NURS 8210 Assessment Description

NURS 8210 Assessment Description

NURS 8210 Assessment Description

For this assignment, you will synthesize the independent evidence-based practice project proposal assignments from NUR-550 and NUR-590 into a 4,500-5,000-word professional paper.

Final Paper

The final paper should:

  1. Incorporate all necessary revisions and corrections suggested by your instructors.
  2. Synthesize the different elements of the overall project into one paper. The synthesis should reflect the main concepts for each section, connect ideas or overreaching concepts, and be rewritten to include the critical aspects (do not copy and paste the assignments).
  3. Contain supporting research for the evidence-based practice project proposal.

Main Body of the Paper

The main body of your paper should include the following sections:

  1. Problem Statement
  2. Organizational Culture and Readiness
  3. Literature Review
  4. Change Model, or Framework
  5. Implementation Plan
  6. Evaluation Plan

Appendices

The appendices at the end of your paper should include the following:

  1. All final changes or revisions for the drafts that will be included in the appendices of your paper.
  2. Complete the “APA Writing Checklist” to ensure that your paper adheres to APA style and formatting criteria and general guidelines for academic writing. Include the completed checklist as the final appendix at the end of your paper. In each preceding course you have been directed to the Student Success Center for assistance with APA style, and have submitted the APA Writing Checklist to help illustrate your adherence to APA style. This final paper should demonstrate a clear ability to communicate your project in a professional and accurately formatted paper using APA style.

General Requirements

You are required to cite 10-12 peer-reviewed sources to complete this assignment. Sources must be published within the last 5 years and appropriate for the assignment criteria and nursing content.

Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center.

This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.

You are required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite. A link to the LopesWrite technical support articles is located in Class Resources if you need assistance.

NUR 590 Topic 4 DQ 2

Identify which statistical test you would use in conjunction with your selected research design from DQ 1 to evaluate the outcomes for your evidence-based project proposal and explain why you selected this test. What kind of information will this test provide about your outcomes?

According to Parab & Bhalerao, “statistical tests are mathematical tools for analyzing quantitative data generated in a research study” (2010). There are a number or test that researchers can use which can also become overwhelming and cause confusion for the research, and that can lead to sabotaging and tainting their study. Selecting the statistical test helps the researcher understand what to look for in the study as well as help organize their data. Parab & Bhalerao (2010) stated that “Before selecting a statistical test, a researcher has to simply answer the following six questions, which will lead to correct choice of test:”.

  1. How many independent variables covary (vary in the same time period) with the dependent variable?
  2. At what level of measurement is the independent variable?
  3. What is the level of measurement of the dependent variable?
  4. Are the observations independent or dependent?
  5. Do the comparisons involve populations to populations, a sample to a population, or are two or more

samples compared?

  1. Is the hypothesis being tested comparative or relationship?

 

Statistical testing is used explain the results of a study. The test that I would use would be the t-test. “A t-test is a type of inferential statistic used to determine if there is a significant difference between the means of two groups, which may be related in certain features” (Investopedia, n.d.). I would used this test because of show the averages of nurses to patient ratios to help determine the correlation between low staffing and high staffing and whether each has a positive or negative effect on patient health outcomes.

 

 

 

Reference:

 

Investopedia. (n.d.). T-Test. Retrieved from https://www.investopedia.com/terms/t/t-test.asp

 

Parab, S. & Bhalerao, S. (2010). Choosing Statistical Test. International Journal of Ayurveda Research. 1(3): 187-191. Retrieved from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2996580/

Statistical tests can be chosen based on independent factors and other project designs. My project seeks to identify if PPE education increases informal (family) caregiver compliance to PPE usage. I’ve identified at least one confounding variable, which is the effects of PPE usage modeling by staff. Siebert et al. (2018) found staff modeling and teaching was a big part of compliance of visitors. However, there is a test which accounts for differences in participants.

