Week 7 Project
Analyzing and Synthesizing the Body of Evidence
In this assignment, you will take a critical look at the Evaluation Table and develop a Synthesis Table, which is the next step in finding the best evidence for your project due in Week 9. From the Evaluation Table, which represents the body of evidence for your topic, you will review the information and synthesize it into one or more tables paring down the body of evidence to the studies that are most appropriate for answering your PICOT question. The Synthesis Table Template has been provided that includes several different types of tables. Choose the tables that are most pertinent to this project. Review the PICOT question you wrote in Submissions Area and the Evaluation Table you started in Submissions Area with the quantitative evidence and complete it by adding the qualitative evidence in Week 5 (ATTACHED). Then:
- Analyze the contents of the table. Which variables (column headings) are the most important to answering the PICOT question? Why?
- Create the appropriate Synthesis Table (or tables) and turn it in for this assignment along with a 1- to 2-page paper providing:
- A reason for including these variables in the Synthesis Table
- A rationale that explains how these variables are most appropriate for answering your PICOT question
Click here to view the Synthesis Table Template. (ATTACHED)
Submit word document as one, table included.
Page 1 of 1
Evidence, Effectiveness, and Clinical Quality ©2014 South University
Synthesis Table Template
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Level I: Systematic review or meta-analysis
Level II: Randomized controlled trial
Level III: Controlled trial without randomization
Level IV: Case-control or cohort study
Level V: Systematic review of qualitative or descriptive studies
Level VI: Qualitative or descriptive study (includes evidence implementation projects)
Level VII: Expert opinion or consensus
Studies
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Interventions
1
2
3
4
Studies Design Sample Outcome
1
2
3
4
5
,
Elizabeth Hernandez
South University
Dr. Crystal Dodson
NSG7020
April 19th, 2025
Evaluation Table
First Author |
Conceptual |
Design/Method |
Sample & |
Major |
Measurement |
Data Analysis |
Findings |
Appraisal: |
(Year) |
Framework |
Setting |
Variables |
Worth to |
||||
Studied (and |
Practice |
|||||||
their |
||||||||
Definitions) |
Hutton et al. (2009) |
Transtheoretical Model of Behavioral Change |
Qualitative, Focus Groups |
20 participants (68–81 years) from falls prevention exercise classes |
Perceptions of physical activity, barriers, self-efficacy, and motivation |
Thematic analysis of focus group data |
Thematic analysis |
Older adults identified barriers to exercise, emphasizing the need for education, motivation, and peer support. |
Results suggest interventions should focus on education, motivation, and accessible, safe exercise programs to improve participation and reduce fall risk, which is relevant to improving fall prevention strategies in clinical practice. |
Barnett et al., (2003) |
None |
Randomized Controlled Trial (RCT) |
163 community-dwelling older adults (65+) at risk of falling; South Western Sydney, Australia |
Balance (postural sway, coordinated stability) Muscle strength Reaction time Physical functioning Falls incidence |
Baseline and 6-month assessments of physical performance Monthly surveys for 12 months to record falls |
Comparative statistical analysis (IRR = 0.60, 95% CI 0.36–0.99); pre- and post-test comparisons |
Exercise group improved significantly in 3 of 6 balance measures. No difference in strength, reaction time, or walking speed. 40% lower fall rate in intervention group. |
High: Supports integrating supervised group + home exercises for fall prevention in clinical/community settings. |
Chang et al. (2004) |
None |
Systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs |
40 randomized controlled trials involving older adults in various care settings |
Interventions to prevent falls (e.g., multifactorial risk assessment, exercise, environmental modifications, education); Outcomes: risk of falling, fall rate |
Fall risk ratios and incidence rate ratios (IRR) |
Random effects meta-analysis and metaregression |
Multifactorial interventions most effective (RR 0.82, IRR 0.63); Exercise also effective (RR 0.86); overall reduced fall risk and monthly fall rate |
