Want create site? With Free visual composer you can do it easy.

PICOT Question And Literature Search

PICOT Question And Literature Search

https://nursingpaperslayers.com/picot-question-and-literature-search/

Assessment Description

The first step of the evidence-based practice process is to evaluate a nursing practice environment to identify a nursing problem in the clinical area. When a nursing problem is discovered, the nurse researcher develops a clinical guiding question to address that nursing practice problem.

For this assignment, you will create a clinical guiding question know as a PICOT question. The PICOT question must be relevant to a nursing practice problem. To support your PICOT question, identify six supporting peer-reviewed research articles, as indicated below. The PICOT question and six peer-reviewed research articles you choose will be utilized for subsequent assignments.

Use the “Literature Evaluation Table” to complete this assignment.

  1. Select a nursing practice problem of interest to use as the focus of your research. Start with the patient population and identify a clinical problem or issue that arises from the patient population. In 200–250 words, provide a summary of the clinical issue.
  2. Following the PICOT format, write a PICOT question in your selected nursing practice problem area of interest. The PICOT question should be applicable to your proposed capstone project (the project students must complete during their final course in the RN-BSN program of study).
  3. The PICOT question will provide a framework for your capstone project.
  4. Conduct a literature search to locate six research articles focused on your selected nursing practice problem of interest. This literature search should include three quantitative and three qualitative peer-reviewed research articles to support your nursing practice problem.

Note: To assist in your search, remove the words qualitative and quantitative and include words that narrow or broaden your main topic. For example: Search for diabetes and pediatric and dialysis. To determine what research design was used in the articles the search produced, review the abstract and the methods section of the article. The author will provide a description of data collection using qualitative or quantitative methods. Systematic Reviews, Literature Reviews, and Metanalysis articles are good resources and provide a strong level of evidence but are not considered primary research articles.  Therefore, they should not be included in this assignment.

While APA style is not required for the body of this assignment, solid academic writing is expected, and documentation of sources should be presented using APA formatting guidelines, which can be 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 not required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite.

Attachments

NRS-433V -RS1-LiteratureEvaluationTa

The first step of the evidence-based practice process is to evaluate a nursing practice environment to identify a nursing problem in the clinical area. When a nursing problem is discovered, the nurse researcher develops a clinical guiding question to address that nursing practice problem.

For this assignment, you will create a clinical guiding question know as a PICOT question. The PICOT question must be relevant to a nursing practice problem. To support your PICOT question, identify six supporting peer-revised research articles, as indicated below. The PICOT question and six peer-reviewed research articles you choose will be utilized for subsequent assignments.

Use the “Literature Evaluation Table” to complete this assignment.

Picot question created( Do obese patients (P) who receive nutritional education, diet and exercise (I), in comparison to those who do not (C), have improved health outcomes and weight loss (O) in a year’s time limit (T)?)

Select a nursing practice problem of interest to use as the focus of your research. Start with the patient population and identify a clinical problem or issue that arises from the patient population. In 200–250 words, provide a summary of the clinical issue.

Following the PICOT format, write a PICOT question in your selected nursing practice problem area of interest. The PICOT question should be applicable to your proposed capstone project (the project students must complete during their final course in the RN-BSN program of study).

The PICOT question will provide a framework for your capstone project.

Conduct a literature search to locate six research articles focused on your selected nursing practice problem of interest. This literature search should include three quantitative and three qualitative peer-reviewed research articles to support your nursing practice problem.

Note: To assist in your search, remove the words qualitative and quantitative and include words that narrow or broaden your main topic. For example: Search for diabetes and pediatric and dialysis. To determine what research design was used in the articles the search produced, review the abstract and the methods section of the article. The author will provide a description of data collection using qualitative or quantitative methods. Systematic Reviews, Literature Reviews, and Metanalysis articles are good resources and provide a strong level of evidence but are not considered primary research articles. Therefore, they should not be included in this assignment.

While APA style is not required for the body of this assignment, solid academic writing is expected, and documentation of sources should be presented using APA formatting guidelines, which can be 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.

Attachments

NRS-433V -RS1-LiteratureEvaluationTable.d

PICOT Question and Literature Search – Rubric

Criteria Description

Summary of Clinical Issue

5. 5: Excellent

6 points

A clinical issue is thoroughly described. The issue relates to nursing practice.

4. 4: Good

5.64 points

A clinical issue is presented. The issue relates to nursing practice. Minor detail is needed for clarity.

3. 3: Satisfactory

4.98 points

A clinical issue is summarized. The issue generally relates to nursing practice.

2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

4.5 points

A clinical issue is partially presented. It is unclear how the clinical issue relates to nursing practice. Significant aspects are missing, or there are inaccuracies.

