Sample Answer for NURS 6052 Assignment EBP Part 3 Critical Appraisal of Research Included After Question<\/strong><\/em><\/h2>\nRealtors rely on detailed property appraisals\u2014conducted using appraisal tools\u2014to assign market values to houses and other properties. These values are then presented to buyers and sellers to set prices and initiate offers.<\/p>\n
Research appraisal is not that different. The critical appraisal process utilizes formal appraisal tools to assess the results of research to determine value to the context at hand. Evidence-based practitioners often present these findings to make the case for specific courses of action.<\/p>\n
In this Assignment, you will use an appraisal tool to conduct a critical appraisal of published research. You will then present the results of your efforts.<\/p>\n
To Prepare:<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n- Reflect on the four peer-reviewed articles you selected in Module 2 and the four systematic reviews (or other filtered high- level evidence) you selected in Module 3.<\/li>\n
- Reflect on the four peer-reviewed articles you selected in Module 2 and analyzed in Module 3.<\/li>\n
- Review and download the Critical Appraisal Tool Worksheet Template provided in the Resources.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
The Assignment<\/strong>\u00a0(Evidence-Based Project)<\/p>\nPart 3A: Critical Appraisal of Research<\/strong><\/h2>\nConduct a critical appraisal of the four peer-reviewed articles you selected by completing the Evaluation Table within the Critical Appraisal Tool Worksheet Template. Choose a total of four peer- reviewed articles that you selected related to your clinical topic of interest in Module 2 and Module 3.<\/p>\n
Note<\/strong>: You can choose any combination of articles from Modules 2 and 3 for your Critical Appraisal. For example, you may choose two unfiltered research articles from Module 2 and two filtered research articles (systematic reviews) from Module 3 or one article from Module 2 and three articles from Module 3. You can choose any combination of articles from the prior Module Assignments as long as both modules and types of studies are represented.<\/p>\nPart 3B: Critical Appraisal of Research<\/strong><\/h2>\nBased on your appraisal, in a 1-2-page critical appraisal, suggest a best practice that emerges from the research you reviewed. Briefly explain the best practice, justifying your proposal with APA citations of the research.<\/p>\n
By Day 7 of Week 7<\/strong><\/h2>\nSubmit<\/strong>\u00a0Part 3A and 3B of your Evidence-Based Project.<\/p>\nSubmission and Grading Information<\/strong><\/p>\nTo submit your completed Assignment for review and grading, do the following:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n- Please save your Assignment using the naming convention \u201cWK7Assgn+last name+first initial.(extension)\u201d as the name.<\/li>\n
- Click the\u00a0Week 7 Assignment Rubric\u00a0<\/strong>to review the Grading Criteria for the Assignment.<\/li>\n
- Click the\u00a0Week 7 Assignment\u00a0<\/strong>link. You will also be able to \u201cView Rubric\u201d for grading criteria from this area.<\/li>\n
- Next, from the Attach File area, click on the\u00a0Browse My Computer<\/strong>\u00a0button. Find the document you saved as \u201cWK7Assgn+last name+first initial.(extension)\u201d and click\u00a0Open<\/strong>.<\/li>\n
- If applicable: From the Plagiarism Tools area, click the checkbox for\u00a0I agree to submit my paper(s) to the Global Reference Database<\/strong>.<\/li>\n
- Click on the\u00a0Submit<\/strong>\u00a0button to complete your submission.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
A Sample Answer For the Assignment: NURS 6052 Assignment EBP Part 3 Critical Appraisal of Research<\/strong><\/h2>\nTitle: <\/strong> NURS 6052 Assignment EBP Part 3 Critical Appraisal of Research<\/strong><\/h2>\n\u00a0There is an overwhelming volume of clinical research articles<\/a> that have been published over time. These papers have both similarities and differences in terms of their content, objectives, timelines, authors, methodologies, findings among other aspects. This brings difficulties for those browsing medical literature for the most relevant and helpful papers for their varied reasons. Critical Appraisal is one of the ways through which this problem can be navigated. With Critical Appraisal, research papers can be examined critically and systematically to determine their integrity, relevance, and value (Morrison, 2017). This is achieved by examining factors such as internal validity, how the study was conducted, methodology among other aspects. This paper will give an example of a critical appraisal of two qualitative research studies for a better understanding of the process.\u00a0<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\nExample 1<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/h2>\nThe first article is <\/span>The perceptions and perspectives of patients and health care providers on chronic disease management in rural South Africa: a qualitative study<\/span><\/i> authored by Eric Maimela, Jean-Pierre Van Geertruyden, Marianne Alberts, Sewela Modjadji, Herman Meulemans, Jesicca Fraeyman, and Hilde Bastiaens in 2015. The paper was conducted in Limpopo province in South Africa to find out and describe the perceptions and perspectives of patients and health care providers on chronic disease management. The authors report that the burden of chronic diseases is increasing worldwide. This problem is commonly addressed by chronic disease management interventions that have been developed over time. The problem is further compounded by other factors such as patients’ and physicians’ perceptions, which influence the implementation and the success of the interventions. However, the exact perception of patients and health care providers on these interventions which can either motivate or hinder their participation, successful implementation, and outcomes has not been fully established in South Africa. To address this issue, the authors developed two questions to answer;<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n\n- First, how do individuals with distinct chronic diseases experience their encounters with professional health care providers (HCP) and what are their expectations and suggestions?\u00a0<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n
\n- And secondly, how do HCP perceive the current CDM and what are their expectations and suggestions for the future CDM?<\/span> \u00a0<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n
