wordpress-seo
domain was triggered too early. This is usually an indicator for some code in the plugin or theme running too early. Translations should be loaded at the init
action or later. Please see Debugging in WordPress for more information. (This message was added in version 6.7.0.) in /home/intelligentwr/nursingassignmentcrackers/wp-includes/functions.php on line 6114The Data Collection<\/a>, Analysis, Evaluation, Dissemination of Results, and Conclusion assignment is due Purpose 2. Title page, running head, body of paper, and reference pages must follow APA guidelines as \uf0b7 Describe the type of data to be collected (i.e. observation, interview, artifacts) 7. Conclusion: In this section, the student will identify a summary of their EBP project as well as Rubric 35.0\u00a0pts 31.0\u00a0pts 28.0\u00a0pts 13.0\u00a0pts 0.0\u00a0pts 35.0\u00a0pts<\/p>\n collection will explanation on how data how data collection will occur \u2022 Explain how data collection will collection will saturation \u2022 occur \u2022 Explain This criterion is linked 25.0\u00a0pts 22.0\u00a0pts 20.0\u00a0pts 10.0\u00a0pts 0.0\u00a0pts 25.0\u00a0pts<\/p>\n quantitative the following elements: For expectations: quantitative design \u2022 Use relevance to this qualitative qualitative design \u2022 Use This criterion is linked 20.0\u00a0pts 18.0\u00a0pts 16.0\u00a0pts 8.0\u00a0pts 0.0\u00a0pts 20.0\u00a0pts<\/p>\n this EBP project area at the micro level if micro level if this EBP project This criterion is linked 20.0\u00a0pts 18.0\u00a0pts 16.0\u00a0pts 8.0\u00a0pts 0.0\u00a0pts 20.0\u00a0pts<\/p>\n This criterion is linked 10.0\u00a0pts 9.0\u00a0pts 8.0\u00a0pts 0.0\u00a0pts 10.0\u00a0pts<\/p>\n the following places and the all of the elements fails to following This criterion is linked 10.0\u00a0pts 4.0\u00a0pts 0.0\u00a0pts 10.0\u00a0pts<\/p>\n dictionary \u2022 A dictionary requirements \u2022 requirements \u2022 Headings are This criterion is linked 10.0\u00a0pts 9.0\u00a0pts 10.0\u00a0pts<\/p>\n paper (including paper (including paper (including paper (including paper (including This criterion is linked 10.0\u00a0pts 9.0\u00a0pts 8.0\u00a0pts 4.0\u00a0pts 0.0\u00a0pts 10.0\u00a0pts<\/p>\n This criterion is linked 10.0\u00a0pts 9.0\u00a0pts 8.0\u00a0pts 4.0\u00a0pts 0.0\u00a0pts 10.0\u00a0pts<\/p>\n APA manual APA manual APA manual APA manual of the APA Total Points:\u00a0150.0 FNPs Role in Reducing Falls in Long-term Care Facilities<\/p>\n Week 7 Proposal NR505: Advanced Research Methods: Evidence-Based Practice<\/p>\n June 17, 2018<\/p>\n Data Collection<\/p>\n The restated PICo question is: \u201cWhat are nurse practitioners (NPs) experiences in (Choy, 2014). The survey\/questionnaire will have a pre-test\/post-test design. With this method, prevention program participants\u2019 attitudes and opinions. The estimated length of time to collect furthermore, all observations should be coded to minimize corruption and manipulation of data questions from test respondents. This also allows me to keep the survey as short as possible, Descriptive statistics are the outcome of analyzing and summarizing data. Descriptive 2017). Inferential statistics allow researchers to hypothesize and develop logical conclusions Evaluation<\/p>\n The stakeholders in this EBP proposal are the sample participants, researchers conducting fall related fractures phenomenon. Researchers have established sound criteria on how NPs in Dissemination of Results<\/p>\n The biggest barriers to implementing fall prevention programs in LTC setting are lack of Disseminating information to state and national policymakers has different dynamics Conclusion<\/p>\n The contribution of EBP to professional nursing is vast. Since its professional inception, allow for the comprehensive examination of the actions of a small or large group of participants, All research participants have rights that include knowing why the research is References<\/p>\n Breimaier, H. E., Halfens, R., & Lohrmann, C. (2015). Effectiveness of multifaceted and tailored Curtis, K., Fry, M., Shaban, R. Z., & Considine, J. (2016). Translating research findings to Harrison, B. E. (2017). Fall prevention program in the community: A nurse practitioner\u2019s Implementing an Evidence-Based Fall Prevention Program in an Outpatient Clinical Walonick,\u00a0D.\u00a0S. (2018). Survey design guidelines. Retrieved from
\nSunday at the end of week 7 at 11:59pm MT. The guidelines and rubric are located below and also in
\nCourse Resources. Please note that for this assignment you are to include your Week 2 and Week 5
\ncontent along with the new content for this week.\u00a0 Only the new content will be graded.\u00a0 Having a final
\ncompleted document of your EBP project will assist you in your future Concluding Graduate Experience
\ncourses within your specialty track.<\/p>\nA Sample Answer For the Assignment: NR 505 Week 7: Data Collection, Analysis, Evaluation, Dissemination of Results, and Conclusion<\/strong><\/h2>\n
Title: NR 505 Week 7: Data Collection, Analysis, Evaluation, Dissemination of Results, and Conclusion<\/strong><\/h2>\n
\nThis assignment provides the opportunity for the student to complete their MSN EBP proposal. This
\nassignment includes the final sections of the proposal which are data collection, analysis, evaluation,
\ndissemination of results, and conclusion.
\nCourse Outcomes
\nThis assignment enables the student to meet the following course outcomes:
\nCO #1. Integrate evidence-based practice and research to support advancement of holistic nursing care
\nin diverse healthcare settings. (PO # 1)
\nCO #2. Integrate knowledge related to evidence-based practice and person-centered care to improve
\nhealthcare outcomes. (PO #2, 5)
\nCO #4. Develop knowledge related to research and evidence-based practice as a basis for designing and
\ncritiquing research studies. (PO 1, 2, 3, 5)
\nCO #5. Analyze research findings and evidence-based practice to advance holistic nursing care initiatives
\nthat promote positive healthcare outcomes. (PO 1, 2, 5)
\nDue Date\u00a0Sunday 11:59 PM MT at the end of\u00a0Week Seven
\nTotal Points: 150 points
\nRequirements
\nDescription of the Assignment
\nFor this assignment, the student will complete MSN EBP project proposal by including the final sections
\nof data collection, analysis, evaluation, dissemination of results, and conclusion.
\nCriteria for Content
\n1. The entire proposal paper (excluding the title page and reference pages) should be maximum of
\n45 pages. This includes assignments from Week 2 and Week 5 along with the new content you
\nwill be writing for the Week 7 assignment. Points will be lost for exceeding this length
\nrequirement.<\/p>\nClick here to ORDER an A++ paper from our Verified MASTERS and DOCTORATE WRITERS: NR 505 Week 7: Data Collection, Analysis, Evaluation, Dissemination of Results, and Conclusion<\/strong><\/a><\/span><\/h3>\n
\nfound in the 6 th \u00a0edition of the manual. This includes the use of headings for each section of the
\npaper except for the introduction where no heading is used.
