DNP 801 Topic 8 PICOT-D Final Draft GCU

DNP 801 Topic 8 PICOT-D Final Draft GCU

DNP 801 Topic 8 PICOT-D Final Draft GCU

Click here to ORDER an A++ paper from our Verified MASTERS and DOCTORATE WRITERS: DNP 801 Topic 8 PICOT-D Final Draft GCU

Assessment Description

The purpose of this assignment is to submit a final draft of your revised PICOT-D using the feedback from your instructor.

Make sure you have identified and incorporated all feedback from your instructor from your “PICOT-D Draft” assignment. In addition, list the primary quantitative research in APA format as indicated and include a working link for each article. Remember, at least two of the articles must support your proposed intervention.

General Requirements:

• Refer to the “PICOT-D Selection Guidelines,” located in the DC Network, for assistance in completing this assignment.
• Use the “PICOT-D Question Template,” located in the DC Network, to complete this assignment.
• A minimum of five primary quantitative research articles, published within 5 years of your anticipated graduation date, are required to complete this assignment.
• While APA style is not required for the body of this assignment, solid academic writing is expected, and documentation of sources should be presented using APA formatting guidelines, which can be found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center.
• This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.
• You are not required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite.
• Learners will submit this assignment using the assignment dropbox in the digital classroom. In addition, learners must upload this deliverable to the Learner Dissertation Page (LDP) in the DNP PI Workspace for later use.

Directions:

Learners are required to submit the final draft of their PICOT-D to the instructor and the college reviewers. Please read the instructions carefully as there are a series of steps.

Step 1: Revise your PICOT-D using instructor feedback you received in Topics 6 and 7.

Step 2: Save your PICOT-D document by labeling it accordingly: Learner’s last name, first name, course number, PICOT-D, and date (e.g., Sally.DNP801A.PICOTD.03.06.2021)

Step 3: Submit a copy of the PICOT-D to your instructor using the dropbox in the digital classroom.

Step 4: Submit a copy of the PICOT-D to the college reviewers using these steps:

1. Submit to the college through this email address: [email protected]
2. Use your my.gcu.edu email only.
3. Copy (CC) your current course faculty on the email.
4. In the subject line of your email, list the course number and your name (e.g., DNP-801A, Sally Black).

 

 

PICOT-D: Final Draft – Rubric

Collapse All PICOT-D: Final Draft – Rubric Collapse All

Population

2.3 points

Criteria Description

Revision is incorporated. Patient population is appropriate.

5. Target

2.3 points

Revision is evident or was not required. All errors have been corrected and feedback has been accurately incorporated for the Population criteria. A description of an appropriate patient population being assessed can be linked to direct practice improvements and is extremely thorough with substantial supporting evidence.

4. Acceptable

2.12 points

NA

3. Approaching

2.02 points

Revision is generally evident. Feedback has been incorporated, but there are still some errors and inaccuracies. A description of an appropriate patient population being assessed is included but lacks a link to direct practice improvements that could be measured through patient and practice outcomes.

2. Insufficient

1.84 points

NA

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

The population is not appropriate for the PICOT-D. Revisions were made but did not correct or improve errors and inaccuracies.

Intervention

23 points

Criteria Description

Revision is incorporated. Evidence-based intervention is directly supported by primary quantitative research articles.

5. Target

23 points

Revision is evident or was not required. All errors have been corrected and feedback has been accurately incorporated for the Intervention criteria. A description of the evidence-based intervention is extremely thorough with substantial evidence and supporting literature. Two primary quantitative research article demonstrate support for the intervention.

4. Acceptable

21.16 points

NA

3. Approaching

20.24 points

Revision is generally evident. Feedback has been incorporated, but there are still some errors and inaccuracies. A description of the evidence-based intervention is presented with general supporting literature. One primary quantitative research article demonstrates support for the intervention. More evidence is needed.

2. Insufficient

18.4 points

NA

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

A description of the intervention is included but lacks a sufficient amount of evidence. Revisions were made but did not correct or improve errors and inaccuracies.

Comparison

2.3 points

Criteria Description

Revision is incorporated. Comparison of proposed intervention to current practice is presented.

5. Target

2.3 points

Revision is evident or was not required. All errors have been corrected and feedback has been accurately incorporated for the Comparison criteria. A description of the comparison information is extremely thorough with substantial evidence and measurable outcomes.