These questions and the purpose of the paper show greater relevance to the problem. This is because they will unravel how perceptions have contributed to the growing prevalence of chronic diseases in the world and how such knowledge can be used to address the situation.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n![\"NURS](\"https:\/\/nursingassignmentcrackers.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/10\/NURS-6052-Assignment-EBP-Part-3-Critical-Appraisal-of-Research-300x129.png\")
NURS 6052 Assignment EBP Part 3 Critical Appraisal of Research<\/figcaption><\/figure>\nThe study employed focus group discussion with both patient and health care providers and the data called was audio recorded. This offered an adequate method of discussing the perceptions of both patients and nurses concerning the topic exhaustively. The authors have enriched the paper with both qualitative and quantitative research papers to develop and justify their assertions. Few of the references date back to the early 2000 and late 1990s while most of them are between 2007 and 2014. They develop a strong case through the use of available literature stating limited information as the only weakness they found. They develop no framework from their findings.<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\nExecution of the research followed the due ethical considerations by seeking approval of the University of Limpopo Medunsa Research Committee and the Department of Health in Limpopo Province before the start. The results show that what clinicians practice is different from what is documented in research interventions. Additionally, it reports that what clinicians recommend to patients is different from what patients do at home. This is because both nurses and patients hold different perspectives and perceptions on the interventions and also, different interventions apply only to different communities, cultures, and patients. Such dynamics interfere with the success and effectiveness of the interventions. With this knowledge, health care providers can employ the most appropriate intervention and make necessary adjustments to the available ones to maximize the expected outcomes. As such, the research study relevantly answered the research questions and achieved its objectives.\u00a0<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\nExample 2<\/span><\/b>\u00a0<\/span><\/h2>\nThe second article is Patient perceptions of patient-centered care: empirical test of a theoretical model authored by Cheryl Rathert, Eric S. Williams, Deirdre McCaughey, and Ghadir Ishqaidef in 2015. The study aimed to determine the perceptions of patients concerning patient-centered care from the care they receive. The authors identify patient-centered care as an important contributor to positive clinical outcomes and patient satisfaction. Most hospitals do not offer patient-centered care but disease\u2010 or physician\u2010centered kinds of care. Patient-centered care should be offered in the manner and time required by the patients. Some nurses who think they do this confused it with process-centered care. The study, therefore, aims to establish the fact by applying the theoretical model of the Picker Institute and the IOM to collect patient perceptions data on various dimensions of patient-centered care. They tend to establish how such perceptions influence patients’ ratings of care. The authors enroot their argument on the available literature and the fact that the Picker Institute theoretical model has not been tested as a unified model to justify their approach. To achieve their objective, the authors developed two research questions;<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n\n- Are the theoretical dimensions of patient\u2010centered care predictive of overall quality of care ratings?<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n
\n- Is each of the theoretical dimensions equally predictive of overall quality of care ratings?<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n
These questions and objectives are relevant to the study questions because the will directly determine how patients’ perceptions on patient-centered care influence their understanding of care quality. It will also tell whether care ratings based on such perceptions are valid or not.\u00a0<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\nThe study used questionnaires containing seven dimensions of care developed from the Picker Institute theoretical model. Participants were emailed the questionnaires to give their perceptions accordingly on a scale of 1 to 4 at most. In the end, the participants were asked to give their overall ratings and satisfaction on the care they received on a scale of 1 to 5. As such the method will adequately answer the coiled research questions. There is no specific perspective that develops the paper though the authors cite many researcher papers to support their assertions. Most of the references were published between 2012 and 2000 with only two extending into the 1990s. even though the literature reinforces the applicability of the Picker Institute theoretical model and the importance of patient-centered care, the authored reports a gap in testing the model as a unified model. No framework is developed.\u00a0<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\nThe paper does not detail any ethical considerations adopted before or after the study or during data collection. The result shows that the theoretical model adopted for patient-centered care can give information that can be used to predict overall quality ratings of care. Among the seven dimensions, emotional support was found to be the top and strongest influencer of quality ratings followed by coordination of care and physical comfort. The study contributes to the possibility and necessity of incorporating patient-centered care into practice. The management can identify what is lacking from the data and provide incentives for their incorporation into practice to enhance evidence-based management for improvement of positive outcomes. The results can also direct further research by highlighting relevant areas of emphasis and interest. Therefore, the paper has achieved its objective and answered its research questions.\u00a0<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\nReferences<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/h2>\nMaimela, E., Van Geertruyden, J. P., Alberts, M., Modjadji, S. E., Meulemans, H., Fraeyman, J., & Bastiaens, H. (2015). The perceptions and perspectives of patients and health care providers on chronic diseases management in rural South Africa: a qualitative study. <\/span>BMC health services research<\/span><\/i>, <\/span>15<\/span><\/i>(1), 143.