| Course | DPH 890 Doctor of Public Health Capstone |
|---|---|
| Module | Module 2 |
| Paper type | Results chapter |
| Length | About 1,082 words, 6 pages |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Aspen University |
| Program | Doctor of Public Health |
| Updated | September 2026 |
Free sample paper for DPH 890 Module 2
Chapter 4: Results of the Community Health Worker Blood Pressure Program Evaluation
Student Name
Doctor of Public Health Program, Aspen University
DPH 890: Doctor of Public Health Capstone
Instructor Name
Month Day, Year
Chapter 4: Results of the Community Health Worker Blood Pressure Program Evaluation
The results chapter reports what the study found, in the order set by the research questions and analysis plan, without interpretation. Readers should be able to see how participants were selected, whether the comparison groups were similar and what the estimates of effect were, with their uncertainty. This paper drafts Chapter 4 for a capstone evaluating a county program linking residents who have high blood pressure to community health workers.
Order of Results
Results follow the analysis plan: participant flow, baseline characteristics and balance, the primary outcome, the secondary outcome, sensitivity analyses, subgroup analyses and qualitative findings. Following the planned order signals that no results were selected after the fact.
Participant Flow
Of 742 residents who enrolled between January 2024 and June 2025, 28 lacked a baseline reading in linked records and 14 could not be matched within the caliper, leaving 700 participants, each paired with one of 4,860 eligible nonparticipants. Twelve-month blood pressure was available for 637 participants (91%) and 623 comparison adults (89%). A flow diagram, recommended by reporting guidance for observational studies, shows each step (von Elm et al., 2007).
Baseline Balance
After matching, standardized differences for all covariates were below 0.1. Mean age was 56.4 years among participants and 56.1 among comparison adults; 58% and 57% were women; and average starting systolic pressure stood at 152.3 versus 151.9 mmHg. Balance on measured characteristics supports the comparison, though it cannot address unmeasured differences.
Main Estimates
The table presents the primary, secondary and sensitivity estimates.
| Analysis | Participants | Comparison | Estimate (95% CI) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Blood pressure controlled at 12 months | 58.1% | 47.6% | Difference 10.5 points (5.3 to 15.7) |
| Odds ratio for control | 1.53 (1.24 to 1.89) | ||
| Mean change in systolic pressure | -14.2 mmHg | -8.6 mmHg | Difference -5.6 mmHg (-7.3 to -3.9) |
| Complete cases only | Difference 10.9 points (5.4 to 16.4) | ||
| Inverse probability weighting | Difference 9.8 points (4.6 to 15.0) | ||
| E-value for control | 1.74 (lower limit 1.46) |
Primary Outcome
One year after enrollment, control below 140/90 was reached by 58.1% in the program group against 47.6% of matches, a gap of 10.5 percentage points (95% CI, 5.3 to 15.7). The corresponding odds ratio from conditional logistic regression was 1.53. The risk difference was estimated from the matched pairs, and its interval accounts for the matching.
Secondary Outcome
Average systolic readings dropped 14.2 mmHg in the program group and 8.6 mmHg among matches; the 5.6 mmHg gap favors the program, with a 95% interval spanning roughly 4 to 7 mmHg.
Sensitivity Analyses
Results were similar in complete-case analysis and with inverse probability weighting instead of matching. The E-value, the minimum strength of association an unmeasured confounder would need with both participation and control to explain away the result, was 1.74 for the point estimate and 1.46 for the lower confidence limit (VanderWeele & Ding, 2017).
Subgroup Results
Differences in control were 11.2 points among women and 9.6 among men, 11.8 among Medicaid enrollees and 13.4 among adults with baseline systolic pressure of 160 mmHg or higher. Among adults over 70, the difference was 6 points with a wide interval from about -7 to 19. Interaction tests provided no clear evidence of differences, and these analyses were exploratory.