\n3. The paper should be presented in the following ordered sections:
\n\uf0b7 Title Page
\n\uf0b7 Overview of evidenced-based practice project
\n\uf0b7 Identification of nursing concern to be improved
\n\uf0b7 PICOT\/PICo question and literature search
\n\uf0b7 Theoretical framework
\n\uf0b7 Research literature support
\n\uf0b7 Research approach and design
\n\uf0b7 Sampling
\n\uf0b7 Proposed implementation with a change model
\n\uf0b7 Data collection
\n\uf0b7 Analysis
\n\uf0b7 Evaluation
\n\uf0b7 Dissemination of Results
\n\uf0b7 Conclusion
\n\uf0b7 References
\n4. Data Collection: In this section, students provide a comprehensive and detailed description regarding
\nhow data are to be collected. The required content includes:
\nA. For quantitative design the required content includes:
\n\uf0b7 Provide a detailed explanation on how data collection will occur
\n\uf0b7 Identify the data collection points
\n\uf0b7 Explain the length of time for data collection
\n\uf0b7 Explain all source(s) of data (i.e. self-report, questionnaires, structured observation,
\nbiophysiologic)
\n\uf0b7 Describe 2 (two) methods that will be useful in enhancing data quality
\n\uf0b7 Use scholarly references to provide information regarding selected data collection method.
\nB. For qualitative design the required content includes:<\/p>\n
\n\uf0b7 Provide a detailed explanation on how data collection will occur
\n\uf0b7 Explain the data collection points
\n\uf0b7 Explain the length of time for data collection
\n\uf0b7 Explain the proposed method to achieve data saturation
\n\uf0b7 Describe 2 (two) methods that would be used to enhance data quality
\n\uf0b7 Use scholarly references to provide information regarding selected data collection method
\n4. Analysis: In this section, students provide a detailed explanation on how data will be analyzed.
\nA. For quantitative data the required content includes:
\n\uf0b7 Discuss descriptive statistics and their use to explain the characteristics of the sample of this EBP
\nproposal
\n\uf0b7 Describe one type of inferential statistics and their use in this EBP proposal
\n\uf0b7 Use scholarly references to provide information regarding selected data collection method
\nB. For qualitative data the required content includes:
\n\uf0b7 Explain how data analysis is organized
\n\uf0b7 Discuss the use of themes and coding for this EBP proposal
\n\uf0b7 Explain triangulation and its relevance to this qualitative design
\n\uf0b7 Use scholarly references to provide information regarding selected data collection method
\n5. Evaluation: In this section, students will present information regarding methods useful to
\nobjectively determine if outcomes from implementing this proposed EBP proposal would be
\npositive for stakeholders as well as the nursing practice area reflected in their specialty track.
\nThe required content includes:
\n\uf0b7 Describe how each of the stakeholders identified earlier in this EBP proposal will experience
\nimproved outcome(s) from implementing this project
\n\uf0b7 Describe 2 (two) changes or improvements to nursing practice that may result in the your
\nspecialty track area at the micro level if this EBP project was to be implemented
\n6. Dissemination of Results: In this section, students will identify specific methods that may be
\nused to share the results from successful implementation of this EBP proposal. The required
\ncontent includes:
\n\uf0b7 Discuss how the results of this EBP project can be shared with stakeholders
\n\uf0b7 Discuss how the results of this EBP project can be shared with members of your future practice
\narea at the facility, community, state, and national levels<\/p>\n
\nconsider the potential contribution to their specialty track practice setting. The required content
\nincludes:
\n\uf0b7 Provide a comprehensive summary of key points from this EBP proposal project
\n\uf0b7 Provide a summary of the potential contributions of this EBP proposal project to your specialty
\ntrack practice and identified practice setting
\n8. Preparing the Assignment
\nCriteria for Format and Special Instructions
\n1. The final proposal paper (excluding the title page and reference page) should not exceed\u00a045
\n(forty-five)\u00a0pages. Points will be lost for not meeting this length requirement.
\n2. Headings are required and listed in above. All headings should be formatted following APA
\nrequirements
\n3. Title page, body of paper, reference page(s), and appendix must follow APA guidelines as found
\nin the 6 th \u00a0edition of the manual.
\n4. Provide all of your references; formatted in APA style, as reference page(s).<\/p>\n
\nWeek 7: Data Collection, Analysis, Evaluation, Dissemination of Results, and Conclusion
\nWeek 7: Data Collection, Analysis, Evaluation, Dissemination of Results, and Conclusion
\nCriteria Ratings Pts
\nThis criterion is linked
\nto a Learning
\nOutcomeData
\nCollection<\/p>\n
\nPresentation of
\ninformation was
\nexceptional and
\nincluded all of
\nthe following
\nelements: For
\nquantitative
\ndesign the
\nrequired
\ncontent
\nincludes: \u2022
\nProvide a
\ndetailed
\nexplanation on
\nhow data<\/p>\n
\nPresentation of
\ninformation was
\ngood, but was
\nsuperficial in
\nplaces and
\nincluded all of
\nthe following
\nelements: For
\nquantitative
\ndesign the
\nrequired
\ncontent
\nincludes: \u2022
\nProvide a
\ndetailed<\/p>\n
\nPresentation of
\ninformation was
\nminimally
\ndemonstrated in
\nthe all of the
\nfollowing
\nelements For
\nquantitative
\ndesign the
\nrequired
\ncontent
\nincludes: \u2022
\nProvide a
\ndetailed
\nexplanation on<\/p>\n
\nPresentation of
\ninformation in
\none or two of
\nthe following
\nelements fails to
\nmeet
\nexpectations:
\nFor quantitative
\ndesign the
\nrequired
\ncontent
\nincludes: \u2022
\nProvide a
\ndetailed
\nexplanation on<\/p>\n
\nPresentation of
\ninformation is
\nunsatisfactory in
\nthree or more of
\nthe following
\nelements: For
\nquantitative
\ndesign the
\nrequired
\ncontent
\nincludes: \u2022
\nProvide a
\ndetailed
\nexplanation on
\nhow data<\/p>\n
\noccur \u2022 Identify
\nthe data
\ncollection points
\n\u2022 Explain the
\nlength of time
\nfor data
\ncollection \u2022
\nExplain the all
\nsource(s) of data
\n(i.e. self-report,
\nquestionnaires,
\nstructured
\nobservation,
\nbiophysiologic)
\n\u2022 Describe 2
\n(two) methods
\nthat will be used
\nto enhance data
\nquality \u2022 Use
\nscholarly
\nreferences to
\nprovide
\ninformation
\nregarding
\nselected data
\ncollection
\nmethod For
\nqualitative
\ndesign the
\nrequired
\ncontent
\nincludes: \u2022
\nDescribe the
\ntype of data to
\nbe collected (i.e.
\nobservation,
\ninterview,
\nartifacts) \u2022
\nProvide a
\ndetailed
\nexplanation on
\nhow data
\ncollection will<\/p>\n
\nhow data
\ncollection will
\noccur \u2022 Identify
\nthe data
\ncollection points
\n\u2022 Explain the
\nlength of time
\nfor data
\ncollection \u2022
\nExplain the all
\nsource(s) of data
\n(i.e. self-report,
\nquestionnaires,
\nstructured
\nobservation,
\nbiophysiologic)
\n\u2022 Describe 2
\n(two) methods
\nthat will be used
\nto enhance data
\nquality \u2022 Use
\nscholarly
\nreferences to
\nprovide
\ninformation
\nregarding
\nselected data
\ncollection
\nmethod For
\nqualitative
\ndesign the
\nrequired
\ncontent
\nincludes: \u2022
\nDescribe the
\ntype of data to
\nbe collected (i.e.
