Chat with us, powered by LiveChat Research Articles Comparison and Contrast What articles have similarities in each section below? | Wridemy

Research Articles Comparison and Contrast What articles have similarities in each section below?

Assignment Content

  1. In class, we learned how to write the introduction and conclusion of the Literature Review section, which includes:
    • Introduction (6 sentences on p. 10a)
    • Review of Literature (using notes on p. 13a – ONE objective summary is graded already — apply feedback)
    • Analysis of Literature (compare and contrast activity on p. 16a)
    • For this submission: You will submit your full draft of the Literature Review in a WORD document.
    •  YOU MUST CHECK YOUR SIMILARITY prior to submission here. 
    • Grading: 
    • Title Page = 10 pts
    • Literature Review: Intro, Review of Literature, and Analysis of Literature WITH in-text citations and correct level headings:
    • Introduction = 15 pts
    • Review of Literature = 40 pts
    • Analysis of Literature = 20 pts
    • References page with ALL three research articles listed = 15 pts

5

Research Articles Comparison and Contrast

Student’s name

Professor’s name

Course title

Institution

Date

Research Articles Comparison and Contrast

1. What articles have similarities in each section below?

a. Methodology

Javed & Brishti (2020) and Köchling & Wehner (2020) both used systematic literature reviews. Both used a significant number of samples as Javed & Brishti (2020) reviewed 22 articles while Köchling & Wehner (2020) reviewed 36 articles.

b. Findings

All studies featured uncertainties and bias in regard to the use of AI in recruitment and hiring. Javed & Brishti (2020) and Köchling & Wehner (2020) indicated how AI could lead to unfairness in practice since algorithms are not inherently free from biases or discrimination. Similarly, van den Broek et al. (2019) showed that there are concerns with what is deemed fair when using AI. The study results indicated that there was uniformity amongst the main stakeholders (managers, candidates, and AI team) in that there was no clear-cut definition of what fairness is in regard to using AI, unlike the consensus that was evident prior to the introduction of algorithms in hiring. Wright & Atkinson (2019) also found out that there are uncertainties in whether AI can avoid biases as the feedback from the interviews, surveys, and observations showed that individuals have views that are conflicting.

c. Recommendations

Both Javed & Brishti (2020) and Köchling & Wehner (2020) indicated that there are both positives and negatives to using AI, and more research is required to enhance the potential of AI in the hiring process. They showed that there are grounds for using AI, but more research and developments should enable the elimination of bias.

2. What articles have differences in each section below?

a. Methodology

In contrast to Javed & Brishti (2020) and Köchling & Wehner (2020), who used systematic reviews, Wright & Atkinson (2019) used three different methods, which were interviews, online surveys, and observation. On the other hand, Van den Broek et al., 2019) used an ethnographic design that also featured observation.

b. Findings

While Javed & Brishti (2020) and Köchling & Wehner (2020) showed both the benefits and limitations of using AI, van den Broek et al. (2019) and Wright & Atkinson (2019) mainly showed that AI has significant shortcomings for it to be applied in the hiring process. They showed that the questions and unreliability of algorithms were too significant. The contrast is that van den Broek et al. (2019) and Wright & Atkinson (2019) did not provide a significant basis for using AI in the current circumstances without further development, while Javed & Brishti (2020) and Köchling & Wehner (2020) were different as they explored the opportunities that algorithms offer to hire managers.

c. Recommendations

While both van den Broek et al. (2019) and Wright & Atkinson (2019) cautioned against having too much confidence in the use of AI in hiring, Javed & Brishti (2020) and Köchling & Wehner (2020) on the other hand, provided some leeway in regards to the positive effects of applying algorithms. They showed that organizations could benefit from applying algorithms, whereas van den Broek et al. (2019) and Wright & Atkinson (2019) basically showed that there is more development required in the use of AI in order to achieve feasible outcomes in recruitment and hiring.

