CAPSTONE PROJECT BENEFITS AND VALUE

Introduction

Determining the potential benefits, costs, and value of a potential capstone project to the organization requires a thoughtful comparison of the benefits and costs, an analysis of project features as value considerations, and the development of anticipated measurable outcomes.

Instructions

Complete a critical analysis of a potential doctoral capstone project and make final recommendations, based on the project’s benefits, costs, and value to the organization.

Requirements

The assignment requirements, outlined below, correspond to the scoring guide criteria, so be sure to address each main point. Read the performance-level descriptions for each criterion to see how your work will be assessed. In addition, note the additional requirements for document format, length, and supporting evidence.

• Substantiate the prospect of a potential capstone project to mitigate the negative effect of an organizational challenge.
  • Explain how the project will mitigate the negative effect of the challenge on the organization and/or a population.
  • Discuss the project’s potential to facilitate improvements for the larger industry and other populations and organizations.
  • Substantiate the potential of the project to improve current, publicly reported metrics, compared to benchmarks.
• Critically analyze the benefits of a potential capstone project to the organization and/or a population.
  • Describe anticipated, improved project outcomes.
  • Describe the benefits of the project relative to the organization’s performance, quality, mission, and goals or outcomes for a population.
  • Critically analyze the potential costs and benefits of the project to the organization.
• Critically analyze a potential capstone project’s value to the organization and/or a population.
  • Discuss aspects of the project that could potentially require the organization to dedicate energy, staff, time, and financial resources.
  • Describe ways in which approvable mentee capstone practicum activities can minimize the costs to the organization.
  • Summarize the features of the project that will provide benefit to the organization and/or a population.
• Make recommendations for a potential doctoral capstone project, based on its benefits, costs, and value to the organization and/or a population.
  • Present an argument for the project, based on its benefits, costs, and value to the organization and/or a population.
    • Weigh both the positive and negative aspects of the project.
  • Substantiate that the benefits of the project outweigh the costs, or that the costs outweigh the benefits.
  • Recommend next steps in communicating with the preceptor and site leaders on the project’s potential.
• Organize content so ideas flow logically with smooth transitions.
• Support main points, assertions, arguments, conclusions, or recommendations with relevant and credible evidence.
  • Assess the relevance and credibility of information sources.

1. Increase Population Participation- Racial and ethnic differences create considerable barriers for populations to be included in health research studies. Some of the barriers involve linguistic differences, lack of information on enrolment, beliefs and values, lack of support, financial barriers, and lack of resources (Nipp et al., 2019). Enrollment to cancer clinical research is perceived to only involve certain population in the society. improvements in the enrollment and retention of minorities in clinical trials.

PLACE YOUR ORDER NOW

2. Improve multi-level factors that contribute to this organizational challenge- Application of the evidence in an organizational level would result to changes mitigating system barriers such as financial costs and resources limitations. Also, community engagement from the individual level would increase participation and ownership of the research. Meanwhile, the individual level evidence reduces individual barriers like population support reducing agreements to enrollment. Interpersonal level evidence addresses barriers related to biasness, communication, and understanding of the trials.

3. Remove culture biases- improve application of effective research strategies which are culture and language sensitive

Considering the multilevel framework of interventions, the organization is likely to facilitate improvements through organizational and individual levels to mitigate the negative impact of the challenge. This can be associated with resources, finance, assistance, support, awareness, community engagement, and positive attitudes towards the trials. The organization would stipulate its contribution of resources and finances since they are challenging factors in the population to reduce under-representation and lack of participation in trials. Assistance, support, awareness, and community engagement would be influenced through application of the resources towards effective organization-community relationships. The interventions specifically apply to the population characteristics through exposure to unique barriers. The barriers such as biasness and under-representation in clinical research resonate with the population. The interventions articulated consider equity and cultural sensitivity of the population. In addition, the population experiences a lot of disparities when assessing quality health care. The interventions ensure that their participation in the trials would lead to quality cancer care through reduced generalization of findings and treatments. The intervention is supported by all the articles articulating its quality and applicability in reducing the negative impacts of the organizational challenge. Additionally, the articles provide substantial evidence which effectively supports the specific intervention. This is because of its effectiveness and applicability. Considering the level of the intervention, it is appropriate as it directly deals with the organization, the community, and individual population members. To impact changes on inclusion in trials, the community, organization, and members ought to be involved. This is facilitated through education, awareness, support, and assistance. Community and organizational support are significant in enabling the inclusion of minorities in oncology clinical trials.

