NRS 490 RS – Literature Evaluation Table

NRS 490 RS – Literature Evaluation Table

NRS 490 RS – Literature Evaluation Table

Professor’s Comments

The selection of diabetes is an appropriate topic. Initially in the beginning of the paper, it eludes to obesity so be careful in the presentation of the project. However, additional insight is needed to determine the narrowing of the board topic of diabetes education to one specific item and individuals to educate. Please see comments provided in the attached document and let me know if you have any questions.

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

Literature Evaluation Table

Student Name:

Change Topic (2-3 sentences):

 

Criteria	Article 1	Article 2	Article 3	Article 4
Author, Journal (Peer-Reviewed), and Permalink or Working Link to Access Article
Article Title and Year Published
Research Questions (Qualitative)/Hypothesis (Quantitative), and Purposes/Aim of Study
Design (Type of Quantitative, or Type of Qualitative)
Setting/Sample
Methods: Intervention/Instruments
Analysis
Key Findings
Recommendations
Explanation of How the Article Supports EBP/Capstone Project

 

 

Criteria	Article 5	Article 6	Article 7	Article 8
Author, Journal (Peer-Reviewed), and Permalink or Working Link to Access Article
Article Title and Year Published
Research Questions (Qualitative)/Hypothesis (Quantitative), and Purposes/Aim of Study
Design (Type of Quantitative, or Type of Qualitative)
Setting/Sample
Methods: Intervention/Instruments
Analysis
Key Findings
Recommendations
Explanation of How the Article Supports EBP/Capstone

NRS 490 RS – Literature Evaluation Table

Rubric:

Course Code	Class Code	Assignment Title	Total Points
NRS-490	NRS-490-O501	PICOT Statement Paper	75.0
Criteria	Percentage	Unsatisfactory (0.00%)	Less than Satisfactory (75.00%)	Satisfactory (79.00%)	Good (89.00%)	Excellent (100.00%)	Comments	Points Earned
Content	80.0%
Identification of Clinical Problem/Issue	30.0%	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.		22.50/22.50
Clinical Problem/Issue, Including Description, Evidence-Based Solution, Nursing Intervention, Patient Care, Health Care Agency, and Nursing Practice	30.0%	Clinical problem/issue is not described with clarity and the corresponding elements are not included. NRS 490 RS – Literature Evaluation Table	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.		22.50/22.50
PICOT Statement Focused on Resolution, Improvement, Application, and Intervention	10.0%	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.		0.00/7.50
PICOT Statement Including Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcomes, and Time	10.0%	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.		0.00/7.50
Organization and Effectiveness	15.0%
Presentation	5.0%	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.		3.75/3.75
Argument Logic and Construction	5.0%	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. NRS 490 RS – Literature Evaluation Table	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.		3.75/3.75
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), 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.		3.75/3.75
Format	5.0%
Paper Format  (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)	2.0%	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.		1.33/1.50
Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style)	3.0%	Sources are not documented. NRS 490 RS – Literature Evaluation Table	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.		2.00/2.25
Total Weightage	100%								59.59/75.0