4. Acceptable

2.12 points

NA

3. Approaching

2.02 points

Revision is generally evident. Feedback has been incorporated, but there are still some errors and inaccuracies. A description of the comparison information is included but lacks evidence and measurable outcomes.

2. Insufficient

1.84 points

NA

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Revisions were made but did not correct or improve errors and inaccuracies. A description of the comparison information is not included.

Outcome

23 points

Criteria Description

Revision is incorporated. Outcome is patient-focused, specific, and measurable. Supporting research demonstrates that evidence-based intervention impacts stated patient outcome.

5. Target

23 points

Revision is evident or was not required. All errors have been corrected and feedback has been accurately incorporated for the Outcome criteria. A description of the outcome is extremely thorough with substantial evidence pertaining to a measurable population or patient outcome.

4. Acceptable

21.16 points

NA

3. Approaching

20.24 points

Revision is generally evident. Feedback has been incorporated, but there are still some errors and inaccuracies. A description of the outcome is included but lacks evidence pertaining to a measurable population or patient outcome.

2. Insufficient

18.4 points

NA

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

A description of the outcome is not included. Revisions were made but did not correct or improve errors and inaccuracies.

Timeline

1.15 points

Criteria Description

Revision is incorporated. Timeline is 8 weeks. Supporting evidence is presented.

5. Target

1.15 points

Revision is evident or was not required. All errors have been corrected and feedback has been accurately incorporated for the Timeline criteria. The timeline is specified as 8 weeks.

4. Acceptable

1.06 points

NA

3. Approaching

1.01 points

NA

2. Insufficient

0.92 points

NA

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Revisions were made but did not correct or improve errors and inaccuracies. The timeline is not specified or is deviates from the 8-week requirement.

PICOT-D Question

34.5 points

Criteria Description

Revision incorporated. PICOT-D question succinctly reflects PICOT-D criteria.

5. Target

34.5 points

Revision is evident or was not required. The PICOT-D elements are present in one statement.

4. Acceptable

31.74 points

NA

3. Approaching

30.36 points

NA

2. Insufficient

27.6 points

NA

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Revisions were made but did not correct or improve errors and inaccuracies. Not all of the PICOT-D elements are present in the statement.

References DNP 801 Topic 8 PICOT-D Final Draft GCU

17.25 points

Criteria Description

Meets criteria for primary quantitative research; published within 5 years of anticipated graduation date; working links are provided for each article. Clinical practice guideline included, if applicable.

5. Target

17.25 points

Revision is evident or was not required. Incorrect articles have been removed or replaced as indicated. Five primary quantitative research articles, published within 5 years of the anticipated graduation date, are presented. All five articles meet the criteria for primary research on the Levels of Evidence chart. Any applicable clinical practice guideline is included.

4. Acceptable

15.87 points

Revision is evident; there are very minor errors. Incorrect articles have been removed or replaced as indicated. Five primary quantitative research articles published within 5 years of the anticipated graduation date meet the criteria for primary research on the Levels of Evidence chart. Any applicable clinical practice guideline is included.

3. Approaching

15.18 points

Revision is generally evident. Incorrect articles have been removed as indicated, but one of the new articles does not meet the required criteria. Four primary quantitative research articles, published within 5 years of the anticipated graduation date, meet the criteria for primary research on the Levels of Evidence chart. Any applicable clinical practice guideline is included.

2. Insufficient

13.8 points

Revision is only sometimes evident. Incorrect articles have been removed as indicated, but two of the new articles do not meet the required criteria. Three primary quantitative research articles, published within 5 years of the anticipated graduation date, are presented and meet the criteria for primary research on the Levels of Evidence chart.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Revision is not evident; or, replacement articles do not meet the required criteria. Overall, fewer than three articles meet the specified criteria. A clinical practice guideline should be listed but is omitted.

Paper Format

2.3 points

Criteria Description

Use of appropriate style for the major and assignment.

5. Target

2.3 points

All format elements are correct.

4. Acceptable

2.12 points

Appropriate template is fully used. There are virtually no errors in formatting style.

3. Approaching

2.02 points

Appropriate template is used. Formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present.

2. Insufficient

1.84 points

Appropriate template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken. A lack of control with formatting is apparent.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Template is not used appropriately or documentation format is rarely followed correctly.

Mechanics of Writing

3.45 points

Criteria Description

Includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, and language use.

5. Target

3.45 points

The writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.

