Research Writing


The edits to do are reiterated here from Draft 1 comments.


This Draft 1 will be regraded in the following below.


“Abstract” — “The results revealed that recorded video podcasts are better than recorded WhatsApp voice messages to improve stress management behaviors.” — Th p-value must be included.


“Review of Related Literature” must be under “Introduction,” but after this paragraph.


“Undergraduate nursing student stress is widely recognized, especially in the clinical setting (Kulland, 2014). With frequent changes and challenges in health care and technology, the clinical setting has the potential to become even more stressful (Kulland, 2014). Increasing numbers of nontraditional students are entering the nursing profession. Many of these adult students have work and life experiences unrelated to the nursing field. Often, these same students must balance home, employment, and educational responsibilities. With the increase or change in responsibilities, the students face greater risks of maladaptive coping strategies (Kaur et al., 2020). Students need an outlet, social support, to adequately manage academic stress they experience, and who better to do it than their peers going through it with them. It is important for students to recognize stressors that they may encounter. Student stressors arose in the process of fulfilling didactic and clinical requirements (Kulland, 2014). This cannot be avoided. However, it is essential to find peer support during these times of multiple transitions (Salamonson et al., 2019).


” This is incomplete. Please refer to your meta-analysis assignment submitted in Fall 2023.


“The literature presented here from PubMed were found by the search terms: “nursing student stress,” “student-led support,” “academic stress,” “nursing school,” and “randomized control trials”. The articles contain educational strategies, in particular, virtual simulations applied to nurses and nursing students from ____ to ____. The search process followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines as outlined in Figure ___. Specifically, meta-analysis was performed by the Researchers in Fall 2023 in a separate unpublished paper. Study effect sizes and publication bias have been estimated. By pooled effects of the studies (see forest plot in Figure ____), overall effect favors the [control, treatment] group since 95% CI does not include the line of no effect (p-value <_____, I2 = _____ or not important heterogeneity/moderate heterogeneity/considerable heterogeneity). However, in the [control, treatment] group, 95% CI includes the line of no effect (p-value <_____, I2 = _____ or not important heterogeneity/moderate heterogeneity/considerable heterogeneity). Since the test for overall effect is [below, above] .05 (z = _____, p < _____), this indicates a [significant, no significant] difference. Egger’s regression test suggested [no] evidence of publication bias due to small-study effects. Even after adjustment in the calculation of publication bias with [fixed, random] effects estimates, there is [no] evidence of publication bias (μ = _____; 95% CI = _____, _____; p = _____).”


These will be numbered.


  1. Introduction


Insert here the conceptual model of the nursing theory. This will Be Figure 1.


1.1. Review of Related Literature


2.1. Research Design


Insert here the PRISMA diagram. This will be Figure 2.


2.2. Participants/Setting


2.3. Data-Gathering Procedure


2.4. Questionnaires


“This study utilized 2 questionnaires.” — There is only 1 questionnaire.


Merge these two under 2.4.1.


2.4.1. Questionnaire (What is the actual name of the questionnaire?)


The survey comprised 12 questions focusing on the role of peer-related interventions in alleviating academic stressors. The questionnaire included three subscales aligned with the Betty Neuman systems model: “Preceding the response of my peers’ system to any academic stressor,” “Following my peers’ system response to an academic stressor,” and “After addressing both the academic stressor and the client’s system.”



We had five responses ranging from 0 to 4, 0 being never and 4 being always. The 12-item questionnaire analyzed measurements in both the intervention group and the control group.


The subscale “Preceding the response of my peers’ system to any academic stressor” consisted of 4 items between 0.859 – 0.850. “After my peer’s system has responded to an academic stressor” subscale consisted of 4 items between 0.888-0.8570 and “After the academic stressor and the client’s system has been addressed” subscale consisted of 4 items between 0.918 – 0.894.


2.5. Ethical Considerations — State here the approval process by the school. “2.6.1 JASP” must be


“2.6.1. Statistical Software”


Rephrase this.


