Contact us:
+1 (520) 226-8615

Email:
[email protected]

Assignment: Evaluating an Evidence-Based Practice Article for Accuracy

Assignment: Evaluating an Evidence-Based Practice Article for Accuracy

Assignment: Evaluating an Evidence-Based Practice Article for Accuracy

Review the included article about Pain Control in Sickle Cell Disease and its use of complementary and Alternative Therapy use.

Writes a 2 page APA style paper that addresses the following: Identify the population, the type of study, the number of participants, the intervention, the method of evaluation, the outcome and the recommendation for implementation into practice and additional research.
-Discuss what the strengths and weaknesses are of the study.
-Discusses how they would change the study if it was to be repeated in the future.
-Identify how the results of this study are important in nursing care.

Reference for the article:

Thompson, W. E., & Eriator, I. (2014). Pain Control in Sickle Cell Disease Patients: Use of Complementary and Alternative Medicine. Pain Medicine, 15(2), 241–246. https://doi-org.ezproxy.rasmussen.edu/10.1111/pme.12292

KINDLY ORDER NOW FOR A CUSTOM-WRITTEN, PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER

THE ARTICLE CAN BE FOUND HERE:
https://academic.oup.com/painmedicine/article/15/2/241/1824660

Rubric

Course Code Class Code
NUR-590 NUR-590-O101 Evidence-Based Practice Proposal – Section A: Organizational Culture and Readiness Assessment and Section B: Proposal/Problem Statement and Literature Review 80.0
Criteria Percentage Unsatisfactory (0.00%) Less than Satisfactory (80.00%) Satisfactory (88.00%) Good (92.00%) Excellent (100.00%) Comments Points Earned
Content 70.0%
Section A: Organizational Culture and Readiness Assessment 40.0% A discussion of the readiness level or the organization, possible project barriers and facilitators, how to integrate clinical inquiry, and the rationale for survey categories is not included. A discussion of the readiness level or the organization, possible project barriers and facilitators, how to integrate clinical inquiry, and the rationale for survey categories is present, but it lacks detail or is incomplete. A discussion of the readiness level or the organization, possible project barriers and facilitators, how to integrate clinical inquiry, and the rationale for survey categories is present. A discussion of the readiness level or the organization, possible project barriers and facilitators, how to integrate clinical inquiry, and the rationale for survey categories is clearly provided and well developed. A comprehensive discussion of the readiness level or the organization, possible project barriers and facilitators, how to integrate clinical inquiry, and the rationale for survey categories is thoroughly developed with supporting details.
Section B: Proposal or Problem Statement 10.0% A proposal or problem statement is not included. A proposal or problem statement is present, but it lacks detail or is incomplete. A proposal or problem statement is present. A proposal or problem statement is clearly provided and well developed. A proposal or problem statement is comprehensive and thoroughly developed with supporting details.
Section B: Literature Review 15.0% A summary of the research you conducted to support your PICOT, including subjects, methods, key findings, and limitations, is not included. A summary of the research you conducted to support your PICOT, including subjects, methods, key findings, and limitations, is present, but it lacks detail or is incomplete. A summary of the research you conducted to support your PICOT, including subjects, methods, key findings, and limitations, is present. A summary of the research you conducted to support your PICOT, including subjects, methods, key findings, and limitations, is clearly provided and well developed. A comprehensive summary of the research you conducted to support your PICOT, including subjects, methods, key findings, and limitations, is thoroughly developed with supporting details.
Assignment: Evaluating an Evidence-Based Practice Article for Accuracy
Required Sources 5.0% Sources are not included. Number of required sources is only partially met. Number of required sources is met, but sources are outdated or inappropriate. Number of required sources is met. Sources are current, but not all sources are appropriate for the assignment criteria and nursing content. Number of required resources is met. Sources are current, and appropriate for the assignment criteria and nursing content.
Organization and Effectiveness 20.0%
Thesis Development and Purpose 7.0% 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.
Argument Logic and Construction 8.0% 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.
Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use) 5.0% 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) 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. Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.
Format 10.0%
Paper Format (Use of appropriate style for the major and assignment) 5.0% 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.
Assignment: Evaluating an Evidence-Based Practice Article for Accuracy
Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style) 5.0% 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.
Total Weightage 100%