References

Brishti, J. K., & Javed, A. (2020). The viability of ai-based recruitment process: A systematic literature review. https://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:1442986/FULLTEXT01.pdf

Elmira van den Broek, E., Sergeeva, A., & Huysman, M. (2019). Hiring algorithms: An ethnography of fairness in practice. https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/301385085.pdf

Köchling, A Wehner, M. C. (2020). Discriminated by an algorithm: a systematic review of discrimination and fairness by algorithmic decision-making in the context of HR recruitment and HR development.  Business Research, 13(3), 795-848. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40685-020-00134-w

Wright, J., & Atkinson, D. (2019). The impact of artificial intelligence within the recruitment industry: Defining a new way of recruiting.  Carmichael Fisher, 1-39. https://www.cfsearch.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/James-Wright-The-impact-of-artificial-intelligence-within-the-recruitment-industry-Defining-a-new-way-of-recruiting.pdf

,

NOTES FOR TWO MORE RESEARCH ARTICLES 5

Notes for Two More Research Articles

Your Name Goes Here

Department of Name of Your Major, King Graduate School

KG 604: Research & Critical Analysis

Professor Ramlochan

2/14/2022

Notes for Two More Research Articles

W(5)H(1): New Research Article #1: Hiring Algorithms: An Ethnography of Fairness in Practice

1. Who conducted the research?

The study was conducted by Elmira van den Broek, Anastasia Sergeeva and Marleen Huysman

2. Why was the study completed (purpose / what researchers hoped to learn) ?

The purpose of the study was to investigate the perceived fairness in use of algorithms in hiring.

3. When was data collected (not the publication year) ?

Data was collected between October 2018 and April 2019.

4. Where was data collected (physical location) ?

Data was collected at multinational company in Europe called MultiCo.

5. How was data collected (methodology)? Cut as paste the paragraph below that describes the methodology and HIGHLIGHT the indicator words that specifically show you the methodology :

The researchers used an ethnographic study design in the research process.

We conducted an ethnographic in-depth study at the HR department of a large multinational company in Europe, “MultiCo” (pseudonym), that recently implemented AI to enable a fair recruitment process .”

We have conducted 7 months (726 hours) of non-participant observation of the work around the AI application in graduate recruitment – including 110 meetings and 27 selection events – in the period between October 2018 and April 2019” (van den Broek et al., 2019).

6. What were the findings? Cut as paste the paragraph below that describes the findings and HIGHLIGHT the sentences that specifically show you the summary of findings:

The findings revealed that all groups involved in the study (HR, candidates, managers and AI team) contested the idea of fairness in using the algorithms in the hiring process.

“Our analysis of the specific practices and interactions of multiple stakeholders in the workplace shows that enabling fairness with AI can take a very different shape from what it promised, when put into practice. In particular, before the use of the AI application, the meaning of fairness was considered unproblematic and shared between stakeholder groups. However, as the various groups started working with AI in practice, they experienced mismatches between those notions of fairness that were inscribed and those implicit understandings of fairness that were important for daily work” (van den Broek et al., 2019).

W(5)H(1): New Research Article #2: The impact of artificial intelligence within the recruitment industry: Defining a new way of recruiting.

1. Who conducted the research?

James Wright and Dr David Atkinson

2. Why was the study completed (purpose / what researchers hoped to learn) ?

The research examined the impact of AI in recruiting employees.

3. When was data collected (not the publication year) ?

The study was conducted in 2019.

4. Where was data collected (physical location) ?

Data was collected in the UK.

5. How was data collected (methodology)? Cut as paste the paragraph below that describes the methodology and HIGHLIGHT the indicator words that specifically show you the methodology :

The research featured use of three methodologies which were interviews, online surveys and observation.

To obtain findings considering the impact of AI in the recruitment process for both employers and candidates, three research methods were used. These are highlighted below.

Research Method: Interviews Online Survey Observation” (Wright & Atkinson, 2019).

6. What were the findings? Cut as paste the paragraph below that describes the findings and HIGHLIGHT the sentences that specifically show you the summary of findings:

The findings showed that there are uncertainties in use of AI with the candidate group majorly opposed to it.

“These are predominately preconceived ideologies on automation rather than AI. There are significant knowledge gaps in the industry, with many recruiters not understanding the technologies available to them. Candidates have a very negative opinion of the recruitment process and their considerations of automation follow this trend. There is clear motivation to change recruitment processes to appease candidates however it is contested whether AI is the solution to these complaints” (Wright & Atkinson, 2019).

W(5)H(1): New Research Article #3: Questioning Racial and Gender Bias in AI-based Recommendations: Do Espoused National Cultural Values Matter?

1. Who conducted the research?

Manjul Gupta, Carlos M. Parra and Denis Dennehy

2. Why was the study completed (purpose / what researchers hoped to learn) ?

The purpose of the study was to explore the role of Hoftede’s cultural values in influencing the inquiry of use of AI due perceived bias.

