NRS 433 PICOT Question and Literature Search

Want create site? With you can do it easy.

NRS 433 PICOT Question and Literature Search

NRS 433 PICOT Question and Literature Search

For this project, you will develop a question, which is a type of clinical guiding question. The PICOT question must be related to a problem in nursing practice. Identify six peer-reviewed research articles to support your PICOT question, as shown below. The PICOT question you choose, as well as six peer-reviewed research articles, will be used in later tasks.

The first step of the evidence-based practice process is to evaluate a nursing practice environment to identify a nursing problem in the clinical area. When a nursing problem is discovered, the nurse researcher develops a clinical guiding question to address that nursing practice problem.

Use the “Literature Evaluation Table” to complete this assignment.

  1. Select a nursing practice problem of interest to use as the focus of your research. Start with the patient population and identify a clinical problem or issue that arises from the patient population. In 200–250 words, provide a summary of the clinical issue.
  2. Following the PICOT format, write a PICOT question in your selected nursing practice problem area of interest. The PICOT question should be applicable to your proposed capstone project (the project students must complete during their final course in the RN-BSN program of study).
  3. The PICOT question will provide a framework for your capstone project.
  4. Conduct a literature search to locate six research articles focused on your selected nursing practice problem of interest. This literature search should include three quantitative and three qualitative peer-reviewed research articles to support your nursing practice problem.

Note: To assist in your search, remove the words qualitative and quantitative and include words that narrow or broaden your main topic. For example: Search for diabetes and pediatric and dialysis. To determine what research design was used in the articles the search produced, review the abstract and the methods section of the article. The author will provide a description of data collection using qualitative or quantitative methods. Systematic Reviews, Literature Reviews, and Metanalysis articles are good resources and provide a strong level of evidence but are not considered primary research articles.  Therefore, they should not be included in this assignment. NRS 433 PICOT Question and Literature Search

While APA style is not required for the body of this assignment, solid academic writing is expected, and documentation of sources should be presented using APA formatting guidelines, which can be found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center.

This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.

You are not required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite. NRS 433 PICOT Question and Literature Search

Attachments

Literature Search and PICOT Question

Issue or Problem of Interest

The hospital, clinics and nursing home facilities are encountering an expanding pace of falls of old patients and this is the issue for this situation Hence, instructing the older patient on technique they can actualize to diminish falls for a term of one year and a half is the proposed mediation that will help lessen falls with healthcare centers. Qualitative and quantitative investigations will be examined in this paper. The qualitative case study led by Al Tehewy, Amin, and Nassar (2015) and the qualitative investigation led by Pohl et al., (2015) will be broken down. As indicated by the investigation directed by Al Tehewy, Amin, and Nassar (2015), it is imperative to consider receiving measures that will help limit instances of falls and this should be possible my diminishing fall danger of patients experiencing diabetes and hypertension. The qualitative study directed by Pohl et al., (2015) centers around distinguishing proof of the measures that can be received so as to limit rates of falls among olderly patients. The study directed by Pohl et al., (2015) found that older patients are acquainted with information regarding to danger of falls. Therefore, the investigation performed by Pfortmueller, Lindner, Exadaktylos (2014) bolster the way that safety of old patent will be improved if avoidance measures are executed.

Falls among the old can be decreased through executing various measures. These measures should be executed in medical clinics or hospitals with the goal that the safety of patients can be improved. Prevention and identification of the hazard is one of the measures that ought to be executed. Other measure incorporates recognizable proof of embracing innovation in the distinguishing proof of the hazard utilizing technological gadgets. For this situation, sensor alarm innovation system will be utilized to reduce falls in the healthcare facilities.

