Description
To Prepare:
Reflect on the four peer-reviewed articles you selected in Module 2 and the four systematic reviews (or other filtered high- level evidence) you selected in Module 3.
Reflect on the four peer-reviewed articles you selected in Module 2 and analyzed in Module 3.
Review and download the Critical Appraisal Tool Worksheet Template provided in the Resources.
The Assignment (Evidence-Based Project)
Part 3A: Critical Appraisal of Research
Conduct a critical appraisal of the four peer-reviewed articles you selected by completing the Evaluation Table within the Critical Appraisal Tool Worksheet Template. Choose a total of four peer- reviewed articles that you selected related to your clinical topic of interest in Module 2 and Module 3.
Note: You can choose any combination of articles from Modules 2 and 3 for your Critical Appraisal. For example, you may choose two unfiltered research articles from Module 2 and two filtered research articles (systematic reviews) from Module 3 or one article from Module 2 and three articles from Module 3. You can choose any combination of articles from the prior Module Assignments as long as both modules and types of studies are represented.
Part 3B: Critical Appraisal of Research
Based on your appraisal, in a 1-2-page critical appraisal, suggest a best practice that emerges from the research you reviewed. Briefly explain the best practice, justifying your proposal with APA citations of the research.
These are the articles that were used for the last assignment that are required for this assignment:
Article 1: Dierkes, A. M., Aiken, L. H., Sloane, D. M., Cimiotti, J. P., Riman, K. A., & McHugh, M. D. (2022). Hospital nurse staffing and sepsis protocol compliance and outcomes among patients with sepsis in the USA: a multistate cross-sectional analysis. BMJ open, 12(3), e056802. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2021-056802
The level of evidence is level 2
Article 2: Lasater, K. B., Aiken, L. H., Sloane, D. M., French, R., Anusiewicz, C. V., Martin, B., Reneau, K., Alexander, M., & McHugh, M. D. (2021). Is Hospital Nurse Staffing Legislation in the Public’s Interest?: An Observational Study in New York State. Medical care, 59(5), 444–450. https://doi.org/10.1097/MLR.0000000000001519
The article is level 2 evidence level.
Article 3:Twigg, D. E., Whitehead, L., Doleman, G., & El-Zaemey, S. (2021). The impact of nurse staffing methodologies on nurse and patient outcomes: A systematic review. Journal of advanced nursing, 77(12), 4599–4611. https://doi.org/10.1111/jan.14909
The third article is level 1 of evidence
Article 4:Lasater, K. B., Aiken, L. H., Sloane, D., French, R., Martin, B., Alexander, M., & McHugh, M. D. (2021). Patient outcomes and cost savings associated with hospital safe nurse staffing legislation: an observational study. BMJ open, 11(12), e052899. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2021-052899
This is level 2 evidence.
Unformatted Attachment Preview
Critical Appraisal Tool
Worksheet Template
Evaluation Table
Use this document to complete the evaluation table requirement of the Module 4 Assessment, Evidence-Based Project, Part
3A: Critical Appraisal of Research
Article #1
Article #2
Article #3
Article #4
Full APA formatted citation of
selected article.
Evidence Level *
(I, II, or III)
Conceptual Framework
Describe the theoretical basis for
the study (If there is not one
mentioned in the article, say
that here).**
Design/Method
Describe the design and how the
© 2021 Walden University, LLC
1
study was carried out (In detail,
including inclusion/exclusion
criteria).
Sample/Setting
The number and characteristics of
patients, attrition rate, etc.
Major Variables Studied
List and define dependent and
independent variables
Measurement
Identify primary statistics used to
answer clinical questions (You
need to list the actual tests
done).
Data Analysis Statistical or
Qualitative findings
(You need to enter the actual
numbers determined by the
statistical tests or qualitative
data).
Findings and Recommendations
General findings and
recommendations of the research
Appraisal and Study Quality
© 2021 Walden University, LLC
2
Describe the general worth of this
research to practice.
What are the strengths and
limitations of study?
What are the risks associated with
implementation of the suggested
practices or processes detailed in
the research?
What is the feasibility of use in
your practice?
