This  assignment will require you to take the PICO, 5 research articles and place them in a table for analysis.  You will critique each article and identify the most important parts of the research, analysis, and findings.

Then  you will summarize the articles by grading the research, and identifying gaps in the literature as well as possible interventions (see grading rubric and examples).

Instructions:

1. Identify your PICO or research question of interest

2. Gather 5 research articles on your topic: be sure to save them and submit them along with the matrix;  please make sure they are PDF documents.

3. Do not use clinical guidelines or Cochran Reviews, abstracts, future research reports or  poster presentations.  You can search for research only by indicating “research” when you do an advanced search.  If you can’t answer a lot of the questions, it is probably not a research article.  

4. We do not recommend that you use more than one  qualitative research article or systematic review or meta analysis.  These are harder to evaluate because they have so much more information in them.  Remember it is not individuals in these studies- it is the articles.  Use the reference list in the systematic reviews or meta analyses to find individual studies that may be easier to understand and use.

5. Review sample matrices and summaries

6. Use matrix table- one for each article and critique the parts of the article using the rubric

7.  Be sure to identify the evaluation tool used to grade the evidence such as (See below for grading the evidence tools)

8. Identify where there are issues with the articles and what gaps were not addressed with the research; be prepared this may change the way you look at your topic or may result in a slightly different direction for your area of interest. This is ok- that is what you want to accomplish with this assignment. It will really assist you as you move forward with your project.

9. For this assignment you will turn in the matrix tables, summary, references and pdf copies of your 5 articles. 

10. Key definitions:

1. Level of evidence:  the process used to evaluate the level of evidence of your articles- such as Jones Hopkins,  Cincinnati Children’s evaluation etc,

2. Evaluation tool: use the method and describe how you arrived at the scoring or knowing that the article included all content it needed to- such as CASP; 

3. Instrument: What type of instrument or tool was used in the article?  This could be  a depression screening tool, Nurse satisfaction tool etc.  Describe the instrument- how many questions, reliability- consistency with test-retest, Cronbach Alpha, inter-rater reliablity; validity with content validity, face validity 

Links to critical appraisal tools to evaluate research quality:

Joanna Briggs Institute (joannabriggs.org) https://jbi.global/critical-appraisal-tools

CASP checklists https://casp-uk.net/casp-tools-checklists/

Mixed Method appraisal checklist McGill:  http://mixedmethodsappraisaltoolpublic.pbworks.com/w/page/24607821/FrontPage

Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center Legend tools- very helpful: https://www.cincinnatichildrens.org/research/divisions/j/anderson-center/evidence-based-care/legend

Johns Hopkins EBP Models and Tools:  https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/evidence-based-practice/ijhn_2017_ebp.html

My PICOT Question: “In the adolescent population with mental health issues seen in primary care settings, how does utilization of Ask Suicide-Screening Questions (ASQ) toolkit impact patient referrals to the psychiatric department over 3 months

Population: Adolescents asked screening questions in primary care setting

I: Ask Suicide Screening questions toolkit

C: those not screened with the toolkit

O: prevention of suicide attempts or worsening of depression

T: 3 months

ARTICLES

Quantitative Articles MUST be Used. Kindly help verify that the attached articles are Quantitative

I found the following articles, you can use any 5 of them: however; I don’t know which ones are quantitative, I found a bunch of these: the articles are attached.

Characteristics of cancer patients who died by suicide: A quantitative study of 15‐year coronial records 

Vera Y. Men1 | Clifton R. Emery1 | Paul S. F. Yip1

Validation of the ask suicide-screening questions (ASQ) with youth in outpatient specialty and primary care clinics 

Laika D. Aguinaldo, Shayla Sullivant, Elizabeth C. Lanzillo, Abigail Ross, Jian-Ping He, Andrea Bradley-Ewing, Jeffrey A. Bridge, Lisa M. Horowitz, Elizabeth A. Wharff 

Development of the Uni Virtual Clinic: an online programme for improving the mental health of university students 

Louise M. Farrer , Amelia Gulliver, Natasha Katruss, Kylie Bennett, Anthony Bennett, Kathina Ali† and Kathleen M. Griffiths

The Feasibility and Impact of a Suicide Risk Screening Program in Rural Adult Primary Care: A Pilot Test of the Ask Suicide-Screening Questions Toolkit 

Mary A. LeCloux, Ph.D., Mathew Weimer, M.D., Stacey L. Culp, Ph.D., Karissa Bjorkgren, B.S., Samantha Service, M.S., John V. Campo, M.D.

