American Nurses Credentialing Center (ANCC) Practice Exam

The strongest evidence for an incontinence reduction program comes from a randomized control trial. This type of study design is the gold standard in clinical research because it minimizes biases and confounding variables. By randomly assigning participants to either the intervention or control group, the research can more accurately establish a cause-and-effect relationship. This provides high-quality evidence regarding the effectiveness of the incontinence program.

While a systematic review of nonrandomized trials can provide valuable insights and summarize findings from multiple studies, it is still considered lower on the evidence hierarchy compared to randomized control trials. This is because nonrandomized trials are more susceptible to bias and may not adequately control for confounding factors.

A consensus statement from a urologic association reflects a collective opinion of experts in the field, but it may not be based on rigorous scientific evidence or studies. It serves as guidance rather than conclusive evidence.

A case report of an experimental program provides individual experiences or observations and lacks the rigorous methodology needed to draw broader conclusions applicable to larger populations. Thus, although it may offer interesting insights or suggest avenues for further research, it ranks lowest in the hierarchy of evidence for guiding practice in clinical settings.

In summary, the hierarchy of evidence prioritizes rigorous, well-structured research designs, which