| Course | NU 602 Epidemiology, Research, and Theory |
|---|---|
| Unit | Unit 8 |
| Paper type | Research protocol outline |
| Length | About 880 words, 6 pages |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Herzing University |
| Program | MSN |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for NU 602 Unit 8
Study Protocol Outline: Beliefs and Structural Factors Predicting Return of Mailed FIT Kits at a Community Health Center
Student Name
Department of Nursing, Herzing University
NU 602: Epidemiology, Research, and Theory
Instructor Name
March 11, 2026
Study Protocol Outline: Beliefs and Structural Factors Predicting Return of Mailed FIT Kits at a Community Health Center
1. Question, Design, and Why the Design Fits
Question: when a composite community health center mails a stool test kit to its patients aged 45 to 75 who are overdue for bowel cancer screening, which of their beliefs about the test, and which circumstances of their lives, predict that the kit comes back within 90 days?
Design: prospective cohort. Beliefs and structural factors are measured by survey before the kit is mailed, and kit return is then observed from laboratory records. The design fits because the question concerns prediction of a future behavior; measuring beliefs before the behavior preserves the time order the Health Belief Model assumes and avoids people explaining their own non-return after the fact. A cross-sectional survey of people who had already returned or not returned a kit would be quicker but would confuse cause and justification. Prospective designs of this kind are the standard approach when the aim is to predict an outcome from characteristics measured beforehand (Polit & Beck, 2021). A trial is not appropriate, because the aim is to understand predictors rather than to test an intervention; the findings will inform a later trial of targeted outreach.
2. Sampling Frame, Recruitment, and Who Is Left Out
Frame: all patients aged 45 to 75 in the health center's electronic record who are due for colorectal cancer screening and are scheduled for the center's routine mailed FIT outreach during a six-month period. Exclusions: a colonoscopy in the past ten years, prior bowel cancer, or Crohn disease or ulcerative colitis, or a documented inability to consent.
Recruitment: two weeks before the kit is mailed, eligible patients are contacted by text and phone, in English or Spanish, and invited to complete a 10-minute survey by phone, online, or at their next visit. Consecutive eligible patients are invited until the target is reached.
Who will be left out: patients with no working phone number or with outdated contact information, patients who speak neither English nor Spanish, and patients who decline the survey. These groups are likely to differ from participants, and patients with unstable contact information may be the least likely to return kits. The protocol will therefore record, from the record, the kit return rate of all eligible patients, including non-participants, so that the difference between participants and the full frame can be reported.
3. Variables and Instruments
Outcome: kit returned to the laboratory within 90 days of mailing, yes or no, from laboratory records. Main predictors: perceived benefits of and barriers to stool testing, measured with validated scales (Rawl et al., 2001); confidence in doing the test at home and posting it back, four pilot-tested items; perceived susceptibility and severity. Structural factors: address verified in the past year, housing stability (one item), work schedule (shift or irregular hours, yes or no), preferred language, and insurance type. Cue to action: reminder contacts from the outreach log. Covariates: age, sex, and previous stool test completion.
4. Sample Size
The analysis will estimate about 10 parameters. A common guide for logistic regression is at least 10 outcome events per estimated parameter, based on simulation studies showing that fewer events produce unstable estimates (Peduzzi et al., 1996). At the center's current return rate of about 40%, returns are the less frequent outcome, so 100 returns are needed, which requires about 250 participants. Assuming 65% of invited patients complete the survey, about 385 patients must be invited; the protocol will invite 400.
5. Analysis Matched to the Measures
The outcome is binary, so the primary analysis is multivariable logistic regression, reporting odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals for each predictor, adjusted for covariates. Belief scales are summed scores treated as continuous, with results expressed per standard deviation so that the size of effects can be compared across scales. Structural factors are categorical. A secondary model adds an interaction between reminder receipt and perceived benefits, testing the framework's claim that cues work mainly for people already inclined to act. Because the event is common, odds ratios will overstate relative risks; the protocol will also report adjusted risk differences, which the health center can more easily use in planning.
6. Ethics
The study involves a survey and review of records for a service patients would receive anyway, and it will be submitted to the institutional review board, likely for expedited review. Participation in the survey is voluntary and does not affect whether a patient receives a kit. Consent is obtained verbally or online, with a script approved by the board. Survey data are linked to kit return by a study number, and the key is stored separately from the data.
7. Limits Stated in Advance
Selection: non-participants are likely to differ, which the comparison with the full frame will describe but not correct. Measurement: beliefs measured once may change before the kit arrives, and self-reported housing and work schedules are imprecise. Confounding: the study describes predictors, not causes; an association between barriers and non-return may reflect something unmeasured, such as general distrust of health care. Generalizability: one health center in one region. The protocol accepts these limits because its purpose is to guide the center's outreach and to design a later trial, not to establish causal effects.
References
Peduzzi, P., Concato, J., Kemper, E., Holford, T. R., & Feinstein, A. R. (1996). A simulation study of the number of events per variable in logistic regression analysis. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 49(12), 1373-1379. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0895-4356(96)00236-3
Polit, D. F., & Beck, C. T. (2021). Nursing research: Generating and assessing evidence for nursing practice (11th ed.). Wolters Kluwer.