Figures
Four figures accompany the chapter: the flow diagram; dot and box plots of systolic change by group, showing individual values rather than bars of means (Weissgerber et al., 2015); an interval plot of the gap in control between groups; and a forest plot of subgroup estimates. Each figure has a caption stating sample sizes and what intervals represent.
Qualitative Findings
Interviews with 12 participants and 3 community health workers identified three themes: trust built through repeated home visits, the value of home blood pressure monitors in making progress visible and practical help with pharmacies and appointments. Participants who disengaged often cited work schedules and moves. Quotations are presented with pseudonyms.
Reporting Without Interpretation
The chapter reports estimates, intervals and themes without explaining their meaning or comparing them with other studies; those tasks belong to Chapter 5. Statistical reporting follows the SAMPL guidelines, giving estimates with intervals and exact P values where relevant (Lang & Altman, 2015).
Tables in the Chapter
Chapter 4 includes four tables: baseline characteristics before and after matching, main estimates, sensitivity analyses and subgroup results. Each table has a descriptive title, notes explaining abbreviations and sample sizes for every group. Numbers in the text match the tables exactly, and the text highlights only the most important values rather than repeating every cell.
Missing Data Reporting
The chapter reports how many participants and comparison adults were missing 12-month outcomes, how they differed from those with outcomes and how missing data were handled. Transparency about missing data allows readers to judge whether results could be biased by who dropped out.
Exact Values and Precision
Estimates are reported to one decimal place and P values exactly, except those below .001. Confidence intervals accompany every estimate of effect. Consistent precision across text, tables and figures prevents confusion.
Quotations From Interviews
Qualitative findings are illustrated with short quotations, each labeled with a pseudonym and role. For example, one participant said that seeing her numbers improve on the home monitor made her believe the medicine was working. Quotations are chosen to represent themes rather than to present the most dramatic statements.
What the Chapter Leaves Out
The chapter does not include analyses beyond those planned unless clearly labeled as post hoc, and it does not include every model's full output. Detailed outputs appear in appendices for readers who want them.
Checking Results Against the Plan
Before finalizing the chapter, each result was checked against the analysis plan. Every prespecified analysis appears, in the planned order, and one additional analysis requested by the committee, adjusting for clinic, is labeled as post hoc. This check assures readers that results were not selected to fit a story.
Balance Table Details
The balance table shows means or percentages for each covariate in both groups before and after matching, with standardized differences. Before matching, participants were younger and more often on Medicaid; after matching, these differences disappeared, which the table makes visible at a glance.
Conclusion
Chapter 4 reports a 10.5-point advantage in blood pressure control and a 5.6 mmHg larger systolic drop for program participants over their matches, with consistent sensitivity analyses and an E-value of 1.74. Subgroup and qualitative findings add detail. Presented in the planned order with clear tables and figures, these results set up the discussion in Chapter 5.
References
Lang, T. A., & Altman, D. G. (2015). Basic statistical reporting for articles published in biomedical journals: The "Statistical Analyses and Methods in the Published Literature" or the SAMPL guidelines. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 52(1), 5-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2014.09.006
VanderWeele, T. J., & Ding, P. (2017). Sensitivity analysis in observational research: Introducing the E-value. Annals of Internal Medicine, 167(4), 268-274. https://doi.org/10.7326/M16-2607
von Elm, E., Altman, D. G., Egger, M., Pocock, S. J., Gøtzsche, P. C., & Vandenbroucke, J. P. (2007). The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: Guidelines for reporting observational studies. The Lancet, 370(9596), 1453-1457. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(07)61602-X
Weissgerber, T. L., Milic, N. M., Winham, S. J., & Garovic, V. D. (2015). Beyond bar and line graphs: Time for a new data presentation paradigm. PLOS Biology, 13(4), Article e1002128. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.1002128
DPH 890 Module 2 instructions, in plain terms
Summarizing the project is central to Aspen's DPH 890 description, and with the second module's instructions not published, this example writes a complete results chapter. Results chapters usually ask you to report findings in a planned order with tables and figures and without interpretation. Follow your analysis plan's order. Report participant flow and balance first. Give every estimate with its confidence interval. Present sensitivity and subgroup analyses clearly labeled. Use figures that show distributions and uncertainty. Report qualitative themes with brief quotations. Keep interpretation for the discussion chapter, and check that every number in the text matches its table. Describe how missing outcomes were handled. Report exact P values above .001.
