Health & Medical Question

EBP Guideline/Position Statement Paper

• Please review the Directions for Assignment and video in the Module.
• All assignments are to be submitted electronically within the course as a Microsoft Word or PDF document. More than 1 document can be attached to the assignment. The paper will be submitted to Turnitin when uploaded into the assignment. Students are responsible for reviewing their Turnitin reports and making changes prior to the final submission date.
• Students must still submit their final paper to the assignment area if any revisions are necessary after reviewing the Turnitin report generated. Submit your paper with your Name and Assignment Name. When you have more than 1 document to submit, include your name and title of what you are submitting, i.e. Davis EBP Paper; Davis EBP Appraisal Tool; Davis EBP Guideline ***This will also help to ensure you submit all documents to the assignment when labeled correctly.
  • Students are NOT permitted to use first person in this writing. Quotes are highly discouraged. Students should be paraphrasing material from refereed/peer reviewed journals. Students are not permitted to submit formally completed papers in partiality or their entirety to the assignment.
• Please pay particular attention to the due date of the assignment. The "accept until" or "re-submission date" is only permitted upon extenuating circumstance or incorrect submission format. Deductions apply to students not submitting by the DUE DATE posted on the course schedule as described in the syllabus.
• Point AllocationsPoints may be adjusted higher or lower than specific allocated points for each criteria. For example, you may receive 1.25 points instead of 1.0 or 1.5 points as indicated in the column depending on the criteria that was met or unmet. This may apply to any of the criterion and will be based on faculty discretion.
• Printing: apply the landscape mode and print to a pdf for the best view.
• Students are responsible for submitting assignment by the due date/time. Assignments that are not complete or missing items will be graded "as is" and students will not be permitted to submit items after the grade has been returned. Students submitting their work early are not permitted to re-submit or revise work once the grade has been returned.
• The use of any form of Artificial Intelligence is strictly prohibited on this assignment.