<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\nMorrison, K. (2017). Dissecting the literature: the importance of critical appraisal. <\/span>Royal college of surgeons<\/span><\/i>.<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\nRathert, C., Williams, E. S., McCaughey, D., & Ishqaidef, G. (2015). Patient perceptions of patient\u2010centred care: empirical test of a theoretical model. <\/span>Health Expectations<\/span><\/i>, <\/span>18<\/span><\/i>(2), 199-209.<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\nClick here to ORDER an A++ paper from our MASTERS and DOCTORATE WRITERS: NURS 6052 Assignment EBP Part 3 Critical Appraisal of Research<\/strong><\/a><\/span><\/em><\/h3>\nA Sample Answer 2 For the Assignment: NURS 6052 Assignment EBP Part 3 Critical Appraisal of Research<\/strong><\/h2>\nTitle: <\/strong> NURS 6052 Assignment EBP Part 3 Critical Appraisal of Research<\/strong><\/h2>\nThe critical appraisal of research has revealed that cognitive training effectively improves cognitive function in persons having mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and dementia. Cognitive training can also improve cognitive performance in older patients since they have a high risk of cognitive decline. MCI often precedes dementia. It is characterized by mainly normal functions in spite of objective evidence of cognitive decline. MCI is a major risk factor for dementia, falls, and high healthcare costs. The risk increases relatively with impaired cognitive domains and severity of symptoms. Cognitive training is the best practice that emerges from the research analysis.\u00a05\u00a0Butler et al.\u00a0<\/a>(2018) revealed that cognitive training improved cognitive performance in healthy elderly persons. Therefore, it the training be incorporated in the preventative care of older adults to lower the risk of declined cognitive function, which is common in advanced age.<\/p>\nCognitive training can be implemented using technology computerized cognitive training (CCT).\u00a010\u00a0Hill et al.\u00a0<\/a>(2017) demonstrated CCT as an effective and safe approach for promoting cognitive function in the elderly. Besides, CCT value has been established in improving cognition and psychosocial functioning, including alleviating depression and neuropsychiatric symptoms and improving the quality of life of individuals MCI. Furthermore, Weng et al.\u2019s (2019) study shows that cognitive training significantly impacts the domains of executive function, memory, and performance of ADLs. The impact on these domains can be sustained for at least three months. It can convey to other untrained areas, including executive function. Executive function also enhances the ability to carry out ADLs. The study justifies cognitive training as a practical approach to enhance working memory in elderly persons having MCI.\u00a04\u00a0Giovagnoli et al.\u00a0<\/a>(2017) further show that cognitive training is useful in increasing initiative and stabilizing memory in persons with mild-moderate AD.<\/p>\nConclusion<\/h2>\n
The above peer-reviewed articles include two systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials and Randomized control trials.\u00a04\u00a0The studies sought to evaluate the impact of cognitive training in improving cognitive function in AD patients.\u00a0<\/a>They support my PICOT by establishing that indeed cognitive training is a feasible intervention that can improve cognitive function in AD patients. Therefore, the interventions can be incorporated in patients\u2019\u2019 treatment plans.<\/p>\nReferences<\/h2>\n
5\u00a0Butler, M., McCreedy, E., Nelson, V.\u00a0<\/a>A., Desai, P., Ratner, E., Fink, H.\u00a0<\/a>A.,. & Kane, R. L. (2018).\u00a08\u00a0Does cognitive training prevent cognitive decline?\u00a0<\/a>9\u00a0A systematic review.\u00a0<\/a>5\u00a0Annals of internal medicine, 168(1), 63-68.\u00a0<\/a>https:\/\/doi.org\/10.7326\/M17-1531<\/a><\/p>\nGiovagnoli, A.\u00a04\u00a0R., Manfredi, V., Parente, A., Schifano, L., Oliveri, S., & Avanzini, G.\u00a0<\/a>(2017).\u00a04\u00a0Cognitive training in Alzheimer\u2019s disease:\u00a0<\/a>11\u00a0a controlled randomized study.\u00a0<\/a>4\u00a0Neurological Sciences, 38(8), 1485-1493.\u00a0<\/a>https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s10072-017-3003-9<\/a><\/p>\nHill, N.\u00a05\u00a0T., Mowszowski, L., Naismith, S.\u00a0<\/a>L., Chadwick, V.\u00a0<\/a>L., Valenzuela, M., & Lampit, A.\u00a0<\/a>(2017).\u00a010\u00a0Computerized cognitive training in older adults with mild cognitive impairment or dementia:\u00a0<\/a>a systematic review and meta-analysis.\u00a0<\/a>5\u00a0American Journal of Psychiatry, 174(4), 329-340.\u00a0<\/a>https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1176\/appi.ajp.2016.16030360<\/a><\/p>\n4\u00a0Weng, W., Liang, J., Xue, J., Zhu, T., Jiang, Y., Wang, J., & Chen, S.\u00a0<\/a>(2019).\u00a04\u00a0The transfer effects of cognitive training on working memory among Chinese older adults with mild cognitive impairment:\u00a0<\/a>9\u00a0a randomized controlled trial.\u00a0<\/a>4\u00a0Frontiers in aging neuroscience, 11, 212.\u00a0<\/a>https:\/\/doi.org\/10.3389\/fnagi.2019.00212<\/a><\/p>\n6\u00a0Critical Appraisal Tool Worksheet Template<\/a><\/p>\nA Sample Answer 3 For the Assignment: NURS 6052 Assignment EBP Part 3 Critical Appraisal of Research<\/strong><\/h2>\nTitle: <\/strong> NURS 6052 Assignment EBP Part 3 Critical Appraisal of Research<\/strong><\/h2>\nIntroduction<\/strong><\/h3>\nA critical appraisal assists in reducing the research burden by enabling a researcher to identify and focus more on relevant articles to their research question. The research can either provide support or disapprove the claims made by the researcher through the utilization of quality, and evidence-based practice interventions. The selected topic for the research study is use of resilience training to redice the problem of nurse burnout among nurses in different care settings. Nurse burnout remains a critical problem that impacts the quality of care and patient outcomes in different care setting. Resilience training allows nurses to develop and use evidence-based interventions to reduce burnout and enhance their overall performance and improve the quality of care.<\/p>\n