How this DPH 890 Module 2 example is built
The chapter begins with the order of results, participant flow and baseline balance. A four-column table of main estimates follows, then sections on the primary and secondary outcomes, sensitivity analyses, subgroups, figures, qualitative findings and reporting without interpretation. Tables in the chapter, missing data, precision, interview quotations, what the chapter leaves out, checking against the plan and balance table details are added. A margin comment explains that stating the order first shows the chapter follows the prespecified plan. Numbers in the text match the table exactly, and the sensitivity rows sit beside the primary estimate so readers can compare them at once. Figures are described with their messages. Qualitative themes follow the quantitative results.
Where the marks sit in the DPH 890 Module 2 rubric
Results chapters are marked on completeness, accurate reporting, clear tables and figures and restraint from interpretation. This chapter cites the STROBE statement, the SAMPL guidelines, guidance on replacing bar charts and VanderWeele and Ding's E-value paper, all in APA style. Participant flow numbers add up. Every estimate has an interval. Post hoc analyses are labeled. The qualitative themes are presented as findings rather than explanations, which instructors expect in a results chapter. Missing outcome data are reported by group, with a comparison of those with and without 12-month readings. Balance before and after matching is shown clearly. Precision is consistent throughout. Readers can trace every figure back to the plan.
Common DPH 890 Module 2 mistakes, and how to avoid them
Students often interpret results in Chapter 4, bury the main finding among secondary analyses or present tables without intervals. Report the primary outcome clearly first after flow and balance. Give intervals for every estimate. Label exploratory and post hoc analyses. Use figures that show data. Keep quotations short and representative. If you are unsure what belongs in results versus discussion, a tutor can help you sort each paragraph. Close with a short summary that leads into Chapter 5, and confirm that your flow diagram numbers add up exactly. Draft your tables before your text so the narrative follows the numbers. Label post hoc work. Match text and tables exactly.
Write yours, or have the desk draft it
This paper is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official Aspen University document. Read it for the moves, then write your own to the instructions in your classroom. If you want one built to your exact prompt and rubric, the first custom sample is free and arrives in 24 to 48 hours.
More DPH 890 and Doctor of Public Health sample papers
- DPH 890 Module 1: Assembling the Complete Manuscript
- DPH 890 Module 3: Discussion and Implications for Practice
- DPH 890 Module 4: Limitations and Future Work
- DPH 890 Module 5: An Executive Summary for Decision Makers
- DPH 890 Module 6: The Defense Presentation
- DPH 890 Module 7: A Dissemination Plan, Manuscript and Brief
- DPH 890 Module 8: Comprehensive Exam Preparation
- DPH 860 Module 4: Power and Sample Size for the Project
- DPH 830 Module 2: Comparing Health Systems Across Countries
- DPH 870 Module 5: Critical Appraisal of Key Studies
- DPH 810 Module 1: Epidemiological Question and Hypothesis
DPH 890 Module 2 questions, answered
What does DPH 890 Module 2 usually ask for?
Aspen's DPH 890 covers summarizing the capstone, so drafting the results chapter with tables and figures is typical. Confirm with your classroom prompt.
Should the results chapter interpret findings?
No; it reports findings in planned order, leaving interpretation to the discussion chapter.
What is an E-value?
The minimum strength of association an unmeasured confounder would need with both exposure and outcome to explain away an observed effect.
Where can I find a free DPH 890 Module 2 sample paper?
Read the results chapter here, including a table of primary, secondary and sensitivity estimates with confidence intervals.
What goes into the results chapter in DPH 890 Module 2?
Participant flow, baseline balance, primary and secondary outcomes with intervals, sensitivity and subgroup analyses, figures and qualitative findings, reported without interpretation.