HIM 675 Module 10 Reflection Example

Reviewed by Delia Ravenscroft, MSN, RN

This HIM 675 Module 10 Reflection sample examines how designing a study changed the way one health information professional thinks about evidence. It was written for SNHU HIM 675 (HIM-675), where the tenth module asks MS Health Information Management learners to consider their growth as researchers before the capstone. The composite writer manages data integrity at a 340-bed teaching hospital in Tulsa and admits to having started the course wanting to prove that coders were setting present-on-admission flags carelessly. The entry traces three changes, writing questions whose answer could go either way, distrusting a reassuring figure until chance agreement is removed and treating the patients in the records as people with a stake in the study, and it ends with a commitment to report the findings even if they show the flags are mostly right.

CourseHIM 675 Research Methods and Evaluation
ModuleModule 10
Paper typegraduate reflection on learning to design health information research
LengthAbout 370 words, 3 pages
FormatAPA 7 student paper
SchoolSouthern New Hampshire University
ProgramMS Health Information Management
UpdatedOctober 2026

Free sample paper for HIM 675 Module 10

1

Module Ten Reflection

I Wanted to Be Right

I came into this course already sure of my answer. The pressure injury audit had convinced me that our coders were flagging wounds as present on admission without looking, and I wanted a study to prove it. Ten weeks later my question no longer assumes who is at fault, and I am a little embarrassed at how close I came to designing a study that could only confirm what I believed.

What this page is doingAn uncomfortable admission opens the entry.
2

The first change is in how I write questions. Hulley et al. (2013) describe a good question as one that is feasible, interesting, novel, ethical and relevant, and I have added my own test: it must be able to come out the other way. My early draft asked how often coders over-report. My final question asks how often flags agree with the chart in either direction and whether documentation explains the errors. If the data show nurses' admission notes are the problem, or that the flags are mostly accurate, the study can say so.

The second change is that I distrust a reassuring number. In the pilot, my abstractors agreed 90% of the time and I was ready to celebrate, until kappa came back near 0.80. McHugh (2012) warns that raw agreement overstates reliability because some of it is chance, and that lesson now applies to everything I report. When someone tells me our coding accuracy is 96%, my first question is what it would be by chance.

The third change is about the people in the data. The woman whose wound went unrecorded for two days is not a row in my spreadsheet. The Belmont Report's principle of justice, that those who bear research burdens should share its benefits (National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research, 1979), is why my proposal now ends with a summary for the community.

What this page is doingThree changes are anchored in moments from the course.
3

My commitment is to share the results with the quality committee and the community summary exactly as they come out, including if the flags are mostly accurate and my original suspicion was wrong. The skill I still lack is statistical confidence; I have arranged for the hospital's biostatistician to review my regression output before I interpret it.

What this page is doingA risky promise and a named weakness end the reflection.
4

References

Hulley, S. B., Cummings, S. R., Browner, W. S., Grady, D. G., & Newman, T. B. (2013). Designing clinical research (4th ed.). Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.

McHugh, M. L. (2012). Interrater reliability: The kappa statistic. Biochemia Medica, 22(3), 276-282. https://doi.org/10.11613/BM.2012.031

National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research. (1979). The Belmont report: Ethical principles and guidelines for the protection of human subjects of research. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. https://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/regulations-and-policy/belmont-report/index.html

What the HIM 675 Module 10 instructions ask for

The last module of HIM 675 asks for a short personal reflection on what designing research taught you. Expect roughly a page, with an APA 7 source or two only where a reading reshaped your thinking. Rather than retracing the syllabus, describe two or three ways your approach to questions, evidence or ethics has changed, each tied to a specific point in your milestones, such as a rewritten question or a pilot result. Be honest about an assumption or bias you brought into the course. Consider what you still find difficult as a researcher. Close with a commitment that matters for your capstone, ideally one that carries some risk, and a skill you will strengthen before carrying out the study.

How this HIM 675 Module 10 reflection example is built

Cimarron Heights Medical Center's data integrity manager begins by admitting a plan to prove coders careless. Three changes follow. Questions must now be able to come out the other way, an addition to Hulley and colleagues' FINER test that reshaped the final question. Reassuring numbers are now suspect, after 90% pilot agreement turned out to mean kappa near 0.80, read through McHugh's warning about chance. People in the data now count, with the Belmont Report's justice principle explaining the community summary. The HIM 675 reflection commits to reporting results even if the flags prove accurate, and names statistics as a weak spot, with a biostatistician review arranged.

Where the HIM 675 Module 10 rubric puts the points

Final reflections in HIM 675 are generally graded on specific changes in research thinking linked to course work, honest acknowledgment of initial assumptions or bias, sources used to explain those changes, awareness of the writer's remaining limitations and a commitment relevant to the capstone. Entries that excel show the writer now values questions that could disconfirm a hunch, understands why certain statistics matter and sees research participants as stakeholders. A commitment that could cost the writer something, such as reporting a result that contradicts a long-held belief, makes the reflection credible. Clear organization, a personal and professional voice and correct APA 7 for any citations round out stronger entries.

HIM 675 Module 10 help: the mistakes that cost points

HIM 675 reflections lose marks when they summarize the course, claim mastery without evidence, avoid any admission of bias or end with a general plan to keep learning research. Others cite methods texts without connecting them to a change in thinking. If your prompt asks about program outcomes, your readiness for the capstone or your growth as a leader, send it with a short summary of your proposal and your role so the reflection draws on your own milestones. One concrete moment, such as a question you rewrote, is worth more than several general claims. Our HIM 675 reflections start from an honest assumption and end with a commitment someone could check.

Get HIM 675 Module 10 written to your instructions

Pass along the HIM 675 Module 10 prompt plus a few lines on your proposal and where you work. You will get a reflection that admits an assumption you started with, ties two or three changes to specific milestone moments and ends with a capstone commitment and a skill to build, finished within two days, with the first at no charge. The paper above is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official Southern New Hampshire University document.

Request this module free All HIM 675 modules

More HIM 675 papers and related MS Health Information Management samples

HIM 675 Module 10 questions, answered

Where can I find a free HIM 675 Module 10 Reflection sample?

This page includes the full HIM 675 Module 10 reflection, in which a data integrity manager learns to test questions instead of proving hunches and to distrust uncorrected agreement figures.

What should a research methods reflection include?

A few specific changes in how you frame questions, judge evidence or handle ethics, each tied to course work, an honest look at an early assumption and a commitment for the capstone.

Is it acceptable to admit bias in an HIM 675 reflection?

Yes. Recognizing that you set out to confirm a belief, and showing how your design changed, demonstrates exactly the growth the course aims for.

Should the reflection mention specific statistics?

Briefly, if a statistic changed your thinking, such as learning that kappa corrects agreement for chance. Keep the focus on what you learned.

How long is the HIM 675 final reflection?

A single page is the norm, though instructors differ; some name a word range while others grade content alone.