Evidence-based practice (EBP) incorporates best practices from studies and patient care information with clinician experience and patient preferences leading to the delivery of highest quality of care, and improving patient outcomes. The use of EBP requires care providers to formulate a clinical question of interest. In this case, the PICOT question is: Among nurses with burnout (P), does resilience training (I) compared to no intervention (C) reduce burnout(O) in six months (T)? The purpose of this assignment is to appraises critically peer-reviewed article for evidence to support resilience training among nurses with burnout to reduce its prevalence.<\/p>\n
\n\n\nFull APA<\/strong> formatted<\/strong><\/td>\nArticle #1<\/strong><\/td>\nArticle #2<\/strong><\/td>\nArticle #3<\/strong><\/td>\nArticle #4<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n\ncitation <\/strong>of selected article<\/td>\nWang, Q. Q., Lv, W. J., Qian, R. L., & Zhang, Y. H. (2019). Job burnout and quality of working life among Chinese nurses: A cross\u2010sectional study.\u00a0Journal of Nursing Management<\/em>,\u00a027<\/em>(8), 1835-1844. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1111\/jonm.12884<\/a><\/td>\nYu, F., Raphael, D., Mackay, L., Smith, M., & King, A. (2019). Personal and work-related factors associated with nurse resilience: A systematic review.\u00a0International Journal of Nursing Studies,<\/em>\u00a093, 129-140. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.ijnurstu.2019.02.014<\/a><\/td>\nBrook, J., Aitken, L. M., MacLaren, J. A., & Salmon, D. (2021). An intervention to decrease burnout and increase retention of early career nurses: A mixed methods study of acceptability and feasibility. BMC Nursing,<\/em> 20(1), 1-12. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1186\/s12912-020-00524-9<\/a><\/td>\nDeldar, K., Froutan, R., Dalvand, S., Gheshlagh, R. G., & Mazloum, S. R. (2018). The Relationship between Resiliency and Burnout in Iranian Nurses: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.\u00a0Open access Macedonian Journal of Medical Sciences,\u00a0<\/em>6(11), 2250\u20132256. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.3889\/oamjms.2018.428<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n\n<\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n \u00a0<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n\n<\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n<\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n<\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n<\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n<\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n<\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n <\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n\u00a0<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n\u00a0<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\nEvidence Level *<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n(I, II, or III)<\/em><\/td>\nII<\/td>\n I<\/td>\n III<\/td>\n I<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \nConceptual Framework<\/strong><\/p>\n\u00a0<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\nDescribe the theoretical basis for the study (If there is not one mentioned in the article, say that here<\/strong>).**<\/td>\nNot provided<\/td>\n Not mentioned<\/td>\n Behavioral change involving use of interventions like cognitive realignment, mindfulness and psychological skills training<\/td>\n Behavior change through increased resiliency training and interventions to improve coping mechanisms.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \nDesign\/Method<\/strong><\/p>\n\u00a0<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\nDescribe the design and how the study was carried out (In detail, including inclusion\/exclusion <\/strong>criteria).<\/td>\nCross-sectional survey where 2504 nurses participated in Eastern China. The researchers invited nurses to complete self-report questionnaire online.<\/td>\n Systematic Review with the aims of identifying the linked personal and work-related factors of nurse resilience.<\/td>\n The article\u2019s design was explanatory sequential mixed methods. The participants were final year pre-registration nursing students in a UK university and healthcare organizations.<\/td>\n The article used a meta-analysis to conduct the study aimed at determining the effects of resiliency on various components of nurses\u2019 professional burnout.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n <\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\nSample\/Setting<\/strong><\/p>\n\u00a0<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\nThe number and characteristics of patients, attrition rate, etc.<\/td>\n
The study was conducted virtually with 2504 nurses completing self-report online questionnaires<\/td>\n The study used data from literature review in five databases based on terms like resilience, occupation, job, nursing and work.<\/td>\n The sample included 74 pre-registration nursing students and 7 academics in a UK university and healthcare organizations.<\/td>\n The researchers used data based on targeted literature review in national and international databases in Persian and English.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \nMajor<\/strong> Variables<\/strong> Studied<\/strong><\/p>\nList and define dependent and independent variables<\/td>\n
Dependent-Quality of life<\/p>\nIndependent- Job burnout<\/td>\n
Dependent Variable-Various components in nursing care<\/p>\nIndependent Variable-Job burnout<\/td>\n
Dependent Variable-Multiple Interventions<\/p>\nIndependent-Retention of nurses<\/td>\n
Dependent-Resiliency & burnout<\/p>\nIndependent-Conducting nursing education<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\nMeasurement<\/strong><\/p>\n\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\nIdentify primary statistics used to answer clinical questions (You need to list the actual tests done).<\/td>\n
The researchers measured the quality of working life based on different aspects like age, income and patient-nurse ratio.<\/td>\n \u00a0The study used a total of 38 articles that met the criteria through a systematic review and narrative synthesis. The authors also used different scales leading to being unfeasible to synthesize the evidence.<\/td>\n Pre and Post measure of acceptability using an Acceptability Theoretical Framework<\/td>\n Researchers used heterogeneity to measure the results by I2 test.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \nData Analysis Statistical or Qualitative findings<\/strong><\/p>\n\u00a0<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n(You need to enter the actual numbers determined by the statistical tests or qualitative data).<\/td>\n