\nobservation,
\ninterview,
\nartifacts) \u2022
\nProvide a
\ndetailed
\nexplanation on<\/p>\n
\ncollection will
\noccur \u2022 Identify
\nthe data
\ncollection points
\n\u2022 Explain the
\nlength of time
\nfor data
\ncollection \u2022
\nExplain the all
\nsource(s) of data
\n(i.e. self-report,
\nquestionnaires,
\nstructured
\nobservation,
\nbiophysiologic)
\n\u2022 Describe 2
\n(two) methods
\nthat will be used
\nto enhance data
\nquality \u2022 Use
\nscholarly
\nreferences to
\nprovide
\ninformation
\nregarding
\nselected data
\ncollection
\nmethod For
\nqualitative
\ndesign the
\nrequired
\ncontent
\nincludes: \u2022
\nDescribe the
\ntype of data to
\nbe collected (i.e.
\nobservation,
\ninterview,
\nartifacts) \u2022
\nProvide a
\ndetailed
\nexplanation on
\nhow data<\/p>\n
\ncollection will
\noccur \u2022 Identify
\nthe data
\ncollection points
\n\u2022 Explain the
\nlength of time
\nfor data
\ncollection \u2022
\nExplain the all
\nsource(s) of data
\n(i.e. self-report,
\nquestionnaires,
\nstructured
\nobservation,
\nbiophysiologic)
\n\u2022 Describe 2
\n(two) methods
\nthat will be used
\nto enhance data
\nquality \u2022 Use
\nscholarly
\nreferences to
\nprovide
\ninformation
\nregarding
\nselected data
\ncollection
\nmethod For
\nqualitative
\ndesign the
\nrequired
\ncontent
\nincludes: \u2022
\nDescribe the
\ntype of data to
\nbe collected (i.e.
\nobservation,
\ninterview,
\nartifacts) \u2022
\nProvide a
\ndetailed
\nexplanation on
\nhow data<\/p>\n
\noccur \u2022 Identify
\nthe data
\ncollection points
\n\u2022 Explain the
\nlength of time
\nfor data
\ncollection \u2022
\nExplain the all
\nsource(s) of data
\n(i.e. self-report,
\nquestionnaires,
\nstructured
\nobservation,
\nbiophysiologic)
\n\u2022 Describe 2
\n(two) methods
\nthat will be used
\nto enhance data
\nquality \u2022 Use
\nscholarly
\nreferences to
\nprovide
\ninformation
\nregarding
\nselected data
\ncollection
\nmethod For
\nqualitative
\ndesign the
\nrequired
\ncontent
\nincludes: \u2022
\nDescribe the
\ntype of data to
\nbe collected (i.e.
\nobservation,
\ninterview,
\nartifacts) \u2022
\nProvide a
\ndetailed
\nexplanation on
\nhow data
\ncollection will<\/p>\n
\nthe data
\ncollection points
\n\u2022 Explain the
\nlength of time
\nfor data
\ncollection \u2022
\nExplain the
\nproposed
\nmethod to
\nachieve data
\nsaturation \u2022
\nDescribe 2 (two)
\nmethods that
\nwould be useful
\nin enhancing
\ndata quality \u2022
\nUse scholarly
\nreferences to
\nprovide
\ninformation
\nregarding
\nselected data
\ncollection
\nmethod<\/p>\n
\ncollection will
\noccur \u2022 Explain
\nthe data
\ncollection points
\n\u2022 Explain the
\nlength of time
\nfor data
\ncollection \u2022
\nExplain the
\nproposed
\nmethod to
\nachieve data
\nsaturation \u2022
\nDescribe 2 (two)
\nmethods that
\nwould be useful
\nin enhancing
\ndata quality \u2022
\nUse scholarly
\nreferences to
\nprovide
\ninformation
\nregarding
\nselected data
\ncollection
\nmethod<\/p>\n
\noccur \u2022 Explain
\nthe data
\ncollection points
\n\u2022 Explain the
\nlength of time
\nfor data
\ncollection \u2022
\nExplain the
\nproposed
\nmethod to
\nachieve data
\nsaturation \u2022
\nDescribe 2 (two)
\nmethods that
\nwould be useful
\nin enhancing
\ndata quality \u2022
\nUse scholarly
\nreferences to
\nprovide
\ninformation
\nregarding
\nselected data
\ncollection
\nmethod<\/p>\n
\noccur \u2022 Explain
\nthe data
\ncollection points
\n\u2022 Explain the
\nlength of time
\nfor data
\ncollection \u2022
\nExplain the
\nproposed
\nmethod to
\nachieve data<\/p>\n
\nDescribe 2 (two)
\nmethods that
\nwould be useful
\nin enhancing
\ndata quality \u2022
\nUse scholarly
\nreferences to
\nprovide
\ninformation
\nregarding
\nselected data
\ncollection
\nmethod<\/p>\n
\nthe data
\ncollection points
\n\u2022 Explain the
\nlength of time
\nfor data
\ncollection \u2022
\nExplain the
\nproposed
\nmethod to
\nachieve data
\nsaturation \u2022
\nDescribe 2 (two)
\nmethods that
\nwould be useful
\nin enhancing
\ndata quality \u2022
\nUse scholarly
\nreferences to
\nprovide
\ninformation
\nregarding
\nselected data
\ncollection
\nmethod<\/p>\n
\nto a Learning
\nOutcomeAnalysis<\/p>\n
\nPresentation of
\ninformation was
\nexceptional and
\nincluded all of
\nthe following
\nelements: For<\/p>\n
\nPresentation of
\ninformation was
\ngood, but was
\nsuperficial in
\nplaces and
\nincluded all of<\/p>\n
\nPresentation of
\ninformation was
\nminimally
\ndemonstrated in
\nthe all of the
\nfollowing<\/p>\n
\nPresentation of
\ninformation in
\none of the
\nfollowing
\nelements fails to
\nmeet<\/p>\n
\nPresentation of
\ninformation is
\nunsatisfactory in
\ntwo or more of
\nthe following
\nelements: For<\/p>\n
\ndata the
\nrequired
\ncontent
\nincludes: \u2022
\nDiscuss
\ndescriptive
\nstatistics and
\ntheir use to
\nexplain the
\ncharacteristics
\nof the sample of
\nthis EBP
\nproposal \u2022
\nDescribe one
\ntype of
\ninferential
\nstatistics and its
\nuse in this EBP
\nproposal \u2022 Use
\nscholarly
\nreferences to
\nprovide
\ninformation
\nregarding
\nselected data
\ncollection
\nmethod For
\nqualitative data
\nthe required
\ncontent
\nincludes: \u2022
\nExplain how
\ndata analysis is
\norganized \u2022
\nDiscuss the use
\nof themes and
\ncoding for this
\nEBP proposal \u2022
\nExplain
\ntriangulation
\nand its
\nrelevance to this
\nqualitative<\/p>\n
\nelements: For
\nquantitative
\ndata the
\nrequired
\ncontent
\nincludes: \u2022
\nDiscuss
\ndescriptive
\nstatistics and
\ntheir use to
\nexplain the
\ncharacteristics
\nof the sample of
\nthis EBP
\nproposal \u2022
\nDescribe one
\ntype of
\ninferential
\nstatistics and its
\nuse in this EBP
\nproposal \u2022 Use
\nscholarly
\nreferences to
\nprovide
\ninformation
\nregarding
\nselected data
\ncollection
\nmethod For
\nqualitative data
\nthe required
\ncontent
\nincludes: \u2022
\nExplain how
\ndata analysis is
\norganized \u2022
\nDiscuss the use
\nof themes and
\ncoding for this
\nEBP proposal \u2022
\nExplain
