Translating Research Into Practice
Secondary Analysis Research
Rita J. Wickham, PhD, RN, AOCN®
Rush University College of Nursing, Chicago, Illinois
Author’s disclosures of conflicts of interest are found at the end of this article.
Rita J. Wickham, PhD, RN, AOCN®, 600 S Paulina Street #1080, Chicago, IL 60612. E-mail: rita.j.wickham@gmail.com
J Adv Pract Oncol 2019;10(4):395–400 |
https://doi.org/10.6004/jadpro.2019.10.4.7 |
© 2019 Harborside™
ABSTRACT
Abstract
In secondary data analysis (SDA) studies, investigators use data collected by other researchers to address different questions. Like primary data researchers, SDA investigators must be knowledgeable about their research area to identify datasets that are a good fit for an SDA. Several sources of datasets may be useful for SDA, and examples of some of these will be discussed. Advanced practice providers must be aware of possible advantages, such as economic savings, the ability to examine clinically significant research questions in large datasets that may have been collected over time (longitudinal data), generating new hypotheses or clarifying research questions, and avoiding overburdening sensitive populations or investigating sensitive areas. When reading an SDA report, the reader should be able to determine that the authors identified the limitation or disadvantages of their research. For example, a primary dataset cannot “fit” an SDA researcher’s study exactly, SDAs are inherently limited by the inability to definitively examine causality given their retrospective nature, and data may be too old to address current issues.
For access to the full length article, please
sign in.
