Evidence-Based Practice Project Proposal Presentation NUR 590

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) established an Institutional Review Board (IRB) to review and monitor human subjects translational research. The IRB is responsible for a variety of tasks, including approving or rejecting research proposals (Nurunnabi, 2014). For example, in order for a study to be approved by the IRB, certain ethical requirements, such as informed consent, scientific validity, fair subject selection, subject respect, and many others, must be met. If the research does not meet IRB requirements, the study may be rejected or the design modified. Furthermore, the IRB has been tasked with training investigators on how to protect human subjects from harm during research (Nurunnabi, 2014). Furthermore, before investigators submit research proposals for funding, the IRB must review the proposals to ensure that ethical principles are followed. Among the ethical research considerations specific to population health are fidelity, nonmaleficence, and beneficence (DeCamp et al., 2018). Fidelity entails an individual’s respect, trust, and autonomy, which the investigator should consider before beginning the research. Non-maleficence implies that the study should not harm human subjects, whereas beneficence implies that the study should act in the patients’ best interests (DeCamp et al., 2018).

Indeed, investigators must ensure that people, potential benefits, and the burden of the research are all respected, and that justice is upheld throughout the translation process. Individuals, for example, should be treated as autonomous subjects with the right to absolute safety. Investigators must ensure that the research is conducted in the best interests of the patients and that the results will benefit population health. Once again, research costs should be reasonable and affordable. Following the research, the research benefits should be distributed fairly and equitably to participants. When an investigator takes all of these factors into account, the research is ethically balanced.

The problem statement is consistent throughout the presentation and concisely describes the issue using strong evidence-based support from the literature review to rationalize and justify the problem. The research from the literature review is current, relevant, and used to provide excellent rationale and support throughout. Evidence-Based Practice Project Proposal Presentation NUR 590

The problem statement outlines the issue. Support from the research from the literature review is inconsistent.

The problem statement is not clearly stated. Research from the literature review is not included.

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

The selected model or framework and its application to the proposed implementation are adequately described.

The selected model or framework and its application to the proposed implementation are generally described.

The selected model or framework is and its application to the proposed implementation are only partially described.

The selected model or framework and its application to the proposed implementation are not described.

The implementation plan is thoroughly described and provides the details for the various aspects.

The implementation plan is generally described and provides an overall outline for the various aspects.

The implementation plan is adequately described and provides the details for the various aspects.

The implementation plan is not described.

The implementation plan is only partially described.

The evaluation plan is thoroughly described and provides the details for the various aspects.

The evaluation plan is adequately described and provides key information for the various aspects.

The evaluation plan is outlined and provides general information for most aspects.

The evaluation plan is only partially described.

The evaluation plan is not described.

The conclusion is short, clear and summarizes the key points of the presentation in a powerful and memorable way.

The conclusion summarizes the key points of the presentation in a concise manner.

The conclusion outlines the broad aspects of the presentation.

The conclusion mentions some aspects of the presentation, but there are some key aspects missing.

A conclusion is not presented.

Research is supportive of the rationale presented. Sources are distinctive. Addresses all of the issues stated in the assignment criteria. Evidence-Based Practice Project Proposal Presentation NUR 590

Research is timely and relevant, and addresses all of the issues stated in the assignment criteria.

No outside sources were used to support the assignment.

Research is adequate. Sources are standard in relevance, quality of outside sources, or timeliness.

Few outside sources were used to support the assignment. Limited research is apparent.

The submission is presented effectively, and all of the required elements creatively contribute to the presentation of the concepts.

The submission is presented effectively and contains all of the required elements.

The submission contains minor inconsistencies that are not overly distracting. Presentation contains a majority of the required elements.

The submission is ineffective, contains multiple inconsistencies, or is missing a few of the required elements.

The submission is incoherent, contains major inconsistencies, is not presented effectively, or is missing a substantial amount of the required elements. Evidence-Based Practice Project Proposal Presentation NUR 590

Design is cluttered. Materials detract from the content or the purpose of presentation is low quality.

Design is appropriate and integrates a variety of objects, charts, and graphs to amplify the message.

Design is clean. Skillful handling of text and visuals creates a distinctive and effective presentation. Overall, effective and functional audio, text, or visuals are evident.

Design is fairly clean, with a few exceptions. Materials add to, not detract from the presentation. Materials used were quality products and easy to see or hear.

Design detracts from purpose. Text and visuals are too simplistic, cluttered, and busy. Little or no creativity or inventiveness is present.

Synthesis integrates ideas but does not adequately form a cohesive whole. Combination of elements at times is confusing.

Synthesis is unique. Synthesis shows careful planning and attention to how disparate elements fit together. The combination of elements is verified.

Synthesis integrates ideas to form a cohesive whole. Combination of elements is logical and justified.

Synthesis integrates ideas inadequately. The combination of elements is not logical.

Synthesis does not successfully integrate ideas to form a cohesive whole. The combination of elements is not logical and/or verifiable.

The writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.

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.

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.

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.

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

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

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

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

Sources are not documented.

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