\ntriangulation
\nand its<\/p>\n
\nquantitative
\ndata the
\nrequired
\ncontent
\nincludes: \u2022
\nDiscuss
\ndescriptive
\nstatistics and
\ntheir use to
\nexplain the
\ncharacteristics
\nof the sample of
\nthis EBP
\nproposal \u2022
\nDescribe one
\ntype of
\ninferential
\nstatistics and its
\nuse in this EBP
\nproposal \u2022 Use
\nscholarly
\nreferences to
\nprovide
\ninformation
\nregarding
\nselected data
\ncollection
\nmethod For
\nqualitative data
\nthe required
\ncontent
\nincludes: \u2022
\nExplain how
\ndata analysis is
\norganized \u2022
\nDiscuss the use
\nof themes and
\ncoding for this
\nEBP proposal \u2022
\nExplain
\ntriangulation
\nand its
\nrelevance to this<\/p>\n
\nFor quantitative
\ndata the
\nrequired
\ncontent
\nincludes: \u2022
\nDiscuss
\ndescriptive
\nstatistics and
\ntheir use to
\nexplain the
\ncharacteristics
\nof the sample of
\nthis EBP
\nproposal \u2022
\nDescribe one
\ntype of
\ninferential
\nstatistics and its
\nuse in this EBP
\nproposal \u2022 Use
\nscholarly
\nreferences to
\nprovide
\ninformation
\nregarding
\nselected data
\ncollection
\nmethod For
\nqualitative data
\nthe required
\ncontent
\nincludes: \u2022
\nExplain how
\ndata analysis is
\norganized \u2022
\nDiscuss the use
\nof themes and
\ncoding for this
\nEBP proposal \u2022
\nExplain
\ntriangulation
\nand its
\nrelevance to this<\/p>\n
\ndata the
\nrequired
\ncontent
\nincludes: \u2022
\nDiscuss
\ndescriptive
\nstatistics and
\ntheir use to
\nexplain the
\ncharacteristics
\nof the sample of
\nthis EBP
\nproposal \u2022
\nDescribe one
\ntype of
\ninferential
\nstatistics and its
\nuse in this EBP
\nproposal \u2022 Use
\nscholarly
\nreferences to
\nprovide
\ninformation
\nregarding
\nselected data
\ncollection
\nmethod For
\nqualitative data
\nthe required
\ncontent
\nincludes: \u2022
\nExplain how
\ndata analysis is
\norganized \u2022
\nDiscuss the use
\nof themes and
\ncoding for this
\nEBP proposal \u2022
\nExplain
\ntriangulation
\nand its
\nrelevance to this
\nqualitative<\/p>\n
\nscholarly
\nreferences to
\nprovide
\ninformation
\nregarding
\nselected data
\ncollection
\nmethod<\/p>\n
\nqualitative
\ndesign \u2022 Use
\nscholarly
\nreferences to
\nprovide
\ninformation
\nregarding
\nselected data
\ncollection
\nmethod<\/p>\n
\ndesign \u2022 Use
\nscholarly
\nreferences to
\nprovide
\ninformation
\nregarding
\nselected data
\ncollection
\nmethod<\/p>\n
\ndesign \u2022 Use
\nscholarly
\nreferences to
\nprovide
\ninformation
\nregarding
\nselected data
\ncollection
\nmethod<\/p>\n
\nscholarly
\nreferences to
\nprovide
\ninformation
\nregarding
\nselected data
\ncollection
\nmethod<\/p>\n
\nto a Learning
\nOutcomeEvaluation<\/p>\n
\nPresentation of
\ninformation was
\nexceptional and
\nincluded all of
\nthe following
\nelements: \u2022
\nDescribe how
\neach of the
\nstakeholders
\nidentified
\nearlier in this
\nEBP proposal
\nwill experience
\nimproved
\noutcome(s)
\nfrom
\nimplementing
\nthis project \u2022
\nDescribe 2 (two)
\nchanges or
\nimprovements
\nto nursing
\npractice that
\nmay result in
\nthe your
\nspecialty track
\narea at the
\nmicro level if<\/p>\n
\nPresentation of
\ninformation was
\ngood, but was
\nsuperficial in
\nplaces and
\nincluded all of
\nthe following
\nelements: \u2022
\nDescribe how
\neach of the
\nstakeholders
\nidentified
\nearlier in this
\nEBP proposal
\nwill experience
\nimproved
\noutcome(s)
\nfrom
\nimplementing
\nthis project \u2022
\nDescribe 2 (two)
\nchanges or
\nimprovements
\nto nursing
\npractice that
\nmay result in
\nthe your
\nspecialty track<\/p>\n
\nPresentation of
\ninformation was
\nminimally
\ndemonstrated in
\nthe all of the
\nfollowing
\nelements: \u2022
\nDescribe how
\neach of the
\nstakeholders
\nidentified
\nearlier in this
\nEBP proposal
\nwill experience
\nimproved
\noutcome(s)
\nfrom
\nimplementing
\nthis project \u2022
\nDescribe 2 (two)
\nchanges or
\nimprovements
\nto nursing
\npractice that
\nmay result in
\nthe your
\nspecialty track
\narea at the<\/p>\n
\nPresentation of
\ninformation in
\none of the
\nfollowing
\nelements fails to
\nmeet
\nexpectations: \u2022
\nDescribe how
\neach of the
\nstakeholders
\nidentified
\nearlier in this
\nEBP proposal
\nwill experience
\nimproved
\noutcome(s)
\nfrom
\nimplementing
\nthis project \u2022
\nDescribe 2 (two)
\nchanges or
\nimprovements
\nto nursing
\npractice that
\nmay result in
\nthe your
\nspecialty track
\narea at the<\/p>\n
\nPresentation of
\ninformation is
\nunsatisfactory in
\ntwo of the
\nfollowing
\nelements: \u2022
\nDescribe how
\neach of the
\nstakeholders
\nidentified
\nearlier in this
\nEBP proposal
\nwill experience
\nimproved
\noutcome(s)
\nfrom
\nimplementing
\nthis project \u2022
\nDescribe 2 (two)
\nchanges or
\nimprovements
\nto nursing
\npractice that
\nmay result in
\nthe your
\nspecialty track
\narea at the
\nmicro level if<\/p>\n
\nwas to be
\nimplemented<\/p>\n
\nmicro level if
\nthis EBP project
\nwas to be
\nimplemented<\/p>\n
\nthis EBP project
\nwas to be
\nimplemented<\/p>\n
\nthis EBP project
\nwas to be
\nimplemented<\/p>\n
\nwas to be
\nimplemented<\/p>\n
\nto a Learning
\nOutcomeDissemination
\nof Results<\/p>\n
\nPresentation of
\ninformation
\nwas
\nexceptional and
\nincluded all of
\nthe following
\nelements: \u2022
\nDiscuss how
\nthe results of
\nthis EBP project
\ncan be shared
\nwith
\nstakeholders \u2022
\nDiscuss how
\nthe results of
\nthis EBP project
\ncan be shared
\nwith members
\nof your future
\npractice area at
\nthe facility,
\ncommunity,
\nstate, and
\nnational levels<\/p>\n
\nPresentation of
\ninformation
\nwas good, but
\nwas superficial
\nin places and
\nincluded all of
\nthe following
\nelements: \u2022
\nDiscuss how the
\nresults of this
\nEBP project can
\nbe shared with
\nstakeholders \u2022
\nDiscuss how the
\nresults of this
\nEBP project can
\nbe shared with
\nmembers of
\nyour future
\npractice area at
\nthe facility,
\ncommunity,
\nstate, and
\nnational levels<\/p>\n
