Description
Note: Please include a PDF or Word copy of your approved article from Week 4 with your submission.
Critique one article using the appraisal form:
Systematic or Integrative ReviewDownload Systematic or Integrative Review
Use the information below to help you know which section of the article to use to answer questions in the template:
Introduction and its subsections have the purpose or WHY the study was done.
Methods section and its subsections contain HOW the study was done.
Results, Discussion, and Conclusions section will have WHAT was found.
Details
In week 3 you selected a topic of interest and formulated a question about that topic for your Evidence-Based Practice Assignment.
In week 4 you searched the literature on your week three topic and submitted three articles for approval towards building your Evidence-Based Practice Assignment.
Module 6 readings are a continuation from week 5 that includes chapters 13 and 14 on Appraising Research Evidence and Clinical Practice Guidelines. Please refer to these chapters on how to complete an appraisal using templates provided here in instructions. Appendix A to G in your book gives you examples of completing a template appraisal form.
For the first template in week 6, you will choose either a Qualitative or a Quantitative Review (Please do not complete both Quantitative and Qualitative Appraisal). Your second article is a Systematic Review Appraisal.
Make sure you receive approval from your instructor in week 4 for the article you use to complete either the Qualitative or Quantitative Review and for the Systematic Review. There are hyperlinks to these templates in the week 6 instructions. Do not create your own document with answers.
Each section of the template is required to be completed as this assignment builds on your Evidence-Based Practice Project. Each template has a citation that must be submitted in APA format. Answers to questions in Synopsis sections are required (see template examples in your book). Each question must have an answer of 1-2 full sentences in length per question. Credibility section Yes/No answers are also required. The Comments area is also required and should be at least 1-3 sentences noting how this article relates to your nursing issue topic from week 3 and what you thought was significant.
You will be using these articles again in your week 9 Evidence Based Practice Project Poster.
Please review the rubric closely and proof your work reviewing instructions before you submit.
The chosen topic and PICOT will be used for your Week 9 Poster Assignment. It guided your article searches in Week 4 which will be used in completing your appraisals in Week 6.
NURS 350_Article Appraisal
NURS 350_Article Appraisal
Criteria Ratings Pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWriting and APA StyleFollows all the requirements related to 7th ed APA format for citation, length, source citations, and layout.
Writing is clear, concise, and organized.
Free of spelling errors. Grammatically correct.
5 point penalty if approved article from week 4 is not included with the appraisal.
15 to >12.0 pts
Meets or Exceeds Expectations
Follows APA Guidelines. Complete Formatting and writing. APA with 1 or fewer errors.
12 to >9.0 pts
Mostly Meets Expectations
Follows APA guidelines. 2-3 formatting, writing, or APA errors
9 to >6.0 pts
Below Expectations
Partially follow guidelines. 4-5 formatting, writing or APA errors.
6 to >0 pts
Does Not Meet Expectations
Does not follow guidelines. More than 5 formatting, writing or APA errors.
15 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSynopsisEach question answered in full sentences 1 to 2 sentences per question.
15 to >12.0 pts
Meets or Exceeds Expectations
Uses approved article to complete. Evidence of critical thinking. Ideas well developed.
12 to >9.0 pts
Mostly Meets Expectations
Well presented, ideas are detailed and mostly well developed
9 to >6.0 pts
Below Expectations
Content is sound, ideas present but not particularly developed
6 to >0 pts
Does Not Meet Expectations
Content is slightly reasonable
15 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeCredibilityAnswer yes or no questions and add a statement 1 to 2 sentences in length under each question
15 to >12.0 pts
Meets or Exceeds Expectations
Uses approved article to complete. Evidence of critical thinking & Ideas well developed
12 to >9.0 pts
Mostly Meets Expectations
Well presented, ideas are detailed and mostly well developed
9 to >6.0 pts
Below Expectations
Content is sound, ideas present but not particularly developed
6 to >0 pts
Does Not Meet Expectations
Content is slightly reasonable
15 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeClinical Significance and ApplicabilityAnswer yes or no questions and add a statement 1 to 2 sentences in length under each question
15 to >12.0 pts
Meets or Exceeds Expectations
Uses approved article to complete. Evidence of critical thinking & Ideas well developed
12 to >9.0 pts
Mostly Meets Expectations
Well presented, ideas are detailed and mostly well developed
9 to >6.0 pts
Below Expectations
Content is sound, ideas present but not particularly developed
6 to >0 pts
Does Not Meet Expectations
Content is slightly reasonable
15 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeCommentsUsing your own words (no direct quotes), describe in 1 paragraph how this article relates to your nursing issue topic from week three and what you thought was significant.
