NRNP_6540_Week6_Application_Assignment

NRNP_6540_Week6_Application_Assignment

Assignment: Application – PICO Analysis of Dementia, Delirium, and Depression

To prepare:

Select one of the following disorders as your topic: dementia, delirium, or depression.
Review the guidelines in the “Literature Review Matrix” document in this week’s Learning Resources.
Think about a research question around your issue as indicated in Part I: PICO Analysis of Research Topic.

Consider the resources you will use, search terms and criteria, and Boolean search strings as indicated in Part II: Search Strategy.

Using the Walden Library and other appropriate databases, locate five articles related to your PICO question. At least one article must be a systematic review. All of the articles should be primary sources.
Reflect on the five articles you selected as indicated in Part III: Analysis of Literature. Consider the conceptual framework/theory, main finding, research method, strengths of study, weaknesses, and level of evidence for each article.

Consider how to use the summaries in Part III to create an evidence table. Use this evidence table to determine appropriate treatment options for patients who present with the disorder you selected as your topic.

To complete:

Formulate a question around the disorder you selected as indicated in Part I: PICO Analysis of Research Topic.

Identify the resources you will use, search terms and criteria, and Boolean search strings as indicated in Part II: Search Strategy.

Summarize the five articles you selected as indicated in Part III: Analysis of Literature. Describe the conceptual framework/theory, main finding, research method, strengths of study, weaknesses, and level of evidence for each article.

Create an evidence table based on the article summaries in Part III. Describe appropriate treatment options for patients based on this evidence table.

 

Rubric Detail

Select Grid View or List View to change the rubric’s layout.

Name: NRNP_6540_Week6_Application_Assignment Rubric

 

Grid View          List View

Quality of Work Submitted:

The extent of which work meets the

assigned criteria and work reflects graduate level critical and analytic thinking.

Excellent

Good

Fair

Poor

0 (0%) – 20

(20%)

Assignment superficially meets some of the

expectations.

Two or more

required topics are either not addressed or

4 (4%) – 4 (4%) Purpose of the assignment is stated, yet is brief and not descriptive.

inadequately addressed.

 

5 (5%) – 5 (5%) A clear and comprehensive purpose statement is provided which delineates all required criteria.

21 (21%) – 23 (23%) Assignment meets most of the expectations. One required topic is either not addressed or inadequately addressed.

24 (24%) – 26 (26%) Assignment meets expectations. All topics are addressed with a minimum of 50% containing good breadth and depth about each of the assignment topics.

27 (27%) – 30 (30%) Assignment  exceeds expectations. All topics are addressed with a minimum of 75% containing  exceptional breadth and depth about each of the assignment topics.

Quality of Work Submitted:

The purpose of the paper is

clear.

0 (0%) – 3 (3%)

3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%) Purpose of the assignment is vague or o” topic.

No purpose statement was provided.

 

Excellent

Good

Fair

 

					Poor 0 (0%) – 6 (6%) Shows a lack of understanding of key concepts, deviates from topics.   0 (0%) – 13 (13%) Includes and integrates specific information from 0 to 1 resoruce to support major points and point of view.

 

 

 

Excellent

Good

Fair

 

					Poor 0 (0%) – 13 (13%) Rarely or does not interpret, apply, and synthesize concepts, and/or strategies.

 

 

 

Excellent

Good

Fair

 

					Poor 0 (0%) – 3 (3%) Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for structure, flow, continuity and clarity < 60% of the time.   0 (0%) – 3 (3%) Contains many (≥ 5) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the reader’s understanding.

 

 

 

 

 

	Excellent	Good	Fair	Poor
Written Expression and Formatting The paper follows correct APA format for title page, headings, font, spacing, margins, indentations, page numbers, running head, parenthetical/in- text citations, and reference list.	5 (5%) – 5 (5%) Uses correct APA format with no errors.	4 (4%) – 4 (4%) Contains a few (1-2) APA format errors.	3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%) Contains several (3-4) APA format errors.	0 (0%) – 3 (3%) Contains many (≥ 5) APA format errors.

 Paper Template

Part I: PICO Analysis of Research Topic

 

P: Patient or Population

 

I: Anticipated Intervention

 

C: Comparison group or Current standard

 

O: Outcome desired

 

Source: Adapted from Elkins (2010)

 

Step 1: Frame your clinical question using the PICO method.

 

P:

 

I:

 

C:

 

O:

 

Part II: Search Strategy

 

Using the Walden Library and other appropriate databases, locate five scholarly articles that pertain to a practice issue of interest to you and that is appropriate for an evidence-based practice project.

 

Step 1: Identify the resources you will utilize, or utilized, to find articles that pertain to your topic.

 

 

Electronic Databases	Research or Professional Organizations	Experts in the Field to Consult	Books, Encyclopedias, Handbooks

 

Step 2: Identify search terms and criteria.

 

Keywords and Phrases	Major Authors	Inclusion Criteria	Exclusion Criteria

 

Step 3: Identify Boolean search strings.

 

 

 

 

Part III: Analysis of Literature

 

Step 1: Summarize the five articles you select from your search efforts in the table below.

 

Summary Table of Analyzed Articles (you may determine your own headings)

 

Citation	Conceptual Framework/ Theory	Main Finding	Research Method	Strengths of Study	Weaknesses	Level of Evidence

 

 

Step 2: Briefly summarize the history and purpose of your research question.

 

 

 

 

Step 3: Analyze the strengths and weaknesses of the existing literature.

 

Strengths	Weaknesses

 

 

Step 4: What gap exists in the current literature? Explain.

 

Elkins, M. Y. (2010). Using PICO and the brief report to answer clinical questions. Nursing, 40(4), 59–60.
Retrieved from the Walden Library databases.