4. Acceptable

3.17 points

Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. The writer uses a variety of effective sentence structures and figures of speech.

3. Approaching

3.04 points

Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct and varied sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are employed.

2. Insufficient

2.76 points

Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) or word choice are present. Sentence structure is correct, but not varied.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is employed.

Documentation of Sources

5.75 points

Criteria Description

Includes citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style.

5. Target

5.75 points

Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of errors.

4. Acceptable

5.29 points

Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct.

3. Approaching

5.06 points

Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present.

2. Insufficient

4.6 points

Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Sources are not documented.

Total 115 points

Click here to ORDER an A++ paper from our Verified MASTERS and DOCTORATE WRITERS: DNP 801 Topic 8 PICOT-D Final Draft GCU

DNP 801 Topic 8 PICOT-D Final Draft GCU Grading Rubric

Performance Category	100% or highest level of performance 100% 16 points	Very good or high level of performance 88% 14 points	Acceptable level of performance 81% 13 points	Inadequate demonstration of expectations 68% 11 points	Deficient level of performance 56% 9 points	Failing level of performance 55% or less 0 points
Total Points Possible= 50	16 Points	14 Points	13 Points	11 Points	9 Points	0 Points
Scholarliness Demonstrates achievement of scholarly inquiry for professional and academic topics.	Presentation of information was exceptional and included all of the following elements: Provides evidence of scholarly inquiry relevant to required TD topic(s). Presents specific information from scholarly sources to develop a comprehensive presentation of facts. Uses at least one outside scholarly reference that is relevant, less than 5 years old (use of older references requires instructor permission) and reliable for the required topic.* Uses in-text citation and full reference at end of posting when presenting another person’s thoughts as quotes or paraphrase of information.	Presentation of information was good, but was superficial in places and included all of the following elements: Provides evidence of scholarly inquiry relevant to required TD topic(s). Presents specific information from scholarly sources to develop a comprehensive presentation of facts. Uses at least one outside scholarly reference that is relevant, less than 5 years old (use of older references requires instructor permission) and reliable for the required topic.* Uses in-text citation and full reference at end of posting when presenting another person’s thoughts as quotes or paraphrase of information.	Presentation of information was minimally demonstrated in all of the following elements: Provides evidence of scholarly inquiry relevant to required TD topic(s). Presents specific information from scholarly sources to develop a comprehensive presentation of facts. Uses at least one outside scholarly reference that is relevant, less than 5 years old (use of older references requires instructor permission) and reliable for the required topic.* Uses in-text citation and full reference at end of posting when presenting another person’s thoughts as quotes or paraphrase of information.	Presentation of information is unsatisfactory in one of the following elements: Provides evidence of scholarly inquiry relevant to required TD topic(s). Presents specific information from scholarly sources to develop a comprehensive presentation of facts. Uses at least one outside scholarly reference that is relevant, less than 5 years old (use of older references requires instructor permission) and reliable for the required topic.* Uses in-text citation and full reference at end of posting when presenting another person’s thoughts as quotes or paraphrase of information.	Presentation of information is unsatisfactory in two of the following elements: Provides evidence of scholarly inquiry relevant to required TD topic(s). Presents specific information from scholarly sources to develop a comprehensive presentation of facts. Uses at least one outside scholarly reference that is relevant, less than 5 years old (use of older references requires instructor permission) and reliable for the required topic.* Uses in-text citation and full reference at end of posting when presenting another person’s thoughts as quotes or paraphrase of information.	Presentation of information is unsatisfactory in three or more of the following elements Provides evidence of scholarly inquiry relevant to required TD topic(s). Presents specific information from scholarly sources to develop a comprehensive presentation of facts. Uses at least one outside scholarly reference that is relevant, less than 5 years old (use of older references requires instructor permission) and reliable for the required topic.* Uses in-text citation and full reference at end of posting when presenting another person’s thoughts as quotes or paraphrase of information
	16 Points	14 Points	13 Points	11 Points	9 Points	0 Points
