Assignment: Evidence-Based Practice Project: Evaluation of Literature Table

Assignment: Evidence-Based Practice Project: Evaluation of Literature Table

Assignment: Evidence-Based Practice Project: Evaluation of Literature Table

Assessment Description

The purpose of this assignment is to provide research evidence in support of the PICOT you developed for your selected topic.

Conduct a search for 6 peer-reviewed, translational research articles published within the last 5 years that demonstrate support for your PICOT. You may include research articles from assignments completed previously in this course. Use the “Literature Evaluation Table” provided to evaluate the articles and explain how the research supports your PICOT.

ORDER A CUSTOMIZED, PLAGIARISM-FREE Assignment: Evidence-Based Practice Project: Evaluation of Literature Table
HERE

Good News For Our New customers . We can write this assignment for you and pay after Delivery. Our Top -rated medical writers will comprehensively review instructions , synthesis external evidence sources(Scholarly) and customize a quality assignment for you. We will also attach a copy of plagiarism report alongside and AI report. Feel free to chat Us

Once your instructor returns this assignment, review the feedback and make any revisions necessary. If you are directed by your instructor to select different articles in order to meet the assignment criteria or to better support your PICOT, make these changes accordingly. You will use the literature evaluated in this assignment for all subsequent assignments you develop as part of your evidence-based practice project proposal in this course and in NUR-590, during which you will synthesize all of the sections into a final written paper detailing your evidence-based practice project proposal.

Refer to “Evidence-Based Practice Project Proposal – Assignment Overview,” located in Class Resources, for an overview of the evidence-based practice project proposal assignments.

While APA style is not required for the body of this assignment, solid academic writing is expected, and documentation of sources should be presented using APA formatting 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 LopesWrite.

Attachments

NUR-550-RS5-LiteratureEvaluationTable.docx

Skip to main contentEnable accessibility for visually impairedOpen the accessibility menuOpen the Accessible Navigation Menu

Evidence-Based Practice Project: Evaluation of Literature Table – Rubric

LISTGRID

PRINT TO PDF

Rubric Criteria

Total150 points

Criterion

1. Unsatisfactory

2. Insufficient

3. Approaching

4. Acceptable

5. Target

PICOT

PICOT
0 points

The PICOT is omitted.

6 points

NA

6.6 points

NA
6.9 points

NA
7.5 points

The PICOT is clearly and accurately presented.

Articles

Articles

0 points

Required number of sources are not included. Article citations and permalinks are omitted.
12 points

Number of required sources is only partially met. Article citations and permalinks are presented. One or more links do not lead to the intended article.
13.2 points

Number of required sources is met, but some sources are outdated or inappropriate. Article citations and permalinks are presented. Article citations are presented, but there are errors.

13.8 points

Sources are current and generally appropriate for the assignment criteria and nursing content. Article citations and permalinks are presented. Article citations are presented, but there are minor errors.

15 points

Sources are current and highly appropriate for the assignment criteria and nursing content. Article citations and permalinks are presented. Article citations are accurate.

Research Question, Hypothesis, Purpose or Aim of Study

Research Question, Hypothesis, Purpose or Aim of Study
0 points

Research question, hypothesis, purpose or aim of study for one or more articles is omitted.
12 points

Research question, hypothesis, purpose or aim of study for each article is presented, but key information is consistently omitted. There are inaccuracies throughout.
13.2 points

Research question, hypothesis, purpose or aim of study for each article is presented. Key aspects are missing for one or two articles. There are minor inaccuracies.
13.8 points

Research question, hypothesis, purpose or aim of study for each article is adequately presented. Minor detail is needed for accuracy or clarity.
15 points

A discussion on the research question, hypothesis, purpose or aim of study is thoroughly and accurately presented for each article.

Study Design

Study Design
0 points

The study design for one or more article is omitted.
12 points

The study design for each article is presented, but key information is consistently omitted. There are inaccuracies throughout.
13.2 points

The study design is indicated for each article. Key aspects are missing for one or two articles. There are minor inaccuracies.
13.8 points

The study design is adequately presented for each article. Minor detail is needed for accuracy or clarity.

15 points

A thorough and accurate discussion on the study design for each article is presented.

