NURS 8201 Full Course Discussions & Assignments (Week 1-10)

NURS 8201 WEEK 1 DISCUSSION: INTRODUCTION AND EXPERIENCE WITH RESEARCH

Have you ever considered the importance of research in nursing? How might research shape the delivery of healthcare?

In this course, you will consider the importance of research in nursing and analyze your previous experience and familiarity with research. Research in nursing began with Florence Nightingale in 1850 and has continued to transform in complexity and scope every year since (Gray & Grove, 2020).

Not surprisingly, the field and practice of nursing is greatly influenced by the implementation of evidence-based practice (EBP) or rather, nursing practices and guidelines that are strongly supported by research and data outcomes.

Struggling to meet your deadline ?

Get assistance on

NURS 8201 Full Course Discussions & Assignments (Week 1-10)

done on time by medical experts. Don’t wait – ORDER NOW!

ORDER A CUSTOMIZED, PLAGIARISM-FREE NURS 8201 Full Course Discussions & Assignments (Week 1-10) 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

For this Discussion, take a moment to introduce yourself to you peers and describe your current or previous role in nursing practice. Reflect on your experience with EBP and consider whether your current organization supports EBP.

Reference: Gray, J. R., & Grove, S. K. (2020). Burns and Grove’s the practice of nursing research: Appraisal, synthesis, and generation of evidence (9th ed.). Elsevier.

RESOURCES

Be sure to review the Learning Resources before completing this activity.

Click the weekly resources link to access the resources.

WEEKLY RESOURCES

TO PREPARE:

Review the Learning Resources for this week.

Reflect on your experience with nursing practice and research, particularly EBP. For example, consider how your current organization may support EBP. How might this connect with what you read in the textbook chapters?

BY DAY 3 OF WEEK 1

Post a brief introduction, including your current or previous role in nursing practice. Describe any previous experience with nursing research. Be specific. Then, explain any previous experience or familiarity with EBP and explain whether your current organization supports EBP. Be specific and provide examples.

BY DAY 6 OF WEEK 1

Read a selection of your colleagues’ responses and respond to at least two of your colleagues on two different days by expanding upon your colleague’s post or suggesting an additional alternative perspective on EBP.

NURS 8201 WEEK 3 DISCUSSION: SAMPLING

Have you ever watched a commercial that touts “four out of five doctors recommend a particular product”? Have you ever wondered how the company is able to make such claims? These types of claims are created using the research method of sampling. Sampling, “involves selecting a group of people, events, behaviors, or other elements with which to conduct a study” (Gray & Grove, 2020).

There are different sampling methods and techniques, with ranging validity outcomes. Therefore, it is important to determine the technique that is most valid. Much of the outcome will be dependent on the particular group sampled (or the population), so a sampling plan will be integral before sampling occurs.

For this Discussion, reflect on the population in your area of practice. Consider the most appropriate use for this population and potential challenges that may affect sampling in this population. Then, think about how you might address these challenges and what strategies you might implement. How might a different population yield similar or conflicting results?

Reference: Gray, J. R., & Grove, S. K. (2020). Burns and Grove’s the practice of nursing research: Appraisal, synthesis, and generation of evidence (9th ed.). Elsevier

RESOURCES

Be sure to review the Learning Resources before completing this activity.

Click the weekly resources link to access the resources.

WEEKLY RESOURCES

WEEK 3: LEARNING RESOURCES

Required Readings

Gray, J. R., & Grove, S. K. (2020). Burns and Grove’s the practice of nursing research: Appraisal, synthesis, and generation of evidence (9th ed.). Elsevier.

Chapter 15, “Sampling” (pp. 410–449)

Chapter 20, “Collecting and Managing Data” (pp. 607–634)

Bruce, N., Pope, D., & Stanistreet, D. (2018). Quantitative methods for health researchâ€¯:Links to an external site. A practical interactive guide to epidemiology and statistics (2nd ed.). Wiley.

TO PREPARE:

Review the Learning Resources for this week and reflect on a population in your area of practice. How might you sample this population, and what challenges might you experience? Consider the use of strategies, or perhaps a different population, to mitigate these challenges.

After considering the sampling of a specific population, consider the importance of data collection. How might sampling be used in research, and what benefits might be derived from sampling in a study? Conversely, consider how a different approach might be useful.

BY DAY 3 OF WEEK 3

Post an explanation of the researchable populations that may be present in your area of practice. Describe which would be most appropriate for use in your research study and explain why. Then, describe the challenges of obtaining a sample from this population. How might you address those challenges? Be specific and provide examples. Be sure to also include the approach you would recommend to collect data from the sample that you described. Provide a rationale for the approach that you choose based on this week’s Learning Resources.

BY DAY 6 OF WEEK 3

Read a selection of your colleagues’ responses and respond to at least two of your colleagues on two different days in one of the following ways:

Provide additional strategies for addressing challenges to obtaining a sample from the identified population.

Suggest a different population that may be appropriate for addressing the research problem.

Summarize the strengths of the data collection method identified in the post.

Share any problems or concerns over the identified data collection method.

Suggest an alternative data collection method and provide your rationale.

NURS_8201_Week3_Discussion_Rubric

Criteria Ratings Pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeMain Posting: Response to the Discussion question is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current scholarly sources.
44 to >39.0 pts

Excellent 90%–100%

Thoroughly responds to the Discussion question(s). Is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current scholarly sources. No less than 75% of post has exceptional depth and breadth. Supported by at least three current scholarly sources that are correctly cited and formatted.

39 to >34.0 pts

Good 80%–89%

Responds to most of the Discussion question(s). Is somewhat reflective with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module. 50% of the post has exceptional depth and breadth. Supported by at least three scholarly sources that are correctly cited and formatted.

34 to >30.0 pts

Fair 70%–79%

Responds to some of the Discussion question(s). One to two criteria are not addressed or are superficially addressed. Is somewhat lacking reflection and critical analysis and synthesis. Somewhat represents knowledge gained from the course readings for the module. Supported by fewer than two scholarly sources that are correctly cited and formatted.

30 to >0 pts

Poor 0%–69%

Does not respond to the Discussion question(s). Lacks depth or superficially addresses criteria. Lacks reflection and critical analysis and synthesis. Does not represent knowledge gained from the course readings for the module. Contains only one or no scholarly sources.
44 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeMain Posting: Writing
6 to >5.0 pts

Excellent 90%–100%

Written clearly and concisely. Contains no grammatical or spelling errors. Adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style. Response is effectively written in Standard Academic English.

5 to >4.0 pts

Good 80%–89%

Written clearly and concisely. May contain one to two grammatical or spelling errors. Adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style. Response is effectively written in Standard Academic English.

4 to >3.0 pts

Fair 70%–79%

Written somewhat clearly and concisely. May contain more than two spelling or grammatical errors. Contains some APA formatting errors. Edits are needed to follow standards for Standard Academic English.

3 to >0 pts

Poor 0%–69%

Not written clearly or concisely. Contains more than two spelling or grammatical errors. Does not adhere to current APA manual writing rules and style. Does not follow Standard Academic English for most of the post.
6 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeMain Posting: Timely and full participation
10 to >8.0 pts

Excellent 90%–100%

Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation. … Posts main Discussion by due date.

8 to >7.0 pts

Good 80%–89%

Meets requirements for full participation. … Posts main Discussion by due date.

7 to >6.0 pts

Fair 70%–79%

Posts main Discussion by due date.

6 to >0 pts

Poor 0%–69%

Does not meet requirements for full participation. … Does not post main Discussion by due date.
10 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeFirst Response: Post to colleague’s main post that is reflective and justified with scholarly sources.
9 to >8.0 pts

Excellent 90%–100%

Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings. Responds to questions posed by faculty. Uses scholarly sources to support ideas. Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives. Scholarly sources are correctly cited and formatted.

8 to >7.0 pts

Good 80%–89%

Response has some depth and may exhibit critical thinking or application to practice setting. Uses scholarly sources to support ideas. Demonstrates a beginning synthesis and understanding of learning objectives. Scholarly sources are correctly cited and formatted.

7 to >6.0 pts

Fair 70%–79%

Response is on topic and may have some depth. Minimal or no scholarly sources provided.

6 to >0 pts

Poor 0%–69%

Response may not be on topic and lacks depth. No sources.
9 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeFirst Response: Writing

6 to >5.0 pts

Excellent 90%–100%

Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues. Response to faculty questions is fully answered, if posed. Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more scholarly sources. Response is effectively written in Standard Academic English.

5 to >4.0 pts

Good 80%–89%

Communication is mostly professional and respectful to colleagues. Response to faculty questions is mostly answered, if posed. Provides opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources. Response is written in Academic English.

4 to >3.0 pts

Fair 70%–79%

Response posed in the Discussion may lack effective professional communication. Response to faculty questions is minimally addressed, if posed. Few or no scholarly sources are cited.

3 to >0 pts

Poor 0%–69%

Responses posted in the Discussion lack effective communication. Response to faculty questions is missing. No scholarly sources are cited.
6 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeFirst Response: Timely and full participation
5 to >4.0 pts

Excellent 90%–100%

Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation. … Posts by due date.

4 to >3.0 pts

Good 80%–89%

Meets requirements for full participation. … Posts by due date.

3 to >2.0 pts

Fair 70%–79%

Posts by due date.

2 to >0 pts

Poor 0%–69%

Does not meet requirements for full participation. … Does not post by due date.
5 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSecond Response: Post to colleague’s main post that is reflective and justified with scholarly sources.

9 to >8.0 pts

Excellent 90%–100%

8 to >7.0 pts

Good 80%–89%

7 to >6.0 pts

Fair 70%–79%

Response is on topic and may have some depth. Minimal or no scholarly sources provided.

6 to >0 pts

Poor 0%–69%

Response may not be on topic and lacks depth. No sources.

9 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSecond Response: Writing
6 to >5.0 pts

Excellent 90%–100%

5 to >4.0 pts

Good 80%–89%

Communication is mostly professional and respectful to colleagues. Response to faculty questions is mostly answered, if posed. Provides opinions and ideas that are supported by few at least two scholarly sources…. Response is written in Standard Academic English.

4 to >3.0 pts

Fair 70%–79%

Response posed in the Discussion may lack effective professional communication. Response to faculty questions is minimally addressed, if posed. Few or no scholarly sources are cited.

3 to >0 pts

Poor 0%–69%

Responses posted in the Discussion lack effective communication. Response to faculty questions is missing. No scholarly sources are cited.
6 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSecond Response: Timely and full participation
5 to >4.0 pts

Excellent 90%–100%

Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation. Posts by due date.

4 to >3.0 pts

Good 80%–89%

Meets requirements for full participation. Posts by due date.

3 to >2.0 pts

Fair 70%–79%

Posts by due date.

2 to >0 pts

Poor 0%–69%

Does not meet requirements for full participation. Does not post by due date.

5 pts

Total Points: 100

WEEK 4 DISCUSSION: LEVELS OF MEASUREMENT

What is the incidence of blood clots from COVID-19 in females over the age of 35?

The above question is an example of a research question. A research question consists of three parts and guides the methods and approaches in which you will study the question to find answers. The research question includes: the question, the topic, and the population or variables. In the example provided above, the question is examining the prevalence of blood clots from severe COVID-19 in a selected population. From this question, the variables can be assessed, considerations can be analyzed, and populations can be sampled in order to guide the research.

During Week 2, you developed a research problem statement based on a topic of interest to you or your specific area of practice. Using this research problem statement, you will develop a research question. “A research question is a concise, interrogative statement that is worded in the present tense and includes one or more of a study’s principal concepts or variables” (Gray & Grove, 2020). These questions typically point to the type of study that will be conducted and serves as a guide for the research.

For this Discussion, reflect on your research problem statement. Consider the independent and dependent variables of your research problem through the construction of a research question. Reflect on the potential levels of measurement for your variables and the rationale for the labels, as well as consider the advantages and challenges that you might experience in the statistical analysis of your proposed variables.