Improving Suicidal Ideation Screening and Suicide Prevention Strategies on Adult Nonbehavioral Health Units

Anne C. Lindstrom, DNP, APRN Rush University, Northwestern Medicine Central DuPage Hospital, Winfield, IL Melinda Earle, DNP, RN

Contact between patients with suicidal ideation and nurses in mental health wards: Development and psychometric evaluation of a questionnaire

Joeri Vandewalle, Veerle Duprez,1 Dimitri Beeckman, Ann Van Hecke,and Sofie Verhaeghe

Patient Opinions About Screening for Suicide Risk in the Adult Medical Inpatient Unit 

Deborah J. Snyder, Elizabeth D. Ballard, Ian H. Stanley, Erica Ludi, Julie Kohn-Godbout, Maryland Pao, Lisa M. Horowitz.

Screening Youth for Suicide Risk in Medical Settings (Time to Ask Questions) 

Lisa M. Horowitz, PhD, MPH, Jeffrey A. Bridge, PhD, Maryland Pao, MD, Edwin D. Boudreaux

DNP 618 Article Matrix and Analysis

Student Name __________________________________

PICO Question ___________________________________________________________________

Search process :

Search terms:

Data bases:

Total number of articles obtained from search results: N=

Number of articles initially excluded based on abstract reading: N=

Number of articles reviewed: N=

Number of articles excluded based on criteria: N=

Inclusion Criteria:

Exclusion Criteria:

Number of systematic reviews or meta analyses used in Matrix- N =

Repeat this table – one for each article you are review. DO NOT double space in the table

The matrix and analysis assignment to submit consists of : 1). introduction describing the search process for this topic, 2). the review table (1 for each article = 5), 3). summary analysis, 4). reference page and 5). PDF copies of the articles – list by 1st author name as attachments

Author, year; Credentials Article #1


If credentials not identified- just state here, or identify place of employment

Article Focus/Title

Research Design/Intervention (describe intervention)

Level of Evidence and model used to grade evidence

Evaluation Tool (CASP or others- identify tool used)

Sample/# of subjects, how recruited, power analysis?

Data Collection procedure

Instruments and

Reliability/validity

of instruments

Data Analysis- id statistics, LOM, findings

Results

Discussion/

Significance of findings

Reliability and Validity of study, limitations

Helpful/Reliable

Compared to other articles

Author, year; Credentials Article #1


If credentials not identified- just state here, or identify place of employment

Article Focus/Title

Research Design/Intervention (describe intervention)

1

Article Matrix and Analysis

Used with Permission

College of Health and Human Services-School of Nursing, Northern Kentucky University

DNP 816: Analysis and Application of Health Data for APRN Practice

September 20, 2020


Article Matrix and Analysis

Student Name: XXXXXX

PICO Question: In patients with hypertension (P), what is the effect of education about hypertension and medications (I) in comparison to no education (C), on compliance with following medication regimens (O) within three months of the first prescription (T).

Search process: Data base search was done using Northern Kentucky University library. Boolean phrases were used. Articles were assessed based on abstract and criteria listed below until five articles were left.

Search terms: hypertension OR high blood pressure AND education OR educational (must be in title) AND medication adherence OR medication compliance

Data bases: CINAHL Complete, Gale Academic OneFile

Total number of articles obtained from search results: N=29/ N=18 N= 33

Number of articles initially excluded based on abstract reading: N=1/N=4

Number of articles reviewed: N= 3/N=6

Number of articles excluded based on criteria: N=20/N=8 N=20

Inclusion Criteria: Full text only, English, Article within the past five years, Peer reviewed

Exclusion Criteria: Article published before 2015, No full text link, Language other than English, Not peer reviewed, Duplicate article, Non-research article

Studies included in systematic review or meta-analysis- N = 0

Author, year; Credentials Article #1

Aghakhani, N. (PhD), Parizad, N. (PhD), Soltani, B. (MSN), Khademvatan, K. (MD), & Rahimi, Z. (MSN) (2019)

Article Focus/Title

The effect of the blended education program on treatment concordance of patients with hypertension: A single-blinded randomized, control trial

Research Design/Intervention

Randomized control trial, single-blind. The intervention was education that was blended in style between face-to-face education and online education.

