Quantitative Study: Opioid & Hepatitis C Injection Link - Research Paper

Introduction

A quantitative study is described as a systematic examination of phenomena by acquiring quantifiable data and performing mathematical, computational, or statistical data. Mainly, quantitative research is used to quantify opinions, attitudes, behaviors, and other variables to examine the relationship between the independent and dependent variables within a population. This paper will evaluate a quantitative study on opioid and hepatitis C, "Associations between prescription opioid injection and Hepatitis C virus among young injection drug users" by Lankenau, Kecojevic, and Silva (2015).

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

Introduction and Literature Review Evaluation

In the article by Lankenau, Kecojevic, and Silva (2015), they begin by outlining the objective of the quantitative study providing specific statistics concerning the concerns surrounding the Hepatitis C virus (HCV) arguing that the disease is surpassing HIV as a cause of mortality in the United States. Within the introduction of the article, the researchers provide a rationale for conducting the study. For instance, Lankenau, Kecojevic, and Silva (2015) outline that, regardless of the numerous studies done about the current opioid prescription (PO) and association with HCV, there have been no studies on the relationship between PO injection and Hepatitis C positivity, particularly amongst the young urban injection drug use (IDUs). Also, Lankenau, Kecojevic, and Silva (2015) specify that most of the researches done on the opioid crisis and hepatitis C are qualitative, thus, creating the need for a quantitative study to examine the various interactions between HCV and opioid.

In consideration of the significance of the study, the incidences of HCV have been on an increasing trend among the IDUs. This creates the need to conduct an examination and determine whether the emerging practice of opioid prescription injection provides any association with self-reported HCV among IDUs. Though the study, it is likely to deliver a difference to the field since most of the acquired information will help in examining the various contributing factors to the increasing HCV infection among young adults in the United States. In the literature review of the articles, straightforward and specific details are provided with a focus on prior qualitative research. In different extents, the literature review is comprehensive and thorough as the researchers based the arguments in the discussion of the literature on statistical data about the PO misuse as well as the rising numbers of HCV infections. Primarily, the literature review is detailed with factual information relating to the study and provides insight into the significant aspects of the research that Lankenau, Kecojevic, and Silva (2015) should focus on.

Moreover, there are minimal potential biases within the literature review. For example, the researchers based most of the arguments on prior qualitative research, which in one way or the other might have provided speculative information since this study is quantitative research. Also, there are chances of bias in the review of literature since no particular theories are presented to ensure that data from the quantitative analysis is reliable. However, despite the availability of qualitative studies in the literature review, more quantitative studies are provided which provide a thorough discussion. Throughout the introduction and literature review, Lankenau, Kecojevic, and Silva (2015) have clearly defined all the significant concepts in the article as they demonstrate the significance of the study. By focusing on the various discussions and findings by the different researchers, Lankenau, Kecojevic, and Silva (2015) maintained a proper description of the concepts in the study. Notably, the researchers provide a clear explanation of previous methods that are fundamental to understanding the aim and objectives of this study. For example, the researchers demonstrate some of the risk factors involved with opioid and HCV amongst the young IDUs in the United States.

Purpose Statement and Hypothesis Evaluation

Provided towards the end of the introduction, this article indicates the purpose statement along with the different research questions to be hypothesized in the report. As expressed in the report, the purpose statement is, "this quantitative analysis examined whether the emerging practice of prescription opioid (PO) injection is involved with self-reported HCV among young IDUs" (Lankenau, Kecojevic, & Silva, 2015). With a view on the interaction between the purpose statement and the literature review, the objective of the study by Lankenau, Kecojevic, and Silva (2015) is developed in the literature review. For instance, the literature review demonstrates details about opioid mediations and its misuse, injection practices among young IDUs, as well as specific risk factors involved with Hepatitis C. However, the independent and dependent variables hypothesized in the research are not clearly identified in the purpose statement.

In terms of the direction of the study's hypothesis, the researchers demonstrate a clear rationale based on the literature review. For instance, the literature review is concluded by the three research questions applied in the study. Through this, a clear rationale is demonstrated as the research questions include; the social, behavioral, and demographic characteristics involved with lifetime PO injection (1), behavioral, social, and demographic characteristics associated with HCV positivity (2), and the question of whether the PO injection interacts with HCV positivity, in controlling for other covariates (3) (Lankenau, Kecojevic, & Silva, 2015). The research questions are a clear indication of the potential of the hypothesis being testable. Also, with the direct hypothesis, this allows an opportunity for testability. On the other hand, since the hypothesis is not clearly indicated in the study, one cannot say that it holds clarity. Within the study, the hypothesis of the study is based on the purpose statement and the three research questions for quantitative research.