3. When was data collected (not the publication year) ?

The study was conducted in 2021.

4. Where was data collected (physical location) ?

Data was collected in the US.

5. How was data collected (methodology)? Cut as paste the paragraph below that describes the methodology and HIGHLIGHT the indicator words that specifically show you the methodology :

Data was collected through use of surveys.

“We first conducted a pilot survey of 60 MTurk users to ensure the readability and clarity of the seven scenarios pertaining to racial and gender bias. Following this, the main study was administered, and 387 completed responses were collected using MTurk in the United States” (Gupta et al., 2021).

6. What were the findings? Cut as paste the paragraph below that describes the findings and HIGHLIGHT the sentences that specifically show you the summary of findings:

The findings showed that AI is likely to lead to biased recommendations.

Indeed, AI-based recommendations may discriminate against some members of society more than others, and this we contend ought to be one of the most worrisome aspects of ubiquitous computing and generalized automation. Even though scholars have also been concerned, albeit recently, with proposing governance mechanisms to prevent AI-related misuses and abuses (Floridi & Cowls, 2019; Zuiderveen Borgesius, 2020), there still are reasons for concern. One such concern that we examine in this study is the extent to which individuals, owing to their individual-level cultural values, would be likely to question AI-based recommendations when perceived as racially or gender biased” (Gupta et al., 2021).

References

Gupta, M., Parra, C. M., & Dennehy, D. (2021). Questioning racial and gender bias in AI-based recommendations: Do espoused national cultural values matter?.  Information Systems Frontiers, 1-17. 10.1007/s10796-021-10156-2

van den Broek, E., Sergeeva, A., & Huysman, M. (2019). Hiring algorithms: An ethnography of fairness in practice. Association for Information Systems https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/301385085.pdf

Wright, J., & Atkinson, D. (2019). The impact of artificial intelligence within the recruitment industry: Defining a new way of recruiting.  Carmichael Fisher, 1-39. https://www.cfsearch.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/James-Wright-The-impact-of-artificial-intelligence-within-the-recruitment-industry-Defining-a-new-way-of-recruiting.pdf

,

RACIAL DISPARITIES IN HEALTH IN PREGNANT WOMEN 1

Racial Disparities in Healthcare Among Pregnant Women in the United States

Tamifer Lewis

Department of Public Health, Monroe College, King Graduate School

KG604-144: Graduate Research and Critical Analysis

Dr. Manya Bouteneff

December 4, 2022

I attest that I have used the checklist on pages 71-78 of my manual

I attest that I passed this paper through the free version of Grammarly

I attest that I incorporated ALL feedback from all previous assignments to make this paper

SHINE

RACIAL DISPARITIES IN HEALTH IN PREGNANT WOMEN 2

Racial Disparities in Healthcare Among Pregnant Women in the United States

Introduction

African American, American Indian, and Alaska Native women are up to three times

more likely to die from adverse pregnancy related outcomes, a disparity that increases with age

(Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [CDC], 2019). Researchers found a program which

provided support to African American women through group trainings, entailing of stress

reduction techniques, life skills development, and the building of social support. This enabled

mitigation efforts to be focused and geared around the factors that influence and contributed to

adverse pregnancy outcomes among the minority women within the community, thus reducing

and preventing negative pregnancy outcomes in women of color. In the United States, maternal

mortality and adverse health outcomes persist within the minority community, yet as racial

disparities in healthcare among pregnant women is a current preventable public health concern, it

is vital to understand the determinants of health that influences negative pregnancy related

outcomes in minority women, similar to one of California’s intervention programs, the Black

Infant Health Program (Nichols & Cohen, 2019).

Literature Review

Introduction to Literature Review

Research suggests that racial disparities in healthcare among pregnant women persists in

the United States (Zhang et al., 2013). Due to this continuous occurrence, it is vital to examine

the factors that contribute to the adverse outcomes in maternal health. The literature review

contained only research articles about factors that impacted and influenced disparities in

pregnancy outcomes. Factors that were reviewed were socioeconomic status, public health

insurance, race/ethnicity, and poverty status. The literature review was conducted using EBSCO

RACIAL DISPARITIES IN HEALTH IN PREGNANT WOMEN 3

Host and ProQuest databases from the Monroe College Library. The search terms used to

compile pertinent articles were racial disparities maternal health, adverse pregnancy outcomes,

and maternal health outcomes.