Reference: Gray, J. R., & Grove, S. K. (2020). Burns and Grove’s the practice of nursing research: Appraisal, synthesis, and generation of evidence (9th ed.). Elsevier.

RESOURCES

Be sure to review the Learning Resources before completing this activity.

Click the weekly resources link to access the resources.

WEEKLY RESOURCES

WEEK 4: LEARNING RESOURCES

Required Readings

Gray, J. R., & Grove, S. K. (2020). Burns and Grove’s the practice of nursing research: Appraisal, synthesis, and generation of evidence (9th ed.). Elsevier.

Chapter 21, “Introduction to Statistical Analysis” (pp. 635–651)

Chapter 22, “Using Statistics to Describe Variables” (pp. 652–662)

Chapter 26, “Interpreting Research Outcomes” (pp. 699–716)

Gholami, S., Mojen, L. K., Rassouli, M., Pahlavanzade, B., & Farahani, A. S. (2020). The predictors of postoperative pain among children based on the theory of unpleasant symptoms: A descriptive-correlational studyLinks to an external site.. Journal of Pediatric Nursing, 55, 141–146. doi:10.1016/j.pedn.2020.08.006

Huang, J., Qi, H., Lv, K., Chen, X., Zhuang, Y., & Yang, L. (2020). Emergence delirium in elderly patients as a potential predictor of subsequent postoperative delirium: A descriptive correlational studyLinks to an external site.. Journal of PeriAnesthesia Nursing, 35(5), 478–483. doi:10.1016/j.jopan.2019.11.009

Document: Week 4 Descriptive Statistics SPSS Output Download Week 4 Descriptive Statistics SPSS Output(PDF)

Document: CITI Program Learner Registration Guide Download CITI Program Learner Registration Guide(PDF)

TO PREPARE:

Review your research problem statement from Week 2 to develop your research question.

Review the Learning Resources on how to describe variables.

Consider the levels of measurement for your variables: nominal, ordinal, interval, or ratio.

After reviewing your research question and considering the levels of measurement, analyze your classification for each variable. What was behind your reasoning for labeling the variables? How might the data be analyzed based on these labels?

Consider advantages and challenges that you might encounter in the statistical analysis of your proposed variables.

BY DAY 3 OF WEEK 4

Post your research question and describe the independent and dependent variables. Then, identify the level of measurement of both your independent and dependent variables. Provide a brief rationale for your classification of each variable. Be specific. Explain considerations of analyzing data related to each variable based on its level of measurement. Be sure to include any advantages or challenges that you might encounter in your statistical analysis of each variable and explain why.

BY DAY 6 OF WEEK 4

Read a selection of your colleagues’ responses and respond to at least two of your colleagues on two different days by noting any discrepancies and/or suggesting alternatives in the levels of measurement and statistical analyses described.

NURS_8201_Week4_Discussion_Rubric

NURS_8201_Week4_Discussion_Rubric
Criteria Ratings Pts

Excellent 90%–100%

39 to >34.0 pts

Good 80%–89%

34 to >30.0 pts

Fair 70%–79%

30 to >0 pts

Poor 0%–69%

44 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeMain Posting: Writing

6 to >5.0 pts

Excellent 90%–100%

Written clearly and concisely. Contains no grammatical or spelling errors. Adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style. Response is effectively written in Standard Academic English.

5 to >4.0 pts

Good 80%–89%

4 to >3.0 pts

Fair 70%–79%

3 to >0 pts

Poor 0%–69%

6 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeMain Posting: Timely and full participation

10 to >8.0 pts

Excellent 90%–100%

Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation. … Posts main Discussion by due date.

8 to >7.0 pts

Good 80%–89%

Meets requirements for full participation. … Posts main Discussion by due date.

7 to >6.0 pts

Fair 70%–79%

Posts main Discussion by due date.

6 to >0 pts

Poor 0%–69%

Does not meet requirements for full participation. … Does not post main Discussion by due date.

10 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeFirst Response: Post to colleague’s main post that is reflective and justified with scholarly sources.

9 to >8.0 pts

Excellent 90%–100%

8 to >7.0 pts

Good 80%–89%

7 to >6.0 pts

Fair 70%–79%

Response is on topic and may have some depth. Minimal or no scholarly sources provided.

6 to >0 pts

Poor 0%–69%

Response may not be on topic and lacks depth. No sources.
9 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeFirst Response: Writing

6 to >5.0 pts

Excellent 90%–100%

5 to >4.0 pts

Good 80%–89%

4 to >3.0 pts

Fair 70%–79%

Response posed in the Discussion may lack effective professional communication. Response to faculty questions is minimally addressed, if posed. Few or no scholarly sources are cited.

3 to >0 pts

Poor 0%–69%

Responses posted in the Discussion lack effective communication. Response to faculty questions is missing. No scholarly sources are cited.

6 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeFirst Response: Timely and full participation

5 to >4.0 pts

Excellent 90%–100%

Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation. … Posts by due date.

4 to >3.0 pts

Good 80%–89%

Meets requirements for full participation. … Posts by due date.

3 to >2.0 pts

Fair 70%–79%

Posts by due date.

2 to >0 pts

Poor 0%–69%

Does not meet requirements for full participation. … Does not post by due date.

5 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSecond Response: Post to colleague’s main post that is reflective and justified with scholarly sources.

9 to >8.0 pts

Excellent 90%–100%

8 to >7.0 pts

Good 80%–89%

7 to >6.0 pts

Fair 70%–79%

Response is on topic and may have some depth. Minimal or no scholarly sources provided.

6 to >0 pts

Poor 0%–69%

Response may not be on topic and lacks depth. No sources.
9 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSecond Response: Writing

6 to >5.0 pts

Excellent 90%–100%

5 to >4.0 pts

Good 80%–89%

Communication is mostly professional and respectful to colleagues. Response to faculty questions is mostly answered, if posed. Provides opinions and ideas that are supported by few at least two scholarly sources…. Response is written in Standard Academic English.

4 to >3.0 pts

Fair 70%–79%

Response posed in the Discussion may lack effective professional communication. Response to faculty questions is minimally addressed, if posed. Few or no scholarly sources are cited.

3 to >0 pts

Poor 0%–69%

Responses posted in the Discussion lack effective communication. Response to faculty questions is missing. No scholarly sources are cited.

6 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSecond Response: Timely and full participation

5 to >4.0 pts

Excellent 90%–100%

Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation. Posts by due date.

4 to >3.0 pts

Good 80%–89%

Meets requirements for full participation. Posts by due date.

3 to >2.0 pts

Fair 70%–79%

Posts by due date.

2 to >0 pts

Poor 0%–69%

Does not meet requirements for full participation. Does not post by due date.
5 pts

Total Points: 100

NURS 8201 Week 4 Assignment: Frequency and Descriptive Statistics

Imagine that you have collected data from 100 patients. You have carefully compiled vitals, pain scores, and medications for each of the patients. However, what does all of this data mean? Is your work now done?

How do we make data meaningful? Why must we move beyond the raw data to ensure that data is purposeful?

Descriptive analysis is the analysis of the data to develop meaning. Descriptive analysis provides meaning through showing, describing, and summarizing the data compiled to “reveal characteristics of the sample and to describe study variables” (Gray & Grove, 2020). This allows the researcher to present data in a more meaningful and simplified way.

For this Assignment, summarize your interpretation of the descriptive statistics provided to you in the Week 4 Descriptive Statistics SPSS Output document. You will evaluate each variable in your analysis.

Reference: Gray, J. R., & Grove, S. K. (2020). Burns and Grove’s the practice of nursing research: Appraisal, synthesis, and generation of evidence (9th ed.). Elsevier.

Resources

Be sure to review the Learning Resources before completing this activity.

Click the weekly resources link to access the resources.

WEEKLY RESOURCES

Week 4: Learning Resources

Required Readings

Gray, J. R., & Grove, S. K. (2020). Burns and Grove’s the practice of nursing research: Appraisal, synthesis, and generation of evidence (9th ed.). Elsevier.

Chapter 21, “Introduction to Statistical Analysis” (pp. 635–651)

Chapter 22, “Using Statistics to Describe Variables” (pp. 652–662)

Chapter 26, “Interpreting Research Outcomes” (pp. 699–716)

Links to an external site.. Journal of Pediatric Nursing, 55, 141–146. doi:10.1016/j.pedn.2020.08.006

Links to an external site.. Journal of PeriAnesthesia Nursing, 35(5), 478–483. doi:10.1016/j.jopan.2019.11.009

Document: Week 4 Descriptive Statistics SPSS Output

Download Week 4 Descriptive Statistics SPSS Output (PDF)

Document: CITI Program Learner Registration Guide

Download CITI Program Learner Registration Guide (PDF)

To Prepare:

Review the Week 4 Descriptive Statistics SPSS Output provided in this week’s Learning Resources.

Review the Learning Resources on how to interpret descriptive statistics, including how to interpret research outcomes.

Consider the results presented in the SPSS output and reflect on how you might interpret the frequency distributions and the descriptive statistics presented.

The Assignment: (2–3 pages)

Summarize your interpretation of the frequency data provided in the output for respondent’s age, highest school grade completed, and family income from prior month.

Note: A frequency analysis is way of summarizing data by depicting the number of times a data value occurs in the data table or output. It is used to analyze the data set including where the data are concentrated or clustered, the range of values, observation of extreme values, and to determine intervals for analysis that could make sense in categorizing your variable values.

Summarize your interpretation of the descriptive statistics provided in the output for respondent’s age, highest school grade completed, race and ethnicity, currently employed, and family income from prior month.

Note: The descriptive analysis includes N (size of your sample), the mean, the median, the standard deviation, the size and spread of your data to determine the variability/variance in your data.

Reminder: The College of Nursing requires that all papers submitted include a title page, introduction, summary, and references. The Sample Paper provided at the Walden Writing Center provides an example of those required elements (available at https://academicguides.waldenu.edu/writingcenter/templates/general#s-lg-box-20293632

Links to an external site.). All papers submitted must use this formatting.

By Day 7

Submit your Assignment by Day 7 of Week 4.

submission information

Before submitting your final assignment, you can check your draft for authenticity. To check your draft, access the Turnitin Drafts from the Start Here area.

To submit your completed assignment, save your Assignment as WK4Assgn+last name+first initial.

Then, click on Start Assignment near the top of the page.

Next, click on Upload File and select Submit Assignment for review.

Rubric

NURS_8201_Week4_Assignment_Rubric

Criteria Ratings Pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Summarize your interpretation of the frequency data provided in the output for respondent’s age, highest school grade completed, and family income from prior month.
35 to >31.0 pts

Excellent

The response accurately and clearly explains, in detail, a summary of the frequency distributions for the variables presented…. The response accurately and clearly explains, in detail, the number of times the value occurs in the data…. The response accurately and clearly explains, in detail, the appearance of the data, the range of data values, and an explanation of extreme values in describing intervals that sufficiently provides an analysis that fully supports the categorization of each variable value…. The response includes relevant, specific, and appropriate examples that fully support the explanations provided for each of the areas described.

31 to >27.0 pts

Good

The response accurately summarizes the frequency distributions for the variables presented…. The response accurately explains the number of times the value occurs in the data…. The response accurately explains the appearance of the data, the range of data values, and explains extreme values in describing intervals that provides an analysis which supports the categorization of each variable value…. The response includes relevant, specific, and accurate examples that support the explanations provided for each of the areas described.

27 to >24.0 pts

Fair

The response inaccurately or vaguely summarizes the frequency distributions for the variables presented…. The response inaccurately or vaguely explains the number of times the value occurs in the data…. The response inaccurately or vaguely explains the appearance of the data, the range of data values, and inaccurately or vaguely explains extreme values…. An analysis that may support the categorization of each variable value is inaccurate or vague…. The response includes inaccurate and irrelevant examples that may support the explanations provided for each of the areas described.