Reference

George, S., Duran, N. & Norris, K. (2014). A systematic review of barriers and facilitators to minority research participation among African Americans, Latinos, Asian Americans, and Pacific Islanders. American journal of public health 104(2). doi:10.2105/AJPH.2013. 301706)

Hamel, L., Penner, L., Albrecht, T., Heath, E., Gwede, C. & Eggly, S. (2016). Barriers to clinical enrollment in racial and ethnic minority patients with cancer. Cancer control 23(4), 327-337.

Nipp, R., Hing, K. & Paskett, E. (2019). Overcoming barriers to clinical trial enrollment. Care delivery and practice management. https://doi.org/ 10.1200/EDBK_ 243729

PLACE YOUR ORDER NOW

Capstone Project Benefits and Value Scoring Guide

PLACE YOUR ORDER NOW

The Georgia Cancer Center houses a dedicated cancer clinical research unit that oversees the center’s own Phase I-IV trials and manages studies from throughout the medical center offered in conjunction with oncology departments such as radiology and gynecologic oncology. The serve all populations in the Central Savannah River Area of Augusta, Ga. The Georgia Cancer does not have a permanent affiliation agreement with Capella University, but I did complete my MPH capstone with this site in 2018 and assisted them with completing the NCI Community Oncology Research Program (NCORP) grant from the National Cancer Institute (NCI). Dr. Ghamande, who serves as the principal investigator for the grant, works with a team at the Georgia Cancer Center and partner sites across Georgia as well as one site in Mississippi. Partners including the University Cancer and Blood Center (Athens), Augusta Oncology Associates (Augusta), Morehouse School of Medicine (Atlanta), Phoebe Putney Memorial Hospital (Albany) and St. Dominic-Jackson Memorial Hospital (Jackson, Mississippi) which has a minority and rural population like what we see in Georgia.

The Georgia Cancer Center research approach supports important National Cancer Institute goals: Ensuring every cancer patient has access to the newest and most innovative clinical trials in the nation. Clinicians and researchers work together to initiate new research protocols based on the clinician’s interaction with the patient. Each cancer patient receives personalized treatment through the interaction of the multidisciplinary team of clinicians and allied health professionals. The main building houses the basic science teams with four floors of open concept-lab space, shared resources and special equipment, such as flow cytometry, radiation therapy research platforms and quantitative pathology imaging as well as administrative offices and meeting spaces for seminars, lectures, training sessions and community-wide forums on cancer-related topics. The Collaborator Corridor is a new addition designed to facilitate communication and collaboration between cancer researchers and clinicians, with a goal of promoting translational research in order to develop the next generation of cancer diagnostics and treatments.

My preceptor is Sharad A. Ghamande, MD. He is a Professor, Executive Vice Chair, and Director for Gynecological Oncology at the Georgia Cancer Center at Augusta, Georgia and have been heavily involved in clinical trials for over 16 years. He is also the Associate Cancer Center Director for Clinical Research. Dr. Ghamande Certifications and Education are as follows: American Board of Obstetrics and Oncology – Certified, 2003; Education and Training: Medical School: Bombay University, India, 1990; Residency: Boston Medical Center Program, Boston University, 1997; Fellowship: Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, New York, 2000.

PLACE YOUR ORDER NOW