How would you find out what the needs are for copy machines?
October 24, 2018
What is your estimate of the cumulative average hours required for the first four designs?
October 24, 2018

Name two different methods for evaluating evidence. Compare and contrast these two methods. (citation and reference)

Week 3

1) Discussion Topic

Max Points: 5.0

Submit a summary of six of your articles on the discussion board. Discuss one strength and one weakness to each of these six articles on why the article may or may not provide sufficient evidence for your practice change. (citation and reference)

2) Discussion Topic

Max Points: 5.0

Name two different methods for evaluating evidence. Compare and contrast these two methods. (citation and reference)

3) PICOT Statement Paper

View Rubric

Max Points: 75

Details: Facility for practicum is a Dialysis unit.

Review the Topic Materials and the work completed in NRS-433V to formulate a PICOT statement for your capstone project.

A PICOT starts with a designated patient population in a particular clinical area and identifies clinical problems or issues that arise from clinical care. The intervention should be an independent, specified nursing change intervention. The intervention cannot require a provider prescription. Include a comparison to a patient population not currently receiving the intervention, and specify the timeframe needed to implement the change process.

Formulate a PICOT statement using the PICOT format provided in the assigned readings. The PICOT statement will provide a framework for your capstone project.

In a paper of 500-750 words, clearly identify the clinical problem and how it can result in a positive patient outcome.

Make sure to address the following on the PICOT statement:

  • Evidence-Based Solution
  • Nursing Intervention
  • Patient Care
  • Health Care Agency
  • Nursing Practice

Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center. An abstract is not required.

This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.

You are required to submit this assignment to Turnitin.

Apply Rubrics

PICOT Statement Paper RUBRIC

1
Unsatisfactory
0.00%
2
Less than Satisfactory
75.00%
3
Satisfactory
79.00%
4
Good
89.00%
5
Excellent
100.00%
80.0 %Content
30.0 %Identification of Clinical Problem/Issue Clinical problem/issue is not identified, and resolution is not addressed. Clinical problem/issue is identified with little discussion of resolution or patient outcome. Clinical problem/issue is identified but not supported with clinical observations or evidence. The identified problem/issue can be resolved, or a patient outcome shows minimal improvement. Clinical problem/issue is identified based on clinical observation experience or evidence in literature. Articles are cited to support the need for change in nursing practice. The identified problem/issue can be resolved, or a patient outcome can be improved using nursing interventions. Clinical problem/issue is identified based on key concepts that define evidence-based practice or clinical experience. Articles are cited to support the need for change in nursing practice. The identified problem/issue can be resolved, or a patient outcome can show a marked improvement through a nursing intervention.
30.0 %Clinical Problem/Issue, Including Description, Evidence-Based Solution, Nursing Intervention, Patient Care, Health Care Agency, and Nursing Practice Clinical problem/issue is not described with clarity and the corresponding elements are not included. Clinical problem/issue description includes a basic understanding of the problem/issue and setting, with few of the following elements explained: evidence-based solution, nursing intervention, patient care, health care agency, and nursing practice. Clinical problem/issue description includes a basic understanding of the problem/issue, the setting, and the patient population. The following elements are explained: evidence-based solution, nursing intervention, patient care, health care agency, and nursing practice. Minimal rationale is provided to support the resolution of the clinical problem/issue. Clinical problem/issue description includes a thorough understanding of the problem/issue, the setting, the patient population, and why it is a problem/issue. The following elements are explained in detail: evidence-based solution, nursing intervention, and patient care consistent with specific health care agency and nursing practice. Sound rationale is provided supporting the clinical problem/issue resolution. Clinical problem/issue description includes a developed and thorough explanation of the problem/issue, the setting, the patient population, and the rationale for why it is a problem/issue. The identified clinical problem/issue explains the following elements with detail and clarity: evidence-based solution, nursing intervention, and improved patient care consistent with specific health care agency resulting in nursing practice change. Sound rationale is provided in the discussion of the clinical problem/issue resolution.
10.0 %PICOT Statement Focused on Resolution, Improvement, Application, and Intervention PICOT statement does not focus on resolution of a problem/issue, improvement of patient care or application of a nursing intervention. PICOT statement discusses a clinical problem/issue without a focus on improvement or intervention. PICOT statement focuses on the resolution of a clinical problem/issue that improves patient care through the application of a nursing intervention. PICOT statement focuses on the resolution of a clinical problem/issue, with discussion of improving patient care through the application of an evidenced-based nursing intervention. PICOT statement clearly focuses on the resolution of a clinical problem/issue and aims at improving patient care through the application of an evidenced-based nursing intervention.
10.0 %PICOT Statement Including Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcomes, and Time Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcomes, and Time are not included. Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcomes, and Time are present, but lack detail or are incomplete. Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcomes, and Time are present. Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcomes, and Time are clearly provided and well developed. Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcomes, and Time are comprehensive and thoroughly developed with supporting details.
15.0 %Organization and Effectiveness
5.0 %Presentation Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim. Thesis is insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not clear. Thesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose. Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper. Thesis is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose. Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.
5.0 %Argument Logic and Construction Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources. Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility. Argument is orderly, but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis. Argument shows logical progressions. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative. Clear and convincing argument that presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative.
5.0 %Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use) Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is used. Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register), sentence structure, or word choice are present. Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are used. Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. A variety of sentence structures and effective figures of speech are used. Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.
5.0 %Format
2.0 %Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment) Template is not used appropriately or documentation format is rarely followed correctly. Template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken; lack of control with formatting is apparent. Template is used, and formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present. Template is fully used; There are virtually no errors in formatting style. All format elements are correct.
5.0 %Format
3.0 %Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style) Sources are not documented. Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors. Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present. Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct. Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error.
100 %