15 to >12.0 pts
Meets or Exceeds Expectations
Exceptionally well presented; ideas detailed and well developed
12 to >9.0 pts
Mostly Meets Expectations
Well presented, Ideas detailed and mostly well developed
9 to >6.0 pts
Below Expectations
Content is sound and solid; ideas are presented but not particularly developed.
6 to >0 pts
Does Not Meet Expectations
Content is slightly reasonable
15 pts
Total Points: 75
Unformatted Attachment Preview
APPENDIX C
Appraisal Guide
Conclusions of a Systematic Review with Narrative Synthesis
Citation:
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
Synopsis
What organization or persons produced the systematic review (SR)?
How many persons were involved in conducting the review?
What topic or question did the SR address?
How were potential research reports identified?
What determined if a study was included in the analysis?
How many studies were included in the review?
What research designs were used in the studies?
What were the consistent and important across-studies conclusions?
Credibility
Was the topic clearly defined?
Yes
No
Not clear
Was the search for studies and other
evidence comprehensive and unbiased?
Yes
No
Not clear
Was the screening of citations for
inclusion based on explicit criteria?
Yes
No
Not clear
*Were the included studies assessed
for quality?
Yes
No
Not clear
Were the design characteristics and
findings of the included studies displayed
or discussed in sufficient detail?
Yes
No
Not clear
*Was there a true integration (i.e., synthesis) of the findings—not
merely reporting of findings from
each study individually?
Yes
No
Not clear
Brown
APP C-1
*Did the reviewers explore why differences
in findings might have occurred?
Yes
No
Not clear
Did the reviewers distinguish between
conclusions based on consistent findings
from several good studies and those
based on inferior evidence (number or quality)?
Yes
No
Not clear
Which conclusions were supported by
consistent findings from two or more
good or high-quality studies?
List
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
ARE THE CONCLUSIONS
CREDIBLE?
Yes All
Yes Some
No
Clinical Significance
*Across studies, is the size of the
treatment or the strength of the
association found or the
meaningfulness of qualitative findings
strong enough to make a difference
in patient outcomes or experiences of care?
Yes
No
Not clear
Are the conclusions relevant to the
care the nurse gives?
Yes
No
Not clear
ARE THE CONCLUSIONS
CLINICALLY SIGNIFICANT?
Yes All
Yes Some
No
Applicability
Does the SR address a problem,
situation, or decision we are addressing in our setting?
Yes
No
Not clear
Are the patients in the studies or a
subgroup of patients in the studies
similar to those we see?
Yes
No
Not clear
What changes, additions, training, or
purchases would be needed to implement
and sustain a clinical protocol based
on these conclusions?
Specify and list
____________________________________________________________________________
APP C-2
Brown
____________________________________________________________________________
Is what we will have to do to implement
the new protocol realistically achievable
by us (resources, capability, commitment)?
How will we know if our patients are
benefiting from our new protocol?
Yes
No
Not clear
Specify
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
ARE THESE CONCLUSIONS
APPLICABLE TO OUR SETTING?
Yes All
Yes Some
No
SHOULD WE PROCEED TO DESIGN
A PROTOCOL INCORPORATING
THESE CONCLUSIONS?
Yes All
Yes Some
No
* = Important criteria
Comments
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
Brown
APP C-3
Purchase answer to see full
attachment
