DNP Method and Design Three studies relating to the PICOT of this proposed study are the qualitative research study Ong, Chua and Ng (2014) on barriers and facilitators of self-monitoring sugar levels for diabetes patients, the quantitative study by Stevens, Shi, Vane, Nie and Peters (2015) on the experiences of diabetes patients receiving home care, and the mixed-methods research study of Wildeboer, du Pon, Schuling, Haaijer-Ruskamp and Denig (2018) on sharing decision making among general practice staff and diabetes patients. Each study utilized a different research and method to obtain data on topics related to diabetes research. These studies are compared in this paper and their methodologies and designs discussed, their internal and external validity issues evaluated, and possible methodologies and designs are identified that the researchers could have used to make their studies more beneficial.

Comparing Methodologies and Designs

Ong et al. (2014) conducted a qualitative method study, the design of which focused on identifying barriers and facilitators that patients suffering from type 2 diabetes face when they are attempting to monitor their own blood sugar levels. The method of collecting data was the interview method. Semi-structured interviews were conducted by the researchers with diabetes patients and transcripts of interviews were analyzed to identify themes that could help to explain what helped and hindered patients in the course of self-monitoring.

Stevens et al. (2015) conducted a quantitative method study, the design of which focused on evaluating...

A method consisting of a cross-sectional longitudinal survey was conducted in order to obtain the data for the study. Data was measured using a primary care tool and quality of life was measured as well. Statistical significance was found among the correlations between home care and quality of life for the diabetes patients in the sample.
Wildeboer et al. (2018) conducted a mixed-methods study, the design of which focused on how general practice staff thought about the use of a patient?oriented treatment decision aid in shared decision making for patients with type 2 diabetes. The method included interviews and self-reported surveys which were collected from the general practice staff. Findings showed that various factors impacted whether staff members viewed the decision aid as helpful or not, but mostly the staff viewed them favorably.

External and Internal Validity Issues

The research appears to have conducted correctly in each of the three studies and thus all three can be said to have internal validity. However, when it comes to external validity, it is not as easy to say that the same findings would be found in other settings. For example, the study by Ong et al. (2014) was conducted in a hospital setting in Malaysia among diabetes patients there. The obstacles to self-monitoring and the supports that the same sample population encountered in the Malaysian hospital might not be the same as a population in the U.S. because of support networks, culture, and environmental factors.…