NURS 6052 Evidence-Based Project

NURS 6052 Evidence-Based Project

ORDER NOW FOR AN ORIGINAL PAPER ASSIGNMENT: NURS 6052 Week 3 Assignment Evidence-Based Project Part 1 Identifying Research Methodologies
Is there a difference between “common practice” and “best practice”?
When you first went to work for your current organization, experienced colleagues may have shared with you details about processes and procedures. Perhaps you even attended an orientation session to brief you on these matters. As a “rookie,” you likely kept the nature of your questions to those with answers that would best help you perform your new role.
Over time and with experience, perhaps you recognized aspects of these processes and procedures that you wanted to question further. This is the realm of clinical inquiry.
Clinical inquiry is the practice of asking questions about clinical practice. To continuously improve patient care, all nurses should consistently use clinical inquiry to question why they are doing something the way they are doing it. Do they know why it is done this way, or is it just because we have always done it this way? Is it a common practice or a best practice?
In this Assignment, you will identify clinical areas of interest and inquiry and practice searching for research in support of maintaining or changing these practices. You will also analyze this research to compare research methodologies employed.
To Prepare:

• Review the Resources and identify a clinical issue of interest that can form the basis of a clinical inquiry. Keep in mind that the clinical issue you identify for your research will stay the same for the entire course.
• Based on the clinical issue of interest and using keywords related to the clinical issue of interest, search at least four different databases in the Walden Library to identify at least four relevant peer-reviewed articles related to your clinical issue of interest. You should not be using systematic reviews for this assignment, select original research articles.
• Review the results of your peer-reviewed research and reflect on the process of using an unfiltered database to search for peer-reviewed research.
• Reflect on the types of research methodologies contained in the four relevant peer-reviewed articles you selected.

Part 1: Identifying Research Methodologies
After reading each of the four peer-reviewed articles you selected, use the Matrix Worksheet template to analyze the methodologies applied in each of the four peer-reviewed articles. Your analysis should include the following:

• The full citation of each peer-reviewed article in APA format.
• A brief (1-paragraph) statement explaining why you chose this peer-reviewed article and/or how it relates to your clinical issue of interest, including a brief explanation of the ethics of research related to your clinical issue of interest.
• A brief (1-2 paragraph) description of the aims of the research of each peer-reviewed article.
• A brief (1-2 paragraph) description of the research methodology used. Be sure to identify if the methodology used was qualitative, quantitative, or a mixed-methods approach. Be specific.
• A brief (1- to 2-paragraph) description of the strengths of each of the research methodologies used, including reliability and validity of how the methodology was applied in each of the peer-reviewed articles you selected.

By Day 7 of Week 3
Submit your Evidence-Based Project.
Submission and Grading Information
To submit your completed Assignment for review and grading, do the following:

• Please save your Assignment using the naming convention “WK3Assgn+last name+first initial.(extension)” as the name.
• Click the Week 3 Assignment Rubric to review the Grading Criteria for the Assignment.
• Click the Week 3 Assignment link. You will also be able to “View Rubric” for grading criteria from this area.
• Next, from the Attach File area, click on the Browse My Computer button. Find the document you saved as “WK3Assgn+last name+first initial.(extension)” and click Open.
• If applicable: From the Plagiarism Tools area, click the checkbox for I agree to submit my paper(s) to the Global Reference Database.
• Click on the Submit button to complete your submission.
• Due to the nature of this assignment, your instructor may require more than 5 days to provide you with quality feedback.

learning Objectives
Students will:

• Differentiate between quantitative, qualitative, and mixed-method research methodologies
• Analyze the relationship between peer-reviewed articles and clinical issues
• Analyze research ethics related to clinical issues and peer-reviewed research
• Analyze the aims of research studies presented in peer-reviewed articles
• Analyze research methodologies described in peer-reviewed articles
• Analyze strengths, reliability, and validity of research methodologies in peer-reviewed research

Learning Resources
Required Readings
Melnyk, B. M., & Fineout-Overholt, E. (2018). Evidence-based practice in nursing & healthcare: A guide to best practice (4th ed.). Philadelphia, PA: Wolters Kluwer.