1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

A clinical issue is omitted or is not relevant to nursing practice.

Criteria Description

PICOT Question

5. 5: Excellent

12 points

A PICOT question is clearly presented. The PICOT question format is applied accurately and presents an answerable and researchable question.

4. 4: Good

11.28 points

A PICOT question is provided. The PICOT question format is applied accurately. Some detail is need for support or clarity.

3. 3: Satisfactory

9.96 points

A PICOT question is provided. The PICOT question format is generally applied. Some information or revision is needed.

2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

9 points

A PICOT question is provided but is incomplete. The PICOT question format is used incorrectly.

1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

A PICOT question is not included.

Criteria Description

APA-Formatted Article Citations With Permalinks

5. 5: Excellent

6 points

Article citations and permalinks are presented. Article citations are accurately presented in APA format.

4. 4: Good

5.64 points

Article citations and permalinks are presented. Article citations are presented in APA format. There are minor errors.

3. 3: Satisfactory

4.98 points

Article citations and permalinks are presented. Article citations are presented in APA format, but there are errors.

2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

4.5 points

Article citations and permalinks are presented. There are significant errors in the APA format. One or more links do not lead to the intended article.

1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

Article citations and permalinks are omitted.

Criteria Description

Relationship of Articles to the PICOT Question

5. 5: Excellent

12 points

Each article clearly relates to the PICOT question. The articles provide strong support for the PICOT question.

4. 4: Good

11.28 points

Each article relates to the PICOT question. The articles provide support for the PICOT question.

3. 3: Satisfactory

9.96 points

At least one articles does not relate to the PICOT question. The remaining articles provide general support for the PICOT question. One or two different articles are needed to provide better support for the PICOT question.

2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

9 points

At least two articles do not relate to the PICOT question. The remaining articles provide a small degree of support for the PICOT question. Different articles are needed to provide better support for the PICOT question.

1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

Three or more articles do not relate to the PICOT question.

Criteria Description

Quantitative and Qualitative Articles

5. 5: Excellent

12 points

Six research articles are presented. Each article meets the assignment criteria for a quantitative, qualitative, or mixed study. An ability to identify the different types of research design used in a study is consistently demonstrated.

4. 4: Good

11.28 points

Six research articles are presented. One article does not meet the assignment criteria for a quantitative, qualitative, or mixed study. A general ability to identify the type of research design used in a study is demonstrated.

3. 3: Satisfactory

9.96 points

Six research articles are presented. Two articles do not meet the assignment criteria for a quantitative, qualitative, or mixed study. Some ability to identify the type of research design used in a study is demonstrated.

2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

9 points

Six research articles are presented. Three articles do not meet the assignment criteria for a quantitative, qualitative

1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

Fewer than six research articles are presented. Four or more articles do not meet the assignment criteria for a quantitative, qualitative,

Criteria Description

Purpose Statements

5. 5: Excellent

6 points

Purpose statements are accurate and clearly summarized.

4. 4: Good

5.64 points

Purpose statements summarized. There are some minor inaccuracies in some.

3. 3: Satisfactory

4.98 points

Purpose statements are presented. There are minor omissions in some areas, or major inaccuracies.

2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

4.5 points

Purpose statements are referenced but are incomplete in some areas.

1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

Purpose statements are omitted or are incomplete overall.

Criteria Description

Research Questions

5. 5: Excellent

6 points

Research questions are accurate and capture the fundamental question posed by the researchers in each study.

4. 4: Good

5.64 points

Research questions are presented. Minor detail is needed for clarity in some areas.

3. 3: Satisfactory

4.98 points

Research questions are presented. The research question has been misidentified or misinterpreted for one of the articles. Some detail is needed to fully illustrate the research question for one or two articles.

2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

4.5 points

Research question is presented for each article. The research question has been misidentified or misinterpreted for at least two of the articles. Additional information is needed to fully illustrate the research question for several of the articles.

1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

Research questions are omitted or are incomplete overall.

Criteria Description

Outcome

5. 5: Excellent

6 points

Research outcomes are accurate and described in detail for each article.

4. 4: Good

5.64 points

Research outcomes are presented. Minor detail is needed for clarity in some areas.

3. 3: Satisfactory

4.98 points

Research outcomes are presented. The research outcome has been misidentified or misinterpreted for one of the articles. Some detail is needed to fully illustrate the research outcomes for one or two articles.

2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

4.5 points

Research outcome is presented for each article. The research outcome has been misidentified or misinterpreted for at least two of the articles. Additional information is needed to fully illustrate the research outcomes for several of the articles.

1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

Research outcomes are omitted or are incomplete overall.

Criteria Description

Setting

5. 5: Excellent

6 points

The setting in which the researcher conducted the study is detailed and accurate for each article.

