Contact us:
+1 (520) 226-8615
Email:
[email protected]
Assignment: Evidence-Based Project
Assignment: Evidence-Based Project
Is there a difference between “common practice” and “best practice”?
When you first went to work for your current organization, experienced colleagues may have shared with you details about processes and procedures. Perhaps you even attended an orientation session to brief you on these matters. As a “rookie,” you likely kept the nature of your questions to those with answers that would best help you perform your new role.
Over time and with experience, perhaps you recognized aspects of these processes and procedures that you wanted to question further. This is the realm of clinical inquiry.
Clinical inquiry is the practice of asking questions about clinical practice. To continuously improve patient care, all nurses should consistently use clinical inquiry to question why they are doing something the way they are doing it. Do they know why it is done this way, or is it just because we have always done it this way? Is it a common practice or a best practice?
In this Assignment, you will identify clinical areas of interest and inquiry and practice searching for research in support of maintaining or changing these practices. You will also analyze this research to compare research methodologies employed.
To Prepare for Assignment: Evidence-Based Project:
Review the Resources and identify a clinical issue of interest that can form the basis of a clinical inquiry.
Based on the clinical issue of interest and using keywords related to the clinical issue of interest, search at least four different databases in the Walden Library to identify at least four relevant peer-reviewed articles related to your clinical issue of interest.
Review the results of your peer-reviewed research and reflect on the process of using an unfiltered database to search for peer-reviewed research.
Reflect on the types of research methodologies contained in the four relevant peer-reviewed articles you selected.
Part 1: An Introduction to Clinical Inquiry
Create a 4- to 5-slide PowerPoint presentation in which you do the following:
Identify and briefly describe your chosen clinical issue of interest.
Describe how you used keywords to search on your chosen clinical issue of interest.
Identify the four research databases that you used to conduct your search for the peer-reviewed articles you selected.
Provide APA citations of the four peer-reviewed articles you selected.
ORDER NOW FOR A CUSTOM-WRITTEN, PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER
Part 2: Identifying Research Methodologies
After reading each of the four peer-reviewed articles you selected, use the Matrix Worksheet template to analyze the methodologies applied in each of the four peer-reviewed articles. Your analysis should include the following:
The full citation of each peer-reviewed article in APA format.
A brief (1-paragraph) statement explaining why you chose this peer-reviewed article and/or how it relates to your clinical issue of interest, including a brief explanation of the ethics of research related to your clinical issue of interest.
A brief (1-2 paragraph) description of the aims of the research of each peer-reviewed article.
A brief (1-2 paragraph) description of the research methodology used. Be sure to identify if the methodology used was qualitative, quantitative, or a mixed-methods approach. Be specific.
A brief (1- to 2-paragraph) description of the strengths of each of the research methodologies used, including reliability and validity of how the methodology was applied in each of the peer-reviewed articles you selected.
By Day 7 of Week 3
Submit Part 1 and Part 2 of your Evidence-Based Project.
Submission and Grading Information
To submit your completed Assignment for review and grading, do the following:
Please save your Assignment using the naming convention “WK#Assgn+last name+first initial.(extension)” as the name.
Click the Weeks 2 and 3 Assignment Rubric to review the Grading Criteria for the Assignment.
Click the Weeks 2 and 3 Assignment link. You will also be able to “View Rubric” for grading criteria from this area.
Next, from the Attach File area, click on the Browse My Computer button. Find the document you saved as “WK3Assgn+last name+first initial.(extension)” and click Open.
If applicable: From the Plagiarism Tools area, click the checkbox for I agree to submit my paper(s) to the Global Reference Database.
Click on the Submit button to complete your submission.
Grading Criteria
To access your rubric:
Weeks 2 and 3 Assignment Rubric
Check Your Assignment Draft for Authenticity
To check your Assignment draft for authenticity:
Submit your Weeks 2 and 3 Assignment drafts and review the originality report.
