The evidence synthesis paper will be a 10-to-12-page paper in

02/15/2021-bw

Appendix A EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS PAPER CRITERIA AND GRADING RUBRIC

CLO 1-6; Signature Assignment Purpose Statement The purpose of this assignment is to formulate a full review of the history of a clinical problem, examining literature which supports a need for a clinical change. By gathering relevant data and information on this problem, justification is established to create a strong foundation of a clinical problem. This assignment often becomes a draft copy of Chapter 1 of the DNP Manuscript. Step 1: Review your graded background and significance paper submitted previously and make revisions/corrections basted on instructor feedback. You may utilize this corrected paper as the foundation of this Signature Assignment. Step 2: Expand on data collected and continue adding information to support the clinical problem utilizing the rubric as a guide for additional topics of discussion. Step 3: Your paper should be structured as follows:

• Title page (not included in the page count) • Abstract (not included in the page count) • Introduction to the Clinical Problem • Background and Significance/Problem Statement • Perspectives, Incidence, and Prevalence (including a graph, figure, or table) • Review of Healthcare Costs (of the problem) • Evidence of Support for the APRN Role in solving the problem • Foundation of the PICOt question • Reference Page (not included in the page count)

Format The final deliverable will be a 10-12-page, double spaced paper presented in MS Word document format. Proper APA (7th edition) standards formatting is required, including in-text citations and references. Submit your paper to TurnItIn for a similarity index

02/15/2021-bw

assessment and to LiveText as well for grading. Both functions are available via the Assignments tab in BlackBoard. This assignment is due by midnight Sunday of Week 7. Please refer to the below rubric for grading expectations.

Exemplary 4 Proficient 3 Developing 2 Emerging 1 Not Complete

Introduction. Background &

Significance, and problem

statement

10 points (40/300)

Exceptionally thorough and insightful introduction and clearly addresses the research foundation that led to the chosen problem Thorough explanation of the problem and its background. Provided several examples of the current state of need for change and gaps in evidence

Generally clear introduction with significant attempts to address the research foundation that led to the chosen problem Generally clear explanation of the problem and its background. Provided a few examples of the current state of need for change and gaps in evidence

Unclear introduction with little attempt to address the research foundation that led to the chosen problem Unclear explanation of the problem and its background. Provided one or two examples of the current state of need for change and gaps in evidence

No introduction with no attempts to address the research foundation that led to the chosen problem No explanation of the problem and its background. Provided no examples of the current state of need for change and gaps in evidence

No introduction, background, or problems statement submitted

02/15/2021-bw

Perspectives, incidence, and

prevalence

10 points (40/300)

Provided a detailed, in- depth examination of the historical and societal perspectives related to the chosen problem Thoroughly described the incidence and prevalence of the chosen problem. Provided a graph, figure, or table with statistical data

Provided a clear examination of the historical and societal perspectives related to the chosen problem Clearly described the incidence and prevalence of the chosen problem. Provided graph, figure, or table with no written discussion or reference

Provided an unclear examination of the historical and societal perspectives related to the chosen problem Unclearly described the incidence and prevalence of the chosen problem. Provided no graph, figure, or table with statistical data

Provided minimal examination of the historical and societal perspectives related to the chosen problem Minimal description of the incidence and prevalence of the chosen problem. Statistical data was minimal with no substantial content.

The perspectives, incidence, and prevalence section is missing from submission

Review of health care cost of problem(s)

15 points (60/300)

Demonstrated clear understanding of the history of and explanations of health care costs and burdens

Generally clear understanding of the history of and explanations of health care costs and burdens

Unclear understanding of the history of and explanations of health care costs and burdens

Did not demonstrate understanding of the history of and explanations of health care costs and burdens

No review of health care costs related to the problem were submitted

Evidence of support for

APRN’s role in solutions

15 points (60/300)

Provided strong and compelling evidence supporting the role of the APRN in their chosen topic

Provided clear evidence supporting the role of the APRN in their chosen topic

Provided weak and unclear evidence supporting the role of the APRN in their chosen topic

Did not provide any evidence supporting the role of the APRN in their chosen topic

APRN Role section is missing from the paper

Foundation of PICOt

10 points (40/300)

Exceptionally insightful PICOt foundation and relevant question

Generally clear and meaningful PICOt foundation and relevant question

PICOt foundation and relevant question lack clarity or insight.

