Description
Collaboration #2: Quantitative PICO(T) Question
PURPOSE
The purpose of Collaboration #2 is for you (the learner) to formulate a quantitative PICO(T) question that will guide your literature review and provide the basis of the hypothetical, quantitative nursing research study you will plan throughout the remainder of NS 812 and NS 813.
DIRECTIONS
Review thee examples of qualitative PICO(T) questions.
Craft an initial post in which you:
Draft one (1) quantitative PICO(T) question that addresses a nursing practice problem that you are interested in exploring.
Provide a rationale for using this PICO(T) question to conduct a study that is supported by at least two (2) scholarly sources. Note: Textbooks may not be used as sources in this activity.
Unformatted Attachment Preview
NS 812—Research Design & Methods I
Practicing PICO(T)—Quantitative Examples
EXAMPLES
In military veterans who are enrolled in a baccalaureate
nursing program
(population)
is there difference between perceptions about immigrants to the United States
(intervention or treatment)
compared with the perceptions of baccalaureate nursing students who are
NOT military veterans?
(comparison intervention or treatment)
For critical care nurses who have lived in more than one place
(e.g., city, state, country)
(population)
is there relationship between knowledge about culturally-competent nursing care
(intervention or treatment)
compared with/to critical care nurses who have lived in the same place (i.e.,
cite, state, country) throughout their lives?
(comparison intervention or treatment)
In nurses who work in the intensive care unit (ICU),
(population)
is there relationship between time management mentoring
(intervention or treatment)
compared with/to no time management mentoring
(comparison intervention or treatment)
on on-time medication administration?
(outcome)
Adapted from Melnyk & Fineout-Overholt, 2019
Revised on 12-Jul-21
CLARKSON COLLEGE GRADUATE NURSING DEPARTMENT
NS 812—NURSING RESEARCH DESIGN & METHODS I
COLLABORATION #2:
Quantitative PICO(T) Question Directions + Evaluation Rubric
PURPOSE
The purpose of Collaboration #2 is for you (the learner) to formulate a quantitative PICO(T)
question that will guide your literature review and provide the basis of the hypothetical,
quantitative nursing research study you will plan throughout the remainder of NS 812 and NS
813.
CONNECTIONS
• Successful completion of Collaboration #2 will contribute to your meeting Course
Competencies 3 and 7.
POINTS
36
Collaborations are considered late when EITHER the Initial or Response Post is not made by
the designated deadline.
DIRECTIONS
1. Review the examples of quantitative PICO(T) questions.
2. Craft an initial post in which you:
a. Draft one (1) quantitative PICO(T) question that addresses a nursing practice
problem that you are interested in exploring. (This topic will be the one you plan to
explore via the hypothetical quantitative study you plan throughout the remainder
of NS 812 and through NS 813.)
b. Provide a rationale for conducting this study that is supported by at least two (2)
scholarly sources. Note: Textbooks may not be used as sources in this activity.
3. Respond to at least two (2) classmates to offer constructive feedback to help them clarify,
streamline, or otherwise enhance their questions. Support your post with at least one (1)
scholarly source.
EVALUATION RUBRIC
Criteria
Initial Post—
Quantitative PICO(T)
Question
Initial Post—
Rationale for PICO(T)
Question
Drafted Fall, 2018
Revised 1-Jun-22
4 points
Initial post includes a
full PICO(T) question
2 points
0 points
No PICO(T) question
provided
Clear, concise
rationale provided
for PICO(T) question
Vague rationale
provided for PICO(T)
question
No rationale
provided for PICO(T)
question
CLARKSON COLLEGE GRADUATE NURSING DEPARTMENT
NS 812—NURSING RESEARCH DESIGN & METHODS I
COLLABORATION #2:
Quantitative PICO(T) Question Directions + Evaluation Rubric
Criteria
Scholarly Support for
Initial Post
Feedback to
Classmates
Quality of Feedback
Scholarly Support for
Response Posts
4 points
At least 2 credible
scholarly sources
supported initial post
Feedback provided to
at least two (2)
classmates
Feedback to both
classmates was
constructive and
substantive, and
contributed to the
other students’ work
(6 points)
At least 1 credible
scholarly source
supported each
response post
0 to 2 errors
(10 points)
Use of APA Format &
Mechanics (i.e.,
Spelling, Grammar, &
Punctuation)
TOTAL 36 points
2 points
1 scholarly source
supported initial post
0 points
No scholarly sources
supported initial post
Feedback provided to No feedback was
one (1) classmate
provided to
classmates
Feedback was
No feedback was
inconsistent*
provided to
classmates
No scholarly sources
supported initial
posts
3 to 4 errors
(5 errors)
More than 4 errors
*Feedback to 1 classmate was constructive AND substantive *AND* feedback to second
classmate was NOT constructive and/or substantive *OR* feedback to BOTH classmates was
NOT constructive and/or substantive.
Drafted Fall, 2018
Revised 1-Jun-22
Purchase answer to see full
attachment