Week 4

1 ) Discussion Topic

Max Points: 5.0

Why is understanding the health care system at the local level important to consider when planning an EBP implementation? Conduct research and solicit anecdotal evidence from your course mentor that you will take into consideration for your own change project. (citation and reference)

2) Discussion Topic

Max Points: 5.0

Compare and contrast two change theories, and determine which theory makes the most sense for implementing your specific EBP project. Why? Has your mentor used either theory, and to what result? (citation and reference)

3) Literature Evaluation Table

View Rubric

Max Points: 75 Facility for practicum is a Dialysis unit.

Details:

In nursing practice, accurate identification and application of research is essential to achieving successful outcomes. Being able to articulate the information and successfully summarize relevant peer-reviewed articles in a scholarly fashion helps to support the student’s ability and confidence to further develop and synthesize the progressively more complex assignments that constitute the components of the course change proposal capstone project.

For this assignment, the student will provide a synopsis of eight peer-reviewed articles from nursing journals using an evaluation table that determines the level and strength of evidence for each of the eight articles. The articles should be current within the last 5 years and closely relate to the PICOT statement developed earlier in this course. The articles may include quantitative research, descriptive analyses, longitudinal studies, or meta-analysis articles. A systematic review may be used to provide background information for the purpose or problem identified in the proposed capstone project. Use the “Literature Evaluation Table” resource to complete this assignment.

While APA style is not required for the body of this assignment, solid academic writing is expected, and in-text citations and references should be presented using APA documentation guidelines, which can be found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center.

This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.

You are not required to submit this assignment to Turnitin.