PICOt foundation and relevant question makes no implications related to healthcare

PICOt foundation is missing from submission

02/15/2021-bw

APA: Mechanics and Style

15 points (60/300)

Exceptional organization and focus throughout paper. Exceptionally clear writing style. Scholarly tone, without being pedantic. Exceptional use of APA format throughout paper. All referenced materials properly cited in text and reference lists. Proper grammar and spelling throughout.

Organization and focus throughout paper. Generally clear writing style. Some lapses in scholarly tone. Some errors in use of APA format. Some missing or improperly formatted citations and/or references. Some grammatical and/or spelling errors.

Lapses in organization and focus, detracting from content and flow. Occasional lack of clarity. Informal tone. Many errors in APA formatting. Several missing or incorrect citations and/or references. Grammar and/or spelling errors, interfering with content.

General lack of organization or focus. Unclear or disrespectful writing style. Informal or disrespectful tone. Significant errors in use of APA format throughout paper. Absent references. Extensive grammatical and/or spelling errors, interfering with content.

Complete lack of use of APA or formatting

Total _____/300

Appendix B DISCUSSION BOARD CRITERIA AND GRADING RUBRIC

(CLO 1-6)

Each discussion board lasts one week. Each student is expected to craft an initial post in a new thread that refers to relevant course readings and draws from at least one additional external reference. Discussion board posts may incorporate personal experiences in addition to course content.

You must have these components covered to earn all points:

1. Initial Post: a position or thoughts supported by evidence and literature regarding this week’s topic. The initial post is due by Wednesday at 10pm (PST)

2. Responses: Each student will substantially comment on the posts made by a minimum of 2 of their peers.

3. Initial 2 Peer responses are due by Friday at midnight. 4. Then respond to more posts by Sunday @ Midnight (PST) 5. APA formatting is required 6. You must have a total of 5 posts to earn all 100 points

All discussion board responses should be substantial, and further the scholarly conversation. For example, responding to a classmate with, “Great post. I totally agree,” would not qualify and substantial, and would not receive credit. Discussion board activity is intended to spark active conversation, synthesis, and reflection. It is a scholarly forum, and thus requires a scholarly tone and appropriate citations in APA format.

Criteria Exemplary (4) Proficient (3) Developing (2) Emerging (1) Not Complete Content of Initial Post 10 points (40/100)

Fully responds to all questions in DB prompt and answers each completely

Answers all questions without fully developing answers for each

Answers some of the questions and/or does not fully develop answers

Off topic or not responsive to DB prompt

Nothing posted

Comments on Others’ Posts 8 points (32/100)

Provides relevant, timely and helpful feedback to at least 2 classmates for a minimum of 5 total responses

Provides feedback to 2 or more classmates that is less relevant, timely, and/or helpful. A minimum of 4 substantive responses

Provides feedback to one classmate that is less relevant, timely, and/or helpful. Only 2 to 3 substantive responses

Provides irrelevant feedback or comments on fewer than 2 classmates’ work. Only 1 substantive response

Nothing posted

Timeliness of Posts 3 points (12/100)

Initial post and responses completed on time

Late on initial post or responses

Late on initial post AND responses

Significantly late on initial post and/or responses

Nothing posted

Format 4 points (16/100)

Correct English; perfect APA format

Minimal grammatical, typographical or APA errors.

Multiple grammatical, typographical or APA errors.

Major grammatical, typographical or APA errors.

Nothing posted

Appendix C BACKGROUND AND SIGNIFICANCE PAPER CRITERIA AND GRADING RUBRIC

(CLO 1-4)

The background and significance (B&S) paper is a five (5) page paper in APA format (excluding title page, abstract, references and appendices) that could form the introductory section of your DNP Clinical Scholarly Project (CSP). The B&S paper will introduce a clinical problem and the clinical context that will lead you to identifying the clinical question. You will review the relevant background literature and explore its significance to your clinical setting. You will discuss the historical and societal perspective of the problem and expand on how this affects the current clinical situation that led to the problem. You will conclude with a discussion of the incidence and prevalence of the clinical problem and assess the larger scope for possible solutions. You must speak in a 3rd person tone.