Application of Course Knowledge Demonstrate the ability to analyze and apply principles, knowledge and information learned in the outside readings and relate them to real-life professional situations	Presentation of information was exceptional and included all of the following elements: Applies principles, knowledge and information from scholarly resources to the required topic. Applies facts, principles or concepts learned from scholarly resources to a professional experience. Application of information is comprehensive and specific to the required topic.	Presentation of information was good, but was superficial in places and included all of the following elements: Applies principles, knowledge and information from scholarly resources to the required topic. Applies facts, principles or concepts learned from scholarly resources to a professional experience. Application of information is comprehensive and specific to the required topic.	Presentation of information was minimally demonstrated in the all of the following elements: Applies principles, knowledge and information from scholarly resources to the required topic. Applies facts, principles or concepts learned from scholarly resources to a professional experience. Application of information is comprehensive and specific to the required topic.	Presentation of information is unsatisfactory in one of the following elements: Applies principles, knowledge and information from scholarly resources to the required topic. Applies facts, principles or concepts learned from and scholarly resources to a professional experience. Application of information is comprehensive and specific to the required topic.	Presentation of information is unsatisfactory in two of the following elements: Applies principles, knowledge and information from scholarly resources to the required topic. Applies facts, principles or concepts learned from scholarly resources to a professional experience. Application of information is comprehensive and specific to the required topic.	Presentation of information is unsatisfactory in three of the following elements Applies principles, knowledge and information and scholarly resources to the required topic. Applies facts, principles or concepts learned scholarly resources to a professional experience. Application of information is comprehensive and specific to the required topic.
	10 Points	9 Points			6 Points	0 Points
Interactive Dialogue Initial post should be a minimum of 300 words (references do not count toward word count) The peer and instructor responses must be a minimum of 150 words each (references do not count toward word count) Responses are substantive and relate to the topic.	Demonstrated all of the following: Initial post must be a minimum of 300 words. The peer and instructor responses must be a minimum of 150 words each. Responses are substantive Responses are related to the topic of discussion.	Demonstrated 3 of the following: Initial post must be a minimum of 300 words. The peer and instructor responses must be a minimum of 150 words each. Responses are substantive Responses are related to the topic of discussion.			Demonstrated 2 of the following: Initial post must be a minimum of 300 words. The peer and instructor responses must be a minimum of 150 words each. Responses are substantive Responses are related to the topic of discussion.	Demonstrated 1 or less of the following: Initial post must be a minimum of 300 words. The peer and instructor responses must be a minimum of 150 words each. Responses are substantive Responses are related to the topic of discussion.
	8 Points	7 Points	6 Points	5 Points	4 Points	0 Points
Grammar, Syntax, APA Points deducted for improper grammar, syntax and APA style of writing. The source of information is the APA Manual 6th Edition Error is defined to be a unique APA error. Same type of error is only counted as one error.	The following was present: 0-3 errors in APA format AND Responses have 0-3 grammatical, spelling or punctuation errors AND Writing style is generally clear, focused on topic,and facilitates communication.	The following was present: 4-6 errors in APA format. AND/OR Responses have 4-5 grammatical, spelling or punctuation errors AND/OR Writing style is somewhat focused on topic.	The following was present: 7-9 errors in APA format. AND/OR Responses have 6-7 grammatical, spelling or punctuation errors AND/OR Writing style is slightly focused on topic making discussion difficult to understand.	The following was present: 10- 12 errors in APA format AND/OR Responses have 8-9 grammatical, spelling and punctuation errors AND/OR Writing style is not focused on topic, making discussion difficult to understand.	The following was present: 13 – 15 errors in APA format AND/OR Responses have 8-10 grammatical, spelling or punctuation errors AND/OR Writing style is not focused on topic, making discussion difficult to understand. AND/OR The student continues to make repeated mistakes in any of the above areas after written correction by the instructor.	The following was present: 16 to greater errors in APA format. AND/OR Responses have more than 10 grammatical, spelling or punctuation errors. AND/OR Writing style does not facilitate communication
	0 Points Deducted					5 Points Lost
Participation Requirements	Demonstrated the following: Initial, peer, and faculty postings were made on 3 separate days					Failed to demonstrate the following: Initial, peer, and faculty postings were made on 3 separate days
	0 Points Lost					5 Points Lost
Due Date Requirements	Demonstrated all of the following: The initial posting to the graded threaded discussion topic is posted within the course no later than Wednesday, 11:59 pm MT. A minimum of one peer and one instructor responses are to be posted within the course no later than Sunday, 11:59 pm MT.					Demonstrates one or less of the following. The initial posting to the graded threaded discussion topic is posted within the course no later than Wednesday, 11:59 pm MT. A minimum of one peer and one instructor responses are to be posted within the course no later than Sunday, 11:59 pm MT.

Check Out Also: DNP 801 Topic 7 Annotated Bibliography