Level of Evidence

Level I (Dearholt et al., 2012)

Sample/# of subjects

Patients age 20-65, hypertension diagnosis, blood pressure greater than 140/90 but less than 180/110, agree to participate in the study, able to read and write, able to receive emails and texts, no severe underlying disease (ex. Kidney disease or heart problems) that could impact the study. Total number of participants – 60

2

Article Matrix and Analysis

Student Name: Used with Permission

College of Health and Human Services-School of Nursing, Northern Kentucky University

DNP 816: Analysis & Application of Health Data for ANP

Dr. Faculty Name

September 20, 2020


Article Matrix and Analysis

Student Name: XXXXX

PICO Question: In adult patients with diabetes (P), how does strict glucose monitoring and treatment regimens (I), when compared to decreased compliance to home treatment i.e. routine glucose monitoring, medication adherence and nutritional changes (C), affect and influence patient quality of life through improvement in treatment education and expectations (O) over one year (T)?

Search process: I utilized the NKU online library to search for articles. The data bases included CINHAL and MEDLINE PLUS. These are peer-reviewed, current and reputable search engines that provided the most accurate and reliable articles for the assignment.

Search terms: Patients with diabetes AND adherence OR compliance to treatment OR management; noncompliance OR nonadherence in diabetic treatment AND effects on quality of life; compliance to diabetic treatment AND management AND importance OR significance

Data bases: CINHAL COMPLETE and MEDLINE

Total number of articles obtained from search results: N=11,568

Number of articles initially excluded based on abstract reading: N=37 (out of first 100 relevant)

Number of articles reviewed: N=9

Number of articles excluded based on criteria: N=7,868

Inclusion Criteria: Must be in English, full text only, research or review article, published in 2013 or later, peer-reviewed articles, include adults as the subject, be discovered in a reputable database

Exclusion Criteria: Article published prior to 2013, language other than English, no full text link, obtained from a non-reputable source

Number of systematic review or meta-analysis used in Matrix: N =0

Repeat this table – one for each article you are reviewing.

The matrix and analysis assignment to submit consists of : 1). introduction describing the search process for this topic, 2). the review table (1 for each article = 5), 3). summary analysis, 4). reference page and 5). 5 PDF copies of the articles

<

DNP 816 Matrix and Summary Rubric

Author, year; Credentials Article #1

Mirahmadizadeh, A. Delam, H. Seif, M. et al. (2019). All authors had a doctorate degree with one holding a masters. Published in the International Journal of Molecular Sciences.

Element

7.5 points

5 points

3.5 points

2 points

Source information and quality

(7.5 points)

All key elements are present: Author credentials listed, article is less than 5 years old, and publication is peer reviewed/

scholarly, article is based on research and relates to the chosen topic of concern; is a primary source

Two key elements are present: Author credentials listed, article is less than 5 years old, ad publication is peer reviewed/

scholarly, article is based on research and relates to the chosen topic of concern but is a secondary source

One key element is listed: Author credentials listed, article is less than 5 years old, ad publication is peer reviewed/

scholarly, the articles only partially relate to the chosen topic of concern or is a secondary source

Missing key elements: Author credentials listed, article is more than 5 years old, and publication is peer reviewed/

scholarly, the article has little or nothing to do with the topic of concern and is a secondary source. The article is not research.

Research Design and interventions described (.7.5 points)

See Polit/Beck pp. 18, 210), (pp. 17, 201 in 11th ed.)