I am choosing a mixed design ANOVA test due to the used of different participants in each group. A mixed design measures “change over time, differences between the groups, interaction of time and group effects”  (Tappen, 2016). This will show the differences between groups (education versus no education) and within the groups themselves.  It can be used to measure the change between before and after the intervention of education. It will help control for the different participants in each intervention group. It could measure the change from several different time points, as desired.

 

Seibert, G., Ewers, T., Barker, A. K., Slavick, A., Wright, M. O., Stevens, L., & Safdar, N. (2018). What do visitors know and how do they feel about contact precautions? American Journal of Infection. 46(1): 115–117.

 

Tappen, R. (2016). Advanced Nursing Research. Jones & Bartlett.

NURS 8210 Assessment Description
NURS 8210 Assessment Description

Benchmark – Evidence-Based Practice Project Proposal Final Paper – Rubric

Collapse All

Synthesis

12 points

Criteria Description

Synthesis Paragraphs are logically sequenced, connect ideas or overreaching concepts, and are rewritten to present a fluid and cohesive paper.

  1. 5: Excellent

12 points

Synthesis is excellent. The paper organizes paragraphs in a logical sequence and connects ideas or overreaching concepts. The paper is well-developed, fluid, and cohesive.

  1. 4: Good

11.04 points

Synthesis is evident. The paper organizes paragraphs in a logical sequence and connects ideas or overreaching concepts. Overall, the paper applies transitions and the paper is fluid and cohesive.

  1. 3: Satisfactory

10.56 points

Synthesis is generally evident. The paper organizes most paragraphs in a logical sequence and generally connects ideas or overreaching concepts. Some paragraphs require better transitions to create a fluid and cohesive paper.

  1. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

9.6 points

Synthesis is sporadic. Overall, the paper fails to organize paragraphs in a logical sequence and connect ideas or overreaching concepts in a fluid and cohesive paper.

  1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

Synthesis is not evident. The paper consists of a cut-and-paste of the previous assignments. Revision based on instructor feedback is not included.

Organizational Culture and Readiness

10.5 points

Criteria Description

Organizational Culture and Readiness Culture, degree of readiness, challenges to implementation, strategies for implementation, stakeholder involvement, communication strategies.

  1. 5: Excellent

10.5 points

The organizational culture and readiness are thoroughly discussed and insight into the organization challenges is presented. Clear strategies for communication, stakeholder involvement, and the implementation of the evidence-based practice project proposal are presented. Thorough explanations and strong supporting evidence are provided.

  1. 4: Good

9.66 points

The organizational culture and readiness are discussed and information on the organizational challenges is presented. Strategies for communication, stakeholder involvement, and the implementation of the evidence-based practice project proposal are presented. Adequate explanations and supporting evidence are provided.

  1. 3: Satisfactory

9.24 points

An incomplete description of the organizational culture, readiness, and some organizational challenges is presented. Strategies for the overall implementation of the evidence-based practice project proposal are incomplete.

  1. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

8.4 points

The organizational culture, readiness, and some organizational challenges, are summarized. General strategies for the overall implementation of the evidence-based practice project proposal is presented, but there are inaccuracies. Some additional information is needed.

  1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

A description of the organizational culture and readiness is not included.

Problem Statement (B)

12 points

Criteria Description

Problem Statement (C5.1a)

  1. 5: Excellent

12 points

The problem statement is consistent throughout the paper and concisely describes the issue using strong evidence-based support to rationalize and justify the problem.

  1. 4: Good

11.04 points

The problem statement is consistent throughout the paper and describes the issue using evidence-based support to rationalize and justify the problem.

  1. 3: Satisfactory

10.56 points

The problem statement is mostly consistent throughout the paper and, in most instances, uses evidence-based support to rationalize and justify the problem.

  1. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

9.6 points

The problem statement is inconsistently presented throughout the paper. Evidence-based support to rationalize and justify the problem is missing in many aspects.

  1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

The problem statement is not used throughout the paper. In general, evidence-based support to rationalize and justify the problem is not provided.