There is critical need to think of modalities that will help upgrade safety of the old through diminishing fall hazard. As such, the qualitative and quantitative research will assume a basic job during advancement of the effective aversion measures. As per Al Tehewy, Amin, and Nassar (2015), distinguishing proof and aversion of danger of fall is one of the measures that can be actualized. Moreover, old patient inside healthcare settings can be taken through preparation and training programs that will help them know techniques that they can embrace so as to limit falls hazard……

 Course Code Class Code Assignment Title Total Points
NRS-433V NRS-433V-O500 PICOT Question and Literature Search 120.0

Criteria Percentage 1: Unsatisfactory (0.00%) 2: Less Than Satisfactory (75.00%) 3: Satisfactory (83.00%) 4: Good (94.00%) 5: Excellent (100.00%)
Content 80.0%
Summary of Clinical Issue 5.0% A clinical issue is omitted or is not relevant to nursing practice. A clinical issue is partially presented. It is unclear how the clinical issue relates to nursing practice. Significant aspects are missing, or there are inaccuracies. A clinical issue is summarized. The issue generally relates to nursing practice. A clinical issue is presented. The issue relates to nursing practice. Minor detail is needed for clarity. A clinical issue is thoroughly described. The issue relates to nursing practice.

PICOT Question 10.0% A PICOT question is not included. A PICOT question is provided but is incomplete. The PICOT question format is used incorrectly. A PICOT question is provided. The PICOT question format is generally applied. Some information or revision is needed. A PICOT question is provided. The PICOT question format is applied accurately. Some detail is need for support or clarity. A PICOT question is clearly presented. The PICOT question format is applied accurately and presents an answerable and researchable question.

APA-Formatted Article Citations With Permalinks 5.0% Article citations and permalinks are omitted. Article citations and permalinks are presented. There are significant errors in the APA format. One or more links do not lead to the intended article. Article citations and permalinks are presented. Article citations are presented in APA format, but there are errors. Article citations and permalinks are presented. Article citations are presented in APA format. There are minor errors. Article citations and permalinks are presented. Article citations are accurately presented in APA format.NRS 433 PICOT Question and Literature Search

Relationship of Articles to the PICOT Question 10.0% Three or more articles do not relate to the PICOT question. At least two articles do not relate to the PICOT question. The remaining articles provide a small degree of support for the PICOT question. Different articles are needed to provide better support for the PICOT question. At least one articles does not relate to the PICOT question. The remaining articles provide general support for the PICOT question. One or two different articles are needed to provide better support for the PICOT question. Each article relates to the PICOT question. The articles provide support for the PICOT question. Each article clearly relates to the PICOT question. The articles provide strong support for the PICOT question.

Quantitative and Qualitative Articles 10.0% Fewer than six research articles are presented. Four or more articles do not meet the assignment criteria for a quantitative, qualitative, Six research articles are presented. Three articles do not meet the assignment criteria for a quantitative, qualitative Six research articles are presented. Two articles do not meet the assignment criteria for a quantitative, qualitative, or mixed study. Some ability to identify the type of research design used in a study is demonstrated. Six research articles are presented. One article does not meet the assignment criteria for a quantitative, qualitative, or mixed study. A general ability to identify the type of research design used in a study is demonstrated. Six research articles are presented. Each article meets the assignment criteria for a quantitative, qualitative, or mixed study. An ability to identify the different types of research design used in a study is consistently demonstrated. NRS 433 PICOT Question and Literature Search

Purpose Statements 5.0% Purpose statements are omitted or are incomplete overall. Purpose statements are referenced but are incomplete in some areas. Purpose statements are presented. There are minor omissions in some areas, or major inaccuracies. Purpose statements summarized. There are some minor inaccuracies in some. Purpose statements are accurate and clearly summarized.

Research Questions 5.0% Research questions are omitted or are incomplete overall. Research question is presented for each article. The research question has been misidentified or misinterpreted for at least two of the articles. Additional information is needed to fully illustrate the research question for several of the articles. Research questions are presented. The research question has been misidentified or misinterpreted for one of the articles. Some detail is needed to fully illustrate the research question for one or two articles. Research questions are presented. Minor detail is needed for clarity in some areas. Research questions are accurate and capture the fundamental question posed by the researchers in each study.

Outcome 5.0% Research outcomes are omitted or are incomplete overall. Research outcome is presented for each article. The research outcome has been misidentified or misinterpreted for at least two of the articles. Additional information is needed to fully illustrate the research outcomes for several of the articles. Research outcomes are presented. The research outcome has been misidentified or misinterpreted for one of the articles. Some detail is needed to fully illustrate the research outcomes for one or two articles. Research outcomes are presented. Minor detail is needed for clarity in some areas. Research outcomes are accurate and described in detail for each article.