NRS-490-RS-LiteratureEvaluationTable.docx

Top of Form

Apply Rubrics

Literature Evaluation Table RUBRIC

1
Unsatisfactory 0-71%
0.00%
2
Less Than Satisfactory 72-75%
75.00%
3
Satisfactory 76-79%
79.00%
4
Good 80-89%
89.00%
5
Excellent 90-100%
100.00%
100.0 %Article Selection
5.0 %Author, Journal (Peer-Reviewed), and Permalink or Working Link to Access Article Author, journal (peer-reviewed), and permalink or working link to access article section is not included. Author, journal (peer-reviewed), and permalink or working link to access article section is present, but it lacks detail or is incomplete. Author, journal (peer-reviewed), and permalink or working link to access article section is present. Author, journal (peer-reviewed), and permalink or working link to access article section is clearly provided and well developed. Author, journal (peer-reviewed), and permalink or working link to access article section is comprehensive and thoroughly developed with supporting details.
5.0 %Article Title and Year Published Article title and year published section is not included. Article title and year published section is present, but it lacks detail or is incomplete. Article title and year published section is present. Article title and year published section is clearly provided and well developed. Article title and year published section is comprehensive and thoroughly developed with supporting details.
10.0 %Research Questions (Qualitative) or Hypothesis (Quantitative), and Purposes or Aim of Study Research questions (qualitative) or hypothesis (quantitative), and purposes or aim of study section is not included. Research questions (qualitative) or hypothesis (quantitative), and purposes or aim of study section is present, but it lacks detail or is incomplete. Research questions (qualitative) or hypothesis (quantitative), and purposes or aim of study section is present. Research questions (qualitative) or hypothesis (quantitative), and purposes or aim of study section is clearly provided and well developed. Research questions (qualitative) or hypothesis (quantitative), and purposes or aim of study section is comprehensive and thoroughly developed with supporting details.
5.0 %Design (Type of Quantitative, or Type of Qualitative) Design (type of quantitative, or type of qualitative) section is not included. Design (type of quantitative, or type of qualitative) section is present, but it lacks detail or is incomplete. Design (type of quantitative, or type of qualitative) section is present. Design (type of quantitative, or type of qualitative) section is clearly provided and well developed. Design (type of quantitative, or type of qualitative) section is comprehensive and thoroughly developed with supporting details.
5.0 %Setting or Sample Setting or sample section is not included. Setting or sample section is present, but it lacks detail or is incomplete. Setting or sample section is present. Setting or sample section is clearly provided and well developed. Setting or sample section is comprehensive and thoroughly developed with supporting details.
5.0 %Methods: Intervention or Instruments Methods: Intervention or instruments section is not included. Methods: Intervention or instruments section is present, but it lacks detail or is incomplete. Methods: Intervention or instruments section is present. Methods: Intervention or instruments section is clearly provided and well developed. Methods: Intervention or instruments section is comprehensive and thoroughly developed with supporting details.
10.0 %Analysis Analysis section is not included. Analysis section is present, but it lacks detail or is incomplete. Analysis section is present. Analysis section is clearly provided and well developed. Analysis section is comprehensive and thoroughly developed with supporting details.
10.0 %Key Findings Key findings section is not included. Key findings section is present, but it lacks detail or is incomplete. Key findings section is present. Key findings section is clearly provided and well developed. Key findings section is comprehensive and thoroughly developed with supporting details.
10.0 %Recommendations Recommendations section is not included. Recommendations section is present, but it lacks detail or is incomplete. Recommendations section is present. Recommendations section is clearly provided and well developed. Recommendations section is comprehensive and thoroughly developed with supporting details.
10.0 %Explanation of How the Article Supports EBP or Capstone Explanation of how the article supports EBP or capstone section is not included. Explanation of how the article supports EBP or capstone section is present, but it lacks detail or is incomplete. Explanation of how the article supports EBP or capstone section is present. Explanation of how the article supports EBP or capstone section is clearly provided and well developed. Explanation of how the article supports EBP or capstone section is comprehensive and thoroughly developed with supporting details.
10.0 %Presentation The piece is not neat or organized, and it does not include all required elements. The work is not neat and includes minor flaws or omissions of required elements. The overall appearance is general, and major elements are missing. The overall appearance is generally neat, with a few minor flaws or missing elements. The work is well presented and includes all required elements. The overall appearance is neat and professional.
10.0 %Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, and language use) Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is employed. Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) or word choice are present. Sentence structure is correct but not varied. Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct and varied sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are employed. Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. The writer uses a variety of effective sentence structures and figures of speech. The writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.
5.0 %Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style) Sources are not documented. Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors. Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present. Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct. Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error.
100 %Total Weightage

Bottom of Form

Week 5

1) Discussion Topic

Max Points: 5.0

Stakeholder support is necessary for a successful change proposal project implementation. Consider your internal stakeholders, such as the facility, unit or health care setting where the change process is situated, and your external stakeholders, like an individual or group outside the health care setting. Why is their support necessary to the success of your project, and how you will go about securing that support? (citation and reference)

2) Discussion Topic

Max Points: 5.0

Technology is integral to successful implementation in many projects, through either support or integration or both. Name at least one technology that could improve the implementation process and the outcomes of your EBP project. Do you plan to use this technology? If not, what are the barriers that prevent its use? (citation and reference)

Week 6

1) Discussion Topic

Max Points: 5.0

After discussion with your mentor, name one financial aspect, one quality aspect, and one clinical aspect that need to be taken into account for developing the evidence-based practice project. Explain how your proposal will directly and indirectly impact each of the aspects. (citation and reference)

2) Discussion Topic Max 5.0

Now that you have completed a series of assignments that have led you into the active project planning and development stage for your project, briefly describe your proposed solution to address the problem, issue, suggestion, initiative, or educational need and how it has changed since you first envisioned it. What led to your current perspective and direction? (citation and reference)

3) Literature Review

View Rubric

Max Points: 100 Facility for practicum is a Dialysis unit.

Details:

While the implementation plan prepares students to apply their research to the problem or issue they have identified for their capstone change proposal project, the literature review enables students to map out and move into the active planning and development stages of the project.