Review of Literature

Adverse Pregnancy Outcome Factors

Darling et al. (2021) conducted a study between 2001 and 2018 to examine the efficiency

of qualified interventions in preterm birth, small for gestational age, low birth weight, neonatal

death, cesarean deliveries, maternal care satisfaction, and coast effectiveness programs. A

systematic review was used to collect data from the United States, France, Spain, and the

Netherlands. The studies consisted of mostly non- Caucasian women from low-income

population ranging from 12 to 46 years of age and being between 20 to 32 weeks' gestation.

Interventional programs were implemented into three categories: group prenatal care, augmented

prenatal care, or a combination of both group and augmented prenatal care (Darling et al., 2021).

The researchers found that certain interventions, such as prenatal care and augmented care, or a

combination of both, may decrease adverse outcomes in small-for-gestational-age and preterm

birth, and could aid in increasing maternal care satisfaction. Interventions that worked on

enhancing coordination of care were found to result in providing more effective cost savings.

The researchers also found disparities in the quality of access to care in the vulnerable

population. There was insufficient evidence of suitable quality to confirm that the interventions

were successful at enhancing clinical outcomes in prenatal care for at risk populations (Darling et

al., 2021).

Similar observations were made in a study conducted by Nichols and Cohen (2020),

between 2006 and 2018 to examine the methods used to improve the results of maternal

RACIAL DISPARITIES IN HEALTH IN PREGNANT WOMEN 4

mortality in California. The study was conducted using a scoping review to evaluate research on

women and maternal health in the United States. The researchers used information from the US

Maternal Fetal Medicine Network to measure the percentage of studies where pregnant women,

women, and children were the main focus. The researchers also reviewed documentation on

healthcare policies and practices from California’s public health department, healthcare

foundation, and Maternal Quality Care Collaborative. Nichols and Cohen (2020) found that

although the health of fetus and children could be adversely affected by the health of the mother,

the majority of maternal programs in the United States places emphasis on the child. The

researchers also found four areas of concern in women health experiences, both in pre and

postnatal care. The problem areas entailed inadequate investment in women's health, inefficient

quality of care and avoidable caesarean delivers, expanding disparities in minority women and

women living in rural areas, and contradictory collection and distribution of data (Nichols &

Cohen, 2020).

Approaches to Improving Pregnancy Outcomes

In contrast to the preceding studies, Zhang et al. (2013) conducted a study between 2005

and 2007 to calculate the excessive rate of unfavorable outcomes in pregnancy within racial and

ethnic groups. The study also aimed to measure the possibility of Medicaid savings that are

linked to paid maternal care claims resulting from the inequalities that contribute to unfavorable

maternal outcomes. A cross-sectional study using Medicaid Analytic eXtract (MAX) data was

used to gather pregnancy outcome information from inpatient hospitals from 14 states (Florida,

Alabama, Arkansas, North Carolina, Georgia, Louisiana, Kentucky, Mississippi, Maryland,

Missouri, Tennessee, South Carolina, Virginia, and Texas). The study consisted of a little over 2

million patients who were insured with Medicaid and had a delivery code of maternal delivery

RACIAL DISPARITIES IN HEALTH IN PREGNANT WOMEN 5

stay. Zhang et al. (2013) found that, with the exception of gestational diabetes, African American

women showed the worst outcomes out of all unfavorable pregnancy outcomes. These disparities

are postulated as being multi-factorial, having causes stemming from complicated experiences

with racism, poverty, and complex healthcare interactions. It was also found that women covered

under Medicaid health insurance were more likely to have consistency in care from prenatal care

through delivery compared to their counterparts. However, due to participation in Medicaid

programs being influenced by reimbursement rates, some providers may choose to stop

accepting Medicaid patients because of reimbursement delays and low payment rates, which

could contribute to negative birth outcomes (Zhang et al., 2013).

Analysis of Literature

In the United States, the persistence of maternal mortality continues to be a problem area

in public health. The contributing factors that impact pregnancy outcomes persist in burdening

the U.S., leading to poor healthcare quality, and increasing health disparities. The studies used in

this literature review each used a different form of research methodology to collect data,

including systematic and scoping reviews and cross-sectional studies. Similarly, Darling et al.

