{"id":19640,"date":"2023-10-10T02:40:23","date_gmt":"2023-10-10T02:40:23","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/academicwritersbay.com\/writings\/the-evidence-synthesis-paper-will-be-a-10-to-12-page-paper-in\/"},"modified":"2023-10-10T02:40:23","modified_gmt":"2023-10-10T02:40:23","slug":"the-evidence-synthesis-paper-will-be-a-10-to-12-page-paper-in","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/academicwritersbay.com\/writings\/the-evidence-synthesis-paper-will-be-a-10-to-12-page-paper-in\/","title":{"rendered":"The evidence synthesis paper will be a 10-to-12-page paper in"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n
\n
\n

\u00a0Assignment<\/p>\n

The evidence synthesis paper will be a 10-to-12-page paper in APA format (excluding title page, abstract, references and appendix) that will form the full review of your scholarly examination of the clinical problem by expanding on your B&S paper (mid-term). The evidence you synthesize will review the foundation of your clinical problem and present the relevant literature that will support your posed clinical question.\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n

Approved PICOt\/ Clinical question<\/strong><\/p>\n

Project Tittle<\/strong>: The Prevalence of Depression Among Adolescents in American Society<\/p>\n

P)<\/strong> Adolescents with depression.<\/p>\n

I)<\/strong> Therapies; guided meditation, aroma therapy and relaxation therapy using an app \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0feature.\u00a0<\/p>\n

C)<\/strong> To no therapy.<\/p>\n

O)<\/strong> Free from Depression.<\/p>\n

t)<\/strong> Over three months.<\/p>\n

Written in question form<\/strong>: For adolescents with depression (P) will benefit from therapies; guided meditation, aroma therapy and relaxation therapy using an app feature (I) as compared to no therapy (C)free from depression (O) over three months (t)?<\/p>\n

Your paper should be structured as follows:\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n

\u2022 Title page (not included in the page count)\u00a0<\/p>\n

\u2022 Abstract (not included in the page count)\u00a0<\/p>\n

\u2022 Introduction to the Clinical Problem\u00a0<\/p>\n

\u2022 Background and Significance\/Problem Statement\u00a0<\/p>\n

\u2022 Perspectives, Incidence, and Prevalence (including a graph, figure, or table)<\/p>\n

\u2022 Review of Healthcare Costs (of the problem)\u00a0<\/p>\n

\u2022 Evidence of Support for the APRN Role in solving the problem<\/p>\n

\u2022 Foundation of the PICOt question\u00a0<\/p>\n

\u2022 Reference Page (not included in the page count)<\/p>\n

Format\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n

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 used will be minimum of 10<\/strong>. \u00a0Submit your paper to TurnItIn for a similarity index.<\/p>\n

RUBRIC<\/strong><\/p>\n

Find the Rubric for this Assignment on \u201cAppendix A \u201c of Assignment Appendixes in the PDF attached file.<\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<\/p><\/div>\n

\n
\n
    \n
  • \n
    \n
    AssignmentAppendices.pdf<\/div>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul><\/div>\n<\/p><\/div>\n
    \n

    02\/15\/2021-bw <\/p>\n

    Appendix A EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS PAPER CRITERIA AND GRADING RUBRIC <\/p>\n

    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: <\/p>\n

    \u2022 Title page (not included in the page count) \u2022 Abstract (not included in the page count) \u2022 Introduction to the Clinical Problem \u2022 Background and Significance\/Problem Statement \u2022 Perspectives, Incidence, and Prevalence (including a graph, figure, or table) \u2022 Review of Healthcare Costs (of the problem) \u2022 Evidence of Support for the APRN Role in solving the problem \u2022 Foundation of the PICOt question \u2022 Reference Page (not included in the page count) <\/p>\n

    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 <\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n

    \n

    02\/15\/2021-bw <\/p>\n

    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. <\/p>\n

    Exemplary 4 Proficient 3 Developing 2 Emerging 1 Not Complete <\/p>\n

    Introduction. Background & <\/p>\n

    Significance, and problem <\/p>\n

    statement <\/p>\n

    10 points (40\/300) <\/p>\n

    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 <\/p>\n

    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 <\/p>\n

    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 <\/p>\n

    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 <\/p>\n<\/p>\n

    No introduction, background, or problems statement submitted <\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n

    \n

    02\/15\/2021-bw <\/p>\n

    Perspectives, incidence, and <\/p>\n

    prevalence <\/p>\n

    10 points (40\/300) <\/p>\n

    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 <\/p>\n

    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 <\/p>\n

    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 <\/p>\n

    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. <\/p>\n

    The perspectives, incidence, and prevalence section is missing from submission <\/p>\n

