Want create site? With Free visual composer you can do it easy.

NUR 513 DQ 1 Review The Evidence-Based Practice Project Ideas You Described In Topic 5 

NUR 513 DQ 1 Review The Evidence-Based Practice Project Ideas You Described In Topic 5 

 

Re: Topic 6 DQ 1

My evidence-based project idea is to create a community education program that focuses on stroke risk factor prevention. When a new program is implemented, it is critical to collect evidence and examine how it can enhance patient outcomes, health policies, services, and programs, as evidence enables increased accountability (DeNisco & Barker, 2016). It is critical to understand the various forms of research and the various degrees of evidence while assembling evidence for any undertaking (Glasofer &Townsend, 2019). Three critical elements determine the strength of evidence: quality, quantity, and consistency (Glasofer &Townsend, 2019). When conducting research on any subject, it should be of high quality with reliable results that are not impacted by biases or occur by chance (art). Quantity can be determined by identifying the number of studies conducted on a particular subject, their size and population, and the impact of the treatments (Glasofer &Townsend, 2019). Consistency occurs when similar results are observed throughout a number of distinct investigations (Glasofer &Townsend, 2019).

When choosing research subjects for my topic, I normally choose those that are deemed level on the evidence hierarchy. These are a randomized controlled trial, a systematic review of a randomized controlled trial, and a meta-analysis in the case of a randomized controlled trial (Glasofer &Townsend, 2019). I would almost certainly include a combination of quantitative and qualitative research in this topic. When dealing with prevention strategies, it is critical to understand how behavior influences health behavior change, which is why qualitative research, in addition to quantitative, should be analyzed.

References

DeNisco, S. M., & Barker, A. M. (2016). Advanced practice nursing: Essential knowledge for the profession (3rd ed.). Jones & Bartlett Learning.

Glasofer, A., & Townsend, A. B. (2019). Determining the level of evidence. Nursing Critical Care14(6), 22–25. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.ccn.0000580120.03118.1d

RESPOND TO MEAGAN HERE (150 WORDS, 2 REFERENCES)

This is insightful Meagan, the implementation of the new research program requires collection and analysis of evidence to improve patient outcomes as well as increased accountability. Understanding different forms of research and levels of evidence are critical in enhancing the validity, reliability, and applicability of the research and evidence-based practice processes. When selecting the research process, it is necessary to consider the level of evidence. Levels of evidence, sometimes called the hierarchy of evidence, are always assigned to the studies on the basis of methodological quality of their validity, design, as well as applicability to patient care (Glasofer & Townsend, 2021). A combination of qualitative and quantitative research processes is always required to enhance the research processes’ effective outcomes. Quantitative research designs require adherence to the data collection and analysis processes. The quantitative approaches are necessary for ensuring the establishment of valid, reliable, as well as applicability of the research outcomes (Bansal et al., 2018). To select a viable research study process, it is necessary for the researcher to consider the hierarchy or level of evidence. Review The Evidence-Based Practice Project Ideas You Described In Topic 5 DQ 1 NUR 513

References

Bansal, P., Smith, W. K., & Vaara, E. (2018). New ways of seeing through qualitative research. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2018.4004

Glasofer, A., & Townsend, A. B. (2021). Determining the level of evidence: experimental research appraisal. Nursing202151(1), 60-63. https://journals.lww.com/nursing/Abstract/2021/01000/Determining_the_level_of_evidence__Experimental.15.aspx

BARBARA

Re: Topic 6 DQ 1

My idea from Topic 5 DQ 1 was workplace violence (WPV), and my initial topic was much too broad. Before finding the best current evidence, I need to identify a specific clinical problem to best search for an answerable question (DeNisco & Barker, 2016). Using the PICOT template: population, intervention, comparison, outcome, and time, will help create that searchable question.

Population: Healthcare Workers

Intervention: Education and Training

Comparison: Workplace Violence

Outcome: Prevent or Minimize

Time: 1-year Period

The next step is searching. I recommend a good starting point in PubMed, mostly because articles are specific to nursing and many are free to access. My organization allows access to the commonly used databases such as the Cochran Library, CINAHL, Medline and is a benefit to avoid paying fees for full review articles.  GCU library also offers students access to these same resources.

After obtaining multiple sources of evidence, critical appraisal or grading evidence is next, from the strongest to weakest evidence

NUR 513 DQ 1 Review The Evidence-Based Practice Project Ideas You Described In Topic 5 

NUR 513 DQ 1 Review The Evidence-Based Practice Project Ideas You Described In Topic 5

Click here to ORDER an A++ paper from our MASTERS and DOCTORATE WRITERS:NUR 513 DQ 1 Review The Evidence-Based Practice Project Ideas You Described In Topic 5 