\nPresentation of
\ninformation was
\nminimally
\ndemonstrated in
\nthe all of the
\nfollowing
\nelements: \u2022
\nDiscuss how the
\nresults of this
\nEBP project can
\nbe shared with
\nstakeholders \u2022
\nDiscuss how the
\nresults of this
\nEBP project can
\nbe shared with
\nmembers of your
\nfuture practice
\narea at the
\nfacility,
\ncommunity,
\nstate, and
\nnational levels<\/p>\n
\nPresentation of
\ninformation in
\none of the
\nfollowing
\nelements fails to
\nmeet
\nexpectations: \u2022
\nDiscuss how the
\nresults of this
\nEBP project can
\nbe shared with
\nstakeholders \u2022
\nDiscuss how the
\nresults of this
\nEBP project can
\nbe shared with
\nmembers of
\nyour future
\npractice area at
\nthe facility,
\ncommunity,
\nstate, and
\nnational levels<\/p>\n
\nPresentation of
\ninformation is
\nunsatisfactory in
\ntwo of the
\nfollowing
\nelements: \u2022
\nDiscuss how the
\nresults of this
\nEBP project can
\nbe shared with
\nstakeholders \u2022
\nDiscuss how the
\nresults of this
\nEBP project can
\nbe shared with
\nmembers of your
\nfuture practice
\narea at the
\nfacility,
\ncommunity,
\nstate, and
\nnational levels<\/p>\n
\nto a Learning
\nOutcomeConclusion<\/p>\n
\nPresentation of
\ninformation was
\nexceptional and
\nincluded all of<\/p>\n
\nPresentation of
\ninformation was
\ngood, but was
\nsuperficial in<\/p>\n
\nPresentation of
\ninformation was
\nminimally
\ndemonstrated in
\n4.0\u00a0pts
\nPresentation of
\ninformation in
\none of the
\nfollowing<\/p>\n
\nPresentation of
\ninformation is
\nunsatisfactory in
\ntwo of the<\/p>\n
\nelements: \u2022
\nProvide a
\ncomprehensive
\nsummary of key
\npoints from this
\nEBP proposal
\nproject \u2022
\nProvide a
\nsummary of the
\npotential
\ncontributions of
\nthis EBP
\nproposal project
\nto your specialty
\ntrack practice
\nand identified
\npractice setting<\/p>\n
\nincluded all of
\nthe following
\nelements: \u2022
\nProvide a
\ncomprehensive
\nsummary of key
\npoints from this
\nEBP proposal
\nproject \u2022
\nProvide a
\nsummary of the
\npotential
\ncontributions of
\nthis EBP
\nproposal project
\nto your specialty
\ntrack practice
\nand identified
\npractice setting<\/p>\n
\nfollowing
\nelements: \u2022
\nProvide a
\ncomprehensive
\nsummary of key
\npoints from this
\nEBP proposal
\nproject \u2022
\nProvide a
\nsummary of the
\npotential
\ncontributions of
\nthis EBP
\nproposal project
\nto your specialty
\ntrack practice
\nand identified
\npractice setting<\/p>\n
\nmeet
\nexpectations: \u2022
\nProvide a
\ncomprehensive
\nsummary of key
\npoints from this
\nEBP proposal
\nproject \u2022
\nProvide a
\nsummary of the
\npotential
\ncontributions of
\nthis EBP
\nproposal project
\nto your specialty
\ntrack practice
\nand identified
\npractice setting<\/p>\n
\nelements: \u2022
\nProvide a
\ncomprehensive
\nsummary of key
\npoints from this
\nEBP proposal
\nproject \u2022
\nProvide a
\nsummary of the
\npotential
\ncontributions of
\nthis EBP
\nproposal project
\nto your specialty
\ntrack practice
\nand identified
\npractice setting<\/p>\n
\nto a Learning
\nOutcomePaper
\nSpecifications<\/p>\n
\nThis section
\nincluded all of
\nthe following: \u2022
\nPaper meets
\nlength
\nrequirements of
\nnot exceeding
\n45pages
\nexcluding title
\nand reference
\npages \u2022
\nHeadings are
\nrequired and
\nlisted above. All
\nheadings should
\nbe formatted
\nfollowing APA
\nrequirements A
\n9.0\u00a0pts
\nThis section
\nincluded three
\nof the following:
\n\u2022 Paper meets
\nlength
\nrequirements of
\nnot exceeding
\n45 pages
\nexcluding title
\nand reference
\npages \u2022
\nHeadings are
\nrequired and
\nlisted above. All
\nheadings should
\nbe formatted
\nfollowing APA
\nrequirements \u2022 .
\n8.0\u00a0pts
\nThis section
\nincluded only
\ntwo of the
\nfollowing: \u2022
\nPaper meets
\nlength
\nrequirements of
\nnot exceeding
\n45 pages
\nexcluding title
\nand reference
\npages \u2022
\nHeadings are
\nrequired and
\nlisted above. All
\nheadings should
\nbe formatted
\nfollowing APA<\/p>\n
\nThis section
\nincluded only
\none of the
\nfollowing: \u2022
\nPaper meets
\nlength
\nrequirements of
\nnot exceeding
\n45 pages
\nexcluding title
\nand reference
\npages \u2022
\nHeadings are
\nrequired and
\nlisted above. All
\nheadings should
\nbe formatted
\nfollowing APA<\/p>\n
\nThis section
\nincluded none
\nof the following:
\n\u2022 Paper meets
\nlength
\nrequirements of
\nnot exceeding
\n45pages
\nexcluding title
\nand reference
\npages \u2022
\nHeadings are
\nrequired and
\nlisted above. All
\nheadings should
\nbe formatted
\nfollowing APA
\nrequirements \u2022<\/p>\n
\n(except for
\nDefinition
\nsection),
\nrequired
\ntextbooks for
\nthis course and
\nChamberlain
\nCollege of
\nNursing lesson
\ninformation,
\nmay NOT be
\nused as
\nscholarly
\nreferences for
\nthis assignment.
\n\u2022 References are
\ncurrent – within
\na 5-year time
\nframe unless a
\nvalid rationale is
\nprovided and
\nthe instructor
\nhas approved
\nthem.<\/p>\n
\n(except for
\nDefinition
\nsection),
\nrequired
\ntextbooks for
\nthis course and
\nChamberlain
\nCollege of
\nNursing lesson
\ninformation,
\nmay NOT be
\nused as
\nscholarly
\nreferences for
\nthis assignment.
\n\u2022 References are
\ncurrent – within
\na 5-year time
\nframe unless a
\nvalid rationale is
\nprovided and
\nthe instructor
\nhas approved
\nthem.<\/p>\n
\nA dictionary
\n(except for
\nDefinition
\nsection),
\nrequired
\ntextbooks for
\nthis course and
\nChamberlain
\nCollege of
\nNursing lesson
\ninformation,
\nmay NOT be
\nused as
\nscholarly
\nreferences for
\nthis assignment.
\n\u2022 References are
\ncurrent – within
\na 5-year time
\nframe unless a
\nvalid rationale is
\nprovided and
\nthe instructor
\nhas approved
\nthem.<\/p>\n
\nA dictionary
\n(except for
\nDefinition
\nsection),
\nrequired
\ntextbooks for
\nthis course and
\nChamberlain
\nCollege of
\nNursing lesson
\ninformation,
\nmay NOT be
\nused as
\nscholarly
\nreferences for
\nthis assignment.