    Review of health care cost of problem(s) <\/p>\n

    15 points (60\/300) <\/p>\n

    Demonstrated clear understanding of the history of and explanations of health care costs and burdens <\/p>\n

    Generally clear understanding of the history of and explanations of health care costs and burdens <\/p>\n

    Unclear understanding of the history of and explanations of health care costs and burdens <\/p>\n

    Did not demonstrate understanding of the history of and explanations of health care costs and burdens <\/p>\n

    No review of health care costs related to the problem were submitted <\/p>\n

    Evidence of support for <\/p>\n

    APRN\u2019s role in solutions <\/p>\n<\/p>\n

    15 points (60\/300) <\/p>\n

    Provided strong and compelling evidence supporting the role of the APRN in their chosen topic <\/p>\n

    Provided clear evidence supporting the role of the APRN in their chosen topic <\/p>\n

    Provided weak and unclear evidence supporting the role of the APRN in their chosen topic <\/p>\n

    Did not provide any evidence supporting the role of the APRN in their chosen topic <\/p>\n

    APRN Role section is missing from the paper <\/p>\n

    Foundation of PICOt <\/p>\n<\/p>\n

    10 points (40\/300) <\/p>\n

    Exceptionally insightful PICOt foundation and relevant question <\/p>\n

    Generally clear and meaningful PICOt foundation and relevant question <\/p>\n

    PICOt foundation and relevant question lack clarity or insight. <\/p>\n

    PICOt foundation and relevant question makes no implications related to healthcare <\/p>\n

    PICOt foundation is missing from submission <\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n

    \n

    02\/15\/2021-bw <\/p>\n

    APA: Mechanics and Style <\/p>\n<\/p>\n

    15 points (60\/300) <\/p>\n

    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. <\/p>\n

    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. <\/p>\n

    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. <\/p>\n

    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. <\/p>\n

    Complete lack of use of APA or formatting <\/p>\n

    Total _____\/300 <\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n

    \n

    Appendix B DISCUSSION BOARD CRITERIA AND GRADING RUBRIC <\/p>\n

    (CLO 1-6) <\/p>\n

    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. <\/p>\n

    You must have these components covered to earn all points: <\/p>\n

    1. Initial Post: a position or thoughts supported by evidence and literature regarding this week\u2019s topic. The initial post is due by Wednesday at 10pm (PST) <\/p>\n

    2. Responses: Each student will substantially comment on the posts made by a minimum of 2 of their peers. <\/p>\n

    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 <\/p>\n

    All discussion board responses should be substantial, and further the scholarly conversation. For example, responding to a classmate with, \u201cGreat post. I totally agree,\u201d 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. <\/p>\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n

    \n

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

    Fully responds to all questions in DB prompt and answers each completely <\/p>\n

    Answers all questions without fully developing answers for each <\/p>\n

    Answers some of the questions and\/or does not fully develop answers <\/p>\n

    Off topic or not responsive to DB prompt <\/p>\n

    Nothing posted <\/p>\n

    Comments on Others\u2019 Posts 8 points (32\/100) <\/p>\n

    Provides relevant, timely and helpful feedback to at least 2 classmates for a minimum of 5 total responses <\/p>\n

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

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

    Provides irrelevant feedback or comments on fewer than 2 classmates\u2019 work. Only 1 substantive response <\/p>\n

    Nothing posted <\/p>\n

    Timeliness of Posts 3 points (12\/100) <\/p>\n

    Initial post and responses completed on time <\/p>\n

    Late on initial post or responses <\/p>\n

    Late on initial post AND responses <\/p>\n

    Significantly late on initial post and\/or responses <\/p>\n

    Nothing posted <\/p>\n

    Format 4 points (16\/100) <\/p>\n

    Correct English; perfect APA format <\/p>\n

    Minimal grammatical, typographical or APA errors. <\/p>\n

    Multiple grammatical, typographical or APA errors. <\/p>\n

    Major grammatical, typographical or APA errors. <\/p>\n

    Nothing posted <\/p>\n<\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n

    \n

    Appendix C BACKGROUND AND SIGNIFICANCE PAPER CRITERIA AND GRADING RUBRIC <\/p>\n

    (CLO 1-4) <\/p>\n

    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. <\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n

