NURS 5052/NURS 6052: ESSENTIALS OF EVIDENCE-BASED PRACTICE – Discussion 10 (Grading Rubic and Media Attached)
Relax! Stop worrying about deadlines and let our professional writers help you. Hire an essay writer helper and receive a professional assignment before your deadline. We provide writing services for all types of academic assignments.
Order a Similar Paper Order a Different Paper
Discussion: Weighing the Evidence
When conducting original research, the final step researchers must complete is weighing the evidence and interpreting the meanings of their data, statistics, and analyses. This is the culmination of the research process in which all of the research methods and designs can be synthesized into a meaningful conclusion. In this stage, researchers should formulate explanations for what their data indicates, determine whether the data answers their initial research question, identify areas of uncertainty, and consider directions for further research.
In this Discussion, you focus on one of the research articles that you identified for Part 2 of the Course Project (Literature Review). You then explore the process of how the researchers generated conclusions based on their data, consider other possible interpretations of their data, and formulate ideas for further research.
To prepare:
Review this week’s Learning Resources, focusing on how researchers find meaning in their data and generate sound conclusions. Pay particular attention to Table 2 in the article, “Study Design in Medical Research.”
Revisit the 5 articles that you identified in Part 2 of the Course Project. Select one to consider for the purpose of this Discussion.
Read sections of the chosen article where the data is presented, analyzed, and interpreted for meaning. What reasoning process did the researchers use to formulate their conclusions? What explanation did they give to support their conclusions? Were there any weaknesses in their analysis or conclusions?
Consider possible alternate conclusions that the researchers could have drawn based on their data.
Examine the findings that the article presents and consider how well they addressed the researcher’s initial question(s). What additional research could be done to build on these findings and gain a fuller understanding of the question?
Post an APA citation and brief summary of the research article that you selected. Describe the data and the results of any statistical tests or analyses presented in the article. Explain how the researchers formulated their conclusion, any weaknesses in their analysis or conclusions, and offer at least one alternate interpretation of their data. Propose at least one additional research study that could be done to further investigate this research topic.
Read a selection of your colleagues’ responses.
Respond to at least two colleagues on two different days using one or more of the following approaches:
Ask a probing question, substantiated with additional background information, and evidence.
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 review of the literature in the Walden Library.
Expand on your colleagues’ postings by providing additional insights or contrasting perspectives based on readings and evidence.
Required Readings
Polit, D. F., & Beck, C. T. (2017). Nursing research: Generating and assessing evidence for nursing practice (10th ed.). Philadelphia, PA: Wolters Kluwer.
Review Chapter 2, Fig. 2.1
Chapter 29, “Systematic Reviews of Research Evidence: Meta-analysis, Metasynthesis, and Mixed Studies Review”
This chapter focuses on the different types of systematic reviews. The chapter discusses the advantages of this type of analysis and the steps for conducting a meta-analysis or metasynthesis.
Dingle, P. (2011). Statin statistics: Lies and deception. Positive Health, 180, 1.
Retrieved from the Walden Library databases.
In this article, the author outlines how misleading statistics are used to make false claims about the positive use of statin drugs in order to retain a market share of sales for pharmaceutical firms.
Katapodi, M. C., & Northouse, L. L. (2011). Comparative effectiveness research: Using systematic reviews and meta-analyses to synthesize empirical evidence. Research & Theory for Nursing Practice, 25(3), 191–209.
Retrieved from the Walden Library databases.
The authors of this article assert that more comparative effectiveness research (CER) is necessary to accommodate the elevated demand for evidence-based health care practices. The article supplies a summary of methodological issues relevant to systematic reviews and meta-analyses used in the process of CER.
Stichler, J. F. (2010). Evaluating the evidence in evidence-based design. Journal of Nursing Administration, 40(9), 348–351.
Retrieved from the Walden Library databases.
The quality of evidence used in EBP can vary considerably. This article highlights the necessity of critically appraising facility design research articles and using a hierarchical model to rate the strength of evidence.
Bernd, R., du Prel, J.-B., & Blettner, M. (2009). Study design in medical research: Part 2 of a series on the evaluation of scientific publications. Deutsches Aerzteblatt International, 106(11), 184–189. Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2695375/pdf/Dtsch_Arztebl_Int-106-0184.pdf
This article provides guidance in evaluating the study design of scientific publications for reliability and credibility. The authors suggest that the most important elements to consider are the question to be answered, the study population, the unit of analysis, the type of study, the measuring technique, and the calculation of sample size.
Walden University. (n.d.a). Paper templates. Retrieved July 23, 2012, from http://writingcenter.waldenu.edu/57.htm
This website provides you access to the School of Nursing Sample Paper, which will serve as a template for formatting your papers.
Media
Laureate Education (Producer). (2012g). Hierarchy of evidence pyramid. Baltimore, MD: Author.
This multimedia piece explains the hierarchy of evidence pyramid. The piece offers definitions and key information for each level of the pyramid.
Laureate Education (Producer). (2012n). Weighing the evidence. Baltimore, MD: Author.
Note: The approximate length of this media piece is 6 minutes.
In this video, Dr. Kristen Mauk provides insight about how she analyzed her data and interpreted meanings of what the data showed. She describes how she drew conclusions based on the results and how she explained unexpected findings that were contrary to her initial hypotheses.