Setting 5.0% The setting is omitted for one or more of the articles. The setting described for three or more articles is inaccurate or incomplete. The setting is indicated for each article. The setting described for two of the articles is inaccurate or incomplete. The setting is indicated for each article. The setting described for one article is inaccurate or incomplete. The setting is indicated for each article. Some detail is needed to fully illustrate the physical, social, or cultural site in which the researcher conducted the study. The setting in which the researcher conducted the study is detailed and accurate for each article.

Sample 5.0% The sample is omitted for one or more of the articles. The sample described for three or more articles is inaccurate or incomplete. The sample is indicated for each article. The sample described for at least two of the articles is inaccurate or incomplete. The sample is indicated for each article. The sample described for one article is inaccurate or incomplete. The sample is indicated for each article. Minor detail is needed for accuracy. The sample is indicated and accurate for each article.

Method 5.0% Method of study for one or more articles is omitted. Overall, the methods of study are incomplete. The method of study is partially presented for each article. Key information is consistently omitted. Overall, the methods reported contain inaccuracies. The method of study for each article is presented. Some key aspects are missing for one or two articles, or there are some inaccuracies for the methods reported. A discussion on the method of study for each article is presented. A thorough discussion on the method of study for each article is presented.

Key Findings of the Study 5.0% Discussion of study results, including findings and implications for nursing practice, is incomplete. A summary of the study results includes findings and implications for nursing practice but lacks relevant details and explanation. There are some omissions or inaccuracies. Discussion of study results, including findings and implications for nursing practice, is generally presented for each article. Overall, the discussion includes some relevant details and explanation. Discussion of study results, including findings and implications for nursing practice, is complete and includes relevant details and explanation. Discussion of study results, including findings and implications for nursing practice, is thorough with relevant details and extensive explanation.

Recommendations of the Researcher 5.0% Researcher recommendations are omitted for one or more of the articles. The recommendations described for three or more articles are inaccurate or incomplete. Researcher recommendations are indicated for each article. The researcher recommendations described for two of the articles are inaccurate or incomplete. Researcher recommendations for each article are presented. Researcher recommendations described for one article are inaccurate or incomplete. Researcher recommendations for each article are accurately presented. Minor detail is needed for accuracy. Researcher recommendations accurate are thoroughly described for each article.

Organization and Effectiveness 10.0%
Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use) 10.0% Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is used. Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register), sentence structure, or word choice are present. Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are used. Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. A variety of sentence structures and effective figures of speech are used. Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.

Format 10.0%
Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style) 10.0% Sources are not documented. Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors. Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present. Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct. Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error.

Resources

Literature Evaluation Table

Use the “Literature Evaluation Table” resource to complete the PICOT Question and Literature Search assignment.


Plagiarism

Read “Plagiarism,” located on the GCU Library website, for information on how to avoid plagiarism.


To Make Your Case, Start with a PICOT Question

Read “To Make Your Case, Start with a PICOT Question,” by Echevarria and Walker, from Nursing 2014 (2014).


Exploring the Evidence. Focusing on the Fundamentals: A Simplistic Differentiation Between Qualitative and Quantitative Research

Read “Exploring the Evidence. Focusing on the Fundamentals: A Simplistic Differentiation Between Qualitative and Quantitative Researc

… 


Adopting Evidence-Based Practice in Clinical Decision Making: Nurses’ Perceptions, Knowledge, and Barriers

Read “Adopting Evidence-Based Practice in Clinical Decision Making: Nurses’ Perceptions, Knowledge, and Barriers,” by Majid et al

… 


Nursing Research: Understanding Methods for Best Practice

Read Chapter 1 in Nursing Research: Understanding Methods for Best Practice.


Writing in APA

View the “Writing in APA” tutorial,” located in the Writing Center in the Student Success Center.


APA Basics

Reference the “APA Basics” information, located on the GCU Library website, to assist with the APA format and documentation of so

… 


EBP: Evidence Based Practice

Read “EBP: Evidence Based Practice,” located in the Student Success Center.


