Evidence based practice
Please
use the grading rubric to create an outline of your assignment. Each
section of the rubric should be a section of your final paper and could
become the headings. Your assignment will be graded based on each
element of the rubric. Compare each section of your paper with the
rubric to ensure all elements are covered. Then, include an introduction
and conclusion to tie the paper together. If you have any questions
regarding the assignment please contact your instructor using the Course
Help forum.
The final project presents a culmination of nursing research and
evidence-based practice (EBP)knowledge as students choose a qualitative
or quantitative study to critically evaluate, including making a
recommendation for utilization in EBP.
In a 5 page paper (excluding title page and references), critically
evaluate either Study 3 or Study 4, which can be found in the Module 7
Overview. Evaluate the credibility of professional citation, research
design, and procedures in a research article. Include a discussion on
how this study contributes to EBP. Use the Final Project Rubric
provided below to help you develop and organize your final paper.
Please remember to follow APA 6th edition formatting for the title page,
body of the paper, and reference page.
Rubric or Grading Criteria:
|
Competency |
10.5 points |
6 points |
4 points |
0 points |
Total |
|
Evaluates credibility of research article the components of the appropriate evaluation checklist in Houser (2018) |
Evaluates credibility of research article using most of the |
Evaluates credibility of research article using 2/3 of the evaluation checklist in Houser (2018). |
Evaluates credibility of research article using one-third or less of the evaluation checklist in Houser (2018) |
No paper submitted, content missing. |
/10.5 |
|
Evaluates the problem statement and research design using the components of the evaluation checklist in Houser (2018) |
Evaluates the problem statement and research design using most of the components of the evaluation checklists in Houser (2018). |
Evaluates the problem statement and research design using half of the components of the evaluation checklists in Houser (2018). |
Evaluates the problem statement and research design using one-third or less of the evaluation checklists in Houser (2018). |
No paper submitted, content missing. |
/10.5 |
|
Evaluates ethical issues in the study using most of the components of the evaluation checklist in Houser (2018). |
Evaluates ethical issues in the study using most of the components of the evaluation checklist in Houser (2018). |
Evaluates ethical issues in the study using half of the components of the evaluation checklist in Houser (2018). |
Evaluates ethical issues in the study using one-third or less of the components of the evaluation checklist in Houser (2018). |
No paper submitted, content missing. |
/10.5 |
|
Evaluates the purpose statement using most of the components of the evaluation checklist in Houser (2018) |
Evaluates the purpose statement using most of the components of the evaluation checklist in Houser (2018) |
Evaluates the purpose statement using half of the components of the evaluation checklist in Houser (2018) |
Evaluates the purpose statement using one-third or less of the components of the evaluation checklist in Houser (2018) |
No paper submitted, content missing. |
/10.5 |
|
Evaluates the literature review using most of the components of the evaluation checklist in Houser (2018) |
Evaluates the literature review using most of the components of the evaluation checklist in Houser (2018) |
Evaluates the literature review using half of the components of the evaluation checklist in Houser (2018) |
Evaluates the literature review using one-third or less of the components of the evaluation checklist in Houser (2018) |
No paper submitted, content missing. |
/10.5 |
|
Evaluates the sampling strategy using most of the components of the evaluation checklist in Houser (2018). |
Evaluates the sampling strategy using most of the components of the evaluation checklist in Houser (2018). |
Evaluates the sampling strategy using half of the components of the evaluation checklist in Houser (2018). |
Evaluates the sampling strategy using one-third or less of the components of the evaluation checklist in Houser (2018). |
No paper submitted, or content missing. |
/10.5 |
|
Evaluates the measurement strategy and validity in quantitative OR Evaluates trustworthiness of data in qualitative studies using most of the checklist components in Houser (2018). |
Evaluates the measurement strategy in quantitative studies using most of the evaluation checklist in Houser (2018) OR. Evaluates trustworthiness of data in qualitative studies using most |
Evaluates the measurement strategy in quantitative studies using half of the evaluation checklist in Houser (2018). OR Evaluates trustworthiness of data in qualitative studies using half of the components of the checklist in Houser (2018). |
Evaluates the measurement strategy in quantitative studies using one-third of the evaluation checklist in Houser (2018). OR Evaluates trustworthiness of data in qualitative studies using |
No paper submitted, content missing. |
/10.5 |
|
Evaluates how study results may (or may not) be used to inform EBP. |
Evaluates how study results may (or may not) be used to inform EBP. |
Discusses study results in general but not how findings may or may not contribute to EBP. |
Does not discuss results or how study findings can inform EBP. |
No paper submitted or content missing |
/10.5 |
|
Competency |
7 points |
5 points |
2.5 points |
0 points |
|
|
APA format |
Demonstrates competent use of mechanics and APA |
Minimal APA errors Two unique errors i.e. abbreviations and in text citation |
Many APA errors More than two APA errors |
Complete lack of understanding APA format |
/7 |
|
Competency |
3 points |
2 points |
1 points |
0 points |
|
|
Organization |
Organization excellent, ideas clear and arranged logically, transitions smooth, no flaws in logic. |
Organization good; ideas usually clear and arranged in acceptable sequence; transitions usually smooth, good support |
Organization minimally effective; problems in approach, sequence, support and transitions |
Organization does not meet requirements |
/3 |
|
Grammar |
Grammar, punctuation, mechanics, and usage correct and idiomatic, consistent with Standard American English |
Grammar, punctuation, mechanics, and usage good mostly consistent |
Grammar, punctuation, mechanics and usage distracting and often interfere with meaning or understanding |
Grammar, punctuation, mechanics, and usage interfere with understanding |
/3 |
|
References |
References are relevant, authoritative and contemporary |
Adequate references |
Minimal use of appropriate references |
Poor use and/or selection of references not relevant |
/3 |
|
Total Possible = 100 |
/100 |
||||
Needs help with similar assignment?
We are available 24x7 to deliver the best services and assignment ready within 3-4 hours? Order a custom-written, plagiarism-free paper
Get Answer Over WhatsApp
Order Paper Now