(2021), Nichols and Cohen (2020), and Zhang et al. (2013) have emphasized the correlation

between race/ethnicity and financial status playing a part in influencing quality of care, access of

care, and pregnancy outcomes in pregnant minority women. To mitigate the disparities in

maternal health Darling et al. (2021) and Zhang et al. (2013) suggested that interventions should

be inspected and geared towards determining and eradicating the racial and ethnic disparities that

affect pregnancy-related outcomes. Whereas Nichols and Cohen (2020) suggested focusing on

exploring the distinctive experiences of particular at-risk subgroups of women, such as women in

RACIAL DISPARITIES IN HEALTH IN PREGNANT WOMEN 6

prison, who are of childbearing age, and the pregnant women who are less likely to pursue

prenatal care, such as undocumented women.

Discussion

Introduction to Discussion

There is current evidence that racial disparities in healthcare among pregnant women

continues to be a problem in the United States. In an article published by The New York Times

(Rabin, 2019), there has been a persistence and growth in racial disparity throughout the years

despite calls to take action to improve medical care access for women of color. Similarly, in a

study conducted by Nichols and Cohen (2019) mounting disparities continue amid women health

outcomes in the United States, primarily among race and ethnicity and within residents living in

urban and rural areas (Nichols & Cohen, 2019). These disparities directly affect African

American, Alaska Native and Native American Women (Rabin, 2019). When compared to other

high-income countries, the United States has substandard records in maternal health outcomes,

and while the rate of maternal mortality dropped across the world, America's maternal health

outcomes have worsened (Rabin, 2019).

Evidence-Based Recommendation

To reduce the disparities among minority women policy changes have been made.

Federal law enacted the Preventing Maternal Death Act providing states with grants to explore,

examine and investigate pregnancy related deaths for up to one year after the birth of a child

(Rabin, 2019). Also, The American College of Obstetrics and Gynecologists created new

guidelines in treating cardiovascular disease in pregnant women (Rabin, 2019). In 2014 Alliance

for Innovation on Maternal Health (AIM) was developed by the American College of Obstetrics

and Gynecology to collaborate with partners of the states and hospitals to gather information on

RACIAL DISPARITIES IN HEALTH IN PREGNANT WOMEN 7

safety measures being taken to improve maternal health outcomes, allowing partners to assess

and track program progress (Nichols & Cohen, 2019). In the study conducted by Nichols and

Cohen (2019), two out of the various programs that California implemented were the Black

Infant Health Program (BIH) and increasing the states income eligibility for pregnant women to

200% of the federal poverty level. With the implementation of these programs, mortality rates

decreased from 22.1% to 8.3% in the best practices toolkit, a program developed for hemorrhage

and high blood pressure during pregnancy. Altogether, California's maternal mortality rate

decreased by above 50% between 2006 and 2018 (Nichols & Cohen, 2019). To prevent negative

pregnancy outcomes in women of color, California used federal funds to develop programs that

focused on African American mothers and the health determinants that are influenced by social

and structural factors. The Black Infant Health Program provided support to African American

women through group trainings, entailing of stress reduction, life skills development, and

building social support (Nichols & Cohen, 2019). Nearly half of the babies born in the United

States are insured under Medicai

Our website has a team of professional writers who can help you write any of your homework. They will write your papers from scratch. We also have a team of editors just to make sure all papers are of HIGH QUALITY & PLAGIARISM FREE. To make an Order you only need to click Ask A Question and we will direct you to our Order Page at WriteDemy. Then fill Our Order Form with all your assignment instructions. Select your deadline and pay for your paper. You will get it few hours before your set deadline.

Fill in all the assignment paper details that are required in the order form with the standard information being the page count, deadline, academic level and type of paper. It is advisable to have this information at hand so that you can quickly fill in the necessary information needed in the form for the essay writer to be immediately assigned to your writing project. Make payment for the custom essay order to enable us to assign a suitable writer to your order. Payments are made through Paypal on a secured billing page. Finally, sit back and relax.

Do you need an answer to this or any other questions?

About Wridemy

We are a professional paper writing website. If you have searched a question and bumped into our website just know you are in the right place to get help in your coursework. We offer HIGH QUALITY & PLAGIARISM FREE Papers.

How It Works

To make an Order you only need to click on “Order Now” and we will direct you to our Order Page. Fill Our Order Form with all your assignment instructions. Select your deadline and pay for your paper. You will get it few hours before your set deadline.

Are there Discounts?

All new clients are eligible for 20% off in their first Order. Our payment method is safe and secure.

Hire a tutor today CLICK HERE to make your first order

Related Tags

Academic APA Writing College Course Discussion Management English Finance General Graduate History Information Justify Literature MLA