The study used Pearson\u2019s correlation and multiple regression to analyze collected data.<\/td>\n \u00a0The study used a quality assessment tool to analyze articles that met the criteria where 23 were rated as good, 15 as fair and 20 as risky due to significant levels of bias.<\/td>\n The researchers used the COREQ guidelines to analyze collected data in a thematic manner.<\/td>\n The researchers used STATA software v.14 to analyze the data.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n <\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n\n
- \n
- Reflect on the four peer-reviewed articles you selected in Module 2 and the four systematic reviews (or other filtered high- level evidence) you selected in Module 3.<\/li>\n
- Reflect on the four peer-reviewed articles you selected in Module 2 and analyzed in Module 3.<\/li>\n
- Review and download the Critical Appraisal Tool Worksheet Template provided in the Resources.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
The Assignment<\/strong>\u00a0(Evidence-Based Project)<\/p>\n
Part 3A: Critical Appraisal of Research<\/strong><\/h2>\n
Conduct a critical appraisal of the four peer-reviewed articles you selected by completing the Evaluation Table within the Critical Appraisal Tool Worksheet Template. Choose a total of four peer- reviewed articles that you selected related to your clinical topic of interest in Module 2 and Module 3.<\/p>\n
Note<\/strong>: You can choose any combination of articles from Modules 2 and 3 for your Critical Appraisal. For example, you may choose two unfiltered research articles from Module 2 and two filtered research articles (systematic reviews) from Module 3 or one article from Module 2 and three articles from Module 3. You can choose any combination of articles from the prior Module Assignments as long as both modules and types of studies are represented.<\/p>\n
Part 3B: Critical Appraisal of Research<\/strong><\/h2>\n
Based on your appraisal, in a 1-2-page critical appraisal, suggest a best practice that emerges from the research you reviewed. Briefly explain the best practice, justifying your proposal with APA citations of the research.<\/p>\n
By Day 7 of Week 7<\/strong><\/h2>\n
Submit<\/strong>\u00a0Part 3A and 3B of your Evidence-Based Project.<\/p>\n
Submission and Grading Information<\/strong><\/p>\n
To submit your completed Assignment for review and grading, do the following:<\/strong><\/p>\n
- \n
- Please save your Assignment using the naming convention \u201cWK7Assgn+last name+first initial.(extension)\u201d as the name.<\/li>\n
- Click the\u00a0Week 7 Assignment Rubric\u00a0<\/strong>to review the Grading Criteria for the Assignment.<\/li>\n
- Click the\u00a0Week 7 Assignment\u00a0<\/strong>link. You will also be able to \u201cView Rubric\u201d for grading criteria from this area.<\/li>\n
- Next, from the Attach File area, click on the\u00a0Browse My Computer<\/strong>\u00a0button. Find the document you saved as \u201cWK7Assgn+last name+first initial.(extension)\u201d and click\u00a0Open<\/strong>.<\/li>\n
- If applicable: From the Plagiarism Tools area, click the checkbox for\u00a0I agree to submit my paper(s) to the Global Reference Database<\/strong>.<\/li>\n
- Click on the\u00a0Submit<\/strong>\u00a0button to complete your submission.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
A Sample Answer For the Assignment: NURS 6052 Assignment EBP Part 3 Critical Appraisal of Research<\/strong><\/h2>\n
Title: <\/strong> NURS 6052 Assignment EBP Part 3 Critical Appraisal of Research<\/strong><\/h2>\n
\u00a0There is an overwhelming volume of clinical research articles<\/a> that have been published over time. These papers have both similarities and differences in terms of their content, objectives, timelines, authors, methodologies, findings among other aspects. This brings difficulties for those browsing medical literature for the most relevant and helpful papers for their varied reasons. Critical Appraisal is one of the ways through which this problem can be navigated. With Critical Appraisal, research papers can be examined critically and systematically to determine their integrity, relevance, and value (Morrison, 2017). This is achieved by examining factors such as internal validity, how the study was conducted, methodology among other aspects. This paper will give an example of a critical appraisal of two qualitative research studies for a better understanding of the process.\u00a0<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n
Example 1<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/h2>\n
The first article is <\/span>The perceptions and perspectives of patients and health care providers on chronic disease management in rural South Africa: a qualitative study<\/span><\/i> authored by Eric Maimela, Jean-Pierre Van Geertruyden, Marianne Alberts, Sewela Modjadji, Herman Meulemans, Jesicca Fraeyman, and Hilde Bastiaens in 2015. The paper was conducted in Limpopo province in South Africa to find out and describe the perceptions and perspectives of patients and health care providers on chronic disease management. The authors report that the burden of chronic diseases is increasing worldwide. This problem is commonly addressed by chronic disease management interventions that have been developed over time. The problem is further compounded by other factors such as patients’ and physicians’ perceptions, which influence the implementation and the success of the interventions. However, the exact perception of patients and health care providers on these interventions which can either motivate or hinder their participation, successful implementation, and outcomes has not been fully established in South Africa. To address this issue, the authors developed two questions to answer;<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n
- \n
- First, how do individuals with distinct chronic diseases experience their encounters with professional health care providers (HCP) and what are their expectations and suggestions?\u00a0<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n
- \n
- And secondly, how do HCP perceive the current CDM and what are their expectations and suggestions for the future CDM?<\/span> \u00a0<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n
These questions and the purpose of the paper show greater relevance to the problem. This is because they will unravel how perceptions have contributed to the growing prevalence of chronic diseases in the world and how such knowledge can be used to address the situation.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n