Exemplary 4 Proficient 3 Developing 2 Emerging 1 Not Complete

Introduction and Background & Significance 5 points (20/100)

Exceptionally thorough and insightful introduction and clearly addresses the research foundation that led to the chosen problem

Generally clear introduction with significant attempts to address the research foundation that led to the chosen problem

Unclear introduction with little attempt to address the research foundation that led to the chosen problem

Poor introduction with minimal attempt to address the research foundation that led to the chosen problem

No introduction or background information given

Assessment of the Phenomena (problem statement) 5 points (20/100)

Thorough explanation of the problem and its background. Provided several examples of the current state of need for change and gaps in evidence

Generally clear explanation of the problem and its background. Provided a few examples of the current state of need for change and gaps in evidence

Unclear explanation of the problem and its background. Provided one or two examples of the current state of need for change and gaps in evidence

Little explanation of the problem and its background. Provided no examples of the current state of need for change and gaps in evidence

No problem statement or assessment included

Historical and Societal Perspective 5 points (20/100)

Provided a detailed, in-depth examination of the historical and societal perspectives related to the chosen problem

Provided a clear examination of the historical and societal perspectives related to the chosen problem

Provided an unclear examination of the historical and societal perspectives related to the chosen problem

Provided little examination of the historical and societal perspectives related to the chosen problem

No historical or societal perspective included

Incidence and Prevalence 5 points (20/100)

Thoroughly described the incidence and prevalence of the chosen problem. Provided a graph, figure, or table with statistical data

Clearly described the incidence and prevalence of the chosen problem. Provided graph, figure, or table but no discussion included

Unclearly described the incidence and prevalence of the chosen problem. Provided no graph, figure, or table with statistical data

Poorly described the incidence and prevalence of the chosen problem. Statistical data was minimal from all aspects of the paper

No incidence and prevalence included

APA: Communication Style and Mechanics 5 points (20/100)

Exceptional organization and focus throughout paper. Paper clearly addresses all required elements. Exceptionally clear writing style. Scholarly tone, without being pedantic. Exceptional use of APA format throughout paper. All referenced materials properly cited in text and reference lists. Proper grammar and spelling throughout.

Organization and focus throughout paper. Paper attempts to address all required elements. Generally clear writing style. Few lapses in scholarly tone. Few errors in use of APA format. Few missing or improperly formatted citations and/or references. Few grammatical and/or spelling errors.

Lapses in organization and focus, detracting from content and flow. Some required elements omitted. Occasional lack of clarity. Informal tone. Many errors in APA formatting. Several missing or incorrect citations and/or references. Grammar and/or spelling errors, interfering with content.

General lack of organization or focus. Many missing elements. Unclear or disrespectful writing style. Informal or disrespectful tone. Significant errors in use of APA format throughout paper. Absent references. Extensive grammatical and/or spelling errors, interfering with content.

Total /100

Appendix D CRITICAL APPRAISAL CRITERIA AND GRADING RUBRIC

(CLO 2-5) Select a research article (1) from your recent literature searches and create a 2 to 3- page critical appraisal paper utilizing a checklist you select as a guide. The critical appraisal will evaluate the study’s crucial elements and will help to inform the decisions you make regarding applicability of the study to your clinical problem and/or clinical practice. The critical appraisal is to adhere to APA format and is to include the proper citation of the chosen study and the critical appraisal checklist you use. You may select the critical appraisal checklists found in the Melnyk & Fineout-Overholt text (also located on the book CD), the ones provided at immersion, or any public-domain checklist you find in your search.

Criteria Exemplary 4 Proficient 3 Developing 2 Emerging 1 Not Complete 0

Appraisal of Study Design and

Sample

10 points (40/100)

Exceptionally insightful and substantive analysis

of study design and sample.

Addressed all relevant

areas of critical appraisal checklist.

Moderately insightful and substantive analysis of

study design and sample.

Addressed most relevant areas of critical appraisal

checklist.

Analysis of study design and sample

lacked substance and/or insight.

Addressed some

relevant areas of critical appraisal checklist.

Did not address relevant areas of critical appraisal

checklist.

Not submitted or incomplete

Appraisal of Study Methods,

Including Protocol and Data Analysis

5 points (20/100)

Exceptionally insightful and substantive analysis

of study methods.

Addressed all relevant areas of critical

appraisal checklist.

Moderately insightful and substantive analysis of

study methods.

Addressed most relevant areas of critical appraisal

checklist.

Analysis of study methods lacked substance and/or

insight.

Addressed some relevant areas of critical

appraisal checklist.

Did not address relevant areas of critical appraisal

checklist.

Not submitted or incomplete

Appraisal of Study Results and Conclusions

5 points (20/100)

Exceptionally insightful and substantive analysis

of study results and conclusions.

Addressed all relevant

areas of critical appraisal checklist.

Moderately insightful and substantive analysis of

study results and conclusions.