(DeNisco & Barker, 2016). The gold standard and strongest evidence is a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials or clinical guidelines based on systematic reviews. Evidence sources may include qualitative or quantitative studies, reviews or clinical expertise, or patient preferences and values. The need is to quickly determine whether it is valid evidence and applicable to practice. Critical appraisal tools exist and ask specific questions based on the methodology or design of the study you are evaluating. Besides validity and usefulness, other criteria to assess include when last updated, clinical context and environment, and patient values and preference. One of my personal favorites, UpToDate, uses a graded approach, 1A being strongest whereas, 2C means a weak recommendation to use an intervention based on both quality of the evidence and patient preference. Review The Evidence-Based Practice Project Ideas You Described In Topic 5 DQ 1 NUR 513

Inquiry and asking the best clinical question in a PICOT format is critical to searching and finding the best evidence. Appraising the evidence and integrating this with patient values and preferences is necessary to make evidence-based-practice decisions within nursing.  My Cochrane Library search resulted in very low-to low-quality evidence, with the common databases searched and seven studies being included. There is limited evidence that some interventions might reduce aggression toward healthcare workers (Spelten et al., 2020).  April is National WPV Month and a great place to start to recognize that more research is needed. I recognize I need more experience in this process too.

References

DeNisco, S. M., & Barker, A. M. (2016). Advanced practice nursing: essential knowledge for the profession. Jones & Bartlett Learning.

Spelten E;Thomas B;O’Meara PF;Maguire BJ;FitzGerald D;Begg SJ; (2020, April 29). Organizational interventions for preventing and minimizing aggression directed towards healthcare workers by patients and patient advocates. The Cochrane database of systematic reviews. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32352565/.

RESPOND TO BARBARA HERE

This is insightful, Barbara, consideration of the PICOT question is necessary for undertaking different research processes (Abbade et al., 2016). Also, it is always necessary to identify the ideal sources of information such as databases that may be applied in supporting the research process. Most of the databases contain essential forms of information that may be applied in addressing various aspects of the project. CINAHL, Cochran Library, and Medline are some of the databases that can be applied to review some of the best sources of information that can be used to authenticate the information required in the research processes. The quality of research processes often depends on the levels of evidence (Glasofer & Townsend, 2019). The level of evidence is always assigned to the studies on the basis of methodological quality of their validity, design, as well as applicability to patient care. To better develop a quality, reliable, valid, and applicable research process, sticking to the PICOT question is necessary. In other words, different researchers need to consider the PICOT question in ensuring the achievement of quality outcomes. Review The Evidence-Based Practice Project Ideas You Described In Topic 5 DQ 1 NUR 513

References

Abbade, L. P., Wang, M., Sriganesh, K., Mbuagbaw, L., & Thabane, L. (2016). Framing of research question using the PICOT format in randomised controlled trials of venous ulcer disease: a protocol for a systematic survey of the literature. BMJ open6(11). https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/6/11/e013175.short

Glasofer, A., & Townsend, A. B. (2019). Determining the level of evidence. Nursing Critical Care14(6), 22–25. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.ccn.0000580120.03118.1d

GINA

Re: Topic 6 DQ 1

My evidence-based practice would be centered around the utilization of new technologies by bedside nurses. I would do a literature review of peer-reviewed studies to further investigate this issue. Then I would develop a framework and intervention with said technology that could be both quantitatively and qualitatively measured. Both quantitative and qualitative data would be important because it would be necessary to study the numerical data regarding technology use, and it would also be important to know both nurse and patient responses to interventions, which could be gathered through surveys, questionnaires, and interviews. When researching, data would have to be recent, within the last five years, peer-reviewed, with adequate sample sizes. DeNisco and Barker say it best, “Not all evidence is created equal, and there is a need to use the best available evidence,” (2016, p.465). Peer-reviewed research is essential, because it helps maintain the quality of the research. Critical appraisals of research by other academic minds can both validate, provide transparency, ensure professionalism, academic integrity and ethically conducted research (Kelly, et al., 2014). Additionally, research should be recent. Just like the rest of the world, data ages and isn’t always applicable as people, the world, the population, and societies adapt and change. You want sources that reflect the newest and most up to date research available. And finally, data in research can be easily statistically manipulated, so sample sizes matter. If a sample size is too small, it often holds less statistical significance and cannot often be used to generalize to a population.

References

DeNisco, S. M., & Barker, A. M. (2016). Advanced practice nursing: Essential knowledge for the profession (3rd ed.). Jones & Bartlett Learning.

Kelly, J., Sadeghieh, T., & Adeli, K. (2014). Peer review in scientific publications: Benefits, critiques, and a survival guide. EJIFCC25(3), 227–243. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4975196/

RESPOND TO GINA HERE

This is insightful, Gina; in general, the application of technology is on the rise, which calls for increased research processes to enhance the understanding of different ways to integrate technological approaches in the research processes (Spelten et al., 2020). The utilization of technology by the bedside nurses is critical in ensuring quality treatment outcomes and patient safety. Usually, the integration of technology in the healthcare processes reduces the errors associated with general care. The literature review is essential in the study processes because it enhances the understanding of past research outcomes that may be applied in addressing some of the research processes’ aspects. In the research process, it is also necessary to consider qualitative and quantitative research approaches to enhance the achievement of valid, reliable, and applicable research processes (Bansal et al., 2018). While undertaking a literature review, it is necessary for the researcher to consider different databases that have authentic, reliable, and applicable sources of information that can be utilized in identifying the required information.