24 to >0 pts

Poor

The response inaccurately and vaguely summarizes the frequency distributions for the variables presented, or it is missing…. The response inaccurately and vaguely explains the number of times the value occurs in the data, or it is missing…. The response inaccurately and vaguely explains the appearance of the data, the range of data values, and an explanation of extreme values, or it is missing…. An analysis that does not support the categorization of each variable values is provided, or it is missing…. The response includes inaccurate and vague examples that do not support the explanations provided for each of the areas described, or it is missing.
35 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Summarize your interpretation of the descriptive statistics provided in the output for respondent’s age, highest school grade completed, race and ethnicity, currently employed, and family income from prior month.

50 to >44.0 pts

Excellent

The response accurately and clearly summarizes in detail the interpretation of the descriptive statistics provided. … The response accurately and clearly evaluates in detail each of the variables presented, including an accurate and complete description of the sample size, the mean, the median, standard deviation, and the size and spread of the data.

44 to >39.0 pts

Good

The response accurately summarizes the interpretation of the descriptive statistics provided…. The response accurately explains evaluates each of the variables presented, including an accurate description of the sample size, the mean, the median, standard deviation, and the size and spread of the data.

39 to >34.0 pts

Fair

The response inaccurately or vaguely summarizes the interpretation of the descriptive statistics provided…. The response inaccurately or vaguely evaluates each of the variables presented, including an inaccurate or vague description of the sample size, the mean, the median, the standard deviation, and the size and spread of the data.

34 to >0 pts

Poor

The response inaccurately and vaguely summarizes the interpretation of the descriptive statistics provided, or it is missing…. The response inaccurately and vaguely evaluates each of the variables presented, including an inaccurate and vague description of the sample size, the mean, the median, the standard deviation, and the size and spread of the data, or it is missing.

50 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome 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 to >4.0 pts

Excellent

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.

4 to >3.0 pts

Good

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 to >2.0 pts

Fair

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.

2 to >0 pts

Poor

Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity < 60% of the time…. No purpose statement, introduction, or conclusion was provided.

5 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Written Expression and Formatting – English writing standards: Correct grammar, mechanics, and proper punctuation
5 to >4.0 pts

Excellent

Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors.

4 to >3.0 pts

Good

Contains a few (1 or 2) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors.

3 to >2.0 pts

Fair

Contains several (3 or 4) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors.

2 to >0 pts

Poor

Contains many (≥ 5) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the reader’s understanding.
5 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Written Expression and Formatting – The paper follows correct APA format for title page, headings, font, spacing, margins, indentations, page numbers, parenthetical/in-text citations, and reference list.

5 to >4.0 pts

Excellent

Uses correct APA format with no errors.

4 to >3.0 pts

Good

Contains a few (1 or 2) APA format errors.

3 to >2.0 pts

Fair

Contains several (3 or 4) APA format errors.

2 to >0 pts

Poor

Contains many (≥ 5) APA format errors.
5 pts

Total Points: 100

NURS 8201 WEEK 5 ASSIGNMENT: T-TESTS AND ANOVA

You are a DNP-Prepared nurse tasked with evaluating patient care at your practice compared to patient care at affiliated practices. You have noticed that a key complaint from your patients concerns the wait times associated with each patient visit. Based on these complaints, you have decided to compare the wait times at your practice to the wait times at affiliated practices. After recording the wait times at each practice, for 50 individual patients at each practice, you are now prepared to analyze your data. What approach will you use to analyze the data?

In the scenario provided, you might decide to use, the Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) approach. “ANOVA is a statistical procedure that compares data between two or more groups or conditions to investigate the presence of differences between those groups on some continuous dependent variable” (Gray & Grove, 2020). ANOVA is often a recommended statistical technique, as it has low chance of error for determining differences between three or more groups.

For this Assignment, analyze the ANOVA statistics provided in the ANOVA Exercises SPSS Output document. Examine the results to determine the differences and reflect on how you would interpret these results.

Reference: Gray, J. R., & Grove, S. K. (2020). Burns and Grove’s the practice of nursing research: Appraisal, synthesis, and generation of evidence (9th ed.). Elsevier.

RESOURCES

Be sure to review the Learning Resources before completing this activity.

Click the weekly resources link to access the resources.

WEEKLY RESOURCES

WEEK 5: LEARNING RESOURCES

Required Readings

Gray, J. R., & Grove, S. K. (2020). Burns and Grove’s the practice of nursing research: Appraisal, synthesis, and generation of evidence (9th ed.). Elsevier.

Chapter 25, “Using Statistics to Determine Differences” (pp. 687–698)

Donovan, L. M., & Payne, C. L. (2021). Organizational commitment of nurse faculty teaching in accelerated baccalaureate nursing programs.Links to an external site. Nursing Education Perspectives,42(2), 81–86. doi:10.1097/01.NEP.0000000000000764

Gray, J. A., & Kim, J. (2020). Palliative care needs of direct care workers caring for people with intellectual and developmental disabilitiesLinks to an external site.. British Journal of Learning Disabilities, 48(1), 69–77. doi:10.1111/bld.12318

Hilvert, E., Hoover, J., Sterling, A., & Schroeder, S. (2020). Comparing tense and agreement productivity in boys with fragile X syndrome, children with developmental language disorder, and children with typical developmentLinks to an external site.. Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research, 63(4), 1181–1194. doi:10.1044/2019_JSLHR-19-00022

Document: Week 5 ANOVA Exercises SPSS Output Download Week 5 ANOVA Exercises SPSS Output(PDF)

TO PREPARE:

Review the Week 5 ANOVA Exercises SPSS Output provided in this week’s Learning Resources.

Review the Learning Resources on how to interpret ANOVA results to determine differences.

Consider the results presented in the SPSS output and reflect on how you might interpret the results presented.

THE ASSIGNMENT: (2–3 PAGES)

Summarize your interpretation of the ANOVA statistics provided in the Week 5 ANOVA Exercises SPSS Output document.

Note: Interpretation of the ANOVA output should include identification of the -value to determine whether the differences between the group means are statistically significant.

Be sure to accurately evaluate each of the results presented (descriptives, ANOVA results, and multiple comparisons using post-hoc analysis)

BY DAY 7

Submit your Assignment by Day 7 of Week 5.

SUBMISSION INFORMATION

Before submitting your final assignment, you can check your draft for authenticity. To check your draft, access the Turnitin Drafts from the Start Here area.

To submit your completed assignment, save your Assignment as WK5Assgn+last name+first initial.

Then, click on Start Assignment near the top of the page.

Next, click on Upload File and select Submit Assignment for review.

Rubric

NURS_8201_Week5_Assignment_Rubric

Criteria Ratings Pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSummarize your interpretation of the ANOVA statistics provided in the Week 5 ANOVA Exercises SPSS Output document.

45 to >40.0 pts

Excellent

The response accurately and clearly summarizes, in detail, the ANOVA statistics provided…. An accurate and detailed explanation of the p-value describing whether the differences are statistically significant is provided.

40 to >35.0 pts

Good

The response accurately summarizes the ANOVA statistics provided…. An accurate explanation of the p-value describing whether the differences are statistically significant is provided.

35 to >31.0 pts

Fair

The response inaccurately or vaguely summarizes the ANOVA statistics provided…. An inaccurate or vague explanation of the p-value describing whether the differences are statistically significant is provided.

31 to >0 pts

Poor

The response inaccurately and vaguely summarizes the ANOVA statistics provided, or itis missing…. An inaccurate and vague explanation of the p-value describing whether the differences are statistically significant is provided, or it is missing.
45 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeBe sure to evaluate each of the results presented (descriptives, ANOVA results, and multiple comparisons).
40 to >35.0 pts

Excellent

The response accurately and clearly evaluates, in detail, each of the results presented in the document (descriptives, ANOVA results, and multiple comparisons).

35 to >31.0 pts

Good

The response accurately evaluates each of the results presented in the document (descriptives, ANOVA results, and multiple comparisons).

31 to >27.0 pts

Fair

The response inaccurately or vaguely evaluates each of the results presented in the document (descriptives, ANOVA results, and multiple comparisons)…. OR… The response summarizes < 3 of the results provided.

27 to >0 pts

Poor

The response inaccurately and vaguely evaluates each of the results presented in the document (descriptives, ANOVA results, and multiple comparisons), or it is missing.
40 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten 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 to >4.0 pts

Excellent

4 to >3.5 pts

Good

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 to >3.0 pts

Fair

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.

3 to >0 pts

Poor

Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity < 60% of the time…. No purpose statement, introduction, or conclusion was provided.

5 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten Expression and Formatting – English writing standards: Correct grammar, mechanics, and proper punctuation
5 to >4.0 pts

Excellent

Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors.

4 to >3.5 pts

Good

Contains a few (1 or 2) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors.

3.5 to >3.0 pts

Fair

Contains several (3 or 4) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors.

3 to >0 pts

Poor

Contains many (≥ 5) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the reader’s understanding.
5 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten Expression and Formatting – The paper follows correct APA format for title page, headings, font, spacing, margins, indentations, page numbers, parenthetical/in-text citations, and reference list.

5 to >4.0 pts

Excellent

Uses correct APA format with no errors.

4 to >3.5 pts

Good

Contains a few (1 or 2) APA format errors.

3.5 to >3.0 pts

Fair

Contains several (3 or 4) APA format errors.

3 to >0 pts

Poor

Contains many (≥ 5) APA format errors.

5 pts

Total Points: 100

NURS 8201 WEEK 6 DISCUSSION: CORRELATIONS

“Much of the clinical research relevant to nursing explores whether a relationship exists between two patient characteristics. Understanding potentially related characteristics helps nurses better identify which physical, psychological, or demographic factors are associated with reason for concern” (American Nurse, 2011).

In order to explore relationships among associated variables, a DNP-prepared nurse may utilize correlational research. This type of research allows for the exploration of connections and measuring of many variables. While not used to determine causality, this research can be integral in proving theory. So, when might an issue or topic need to be explored through relationships and associations?

For this Discussion, review the Learning Resources and reflect on a particular topic of interest that may benefit from a correlational study. Formulate a research question and consider your hypotheses and prediction. Reflect on the effectiveness of conducting correlational research.

Reference:

American Nurse. (2011). Understanding correlation analysis. https://www.myamericannurse.com/understanding-correlation-analysis/Links to an external site.

RESOURCES

Be sure to review the Learning Resources before completing this activity.

Click the weekly resources link to access the resources.

WEEKLY RESOURCES

WEEK 6: LEARNING RESOURCES

Required Readings

Gray, J. R., & Grove, S. K. (2020). Burns and Grove’s the practice of nursing research: Appraisal, synthesis, and generation of evidence (9th ed.). Elsevier.

Chapter 11, “Quantitative Methodology: Noninterventional Designs and Methods” (pp. 252–256)

Chapter 23, “Using Statistics to Examine Relationships” (pp. 663–674)

Benton, C. P. (2021). Sexual health attitudes and beliefs among nursing faculty: A correlational studyLinks to an external site.. Nurse Education Today, 98. doi:10.1016/j.nedt.2020.104665

Rio, L., Tenthorey, C., & Ramelet, A.-S. (2021). Unplanned postdischarge healthcare utilisation, discharge readiness, and perceived quality of teaching in mothers of neonates hospitalized in a neonatal intensive care unit: A descriptive and correlational studyLinks to an external site.. Australian Critical Care, 34(1), 9–14. doi:10.1016/j.aucc.2020.07.001

Woo, M.-J., & Kim, D.-H. (2021). Factors associated with secondary traumatic stress among nurses in regional trauma centers in South Korea: A descriptive correlational studyLinks to an external site.. Journal of Emergency Nursing, 47(3), 400–411. doi:10.1016/j.jen.2020.08.006

Document: Week 6 Correlations Exercises SPSS Output (PDF)Download Week 6 Correlations Exercises SPSS Output (PDF)

Document: CITI Program Learner Registration Guide (PDF)

TO PREPARE:

Review this week’s Learning Resources and focus on the types of research questions that can be answered using a correlational statistic.