Rubric

EBP Guideline/Position Statement Paper 2026

EBP Guideline/Position Statement Paper 2026

Criteria	Ratings	Pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeIntroductionIn one paragraph, the student should: 1. Introduce the topic to the reader in 2-3 sentences to grab the reader's attention. -student should introduce Phenomenon of Interest (POI) topic to reader 2. Conclude this paragraph with one (1) clear and concise statement informing the reader of the purpose or primary objective of the paper/discussion.	0.5 to >0.38 ptsMet or Exceeds CriteriaThe information provides an introduction to the topic followed by a well stated, concise thesis statement. Minimal to no information or details lacking.0.38 to >0.25 ptsMet Minimum CriteriaStudents met minimum requirements for introduction by including a few attention grabbing statement and a thesis statement. Organization or detail may be lacking. 0.25 to >0.0 ptsMissing Significant CriteriaInformation fails to address the required elements and the introduction or thesis statement may not be included.0 ptsMissingIntroduction and/or thesis statement missing.	0.5 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeTool CompletionStudent demonstrated understanding of critique by completing the correct appraisal tool as designated in the module directions. Completed appraisal tool is submitted with the paper.	1 to >0.75 ptsMet or Exceeds CriteriaStudent addressed each component of the tool demonstrating understanding of the critique. Tool submitted correctly with assignment. Minimal to no information or details lacking.0.75 to >0.5 ptsMet Minimum CriteriaTool missing minimal data; submitted correctly with assignment. 0.5 to >0.25 ptsMissing Significant CriteriaStudent did not address each component of the tool OR failed to show full understanding of the critique. May or may not be submitted correctly with assignment.0.25 to >0 ptsMissingStudent did not submit tool with assignment OR submitted the incorrect tool.	1 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeGuideline or Position StatementSubmit the approved guideline or position statement with the assignment.	0.5 to >0.25 ptsMet CriteriaStudent submitted guideline position statement with paper. Links should NOT be submitted unless specifically approved by your faculty member. If the link is approved and provided, it should lead directly to the guideline or position statement rather than a login page.0.25 to >0 ptsDid Not Meet Full CriteriaStudent did not submit the guideline or position statement or failed to submit a correct guideline/position statement.	0.5 pts
Questions were the resources consistent, well-designed studies? were the majority of the studies used to form recommendations primarily high level or low level studies? Should the authors consider using more studies, different types of studies? Is the guideline current or do you feel there are any gaps in the guideline/position statement that should have been addressed, but wasn't? Support your statements with peer reviewed resources and thorough rationales to explain your answers (2-3 paragraphs). (3 points)5. How does the levels of evidence described in #3-4 impact the clarity and quality of the recommendations? (2 points)All answers should be fully supported from information in the guideline or position statement, and other resources as necessary.All answers should be fully supported from information in the guideline or position statement. Discussions should be detailed and robust demonstrating full understanding of the content. No simple yes/no answers permitted.	10 to >7.5 ptsMet or Exceeds CriteriaStudent provided a robust discussion addressing each of the 5 criterions with minimal to no details missing.7.5 to >5.0 ptsMet Minimum CriteriaStudent addressed each of the 5 criterions with minimal details missing in at least one but no more than two of the criterions OR only addressed 4 of the criterions with details; missing one criterion in the discussion. 5 to >2.5 ptsMissing Significant CriteriaStudent missing significant details in at least three of the criterions or did not address at least two of the criterions in the discussion.2.5 to >0 ptsMissingStudent missing significant details in all criterions or failed to addressed at least 4 of the criterions in the discussion.	10 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeNational Academy of Medicine (Institute of Medicine)(IOM) AimsHow will your intended change impact the National Academy of Medicine (IOM) Aims of your selected population? Choose a minimum of 3 aims and thoroughly describe how they each relate to your POI and role as an APN. Support with evidence of at least 2 peer-reviewed sources.	6 to >4.5 ptsMet or Exceeds CriteriaStudent included a robust discussion on how 3 of the IOM Aims impact the selected population, including how it relates to the selected POI and role as an APN. Minimal to no details missing in the discussion.4.5 to >3.0 ptsMet Minimum CriteriaStudent included a discussion on how 3 of the IOM Aims impact the selected population, including how it relates to the selected POI and role as an APN. Minimal details missing in one but no more than two of the discussion points. 3 to >1.5 ptsMissing Significant CriteriaStudent included a discussion on how 3 of the IOM Aims impact the selected population, including how it relates to the selected POI and role as an APN. Significant details missing in at least two of the aims. Did not fully demonstrate understanding of the AIMs or how it relates to the selected population, POI, and/or role as an APN.1.5 to >0 ptsMissingSignificant details missing in the discussion and the student did not demonstrate full understanding of the AIMs and how it relates to the selected population, POI, or role as an APN.	6 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeBarriers to ImplementationIn each project, you should expect to come across barriers. These barriers will impact your implementation and may include personnel, individuals, groups, administrators, etc.; financial, structural, process (inadequate planning), time, etc. As the project lead, you must anticipate and plan for barriers. What will you do to overcome them, can you prevent them, or will you have to create an idea to simply work around the barrier? Whatever the case, you will need to consider these barriers for your project and describe 2 that will directly impact implementation. You need to incorporate your original outcome as specified in your PICO Clinical Question and determine what those barriers are, how will you resolve these barriers so that implementation can move forward? This section should be well supported by peer reviewed references and also serves as an area where the depth of the discussion is expected. Support with proper documentation.	