NURS 6052 Assignment EBP Part 3 Critical Appraisal of Research<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n The study employed focus group discussion with both patient and health care providers and the data called was audio recorded. This offered an adequate method of discussing the perceptions of both patients and nurses concerning the topic exhaustively. The authors have enriched the paper with both qualitative and quantitative research papers to develop and justify their assertions. Few of the references date back to the early 2000 and late 1990s while most of them are between 2007 and 2014. They develop a strong case through the use of available literature stating limited information as the only weakness they found. They develop no framework from their findings.<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n
Execution of the research followed the due ethical considerations by seeking approval of the University of Limpopo Medunsa Research Committee and the Department of Health in Limpopo Province before the start. The results show that what clinicians practice is different from what is documented in research interventions. Additionally, it reports that what clinicians recommend to patients is different from what patients do at home. This is because both nurses and patients hold different perspectives and perceptions on the interventions and also, different interventions apply only to different communities, cultures, and patients. Such dynamics interfere with the success and effectiveness of the interventions. With this knowledge, health care providers can employ the most appropriate intervention and make necessary adjustments to the available ones to maximize the expected outcomes. As such, the research study relevantly answered the research questions and achieved its objectives.\u00a0<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n
Example 2<\/span><\/b>\u00a0<\/span><\/h2>\n
The second article is Patient perceptions of patient-centered care: empirical test of a theoretical model authored by Cheryl Rathert, Eric S. Williams, Deirdre McCaughey, and Ghadir Ishqaidef in 2015. The study aimed to determine the perceptions of patients concerning patient-centered care from the care they receive. The authors identify patient-centered care as an important contributor to positive clinical outcomes and patient satisfaction. Most hospitals do not offer patient-centered care but disease\u2010 or physician\u2010centered kinds of care. Patient-centered care should be offered in the manner and time required by the patients. Some nurses who think they do this confused it with process-centered care. The study, therefore, aims to establish the fact by applying the theoretical model of the Picker Institute and the IOM to collect patient perceptions data on various dimensions of patient-centered care. They tend to establish how such perceptions influence patients’ ratings of care. The authors enroot their argument on the available literature and the fact that the Picker Institute theoretical model has not been tested as a unified model to justify their approach. To achieve their objective, the authors developed two research questions;<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n
- \n
- Are the theoretical dimensions of patient\u2010centered care predictive of overall quality of care ratings?<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n
- \n
- Is each of the theoretical dimensions equally predictive of overall quality of care ratings?<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n
These questions and objectives are relevant to the study questions because the will directly determine how patients’ perceptions on patient-centered care influence their understanding of care quality. It will also tell whether care ratings based on such perceptions are valid or not.\u00a0<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n
The study used questionnaires containing seven dimensions of care developed from the Picker Institute theoretical model. Participants were emailed the questionnaires to give their perceptions accordingly on a scale of 1 to 4 at most. In the end, the participants were asked to give their overall ratings and satisfaction on the care they received on a scale of 1 to 5. As such the method will adequately answer the coiled research questions. There is no specific perspective that develops the paper though the authors cite many researcher papers to support their assertions. Most of the references were published between 2012 and 2000 with only two extending into the 1990s. even though the literature reinforces the applicability of the Picker Institute theoretical model and the importance of patient-centered care, the authored reports a gap in testing the model as a unified model. No framework is developed.\u00a0<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n
The paper does not detail any ethical considerations adopted before or after the study or during data collection. The result shows that the theoretical model adopted for patient-centered care can give information that can be used to predict overall quality ratings of care. Among the seven dimensions, emotional support was found to be the top and strongest influencer of quality ratings followed by coordination of care and physical comfort. The study contributes to the possibility and necessity of incorporating patient-centered care into practice. The management can identify what is lacking from the data and provide incentives for their incorporation into practice to enhance evidence-based management for improvement of positive outcomes. The results can also direct further research by highlighting relevant areas of emphasis and interest. Therefore, the paper has achieved its objective and answered its research questions.\u00a0<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n
References<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/h2>\n
Maimela, E., Van Geertruyden, J. P., Alberts, M., Modjadji, S. E., Meulemans, H., Fraeyman, J., & Bastiaens, H. (2015). The perceptions and perspectives of patients and health care providers on chronic diseases management in rural South Africa: a qualitative study. <\/span>BMC health services research<\/span><\/i>, <\/span>15<\/span><\/i>(1), 143.<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n
Morrison, K. (2017). Dissecting the literature: the importance of critical appraisal. <\/span>Royal college of surgeons<\/span><\/i>.<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n
Rathert, C., Williams, E. S., McCaughey, D., & Ishqaidef, G. (2015). Patient perceptions of patient\u2010centred care: empirical test of a theoretical model. <\/span>Health Expectations<\/span><\/i>, <\/span>18<\/span><\/i>(2), 199-209.<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n