Literature Review

10.5 points

Criteria Description

Literature Review

  1. 5: Excellent

10.5 points

The supporting literature from the literature review is organized and synthesized strategically throughout the paper to provide convincing evidence. The main components of the articles are used to provide substantial rationale for how the research supports the PICOT.

  1. 4: Good

9.66 points

The supporting literature from the literature review is used throughout most of the paper to provide evidence. The articles are used to provide general rationale for how the research supports the PICOT.

  1. 3: Satisfactory

9.24 points

The supporting literature from the literature review is synthesized and used throughout the paper to provide evidence. The main components of the articles are used to provide rationale for how the research supports the PICOT.

  1. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

8.4 points

The supporting literature from the literature review is inconsistently used in the paper to provide evidence. The articles do not provide clear rationale for how the research supports the PICOT.

  1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

Supporting literature from the literature review is not evident. Clear rationale for how the research supports the PICOT is not presented.

Change Model or Framework

10.5 points

Criteria Description

Change Model or Framework

  1. 5: Excellent

10.5 points

The selected model or framework and its application for the proposed implementation are thoroughly described.

  1. 4: Good

9.66 points

The selected model or framework and its application for the key aspects of the proposed implementation are described.

  1. 3: Satisfactory

9.24 points

The selected model or framework and its general application for implementation are outlined.

  1. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

8.4 points

The selected model or framework and its application for implementation are incomplete.

  1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

The selected model or framework and its application for implementation are not described.

Implementation Plan (B)

10.5 points

Criteria Description

Plan includes setting/access to subjects; timeline; budget and resources; research design; methods instruments; process for delivering intervention; stakeholders; barriers and challenges. (C5.1b)

  1. 5: Excellent

10.5 points

The implementation plan is thoroughly described and provides the details for the various aspects. Thorough explanations and strong supporting evidence are provided.

  1. 4: Good

9.66 points

The implementation plan is described and provides key information for the various aspects. Adequate explanations and supporting evidence are provided.

  1. 3: Satisfactory

9.24 points

The implementation plan is generally described. Information for some key aspects is presented, but there are inaccuracies. Some additional information is needed.

  1. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

8.4 points

The implementation plan is incomplete.

  1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

The implementation plan is not described.

Evaluation Plan

10.5 points

Criteria Description

Evaluation Plan Plan includes expected outcomes, data collection tools, statistical test, methods applied to data collection tool, strategies for nonpositive outcomes, plans for maintaining, extending, revising and discontinuing proposed solution.

  1. 5: Excellent

10.5 points

The evaluation plan is thoroughly described and provides the details for the various aspects. Thorough explanations and strong supporting evidence are provided.

  1. 4: Good

9.66 points

The evaluation plan is described and provides key information for the various aspects. Adequate explanations and supporting evidence are provided.

  1. 3: Satisfactory

9.24 points

The evaluation plan is generally described. Information for some key aspects is presented, but there are inaccuracies. Some additional information is needed.

  1. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

8.4 points

The evaluation plan is incomplete.

  1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

The evaluation plan is not described.

Associated Documents and Appendix

9 points

Criteria Description

Associated Documents and Appendix Appendix includes consent or approval form; timeline; budget and resource list; method or instrument; APA Writing Checklist.

  1. 5: Excellent

9 points

The resources are accurate and attached in the appendix. It is clearly evident by the quality of the paper that the APA Writing Checklist was effectively used in development of the paper.

  1. 4: Good

8.28 points

The resources are revised accordingly and attached in the appendix. It is apparent that the APA Writing Checklist was used in development of the paper.

  1. 3: Satisfactory

7.92 points

The resources have been revised, but there are one or two minor errors. The resources are attached in the appendix. It is apparent that the APA Writing Checklist was generally used in development of the paper, but some aspects are inconsistent with the paper format or quality.

  1. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

7.2 points

The required resources are attached, but an appendix has not been created. Some resources contain errors and have not been revised. The paper does not reflect the use of the APA Writing Checklist during development.

