This literature review to enable the argument upon the

 

This formal account
report aims to analyse the two research papers on basis of comparing strength
and limitations for qualitative and quantitative approach. These papers are
based on suicide research screening carried out in America which identified
suicide risk for psychiatric outpatients (Finch, J 1986).  Included will be a literature review to
enable the argument upon the approach used of qualitative and quantitative
research papers and whether the researchers could have completed these studies
using a different method. The qualitative and quantitative research papers were
produced by the same writer; (Lang, M. Uttaro, T et al, 2009). Using the 6
month pilot screening period. Both papers had similar outcomes in their
abstract and conclusion. They showed that type of research met the aim required
for the purpose; therefore both papers are valid and reliable, arguably the
study could show subject bias due to the same researchers carrying out two
different methods for the same study. The subject for the key word is the public mental health system, risk screening
suicide prevention by: (Lang, M. Uttaro, T et al, 2009).

 

 

Qualitative:

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!


order now

The qualitative paper
shows that a screening method was used to collect data, based on an incident
reporting system, to monitor patients and establish if there is an increase in attempting
suicide to a complete suicide. The focus was based on dynamic risk factors such
as “Change in mood and thoughts or recent
stressors based of family history, suicidal childhood emotional, physical and
sexual abuse” (Lang, M. Uttaro, T
et al, 2009). Part of this method was to send an invitation email to collect
data through a secure intranet system. Some ethical issues were identified as; the
assessment of the site to whether it was going to cause issue, location was not
a problem as this was the aim of the researcher to target this particular area,
the risk development of screening and duration of the pilot period was also
considered. This was considered as a low risk as information was collected
anonymously, the effectiveness of staff showing that patients are low risk in
suicidal behaviours in chosen geographical areas (Lang, M. Uttaro, T et al, 2009). The ethical barrier was overcome
through the assessment and also consent was granted by mental health
authorities prior to starting the screening. (Lang, M. Uttaro, T et al, 2009).

 

 

Quantitative:

Quantitative paper
shows that 153 clinicians were provided with a list of randomly selected
patients for a routine of a 6 month pilot period. The paper also shows that 719
patients went through screening routine for suicidal risk. Out of 719 patients  a figure was obtained, in percentages showing
the mixture of different ethnic backgrounds as follows:

 

56% female 44% male  78% White17% Black 5% Asian 18% Other 

 Each clinician had to screen 5 of their clients
monthly, for a 6 month period. This shows that the researcher was more
interested in facts and figures above all else. (Lang, M. Uttaro, T et al,
2009).

 

 

 

UK
research:

In the United Kingdom many
professionals believe that numbers of the official statistics are never
accurate (Samaritan, 2017). This does not apply to the United Kingdom alone,
but also in other countries. For many different reasons the under reporting of
suicide is prevalent especially in ethnic and minority groups because of
misclassification. The explanation for this is due to cultural and religious beliefs,
and how reports are presented to the coroners. This can cause associated stigma
for families and can be additionally attached to cultural or religious taboo. Therefore
when carrying out a quantitative research, considerations should be made to
finding an appropriate approach to include people of varying cultures and
religious beliefs as such mixed methods can improve data. (Leo 2002; 2009).

 

Results:

The end results of
both papers show the positive outcome though there were many challenges, such
as ethical issues and limitations.  This
shows that some clinicians declined to be involved in the research itself.
Clinicians response was positive in theory but in practice there was concern
for triggering more negative responses in patients and reluctant to get
involved (Neuman W L, 2000).  A number of
people and patients stated this is a good thing to do to minimise the risk of
suicide. Others did not feel strongly towards the questionnaire either way, but
some people did feel it may trigger the risk of suicide. Both qualitative and
quantitative show that the results are low risk.  Everitt, B and Hay, D (1992).

 

To evaluate the
qualitative and quantitative papers there is no wrong or right way of carrying
out the research depending on the target, geographical area, location and the
subject (Mcdowell, I. and Maclean, L. (1998). For a wider topic such as suicide
it may suggest using a different research method such as a mixed method. This
is because both qualitative and quantitative would join together from both perspectives
using triangulation for a positive outcome, aiming for the bigger picture (Cassell,
C and Symon, G. (1994).

 

Literature Review:

Research which has been undertaken with humans has a
certain level of complexity involved, which is unique with such studies due to
ethical issues, beliefs and bias (Mason, J, 1994).  Carrying out the screening of suicide as a subject,
is already anticipated to be difficult to engage the public because of ethical
issues such as social, environment political matters and also legal. Rocha
S (2004). Both
qualitative and quantitative looked into analysing ethical issues which could
have potentially involved those participating, both methodically considered
ethical issues and addressed them. (Stanley, L (Ed) (1990).

 

x

Hi!
I'm Joan!

Would you like to get a custom essay? How about receiving a customized one?

Check it out