All key elements are present: appropriate research design identified, thorough description of intervention, justification for not using a different research design, longitudinal or prospective, or causal intent. Identifies IV and DV if appropriate

Elements are covered but not in enough depth: appropriate research design identified, thorough description of intervention, justification for not using a different research design, longitudinal or prospective, or causal intent. Identifies IV and DV

Missing elements in this category- research design or intervention: appropriate research design identified, thorough description of intervention, justification for not using a different research design, longitudinal or prospective, or causal intent. Identifies IV and DV

Missing key elements: does not identify the correct research design, no description of the intervention (if present), does not identify IV or DV (if appropriate)

Level of Evidence and model used to grade evidence and Evaluation tool used (CASP or others) (7.5 points)

See Polit/Beck p. 35 (p. 36-37 in 11th ed)

Key elements addressed: What was the strength of the evidence in support of your research topic- what model was used to grade the evidence? What evaluation t

Received: 11 December 2020 – Revised: 14 January 2021 – Accepted: 22 January 2021

DOI: 10.1002/pon.5634

OR I G I NA L AR T I C L E

Characteristics of cancer patients who died by suicide: A
quantitative study of 15‐year coronial records

Vera Y. Men1 | Clifton R. Emery1 | Paul S. F. Yip1,2

1Department of Social Work and Social

Administration, The University of Hong Kong,

Pokfulam, Hong Kong

2Hong Kong Jockey Club Centre for Suicide

Research and Prevention, The University of

Hong Kong, Pokfulam, Hong Kong

Correspondence

Paul S. F. Yip, Centre for Suicide Research and

Prevention, The University of Hong Kong,

Pokfulam, Hong Kong.

Email: [email protected]

Funding information

Li Ka Shing Foundation, Grant/Award Number:

AR180055; Hong Kong Research Grants

Council General Research Fund (GRF), Grant/

Award Number: 17103620

Abstract

Objective: Cancer patients have elevated suicide risk compared to the general

population. However, little is known about the characteristics of cancer patients

who have died by suicide. The objectives of the study were to compare the char-

acteristics of suicide cases with, and without cancer, and determine whether age

was associated with differences in characteristics.

Methods: A total of 14,446 suicide cases between 2003 and 2017 in Hong Kong

were identified using Coroner’s Court reports. Cases were grouped by cancer sta-

tus, based on medical history in the reports. Information extracted from the reports

included sociodemographic variables and detailed descriptions of the suicide event.

Univariate analyses and overall and subgroup multiple logistic regressions were

performed to compare characteristics between the two groups.

Results: Of the 14,446 suicide cases, 1,461 (10.11%) had a cancer history.

Compared to noncancer cases, cancer patients were generally older and less likely

to live alone; more likely to use violent methods; less likely to have histories of

physical and psychiatric problems; and more likely to communicate about their

suicidal intent before death. Age was significantly associated with differences be-

tween cancer and noncancer cases.

Conclusions: Cancer suicide cases have different characteristics from noncancer

cases. Mental health screening may not be sufficient for suicide prevention among

cancer patients. Healthcare professionals and caregivers should be aware of cancer

patients’ suicide risk, even when there are no signs of psychiatric disturbance.

K E YWORD S

cancer, mental health, psycho‐oncology, suicide p

Psychosomatics 2020:61:698–706 ª 2020 Academy of Consultation-Liaison Psychiatry. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Original Research Article

698

The Feasibility and Impact of a Suicide Risk
Screening Program in Rural Adult Primary Care:

A Pilot Test of the Ask Suicide-Screening
Questions Toolkit

Mary A. LeCloux, Ph.D., Mathew Weimer, M.D., Stacey L. Culp, Ph.D.,
Karissa Bjorkgren, B.S., Samantha Service, M.S., John V. Campo, M.D.

Objective: The purpose of this study was to evaluate
the feasibility and impact of a suicide risk screening
program in a rural West Virginia primary care prac-
tice. Methods: Patients presenting for routine and sick
visits were asked to participate in electronic suicide
risk screening using the Ask Suicide-Screening Ques-
tions tool; screen positive individuals were assessed
with the Ask Suicide-Screening Questions Brief Suicide
Safety Assessment. Screening program feasibility was
evaluated by the proportion of patients consenting to
participate, participant Ask Suicide-Screening Ques-
tions and Brief Suicide Safety Assessment completion
rates, and response to a question asking whether pri-
mary care providers should ask about suicide.
Screening impact was evaluated quasi-experimentally
by comparing electronic medical record documentation
of suicide risk screening, assessment, and risk deter-
mination in practice patients before and after