4. 4: Good

5.64 points

The setting is indicated for each article. Some detail is needed to fully illustrate the physical, social, or cultural site in which the researcher conducted the study.

3. 3: Satisfactory

4.98 points

The setting is indicated for each article. The setting described for one article is inaccurate or incomplete.

2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

4.5 points

The setting is indicated for each article. The setting described for two of the articles is inaccurate or incomplete.

1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

The setting is omitted for one or more of the articles. The setting described for three or more articles is inaccurate or incomplete.

Criteria Description

Sample

5. 5: Excellent

6 points

The sample is indicated and accurate for each article.

4. 4: Good

5.64 points

The sample is indicated for each article. Minor detail is needed for accuracy.

3. 3: Satisfactory

4.98 points

The sample is indicated for each article. The sample described for one article is inaccurate or incomplete.

2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

4.5 points

The sample is indicated for each article. The sample described for at least two of the articles is inaccurate or incomplete.

1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

The sample is omitted for one or more of the articles. The sample described for three or more articles is inaccurate or incomplete.

Criteria Description

Method

5. 5: Excellent

6 points

A thorough discussion on the method of study for each article is presented.

4. 4: Good

5.64 points

A discussion on the method of study for each article is presented.

3. 3: Satisfactory

4.98 points

The method of study for each article is presented. Some key aspects are missing for one or two articles, or there are some inaccuracies for the methods reported.

2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

4.5 points

The method of study is partially presented for each article. Key information is consistently omitted. Overall, the methods reported contain inaccuracies.

1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

Method of study for one or more articles is omitted. Overall, the methods of study are incomplete.

Criteria Description

Key Findings of the Study

5. 5: Excellent

6 points

Discussion of study results, including findings and implications for nursing practice, is thorough with relevant details and extensive explanation.

4. 4: Good

5.64 points

Discussion of study results, including findings and implications for nursing practice, is complete and includes relevant details and explanation.

3. 3: Satisfactory

4.98 points

Discussion of study results, including findings and implications for nursing practice, is generally presented for each article. Overall, the discussion includes some relevant details and explanation.

2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

4.5 points

A summary of the study results includes findings and implications for nursing practice but lacks relevant details and explanation. There are some omissions or inaccuracies.

1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

Discussion of study results, including findings and implications for nursing practice, is incomplete.

Criteria Description

Recommendations of the Researcher

5. 5: Excellent

6 points

Researcher recommendations accurate are thoroughly described for each article.

4. 4: Good

5.64 points

Researcher recommendations for each article are accurately presented. Minor detail is needed for accuracy.

3. 3: Satisfactory

4.98 points

Researcher recommendations for each article are presented. Researcher recommendations described for one article are inaccurate or incomplete.

2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

4.5 points

Researcher recommendations are indicated for each article. The researcher recommendations described for two of the articles are inaccurate or incomplete.

1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

Researcher recommendations are omitted for one or more of the articles. The recommendations described for three or more articles are inaccurate or incomplete.

Criteria Description

Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)

5. 5: Excellent

12 points

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

4. 4: Good

11.28 points

Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. A variety of sentence structures and effective figures of speech are used.

3. 3: Satisfactory

9.96 points

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

2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

9 points

Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register), sentence structure, or word choice are present.

1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

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

Criteria Description

Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style)

5. 5: Excellent

12 points

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

4. 4: Good

11.28 points

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

3. 3: Satisfactory

9.96 points

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

2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

9 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 120 points

Rubric Criteria

Total 120 points

Criterion

1. 1: Unsatisfactory

2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

3. 3: Satisfactory

4. 4: Good

5. 5: Excellent

PICOT Question

PICOT Question

0 points

A PICOT question is not included.

9 points

A PICOT question is provided but is incomplete. The PICOT question format is used incorrectly.

9.96 points

A PICOT question is provided. The PICOT question format is generally applied. Some information or revision is needed.

11.28 points

A PICOT question is provided. The PICOT question format is applied accurately. Some detail is need for support or clarity.

12 points

A PICOT question is clearly presented. The PICOT question format is applied accurately and presents an answerable and researchable question.

Relationship of Articles to the PICOT Question

Relationship of Articles to the PICOT Question

0 points

Three or more articles do not relate to the PICOT question.

9 points

At least two articles do not relate to the PICOT question. The remaining articles provide a small degree of support for the PICOT question. Different articles are needed to provide better support for the PICOT question.

9.96 points

At least one articles does not relate to the PICOT question. The remaining articles provide general support for the PICOT question. One or two different articles are needed to provide better support for the PICOT question.

11.28 points

Each article relates to the PICOT question. The articles provide support for the PICOT question.

12 points

Each article clearly relates to the PICOT question. The articles provide strong support for the PICOT question.