Rawl, S., Champion, V., Menon, U., Loehrer, P. J., Vance, G. H., & Skinner, C. S. (2001). Validation of scales to measure benefits of and barriers to colorectal cancer screening. Journal of Psychosocial Oncology, 19(3-4), 47-63. https://doi.org/10.1300/J077v19n03_05
The Herzing NU 602 Unit 8 instructions
In Unit 8 you outline a research protocol for a study answering your question. Expect to state the question and design, define the population and sampling, list variables and instruments, calculate or justify sample size, describe the analysis, address ethics and state limitations. Many versions build on earlier units, using the same question and framework. Check whether your section wants an outline with numbered sections or a narrative proposal. The analysis plan should match the type of outcome, such as logistic regression for a yes-or-no outcome. Ethics should describe the likely level of review and how consent will be handled. You do not need actual approval to write the outline, but you should explain what approval the study would require.
How this NU 602 Unit 8 example is built
The outline uses numbered sections, which makes each protocol element easy to find. The design section explains why a survey linked to records fits the question. The sampling section defines the frame precisely and names groups that will be missed, such as patients without a mailing address. Variables are listed with their source and instrument, carried over from the framework paper. Sample size is calculated from the expected return rate and the number of parameters, with the arithmetic shown. The analysis is matched to the binary outcome and lists the covariates. The ethics section describes consent and review in practical terms. Limits are stated before any data are collected, which shows they shaped the design rather than being added at the end.
NU 602 Unit 8 rubric: what full points look like
Herzing's protocol rubric typically weighs the question and design, sampling, variables and measurement, sample size, analysis plan, ethics and limitations. Design points require a match between question and method. Sampling criteria reward a clear frame and attention to who is excluded. Measurement earns full marks with defined variables and validated instruments. Sample size is often a separate row, rewarding a justified calculation. The analysis criterion looks for a method matched to the outcome type with covariates named. Ethics points go to realistic review and consent plans. Limitations are scored on specific threats. APA 7 references for methods, such as Peduzzi's simulation study, support the plan.
NU 602 Unit 8 help before you submit
The usual Unit 8 problem is an analysis plan that does not match the outcome, such as a t-test for a yes-or-no variable. Another frequent gap is a sample size stated without justification. Students often describe the population without a sampling frame. Instruments are named without evidence of validity. Ethics sections either overstate the review needed or skip consent. Limitations written after the fact, such as the sample may be small, add little. Some outlines repeat the framework paper instead of moving to methods. Finally, keep the protocol consistent with earlier units, because graders compare the question and variables across the course and notice changes without explanation.
Get a NU 602 Unit 8 example written to your instructions
Send the Unit 8 instructions and the rubric from your NU 602 classroom, plus the question you have been building on through the term. We write a custom example that carries one question through design, sampling, a variable table with measurement levels, a matched analysis plan and limits specific to the design, returned in 24 to 48 hours. The first custom sample is free.
More NU 602 papers and MSN samples
- NU 602 Unit 1: Rate calculation worksheet
- NU 602 Unit 2: Prevalence and duration brief
- NU 602 Unit 3: Standardized rate comparison
- NU 602 Unit 4: Study design justification
- NU 602 Unit 5: Bias and confounding review
- NU 602 Unit 6: Screening test evaluation
- NU 602 Unit 7: Theoretical framework application
- NU 715 Unit 8: Telehealth program plan
- NSG 520 Unit 8: Foundational sciences portfolio
- NSG 521 Unit 8: Assessment skills portfolio
- NU 700 Unit 8: Reflection
NU 602 Unit 8 questions, answered
How detailed does the analysis plan have to be?
Detailed enough to name a procedure for each question and to justify it from the measurement level of the variables involved. You are not expected to produce output, and you are expected to know why a comparison of two group means is not the same job as a test of association between two categorical variables. State what form the answer would take.
Does the outline need ethics approval to be written?
No. A protocol is written before any approval exists, and describing what you would submit, to whom, and what consent and data storage would involve is exactly what this section is for. Nothing here authorizes collecting data. If you ever intend to run the study, the application goes in under your own name through your own institution.
Is the last unit of NU 602 always a protocol?
Not dependably. Herzing publishes no unit-level list of deliverables and sections vary in how a course closes, so read the page for the finished form rather than for an assignment description. What a final unit commonly asks is that one question be carried intact from design through to stated limits, which is the chain the example is built to show.
Where can I find a free NU 602 Unit 8 sample paper?
The full NU 602 Unit 8 FIT return protocol is on this page at no cost, all seven numbered sections. A custom protocol outline can be built on the question and framework from your own earlier units.
How do I justify sample size in a nursing research protocol?
State the analysis, the expected outcome rate and a rule or power calculation, and show the arithmetic. This sample uses about 10 outcome events per estimated parameter for logistic regression, then works back from the expected kit return rate.