    \n

    Exemplary 4 Proficient 3 Developing 2 Emerging 1 Not Complete <\/p>\n

    Introduction and Background & Significance 5 points (20\/100) <\/p>\n

    Exceptionally thorough and insightful introduction and clearly addresses the research foundation that led to the chosen problem <\/p>\n

    Generally clear introduction with significant attempts to address the research foundation that led to the chosen problem <\/p>\n

    Unclear introduction with little attempt to address the research foundation that led to the chosen problem <\/p>\n

    Poor introduction with minimal attempt to address the research foundation that led to the chosen problem <\/p>\n

    No introduction or background information given <\/p>\n

    Assessment of the Phenomena (problem statement) 5 points (20\/100) <\/p>\n

    Thorough explanation of the problem and its background. Provided several examples of the current state of need for change and gaps in evidence <\/p>\n

    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 <\/p>\n

    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 <\/p>\n

    Little explanation of the problem and its background. Provided no examples of the current state of need for change and gaps in evidence <\/p>\n

    No problem statement or assessment included <\/p>\n

    Historical and Societal Perspective 5 points (20\/100) <\/p>\n

    Provided a detailed, in-depth examination of the historical and societal perspectives related to the chosen problem <\/p>\n

    Provided a clear examination of the historical and societal perspectives related to the chosen problem <\/p>\n

    Provided an unclear examination of the historical and societal perspectives related to the chosen problem <\/p>\n

    Provided little examination of the historical and societal perspectives related to the chosen problem <\/p>\n

    No historical or societal perspective included <\/p>\n

    Incidence and Prevalence 5 points (20\/100) <\/p>\n

    Thoroughly described the incidence and prevalence of the chosen problem. Provided a graph, figure, or table with statistical data <\/p>\n

    Clearly described the incidence and prevalence of the chosen problem. Provided graph, figure, or table but no discussion included <\/p>\n

    Unclearly described the incidence and prevalence of the chosen problem. Provided no graph, figure, or table with statistical data <\/p>\n

    Poorly described the incidence and prevalence of the chosen problem. Statistical data was minimal from all aspects of the paper <\/p>\n

    No incidence and prevalence included <\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n

    \n

    APA: Communication Style and Mechanics 5 points (20\/100) <\/p>\n

    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. <\/p>\n

    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. <\/p>\n

    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. <\/p>\n

    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. <\/p>\n<\/p>\n

    Total \/100 <\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n

    \n

    Appendix D CRITICAL APPRAISAL CRITERIA AND GRADING RUBRIC <\/p>\n

    (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\u2019s 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. <\/p>\n