• Chapter 2, “Asking Compelling Clinical Questions” (pp. 33–54)
• Chapter 21, “Generating Evidence Through Quantitative and Qualitative Research” (pp. 607–653)

Grant, M. J., & Booth, A. (2009). A typology of reviews: An analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies. Health Information and Libraries Journal, 26, 91–108. doi:10.1111/j.1471-1842.2009.00848.x
 
Hoare, Z., & Hoe, J. (2013). Understanding quantitative research: Part 2. Nursing Standard, 27(18), 48–55. doi:10.7748/ns2013.01.27.18.48.c9488
 
Hoe, J., & Hoare, Z. (2012). Understanding quantitative research: Part 1. Nursing Standard, 27(15), 52–57. doi:10.7748/ns2012.12.27.15.52.c9485
 
Walden University Library. (n.d.-a). Databases A-Z: Nursing. Retrieved September 6, 2019, from https://academicguides.waldenu.edu/az.php?s=19981
Walden University Library. (n.d.-b). Evaluating resources: Primary & secondary sources. Retrieved January 22, 2020, from https://academicguides.waldenu.edu/library/evaluating/sources
Walden University Library. (n.d.-f). Keyword searching: Finding articles on your topic: Boolean terms. Retrieved September 19, 2018, from http://academicguides.waldenu.edu/library/keyword/boolean
Walden University Library. (n.d.-g). Keyword searching: Finding articles on your topic: Introduction to keyword searching. Retrieved September 19, 2018, from http://academicguides.waldenu.edu/library/keyword/searching-basics 
Walden University Library. (n.d.-i). Quick Answers: What are filtered and unfiltered resources in nursing? Retrieved September 6, 2019, from https://academicanswers.waldenu.edu/faq/73299
Document: Matrix Worksheet Template (Word Document)
 
Required Media
Centers for Research Quality. (2015a, August 13). Overview of qualitative research methods [Video file]. Retrieved from https://youtu.be/IsAUNs-IoSQ
Centers for Research Quality. (2015b, August 13). Overview of quantitative research methods [Video file]. Retrieved from https://youtu.be/cwU8as9ZNlA
Laureate Education (Producer). (2018). Review of research: Anatomy of a research study [Mutlimedia file]. Baltimore, MD: Author.
Schulich Library McGill. (2017, June 6). Types of reviews [Video file]. Retrieved from https://youtu.be/5Rv9z7Mp4kg
 