Formulating a Researchable Question: A Criticle Step for Facilitating Good Clinical Research

Read “Formulating a Researchable Question: A Criticle Step for Facilitating Good Clinical Research,” by Aslam and Emmanuel, from

… 


Searching Nursing Databases

Read the strategies and tips located on “Searching Nursing Databases” on the GCU Library website to assist you in searching the m

… 


GCU Library Research Guides: Citing Sources

Reference the “GCU Library Research Guides: Citing Sources” resource for information on how to cite sources properly.


Chapter 7: The Evidence for Evidence-Based Practice Implementation

Read “Chapter 7: The Evidence for Evidence-Based Practice Implementation,” by Titler, from the online eBook, Patient Saf

… 


Library Walk Through Tutorial

View the “Library Walk Through Tutorial.”

PICOT Question and Literature Search – Rubric

Summary of Clinical Issue

Criteria Description

Summary of Clinical Issue

5. 5: Excellent

6 points

A clinical issue is thoroughly described. The issue relates to nursing practice.

4. 4: Good

5.64 points

A clinical issue is presented. The issue relates to nursing practice. Minor detail is needed for clarity.

3. 3: Satisfactory

4.98 points

A clinical issue is summarized. The issue generally relates to nursing practice.

2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

4.5 points

A clinical issue is partially presented. It is unclear how the clinical issue relates to nursing practice. Significant aspects are missing, or there are inaccuracies.

1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

A clinical issue is omitted or is not relevant to nursing practice.

PICOT Question

Criteria Description

PICOT Question

5. 5: Excellent

12 points

A PICOT question is clearly presented. The PICOT question format is applied accurately and presents an answerable and researchable question.

4. 4: Good

11.28 points

A PICOT question is provided. The PICOT question format is applied accurately. Some detail is need for support or clarity.

3. 3: Satisfactory

9.96 points

A PICOT question is provided. The PICOT question format is generally applied. Some information or revision is needed.

2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

9 points

A PICOT question is provided but is incomplete. The PICOT question format is used incorrectly.

1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

A PICOT question is not included.

APA-Formatted Article Citations With Permalinks

Criteria Description

APA-Formatted Article Citations With Permalinks

5. 5: Excellent

6 points

Article citations and permalinks are presented. Article citations are accurately presented in APA format.

4. 4: Good

5.64 points

Article citations and permalinks are presented. Article citations are presented in APA format. There are minor errors.

3. 3: Satisfactory

4.98 points

Article citations and permalinks are presented. Article citations are presented in APA format, but there are errors.

2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

4.5 points

Article citations and permalinks are presented. There are significant errors in the APA format. One or more links do not lead to the intended article.

1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

Article citations and permalinks are omitted.

Relationship of Articles to the PICOT Question

Criteria Description

Relationship of Articles to the PICOT Question

5. 5: Excellent

12 points

Each article clearly relates to the PICOT question. The articles provide strong support for the PICOT question.

4. 4: Good

11.28 points

Each article relates to the PICOT question. The articles provide support for the PICOT question.

3. 3: Satisfactory

9.96 points

At least one articles does not relate to the PICOT question. The remaining articles provide general support for the PICOT question. One or two different articles are needed to provide better support for the PICOT question.

2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

9 points

At least two articles do not relate to the PICOT question. The remaining articles provide a small degree of support for the PICOT question. Different articles are needed to provide better support for the PICOT question.

1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

Three or more articles do not relate to the PICOT question.

Quantitative and Qualitative Articles

Criteria Description

Quantitative and Qualitative Articles

5. 5: Excellent

12 points

Six research articles are presented. Each article meets the assignment criteria for a quantitative, qualitative, or mixed study. An ability to identify the different types of research design used in a study is consistently demonstrated.

4. 4: Good

11.28 points

Six research articles are presented. One article does not meet the assignment criteria for a quantitative, qualitative, or mixed study. A general ability to identify the type of research design used in a study is demonstrated.

3. 3: Satisfactory

9.96 points

Six research articles are presented. Two articles do not meet the assignment criteria for a quantitative, qualitative, or mixed study. Some ability to identify the type of research design used in a study is demonstrated.