6 to >4.5 ptsMet or Exceeds CriteriaStudent provided a robust discussion on two of the barriers to implementation and was able to connect barriers to structure, process, or outcomes measures. The role the APN has to resolve these barriers and move the implementation forward was fully explained. Minimal to no details missing in discussion points.4.5 to >3.0 ptsMet Minimum CriteriaStudent provided a discussion on two of the barriers to implementation and was able to connect barriers to structure, process, or outcomes measures. The role the APN has to resolve these barriers and move the implementation forward was fully explained. Some details missing throughout the discussion in at least one, but no more than two of the areas. 3 to >1.5 ptsMissing Significant CriteriaStudent provided a discussion on two of the barriers to implementation and was able to connect barriers to structure, process, or outcomes measures. The role the APN has to resolve these barriers and move the implementation forward was fully explained. Significant details missing throughout the discussion in at least two of the areas or failed to address one of the aspects of the discussion. Student did not demonstrate understanding of the concepts.1.5 to >0 ptsMissingStudent missing major details in this discussion demonstrating a lack of understanding of the barriers and/or role of the APN to resolve the barriers moving implementation forward.	6 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeTeam of StakeholdersThis section will be written in a shorter format. Include the heading: Stakeholders, then simply list your stakeholders by including a short description of their role. Keep in mind that this list will likely expand upon who is listed on your guideline/position statement itself as that only applies to who is using the guideline. You are including all those impacted by the implementation of the guideline, so the list will be much broader. Use the format seen in the directions.	3 to >2.25 ptsMet or Exceeds CriteriaStudent correctly formatted the list of stakeholders and short description of involvement to POI with minimal to no details missing in the discussion.2.25 to >1.5 ptsMet Minimum CriteriaStudent correctly formatted the list of stakeholders and short description of involvement to POI with some details missing to the discussion or lack of consideration given to include additional (1-2) stakeholders impacting POI. 1.5 to >0.75 ptsMissing Significant CriteriaStudent correctly formatted the list of stakeholders and short description of involvement to POI with significant details missing to the discussion or lack of consideration given to include additional (3 or more) stakeholders impacting POI.0.75 to >0 ptsMissing Significant CriteriaStudent demonstrated a lack of understanding of this section of the paper by either not completing or missing at least 3 or more stakeholders and/or not providing a thorough understanding of their role in the POI.	3 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeConclusion1. Summarize the major points of the paper in one (1) paragraph. 2. No new information or references should be included in this section.	0.5 to >0.38 ptsMet or Exceeds CriteriaThe information fully summarizes the main points of the paper/discussion, without including any new information or references. Minimal to no information or details lacking.0.38 to >0.25 ptsMet Minimum CriteriaInformation summarized with minimal detail. 0.25 to >0.0 ptsMissing Significant CriteriaThe information did not adequately summarize the main points of the paper/discussion. New information or references may have been introduced.0 ptsMissingStudent did not address or poorly addressed in one (1) sentence.	0.5 pts
INSTRUCTIONS Format ted title page included with page numbers formatted according to APA 7th edition standards.6. Writing should be free of APA errors.7. Paper to include a minimum of 2 peer-reviewed or scholarly references in addition to required EBP guideline and textbooks.8. Citations and references follow APA 7th edition format. References should be current, within 5 years.9. Writing should be free of grammatical and spelling errors.10. Paper not to exceed 8 pages excluding title page, reference page and any appendices.11. Follow all assignments instructions/directions.12. Additional deductions may apply for late submissions, plagiarism or lack of scholarship and professionalism in the assignment.13. Use Times New Roman 12 point font.	2.5 to >1.85 ptsMet or Exceeds CriteriaThe student’s application of graduate level critical thinking, writing skills, and application of 7th edition APA format are exemplary. Faculty discretion may apply1.85 to >1.25 ptsMet Minimum CriteriaThe student’s application of graduate level critical thinking, writing skills, and application of 7th edition APA format are good with room for minor improvements. Additional assistance outside of class optional. Faculty discretion may apply. 1.25 to >0.0 ptsMissing Significant CriteriaThe student’s application of graduate level critical thinking, writing skills, and application of APA format illustrates some competency with room for moderate improvements. Additional assistance outside of class recommended. See Student and CON Resources and Support for information on how to create an eTutoring account with the Center for Academic Excellence and/or help with Scholarly Writing. Faculty discretion may apply.0 ptsMissingThe student’s application of graduate level critical thinking, writing skills, and application of APA format are absent with major improvements necessary. Additional assistance outside of class likely required for success in the course. See Student Resources and Support for information on how to create an eTutoring account with the Center for Academic Excellence and/or help with Scholarly Writing. Faculty discretion may apply.	2.5 pts