  1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

The appendix and required resources are omitted.

Ability to Translate Research and Knowledge to Improve Patient Outcomes and Practice (B)

12 points

Criteria Description

Ability to translate research and knowledge to improve patient outcomes and practice (C1.1)

  1. 5: Excellent

12 points

The final paper clearly adheres to ethical research standards and demonstrates a strong ability to translate research and knowledge gained from practice to the improvement of patient outcomes and clinical practice.

  1. 4: Good

11.04 points

The final paper observes ethical research standards and demonstrates an ability to translate research and knowledge gained from practice to the improvement of patient outcomes and clinical practice.

  1. 3: Satisfactory

10.56 points

The final paper observes ethical research standards, but there are some aspects of the paper that need more detail or information. A general ability to translate research and knowledge gained from practice to the improvement of patient outcomes and clinical practice is demonstrated.

  1. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

9.6 points

The final paper is inconsistent in its adherence to ethical research standards. The ability to translate research and knowledge gained from practice to the improvement of patient outcomes and clinical practice is not consistently demonstrated.

  1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

The final paper does not adhere to ethical research standards. The ability to translate research and knowledge gained from practice to the improvement of patient outcomes and clinical practice is not demonstrated.

Required Sources

7.5 points

Criteria Description

Required Sources

  1. 5: Excellent

7.5 points

Number of required resources is met. Sources are current, and appropriate for the assignment criteria and nursing content.

  1. 4: Good

6.9 points

Number of required sources is met. Sources are current, but not all sources are appropriate for the assignment criteria and nursing content.

  1. 3: Satisfactory

6.6 points

Number of required sources is met, but sources are outdated or inappropriate.

  1. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

6 points

Number of required sources is only partially met.

  1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

Sources are not included.

Thesis Development and Purpose

10.5 points

Criteria Description

Thesis Development and Purpose

  1. 5: Excellent

10.5 points

Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.

  1. 4: Good

9.66 points

Thesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose.

  1. 3: Satisfactory

9.24 points

Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper. Thesis is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose.

  1. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

8.4 points

Thesis is insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not clear.

  1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.

Argument Logic and Construction

12 points

Criteria Description

Argument Logic and Construction

  1. 5: Excellent

12 points

Clear and convincing argument that presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative.

  1. 4: Good

11.04 points

Argument shows logical progressions. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative.

  1. 3: Satisfactory

10.56 points

Argument is orderly but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis.

  1. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

9.6 points

Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility.

  1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources.

Mechanics of Writing

7.5 points

Criteria Description

Mechanics of Writing Includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use.

  1. 5: Excellent

7.5 points

Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.

  1. 4: Good

6.9 points

Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. The writer uses a variety of effective sentence structures and figures of speech.

  1. 3: Satisfactory

6.6 points

Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct and varied sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are employed.

  1. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

6 points

Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is used.

  1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) or word choice are present. Sentence structure is correct but not varied.

Paper Format

7.5 points

Criteria Description

Paper Format Use of appropriate style for the major and assignment.

  1. 5: Excellent

7.5 points

Template is fully used. There are virtually no errors in formatting style.

  1. 4: Good

6.9 points

All format elements are correct.

  1. 3: Satisfactory

6.6 points

Template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken; lack of control with formatting is apparent. The organizational culture and the degree to which it supports change is thoroughly discussed. The various aspects of the culture are included. Thorough explanations and strong supporting research are provided.

  1. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

6 points

Template is used, and formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present.

  1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

Template is not used appropriately, or documentation format is rarely followed correctly.

Documentation of Sources

7.5 points

Criteria Description

Documentation of Sources Citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style.

  1. 5: Excellent

7.5 points

Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error.

  1. 4: Good

6.9 points

Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct.

  1. 3: Satisfactory

6.6 points

Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present.

  1. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

6 points

Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.

  1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

Sources are not documented.

Total 150 points