2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

9 points

Six research articles are presented. Three articles do not meet the assignment criteria for a quantitative, qualitative

1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

Fewer than six research articles are presented. Four or more articles do not meet the assignment criteria for a quantitative, qualitative,

Purpose Statements

Criteria Description

Purpose Statements

5. 5: Excellent

6 points

Purpose statements are accurate and clearly summarized.

4. 4: Good

5.64 points

Purpose statements summarized. There are some minor inaccuracies in some.

3. 3: Satisfactory

4.98 points

Purpose statements are presented. There are minor omissions in some areas, or major inaccuracies.

2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

4.5 points

Purpose statements are referenced but are incomplete in some areas.

1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

Purpose statements are omitted or are incomplete overall.

Research Questions

Criteria Description

Research Questions

5. 5: Excellent

6 points

Research questions are accurate and capture the fundamental question posed by the researchers in each study.

4. 4: Good

5.64 points

Research questions are presented. Minor detail is needed for clarity in some areas.

3. 3: Satisfactory

4.98 points

Research questions are presented. The research question has been misidentified or misinterpreted for one of the articles. Some detail is needed to fully illustrate the research question for one or two articles.

2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

4.5 points

Research question is presented for each article. The research question has been misidentified or misinterpreted for at least two of the articles. Additional information is needed to fully illustrate the research question for several of the articles.

1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

Research questions are omitted or are incomplete overall.

Outcome

Criteria Description

Outcome

5. 5: Excellent

6 points

Research outcomes are accurate and described in detail for each article.

4. 4: Good

5.64 points

Research outcomes are presented. Minor detail is needed for clarity in some areas.

3. 3: Satisfactory

4.98 points

Research outcomes are presented. The research outcome has been misidentified or misinterpreted for one of the articles. Some detail is needed to fully illustrate the research outcomes for one or two articles.

2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

4.5 points

Research outcome is presented for each article. The research outcome has been misidentified or misinterpreted for at least two of the articles. Additional information is needed to fully illustrate the research outcomes for several of the articles.

1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

Research outcomes are omitted or are incomplete overall.

Setting

Criteria Description

Setting

5. 5: Excellent

6 points

The setting in which the researcher conducted the study is detailed and accurate for each article.

4. 4: Good

5.64 points

The setting is indicated for each article. Some detail is needed to fully illustrate the physical, social, or cultural site in which the researcher conducted the study.

3. 3: Satisfactory

4.98 points

The setting is indicated for each article. The setting described for one article is inaccurate or incomplete.

2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

4.5 points

The setting is indicated for each article. The setting described for two of the articles is inaccurate or incomplete.

1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

The setting is omitted for one or more of the articles. The setting described for three or more articles is inaccurate or incomplete.

Sample

Criteria Description

Sample

5. 5: Excellent

6 points

The sample is indicated and accurate for each article.

4. 4: Good

5.64 points

The sample is indicated for each article. Minor detail is needed for accuracy.

3. 3: Satisfactory

4.98 points

The sample is indicated for each article. The sample described for one article is inaccurate or incomplete.

2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

4.5 points

The sample is indicated for each article. The sample described for at least two of the articles is inaccurate or incomplete.

1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

The sample is omitted for one or more of the articles. The sample described for three or more articles is inaccurate or incomplete.

Method

Criteria Description

Method

5. 5: Excellent

6 points

A thorough discussion on the method of study for each article is presented.

4. 4: Good

5.64 points

A discussion on the method of study for each article is presented.

3. 3: Satisfactory

4.98 points

The method of study for each article is presented. Some key aspects are missing for one or two articles, or there are some inaccuracies for the methods reported.

2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

4.5 points

The method of study is partially presented for each article. Key information is consistently omitted. Overall, the methods reported contain inaccuracies.

1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

Method of study for one or more articles is omitted. Overall, the methods of study are incomplete.

Key Findings of the Study

Criteria Description

Key Findings of the Study

5. 5: Excellent

6 points

Discussion of study results, including findings and implications for nursing practice, is thorough with relevant details and extensive explanation.

4. 4: Good

5.64 points

Discussion of study results, including findings and implications for nursing practice, is complete and includes relevant details and explanation.

