Applied Nursing Research – Best Writing Service

INSTRUCTIONS
COMPETENCIES 724.8.5 : Foundations of Inquiry The graduate differentiates between quality improvement processes, evidence based practice, and research. 724.8.6 : Literature Review and Analysis The graduate demonstrates knowledge of the process and outcomes of conducting a literature review. 724.8.7 : Ethics and Research The graduate demonstrates understanding of the ethics of nursing research, particularly human subjects’ protections, informed consent, and alignment with patient and family values and preferences. 724.8.8 : Patient Outcomes The graduate discriminates between identified standards and practices that do not provide improvements in patient outcomes utilizing relevant sources of evidence and the application of nursing theory. 724.8.9 : Data Collection, Analysis, and Documentation The graduate describes the process of data collection, analysis and implementation of evidence that can improve clinical practice from an interprofessional perspective.
INTRODUCTION Evidence-based literature comes from many sources. The discipline of nursing has an abundance of research data and resources to guide clinical decisions. Therefore, it is of pivotal importance to understand the basic tenets of critical appraisal of such evidence for its use in interprofessional healthcare practices. In this task, you will identify a healthcare problem, develop an evidence-based practice (EBP) question, and review selected research and non-research evidence to find answers to that question. Note that while you will be analyzing only one research-based and one non-research-based article in this task, an actual evidence-based practice change would require the support of many high-quality research studies.
REQUIREMENTS Your submission must be your original work. No more than a combined total of 30% of the submission and no more than a 10% match to any one individual source can be directly quoted or closely paraphrased from sources, even if cited correctly. The originality report that is provided when you submit your task can be used as a guide. You must use the rubric to direct the creation of your submission because it provides detailed criteria that will be used to evaluate your work. Each requirement below may be evaluated by more than one rubric aspect. The rubric aspect titles may contain hyperlinks to relevant portions of the course. Tasks may not be submitted as cloud links, such as links to Google Docs, Google Slides, OneDrive, etc., unless specified in the task requirements. All other submissions must be file types that are uploaded and submitted as attachments (e.g., .docx, .pdf, .ppt).
A. Discuss the impact of a clinical practice problem on the patient(s) and the organization it affects. 1. Identify the following PICO components of the clinical practice problem: • patient/population/problem (P) • intervention (I) • comparison (C) • outcome (O) 2. Develop an evidence-based practice (EBP) question based on the clinical practice problem discussed in part A and the PICO components identified in part A1. Note: Refer to “Appendix B: Question Development Tool” for information on the creation of an EBP question.
B. Select a research-based article that answers your EBP question from part A2 to conduct an evidence appraisal. 1. Discuss the background or introduction (i.e., the purpose) of the research article. 2. Describe the research methodology. 3. Identify the level of evidence using the Johns Hopkins Nursing Evidence-Based Practice (JHNEBP) model. Note: The article you select should not be more than five years old. Note: Refer to “Appendix E: Research Evidence Appraisal Tool” for information on how to level a research-based article. 4. Summarize how the researcher analyzed the data in the article. 5. Summarize the ethical consideration(s) of the research-based article. If none are present, explain why. 6. Identify the quality rating of the research-based article according to the JHNEBP model. Note: Refer to “Appendix E: Research Evidence Appraisal Tool” for information on how to establish the quality rating. 7. Analyze the results or conclusions of the research-based article and explain how the article helps answer your EBP question.
C. Select a non-research article from a peer-reviewed journal that helps to answer your EBP question from part A2 to conduct an evidence appraisal. 1. Discuss the background or introduction (i.e., the purpose) of the non-research article. 2. Describe the type of evidence (e.g., case study, quality improvement project, clinical practice guideline). 3. Identify the level of evidence using the JHNEBP model. Note: The article you select should not be more than five years old. Note: Refer to “Appendix F: Non-Research Evidence Appraisal Tool” for information on how to level the non-research-based article. 4. Identify the quality rating of the non-research-based article according to the JHNEBP model. 5. Discuss how the author’s recommendation(s) in the article helps to answer your EBP question.
D. Recommend a practice change that addresses your EBP question using both the research and non-research articles you selected for Part B and Part C. 1. Explain how you would involve three key stakeholders in supporting the practice change recommendation. 2. Discuss one specific barrier you may encounter when implementing the practice change recommendation. 3. Identify one strategy that could be used to overcome the barrier discussed in part D2. 4. Identify one outcome (the O component in PICO) from your EBP question to measure the recommended practice change.
E. Acknowledge sources, using APA-formatted in-text citations and references, for content that is quoted, paraphrased, or summarized. F. Demonstrate professional communication in the content and presentation of your submission.
File Restrictions File name may contain only letters, numbers, spaces, and these symbols: ! – _ . * ‘ ( ) File size limit: 200 MB File types allowed: doc, docx, rtf, xls, xlsx, ppt, pptx, odt, pdf, txt, qt, mov, mpg, avi, mp3, wav, mp4, wma, flv, asf, mpeg, wmv, m4v, svg, tif, tiff, jpeg, jpg, gif, png, zip, rar, tar, 7z RUBRIC
RUBRIC