Total Points: 30

EBP Guideline/Position Statement AppraisalDirections for Assignment

Please review these directions for a better understanding of the assignment. You will find a video that goes over the assignment rubric and instructions for submission.

Background Information for the assignment:

Health care policies are developed and implemented based on EBP. Advanced practice nurses (APNs) serve a critical role in this implementation process: evaluating and critiquing EBP to inform, create and change the delivery of health care while guiding policy formation. Since policies promote the care of patients, they are often governed by other agencies or organizations. For example, the World Health Organization describes health policy as actions that have been instituted by local, state and national government entities to influence health care outcomes. Even the International Council of Nurses feels that EBP is a problem-solving approach that influences decision making in the clinical setting (Hall & Roussel, 2017, p. 248-249).

However, just because you find a guideline or position statement does not mean that it will work for your facility, your group of patients, and so forth. To determine whether the recommendations in that guideline or position statement fit the needs of your facility, population, problem, APNs must determine the strength of the recommendations to regulate whether policy changes are warranted. Through this process the APN may begin with the development of a clinical question and a thorough search of the literature on the proposed changes needed. This question is typically presented in a PICO framework, which shapes how the question is searched, the outcomes intended, and timing of those outcomes (Hall & Roussel, 2017, Ch. 14). Sometimes as you uncover more research on the problem, the question can become revised, but nonetheless, any problem starts with a typical question that needs to be answered. This assignment will start by taking your POI and PICO clinical question and determine if the guideline or position statement should be implemented into practice by completing a thorough appraisal of it. Then you will determine who will be needed for implementation to occur, what barriers may be present, and ultimately why should it be done.

Step 1: Introduction

A good introduction should be no more than 1 paragraph grabbing the reader’s attention providing insight to the POI, guideline, and significance to the APN's role. End with a strong thesis or purpose statement. Note: the thesis should be condensed to 1 brief purpose statement. The introduction should be one paragraph in length.

Step 2: Tool Completion

While this is the next step on the rubric, you will not be writing anything directly in the paper for this section. However, it must be completed as the next step because this is where you will appraise the guideline or position statement. Therefore, you will need to submit a copy of your completed tool to the assignment area. When you submitted your POI topic you also submitted a guideline/position statement for approval. You should be using your approved guideline/position statement to complete the tool for this section. If for some reason you were unsuccessful in gaining approval for your guideline/position statement, you still must complete this section by finding a guideline/position statement, but the opportunity to have that pre-approved is now past the deadline.

To provide an overview of the guideline OR position statement use the tool below. You will need to address each question in the corresponding guideline/practice recommendation section of the tool; missing information may cause you to lose points. You must submit the completed tool with the assignment. Please attach the completed tool separately to the assignment area. Faculty need to see your analysis of the guideline for full credit. Use the link below to complete. You can save the document as a pdf, use the edit function to fill in or handwrite and scan back into the assignment area. The tool has multiple parts that apply to other types of resources. You are expected to complete the sections that apply to the appraisal of the guideline or position statement. Read the directions on the tool.

Evaluation Tool for Guideline OR Position Statement Word Document

EXAMPLE ONLY Guideline or Position Statement.pdf Download EXAMPLE ONLY Guideline or Position Statement.pdfdo not use this document for your appraisal but as a guide only

Important Note: At this point, some students feel like they chose a guideline/position statement that perhaps was not the best fit for various reasons (settings may be too different, low quality, etc.). It is important that you understand that is ok. This assignment allows you the opportunity to determine if you should implement the recommendations and explain why or why not. Likewise, you also have the opportunity to explain the quality rating which may have led you to determine that it was not a good fit after all. Regardless that is the point of the appraisal process. If you were going to implement this in real time, you may have to search for a different guideline that is a better fit, but for the purposes of this course, time does not permit us that luxury. So be sure that you explain your rationales thoroughly in the paper.

Step 3: Guideline or Position Statement

This section will not have any written text in the paper but serves as a reminder to submit the proper documents to the assignment. Please submit the guideline or position statement to the assignment area. If your guideline has been updated or revised, you need to submit the original and updated versions to the assignment area. Do not submit a link as links often do not open or require a login. Faculty need to see your document so they can refer back to it and add any comments directly on the document as needed for clarification. Guidelines/position statements should be current, within 5 years.

Step 4: Appraisal of the Guideline/Position Statement

Appraise the guideline or position statement by providing a robust discussion of the following criterions.