Key findings
Outcomes
General Notes/Comments
© 2021 Walden University, LLC
3
*These levels are from the Johns Hopkins Nursing Evidence-Based Practice: Evidence Level and Quality Guide
•
Level I
Experimental, randomized controlled trial (RCT), systematic review RTCs with or without meta-analysis
•
Level II
Quasi-experimental studies, systematic review of a combination of RCTs and quasi-experimental studies, or quasi-experimental studies only, with or without metaanalysis
•
Level III
Nonexperimental, systematic review of RCTs, quasi-experimental with/without meta-analysis, qualitative, qualitative systematic review with/without meta-synthesis
•
Level IV
Respected authorities’ opinions, nationally recognized expert committee/consensus panel reports based on scientific evidence
•
Level V
Literature reviews, quality improvement, program evaluation, financial evaluation, case reports, nationally recognized expert(s) opinion based on experiential evidence
**Note on Conceptual Framework
•
The following information is from Walden academic guides which helps explain conceptual frameworks and the reasons they are used in research. Here is the link
https://academicguides.waldenu.edu/library/conceptualframework
•
Researchers create theoretical and conceptual frameworks that include a philosophical and methodological model to help design their work. A formal theory provides
context for the outcome of the events conducted in the research. The data collection and analysis are also based on the theoretical and conceptual framework.
•
As stated by Grant and Osanloo (2014), “Without a theoretical framework, the structure and vision for a study is unclear, much like a house that cannot be constructed
without a blueprint. By contrast, a research plan that contains a theoretical framework allows the dissertation study to be strong and structured with an organized flow
from one chapter to the next.”
•
Theoretical and conceptual frameworks provide evidence of academic standards and procedure. They also offer an explanation of why the study is pertinent and how the
researcher expects to fill the gap in the literature.
•
Literature does not always clearly delineate between a theoretical or conceptual framework. With that being said, there are slight differences between the two.
© 2021 Walden University, LLC
4
References
The Johns Hopkins Hospital/Johns Hopkins University (n.d.). Johns Hopkins nursing evidence-based practice: appendix C: evidence level and
quality guide. https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/evidence-based-practice/_docs/appendix_c_evidence_level_quality_guide.pdf
Grant, C., & Osanloo, A. (2014). Understanding, selecting, and integrating a theoretical framework in dissertation research: Creating the blueprint
for your house. Administrative Issues Journal: Education, Practice, and Research, 4(2), 12-26.
Walden University Academic Guides (n.d.). Conceptual & theoretical frameworks overview.
https://academicguides.waldenu.edu/library/conceptualframework
© 2021 Walden University, LLC
5
Learning Resources
•
Melnyk, B. M., & Fineout-Overholt, E. (2023). Evidence-based practice in
nursing & healthcare: A guide to best practice (5th ed.). Wolters Kluwer.
o Chapter 6, “Critically Appraising Quantitative Evidence for Clinical
Decision Making” (pp. 189–228)
•
Fineout-Overholt, E., Melnyk, B. M., Stillwell, S. B., & Williamson, K. M. (2010).
Evidence-based practice step by step: Critical appraisal of the evidence: Part
I. American Journal of NursingLinks to an external site., 110(7), 47–52.
doi:10.1097/01.NAJ.0000383935.22721.9c
Fineout-Overhold, E., Melnyk, B.M., Stillwell, S.B., & Williamson, K.M. (2010).
Evidence-based practice step-by-step: Critical appraisal of the evidence: Part
II. American Journal of NursingLinks to an external site., 110(7), 47-52
Fineout-Overholt, E., Melnyk, B., Stillwell, S., & Williamson, K. (2010). Critical
appraisal of the evidence: Part III the process of synthesis: Seeing similarities
and differences across the body of evidence.American Journal of NursingLinks
to an external site., 110(11), 43-51.
doi:10.1097/01.NAJ.0000390523.99066.b5
Williamson, K. M. (2009). Evidence-based practice: Critical appraisal of
qualitative evidence. Journal of the American Psychiatric Nurses
AssociationLinks to an external site., 15(3), 202–207.
doi:10.1177/1078390309338733
•
•
•
Purchase answer to see full
attachment