Addressed most relevant areas of critical appraisal

checklist.

Analysis of study results and conclusions lacked substance and/or

insight.

Addressed some relevant areas of critical

appraisal checklist.

Did not address relevant areas of critical appraisal

checklist.

Not submitted or incomplete

APA Formatting and

Communication

5 points (20/100)

No errors in APA formatting of references.

Exceptionally clear

communication style.

Rare errors in APA formatting of references.

Generally clear

communication style.

Several errors in APA formatting of references.

Frequent lapses in

clarity of communication style.

Obvious inattention to APA formatting

of references.

Unclear or disrespectful

communication style.

Not submitted or NO APA

formatting

Appendix E MATRIX OF SIGNIFICANT STUDIES CRITERIA

(CLO 1-6)

The Matrix is a personal critical appraisal of key studies contributing to the body of evidence related to your clinical topic and proposed project. This matrix represents your synthesis of articles you find most relevant to your proposed evidence-based project. This matrix is not only a class assignment, but should be a tool you use throughout your journey towards the completion of your project. As your accumulation of evidence grows, so should your matrix so you are able to locate valuable information easily!

For this assignment, you will appraise 10 articles related to your project, sharing all pertinent data you can in the matrix form. Please view the sample matrix as a visual guide as to what information should be gathered. Remember, this is evidence for change and should be relevant, reflect useful data, and be current.

Exemplary 4 Proficient 3 Developing 2 Emerging 1 Not Complete Matrix 25 points (100/100)

At least 10 articles submitted with strong evidence of data analysis

Between 6-10 articles were submitted with strong evidence of data analysis 10 articles were submitted but evidence and relevance is unclear

1-5 articles were submitted with strong evidence of data analysis 10 articles were submitted but data collected is unrelated or irrelevant

Unrelated articles were submitted with no evidence of data analysis

Assignment not submitted

MATRIX EXAMPLE

Source Citation Purpose/Problem Design/Sample Instruments/Measures [Include Reliability/Validity]

Results [Include actual data]

Strengths/Weaknesses (included the rating the level of the evidence)

Kidd, L. I., Knisley, S. J., & Morgan, K. I. (2012). Effective of a second life simulation as a teaching strategy for undergraduate mental health nursing students. Journal of Psychosocial Nursing, 50(7), 29- 37.

Measure the effectiveness of a Second Life® virtual simulation as a teaching strategy for undergraduate mental health nursing students.

QN – Descriptive Sample – 126 Convenience Sample of undergraduate nursing students.

IPV = Second Life® simulation exercise DOV – Education effectiveness Measures: Second Life® Simulation Evaluation Survey – 3 parts including education effect-iveness, technical difficulty and two open ended questions. No validation of survey

Students perceived the simulation to be moderately effective as an educational strategy and slightly difficult as a technical program. Positive aspects included client assessment in an environment where mistakes were with-out consequence, working from home…

Second Life® simulation activity described well. No validation of survey. Evidence Rating: Moderate evidence, Low quailty

Appendix F FORMULATION OF A PICOt QUESTION

(CLO 2)

The PICOt question is an important tool used to develop clinical solutions. Although this question will be used throughout the program as you work on your project, it is NOT a project title. The question that is formulated assists the provider in the development of keywords that will be necessary to assemble data and research to support a project. Since we are often implementing a change in practice, we need to discover as much current evidence as we can to support that change! Keywords determined by analyzing a PICOt question will help to accelerate the search engine location of such documents/research.

For this assignment you will need to do the following:

1. Develop your PICOt question based on the idea for your project. Use the attached PICOt form to break down the question details, then formulate that in a complete question at the bottom of the form.

2. Submit this form via email directly to your instructor by Wednesday.

3. Edit your PICOt based on feedback given by your instructor and email again for approval.

4. Your instructor will sign the top of your form giving approval and return to you.

5. Submit this under the assignment tab for week 4 by Sunday for full credit.

Exemplary 4 Proficient 3 Developing 2 Emerging 1 Not Complete

Formulation of PICOt 25 points (100/100)

Exceptionally presented clinical question with realistic intervention, goal, and timeframe. Written in question format as well as by category.

Generally clear clinical question with reasonable intervention and realistic timeframe. No question was written to support the categories or question was written but not broken down by category

Unclear clinical question Nonspecific interventions or timeframe given. Question submitted for grade without instructor approval (signature)

Poorly designed question that does not give clear understanding of the idea or its execution

No PICOt question was submitted

Total /100