Brainstorm a number of healthcare delivery or nursing practice problems that could be explored using correlational statistics. Then, select one problem on which to focus for this Discussion.

Formulate a research question to address the problem and that would lead you to employ correlational statistics.

Develop a null hypothesis and alternate hypotheses.

Ask yourself: What is the expected direction of the relationship?

BY DAY 3 OF WEEK 6

Post a brief description of the selected problem that you identified for the focus of this Discussion and include your research question. Be specific. Explain your null hypothesis and alternate hypotheses for your research question and identify the dependent and independent variables that you would recommend to best support the research study. Then, explain your prediction for the expected relationship (positive or negative) between the variables that you identified. Why do you think that sort of relationship will exist? What other factors might affect the outcome? Be specific and provide examples.

BY DAY 6 OF WEEK 6

Read a selection of your colleagues’ responses and respond to at least two of your colleagues on two different days in one or more of the following ways:

Ask a probing question, substantiated with additional background information, evidence, or research.

Share an insight from having read your colleagues’ postings, synthesizing the information to provide new perspectives.

Offer and support an alternative perspective using readings from the classroom or from your own research in the Walden Library.

Validate an idea with your own experience and additional research.

Suggest an alternative perspective based on additional evidence drawn from readings or after synthesizing multiple postings.

Expand on your colleagues’ postings by providing additional insights or contrasting perspectives based on readings and evidence.

NURS_8201_Week6_Discussion_Rubric

Criteria Ratings Pts

44 to >39.0 pts

Excellent 90%–100%

39 to >34.0 pts

Good 80%–89%

34 to >30.0 pts

Fair 70%–79%

30 to >0 pts

Poor 0%–69%

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeMain Posting: Writing
6 to >5.0 pts

Excellent 90%–100%

Written clearly and concisely. Contains no grammatical or spelling errors. Adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style. Response is effectively written in Standard Academic English.

5 to >4.0 pts

Good 80%–89%

4 to >3.0 pts

Fair 70%–79%

3 to >0 pts

Poor 0%–69%

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeMain Posting: Timely and full participation
10 to >8.0 pts

Excellent 90%–100%

Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation. … Posts main Discussion by due date.

8 to >7.0 pts

Good 80%–89%

Meets requirements for full participation. … Posts main Discussion by due date.

7 to >6.0 pts

Fair 70%–79%

Posts main Discussion by due date.

6 to >0 pts

Poor 0%–69%

Does not meet requirements for full participation. … Does not post main Discussion by due date.
10 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeFirst Response: Post to colleague’s main post that is reflective and justified with scholarly sources.
9 to >8.0 pts

Excellent 90%–100%

8 to >7.0 pts

Good 80%–89%

7 to >6.0 pts

Fair 70%–79%

Response is on topic and may have some depth. Minimal or no scholarly sources provided.

6 to >0 pts

Poor 0%–69%

Response may not be on topic and lacks depth. No sources.
9 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeFirst Response: Writing
6 to >5.0 pts

Excellent 90%–100%

5 to >4.0 pts

Good 80%–89%

4 to >3.0 pts

Fair 70%–79%

Response posed in the Discussion may lack effective professional communication. Response to faculty questions is minimally addressed, if posed. Few or no scholarly sources are cited.

3 to >0 pts

Poor 0%–69%

Responses posted in the Discussion lack effective communication. Response to faculty questions is missing. No scholarly sources are cited.
6 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeFirst Response: Timely and full participation
5 to >4.0 pts

Excellent 90%–100%

Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation. … Posts by due date.

4 to >3.0 pts

Good 80%–89%

Meets requirements for full participation. … Posts by due date.

3 to >2.0 pts

Fair 70%–79%

Posts by due date.

2 to >0 pts

Poor 0%–69%

Does not meet requirements for full participation. … Does not post by due date.
5 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSecond Response: Post to colleague’s main post that is reflective and justified with scholarly sources.
9 to >8.0 pts

Excellent 90%–100%

8 to >7.0 pts

Good 80%–89%

7 to >6.0 pts

Fair 70%–79%

Response is on topic and may have some depth. Minimal or no scholarly sources provided.

6 to >0 pts

Poor 0%–69%

Response may not be on topic and lacks depth. No sources.
9 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSecond Response: Writing

6 to >5.0 pts

Excellent 90%–100%

5 to >4.0 pts

Good 80%–89%

Communication is mostly professional and respectful to colleagues. Response to faculty questions is mostly answered, if posed. Provides opinions and ideas that are supported by few at least two scholarly sources…. Response is written in Standard Academic English.

4 to >3.0 pts

Fair 70%–79%

Response posed in the Discussion may lack effective professional communication. Response to faculty questions is minimally addressed, if posed. Few or no scholarly sources are cited.

3 to >0 pts

Poor 0%–69%

Responses posted in the Discussion lack effective communication. Response to faculty questions is missing. No scholarly sources are cited.

6 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSecond Response: Timely and full participation

5 to >4.0 pts

Excellent 90%–100%

Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation. Posts by due date.

4 to >3.0 pts

Good 80%–89%

Meets requirements for full participation. Posts by due date.

3 to >2.0 pts

Fair 70%–79%

Posts by due date.

2 to >0 pts

Poor 0%–69%

Does not meet requirements for full participation. Does not post by due date.

5 pts

Total Points: 100

NURS 8201 WEEK 6 ASSIGNMENT: CORRELATIONS

Is there a connection between caffeine and headaches? Is there an association between hospital wait times and patient care? Is there a relationship between antibiotic use and weight gain?

Correlation statistics all begin with a research question, and these research questions all seek to determine relationships between variables. Correlational analysis clarifies relationships, but there are many ways to formulate a correlation. Therefore, the strength of a correlation relies on the variables used and the interpretation of the results that may signify a statistically relevant association or relationship.

For this Assignment, you will examine how to interpret results obtained through a correlational analysis. You will evaluate the correlation results provided in the Week 6 Correlations Exercises SPSS output and will reflect on the meaning of the results for the variables examined.

RESOURCES

Be sure to review the Learning Resources before completing this activity.

Click the weekly resources link to access the resources.

WEEKLY RESOURCES

TO PREPARE:

Review the Week 6 Correlations Exercises SPSS Output provided in this week’s Learning Resources.

Review the Learning Resources on how to interpret correlation results to determine the relationship between variables.

Consider the results presented in the SPSS output and reflect on how you might interpret the results presented.

THE ASSIGNMENT: (2–3 PAGES)

Answer the following questions using the Week 6 Correlations Exercises SPSS Output provided in this week’s Learning Resources.

What is the strongest correlation in the matrix? (Provide the correlation value and the names of variables)

What is the weakest correlation in the matrix? (Provide the correlation value and the names of variables)

How many original correlations are present on the matrix?

What does the entry of 1.00 indicate on the diagonal of the matrix?

Indicate the strength and direction of the relationship between body mass index (BMI) and physical health component subscale.

Which variable is most strongly correlated with BMI? What is the correlational coefficient? What is the sample size for this relationship?

What is the mean and standard deviation for BMI and doctor visits?

What is the mean and standard deviation for weight and BMI?

Describe the strength and direction of the relationship between weight and BMI.

Describe the scatterplot. What information does it provide to a researcher?

BY DAY 7

Submit your Assignment by Day 7 of Week 6.

SUBMISSION INFORMATION

Before submitting your final assignment, you can check your draft for authenticity. To check your draft, access the Turnitin Drafts from the Start Here area.

To submit your completed assignment, save your Assignment as WK6Assgn+last name+first initial.

Then, click on Start Assignment near the top of the page.

Next, click on Upload File and select Submit Assignment for review.

Rubric

NURS_8201_Week6_Assignment_Rubric

Criteria Ratings Pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeDescribe the strongest and weakest correlation in the matrix. Provide the correlation value and the names of variables.
15 to >13.0 pts

Excellent

The response accurately and clearly describes in detail the strongest and weakest correlation in the matrix…. The response includes an accurate and clear correlation value and the names of variables for both the strongest and weakest correlation in the matrix.

13 to >11.0 pts

Good

The response accurately describes the strongest and weakest correlation in the matrix…. The response includes an accurate correlation value and the names of variables for both the strongest and weakest correlation in the matrix.

11 to >10.0 pts

Fair

The response inaccurately or vaguely describes the strongest and weakest correlation in the matrix. … OR … The response omits either the strongest or weakest correlation. … The response includes inaccurate or vague correlation value and the names of variables for both the strongest and weakest correlation in the matrix…. OR … The response omits the correlation value and/or the names of variables for either the strongest or weakest correlation.

10 to >0 pts

Poor

The response inaccurately and vaguely describes the strongest and weakest correlation in the matrix, or it is missing…. The response includes an inaccurate and vague correlation value and the names of variables for both the strongest and weakest correlation in the matrix, or it is missing.
15 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeExplain how many original correlations are present in the matrix.
10 to >8.0 pts

Excellent

The response accurately and clearly explains, in detail, how many original correlations are present in the matrix.

8 to >7.0 pts

Good

The response accurately explains how many original correlations are present in the matrix.

7 to >6.0 pts

Fair

The response inaccurately or vaguely explains how many original correlations are present in the matrix.

6 to >0 pts

Poor

The response inaccurately and vaguely explains how many original correlations are present in the matrix, or it is missing.
10 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeExplain what the entry of 1.00 indicates on the diagonal of the matrix.
10 to >8.0 pts

Excellent

The response accurately and clearly explains in detail what the entry of 1.00 indicates on the diagonal of the matrix.

8 to >7.0 pts

Good

The response accurately explains what the entry of 1.00 indicates on the diagonal of the matrix.

7 to >6.0 pts

Fair

The response inaccurately or vaguely explains what the entry of 1.00 indicates on the diagonal of the matrix.

6 to >0 pts

Poor

The response inaccurately and vaguely explains what the entry of 1.00 indicates on the diagonal of the matrix, or it is missing.
10 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeIndicate the strength and direction of the relationship between body mass index and physical component subscale.

10 to >8.0 pts

Excellent

The response accurately and clearly indicates, in detail, the strength and direction of the relationship between body mass index and physical component subscale.

8 to >7.0 pts

Good

The response accurately indicates the strength and direction of the relationship between body mass index and physical component subscale.

7 to >6.0 pts

Fair

The response inaccurately or vaguely indicates the strength and direction of the relationship between body mass index and physical component subscale.

6 to >0 pts

Poor

The response inaccurately and vaguely indicates the strength and direction of the relationship between body mass index and physical component subscale, or it is missing.
10 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeExplain which variable is most strongly correlated with BMI. Explain the correlational coefficient and the sample size for this relationship.
10 to >8.0 pts

Excellent

The response accurately and clearly explains in detail which variable is most strongly corrected with BMI…. The response accurately and clearly explains in detail the correlational coefficient and the sample size for this relationship.

8 to >7.0 pts

Good

The response accurately explains which variable is most strongly corrected with BMI…. The response accurately explains the correlational coefficient and the sample size for this relationship.

7 to >6.0 pts

Fair

The response inaccurately or vaguely explains which variable is most strongly corrected with BMI…. The response inaccurately or vaguely explains the correlational coefficient and the sample size for this relationship.

6 to >0 pts

Poor

The response inaccurately and vaguely explains which variable is most strongly corrected with BMI, or it is missing…. The response inaccurately and vaguely explains the correlational coefficient and the sample size for this relationship, or it is missing.
10 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeExplain the mean and standard deviation for BMI and doctor visits.
10 to >8.0 pts

Excellent

The response accurately and clearly explains in detail the mean and standard deviation for BMI and doctor visits.

8 to >7.0 pts

Good

The response accurately explains the mean and standard deviation for BMI and doctor visits.