3. 3: Satisfactory

4.98 points

Discussion of study results, including findings and implications for nursing practice, is generally presented for each article. Overall, the discussion includes some relevant details and explanation.

2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

4.5 points

A summary of the study results includes findings and implications for nursing practice but lacks relevant details and explanation. There are some omissions or inaccuracies.

1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

Discussion of study results, including findings and implications for nursing practice, is incomplete.

Recommendations of the Researcher

Criteria Description

Recommendations of the Researcher

5. 5: Excellent

6 points

Researcher recommendations accurate are thoroughly described for each article.

4. 4: Good

5.64 points

Researcher recommendations for each article are accurately presented. Minor detail is needed for accuracy.

3. 3: Satisfactory

4.98 points

Researcher recommendations for each article are presented. Researcher recommendations described for one article are inaccurate or incomplete.

2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

4.5 points

Researcher recommendations are indicated for each article. The researcher recommendations described for two of the articles are inaccurate or incomplete.

1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

Researcher recommendations are omitted for one or more of the articles. The recommendations described for three or more articles are inaccurate or incomplete.

Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)

Criteria Description

Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)

5. 5: Excellent

12 points

Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.

4. 4: Good

11.28 points

Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. A variety of sentence structures and effective figures of speech are used.

3. 3: Satisfactory

9.96 points

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

2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

9 points

Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register), sentence structure, or word choice are present.

1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

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

Documentation of Sources

Criteria Description

Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style)

5. 5: Excellent

12 points

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

4. 4: Good

11.28 points

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

3. 3: Satisfactory

9.96 points

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

2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

9 points

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

1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

Sources are not documented.

Total 120 points

Rubric Criteria

Total 120 points

Criterion

1. 1: Unsatisfactory

2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

3. 3: Satisfactory

4. 4: Good

5. 5: Excellent

PICOT Question

PICOT Question

0 points

A PICOT question is not included.

9 points

A PICOT question is provided but is incomplete. The PICOT question format is used incorrectly.

9.96 points

A PICOT question is provided. The PICOT question format is generally applied. Some information or revision is needed.

11.28 points

A PICOT question is provided. The PICOT question format is applied accurately. Some detail is need for support or clarity.

12 points

A PICOT question is clearly presented. The PICOT question format is applied accurately and presents an answerable and researchable question.

Relationship of Articles to the PICOT Question

Relationship of Articles to the PICOT Question

0 points

Three or more articles do not relate to the PICOT question.

9 points

At least two articles do not relate to the PICOT question. The remaining articles provide a small degree of support for the PICOT question. Different articles are needed to provide better support for the PICOT question.

9.96 points

At least one articles does not relate to the PICOT question. The remaining articles provide general support for the PICOT question. One or two different articles are needed to provide better support for the PICOT question.

11.28 points

Each article relates to the PICOT question. The articles provide support for the PICOT question.

12 points

Each article clearly relates to the PICOT question. The articles provide strong support for the PICOT question.

Setting

Setting

0 points

The setting is omitted for one or more of the articles. The setting described for three or more articles is inaccurate or incomplete.

4.5 points

The setting is indicated for each article. The setting described for two of the articles is inaccurate or incomplete.

4.98 points

The setting is indicated for each article. The setting described for one article is inaccurate or incomplete.

5.64 points

The setting is indicated for each article. Some detail is needed to fully illustrate the physical, social, or cultural site in which the researcher conducted the study.

6 points

The setting in which the researcher conducted the study is detailed and accurate for each article.

Recommendations of the Researcher

Recommendations of the Researcher

0 points

Researcher recommendations are omitted for one or more of the articles. The recommendations described for three or more articles are inaccurate or incomplete.

4.5 points

Researcher recommendations are indicated for each article. The researcher recommendations described for two of the articles are inaccurate or incomplete.

4.98 points

Researcher recommendations for each article are presented. Researcher recommendations described for one article are inaccurate or incomplete.

5.64 points

Researcher recommendations for each article are accurately presented. Minor detail is needed for accuracy.

6 points

Researcher recommendations accurate are thoroughly described for each article.

Purpose Statements

Purpose Statements

0 points

Purpose statements are omitted or are incomplete overall.