Click here to ORDER an A++ paper from our MASTERS and DOCTORATE WRITERS: NURS 6052 Assignment EBP Part 3 Critical Appraisal of Research<\/strong><\/a><\/span><\/em><\/h3>\n
A Sample Answer 2 For the Assignment: NURS 6052 Assignment EBP Part 3 Critical Appraisal of Research<\/strong><\/h2>\n
Title: <\/strong> NURS 6052 Assignment EBP Part 3 Critical Appraisal of Research<\/strong><\/h2>\n
The critical appraisal of research has revealed that cognitive training effectively improves cognitive function in persons having mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and dementia. Cognitive training can also improve cognitive performance in older patients since they have a high risk of cognitive decline. MCI often precedes dementia. It is characterized by mainly normal functions in spite of objective evidence of cognitive decline. MCI is a major risk factor for dementia, falls, and high healthcare costs. The risk increases relatively with impaired cognitive domains and severity of symptoms. Cognitive training is the best practice that emerges from the research analysis.\u00a05\u00a0Butler et al.\u00a0<\/a>(2018) revealed that cognitive training improved cognitive performance in healthy elderly persons. Therefore, it the training be incorporated in the preventative care of older adults to lower the risk of declined cognitive function, which is common in advanced age.<\/p>\n
Cognitive training can be implemented using technology computerized cognitive training (CCT).\u00a010\u00a0Hill et al.\u00a0<\/a>(2017) demonstrated CCT as an effective and safe approach for promoting cognitive function in the elderly. Besides, CCT value has been established in improving cognition and psychosocial functioning, including alleviating depression and neuropsychiatric symptoms and improving the quality of life of individuals MCI. Furthermore, Weng et al.\u2019s (2019) study shows that cognitive training significantly impacts the domains of executive function, memory, and performance of ADLs. The impact on these domains can be sustained for at least three months. It can convey to other untrained areas, including executive function. Executive function also enhances the ability to carry out ADLs. The study justifies cognitive training as a practical approach to enhance working memory in elderly persons having MCI.\u00a04\u00a0Giovagnoli et al.\u00a0<\/a>(2017) further show that cognitive training is useful in increasing initiative and stabilizing memory in persons with mild-moderate AD.<\/p>\n
Conclusion<\/h2>\n
The above peer-reviewed articles include two systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials and Randomized control trials.\u00a04\u00a0The studies sought to evaluate the impact of cognitive training in improving cognitive function in AD patients.\u00a0<\/a>They support my PICOT by establishing that indeed cognitive training is a feasible intervention that can improve cognitive function in AD patients. Therefore, the interventions can be incorporated in patients\u2019\u2019 treatment plans.<\/p>\n
References<\/h2>\n
5\u00a0Butler, M., McCreedy, E., Nelson, V.\u00a0<\/a>A., Desai, P., Ratner, E., Fink, H.\u00a0<\/a>A.,. & Kane, R. L. (2018).\u00a08\u00a0Does cognitive training prevent cognitive decline?\u00a0<\/a>9\u00a0A systematic review.\u00a0<\/a>5\u00a0Annals of internal medicine, 168(1), 63-68.\u00a0<\/a>https:\/\/doi.org\/10.7326\/M17-1531<\/a><\/p>\n
Giovagnoli, A.\u00a04\u00a0R., Manfredi, V., Parente, A., Schifano, L., Oliveri, S., & Avanzini, G.\u00a0<\/a>(2017).\u00a04\u00a0Cognitive training in Alzheimer\u2019s disease:\u00a0<\/a>11\u00a0a controlled randomized study.\u00a0<\/a>4\u00a0Neurological Sciences, 38(8), 1485-1493.\u00a0<\/a>https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s10072-017-3003-9<\/a><\/p>\n
Hill, N.\u00a05\u00a0T., Mowszowski, L., Naismith, S.\u00a0<\/a>L., Chadwick, V.\u00a0<\/a>L., Valenzuela, M., & Lampit, A.\u00a0<\/a>(2017).\u00a010\u00a0Computerized cognitive training in older adults with mild cognitive impairment or dementia:\u00a0<\/a>a systematic review and meta-analysis.\u00a0<\/a>5\u00a0American Journal of Psychiatry, 174(4), 329-340.\u00a0<\/a>https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1176\/appi.ajp.2016.16030360<\/a><\/p>\n
4\u00a0Weng, W., Liang, J., Xue, J., Zhu, T., Jiang, Y., Wang, J., & Chen, S.\u00a0<\/a>(2019).\u00a04\u00a0The transfer effects of cognitive training on working memory among Chinese older adults with mild cognitive impairment:\u00a0<\/a>9\u00a0a randomized controlled trial.\u00a0<\/a>4\u00a0Frontiers in aging neuroscience, 11, 212.\u00a0<\/a>https:\/\/doi.org\/10.3389\/fnagi.2019.00212<\/a><\/p>\n
6\u00a0Critical Appraisal Tool Worksheet Template<\/a><\/p>\n
A Sample Answer 3 For the Assignment: NURS 6052 Assignment EBP Part 3 Critical Appraisal of Research<\/strong><\/h2>\n
Title: <\/strong> NURS 6052 Assignment EBP Part 3 Critical Appraisal of Research<\/strong><\/h2>\n
Introduction<\/strong><\/h3>\n
A critical appraisal assists in reducing the research burden by enabling a researcher to identify and focus more on relevant articles to their research question. The research can either provide support or disapprove the claims made by the researcher through the utilization of quality, and evidence-based practice interventions. The selected topic for the research study is use of resilience training to redice the problem of nurse burnout among nurses in different care settings. Nurse burnout remains a critical problem that impacts the quality of care and patient outcomes in different care setting. Resilience training allows nurses to develop and use evidence-based interventions to reduce burnout and enhance their overall performance and improve the quality of care.<\/p>\n
Evidence-based practice (EBP) incorporates best practices from studies and patient care information with clinician experience and patient preferences leading to the delivery of highest quality of care, and improving patient outcomes. The use of EBP requires care providers to formulate a clinical question of interest. In this case, the PICOT question is: Among nurses with burnout (P), does resilience training (I) compared to no intervention (C) reduce burnout(O) in six months (T)? The purpose of this assignment is to appraises critically peer-reviewed article for evidence to support resilience training among nurses with burnout to reduce its prevalence.<\/p>\n
\n\n