\n\u2022 References are
\ncurrent – within
\na 5-year time
\nframe unless a
\nvalid rationale is
\nprovided and
\nthe instructor
\nhas approved
\nthem.<\/p>\n
\npresent and
\nconsistent with
\nAPA format. \u2022 A
\ndictionary
\n(except for
\nDefinition
\nsection),
\nrequired
\ntextbooks for
\nthis course and
\nChamberlain
\nCollege of
\nNursing lesson
\ninformation,
\nmay NOT be
\nused as
\nscholarly
\nreferences for
\nthis assignment.
\n\u2022 References are
\ncurrent – within
\na 5-year time
\nframe unless a
\nvalid rationale is
\nprovided and
\nthe instructor
\nhas approved
\nthem.<\/p>\n
\nto a Learning
\nOutcomeAPA Style<\/p>\n
\nAPA guidelines,
\nas per the 6th
\nedition of the
\nmanual, are
\ndemonstrated
\nfor the \u2022 title
\npage, \u2022 running
\nhead, \u2022 body of<\/p>\n
\nAPA guidelines,
\nas per the 6th
\nedition of the
\nmanual, are
\ndemonstrated
\nfor the \u2022 title
\npage, \u2022 running
\nhead, \u2022 body of
\n8.0\u00a0pts
\nAPA guidelines,
\nas per the 6th
\nedition of the
\nmanual, are
\ndemonstrated
\nfor the \u2022 title
\npage, \u2022 running
\nhead, \u2022 body of
\n4.0\u00a0pts
\nAPA guidelines,
\nas per the 6th
\nedition of the
\nmanual, are
\ndemonstrated
\nfor the \u2022 title
\npage, \u2022 running
\nhead, \u2022 body of
\n0.0\u00a0pts
\nAPA guidelines,
\nas per the 6th
\nedition of the
\nmanual, are
\ndemonstrated
\nfor the \u2022 title
\npage, \u2022 running
\nhead, \u2022 body of<\/p>\n
\nmargins,
\nheadings. font,
\netc.), and
\nreference page
\n\u2022 One deduction
\nfor each type of
\nAPA format
\nerror 0 to 1 APA
\nerror was
\npresent<\/p>\n
\nmargins,
\nheadings, font,
\netc.), and
\nreference page
\n\u2022 One deduction
\nfor each type of
\nAPA format
\nerror 2 – 3 APA
\nerrors were
\npresent<\/p>\n
\nmargins,
\nheadings, font,
\netc.), and
\nreference page
\n\u2022 One deduction
\nfor each type of
\nAPA format
\nerror 4 \u2013 5 APA
\nwere are
\npresent<\/p>\n
\nmargins,
\nheadings, font,
\netc.), and
\nreference page
\n\u2022 One deduction
\nfor each type of
\nAPA format
\nerror 6 \u2013 7 APA
\nwere are
\npresent<\/p>\n
\nmargins,
\nheadings, font,
\netc.), and
\nreference page \u2022
\nOne deduction
\nfor each type of
\nAPA format
\nerror 8 or
\ngreater APA
\nerrors were
\npresent<\/p>\n
\nto a Learning
\nOutcomeCitations<\/p>\n
\nThere were 0-1
\nerrors in the
\ncrediting of ideas,
\nand information
\nthat contributed
\nto knowledge
\nPermission to use
\nreferences older
\nthan 5 years was
\nobtained from
\nfaculty.<\/p>\n
\nThere were 2-3
\nerrors in the
\ncrediting of ideas,
\nand information
\nthat contributed
\nto knowledge
\nPermission to use
\nreferences older
\nthan 5 years was
\nNOT obtained
\nfrom faculty.<\/p>\n
\nThere were 4-5
\nerrors in the
\ncrediting of
\nideas, and
\ninformation
\nthat
\ncontributed to
\nknowledge<\/p>\n
\nThere were 6-7
\nerrors in the
\ncrediting of
\nideas, and
\ninformation
\nthat
\ncontributed to
\nknowledge<\/p>\n
\nThere were 8
\nor greater
\nerrors in the
\ncrediting of
\nideas, and
\ninformation
\nthat
\ncontributed to
\nknowledge<\/p>\n
\nto a Learning
\nOutcomeWriting
\nQuality<\/p>\n
\n1\u20132 errors or
\nexceptions to
\nthe rules of
\ngrammar,
\nspelling, word
\nusage,
\npunctuation and
\nother aspects of
\nformal written
\nwork as found
\nin the 6th
\nedition of the<\/p>\n
\n3 \u2013 4 errors or
\nexceptions to
\nthe rules of
\ngrammar,
\nspelling, word
\nusage,
\npunctuation and
\nother aspects of
\nformal written
\nwork as found
\nin the 6th
\nedition of the<\/p>\n
\n5 \u2013 6 errors or
\nexceptions to
\nthe rules of
\ngrammar,
\nspelling, word
\nusage,
\npunctuation and
\nother aspects of
\nformal written
\nwork as found
\nin the 6th
\nedition of the<\/p>\n
\n7 \u2013 8 errors or
\nexceptions to
\nthe rules of
\ngrammar,
\nspelling, word
\nusage,
\npunctuation and
\nother aspects of
\nformal written
\nwork as found
\nin the 6th
\nedition of the<\/p>\n
\n9 or greater
\nerrors or
\nexceptions to
\nthe rules of
\ngrammar,
\nspelling, word
\nusage,
\npunctuation and
\nother aspects of
\nformal written
\nwork as found in
\nthe 6th edition<\/p>\n
\nmanual<\/p>\n
\nPreviousNext<\/p>\n
\nFride Wandji
\nChamberlain College of Nursing<\/p>\n
\nproviding care to patients who have fallen in an LTC and fractured bones in the United States?\u201d
\nThe data collection method that applies the best for my research topic is a quantitative survey\/
\nquestionnaire (Choy, 2014). Surveys are cost effective and can be mailed or emailed to
\nparticipants. Disseminating the surveys by email is a much faster process than mailing the
\nsurveys to participants, but each method will all participants are provided an equal opportunity to
\njoin in the survey process. The online option allows for a large, diverse population of NPs to be
\nsampled. The ability to survey large numbers of respondents reduces geographical dependence.
\nThe strength of the survey or questionnaire is that it contains closed-ended questions and the
\nanswer options are provided. A weakness with the survey\/questionnaire is the questions and
\nanswers are basic and lack detail. However, the researcher can ask numerous questions about a
\nsubject, allowing for flexibility in data analysis. The researcher can also add a section of open –
\nended questions that allow for short answers. According to Choy (2014), open-ended survey
\nquestions can be turned into qualitative data. The best thing about surveys or questionnaires is
\nthat from the collected data, researchers can infer respondents\u2019 attitudes, opinions, beliefs,
\nvalues, and behavior and can generalize or transfer this information across multiple situations<\/p>\n
\nthe same research participants are surveyed on the same variables at multiple times during the
\nstudy.
\nTo collect the data, researchers will assemble a team of two or three people. This team
\nwill call the selected research participants and ask if they would prefer to receive the survey by
\nmail or via email. The team will then send out the first survey (pre-test) to each participant via
\neach respective method chosen. Once the completed surveys have been returned, data collection
\nteam members will file the first set of surveys under \u201ccompleted surveys: phase one.\u201d This
\nprocess will need to be duplicated three times. Data collection team members will contact
\nparticipants who did not return completed surveys to ask if they still want to be a part of the
\nstudy and schedule a time for completed surveys to be returned.