“JASP version 0.18 was employed for data analysis. Descriptive data were examined using frequency and percentage. The relationship between each variable was tested using an independent sample T-test.”




Statistical analysis was performed in JASP 0.18.2. Descriptive data were examined by frequency, percentage, mean, and standard deviation. Independent samples t-Test was used to compare scores before and after the intervention between control and intervention groups.


DELETE this. “Additionally, a path model was created using JASP 0.18 to assess the assumed relationships among the variables. Furthermore, a structural equation model, generated through JASP 0.18 using the dataset uploaded from Microsoft Excel, was implemented to test the presumed relationships in this study. The construction of the structural equation model was guided by correlation results.” “2.6.2 Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA)” must be


“2.6.2. Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA)”


Move this under “3. Results”.


All factor loadings were above the .50 threshold and. RMSEA 0.206 (90% CI 0.165, 0.248] was over the acceptable range of .05 to .08. CFI 0.802 was below the .95 cutoff. TLI 0.744 was below the .90 cutoff.


Add a square bracket before this “0.165, 0.248]”


“2.6.3 Unidimensional Reliability (Cronbach’s Alpha)” must be “2.6.3. Unidimensional Reliability (Cronbach’s Alpha)”


Move this under “3. Results”.


The “Before my peers’ system can respond to any academic stressor” subscale consisted of 4 items (between αOverall = 0.859 – 0.850 ), the “After my peer’s system has responded to an academic stressor” subscale consisted of 4 items (between αOverall = 0.888- 0.857 ), and the “After the academic stressor and the client’s system has been addressed” subscale consisted of 4 items (between αOverall = 0.918 – 0.894). [No items were ≤ .59.


“[No items were ≤ .59.” — Delete square bracket. “2.6.4 Independent Sample T-Test” mus be


“2.6.4. Independent Samples t-Test”


Move this under “3. Results”.


For the average pretest scores, the t-value of -0.457 with a p-value of 0.651 suggests that there is no statistically significant difference between the two independent groups. Similarly, for the average posttest scores, the t-value of -0.210 with a p-value of 0.835 indicates no statistically significant difference between the groups. The Cohen’s d values, representing effect size, are small (around -0.145 and -0.067), suggesting a limited practical significance of any observed differences. The p-values are notably higher than the commonly used significance level of 0.05, further supporting the conclusion that there is no significant difference between the groups.


Under “Results”…


The sample consisted of ___ participants (Table 1). This was largely composed of ___ nursing students under the ____________________ Program (___% or ___ out of ___), between ___ to ___ years old (___% or ___ out of ___), and mostly [single, married] (___% or ___ out of ___) belonging to the [Hispanic group, African-American group] (___% or ___ out of ___).


Insert Demographic table. See attached file.


DELETE these tables.


Model fit


Chi-square test


Additional fit measures


Fit indices


Information criteria


Other fit measures


Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) test


Bartlett’s test of sphericity




Parameter estimates


Factor loadings


Factor variances


Factor Covariances


Residual variances


Average variance extracted


Residual covariance matrix


Plots Model plot


Misfit plot


Unidimensional Reliability


Frequentist Scale Reliability Statistics


Frequentist Individual Item Reliability Statistics


Assumption Checks


Test of Normality (Shapiro-Wilk)


Test of Equality of Variances (Levene’s)




Group Descriptives


Descriptives Plots


Average Pretest


Average Posttest


Rename this table.


From “APPENDIX C: Research Instrument” to “Mean and Standard Deviation of Responses, and Item Reliability”


Edit this.


Independent Samples T-Test (Delete this first heading.)


Independent Samples T-Test — This will be “Table __. Independent Samples t-Test Results”


“Discussion and/or Conclusion” — This must be separated.


Under “Discussion” — There must be an explanation of the results with support from the literature you listed under “Review of Related Literature”.


Under “Conclusion” — This will be about the insights from the study or what knowledge is added by the study to nursing education.



Under “Review of Related Literature,” each literature presented did not include this part: “Sample population and effective size?” — Again, refer to the meta-analysis results in Fall 2023.

Instructions For The Draft