NOT EVIDENT The submission does not identify a clinical practice problem or does not include a discussion of the impact of a clinical practice problem on th patient(s) and the organizatio it affects.
Al:PlCO COMPONENTS

COMPETENCE The submission includes a discussion of the clinical practice problem but does not logically address its impact on the patient(s) and the organization it affects.
COMPETENT The submission includes a discussion of the clinical practice problem that logically addresses its impact on the patient(s) and the organization it affects.
NOT EVIDENT The submission does not include each of the given PIC components of the clinical practice problem.
APPROACHING COMPETENCE The submission includes each of the PICO components of the clinical practice problem, but 1 or more of the given components are inaccurate or incomplete.
COMPETENT The submission includes each of the given PICO components of the clinical practice problem. Each of the given components is accurate and complete.
 

A2:EVlDENCE-BASED QUESTION
NOT EVIDENT The submission does not include an EBP question.
APPROACHING COMPETENCE The submission includes an EBP question, but the EBP question does not appropriatel address the clinical practice problem or does not include all the PICO components.
COMPETENT The submission includes an EBP question that appropriately addresses the clinical practice problem and includes all the PICO components.
 
 
 
B:SELECTION OF A RESEARCH-BASED ARTICLE
NOT EVIDENT An article selection is not provided.
APPROACHING COMPETENCE The selected article is not research based or does not
COMPETENT The selected article is research based and answers the EBP question from part A2.
 
answer the EBP question from part A2.
 
BI:BACKGROUND/INTRODUCTION OF THE RESEARCH-BASED ARTICLE
NOT EVIDENT The submission does not include a discussion of the background or introduction.
APPROACHING COMPETENCE The submission does not accurately address a discussion of the background or introduction of the researchbased article.
COMPETENT The submission accurately addresses a discussion of the background or introduction of the research-based article.
B2:RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
NOT EVIDENT The submission does not include a description of the research methodology.
APPROACHING COMPETENCE The submission includes a description but inaccurately describes the research methodology.
COMPETENT The submission includes a description that accurately describes the research methodology.
B3:LEVEL OF EVIDENCE IN THE RESEARCH-BASED ARTICLE
NOT EVIDENT The submission does not identify a level of evidence for the research-based article.
APPROACHING COMPETENCE The submission identifies a level of evidence that is not accurate according to the JHNEBP model.
COMPETENT The submission accurately identifies a level Of evidence that is based on the JHNEBP model.
B4:ANALYSlS OF THE DATA
NOT EVIDENT The submission does not include a summary of data analysis.
APPROACHING COMPETENCE The submission includes a summary of data analysis, but the summary does not accurately describe how the
COMPETENT The submission includes a summary that accurately describes how the researcher analyzed the data in the article.
researcher analyzed the data in the article.
B5:ETHlCAL CONSIDERATIONS
NOT EVIDENT The submission does not include a summary of ethical considerations. Or, the submission does not include explanation of why no ethical considerations are present if the research-based article contains none.
APPROACHING COMPETENCE The submission includes a summary of ethical considerations, but the summary does not logically describe the ethical consideration(s) of the research-based article. Or, if n ethical considerations are present in the research-based article, the submission does not logically explain why none are present.
 
COMPETENT The submission includes a summary that logically describes the ethical consideration(s) of the research-based article. Or, if no ethical considerations are present, the submission includes a logical explanation of why none are present.