    Criteria Exemplary 4 Proficient 3 Developing 2 Emerging 1 Not Complete 0 <\/p>\n

    Appraisal of Study Design and <\/p>\n

    Sample <\/p>\n

    10 points (40\/100) <\/p>\n

    Exceptionally insightful and substantive analysis <\/p>\n

    of study design and sample. <\/p>\n

    Addressed all relevant <\/p>\n

    areas of critical appraisal checklist. <\/p>\n

    Moderately insightful and substantive analysis of <\/p>\n

    study design and sample. <\/p>\n

    Addressed most relevant areas of critical appraisal <\/p>\n

    checklist. <\/p>\n

    Analysis of study design and sample <\/p>\n

    lacked substance and\/or insight. <\/p>\n

    Addressed some <\/p>\n

    relevant areas of critical appraisal checklist. <\/p>\n

    Did not address relevant areas of critical appraisal <\/p>\n

    checklist. <\/p>\n

    Not submitted or incomplete <\/p>\n

    Appraisal of Study Methods, <\/p>\n

    Including Protocol and Data Analysis <\/p>\n

    5 points (20\/100) <\/p>\n

    Exceptionally insightful and substantive analysis <\/p>\n

    of study methods. <\/p>\n

    Addressed all relevant areas of critical <\/p>\n

    appraisal checklist. <\/p>\n

    Moderately insightful and substantive analysis of <\/p>\n

    study methods. <\/p>\n

    Addressed most relevant areas of critical appraisal <\/p>\n

    checklist. <\/p>\n

    Analysis of study methods lacked substance and\/or <\/p>\n

    insight. <\/p>\n

    Addressed some relevant areas of critical <\/p>\n

    appraisal checklist. <\/p>\n

    Did not address relevant areas of critical appraisal <\/p>\n

    checklist. <\/p>\n

    Not submitted or incomplete <\/p>\n

    Appraisal of Study Results and Conclusions <\/p>\n

    5 points (20\/100) <\/p>\n

    Exceptionally insightful and substantive analysis <\/p>\n

    of study results and conclusions. <\/p>\n

    Addressed all relevant <\/p>\n

    areas of critical appraisal checklist. <\/p>\n

    Moderately insightful and substantive analysis of <\/p>\n

    study results and conclusions. <\/p>\n

    Addressed most relevant areas of critical appraisal <\/p>\n

    checklist. <\/p>\n

    Analysis of study results and conclusions lacked substance and\/or <\/p>\n

    insight. <\/p>\n

    Addressed some relevant areas of critical <\/p>\n

    appraisal checklist. <\/p>\n

    Did not address relevant areas of critical appraisal <\/p>\n

    checklist. <\/p>\n

    Not submitted or incomplete <\/p>\n

    APA Formatting and <\/p>\n

    Communication <\/p>\n

    5 points (20\/100) <\/p>\n

    No errors in APA formatting of references. <\/p>\n

    Exceptionally clear <\/p>\n

    communication style. <\/p>\n

    Rare errors in APA formatting of references. <\/p>\n

    Generally clear <\/p>\n

    communication style. <\/p>\n

    Several errors in APA formatting of references. <\/p>\n

    Frequent lapses in <\/p>\n

    clarity of communication style. <\/p>\n

    Obvious inattention to APA formatting <\/p>\n

    of references. <\/p>\n

    Unclear or disrespectful <\/p>\n

    communication style. <\/p>\n

    Not submitted or NO APA <\/p>\n

    formatting <\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n

    \n

    Appendix E MATRIX OF SIGNIFICANT STUDIES CRITERIA <\/p>\n

    (CLO 1-6) <\/p>\n

    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! <\/p>\n

    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. <\/p>\n<\/p>\n

    Exemplary 4 Proficient 3 Developing 2 Emerging 1 Not Complete Matrix 25 points (100\/100) <\/p>\n

    At least 10 articles submitted with strong evidence of data analysis <\/p>\n

    Between 6-10 articles were submitted with strong evidence of data analysis 10 articles were submitted but evidence and relevance is unclear <\/p>\n

    1-5 articles were submitted with strong evidence of data analysis 10 articles were submitted but data collected is unrelated or irrelevant <\/p>\n

    Unrelated articles were submitted with no evidence of data analysis <\/p>\n

    Assignment not submitted <\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n

    \n

    MATRIX EXAMPLE <\/p>\n

    Source Citation Purpose\/Problem Design\/Sample Instruments\/Measures [Include Reliability\/Validity] <\/p>\n

    Results [Include actual data] <\/p>\n

    Strengths\/Weaknesses (included the rating the level of the evidence) <\/p>\n

    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. <\/p>\n

    Measure the effectiveness of a Second Life\u00ae virtual simulation as a teaching strategy for undergraduate mental health nursing students. <\/p>\n

    QN \u2013 Descriptive Sample \u2013 126 Convenience Sample of undergraduate nursing students. <\/p>\n

    IPV = Second Life\u00ae simulation exercise DOV \u2013 Education effectiveness Measures: Second Life\u00ae Simulation Evaluation Survey \u2013 3 parts including education effect-iveness, technical difficulty and two open ended questions. No validation of survey <\/p>\n

    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\u2026 <\/p>\n

    Second Life\u00ae simulation activity described well. No validation of survey. Evidence Rating: Moderate evidence, Low quailty <\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n

    \n

    Appendix F FORMULATION OF A PICOt QUESTION <\/p>\n

    (CLO 2) <\/p>\n

    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. <\/p>\n

    For this assignment you will need to do the following: <\/p>\n

    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. <\/p>\n

    2. Submit this form via email directly to your instructor by Wednesday. <\/p>\n

    3. Edit your PICOt based on feedback given by your instructor and email again for approval. <\/p>\n

    4. Your instructor will sign the top of your form giving approval and return to you. <\/p>\n

    5. Submit this under the assignment tab for week 4 by Sunday for full credit. <\/p>\n<\/p>\n

    Exemplary 4 Proficient 3 Developing 2 Emerging 1 Not Complete <\/p>\n

    Formulation of PICOt 25 points (100\/100) <\/p>\n

    Exceptionally presented clinical question with realistic intervention, goal, and timeframe. Written in question format as well as by category. <\/p>\n

    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 <\/p>\n

    Unclear clinical question Nonspecific interventions or timeframe given. Question submitted for grade without instructor approval (signature) <\/p>\n

    Poorly designed question that does not give clear understanding of the idea or its execution <\/p>\n

    No PICOt question was submitted <\/p>\n

    Total \/100 <\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n