\n Full APA<\/strong> formatted<\/strong><\/td>\n Article #1<\/strong><\/td>\n Article #2<\/strong><\/td>\n Article #3<\/strong><\/td>\n Article #4<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n citation <\/strong>of selected article<\/td>\n Wang, Q. Q., Lv, W. J., Qian, R. L., & Zhang, Y. H. (2019). Job burnout and quality of working life among Chinese nurses: A cross\u2010sectional study.\u00a0Journal of Nursing Management<\/em>,\u00a027<\/em>(8), 1835-1844. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1111\/jonm.12884<\/a><\/td>\n Yu, F., Raphael, D., Mackay, L., Smith, M., & King, A. (2019). Personal and work-related factors associated with nurse resilience: A systematic review.\u00a0International Journal of Nursing Studies,<\/em>\u00a093, 129-140. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.ijnurstu.2019.02.014<\/a><\/td>\n Brook, J., Aitken, L. M., MacLaren, J. A., & Salmon, D. (2021). An intervention to decrease burnout and increase retention of early career nurses: A mixed methods study of acceptability and feasibility. BMC Nursing,<\/em> 20(1), 1-12. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1186\/s12912-020-00524-9<\/a><\/td>\n Deldar, K., Froutan, R., Dalvand, S., Gheshlagh, R. G., & Mazloum, S. R. (2018). The Relationship between Resiliency and Burnout in Iranian Nurses: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.\u00a0Open access Macedonian Journal of Medical Sciences,\u00a0<\/em>6(11), 2250\u20132256. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.3889\/oamjms.2018.428<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n \u00a0<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n <\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n
\n\n
\n Evidence Level *<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n (I, II, or III)<\/em><\/td>\n
II<\/td>\n I<\/td>\n III<\/td>\n I<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n Conceptual Framework<\/strong><\/p>\n \u00a0<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n
Describe the theoretical basis for the study (If there is not one mentioned in the article, say that here<\/strong>).**<\/td>\n
Not provided<\/td>\n Not mentioned<\/td>\n Behavioral change involving use of interventions like cognitive realignment, mindfulness and psychological skills training<\/td>\n Behavior change through increased resiliency training and interventions to improve coping mechanisms.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n Design\/Method<\/strong><\/p>\n \u00a0<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n
Describe the design and how the study was carried out (In detail, including inclusion\/exclusion <\/strong>criteria).<\/td>\n
Cross-sectional survey where 2504 nurses participated in Eastern China. The researchers invited nurses to complete self-report questionnaire online.<\/td>\n Systematic Review with the aims of identifying the linked personal and work-related factors of nurse resilience.<\/td>\n The article\u2019s design was explanatory sequential mixed methods. The participants were final year pre-registration nursing students in a UK university and healthcare organizations.<\/td>\n The article used a meta-analysis to conduct the study aimed at determining the effects of resiliency on various components of nurses\u2019 professional burnout.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n <\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n
\n\n
\n Sample\/Setting<\/strong><\/p>\n \u00a0<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n
The number and characteristics of patients, attrition rate, etc.<\/td>\n
The study was conducted virtually with 2504 nurses completing self-report online questionnaires<\/td>\n The study used data from literature review in five databases based on terms like resilience, occupation, job, nursing and work.<\/td>\n The sample included 74 pre-registration nursing students and 7 academics in a UK university and healthcare organizations.<\/td>\n The researchers used data based on targeted literature review in national and international databases in Persian and English.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n Major<\/strong> Variables<\/strong> Studied<\/strong><\/p>\n List and define dependent and independent variables<\/td>\n
Dependent-Quality of life<\/p>\n Independent- Job burnout<\/td>\n
Dependent Variable-Various components in nursing care<\/p>\n Independent Variable-Job burnout<\/td>\n
Dependent Variable-Multiple Interventions<\/p>\n Independent-Retention of nurses<\/td>\n
Dependent-Resiliency & burnout<\/p>\n Independent-Conducting nursing education<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\n Measurement<\/strong><\/p>\n \u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n
Identify primary statistics used to answer clinical questions (You need to list the actual tests done).<\/td>\n
The researchers measured the quality of working life based on different aspects like age, income and patient-nurse ratio.<\/td>\n \u00a0The study used a total of 38 articles that met the criteria through a systematic review and narrative synthesis. The authors also used different scales leading to being unfeasible to synthesize the evidence.<\/td>\n Pre and Post measure of acceptability using an Acceptability Theoretical Framework<\/td>\n Researchers used heterogeneity to measure the results by I2 test.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n Data Analysis Statistical or Qualitative findings<\/strong><\/p>\n \u00a0<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n
(You need to enter the actual numbers determined by the statistical tests or qualitative data).<\/td>\n
The study used Pearson\u2019s correlation and multiple regression to analyze collected data.<\/td>\n \u00a0The study used a quality assessment tool to analyze articles that met the criteria where 23 were rated as good, 15 as fair and 20 as risky due to significant levels of bias.<\/td>\n The researchers used the COREQ guidelines to analyze collected data in a thematic manner.<\/td>\n The researchers used STATA software v.14 to analyze the data.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n <\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n
\n
- Is each of the theoretical dimensions equally predictive of overall quality of care ratings?<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n
- Are the theoretical dimensions of patient\u2010centered care predictive of overall quality of care ratings?<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n
- And secondly, how do HCP perceive the current CDM and what are their expectations and suggestions for the future CDM?<\/span> \u00a0<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n
- Click the\u00a0Week 7 Assignment\u00a0<\/strong>link. You will also be able to \u201cView Rubric\u201d for grading criteria from this area.<\/li>\n