 

 
 

B6:QUALlTY RATING OF THE RESEARCH-BASED ARTICLE
NOT EVIDENT The submission does not identify a quality rating of the research-based article.
APPROACHING COMPETENCE The submission identifies a quality rating that is not accurate according to the JHNEBP model.
COMPETENT The submission accurately identifies a quality rating according to the JHNEBP model.
B7:RESULTS/CONCLUSlONS OF THE RESEARCH-BASED ARTICLE
NOT EVIDENT The submission does not include an analysis of the results or conclusions of the research-based article.
APPROACHING COMPETENCE The submission includes an analysis of the results or conclusions, but the analysis does not logically evaluate the results or conclusions of the research-based article. Or the analysis does not appropriately explain how the results or
COMPETENT The submission includes an analysis that logically evaluates the results or conclusions of the research-based article and appropriately explains how the results or conclusions helps answer the EBP question.

 

 
 

conclusions helps answer the
EBP question.
C:SELECTION OF A NON-RESEARCH-BASED ARTICLE
NOT EVIDENT An article selection is not provided.
APPROACHING COMPETENCE The selected article is not a non-research article or does not answer the EBP question from part A2.
COMPETENT The selected article is a nonresearch article and answers the EBP question from part A2.
CI:BACKGROUND/INTRODUCTION OF THE NON-RESEARCH ARTICLE
NOT EVIDENT The submission does not include a discussion of the background or introduction.
APPROACHING COMPETENCE The submission includes a discussion that does not accurately address the background or introduction of the non-research-based article.
COMPETENT The submission includes a discussion that accurately addresses the background or introduction of the nonresearch-based article.
C2:TYPE OF EVIDENCE
NOT EVIDENT The submission does not include a description of a type of evidence.
APPROACHING COMPETENCE The submission includes a description of a type of evidence, but the description does not accurately describe the type of evidence used in the article.
COMPETENT The submission includes a description that accurately describes the type of evidence used in the article.
 
 
C3.•LEVEL OF EVIDENCE IN THE NON-RESEARCH ARTICLE
NOT EVIDENT The submission does not identify a level of evidence for the non-research-based articl
APPROACHING COMPETENCE The submission identifies a level of evidence that is not accurate according to the JHNEBP model.
COMPETENT The submission accurately identifies the level of evidence according to the JHNEBP model.
C4:QUALlTY RATING OF THE NON-RESEARCH ARTICLE
NOT EVIDENT The submission does not identify a quality rating for the non-research-based article.
APPROACHING COMPETENCE The submission identifies a quality rating that is not accurate according to the JHNEBP model.
COMPETENT The submission accurately identifies the quality rating according to the JHNEBP model.
NOT EVIDENT The submission does not include an explanation of 3 ke
APPROACHING COMPETENCE
COMPETENT The submission includes an explanation of how 3 key
C5:AUTHOR’S RECOMMENDATION
NOT EVIDENT The submission does not include a discussion of the author’s recommendation(s) that helped answer the EBP question.
APPROACHING COMPETENCE The submission includes a discussion, but the discussion does not logically explain how the author’s recommendation(s) helped answer the EBP question.
COMPETENT The submission includes a discussion that logically explains how the author’s recommendation(s) helped answer the EBP question.
 
 
D:RECOMMENDED PRACTICE CHANGE
NOT EVIDENT The submission does not include a practice change recommendation.
APPROACHING COMPETENCE The submission includes a practice change recommendation, but the recommendation does not appropriately address the EBP question. Or, the recommendation does not accurately utilize both the research and non-research articles to show how the change should be made.
COMPETENT The submission includes a practice change recommendation that appropriately addresses the EBP question and accurately utilizes both the research and non-research articles to show how the change should be made.

 

 
 

DI:INVOLVEMENT OF KEY STAKEHOLDERS
stakeholders.
The submission includes an explanation of 3 key stake holders’ involvement, but the explanation does not describe how 1 or more of the stakeholders would appropriately support the practice change recommendation.
stakeholders would appropriately support the practice change recommendation.
 
 
 
D2:BARRlER OF IMPLEMENTING THE PRACTICE CHANGE
NOT EVIDENT The submission does not include a discussion of a specific barrier that might be encountered when implementing the practice change recommendation.
APPROACHING COMPETENCE The submission includes a discussion of a specific barrier that might be encountered, but the barrier discussed is not appropriate for the practice change recommendation, or the barrier discussed would not feasibly be encountered during implementation.
COMPETENT The submission includes a discussion of a specific barrier that might feasibly be encountered during implementation, and the barrier discussed is appropriate for the practice change recommendation.