A literature review analyzes how current research supports the PICOT, as well as identifies what is known and what is not known in the evidence. Students will use the information from the earlier PICOT Statement Paper and Literature Evaluation Table assignments to develop a 750-1,000 word review that includes the following sections:

  • Title page
  • Introduction section
  • A comparison of research questions
  • A comparison of sample populations
  • A comparison of the limitations of the study
  • A conclusion section, incorporating recommendations for further research

Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center. An abstract is not required.

This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.

You are required to submit this assignment to Turnitin. (citation and references)

Top of Form

Apply Rubrics

Literature Review RUBRIC

1
Unsatisfactory
0.00%
2
Less than Satisfactory
75.00%
3
Satisfactory
79.00%
4
Good
89.00%
5
Excellent
100.00%
80.0 %Content
10.0 %Introduction An introduction is not present. An introduction is present, but it does not relate to the body of the paper. An introduction is present, and it relates to the body of the paper. There is nothing in the introduction to entice the reader to continue reading. An introduction is present, and it relates to the body of the paper. Information presented in the introduction provides incentive for the reader to continue reading. An introduction is present, and it relates to the body of the paper. Information presented in the introduction is intriguing and encourages the reader to continue reading.
20.0 %Comparison of Research Questions No comparison of research questions is presented. A comparison of research questions is presented, but it is not valid. A cursory though valid comparison of research questions is presented. A moderately thorough and valid comparison of research questions is presented. A reflective and insightful comparison of research questions is presented.
20.0 %Comparison of Sample Populations No comparison of sample populations is presented. A comparison of sample populations is presented, but it is not valid. A cursory though valid comparison of sample populations is presented. A moderately thorough and valid comparison of sample populations is presented. A reflective and insightful comparison of sample populations is presented.
20.0 %Comparison of the Limitations of the Study No comparison of the limitations of the study is presented. A comparison of the limitations of the study is presented, but it is not valid. A cursory though valid comparison of the limitations of the study is presented. A moderately thorough and valid comparison of the limitations of the study is presented. A reflective and insightful comparison of the limitations of the study is presented.
10.0 %Conclusion and Recommendations for Further Research No conclusion and recommendations for further research are presented. A conclusion and recommendations for further research are presented, but they are not valid. A conclusion and recommendations for further research are valid, but they are cursory. A conclusion and recommendations for further research are valid and moderately thorough. A conclusion and recommendations for further research are reflective and insightful.
15.0 %Organization and Effectiveness
5.0 %Thesis Development and Purpose Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim. Thesis is insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not clear. Thesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose. Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper. Thesis is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose. Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.
5.0 %Argument Logic and Construction Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources. Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility. Argument is orderly, but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis. Argument shows logical progressions. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative. Clear and convincing argument that presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative.
5.0 %Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use) Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is used. Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register), sentence structure, or word choice are present. Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are used. Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. A variety of sentence structures and effective figures of speech are used. Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.
5.0 %Format
2.0 %Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment) Template is not used appropriately or documentation format is rarely followed correctly. Template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken; lack of control with formatting is apparent. Template is used, and formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present. Template is fully used; There are virtually no errors in formatting style. All format elements are correct.
3.0 %Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style) Sources are not documented. Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors. Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present. Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct. Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error.
100 %Total Weightage

Bottom of Form

Week 7

1) Discussion Topic

Max Points: 5.0

Describe one internal and one external method for the dissemination of your EBP project results. For example, an internal method may be the hospital board, and an external method may be a professional nursing organization. Discuss why it is important to report your results to both of these groups. How will your communication strategies change for each group? (citation and reference)

2) Discussion Topic

Max Points: 5.0

In order to evaluate an evidence-based practice project, it is important to be able to determine the effectiveness of your change. Discuss one way you will be able to evaluate whether your project made a difference in practice. (citation and reference)

Week 8

1) Discussion Topic

Max Points: 5.0

Based on how you will evaluate your EBP project, which independent and dependent variables do you need to collect? Why? (citation and reference)

2) Discussion Topic

Max Points: 5.0

Not all EBP projects result in statistically significant results. Define clinical significance, and explain the difference between clinical and statistical significance. How can you use clinical significance to support positive outcomes in your project? (citation and reference)

 

"Looking for a Similar Assignment? Get Expert Help at an Amazing Discount!"

Hi there! Click one of our representatives below and we will get back to you as soon as possible.

Chat with us on WhatsApp