4.5 points

Purpose statements are referenced but are incomplete in some areas.

4.98 points

Purpose statements are presented. There are minor omissions in some areas, or major inaccuracies.

5.64 points

Purpose statements summarized. There are some minor inaccuracies in some.

6 points

Purpose statements are accurate and clearly summarized.

Method

Method

0 points

Method of study for one or more articles is omitted. Overall, the methods of study are incomplete.

4.5 points

The method of study is partially presented for each article. Key information is consistently omitted. Overall, the methods reported contain inaccuracies.

4.98 points

The method of study for each article is presented. Some key aspects are missing for one or two articles, or there are some inaccuracies for the methods reported.

5.64 points

A discussion on the method of study for each article is presented.

6 points

A thorough discussion on the method of study for each article is presented.

Sample

Sample

0 points

The sample is omitted for one or more of the articles. The sample described for three or more articles is inaccurate or incomplete.

4.5 points

The sample is indicated for each article. The sample described for at least two of the articles is inaccurate or incomplete.

4.98 points

The sample is indicated for each article. The sample described for one article is inaccurate or incomplete.

5.64 points

The sample is indicated for each article. Minor detail is needed for accuracy.

6 points

The sample is indicated and accurate for each article.

Quantitative and Qualitative Articles

Quantitative and Qualitative Articles

0 points

Fewer than six research articles are presented. Four or more articles do not meet the assignment criteria for a quantitative, qualitative,

9 points

Six research articles are presented. Three articles do not meet the assignment criteria for a quantitative, qualitative

9.96 points

Six research articles are presented. Two articles do not meet the assignment criteria for a quantitative, qualitative, or mixed study. Some ability to identify the type of research design used in a study is demonstrated.

11.28 points

Six research articles are presented. One article does not meet the assignment criteria for a quantitative, qualitative, or mixed study. A general ability to identify the type of research design used in a study is demonstrated.

12 points

Six research articles are presented. Each article meets the assignment criteria for a quantitative, qualitative, or mixed study. An ability to identify the different types of research design used in a study is consistently demonstrated.

Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)

Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)

0 points

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

9 points

Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register), sentence structure, or word choice are present.

9.96 points

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

11.28 points

Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. A variety of sentence structures and effective figures of speech are used.

12 points

Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.

APA-Formatted Article Citations With Permalinks

APA-Formatted Article Citations With Permalinks

0 points

Article citations and permalinks are omitted.

4.5 points

Article citations and permalinks are presented. There are significant errors in the APA format. One or more links do not lead to the intended article.

4.98 points

Article citations and permalinks are presented. Article citations are presented in APA format, but there are errors.

5.64 points

Article citations and permalinks are presented. Article citations are presented in APA format. There are minor errors.

6 points

Article citations and permalinks are presented. Article citations are accurately presented in APA format.

Summary of Clinical Issue

Summary of Clinical Issue

0 points

A clinical issue is omitted or is not relevant to nursing practice.

4.5 points

A clinical issue is partially presented. It is unclear how the clinical issue relates to nursing practice. Significant aspects are missing, or there are inaccuracies.

4.98 points

A clinical issue is summarized. The issue generally relates to nursing practice.

5.64 points

A clinical issue is presented. The issue relates to nursing practice. Minor detail is needed for clarity.

6 points

A clinical issue is thoroughly described. The issue relates to nursing practice.

Key Findings of the Study

Key Findings of the Study

0 points

Discussion of study results, including findings and implications for nursing practice, is incomplete.

4.5 points

A summary of the study results includes findings and implications for nursing practice but lacks relevant details and explanation. There are some omissions or inaccuracies.

4.98 points

Discussion of study results, including findings and implications for nursing practice, is generally presented for each article. Overall, the discussion includes some relevant details and explanation.

5.64 points

Discussion of study results, including findings and implications for nursing practice, is complete and includes relevant details and explanation.

6 points

Discussion of study results, including findings and implications for nursing practice, is thorough with relevant details and extensive explanation.

Research Questions

Research Questions

0 points

Research questions are omitted or are incomplete overall.