\nData Collection Points and Length of Data Collection
\nAs established by pre-test\/post-test design, the survey data will be collected at three
\nseparate times during the study: at the start of the study, the midpoint of the study, and the end of
\nthe study. The survey format and questions will remain the same during each time of
\ndissemination. Ponto (2015) states to guarantee that some data is gathered from as many
\nparticipants as possible and to ensure consistency of answers per survey participant, collecting
\ndata at multiple times is necessary. Ponto (2015) also maintains passing out surveys at three
\npoints will address the issue of getting participants to return the surveys on time, allow
\nresearchers to compare respondents first set of answers to their second and third set of answers,
\nand provide a measure to safeguard against respondents rushing through the questions. With such
\na wealth of data, researchers will be able to formulate a more comprehensive view of how to
\nimplement fall prevention programs in LTC settings, as well as get an understanding of fall<\/p>\n
\nthe data for this EBP proposal is twelve weeks. Participants will be given surveys at the
\nbeginning of the project, at the six-week mark, and at the 12-week mark.
\nSources of Data
\nCommonly used quantitative sources of data are found in the form of self-reports like
\nstructured interviews, surveys, and tests; structured or recorded observations; In vivo and In vitro
\nbiophysiologic methods (Sutton & Austin, 2015). Conducting literature reviews of scholarly
\narticles, documents, and records is also a quantitative source of data (Sutton & Austin, 2015).
\nSelf-reports are defined as detailed verbal communications between participants and designated
\nresearch recorders, usually disseminated in the form of interviews and surveys (Sutton & Austin,
\n2015). The format for interview must be structured, allowing the interviewer to ask the same
\nquestions in the same order and offering no explanation for questions respondents do not
\nunderstand (Sutton & Austin, 2015). Surveys\/questionnaires are self-reports that have been
\ndeveloped to collect written responses from participants (Sutton & Austin, 2015). Quantitative
\nsurveys should contain closed-ended, structured questions; some common formats of closed-
\nended questions are as multiple choice, rank-order, true or false; Likert scale, and differential
\nscale (Sutton & Austin, 2015). The purpose of the questionnaire for this EBP proposed plan is to
\nobtain information about whether participants utilize holistic and complementary cancer
\ntreatment effect care plans designed by family nurse practitioners (FNP). If participants do,
\nresearchers aim to examine which therapies participants use and their attitudes, beliefs, and
\nopinions regarding these care therapies.
\nObservational sources of data are collected through visual and auditory methods, should
\nbe structured and have a distinct format for how researchers will carry out the observations;<\/p>\n
\n(Sutton & Austin, 2015). An example of how a structured observation would fit into this research
\nEBP proposal is to create categories of questions for fall prevention program participants to
\nanswer. One such category might describe the behavior of participants after they finish a fall
\nprevention program activity in their LTC settings. Observation formats should also contain rating
\nscales to rate participants characteristics and behaviors (Sutton & Austin, 2015). Biophysiologic
\ndata collection methods are ideal for nurses. Biophysiologic self-report methods allow nurses to
\nevaluate their how their actions and nursing interventions determine or affect patient outcomes
\n(Sutton & Austin, 2015). Biophysiologic data collection methods also allow nurses to test
\nhypothesis and relates patients\u2019 physiologic functions to common health illnesses (Sutton &
\nAustin, 2015). Conducting a literature review of published correlational studies and relevant
\nhealth demographic documents and records provides researchers opportunities to compare their
\nstudy results with the results of similar research studies.
\nEnsuring Quality Data
\nTo guarantee quality data, I will design a survey or questionnaire that eliminates
\nunnecessary questions by defining the goals of the research then forming those goals into survey
\nquestions. While there are no statistical tests for validity, Walonick (2018) suggests the
\nfollowing steps to maintain validity and reliability: Find a participant who agrees to act as a
\nrespondent and ask the person to complete the survey. Take note of any clarifying questions the
\nrespondent asks about the survey. Take time to note which questions need \u201cfixing\u201d as these are
\ndefective. In real life, respondents do not have the chance to ask the survey developer questions.
\nOnce the original questions that have clarification issues have been modified, repeat the survey
\ncompletion process with a new test respondent. Continue this process until there are no more<\/p>\n
\nwhich safeguards against respondent boredom like skipping over questions. Another way to
\nensure quality data is to train research staff how to disseminate study information, collect data,
\nand interact with participants (Chen et al., 2014).
\nAnalysis<\/p>\n
\nstatistics \u201cdescribe\u201d raw data so that it become easier to understand and more meaningful to the
\npurpose of the study (Hayat, Powell, Johnson, Cadwell, 2017). Raw data are just numbers and
\nfigures, but with descriptive statistics methods, researchers interpret data to create patterns.
\nDescriptive data methods are limiting because there is no agreed upon format that allows
\nresearchers to develop supported conclusions for hypotheses beyond analyzed data (Hayat et al.,
\n2017). Descriptive statistics brings facts, figures, graphs and charts to life. There are two
\ncomponents of descriptive statistics: measures of central tendency and spread are generally
\nutilized to summarize the qualities of the sample population (Hayat et al., 2017). In this EBP
\nproposal, researchers can use descriptive statistics to format raw data about how many nurses
\nhave experience in implementing fall prevention and injury programs in clinical settings. Other
\nraw data that can be designed into graphs, charts, and statistics are the ages and injuries of fall
\nprevention program participants. For this EBP proposal, formulating relevant descriptive
\nstatistics begins with the development of the survey questions. Researchers can use the
\ninformation gathered from collected surveys to identify any standard deviations before creating
\ndescriptive statistics.
\nInferential statistics not only describe but also make inferences, which are predictions
\nabout a sample population based on the data collected from the sample population (Hayat et al.,<\/p>\n
\nabout the research data and correlate it to the sample population (Hayat et al., 2017). Inferential
\nstatistics help researchers consider aspects like probability judgements, variation of the same
\ndata within the sample population, even question how dependable their observations are (Hayat
\net al., 2017). The advantage to inferential statistics is they apply to more general conditions and
\nlarger populations. Within this EBP proposal, inferential statistics can assist NPs decide with fall
\nprevention techniques are best applied to different age groups and in which settings.<\/p>\n
\nthe study, health organizations who have a vested and financial interest in the research project,
\nand anyone in the larger population agreeing or disagreeing with the study and its purpose.