References

Spelten E;Thomas B;O’Meara PF;Maguire BJ;FitzGerald D;Begg SJ; (2020, April 29). Organizational interventions for preventing and minimizing aggression directed towards healthcare workers by patients and patient advocates. The Cochrane database of systematic reviews. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32352565/.

Bansal, P., Smith, W. K., & Vaara, E. (2018). New ways of seeing through qualitative research. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2018.4004

Name:  Discussion Rubric

  Excellent

90–100

Good

80–89

Fair

70–79

Poor

0–69

Main 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 credible sources.

40 (40%) – 44 (44%)

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 credible sources.

No less than 75% of post has exceptional depth and breadth.

Supported by at least three current credible sources.

35 (35%) – 39 (39%)

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 credible references.

31 (31%) – 34 (34%)

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.

Cited with fewer than two credible references.

0 (0%) – 30 (30%)

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 credible references.

Main Posting:

Writing

6 (6%) – 6 (6%)

Written clearly and concisely.

Contains no grammatical or spelling errors.

Adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.

5 (5%) – 5 (5%)

Written concisely.

May contain one to two grammatical or spelling errors.

Adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.

4 (4%) – 4 (4%)

Written somewhat concisely.

May contain more than two spelling or grammatical errors.

Contains some APA formatting errors.

0 (0%) – 3 (3%)

Not written clearly or concisely.

Contains more than two spelling or grammatical errors.

Does not adhere to current APA manual writing rules and style.

Main Posting:

Timely and full participation

9 (9%) – 10 (10%)

Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation.

Posts main Discussion by due date.

8 (8%) – 8 (8%)

Meets requirements for full participation.

Posts main Discussion by due date.

7 (7%) – 7 (7%)

Posts main Discussion by due date.

0 (0%) – 6 (6%)

Does not meet requirements for full participation.

Does not post main Discussion by due date.

First Response:

Post to colleague’s main post that is reflective and justified with credible sources.

9 (9%) – 9 (9%)

Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings.

Responds to questions posed by faculty.

The use of scholarly sources to support ideas demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.

8 (8%) – 8 (8%)

Response has some depth and may exhibit critical thinking or application to practice setting.

7 (7%) – 7 (7%)

Response is on topic and may have some depth.

0 (0%) – 6 (6%)

Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.

First Response:

Writing

6 (6%) – 6 (6%)

Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.

Response to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed.

Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources.

Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.

5 (5%) – 5 (5%)

Communication is mostly professional and respectful to colleagues.

Response to faculty questions are mostly answered, if posed.

Provides opinions and ideas that are supported by few credible sources.

Response is written in standard, edited English.

4 (4%) – 4 (4%)

Response posed in the Discussion may lack effective professional communication.

Response to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed.

Few or no credible sources are cited.

0 (0%) – 3 (3%)

Responses posted in the Discussion lack effective communication.

Response to faculty questions are missing.

No credible sources are cited.

First Response:

Timely and full participation

5 (5%) – 5 (5%)

Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation.

Posts by due date.

4 (4%) – 4 (4%)

Meets requirements for full participation.

Posts by due date.

3 (3%) – 3 (3%)

Posts by due date.

0 (0%) – 2 (2%)

Does not meet requirements for full participation.

Does not post by due date.

Second Response:
Post to colleague’s main post that is reflective and justified with credible sources.
9 (9%) – 9 (9%)

Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings.

Responds to questions posed by faculty.

The use of scholarly sources to support ideas demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.

8 (8%) – 8 (8%)

Response has some depth and may exhibit critical thinking or application to practice setting.

7 (7%) – 7 (7%)

Response is on topic and may have some depth.

0 (0%) – 6 (6%)

Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.

Second Response:
Writing
6 (6%) – 6 (6%)

Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.

Response to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed.

Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources.

Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.

5 (5%) – 5 (5%)

Communication is mostly professional and respectful to colleagues.

Response to faculty questions are mostly answered, if posed.

Provides opinions and ideas that are supported by few credible sources.

Response is written in standard, edited English.

4 (4%) – 4 (4%)

Response posed in the Discussion may lack effective professional communication.

Response to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed.

Few or no credible sources are cited.

0 (0%) – 3 (3%)

Responses posted in the Discussion lack effective communication.

Response to faculty questions are missing.

No credible sources are cited.

Second Response:
Timely and full participation
5 (5%) – 5 (5%)

Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation.

Posts by due date.

4 (4%) – 4 (4%)

Meets requirements for full participation.

Posts by due date.

3 (3%) – 3 (3%)

Posts by due date.

0 (0%) – 2 (2%)

Does not meet requirements for full participation.

Does not post by due date.

Total Points: 100

Name:  Discussion Rubric

Did you find apk for android? You can find new Free Android Games and apps.