Submit Part 1 and Part 2 of Your Assignment by Day 7 of Week 3
To submit your Assignment:
Weeks 2 and 3 Assignment
Rubric Detail
Select Grid View or List View to change the rubric’s layout.
| Excellent | Good | Fair | Poor | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Part 4A: Critical Appraisal of Research
Conduct a critical appraisal of the four peer-reviewed articles you selected and analyzed by completing the Critical Appraisal Tool Worksheet Template. Be sure to include: · An Evaluation Table |
45 (45%) – 50 (50%)
The critical appraisal accurately and clearly provides a detailed evaluation table. The responses provide a detailed, specific, and accurate evaluation of each of the peer-reviewed articles selected.
|
40 (40%) – 44 (44%)
The critical appraisal accurately provides an evaluation table. The responses provide an accurate evaluation of each of the peer-reviewed articles selected with some specificity.
|
35 (35%) – 39 (39%)
The critical appraisal provides an evaluation table that is inaccurate or vague. The responses provide an inaccurate or vague evaluation of each of the peer-reviewed articles selected. Assignment: Evidence-Based Project
|
0 (0%) – 34 (34%)
The critical appraisal provides an evaluation table that is inaccurate and vague or is missing.
|
| Part 4B: Evidence-Based Best Practices
Based on your appraisal, suggest a best practice that emerges from the research you reviewed. Briefly explain the best practice, justifying your proposal with APA citations of the research. |
32 (32%) – 35 (35%)
The responses accurately and clearly suggest a detailed best practice that is fully aligned to the research reviewed.
The responses accurately and clearly explain in detail the best practice, with sufficient justification of why this represents a best practice in the field. The responses provide a complete, detailed, and specific synthesis of two outside resources reviewed on the best practice explained. The response fully integrates at least two outside resources and two or three course-specific resources that fully support the responses provided. Accurate, complete, and full APA citations are provided for the research reviewed. |
28 (28%) – 31 (31%)
The responses accurately suggest a best practice that is adequately aligned to the research reviewed.
The responses accurately explain the best practice, with adequately justification of why this represents a best practice in the field. The responses provide an accurate synthesis of at least one outside resource reviewed on the best practice explained. The response integrates at least one outside resource and two or three course-specific resources that may support the responses provided. Accurate and complete APA citations are provided for the research reviewed. Assignment: Evidence-Based Project |
25 (25%) – 27 (27%)
The responses inaccurately or vaguely suggest a best practice that may be aligned to the research reviewed.
The responses inaccurately or vaguely explain the best practice, with inaccurate or vague justification for why this represents a best practice in the field. The responses provide a vague or inaccurate synthesis of outside resources reviewed on the best practice explained. The response minimally integrates resources that may support the responses provided. Inaccurate and incomplete APA citations are provided for the research reviewed. |
0 (0%) – 24 (24%)
The responses inaccurately and vaguely suggest a best practice that may be aligned to the research reviewed or are missing.
The responses inaccurately and vaguely explain the best practice, with inaccurate and vague justification for why this represents a best practice in the field, or are missing. A vague and inaccurate synthesis of no outside resources reviewed on the best practice explained is provided or is missing. The response fails to integrate any resources to support the responses provided. Inaccurate and incomplete APA citations are provided for the research reviewed or is missing. |
| Written Expression and Formatting—Paragraph Development and Organization:
Paragraphs make clear points that support well-developed ideas, flow logically, and demonstrate continuity of ideas. Sentences are carefully focused—neither long and rambling nor short and lacking substance. A clear and comprehensive purpose statement and introduction is provided which delineates all required criteria. |
5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity.
A clear and comprehensive purpose statement, introduction, and conclusion is provided which delineates all required criteria. Assignment: Evidence-Based Project |
4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 80% of the time.
Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment is stated yet is brief and not descriptive. |
3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%)
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 60–79% of the time.
Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment is vague or off topic. |
0 (0%) – 3 (3%)
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity less than 60% of the time.
No purpose statement, introduction, or conclusion was provided. |
| Written Expression and Formatting—English Writing Standards:
Correct grammar, mechanics, and proper punctuation. |
5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors.
|
4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Contains a few (one or two) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors.
|
3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%)
Contains several (three or four) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors.
|
0 (0%) – 3 (3%)
Contains many (five or more) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the reader’s understanding.
|
| Written Expression and Formatting—The paper follows correct APA format for title page, headings, font, spacing, margins, indentations, page numbers, running head, parenthetical/in-text citations, and reference list. |
5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Uses correct APA format with no errors.
|
4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Contains a few (one or two) APA format errors.
|
3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%)
Contains several (three or four) APA format errors.
|
0 (0%) – 3 (3%)
Contains many (five or more) APA format errors.
|
| Total Points: 100 |
|---|