Name: NURS_6052_Module02_Week03_Assignment_Rubric

• Grid View
• List View

		Excellent	Good	Fair	Poor
Part 1: Identifying Research Methodologies  After reading each of the four peer-reviewed articles you selected, use the Matrix Worksheet template to analyze the methodologies applied in each of the four peer-reviewed articles. Your analysis should include the following: <br *The full citation of each peer-reviewed article in APA format. <br *A brief statement explaining why you chose this peer-reviewed article and/or how it relates to your clinical issue of interest, including a brief explanation of the ethics of research related to your clinical issue of interest. <br *A brief description of the aims of the research of each peer-reviewed article. <br *A brief description of the research methodology used. Be sure to identify if the methodology used was qualitative, quantitative, or a mixed-methods approach. Be specific.</br </br </br </br		81 (81%) – 90 (90%)  The response accurately and clearly provides a full citation of each article in APA format. The responses accurately and thoroughly explain the selection of these articles and/or how they relate to a clinical issue of interest, including a detailed explanation of the ethics of research. The responses accurately and clearly describe the aims of the research. The responses accurately and clearly describe the research methodology used, and clearly identify the type of methodology used with specific and relevant examples. The responses accurately and clearly describe the strengths of each of the research methodologies used, including a detailed explanation of the reliability and validity of how the methodology was applied in each of the articles selected. The responses provide a complete, detailed, and specific synthesis of two outside resources related to the selection of articles and two or three course-specific resources.	72 (72%) – 80 (80%)  The response accurately provides a citation of each peer-reviewed article in APA format. The responses accurately explain the selection of these peer-reviewed articles and/or how they relate to a clinical issue of interest, including an accurate explanation of ethics. The responses accurately describe the aims of the research of each peer-reviewed article. The responses accurately describe the research methodology used and type of methodology used with some examples. The responses accurately describe the strengths of each of the research methodologies used, including an explanation of the reliability and validity of how the methodology was applied in each of the peer-reviewed articles selected. The responses provide an accurate synthesis of at least one outside resource related to the selection of the peer-reviewed articles. The response integrates at least one outside resource and two or three course-specific resources.	63 (63%) – 71 (71%)  The response inaccurately or vaguely provides a citation of each peer-reviewed article in APA format. The responses inaccurately or vaguely explain the selection of these articles and/or how they relate to a clinical issue of interest, including the explanation of the ethics. The responses inaccurately or vaguely describe the aims of the research of each article. The responses inaccurately or vaguely describe the research methodology used and the type of methodology used, with only some examples. The responses inaccurately or vaguely describe the strengths of each of the research methodologies used, including the explanation of the reliability and validity of how the methodology was applied in each of the articles selected. The responses provided vaguely or inaccurately synthesize outside resources related to the selection of the articles. The response minimally integrates resources that may support the responses provided.	0 (0%) – 62 (62%)  The response inaccurately and vaguely provides a citation of each peer-reviewed article in APA format or is missing. The responses inaccurately & vaguely explain the selection of these articles and/or how they relate to a clinical issue, including the explanation of ethics of research, or they are missing. The responses inaccurately and vaguely describe the aims of the research, or they are missing. The responses inaccurately and vaguely describe the research methodology used, the type of methodology used with no examples present, or they are missing. The responses inaccurately and vaguely describe the strengths of each of the methodologies used, including the explanation of the reliability and validity of the methodology, or they are missing. The responses provide a vague and inaccurate synthesis of outside resources related to the selection of the articles and fail to integrate any resources to support the responses provided, or is missing.
Written Expression and Formatting—Paragraph Development and Organization:  Paragraphs make clear points that support well-developed ideas, flow logically, and demonstrate continuity of ideas. Sentences are carefully focused—neither long and rambling nor short and lacking substance. A clear and comprehensive purpose statement and introduction is provided, which delineates all required criteria.		5 (5%) – 5 (5%)  Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity. A clear and comprehensive purpose statement, introduction, and conclusion are provided, which delineates all required criteria.	4 (4%) – 4 (4%)  Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 80% of the time. Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment are stated but are brief and not descriptive.	3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%)  Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 60–79% of the time. Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment is vague or off topic.	0 (0%) – 3 (3%)  Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity less than 60% of the time. No purpose statement, introduction, or conclusion is provided.
Written Expression and Formatting—English Writing Standards:  Correct grammar, mechanics, and proper punctuation.		5 (5%) – 5 (5%)  Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity. A clear and comprehensive purpose statement, introduction, and conclusion are provided, which delineates all required criteria.	4 (4%) – 4 (4%)  Contains a few (one or two) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors.	3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%)  Contains several (three or four) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors.	0 (0%) – 3 (3%)  Contains many (five or more) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the reader’s understanding.
	Total Points: 100

Name: NURS_6052_Module02_Week03_Assignment_Rubric
 

SCORE A+ WITH HELP FROM OUR PROFESSIONAL WRITERS: ORDER NOW FOR AN ORIGINAL PAPER ASSIGNMENT

We will process your orders through multiple stages and checks to ensure that what we are delivering to you, in the end, is something that is precise as you envisioned it. All of our essay writing service products are 100% original, ensuring that there is no plagiarism in them. The sources are well-researched and cited so that it is interesting. Our goal is to help as many students as possible with their assignments, i.e. our prices are affordable and services premium.

Your assignment woes end here!