7 to >6.0 pts

Fair

The response inaccurately or vaguely explains the mean and standard deviation for BMI and doctor visits…. OR… The response omits the mean or standard deviation for BMI and doctor visits.

6 to >0 pts

Poor

The response inaccurately and vaguely explains the mean and standard deviation for BMI and doctor visits, or it is missing.
10 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeExplain the mean and standard deviation for weight and BMI. Describe the strength and direction of the relationship between weight and BMI.
10 to >8.0 pts

Excellent

The response accurately and clearly explains, in detail, the mean and standard deviation for weight and BMI…. The response accurately and clearly explains, in detail, the strength and direction of the relationship between weight and BMI.

8 to >7.0 pts

Good

The response accurately explains the mean and standard deviation for weight and BMI…. The response accurately explains the strength and direction of the relationship between weight and BMI.

7 to >6.0 pts

Fair

The response inaccurately or vaguely explains the mean and standard deviation for weight and BMI…. OR… The response omits weight or BMI. … OR … The response omits the mean or standard deviation. … The response inaccurately or vaguely explains the strength and direction of the relationship between weight and BMI.

6 to >0 pts

Poor

The response inaccurately and vaguely explains the mean and standard deviation for weight and BMI, or it is missing…. The response inaccurately and vaguely explains the strength and direction of the relationship between weight and BMI, or it is missing.
10 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeDescribe the scatterplot. Explain what information it provides to the researcher.
10 to >8.0 pts

Excellent

The response accurately and clearly describes the scatterplot in detail…. The response accurately and clearly explains, in detail, what information the scatterplot provides to the researcher.

8 to >7.0 pts

Good

The response accurately describes the scatterplot…. The response accurately explains what information the scatterplot provides to the researcher.

7 to >6.0 pts

Fair

The response inaccurately or vaguely describes the scatterplot…. The response inaccurately or vaguely explains what information the scatterplot provides to the researcher.

6 to >0 pts

Poor

The response inaccurately and vaguely describes the scatterplot, or it is missing…. The response inaccurately and vaguely explains what information the scatterplot provides to the researcher, or it is missing.

10 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten 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 to >4.0 pts

Excellent

4 to >3.5 pts

Good

3.5 to >3.0 pts

Fair

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.

3 to >0 pts

Poor

Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity < 60% of the time…. No purpose statement, introduction, or conclusion was provided.
5 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten Expression and Formatting – English writing standards: Correct grammar, mechanics, and proper punctuation

5 to >4.0 pts

Excellent

Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors.

4 to >3.5 pts

Good

Contains a few (1 or 2) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors.

3.5 to >3.0 pts

Fair

Contains several (3 or 4) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors.

3 to >0 pts

Poor

Contains many (≥ 5) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the reader’s understanding.
5 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten Expression and Formatting – The paper follows correct APA format for title page, headings, font, spacing, margins, indentations, page numbers, parenthetical/in-text citations, and reference list.
5 to >4.0 pts

Excellent

Uses correct APA format with no errors.

4 to >3.5 pts

Good

Contains a few (1 or 2) APA format errors.

3.5 to >3.0 pts

Fair

Contains several (3 or 4) APA format errors.

3 to >0 pts

Poor

Contains many (≥ 5) APA format errors.
5 pts

Total Points: 100

ORDER A CUSTOMIZED, PLAGIARISM-FREE NURS 8201 Full Course Discussions & Assignments (Week 1-10) HERE

NURS 8201 WEEK 7 DISCUSSION: USE OF REGRESSION ANALYSIS IN CLINICAL PRACTICE

Regression analysis provides the researcher with an opportunity to predict and explore future outcomes. Whether it is to determine prevention methods, promote opportunities for learning, or propose new treatments, looking towards the future can have a significant impact on patient care and sustained positive patient outcomes.

This week, you explore regression analysis, paying particular attention to linear regression. Linear regression is used to “estimate the value of a dependent variable based on the value of an independent variable” (Gray & Grove, 2020). In your Discussion, you will apply your understanding of this statistical technique as it concerns use in a research study.

For this Discussion, you will select an article on a study to examine the strengths and weaknesses in the use of linear regression. Consider how you might remedy the weaknesses associated with the application of linear regression and reflect on how the findings of the study that you selected might contribute to various areas of your practice.

Reference: Gray, J. R., & Grove, S. K. (2020). Burns and Grove’s the practice of nursing research: Appraisal, synthesis, and generation of evidence (9th ed.). Elsevier.

RESOURCES

Be sure to review the Learning Resources before completing this activity.

Click the weekly resources link to access the resources.

WEEKLY RESOURCES

WEEK 7: LEARNING RESOURCES

Required Readings

Gray, J. R., & Grove, S. K. (2020). Burns and Grove’s the practice of nursing research: Appraisal, synthesis, and generation of evidence (9th ed.). Elsevier.

Chapter 24, “Using Statistics to Predict” (pp. 675–686)

Linear Regression Resources

Chi, C., Wu, H., Huan, C., & Lee, Y. (2017). Using linear regression to identify critical demographic variables affecting patient safety culture from viewpoints of physicians and nursesLinks to an external site.. Hospital Practices and Research, 2(2), 47–53. doi:10.15171/hpr.2017.12

De Groot, K., De Veer, A. J. E., Paans, W., & Francke, A. L. (2020). Use of electronic health records and standardized terminologies: A nationwide survey of nursing staff experiencesLinks to an external site.. International Journal of Nursing StudiesLinks to an external site., 104. doi:10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2020.103523

Echevarria, I. M., Patterson, B. J., & Krouse, A. (2017). Predictors of transformational leadership of nurse managersLinks to an external site.. Journal of Nursing Management, 25(3), 167–175. doi:10.1111/jonm.12452

Edmonson, C. (2015). Strengthening moral courage among nurse leadersLinks to an external site.. Online Journal of Issues in Nursing, 20(2). doi:10.3912/OJIN.Vol20No20PPT01

Malagon-Aguilera, M. C., Suñer-Soler, R., Bonmatí-Tomas, A., Bosch-Farré, C., Gelabert-Vilella. S., & Juvinyà-Canal, D. (2019). Relationship between sense of coherence, health and work engagement among nursesLinks to an external site.. Journal of Nursing Management, 27(8), 1620–1630. doi:10.1111/jonm.12848

Westland, H., Schuurmans, M. J., Bos-Touwen, I. D., de Bruin-van Leersum, M. A., Monninkhof, E. M., Schröder, C. D., de Vette, D. A., & Trappenburg, J. C. (2020). Effectiveness of the nurse-led Activate intervention in patients at risk of cardiovascular disease in primary care: A cluster-randomised controlled trialLinks to an external site.. European Journal of Cardiovascular Nursing, 19(8), 721–731. doi:10.1177/1474515120919547

Yeom, H.-E. (2021). Causal beliefs about hypertension and self-care behaviour in Korean patientsLinks to an external site.. Collegian, 28(1), 48–56. doi:10.1016/j.colegn.2020.04.007

Article Critique Resources

Coughlan, M., Cronin, P., & Ryan, F. (2007). Step-by-step guide to critiquing research. Part 1: Quantitative researchLinks to an external site.. British Journal of Nursing, 16(11), 658–663. doi:10.12968/bjon.2007.16.11.23681

Ryan, F., Coughlan, M., & Cronin, P. (2007). Step-by-step guide to critiquing research. Part 2: Qualitative researchLinks to an external site.. British Journal of Nursing, 16(12), 738–744. doi:10.12968/bjon.2007.16.12.23726

Vance, D. E., Talley, M., Azuero, A., Pearce, P. F., & Christian, B. J. (2013). Conducting an article critique for a quantitative research study: Perspectives for doctoral students and other novice readersLinks to an external site.. Nursing: Research and Reviews, 3, 67–75. doi:10.2147/NRR.S43374

TO PREPARE:

Review the articles in this week’s Learning Resources and evaluate their use of linear regression. Select one article that interests you to examine more closely in this Discussion.

Critically analyze the article that you selected and consider the strengths and weaknesses described.

Reflect on potential remedies to address these weaknesses, and how the findings from this study may contribute to evidence-based practice, the field of nursing, or society in general.

BY DAY 3 OF WEEK 7

Post a brief description of the article that you selected, providing its correct APA citation. Critically analyze the article by addressing the following questions:

What are the goals and purposes of the research study that the article describes?

How is linear or logistic regression used in the study? What are the results of its use?

What other quantitative and statistical methods could be used to address the research issue discussed in the article?

What are the strengths and weaknesses of the study?

Then, explain potential remedies to address the weaknesses that you identified for the research article that you selected. Analyze the importance of this study to evidence-based practice, the nursing profession, or society. Be specific and provide examples.

BY DAY 6 OF WEEK 7

Read a selection of your colleagues’ responses and respond to at least two of your colleagues on two different days in one or more of the following ways:

Ask a probing question, substantiated with additional background information, evidence, or research.

·Share an insight from having read your colleagues’ postings, synthesizing the information to provide new perspectives.

Offer and support an alternative perspective using readings from the classroom or from your own research in the Walden Library.

Validate an idea with your own experience and additional research.

Suggest an alternative perspective based on additional evidence drawn from readings or after synthesizing multiple postings.

Expand on your colleagues’ postings by providing additional insights or contrasting perspectives based on readings and evidence.

NURS_8201_Week7_Discussion_Rubric

NURS_8201_Week7_Discussion_Rubric
Criteria Ratings Pts

44 to >39.0 pts

Excellent 90%–100%

39 to >34.0 pts

Good 80%–89%

34 to >30.0 pts

Fair 70%–79%

30 to >0 pts

Poor 0%–69%

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeMain Posting: Writing

6 to >5.0 pts

Excellent 90%–100%

Written clearly and concisely. Contains no grammatical or spelling errors. Adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style. Response is effectively written in Standard Academic English.

5 to >4.0 pts

Good 80%–89%

4 to >3.0 pts

Fair 70%–79%

3 to >0 pts

Poor 0%–69%

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeMain Posting: Timely and full participation

10 to >8.0 pts

Excellent 90%–100%

Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation. … Posts main Discussion by due date.

8 to >7.0 pts

Good 80%–89%

Meets requirements for full participation. … Posts main Discussion by due date.

7 to >6.0 pts

Fair 70%–79%

Posts main Discussion by due date.

6 to >0 pts

Poor 0%–69%

Does not meet requirements for full participation. … Does not post main Discussion by due date.

10 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeFirst Response: Post to colleague’s main post that is reflective and justified with scholarly sources.
9 to >8.0 pts

Excellent 90%–100%

8 to >7.0 pts

Good 80%–89%

7 to >6.0 pts

Fair 70%–79%

Response is on topic and may have some depth. Minimal or no scholarly sources provided.

6 to >0 pts

Poor 0%–69%

Response may not be on topic and lacks depth. No sources.
9 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeFirst Response: Writing

6 to >5.0 pts

Excellent 90%–100%

5 to >4.0 pts

Good 80%–89%

4 to >3.0 pts

Fair 70%–79%

Response posed in the Discussion may lack effective professional communication. Response to faculty questions is minimally addressed, if posed. Few or no scholarly sources are cited.

3 to >0 pts

Poor 0%–69%

Responses posted in the Discussion lack effective communication. Response to faculty questions is missing. No scholarly sources are cited.
6 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeFirst Response: Timely and full participation
5 to >4.0 pts

Excellent 90%–100%

Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation. … Posts by due date.

4 to >3.0 pts

Good 80%–89%

Meets requirements for full participation. … Posts by due date.

3 to >2.0 pts

Fair 70%–79%

Posts by due date.

2 to >0 pts

Poor 0%–69%

Does not meet requirements for full participation. … Does not post by due date.
5 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSecond Response: Post to colleague’s main post that is reflective and justified with scholarly sources.
9 to >8.0 pts

Excellent 90%–100%

8 to >7.0 pts

Good 80%–89%

7 to >6.0 pts

Fair 70%–79%

Response is on topic and may have some depth. Minimal or no scholarly sources provided.