www.psychosomaticsjournal.org

implementing the screening program. Results: Over half
of the patients approached agreed to participate in
a research study about suicide (N = 196; 57.7%).
Feasibility of the screening program was demonstrated
by the high completion rates for the Ask Suicide-
Screening Questions (99.0%) and the Brief Suicide
Safety Assessment (100.0%) among study participants.
Additionally, 95.4% (N = 187) of participants agreed
primary care providers should screen patients for suicide.
Suicide screening rates rose significantly between the
baseline and intervention phases (5.8% to 61.0%;
X2 = 200.61, P , 0.001), as did suicide risk detection
rates (0.7% to 6.2%; X2 = 12.58, P , 0.001).
Conclusion: Suicide risk screening was feasible and
well accepted by adult patients in rural primary care
and has potential to improve suicide risk detection in
this setting.

(Psychosomatics 2020; 61:698–706)

Key words: suicide, primary care, mental health, behavioral medicine.

ReceivedFebruary 27, 2020; revisedMay7, 2020; acceptedMay 7, 2020.
From the School of Social Work (M.A.L., K.B.), West Virginia Uni-
versity, Morgantown, WV; Family Medicine, Valley Health Systems
(M.W.), Milton, WV; Department of Statistics (S.L.C., S.S.), West
Virginia University, Morgantown, WV; Department of Behavioral
Medicine and Psychiatry (J.V.C.), School of Medicine, West Virginia
University, Morgantown, WV. Send correspondence and reprint re-
quests toMary A. LeCloux, PhD,

General Hospital Psychiatry 68 (2021) 52–58

Available online 13 November 2020
0163-8343/© 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Validation of the ask suicide-screening questions (ASQ) with youth in
outpatient specialty and primary care clinics

Laika D. Aguinaldo a,*, Shayla Sullivant b, Elizabeth C. Lanzillo c, Abigail Ross d, Jian-Ping He c,
Andrea Bradley-Ewing b, Jeffrey A. Bridge e,f, Lisa M. Horowitz c, Elizabeth A. Wharff g,h

a Department of Psychiatry, University of California, San Diego, 9500 Gilman Drive (MC 0862), La Jolla, CA 92093, USA
b Children’s Mercy Kansas City, 2401 Gillham Rd, Kansas City, MO 64108, USA
c National Institute of Mental Health, 10 Center Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892, USA
d Graduate School of Social Service, Fordham University, 113 W 60th St #7, New York, NY 10023, USA
e The Abigail Wexner Research Institute at Nationwide Children’s Hospital, 575 Children’s Crossroad, Columbus, OH 43215, USA
f Department of Pediatrics, Ohio State University, 370 W. 9th Avenue, Columbus, OH 43210, USA
g Department of Psychiatry, Boston Children’s Hospital, 300 Longwood Avenue, Boston, MA 02115, USA
h Department of Psychiatry, Harvard Medical School, 401 Park Drive, Boston, MA 02215, USA

A R T I C L E I N F O

Keywords:
Screening
Prevention
Instrument validation

A B S T R A C T

Objective: Validate the Ask Suicide-Screening Questions (ASQ) with youth in outpatient specialty and primary
care clinics.
Method: This is a cross sectional instrument validation study assessing the validity of the ASQ with respect to the
standard criterion, Suicidal Ideation Questionnaire (SIQ/SIQ Jr.). The sample included 515 English speaking
youth ages 10–21 years old from outpatient specialty and primary care clinics. ASQ sensitivity, specificity,
positive and negative predictive values (PPV/NPV), positive and negative likelihood ratios, c statistic and
respective receiver operating characteristic curves were assessed.
Results: A total of 335 outpatient specialty and 180 primary care clinic participants completed the study. In
outpatient specialty clinics, the ASQ showed a sensitivity of 100.0% (95% CI: 80.5–100.0%), specificity of 91.2%
(95% CI: 87.5–94.1%), and NPV of 100.0% (95% CI: 98.7–100.0). In the primary care clinic, the ASQ showed a
sensitivity of 100.0% (95% CI: 59.0–100.0%), specificity of 87.9% (95% CI: 82.0–92.3%), and NPV of 100.0%
(95% CI: 97.7–100.0). Forty-five (13.4%) outpatient specialty clinic participants and 28 (15.6%) primary care
clinic participants screened positive for suicide risk on the ASQ.
Conclusions: The ASQ is a valid screening tool for identifying youth at elevated suicide risk in outpatient clinical
settings.