Setting and Sample

Setting and Sample
0 points

The setting and sample are omitted for one or more of the articles.
12 points

The setting and sample are indicated for each article, but key information is consistently omitted. There are inaccuracies throughout.
13.2 points

The setting and sample are indicated for each article. Key aspects are missing for one or two articles. There are minor inaccuracies.

13.8 points

The setting and sample are adequately presented for each article. Minor detail is needed for accuracy or clarity.
15 points

The setting and sample in which the researcher conducted the study are detailed and accurate for each article.

Methods

Methods

0 points

Method of study for one or more articles is omitted. Overall, the methods of study are incomplete.

12 points

ORDER A CUSTOMIZED, PLAGIARISM-FREE Assignment: Evidence-Based Practice Project: Evaluation of Literature Table HERE

The method of study is presented for each article, but key information is consistently omitted. There are inaccuracies throughout.
13.2 points

The method of study for each article is presented. Key aspects are missing for one or two articles. There are minor inaccuracies
13.8 points

An adequate discussion on the method of study for each article is presented. Minor detail is needed for accuracy or clarity.

15 points

A thorough and accurate discussion on the method of study for each article is presented.

Analysis and Data Collection

Analysis and Data Collection
0 points

Analysis and data collection for one or more articles is omitted. Overall, the analysis and data collection are incomplete.
12 points

Analysis and data collection are presented for each article, but key information is consistently omitted. There are inaccuracies throughout.

13.2 points

Analysis and data collection for each article are presented. Key aspects are missing for one or two articles. There are minor inaccuracies.

13.8 points

An adequate discussion on the method of study for each article is presented. Minor detail is needed for accuracy or clarity.
15 points

A thorough and accurate discussion on the analysis and data collection for each article is presented.

Outcomes and Key Findings

Outcomes and Key Findings
0 points

Outcomes and key findings for one or more articles are omitted. Overall, the outcomes and key findings are incomplete.
12 points

Outcomes and key findings are presented for each article, but key information is consistently omitted. There are inaccuracies throughout.

13.2 points

Outcomes and key findings for each article are presented. Key aspects are missing for one or two articles. There are minor inaccuracies.
13.8 points

An adequate discussion on outcomes and key findings for each article are presented. Minor detail is needed for accuracy or clarity.
15 points

A thorough and accurate discussion on the outcomes and key findings collection for each article are presented.

Recommendations

Recommendations

0 points

Researcher recommendations are omitted for one or more of the articles. The recommendations described for three or more articles are inaccurate or incomplete.

12 points

Researcher recommendations are indicated for each article. The researcher recommendations described for two of the articles are inaccurate or incomplete.

13.2 points

Researcher recommendations for each article are presented. Researcher recommendations described for one article are inaccurate or incomplete.
13.8 points

Researcher recommendations for each article are accurately presented. Minor detail is needed for accuracy or clarity.

15 points

Researcher recommendations are accurately and thoroughly described for each article.

Explanation of How Articles Support Proposed Evidence-Based Practice Project Proposal

Explanation of How Articles Support Proposed Evidence-Based Practice Project Proposal

0 points

An explanation of how the article supports the proposed evidence-based practice project proposal is omitted for one or more of the articles. The explanation for three or more articles is inaccurate or incomplete.

12 points

An explanation for how each article supports the proposed evidence-based practice project proposal is presented. The explanation for two of the articles is inaccurate or incomplete.

13.2 points

A general explanation for how each article supports the proposed evidence-based practice project proposal is presented. The explanation for one article is inaccurate or incomplete. Support for the evidence-based project proposal is generally evident.

13.8 points

An explanation for how each article supports the proposed evidence-based practice project proposal is presented. Minor detail is needed for accuracy or clarity. Adequate support for the evidence-based project proposal is demonstrated.
15 points

A detailed explanation for how each article supports the proposed evidence-based practice project proposal is presented. Support for the evidence-based project proposal is clearly evident.

Mechanics of Writing

Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, and language use)
0 points

Errors in grammar or syntax are pervasive and impede meaning. Incorrect language choice or sentence structure errors are found throughout.
6 points

Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors are present. Inconsistencies in language choice or sentence structure are recurrent.
6.6 points

Occasional mechanical errors are present. Language choice is generally appropriate. Varied sentence structure is attempted.
6.9 points

Few mechanical errors are present. Suitable language choice and sentence structure are used.
7.5 points

No mechanical errors are present. Skilled control of language choice and sentence structure are used throughout.

© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.