1. Summarize the purpose of the guideline and who the guideline impacts. (1 paragraph)
2. Explain who developed the guidelines and their significance to practice. Do not give names, instead provide the groups of nationally recognized experts by group, organization, or expertise in the field. What makes the developers experts? Explain your answer. (1 paragraph).
3. What different levels of evidence (classes/grades of evidence) were used to develop the recommendations? To complete this step you must look at the studies/references used that support the recommendations or position statements. You must use levels as indicated on the level of evidence hierarchy as described in your book or resource in the Readings/Resources section of the course page to support your answer. You may also include any specific rating system the guideline or position statement referenced as well. How many levels of evidence were used? What is the difference between the various levels? Support your answers by explaining why these various levels of evidence matter when assessing the strength of the guideline. (2-3 paragraphs).
4. Review the levels of evidence discussed in #3 to support the recommendations to explain the following: 1. were the resources consistent, well-designed studies? 2. were the majority of the studies used to form recommendations primarily high level or low level studies? 3. Should the authors consider using more studies, different types of studies? 4. Is the guideline current or do you feel there are any gaps in the guideline/position statement that should have been addressed, but wasn't? Support your statements with peer reviewed resources and thorough rationales to explain your answers (2-3 paragraphs). You may want to revisit the level of evidence hierarchy to assist you in answering this question.
5. Based on your answers in #3-4, how does this impact your decision to use this guideline in practice or to disregard the recommendation. Explain your answer with fully supported information from the guideline or position statement, and other resources as necessary. (2-3 paragraphs)

Discussions should be detailed and robust demonstrating full understanding of the content. No simple yes/no answers permitted. This section is your longest section and worth the most points, so the depth of answers should be noted in your responses. It would be expected to have 1-2 pages of information related to the appraisal in this section. Use the resources provided to you on the readings/resources page. There are several that discuss levels of evidence. It is expected that you can differentiate among the various levels used.

Step 5: National Academy of Medicine (Previously the Institute of Medicine) Aims

In this section, you will be discussing the National Academy of Medicine (IOM) Aims. While there are 6 aims in total, you are only expected to discuss 3. Therefore, you should identify the selected 3 aims and provide a robust understanding of the aim, then how that aim relates to the POI, and finally how your APN role will further influence the aim. This section should be well supported by peer reviewed references and also serves as an area where the depth of the discussion is expected. Support with at least 2 peer-reviewed/proper resources (1/2 to 1 page).

Step 6: Barriers to Implementation

In each project, you should expect to come across barriers. These barriers will impact your implementation and may include personnel, individuals, groups, administrators, etc.; financial, structural, process (inadequate planning), time, etc. As the project lead, you must anticipate and plan for barriers. What will you do to overcome them, can you prevent them, or will you have to create an idea to simply work around the barrier? Whatever the case, you will need to consider these barriers for your project and describe 2 that will directly impact implementation. You need to incorporate your original outcome as specified in your PICO Clinical Question and determine what those barriers are, how will you resolve these barriers so that implementation can move forward? This section should be well supported by peer reviewed references and also serves as an area where the depth of the discussion is expected. Support with proper documentation. (1/2 to 1 page).

Team 7: Stakeholders

This section will be written in a shorter format. Include the heading: Stakeholders, then simply list your stakeholders by including a short description of their role. Keep in mind that this list will likely expand upon who is listed on your guideline/position statement itself as that only applies to who is using the guideline. You are including all those impacted by the implementation of the guideline, so the list will be much broader.

Here is the expected format:

Stakeholders

• Nurse Educator: provides education to day/night shift workers as needed on policy changes
• Computer/Tech Personnel: updates Electronic Health Record to support new additions to assessments

Step 8: Conclusion

Conclude the entire paper by summarizing each section. Do not simply tell me a summary of what you wrote (i.e. avoid "First I discussed", Next, I wrote..." statements in the paper), instead summarize the essential or main points for the various sections. Never include new findings in the conclusion. (1 paragraph)

Step 9: Turnitin:

You will receive a Turnitin report after uploading the paper into the assignment. Review the similarity report and change any phrases or sentences that you need to. You can re-submit the assignment if needed. Failure to submit to the assignment by the due date will result in a late penalty deduction. Faculty will view your similarity report upon submission.

See Rubric for specific guidelines on scholarship deductions.

Page limit: 8 max pages excluding title page, references and any attachments included. Students should write in third person only for all sections of this paper. First person pronouns are not permitted. Paper should be submitted to the Assignment area.

References: you should include at least 2 additional peer reviewed references in addition to text books and the guideline or position statement selected. All references and guideline/position statement should be current, no older than 5 yrs. unless that guideline or position statement remains the gold standard (support with evidence). You must get any guideline or position statement approved if it older than 5 years. Minimum number of references: 1-2 textbooks, 2 peer reviewed resources, guideline/position statement= 4 MINIMUM

To see the rubric, go the next section of the Module and click on the Rubric link.

Printable Rubric:

EBP Guideline_Position Statement Paper 2025.pdf