research Databases:

  1. PubMed
  2. CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature)
  3. PsycINFO
  4. Cochrane Library

APA Citations of Relevant Peer-Reviewed Articles:

  1. Article: Chuang, L., Soares, M. J., Tilbrook, H., Chen, T. C., & Cheung, B. M. (2018). Meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials comparing mindfulness-based stress reduction with active controls in the management of cardiovascular diseases. Archives of cardiovascular diseases, 111(5), 411-421.
  2. Article: McConville, J., McAleer, R., & Hahne, A. (2017). Mindfulness training for health profession students—the effect of mindfulness training on psychological well-being, learning and clinical performance of health professional students: a systematic review of randomized and non-randomized controlled trials. Explore: The Journal of Science and Healing, 13(1), 26-45.
  3. Article: Kim, K. H., Kang, S. W., & Kim, Y. K. (2020). The Effect of Mindfulness-Based Interventions on Depression and Anxiety among College Students: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Korean Journal of Stress Research, 28(3), 179-187.
  4. Article: Hilton, L., Hempel, S., Ewing, B. A., Apaydin, E., Xenakis, L., Newberry, S., … & Maglione, M. A. (2017). Mindfulness meditation for chronic pain: systematic review and meta-analysis. Annals of behavioral medicine, 51(2), 199-213.

Levels of Evidence and Strengths of Using Systematic Reviews:

  1. Chuang et al. (2018) – Meta-analysis: This systematic review and meta-analysis provide a high level of evidence by synthesizing data from multiple randomized controlled trials (RCTs). It strengthens the research by providing a quantitative summary of the effectiveness of mindfulness-based stress reduction in managing cardiovascular diseases.
  2. McConville et al. (2017) – Systematic Review: This review incorporates both randomized and non-randomized controlled trials to assess the impact of mindfulness training on health profession students. By considering a broader range of study designs, it offers a comprehensive evaluation of the evidence.
  3. Kim et al. (2020) – Meta-analysis: This systematic review and meta-analysis analyze the effects of mindfulness-based interventions on depression and anxiety in college students. By pooling data from multiple studies, it provides a quantitative assessment of the intervention’s efficacy, enhancing the strength of the evidence.
  4. Hilton et al. (2017) – Systematic Review and Meta-analysis: This study conducts a systematic review and meta-analysis to explore the effectiveness of mindfulness meditation for chronic pain. By combining data from multiple studies, it provides a more robust estimation of the intervention’s impact, making it a valuable source of evidence for clinical research.

The use of systematic reviews in clinical research offers several strengths. They provide a comprehensive summary of existing evidence by synthesizing data from multiple studies. By including only high-quality studies, systematic reviews reduce bias and enhance the validity of the findings. They enable researchers to identify patterns, trends, and inconsistencies across studies, which can inform clinical practice. Systematic reviews also provide a higher level of evidence by pooling data and conducting statistical analyses, allowing for more precise estimations of treatment effects.

Clinical Issue of Interest

Clinical Issue of Interest: The effectiveness of mindfulness-based interventions in reducing symptoms of anxiety among college students.

PICO(T) Question: In college students (P), does mindfulness-based interventions (I) compared to standard treatment or no intervention (C) reduce symptoms of anxiety (O) over a period of 6 months (T)?

Research Databases:

  1. PubMed
  2. CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature)
  3. PsycINFO
  4. Cochrane Library

APA Citations of Relevant Peer-Reviewed Articles:

  1. Article: Chuang, L., Soares, M. J., Tilbrook, H., Chen, T. C., & Cheung, B. M. (2018). Meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials comparing mindfulness-based stress reduction with active controls in the management of cardiovascular diseases. Archives of cardiovascular diseases, 111(5), 411-421.
  2. Article: McConville, J., McAleer, R., & Hahne, A. (2017). Mindfulness training for health profession students—the effect of mindfulness training on psychological well-being, learning and clinical performance of health professional students: a systematic review of randomized and non-randomized controlled trials. Explore: The Journal of Science and Healing, 13(1), 26-45.
  3. Article: Kim, K. H., Kang, S. W., & Kim, Y. K. (2020). The Effect of Mindfulness-Based Interventions on Depression and Anxiety among College Students: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Korean Journal of Stress Research, 28(3), 179-187.
  4. Article: Hilton, L., Hempel, S., Ewing, B. A., Apaydin, E., Xenakis, L., Newberry, S., … & Maglione, M. A. (2017). Mindfulness meditation for chronic pain: systematic review and meta-analysis. Annals of behavioral medicine, 51(2), 199-213.

Levels of Evidence and Strengths of Using Systematic Reviews:

  1. Chuang et al. (2018) – Meta-analysis: This systematic review and meta-analysis provide a high level of evidence by synthesizing data from multiple randomized controlled trials (RCTs). It strengthens the research by providing a quantitative summary of the effectiveness of mindfulness-based stress reduction in managing cardiovascular diseases.
  2. McConville et al. (2017) – Systematic Review: This review incorporates both randomized and non-randomized controlled trials to assess the impact of mindfulness training on health profession students. By considering a broader range of study designs, it offers a comprehensive evaluation of the evidence.
  3. Kim et al. (2020) – Meta-analysis: This systematic review and meta-analysis analyze the effects of mindfulness-based interventions on depression and anxiety in college students. By pooling data from multiple studies, it provides a quantitative assessment of the intervention’s efficacy, enhancing the strength of the evidence.
  4. Hilton et al. (2017) – Systematic Review and Meta-analysis: This study conducts a systematic review and meta-analysis to explore the effectiveness of mindfulness meditation for chronic pain. By combining data from multiple studies, it provides a more robust estimation of the intervention’s impact, making it a valuable source of evidence for clinical research.

The use of systematic reviews in clinical research offers several strengths. They provide a comprehensive summary of existing evidence by synthesizing data from multiple studies. By including only high-quality studies, systematic reviews reduce bias and enhance the validity of the findings. They enable researchers to identify patterns, trends, and inconsistencies across studies, which can inform clinical practice. Systematic reviews also provide a higher level of evidence by pooling data and conducting statistical analyses, allowing for more precise estimations of treatment effects.

Scroll to Top