\nImplementing this EBP proposal will improve outcomes for sample participants. Research
\nconducted by Harrison (2017) shows that NPs who collaborate to implement fall prevention
\nprograms help reduce fall risk and improve health outcomes for patients. Li et al., (2013) show
\nthat implementing the Tai Ji Quan program maximizes senior participation in community-based
\nfall prevention programs. 61% of senior participants who completed the program reported they
\ncontinue weekly Tai Ji Quan practice on their own. Also, research by Breimaier, Halfens, &
\nLohrmann (2015) show that nurses\u2019 knowledge on fall prevention increased 4.1% and how to
\naccess the Falls Clinical Practice Guideline (CPG)
\nResearchers experience improvements since they can now share credible results and
\noutcomes with colleagues, sample participants, and research funders. This EBP proposal can
\nhelp establish which fall prevention program data is generalizable and transferable to larger
\npopulations. It also provides a template for sound quantitative research design for understanding<\/p>\n
\nLTC settings can implement or improve fall prevention initiatives and created a reason for LTC
\norganizational boards to structure policies that support EBP fall prevention programs. Health
\nbased associations and clinical organizations experience better outcomes when research such as
\nthis gives credibility their research and platforms. The result is that these organizations use this
\ninformation to lobby on a legislative level and to develop NP best practices and standards.<\/p>\n
\ninformation and motivation. NP leaders play a significant role in overcoming these barriers. NP
\nleaders can inform nursing staff about falls prevention EBP practices during staff meetings and
\nstart of shift meetings. NPs can lead open discussions that allow staff to provide feedback on the
\nstatus of at risk patients, as well as whether benchmarks and goals have been reached. The results
\nof this EBP project can also be shared with study participants. Once these stakeholders receive
\nthe results, they may contact the research team to add valuable follow-up information (Curtis,
\nFry, Shaban, & Considine, 2016). Two feasible ways to share the outcomes with participant
\nstakeholders are through social media and the local newspaper. Data findings can be put in
\npamphlets to be disseminated at rehabilitation therapy clinics, LTC settings, or assisted living
\ncommunities. Gerontology practitioners can also play a role is disseminating the findings to
\nparticipant and patient stakeholders. Sharing results with health organizations and colleagues can
\nbe achieved through passing out information pamphlets at health conferences, publishing the
\nstudy is a scholarly or peer-reviewed publication. Health care industry magazines and health care
\norganization websites are also good places to publish validated research outcomes (Curtis et al.,
\n2016).<\/p>\n
\nbecause these stakeholders have very little time and need the information presented to them in a
\ncondensed format. So, researchers must decide what part of the information to disseminate and
\nby which medium. Dodson, Geary, and Brownson (2015) state that policymakers on the national
\nand state levels use EBP research results to shape health policies and create standards for health
\naccess and equity. Geary, & Brownson, 2015). Polled legislators stated they prefer receiving
\nhealth-based research results that include financial cost of implementation in the format of
\nstatistics, graphs, and charts (Dodson, Geary, & Brownson, 2015). When disseminating
\ninformation to policymaker stakeholders on the state and national levels, researchers should post
\nfindings on government and university websites, in health care advocacy group publications, and
\non health lobbyist websites (Dodson, Geary, & Brownson, 2015).<\/p>\n
\nnursing has evolved the way nurses provide optimal patient care and the way in which they are
\neducated. Over the past decade, EBP has been garnering more attention from nursing
\nprofessionals and has slowly emerged as an excellent standard by which to provide clinical care
\nQuantitative research is objective and conclusive and aids in the implementation of evidence-
\nbased treatment interventions (Choy, 2014). The quantitative research approach provides the
\nformat and methodology to distinguish and quantify multiple reasons why patient\u2019s fall in
\nclinical settings, as well as apply the same methods to determining which NP designed fall- and
\ninjury-prevention programs are effective and which programs are ineffective. Furthermore,
\nquantitative research will allow me to compare my findings with data from clinical settings that
\ndo not have NP designed fall- and injury-prevention programs and determine if NPs even inform
\npatients about fall prevention strategies. Since quantitative research is comprised of methods that<\/p>\n
\nI will then be able to understand how prevalent the results are to small and large populations. The
\npreferred sample population of nurses is nurse practitioners; however, experiences of registered
\nnurses (RNs) and licensed practical nurses (LPNs) will be considered. Nursing patients must be
\nadult males and females, ranging in age from 21 years old and above (around or above 90 years
\nold). Study participants must be in a long-term care or acute care facility for more than 48 hours.
\nThese facilities include but are not limited to nursing homes, acute care hospitals, and LTC
\nrehabilitation facilities.<\/p>\n
\nbeing conducted, being informed of the risks or side effects that will or may occur, asking
\nquestions during any phase of the research, requesting that personal information be kept private,
\nand dropping out of the research project at any time. Participants should be well informed about
\npatient rights regarding confidentiality and anonymity, protection from harm, and informed
\nconsent. The biggest barriers to implementing fall prevention programs in LTC setting are lack
\nof information and motivation. NP leaders play a significant role in overcoming these barriers.
\nTo motivate nurses to stay diligent about helping patients avoid falls, NP leaders can institute a
\nmerit-based program that rewards the nurse with the least patient falls per month. Once nurses
\nfeel comfortable they will be supported by management if they implement EBP falls prevention
\nstrategies, the clinical setting will change to a more patient centered environment. Supporting
\nEBP practices is an organizational effort. NP leaders can improve access to falls prevention
\nresources by having these resources available onsite for nurses to interact with.<\/p>\n
\nstrategies to implement a fall-prevention guideline into acute care nursing practice: A
\nbefore-and-after, mixed-method study using a participatory action research approach.
\nBMC Nursing, 14(18). Retrieved from
\nhttps:\/\/bmcnurs.biomedcentral.com\/articles\/10.1186\/s12912-015-0064-z
\nChen, H., Hailey, D., Wang, N., & Yu, P. (2014). A review of data quality assessment methods
\nfor public health information systems. International Journal of Environmental Research
\nand Public Health, 11(5), 5170\u20135207. Retrieved from
\nhttp:\/\/doi.org\/10.3390\/ijerph110505170
\nChoy,\u00a0L.\u00a0T. (2014). The strengths and weaknesses of research methodology: Comparison and
\ncomplimentary between qualitative and quantitative approaches. IOSR Journal Of
\nHumanities And Social Science (IOSR -JHSS), 19(4), 99-104. Retrieved from
\nhttps:\/\/s3.amazonaws.com\/academia.edu.documents\/37208325\/N0194399104.pdf?AWS
\nAccessKeyId=AKIAIWOWYYGZ2Y53UL3A&Expires=1527688542&Signature=1kS
\nmo8tbMB1e8VxJp5c6szw0NAo%3D&response-content-
\ndisposition=inline%3B%20filename%3DThe_Strengths_and_Weaknesses_of_Research.
\npdf<\/p>\n
\nclinical nursing practice. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 26(5-6), 862-872. Retrieved from
\nhttps:\/\/doi.org\/10.1111\/jocn.13586
\nDodson, E. A., Geary, N. A., & Brownson, R. C. (2015). State legislators\u2019 sources and use of
\ninformation: bridging the gap between research and policy. Health Education Research,
\n30(6), 840\u2013848. http:\/\/doi.org\/10.1093\/her\/cyv044<\/p>\n
\ncontribution. The Journal for Nurse Practitioners, 13(8), e395\u2013e397. Retrieved from DOI:
\nhttps:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.nurpra.2017.06.017
\nHayat, M. J., Powell, A., Johnson, T., & Cadwell, B. L. (2017). Statistical methods used in the
\npublic health literature and implications for training of public health professionals. PLoS
\nONE, 12(6), e0179032. Retrieved from http:\/\/doi.org\/10.1371\/journal.pone.0179032
\nLi, F., Harmer, P., Stock, R., Fitzgerald, K., Stevens, J., Gladieux, M., \u2026 Voit, J. (2013).<\/p>\n
\nSetting. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 61(12), 2142\u20132149. Retrieved from
\nhttp:\/\/doi.org\/10.1111\/jgs.12509
\nPonto, J. (2015). Understanding and evaluating survey research.\u00a0Journal of the Advanced
\nPractitioner in Oncology,\u00a06(2), 168\u2013171.Retrieved from
\nhttps:\/\/www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov\/pmc\/articles\/PMC4601897\/
\nSutton, J., & Austin, Z. (2015). Qualitative Research: Data Collection, Analysis, and
\nManagement. The Canadian Journal of Hospital Pharmacy, 68(3), 226\u2013231. Retrieved
\nfrom https:\/\/www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov\/pmc\/articles\/PMC4485510\/<\/p>\n
\nhttps:\/\/www.statpac.com\/survey-design-guidelines.htm<\/p>\n