1. Introduction

Suicide is an increasingly devastating public health problem in the
United States (U.S.) and the current rate is the highest it has been

Patient Opinions About Screening for Suicide
Risk in the Adult Medical Inpatient Unit

Deborah J. Snyder, MSW
Elizabeth D. Ballard, PhD
Ian H. Stanley, BA
Erica Ludi, BS
Julie Kohn-Godbout, MSN, RN, PMHCNS-BC
Maryland Pao, MD
Lisa M. Horowitz, PhD, MPH

Abstract

As hospital clinicians and administrators consider implementing suicide risk screening on
medical inpatient units, patient reactions to screening can provide essential input. This post hoc
analysis examined patient opinions about screening for suicide risk in the medical setting. This
analysis includes a subsample of a larger quality improvement project designed to screen
medically hospitalized patients for suicide risk. Fifty-three adult medical inpatients at a clinical
research hospital provided opinions about suicide risk screening. A qualitative analysis of
responses to an opinion question about screening was conducted to identify major themes. Forty-
three (81%) patients supported screening medical inpatients for suicide risk. Common themes
emphasized asking patients directly about suicide, connection between mental/physical health, and
the role of screening in suicide prevention. Adult medical inpatients supported screening for
suicide risk on medical/surgical inpatient units. Behavioral health clinicians are uniquely poised to
champion suicide detection and intervention in the general medical hospital setting. Patient
opinions can be utilized to inform thoughtful implementation of universal suicide risk screening in
the medical setting.

Address correspondence to Lisa M. Horowitz, PhD, MPH, National Institute of Mental Health Intramural Research
Program, Bethesda, Maryland, USA. Email: [email protected].
Deborah J. Snyder, MSW, National Institute of Mental Health Intramural Research Program, Bethesda, Maryland, USA.
Elizabeth D. Ballard, PhD, National Institute of Mental Health Intramural Research Program, Bethesda, Maryland, USA.
Maryland Pao, MD, National Institute of Mental Health Intramural Research Program, Bethesda, Maryland, USA.
Ian H. Stanley, BA, Florida State University, Tallahassee, Florida, USA.
Erica Ludi, BS, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
Julie Kohn-Godbout, MSN, RN, PMHCNS-BC, Research and Practice Development, Clinical Center Nursing

Department, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, USA.

Journal of Behavioral Health Services & Research, 2016. 364–372. c) 2016 National Council for Behavioral Health (outside

364 The Journal of Behavioral Health Services & Research 44:3 July 2017

the USA). DOI 10.1007/s11414-016-9498-7

Introduction

Individuals with medical illnesses are at elevated risk for suicide.1–4 Diagnoses such as cancer,
diabetes, HIV/AIDS, lung disease, and gas

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Contact between patients with suicidal ideation
and nurses in mental health wards: Development
and psychometric evaluation of a questionnaire

Joeri Vandewalle,1,2 Veerle Duprez,1 Dimitri Beeckman,1,3,4,5,6,7 Ann Van Hecke1,8 and
Sofie Verhaeghe1,9
1Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University Centre for Nursing and Midwifery, Ghent University,
Ghent, 2Research Foundation-Flanders (FWO), Brussel, 3Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Skin
Integrity Research Group (SKINT), University Centre for Nursing and Midwifery, Ghent, Belgium, 4School of
Health Sciences, €Orebro University, €Orebro, Sweden, 5School of Nursing and Midwifery, Royal College of Surgeons
in Ireland, Dublin, Ireland, 6Research Unit of Plastic Surgery, Department of Clinical Research, Faculty of Health
Sciences, Copenhagen, Denmark, 7School of Nursing and Midwifery, Monash University, Melbourne, Austral