NURS 5052/NURS 6052: ESSENTIALS OF EVIDENCE-BASED PRACTICE – Discussion 10 (Grading Rubic and Media Attached)
Discussion Rubric Levels of Achievement Criteria Outstanding Performance Excellent Performance Competent Performance Room for Improvement Poor Performance Content-Main Posting 30 to 30 points -Main posting addresses all criteria with 75% of post exceptional depth and breadth supported by credible references 27 to 29 points -Main posting addresses all criteria with 75% of post exceptional depth and breadth supported by credible references 24 to 26 points Main posting meets expectations. All criteria are addressed with 50% containing good breadth and depth. 21 to 23 points Main posting addresses most of the criteria. One to two criterion are not addressed or superficially addressed. 0 to 20 points Main posting does not address all of criteria, superficially addresses criteria. Two or more criteria are not addressed. Course Requirements and Attendance 20 to 20 points -Responds to two colleagues’ with posts that are reflective, are justified with credible sources, and ask questions that extend the discussion. 18 to 19 points -Responds to two colleagues’ with posts that are reflective, are justified with credible sources, and ask questions that extend the discussion. 16 to 17 points Responds to a minimum of two colleagues’ posts, are reflective, and ask questions that extend the discussion. One post is justified by a credible source. 14 to 15 points Responds to less than two colleagues’ posts. Posts are on topic, may have some depth, or questions. May extend the discussion. No credible sources are cited 0 to 13 points Responds to less than two colleagues’ posts. Posts may not be on topic, lack depth, do not pose questions that extend the discussion Scholarly Writing Quality 30 to 30 points -The main posting clearly addresses the discussion criteria and is written concisely. The main posting is cited with more than two credible references that adhere to the correct format per the APA Manual 6th Edition. No spelling or grammatical errors. ***The use of scholarly sources or real life experiences needs to be included to deepen the discussion and earn points in reply to fellow students. 27 to 29 points -The main posting clearly addresses the discussion criteria and is written concisely. The main posting is cited with more than two credible references that adhere to the correct format per the APA Manual 6th Edition. No spelling or grammatical errors. 24 to 26 points -The main posting clearly addresses the discussion criteria and is written concisely. The main posting is cited with a minimum of two current credible references that adhere to the correct format per the APA Manual 6th Edition. Contains one to two spelling or grammatical errors. 21 to 23 points -The main posting is not clearly addressing the discussion criteria and is not written concisely. The main posting is cited with less than two credible references that may lack credibility and/or do not adhere to the correct format per the APA Manual 6th Edition. Contains more than two spelling or grammatical errors. 0 to 20 points -The main posting is disorganized and has one reference that may lack credibility and does not adhere to the correct format per the APA Manual 6th Edition or has zero credible references. Contains more than two spelling or grammatical errors. Professional CommunicationEffectiveness 20 to 20 points -Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues and response to faculty questions are answered if posed. Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas effectively written in Standard Edited English -Responses posted in the discussion demonstrate effective professional communication through deep reflective discussion which leads to an exchange of ideas and focus on the weekly discussion topic. 18 to 19 points -Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues. -Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas effectively written in Standard Edited English -Responses posted in the discussion demonstrate effective professional communication through deep reflective discussion which leads to an exchange of ideas and focus on the weekly discussion topic . -Responses are cited with at least one credible reference per post and a probing question that extends the discussion. Adheres to the correct format per the APA Manual 6th Edition. No spelling or grammatical errors. 16 to 17 points -Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues. Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas effectively written in Standard Edited English. -Responses posted in the discussion demonstrate effective professional communication through deep reflective discussion which leads to an exchange of ideas and focus on the weekly discussion topic. -Responses are cited with at least one credible and/or contain probing questions that extends the discussion. Adheres to the correct format per the APA Manual 6th Edition. May have one to two spelling or grammatical errors. 14 to 15 points -Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues. Provides opinions that may not be concise or ideas not effectively written in Standard Edited English. -Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication that does not extend the discussion, leads to an exchange of ideas and/or not focused on the weekly discussion topic. -Responses are not cited and/or do not contain a probing question. May not adhere to the correct format per the APA Manual 6th Edition. May have more than two spelling or grammatical errors. 0 to 13 points -Communication may lack professional tone or be disrespectful to colleagues. Provides opinions that may not be concise or ideas not effectively written in Standard Edited English -Responses posted in the discussion lack effective professional communication through discussion that does not extend the discussion, do not lead to an exchange of ideas and/or not focused on the weekly discussion topic. -Responses are not cited and do not contain a probing question. May not adhere to the correct format per the APA Manual 6th Edition. May have multiple spelling or grammatical errors. Timely Submission 0 to 0 points All criteria met: Initial post submitted on time. Response to two peer initial posts. Response on 3 separate days. -5 to 0 points 5 points deducted for responding to less than two peers or 5 points deducted for responding less than three days -10 to -5 points 5 points deducted for responding to less than two peers and 5 points deducted for responding less than three days -10 to -10 points 10 points deducted for Initial post submitted late -20 to -15 points Initial post submitted late and 5 points deducted for responding to less than two peers and/ or 5 points deducted for responding less than three days
Great students hand in great papers. Order our essay service if you want to meet all the deadlines on time and get top grades. Professional custom writing is the choice of goal-focused students. Word on the online streets is... we're simply the best!
Get a 15% discount on your order using the following coupon code SAVE15
Order a Similar Paper Order a Different Paper