6 to >0 pts

Poor 0%–69%

Response may not be on topic and lacks depth. No sources.

9 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSecond Response: Writing
6 to >5.0 pts

Excellent 90%–100%

5 to >4.0 pts

Good 80%–89%

Communication is mostly professional and respectful to colleagues. Response to faculty questions is mostly answered, if posed. Provides opinions and ideas that are supported by few at least two scholarly sources…. Response is written in Standard Academic English.

4 to >3.0 pts

Fair 70%–79%

Response posed in the Discussion may lack effective professional communication. Response to faculty questions is minimally addressed, if posed. Few or no scholarly sources are cited.

3 to >0 pts

Poor 0%–69%

Responses posted in the Discussion lack effective communication. Response to faculty questions is missing. No scholarly sources are cited.

6 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSecond Response: Timely and full participation
5 to >4.0 pts

Excellent 90%–100%

Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation. Posts by due date.

4 to >3.0 pts

Good 80%–89%

Meets requirements for full participation. Posts by due date.

3 to >2.0 pts

Fair 70%–79%

Posts by due date.

2 to >0 pts

Poor 0%–69%

Does not meet requirements for full participation. Does not post by due date.
5 pts

Total Points: 100

NURS 8201 WEEK 8 DISCUSSION: STATISTICAL ANALYSIS IN NURSING

“An essential component of nursing education is ensuring students develop the competencies in the use of empirical evidence in their clinical practice. The fundamental goal of statistics courses is to teach healthcare professionals the proper uses of statistical thinking to enable them to effectively evaluate the literature and integrate evidence into their practice” (Baghi & Kornides, 2014).

How are research methods used in nursing? What particular methods are used in your area of nursing practice? Over the last few weeks, you have been exploring these questions, and you will continue this exploration examining the specific tests and methods that may be used in your particular area of nursing practice. Why might different methods be used based on an area of practice? Why is it important for DNP-prepared nurses to be familiar with various research methods?

For this Discussion, reflect on the tests and methods utilized in research studies, presented over the last eight weeks of the course, to consider the approach, impact, and purpose of these in conducting nursing research. Using a selected article, consider the approach used and reflect on how that approach might fits within your area of nursing practice.

Reference: Baghi, H., & Kornides, M. (2013). Current and future health care professionals attitudes toward and knowledge of statistics: How confidence influences learning. Journal of Nursing Education Practitioners 3(7), 24–29 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4239707/Links to an external site.

RESOURCES

Be sure to review the Learning Resources before completing this activity.

Click the weekly resources link to access the resources.

WEEKLY RESOURCES

WEEK 8: LEARNING RESOURCES

Required Readings

Gray, J. R., & Grove, S. K. (2020). Burns and Grove’s the practice of nursing research: Appraisal, synthesis, and generation of evidence (9th ed.). Elsevier.

Chapter 25, “Using Statistics to Determine Differences” (pp. 687–698)

Kim, Y. H., Min, J., Kim, S. H., & Shin, S. (2018). Effects of a work-based critical reflection program for novice nursesLinks to an external site.. BMC Medical Education, 18(30), 1–6. doi:10.1186/s12909-018-1135-0

Leigh, L., Taylor, C., Glassman, T., Thompson, A., & Sheu, J-. J. (2020). A cross-sectional examination of the factors related to emergency nurses’ motivation to protect themselves against an Ebola infectionLinks to an external site.. Journal of Emergency Nursing, 46(6), 814–826. doi:10.1016/j.jen.2020.05.002

Schober, P., & Vetter, T. R. (2020). Nonparametric statistical methods in medical researchLinks to an external site.. Anesthesia & Analgesia, 131(6), 1862–1863. doi:10.1213/ANE.0000000000005101

Wilson, D., Redman, R., Talsma, A., & Aebersold, M. (2012). Differences in perceptions of patient safety culture between charge and noncharged nurses: Implications for effectiveness outcomes and researchLinks to an external site.. Nursing Research and Practice, 2012, 1–7. doi:10.1155/2012/847626

Document: CITI Program Learner Registration Guide (PDF)Download CITI Program Learner Registration Guide (PDF)

TO PREPARE:

Review the articles presented in this week’s Learning Resources and analyze each study’s use of statistical and nonparametric tests.

Select an article to focus on for this Discussion.

Ask yourself: Which method is most commonly used in research studies that pertain to my area of nursing practice, and why this might be so?

BY DAY 3 OF WEEK 8

Post a critical analysis of the article that you selected by addressing the following:

What are the goals and purpose of the research study described by the article you selected?

How are nonparametric tests used in the research study? What are the results of their use? Be specific.

Why are parametric methods ( tests and ANOVA) inappropriate for the statistical analysis of the research study’s data? Be specific and provide examples.

What are the strengths and weaknesses of the research study (e.g., study design, sampling, and measurement)?

How could the findings and recommendations of the research study contribute to evidence-based practice for nursing?

BY DAY 6 OF WEEK 8

Read a selection of your colleagues’ responses and respond to at least two of your colleagues on two different days in one or more of the following ways:

Ask a probing question, substantiated with additional background information, evidence, or research.

Share an insight from having read your colleagues’ postings, synthesizing the information to provide new perspectives.

Offer and support an alternative perspective using readings from the classroom or from your own research in the Walden Library.

Validate an idea with your own experience and additional research.

Suggest an alternative perspective based on additional evidence drawn from readings or after synthesizing multiple postings.

Expand on your colleagues’ postings by providing additional insights or contrasting perspectives based on readings and evidence.

URS_8201_Week8_Discussion_Rubric

NURS_8201_Week8_Discussion_Rubric

Criteria Ratings Pts

44 to >39.0 pts

Excellent 90%–100%

39 to >34.0 pts

Good 80%–89%

34 to >30.0 pts

Fair 70%–79%

30 to >0 pts

Poor 0%–69%

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeMain Posting: Writing

6 to >5.0 pts

Excellent 90%–100%

Written clearly and concisely. Contains no grammatical or spelling errors. Adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style. Response is effectively written in Standard Academic English.

5 to >4.0 pts

Good 80%–89%

4 to >3.0 pts

Fair 70%–79%

3 to >0 pts

Poor 0%–69%

6 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeMain Posting: Timely and full participation

10 to >8.0 pts

Excellent 90%–100%

Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation. … Posts main Discussion by due date.

8 to >7.0 pts

Good 80%–89%

Meets requirements for full participation. … Posts main Discussion by due date.

7 to >6.0 pts

Fair 70%–79%

Posts main Discussion by due date.

6 to >0 pts

Poor 0%–69%

Does not meet requirements for full participation. … Does not post main Discussion by due date.
10 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeFirst Response: Post to colleague’s main post that is reflective and justified with scholarly sources.

9 to >8.0 pts

Excellent 90%–100%

8 to >7.0 pts

Good 80%–89%

7 to >6.0 pts

Fair 70%–79%

Response is on topic and may have some depth. Minimal or no scholarly sources provided.

6 to >0 pts

Poor 0%–69%

Response may not be on topic and lacks depth. No sources.

9 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeFirst Response: Writing

6 to >5.0 pts

Excellent 90%–100%

5 to >4.0 pts

Good 80%–89%

4 to >3.0 pts

Fair 70%–79%

Response posed in the Discussion may lack effective professional communication. Response to faculty questions is minimally addressed, if posed. Few or no scholarly sources are cited.

3 to >0 pts

Poor 0%–69%

Responses posted in the Discussion lack effective communication. Response to faculty questions is missing. No scholarly sources are cited.
6 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeFirst Response: Timely and full participation
5 to >4.0 pts

Excellent 90%–100%

Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation. … Posts by due date.

4 to >3.0 pts

Good 80%–89%

Meets requirements for full participation. … Posts by due date.

3 to >2.0 pts

Fair 70%–79%

Posts by due date.

2 to >0 pts

Poor 0%–69%

Does not meet requirements for full participation. … Does not post by due date.

5 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSecond Response: Post to colleague’s main post that is reflective and justified with scholarly sources.
9 to >8.0 pts

Excellent 90%–100%

8 to >7.0 pts

Good 80%–89%

7 to >6.0 pts

Fair 70%–79%

Response is on topic and may have some depth. Minimal or no scholarly sources provided.

6 to >0 pts

Poor 0%–69%

Response may not be on topic and lacks depth. No sources.
9 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSecond Response: Writing
6 to >5.0 pts

Excellent 90%–100%

5 to >4.0 pts

Good 80%–89%

Communication is mostly professional and respectful to colleagues. Response to faculty questions is mostly answered, if posed. Provides opinions and ideas that are supported by few at least two scholarly sources…. Response is written in Standard Academic English.

4 to >3.0 pts

Fair 70%–79%

Response posed in the Discussion may lack effective professional communication. Response to faculty questions is minimally addressed, if posed. Few or no scholarly sources are cited.

3 to >0 pts

Poor 0%–69%

Responses posted in the Discussion lack effective communication. Response to faculty questions is missing. No scholarly sources are cited.
6 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSecond Response: Timely and full participation

5 to >4.0 pts

Excellent 90%–100%

Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation. Posts by due date.

4 to >3.0 pts

Good 80%–89%

Meets requirements for full participation. Posts by due date.

3 to >2.0 pts

Fair 70%–79%

Posts by due date.

2 to >0 pts

Poor 0%–69%

Does not meet requirements for full participation. Does not post by due date.

5 pts

Total Points: 100

NURS 8201 WEEK 9 DISCUSSION: USING QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TO INFORM EVIDENCE-BASED PRACTICE

“Qualitative researchers are motivated to know more about a phenomenon, a social process, or a culture from the perspectives of the people who are experiencing the phenomenon, involved in the social process, or living in the culture (Gray & Grove, 2020).

Qualitative research requires extensive time commitment and dedication. While all research can be rigorous and time consuming, by nature, the qualitative researcher seeks to build connections and trust with participants, which adds an additional layer of dedication. However, before research can even begin, researchers must first develop a research question.

Qualitative research questions tend to be broader than quantitative research questions. In a qualitative study, the researcher seeks to describe an experience or a phenomenon, so the questions are typically more global in scope. Additionally, many research questions describe and guide the research purpose, versus state it directly. Oftentimes phrases such as, “lived experience, framework or theoretical development, society, culture, or narrative” are used to describe the purpose (Gray & Grove, 2020).

For this Discussion, reflect on an area of interest and develop your own qualitative research question. How might you approach this topic and purpose? What types of research methods and design might you employ to address your qualitative research question?

Reference: Gray, J. R., & Grove, S. K. (2020). Burns and Grove’s the practice of nursing research: Appraisal, synthesis, and generation of evidence (9th ed.). Elsevier.

RESOURCES

Be sure to review the Learning Resources before completing this activity.

Click the weekly resources link to access the resources.

WEEKLY RESOURCES

TO PREPARE:

Review the Learning Resources for this week and reflect on qualitative research methods and designs.

Select a topic or issue in nursing practice to focus on for this Discussion.

Consider a qualitative research question that you might develop to address the topic or issue in nursing practice that you selected.

Reflect on how a qualitative research design might best support a research study to address your research question.

BY DAY 3 OF WEEK 9

Post a qualitative research question in relation to your topic or issue of interest. Explain why a qualitative research design is best suited to support this research question. Then, describe potential ethical considerations you should keep in mind in relation to your qualitative research question. Be specific and provide examples.

BY DAY 6 OF WEEK 9

Read a selection of your colleagues’ responses and respond to at least two of your colleagues on two different days in one or more of the following ways:

Ask a probing question, substantiated with additional background information, evidence, or research.

Share an insight from having read your colleagues’ postings, synthesizing the information to provide new perspectives.

Offer and support an alternative perspective using readings from the classroom or from your own research in the Walden Library.

Validate an idea with your own experience and additional research.

