Analysis of Newspaper Research Report Results Essay

A check deep published in the San Jose Mercury tidings suggests the p arnts of round tikeren do non get the picture their children as rotund. An analytic thinking of this study, its methods, and its findings is an important cypher in on a lower floorstanding the meaning and relevance of all question. The ability to read look critically and understand how it was generated allows us to chance on possible design flaws or to draw in the validity of its conclusions and make appropriate affair of the entropy.The study was conducted through an network research firm for the University of Michigan. Its goal was to determine the contri entirelyion of p atomic number 18nts who pick upd their children are grievous and to differentiate it to the percent hop on of parents that do not realize their children are obese. The participants were selected by simple ergodic s ampereling and were considered a representative try on of American parents. The sample include 2060 respo ndents (Runk, 2007).The data appeared to be collected through network surveys. The study was observational and measured free burning data sets including the height, weight, mount, and gender of the participants children (Bennett, Briggs, & Triola, 2003). A body bunch index greater than or meet to the 95th percentile in relation to children the same days and gender was the criteria utilize for corpulency in this study. The data from these children was thence canvasd the content percent shape up of children considered obese by the same standards. Qualitative data pertaining to whether or not the parents thought their children were fairly overweight, rattling overweight, or almost rightly was similarly collected (Runk, 2007).Although it was not specifically stated, I hypothesize the children studied were broken bundle into hive aways by age and gender. The initiative bin comprised of obese girls six to 11 long time octogenarian and the endorse bin obese boys si x to11 stratums one-time(a). For the 12 to 17 course of instruction old root the first bin include obese girls 12 to 17 years old and the second bin include obese boys 12 to 17 years old. I shape up hypothesize the parents of children in each group were binned according to their response to the qualitative appraisal of their childs weight. For each age group the first bin included parents who answered   very(prenominal) overweight, the second bin included parents who answered slightly overweight, and the third bin included parents who answered about normal (Bennett, Briggs, & Triola, 2003).The findings in the six to 11 year old group revealed 15% of the children in this age group met the criteria for fleshiness. This finding was not importantly different from the bailiwick figure which reports 17% of all children in the United States are obese by the standard of this study. long dozen percent of the parents of obese children in this age group categorized their childre n as very overweight, 37% classified their children as slightly overweight, and 43% inform their children were about right (Runk, 2007).The findings in the 12 to 17 year old group revealed 10% of children in this age group met the criteria for corpulency. This finding is importantly lower than the national figure for obese children. Thirty one percent of the parents of obese children in this age group account their children as being very overweight, 56% inform their children as slightly overweight, and 11% reported their children were about right (Runk, 2007).Researchers reason out both(prenominal) age groups under reported the incidence and severity of obesity when compared to the national statistic stating 17% of all children meet the criteria for obesity outlined in this study (Runk, 2007). I agree the severity of obesity was greatly under reported in both groups. However, I disagree with the assertion the incidence of obesity was under reported in the six to 11 year old gr oup. I believe the difference amongst 15% and 17% could substantially be a coincidence. It whitethorn also perplex resulted because the internet was used to collect data and poor children are more than potential to be obese and less believably to have internet access (Vieweg, Johnston, Fernandez & Pandurangi, 2007).I do agree that obesity seemed to be considerably under reported in the 12 to 17 year old group. A statistically substantial difference (about 7%) occurred between that age groups 10% incidence and the 17% national incidence of childishness obesity (Runk, 2007). much(prenominal) a large difference is tall(a) to be a coincidence and supports the possibility that obesity was under reported in this age group or  be was present (Bennett, Briggs, & Triola, 2003).Critical analysis of this data reveals many strengths and a a few(prenominal) significant weaknesses in the design and murder of this study. The goal is glide byly stated, to determine the charact er of parents who realized their children are obese and to compare it to the percentage of parents that do not realize their children are obese. This goal was clearly unadulterated for all the study participants. The source of the study is the University of Michigan which can be considered a reliable, neutral source. The sampling is sufficiently large, entirely whether or not it is representative of childhood obesity in this country is questionable. A serious problem with the sample exists as a result of using the internet as the scenery. High proportions of obese children are socioeconomically disadvantaged and may not have internet access.The internet setting is likely to account for the apparent under reporting of obese children noted in this study and as such is a probable source of confounding. The criterion for obesity is well defined and could be easily measured in all the subjects, but I remain concerned a significant portion of obese children may have been inadvertently omitted from consideration. In the end, however, I find there is a fast(a) practical use for this data. Healthcare providers are made conscious of the fact that the parents are, more often than not, genuinely unaware their child is obese. This data supports the decision to open a dialogue with parents and offer teaching about the dangers and prevention of childhood obesity the clear course of action.ReferencesBennett, J., Briggs, W., & Triola, M. (2003). Statistical reason out for EverydayLife, Second Edition. Upper Saddle River, NJ Addison Wesley. Retrieved declination 5, 2007, from University of Phoenix rEsource HCS 438.Runk, D. (2007, December 24). Parents put one acrosst realize their kids are fat. MercuryNews (San Jose). Retrieved December 28, 2007, fromhttp//www.mercurynews.com/healthandscience/ci_7799918?nclick_check=1.Vieweg, V., Johnston, Fernandez, A., & Pandurangi. A. (2007). Correlationbetween senior high risk obesity groups and low socioeconomic status in scho ol children. Confederate Medical Association. Retrieved January 12, 2008, from University of Phoenix library EBSCOhost.