 

 
 

D3:STRATEGY FOR OVERCOMING THE BARRIER
NOT EVIDENT The submission does not identify a strategy that could b used to overcome a barrier.
APPROACHING COMPETENCE The submission identifies a strategy for overcoming a barrier, but that strategy would not logically be used to overcome the barrier discusse in part D2.
COMPETENT The submission identifies a strategy that could logically be used to overcome the barrier discussed in part D2.
 
 
D4:OUTCOME TO MEASURE THE RECOMMEND PRACTICE CHANGE
NOT EVIDENT The submission does not identify 1 outcome for
APPROACHING COMPETENCE The submission identifies 1 outcome from the EBP question, but the outcome doe
COMPETENT The submission identifies 1 outcome from the EBP question
measuring the recommended practice change.
not appropriately measure the recommended practice change
that appropriately measures the recommended practice change.
E:APA SOURCES
NOT EVIDENT The submission does not include in-text citations and references according to APA style for content that is quote paraphrased, or summarized.
APPROACHING COMPETENCE The submission includes in-tex citations and references for content that is quoted, paraphrased, or summarized but does not demonstrate a consistent application of APA style.
COMPETENT The submission includes in-text citations and references for content that is quoted, paraphrased, or summarized and demonstrates a consistent application of APA style.
 
 
 
F:PROFESSIONAL COMMUNICATION
NOT EVIDENT Content is unstructured, is disjointed, or contains pervasive errors in mechanic usage, or grammar. Vocabula or tone is unprofessional or distracts from the topic.
APPROACHING COMPETENCE Content is poorly organized, is difficult to follow, or contains errors in mechanics, usage, or grammar that cause confusion. Terminology is misused or ineffective.
COMPETENT Content reflects attention to detail, is organized, and focuses on the main ideas as prescribed in the task or chosen by the candidate. Terminology is pertinent, is used correctly, and effectively conveys the intended meaning. Mechanics, usage, and grammar promote accurate interpretation and understanding.

 

 

For a custom paper on the above or a related topic/instructions, place your order with us.
Why choose us:
• Affordable Rates – (15 – 30% Discount on all orders above $50)-• 100% Free from Plagiarism • Masters & PhD. Level Writers• Money Back Guarantee • 100% Privacy and Confidentiality• Unlimited Revisions at no Extra Charges• Guaranteed High-Quality Content

• WE OFFER THE BEST CUSTOM PAPER WRITING SERVICES. WE HAVE DONE THIS QUESTION BEFORE, WE CAN ALSO DO IT FOR YOU.
• Assignment status: Already Solved By Our Experts
• (USA, AUS, UK & CA PhD. Writers)
• CLICK HERE TO GET A PROFESSIONAL WRITER TO WORK ON THIS PAPER AND OTHER SIMILAR PAPERS, GET A NON PLAGIARIZED PAPER FROM OUR EXPERTS

QUALITY: 100% ORIGINAL PAPER – NO PLAGIARISM – CUSTOM PAPER

Why Choose Us?

How It Works

• Click on the “Place Your Order” tab at the top menu or “Order Now” icon at the bottom and a new page will appear with an order form to be filled.
• Fill in your paper’s requirements in the “PAPER DETAILS” section.
• Fill in your paper’s academic level, deadline, and the required number of pages from the drop-down menus.
• Click “CREATE ACCOUNT & SIGN IN” to enter your registration details and get an account with us for record-keeping and then, click on “PROCEED TO CHECKOUT” at the bottom of the page.
• From there, the payment sections will show, follow the guided payment process and your order will be available for our writing team to work on it.

About AcademicWritersBay.com

AcademicWritersBay.com is an easy-to-use and reliable service that is ready to assist you with your papers 24/7/ 365days a year. 99% of our customers are happy with their papers. Our team is efficient and will always tackle your essay needs comprehensively assuring you of excellent results. Feel free to ask them anything concerning your essay demands or Order.

AcademicWritersBay.com is a private company that offers academic support and assistance to students at all levels. Our mission is to provide proficient and high quality academic services to our highly esteemed clients. AcademicWritersBay.com is equipped with competent and proficient writers to tackle all types of your academic needs, and provide you with excellent results. Most of our writers are holders of master’s degrees or PhDs, which is an surety of excellent results to our clients. We provide assistance to students all over the world.
We provide high quality term papers, research papers, essays, proposals, theses and many others. At AcademicWritersBay.com, you can be sure of excellent grades in your assignments and final exams.