Suggest an alternative perspective based on additional evidence drawn from readings or after synthesizing multiple postings.

Expand on your colleagues’ postings by providing additional insights or contrasting perspectives based on readings and evidence.

NURS_8201_Week9_Discussion_Rubric

Criteria Ratings Pts

44 to >39.0 pts

Excellent 90%–100%

39 to >34.0 pts

Good 80%–89%

34 to >30.0 pts

Fair 70%–79%

30 to >0 pts

Poor 0%–69%

44 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeMain Posting: Writing

6 to >5.0 pts

Excellent 90%–100%

Written clearly and concisely. Contains no grammatical or spelling errors. Adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style. Response is effectively written in Standard Academic English.

5 to >4.0 pts

Good 80%–89%

4 to >3.0 pts

Fair 70%–79%

3 to >0 pts

Poor 0%–69%

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeMain Posting: Timely and full participation
10 to >8.0 pts

Excellent 90%–100%

Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation. … Posts main Discussion by due date.

8 to >7.0 pts

Good 80%–89%

Meets requirements for full participation. … Posts main Discussion by due date.

7 to >6.0 pts

Fair 70%–79%

Posts main Discussion by due date.

6 to >0 pts

Poor 0%–69%

Does not meet requirements for full participation. … Does not post main Discussion by due date.
10 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeFirst Response: Post to colleague’s main post that is reflective and justified with scholarly sources.

9 to >8.0 pts

Excellent 90%–100%

8 to >7.0 pts

Good 80%–89%

7 to >6.0 pts

Fair 70%–79%

Response is on topic and may have some depth. Minimal or no scholarly sources provided.

6 to >0 pts

Poor 0%–69%

Response may not be on topic and lacks depth. No sources.
9 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeFirst Response: Writing

6 to >5.0 pts

Excellent 90%–100%

5 to >4.0 pts

Good 80%–89%

4 to >3.0 pts

Fair 70%–79%

Response posed in the Discussion may lack effective professional communication. Response to faculty questions is minimally addressed, if posed. Few or no scholarly sources are cited.

3 to >0 pts

Poor 0%–69%

Responses posted in the Discussion lack effective communication. Response to faculty questions is missing. No scholarly sources are cited.
6 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeFirst Response: Timely and full participation

5 to >4.0 pts

Excellent 90%–100%

Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation. … Posts by due date.

4 to >3.0 pts
Good 80%–89%

Meets requirements for full participation. … Posts by due date.

3 to >2.0 pts

Fair 70%–79%

Posts by due date.

2 to >0 pts

Poor 0%–69%

Does not meet requirements for full participation. … Does not post by due date.
5 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSecond Response: Post to colleague’s main post that is reflective and justified with scholarly sources.
9 to >8.0 pts

Excellent 90%–100%

8 to >7.0 pts

Good 80%–89%

7 to >6.0 pts

Fair 70%–79%

Response is on topic and may have some depth. Minimal or no scholarly sources provided.

6 to >0 pts

Poor 0%–69%

Response may not be on topic and lacks depth. No sources.
9 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSecond Response: Writing
6 to >5.0 pts

Excellent 90%–100%

5 to >4.0 pts

Good 80%–89%

Communication is mostly professional and respectful to colleagues. Response to faculty questions is mostly answered, if posed. Provides opinions and ideas that are supported by few at least two scholarly sources…. Response is written in Standard Academic English.

4 to >3.0 pts

Fair 70%–79%

Response posed in the Discussion may lack effective professional communication. Response to faculty questions is minimally addressed, if posed. Few or no scholarly sources are cited.

3 to >0 pts

Poor 0%–69%

Responses posted in the Discussion lack effective communication. Response to faculty questions is missing. No scholarly sources are cited.

6 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSecond Response: Timely and full participation

5 to >4.0 pts

Excellent 90%–100%

Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation. Posts by due date.

4 to >3.0 pts

Good 80%–89%

Meets requirements for full participation. Posts by due date.

3 to >2.0 pts

Fair 70%–79%

Posts by due date.

2 to >0 pts

Poor 0%–69%

Does not meet requirements for full participation. Does not post by due date.
5 pts

Total Points: 100

NURS 8201 WEEK 10 ASSIGNMENT 2: ARTICLE CRITIQUE

This is Assignment 2 for the course, but the first Assignment this week.

DNP graduates are expected to apply research findings and integrate nursing science into evidence-based practice. To develop your skills in this high level of nursing practice, you will analyze the strengths and weaknesses of a research study over the next several weeks using the concepts presented throughout the course. Your final analysis will be a 5- to 7-page paper that includes the following:
A brief, 1- to 2-paragraph overview of the quantitative study that you selected. FOR THE PURPOSE OF THIS ASSIGNMENT THE ARTICLE CANNOT BE A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW. Review the Walden University library information on a systematic review https://academicanswers.waldenu.edu/faq/145443Links to an external site.

An explanation of two to three strengths of the study and support for your selection (i.e., why is this a strength). Be specific.

An explanation of 2–3 weaknesses of the study and support for your selection (i.e., why is this a weakness). Be specific.

Note: The strengths and weaknesses that you identified should be in relation to design, sampling, data collection, statistical analysis, results, and discussion of the study that you selected.

An explanation of proposed changes you would recommend to improve the quality of the this quantitative study, capitalizing on the strengths and improving on the weaknesses that you identified in the study. Be specific and provide examples.

A final summary of the implications of this study for nursing practice.

The purpose of the analysis is to help you develop a deeper understanding of the research process, to inspire you to think critically and deeply about research on a specific topic, and to strengthen your ability to integrate research findings into evidence-based nursing practice. This Assignment also gives you practice in analyzing the research literature, which will support you when you begin your DNP project. Before you proceed, please review the rubric for this Assignment.

RESOURCES

Be sure to review the Learning Resources before completing this activity.

Click the weekly resources link to access the resources.

WEEKLY RESOURCES

WEEK 10: LEARNING RESOURCES

Required Readings

Bradshaw, B., Atkinson, S., & Doody, O. (2017). Employing a qualitative description approach in health care researchLinks to an external site.. Global Qualitative Nursing ResearchLinks to an external site., 4, 1–8. doi:10.1177/2333393617742282

Doyle, L., McCabe, C., Keogh, B., Brady, A., & McCann, M. (2020). An overview of the qualitative descriptive design within nursing researchLinks to an external site.. Journal of Research in Nursing, 25(5), 443–455. doi:10.1177/1744987119880234

Kim, H., Sefcik, J. S., & Bradway, C. (2017).Characteristics of qualitative descriptive studies: A systematic reviewLinks to an external site.. Research in Nursing and Health, 40(1), 23–42. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5225027/

Morgan, D. L. (1997). Focus groups as qualitative researchLinks to an external site.(2nd ed.). SAGE Publications, Inc. https://go.openathens.net/redirector/waldenu.edu?url=https://doi.org/10.4135/978141298

Ramos-Morcillo, A. J., Harillo-Acevedo, D., & Ruzafa-Martinez, M. (2020). Using the Knowledgeâ€toâ€Action Framework to understand experiences of breastfeeding guideline implementation: A qualitative study.Links to an external site.Journal of Nursing Management, 28(7), 1670–1685. doi:10.1111/jonm.13123

Springer, S. I., Land, C. W., Moss, L. J., & Cinotti, D. (2018). Collecting school counseling group work data: Initiating consensual qualitative research through practitioner-researcher partnershipsLinks to an external site.. Journal for Specialists in Group Work, 43(2), 128–143. doi:10.1080/01933922.2018.1431346

Required Media

Brett, B. M. (2021). What interviewing style should I use?Links to an external site. [Video]. SAGE Research Methods. https://go.openathens.net/redirector/waldenu.edu?url=https://doi.org/10.4135/9781529763126

Wheeler, K. (2021). What is an in-depth interview?Links to an external site. [Video]. SAGE Research Methods. https://go.openathens.net/redirector/waldenu.edu?url=https://doi.org/10.4135/9781529763119

Wheeler, K., & Brett, B. M. (2021). Top ten tips for a successful interviewLinks to an external site.[Video]. SAGE Research Methods. https://go.openathens.net/redirector/waldenu.edu?url=https://doi.org/10.4135/9781529763195

Hein, W. (2020). Top tips for conducting qualitative researchLinks to an external site. [Video]. SAGE Research Methods. https://go.openathens.net/redirector/waldenu.edu?url=https://doi.org/10.4135/9781529730708

Marshall, C., & Rossman, G. B. (2011). How should one go about designing a qualitative research project?Links to an external site. [Video]. SAGE Research Methods. https://go.openathens.net/redirector/waldenu.edu?url=https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412993746

Marshall, C., & Rossman, G. B. (2011). When should a researcher choose a qualitative approach?Links to an external site. [Video]. SAGE Research Methods. https://go.openathens.net/redirector/waldenu.edu?url=https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412993753

THE ASSIGNMENT: (5–7 PAGES)

Select a quantitative research article from the body of literature that you have reviewed related to the practice gap that you have identified and for which you will develop for your DNP Project.

Review the various quantitative research designs presented in the textbook readings and research articles.

Consider the research design used in your selected article. Ask yourself the following questions:

Is the design appropriate for the study? Why or why not?

Would a different design provide better results? Why or why not?

BY DAY 7

Submit your Assignment by Day 7 of Week 10.

SUBMISSION INFORMATION

Before submitting your final assignment, you can check your draft for authenticity. To check your draft, access the Turnitin Drafts from the Start Here area.

To submit your completed assignment, save your Assignment as WK10Assgn2+last name+first initial.

Then, click on Start Assignment near the top of the page.

Next, click on Upload File and select Submit Assignment for review.

Rubric

NURS_8201_Week10_Assignment2_Rubric

Criteria Ratings Pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWrite a 1- to 2-paragraph overview of the study selected.

25 to >22.0 pts

Excellent

The response accurately and completely provides a detailed overview of the research study selected.

22 to >19.0 pts

Good

The response accurately provides an overview of the research study selected.

19 to >17.0 pts

Fair

The response inaccurately or vaguely provides an overview of the research study selected.

17 to >0 pts

Poor

The response inaccurately and vaguely provides an overview of the research study selected, or it is missing.

25 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeExplain two to three strengths of the study and support for your selection. Be specific.Explain two to three weaknesses of the study and support for your selection. Be specific.

80 to >71.0 pts

Excellent

The response accurately and clearly explains in detail two to three strengths of the study…. The response accurately and clearly explains in detail two to three weaknesses of the study…. The response includes relevant, specific, and appropriate examples that fully support the strengths and weaknesses explained.

71 to >70.0 pts

Good

The response accurately explains two to three strengths of the study…. The response accurately explains two to three weaknesses of the study…. The response includes relevant, specific, and accurate examples that support the strengths and weaknesses explained.

70 to >55.0 pts

Fair

The response inaccurately or vaguely explains two to three strengths of the study…. The response inaccurately or vaguely explains two to three weaknesses of the study…. OR… The response explains <2 strengths and weaknesses…. The response includes inaccurate and irrelevant examples that may support the strengths and weaknesses explained.

55 to >0 pts

Poor

The response inaccurately and vaguely explains two to three strengths of the study, or it is missing…. The response inaccurately and vaguely explains two to three weaknesses of the study, or it is missing. … The response includes inaccurate and vague examples that do not support the strengths weaknesses explained, or it is missing.
80 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeExplain the proposed changes that you would recommend to improve the quality of the study. Capitalize on the strengths to improve on the weaknesses. Be specific and provide examples.

100 to >89.0 pts

Excellent

The response comprehensively and fully explains, in detail, the proposed recommended changes to improve the quality of the study…. The response accurately and clearly analyzes, in detail, the strengths of the study, in the proposed changes, to capitalize on these strengths. … The response includes relevant, specific, and appropriate examples to fully support the proposed changes.