Methods Evaluation

The study used mixed-methods study design in that it included a formative qualitative stage and also a quantitative phase. Within the methodology of the study, the participants in the study were recruited and interviewed in Los Angeles and New York and represent contrasting markets for illicit and prescription drugs. Through the samples and sampling method, eligible participants were young adults between the age of 16 and 25 and must have had engaged misuse of any of the opioid prescribed drugs (Lankenau, Kecojevic, & Silva, 2015). As such, one can say that the applied type of sample method in the study is appropriate. In the methodology, the relevant demographic features of the sample are clearly identified as they represent the specific hypothesis for the study. With a view of the population, it is clear that the methods of sample selection applied by the researchers provide a proper representative sample as the study tries to examine the relationship between opioid injections and the rising numbers of HCV positivity. In the selection of the sample, apparent biases are evident. Only young adults were considered in the study, and they were selected from New York and Los Angeles.

On the other hand, the sample size for the study is large enough. In the study, it included 4432 participants that were screened across both locations; however, 831 (18.8%) of the participants met the enrollment criteria while 618 (74.4%) of the sample size were interviewed. Later on, 22 participants (3.6%) were removed from the sample after a determination that they failed the inclusion criteria, which means that only 596 participants completed the interview (Lankenau, Kecojevic, & Silva, 2015). Within the study, the true experimental research design was applied in that the research's sampling was stratified within each location to enhance enrollment of three groups of participants with different risk profiles and access to the prescription drugs. Throughout the method, this research is consistent with the hypothesis and purpose demonstrated in the introductions since most of the characteristics in selecting participants are based on the objective of the study. For example, Lankenau, Kecojevic, and Silva (2015) outline that the analysis is restricted to an individual that had reported injection drug use within the past three months. In the research, both the dependent and independent variables are clearly given to ensure replication using the provided information. The primary dependent variable in the study is self-reported HCV positivity, while the independent variable is the lifetime opioid prescription injection. Some of the potential threats to internal validity are based on wring entry of information as there are many participants in the study, while some of the potential risks to external validity are based on the consideration where the participants could provide biased information. Also, external factors such as the present trends in opioid prescription and hepatitis C could deliver a threat to external validity.

Correspondingly, the data collection method used in the study is clearly defined. The data collection instrument was developed with the application of the Entry ware software. The instrument was administered via face to face interviews with the eligible participants. In data collection, the interview data were recorded using a digital recorder on laptops. As a measure, self-reports were used since there was no testing done for HCV. A binary variable was applied to acquire data on hepatitis C positivity, whereby positive =1 and negative=0. As for the independent variable, a dichotomous variable was developed to demonstrate the lifetime history of opioid injection with yes=1 and No=0. Later, covariates were selected based on prior literature in the identification of risk factors involved with hepatitis C and opioid infusion (Lankenau, Kecojevic, & Silva, 2015). Some of the limitations with this type of measure include the time and cost of face to face interviews and mistakes associated with the entry of the binary variables. In the quantitative study, various types of standardized scoring were used with the availability of dichotomous and binary variables. The bivariate and multivariable analyses were analyzed using Poisson regression along with error variance. This instrument appears appropriate for the sample since it provides a proper examination between the PO injection and hepatitis C positivity.

Moreover, the reliability of the used instrument is reported in that; reduced models were developed by removing one secondary explanatory variable corresponding to the smallest change in coefficient form the primary variable, between the reduced and full model. The process was repeated to ensure that the lowest achievable coefficient exceeded 10%. As a result, one can say that the reliability reported is adequate. The variables were perceived collinear if the correlation coefficient value was more significant than 0.6. Also, the adjusted incidence rate ratios (IRR) were acquired by the exponentiation of the Poisson regression coefficient for the final model (Lankenau, Kecojevic, & Silva, 2015). Hence, the validity is considered adequate.

Results Evaluation

In the results of the study, bivariate analyses were used to answer the hypothesis of the study as it compared the lifetime opioid injectors to non-opioid prescription injectors revealing significant relationships. Through the use of a Predictive Analytics Software (PASW), this enabled the researchers to adequately describe the sample of the study as they referred to the measures of the study. The adjus...