High – Supports evidence-based fall prevention strategies, especially multifactorial interventions and exercise, for older adults |
El-Khoury et al. (2013) |
evidence-based practice and fall prevention theory |
Systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs |
17 RCTs with 4,305 older adults living in the community |
Independent variable: Fall prevention exercise programs. Dependent variables: Types of injurious falls — all injurious falls, those needing medical care, severe injuries, and fractures |
Extraction and pooling of rate ratios from included trials |
Random effects models to estimate pooled rate ratios; heterogeneity assessed with I² statistic |
Exercise significantly reduced rates of all injurious falls (RR=0.63), falls requiring medical care (RR=0.70), severe injuries (RR=0.57), and fractures (RR=0.39). Some heterogeneity observed |
High relevance to clinical practice; supports implementing exercise programs for older adults to reduce fall-related injuries |
(Oh et al., 2012) |
None |
Randomized Controlled Trial (RCT) |
65 elderly community-dwelling individuals in Korea who had fallen in the past year; 36 in Exercise Group (EG), 29 in Control Group (CG) |
Independent Variable: Participation in 12-week intensive exercise program; Dependent Variables: Fear of falling, balance, flexibility, muscle strength |
Fear of falling questionnaire, physical fitness tests (balance, flexibility, strength, walking speed) |
Statistical analysis comparing pre- and post-intervention measures (e.g., p-values reported) |
Exercise group showed significant improvements in balance (p=0.003), flexibility (p<0.001), lower body strength (p=0.004), and reduced fear of falling (p=0.02) |
High – supports use of structured exercise to reduce fear of falling and improve physical function in elderly fallers |
Sherrington et al. (2008) |
Falls prevention through exercise, with a focus on balance training and total exercise dose. |
Systematic review with meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. |
Sample: 9,603 participants from 44 trials. Setting: General community and residential care for older adults. |
Independent Variable: Exercise program (including balance exercises, total exercise dose). Dependent Variable: Fall rates in older people. |
Fall rates, measured by the number of falls over the trial period. |
Pooled estimate using meta-analysis (relative risk calculation, confidence intervals, and I2 statistic to assess variability). |
Exercise reduced the rate of falling by 17% overall. The greatest effects were seen in programs with higher total doses of exercise (450 hours) and challenging balance exercises, excluding walking programs. |
Exercise, especially balance-focused and higher-dose programs, significantly reduces fall rates. Service providers can apply these findings to design more effective exercise programs for fall prevention in older adults, emphasizing balance challenges and sufficient exercise duration. |
Taylor et al., (2012) |
Falls prevention, mobility, balance, and strength improvement in older adults. |
Randomized controlled trial (RCT) |
Sample: 684 community-residing older adults (mean age 74.5, 73% female) with at least one fall risk factor. Setting: Eleven sites throughout New Zealand. |
Falls: Number of falls recorded through monthly falls calendars. Mobility: Assessed using the Timed-Up and-Go test. Balance: Assessed through the step test (right and left legs). Lower Limb Strength: Measured via the chair stand test. |
Fall rates (primary outcome). Mobility, balance, and lower limb strength (secondary outcomes). |
Statistical Analysis: Adjusted incident rate ratios (IRR) for fall comparisons, multilevel mixed-effects Poisson regression, and fixed-effect analyses. Significance: Falls rates reduced similarly in all groups (58% reduction), with no significant differences in falls, balance, or strength improvements between tai chi and low-level exercise groups. |
No significant difference in fall rates between groups All groups had significant balance & strength improvements No mobility improvement |
Supports inclusion of tai chi or similar exercise for strength and balance; however, tai chi was not superior to low-level exercise |
For definitions of columns, see Appendix C in text below from which this template was created.
Melnyk, B., & Fineout-Overholt, E. (2014). Evidence-Based Practice in Nursing & Healthcare A Guide to Best Practice (3rd ed.). Philadelphia, PA: Wolters Kluwer.
,[removed]