89 to >79.0 pts

Good

The response explains the proposed recommended changes to improve the quality of the study…. The response analyzes the strengths of the study, in the proposed changes, to capitalize on these strengths. … The response includes relevant, specific, and accurate examples that support the proposed changes.

79 to >69.0 pts

Fair

The response inaccurately or vaguely explains the proposed recommended changes to improve the quality of the study…. The response inaccurately or vaguely analyzes the strengths of the study, in the proposed changes, and may capitalize on these strengths. … The response includes inaccurate and irrelevant examples that may support the proposed changes.

69 to >0 pts

Poor

The response inaccurately and vaguely explains the proposed recommended changes to improve the quality of the study, or it is missing…. The response inaccurately and vaguely analyzes the strengths of the study, in the proposed changes, and does not capitalize on these strengths, or it is missing. … The response includes inaccurate and vague examples that do not support the proposed changes, or it is missing.
100 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWrite a final summary of the implications of this study for nursing practice.
50 to >44.0 pts

Excellent

The response accurately and clearly summarizes, in detail, the implications of this study for nursing practice…. The response includes relevant, specific, and appropriate examples that fully support the summarized implications.

44 to >39.0 pts

Good

The response accurately summarizes the implications of this study for nursing practice…. The response includes relevant, specific, and accurate examples that support the summarized implications.

39 to >34.0 pts

Fair

The response inaccurately or vaguely summarizes the implications of this study for nursing practice…. The response includes inaccurate and irrelevant examples that may support the summarized implications.

34 to >0 pts

Poor

The response inaccurately and vaguely summarizes the implications of this study for nursing practice, or it is missing…. The response includes inaccurate and vague examples that do not support the summarized implications, or it is missing.

50 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten 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.
15 to >12.0 pts

Excellent

12 to >10.5 pts

Good

10.5 to >10.0 pts

Fair

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.

10 to >0 pts

Poor

Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity < 60% of the time…. No purpose statement, introduction, or conclusion was provided.

15 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten Expression and Formatting – English writing standards: Correct grammar, mechanics, and proper punctuation
15 to >12.0 pts

Excellent

Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors.

12 to >10.5 pts

Good

Contains a few (1 or 2) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors.

10.5 to >10.0 pts

Fair

Contains several (3 or 4) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors.

10 to >0 pts

Poor

Contains many (≥ 5) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the reader’s understanding.

15 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten Expression and Formatting – The paper follows correct APA format for title page, headings, font, spacing, margins, indentations, page numbers, parenthetical/in-text citations, and reference list.

15 to >12.0 pts

Excellent

Uses correct APA format with no errors.

12 to >10.5 pts

Good

Contains a few (1 or 2) APA format errors.

10.5 to >10.0 pts

Fair

Contains several (3 or 4) APA format errors.

10 to >0 pts

Poor

Contains many (≥ 5) APA format errors.

15 pts

Total Points: 300

PreviousNext

NURS 8201 WEEK 10 ASSIGNMENT 3: QUALITATIVE RESEARCH APPROACHES TO SUPPORT NURSING PRACTICE

When researchers want to seek group interaction, a focus group may be utilized in a qualitative research study. “Focus groups, or groups interviews, are composed of similar participants to encourage interaction among the participants” (Gray & Grove, 2020).These interactions cannot be evaluated in a traditional one-on-one interview, but in a group setting, researchers have the opportunity to explore perceptions, attitudes, and positioning within a group.

Interviews and focus groups are often used for collecting qualitative data about people’s experiences, opinions, attitudes, and motivations.

Focus groups are a specific form of group interview. The person conducting a focus group serves as a facilitator and encourages discussion.

Interviewing involves asking individuals or small groups questions about a topic.

Reference: NSW Government-Education, 2021, https://education.nsw.gov.au/teaching-and-learning/professional-learning/pl-resources/evaluation-resource-hub/collecting-data/interviews-and-focus-groups#:~:text=Interviewing%20involves%20asking%20individuals%20or,interaction%20between%20participants%20is%20encouraged.

Take for example, a researcher exploring why women report inadequate care from medical professionals versus their male counterparts. A focus group might illicit responses more detailed and complex versus simply in a traditional interview, especially if the women in the group all report a similar experience in their care. In a focus group setting, individuals may be able to find connection in meaning to share an experience that might be missed in a different format.

For this Assignment, explore the use of focus groups or interviews in qualitative research. Consider the effectiveness of the method and examine how this approach might lend itself to a mixed method of study.

Reference: Gray, J. R., & Grove, S. K. (2020). Burns and Grove’s the practice of nursing research: Appraisal, synthesis, and generation of evidence (9th ed.). Elsevier.

RESOURCES

Be sure to review the Learning Resources before completing this activity.

Click the weekly resources link to access the resources.

WEEKLY RESOURCES

WEEK 10: LEARNING RESOURCES

Required Readings

Required Media

Wheeler, K. (2021). What is an in-depth interview?Links to an external site. [Video]. SAGE Research Methods. https://go.openathens.net/redirector/waldenu.edu?url=https://doi.org/10.4135/9781529763119

TO PREPARE:

Review the Learning Resources for this week and reflect on the use of focus groups and interviews in qualitative research designs.

Select a topic or issue in nursing practice to focus on for this Discussion.

Consider which type of qualitative research design, focus groups or interviews, might be most appropriate for the topic or issue in nursing practice and why. How will this type of qualitative research design support the aims of addressing the topic or issue for nursing practice?

THE ASSIGNMENT: (1–2 PAGES)

Describe the topic or issue in nursing practice that you selected and explain why.

Explain which qualitative research design approach that you selected to address this topic or issue and describe the method you chose. Be specific.

Justify why this qualitative research design approach would be best suited for this topic or issue and explain how this approach will better inform improvements for nursing practice for the topic or issue that you selected. Be specific and provide examples.

Explain why it is important for the DNP-prepared nurse to understand qualitative research approaches for nursing practice.

BY DAY 7

Submit your Assignment by Day 7 of Week 10.

SUBMISSION INFORMATION

Before submitting your final assignment, you can check your draft for authenticity. To check your draft, access the Turnitin Drafts from the Start Here area.
To submit your completed assignment, save your Assignment as WK10Assgn3+last name+first initial.

Then, click on Start Assignment near the top of the page.

Next, click on Upload File and select Submit Assignment for review.

Rubric

NURS_8201_Week10_Assignment3_Rubric

Criteria Ratings Pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeDescribe the topic or issue in nursing practice that you selected and explain why.

20 to >17.0 pts

Excellent

The response comprehensively and clearly describes in detail the selected topic or issue in nursing practice. … The response includes relevant, specific, and appropriate examples that fully support the selection of the topic or issue.

17 to >15.0 pts

Good

The response clearly describes the selected topic or issue in nursing practice. … The response includes relevant, specific, and accurate examples that support the selection of the topic or issue.

15 to >13.0 pts

Fair

The response inaccurately or vaguely describes the selected topic or issue in nursing practice. … The response includes inaccurate and irrelevant examples that may support the selection of the topic or issue.

13 to >0 pts

Poor

The response inaccurately and vaguely describes the selected topic or issue in nursing practice, or it is missing…. The response includes inaccurate and vague examples that do not support selection of the topic or issue, or it is missing.
20 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeExplain which qualitative research design approach you selected to address this topic or issue and describe the method that you chose. Be specific.

20 to >17.0 pts

Excellent

The response comprehensively and clearly explains in detail the selected qualitative research design approach. … The response comprehensively and clearly describes, in detail, the selected method …. The response includes relevant, specific, and appropriate examples that fully support the selection of the research design approach.

17 to >15.0 pts

Good

The response clearly explains the selected qualitative research design approach…. The response clearly describes the selected method chosen…. The response includes relevant, specific, and accurate examples that support the selection of the research design approach.

15 to >13.0 pts

Fair

The response inaccurately or vaguely explains the selected qualitative research design approach…. The response inaccurately or vaguely describes the selected method chosen…. The response includes inaccurate and irrelevant examples that may support the selection of research design approach.

13 to >0 pts

Poor

The response inaccurately and vaguely explains the selected qualitative research design approach, or it is missing…. The response inaccurately and vaguely describes the selected topic or issue in nursing practice, or it is missing…. The response includes inaccurate and vague examples that do not support selection of the research design approach, or it is missing.
20 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeJustify why this qualitative research design approach would be best suited for this topic or issue and explain how this approach will better inform improvements for nursing practice for the topic or issue that you selected. Be specific and provide examples.

25 to >22.0 pts

Excellent

The response comprehensively and fully justifies in detail the use of the selected research design approach…. The response comprehensively and clearly explains in detail how the research design approach will better inform improvements for nursing practice for the selected topic or issue…. The response includes relevant, specific, and appropriate examples that fully support the use of the research design approach.

22 to >19.0 pts

Good

The response clearly justifies the use of the selected research design approach…. The response clearly explains how the research design approach will better inform improvements for nursing practice for the selected topic or issue…. The response includes relevant, specific, and accurate examples that support the use of the research design approach.

19 to >17.0 pts

Fair

The response inaccurately or vaguely justifies the use of the selected research design approach…. The response inaccurately or vaguely explains how the research design approach will better inform improvements for nursing practice for the selected topic or issue…. The response includes inaccurate and irrelevant examples that may support the use of research design approach.

17 to >0 pts

Poor

The response inaccurately and vaguely justifies the use of the selected research design approach, or it is missing…. The response inaccurately and vaguely explains how the research design approach will better inform improvements for nursing practice for the selected topic or issue, or it is missing…. The response includes inaccurate and vague examples that do not support use of the research design approach, or it is missing.
25 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeExplain why it is important for the DNP-prepared nurse to understand qualitative research approaches for nursing practice.

20 to >17.0 pts

Excellent

The response accurately and clearly explains in detail the importance of a DNP-prepared nurse understanding qualitative research approaches for nursing practice…. The response includes relevant, specific, and appropriate examples that fully support the explanation.

17 to >15.0 pts

Good

The response accurately explains the importance of a DNP-prepared nurse understanding qualitative research approaches for nursing practice…. The response includes relevant, specific, and accurate examples that support the explanation.

15 to >13.0 pts

Fair

The response inaccurately or vaguely explains the importance of a DNP-prepared nurse understanding qualitative research approaches for nursing practice…. The response includes inaccurate and irrelevant examples that may support the explanation.

13 to >0 pts

Poor

The response inaccurately and vaguely explains the importance of a DNP-prepared nurse understanding qualitative research approaches for nursing practice, or it is missing…. The response includes inaccurate and vague examples that do not support the explanation, or it is missing.

20 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten 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 to >4.0 pts

Excellent

4 to >3.5 pts

Good

3.5 to >3.0 pts

Fair

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.

3 to >0 pts

Poor

Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity < 60% of the time…. No purpose statement, introduction, or conclusion was provided.
5 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten Expression and Formatting – English writing standards: Correct grammar, mechanics, and proper punctuation

5 to >4.0 pts

Excellent

Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors.

4 to >3.5 pts

Good

Contains a few (1 or 2) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors.

3.5 to >3.0 pts

Fair

Contains several (3 or 4) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors.

3 to >0 pts

Poor

Contains many (≥ 5) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the reader’s understanding.

5 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten Expression and Formatting – The paper follows correct APA format for title page, headings, font, spacing, margins, indentations, page numbers, parenthetical/in-text citations, and reference list.

5 to >4.0 pts

Excellent

Uses correct APA format with no errors.

4 to >3.5 pts

Good

Contains a few (1 or 2) APA format errors.

3.5 to >3.0 pts

Fair

Contains several (3 or 4) APA format errors.

3 to >0 pts

Poor

Contains many (≥ 5) APA format errors.

5 pts

Total Points: 100

Struggling to meet your deadline ?

Get assistance on

NURS 8201 Full Course Discussions & Assignments (Week 1-10)

done on time by medical experts. Don’t wait – ORDER NOW!

NURS 8201 Full Course Discussions & Assignments (Week 1-10)