4.5 points

Research question is presented for each article. The research question has been misidentified or misinterpreted for at least two of the articles. Additional information is needed to fully illustrate the research question for several of the articles.

4.98 points

Research questions are presented. The research question has been misidentified or misinterpreted for one of the articles. Some detail is needed to fully illustrate the research question for one or two articles.

5.64 points

Research questions are presented. Minor detail is needed for clarity in some areas.

6 points

Research questions are accurate and capture the fundamental question posed by the researchers in each study.

Documentation of Sources

Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style)

0 points

Sources are not documented.

9 points

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

9.96 points

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

11.28 points

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

12 points

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

Outcome

Outcome

0 points

Research outcomes are omitted or are incomplete overall.

4.5 points

Research outcome is presented for each article. The research outcome has been misidentified or misinterpreted for at least two of the articles. Additional information is needed to fully illustrate the research outcomes for several of the articles.

4.98 points

Research outcomes are presented. The research outcome has been misidentified or misinterpreted for one of the articles. Some detail is needed to fully illustrate the research outcomes for one or two articles.

5.64 points

Research outcomes are presented. Minor detail is needed for clarity in some areas.

6 points

Research outcomes are accurate and described in detail for each article.

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

Calculate the price
Make an order in advance and get the best price
Pages (550 words)
$0.00
*Price with a welcome 15% discount applied.
Pro tip: If you want to save more money and pay the lowest price, you need to set a more extended deadline.
We know how difficult it is to be a student these days. That's why our prices are one of the most affordable on the market, and there are no hidden fees.

Instead, we offer bonuses, discounts, and free services to make your experience outstanding.
How it works
Receive a 100% original paper that will pass Turnitin from a top essay writing service
step 1
Upload your instructions
Fill out the order form and provide paper details. You can even attach screenshots or add additional instructions later. If something is not clear or missing, the writer will contact you for clarification.
Pro service tips
How to get the most out of your experience with Assignments ABC
One writer throughout the entire course
If you like the writer, you can hire them again. Just copy & paste their ID on the order form ("Preferred Writer's ID" field). This way, your vocabulary will be uniform, and the writer will be aware of your needs.
The same paper from different writers
You can order essay or any other work from two different writers to choose the best one or give another version to a friend. This can be done through the add-on "Same paper from another writer."
Copy of sources used by the writer
Our college essay writers work with ScienceDirect and other databases. They can send you articles or materials used in PDF or through screenshots. Just tick the "Copy of sources" field on the order form.
Testimonials
See why 10k+ students have chosen us as their sole writing assistance provider
Check out the latest reviews and opinions submitted by real customers worldwide and make an informed decision.
English 101
Thank you guys for always being there and helping me always get a 100% on my assignments!
Customer 452483, August 16th, 2021
Sociology
Thank you so much! Appreciate it!
Customer 452483, November 8th, 2021
Mathematics
Thank you so much!
Customer 452483, July 26th, 2021
Healthcare Writing & Communications
Perfect! Thank you for also remembering to highlight the necessary words. Appreciate all of your help and hard work!
Customer 452483, November 7th, 2021
Microbiology
Perfect! Thank you guys for all of your great help! :)
Customer 452483, August 23rd, 2021
Sociology
Perfect! Appreciate all of your help! Thank you so much!
Customer 452483, November 14th, 2021
Healthcare Writing & Communications
Perfect! Thank you so much for all of your help!
Customer 452483, October 31st, 2021
Classic English Literature
Great paper, thank you!
Customer 452591, May 5th, 2022
Nursing
Good job! Thank you.
Customer 452487, October 26th, 2021
Nursing
Excellent. Thank you.
Customer 452487, August 26th, 2021
Nursing
Good job! Thank you
Customer 452487, October 17th, 2021
Biology (and other Life Sciences)
Power Point Presentation was great, appreciate all of your hard work. Thank you!
Customer 452483, August 9th, 2021
1159
Customer reviews in total
96%
Current satisfaction rate
2 pages
Average paper length
47%
Customers referred by a friend
OUR GIFT TO YOU
15% OFF your first order
Use a coupon ABC15 and enjoy expert help with any task at the most affordable price.
Claim my 15% OFF Order in Chat