Setting

Setting

0 points

The setting is omitted for one or more of the articles. The setting described for three or more articles is inaccurate or incomplete.

4.5 points

The setting is indicated for each article. The setting described for two of the articles is inaccurate or incomplete.

4.98 points

The setting is indicated for each article. The setting described for one article is inaccurate or incomplete.

5.64 points

The setting is indicated for each article. Some detail is needed to fully illustrate the physical, social, or cultural site in which the researcher conducted the study.

6 points

The setting in which the researcher conducted the study is detailed and accurate for each article.

Recommendations of the Researcher

Recommendations of the Researcher

0 points

Researcher recommendations are omitted for one or more of the articles. The recommendations described for three or more articles are inaccurate or incomplete.

4.5 points

Researcher recommendations are indicated for each article. The researcher recommendations described for two of the articles are inaccurate or incomplete.

4.98 points

Researcher recommendations for each article are presented. Researcher recommendations described for one article are inaccurate or incomplete.

5.64 points

Researcher recommendations for each article are accurately presented. Minor detail is needed for accuracy.

6 points

Researcher recommendations accurate are thoroughly described for each article.

Purpose Statements

Purpose Statements

0 points

Purpose statements are omitted or are incomplete overall.

4.5 points

Purpose statements are referenced but are incomplete in some areas.

4.98 points

Purpose statements are presented. There are minor omissions in some areas, or major inaccuracies.

5.64 points

Purpose statements summarized. There are some minor inaccuracies in some.

6 points

Purpose statements are accurate and clearly summarized.

Method

Method

0 points

Method of study for one or more articles is omitted. Overall, the methods of study are incomplete.

4.5 points

The method of study is partially presented for each article. Key information is consistently omitted. Overall, the methods reported contain inaccuracies.

4.98 points

The method of study for each article is presented. Some key aspects are missing for one or two articles, or there are some inaccuracies for the methods reported.

5.64 points

A discussion on the method of study for each article is presented.

6 points

A thorough discussion on the method of study for each article is presented.

Sample

Sample

0 points

The sample is omitted for one or more of the articles. The sample described for three or more articles is inaccurate or incomplete.

4.5 points

The sample is indicated for each article. The sample described for at least two of the articles is inaccurate or incomplete.

4.98 points

The sample is indicated for each article. The sample described for one article is inaccurate or incomplete.

5.64 points

The sample is indicated for each article. Minor detail is needed for accuracy.

6 points

The sample is indicated and accurate for each article.

Quantitative and Qualitative Articles

Quantitative and Qualitative Articles

0 points

Fewer than six research articles are presented. Four or more articles do not meet the assignment criteria for a quantitative, qualitative,

9 points

Six research articles are presented. Three articles do not meet the assignment criteria for a quantitative, qualitative

9.96 points

Six research articles are presented. Two articles do not meet the assignment criteria for a quantitative, qualitative, or mixed study. Some ability to identify the type of research design used in a study is demonstrated.

11.28 points

Six research articles are presented. One article does not meet the assignment criteria for a quantitative, qualitative, or mixed study. A general ability to identify the type of research design used in a study is demonstrated.

12 points

Six research articles are presented. Each article meets the assignment criteria for a quantitative, qualitative, or mixed study. An ability to identify the different types of research design used in a study is consistently demonstrated.

Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)

Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)

0 points

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

9 points

Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register), sentence structure, or word choice are present.

9.96 points

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

11.28 points

Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. A variety of sentence structures and effective figures of speech are used.

12 points

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

APA-Formatted Article Citations With Permalinks

APA-Formatted Article Citations With Permalinks

0 points

Article citations and permalinks are omitted.

4.5 points

Article citations and permalinks are presented. There are significant errors in the APA format. One or more links do not lead to the intended article.

4.98 points

Article citations and permalinks are presented. Article citations are presented in APA format, but there are errors.

5.64 points

Article citations and permalinks are presented. Article citations are presented in APA format. There are minor errors.

6 points

Article citations and permalinks are presented. Article citations are accurately presented in APA format.

Summary of Clinical Issue

Summary of Clinical Issue

0 points

A clinical issue is omitted or is not relevant to nursing practice.

4.5 points

A clinical issue is partially presented. It is unclear how the clinical issue relates to nursing practice. Significant aspects are missing, or there are inaccuracies.

4.98 points

A clinical issue is summarized. The issue generally relates to nursing practice.

5.64 points

A clinical issue is presented. The issue relates to nursing practice. Minor detail is needed for clarity.

6 points

A clinical issue is thoroughly described. The issue relates to nursing practice.

Key Findings of the Study

Key Findings of the Study

0 points

Discussion of study results, including findings and implications for nursing practice, is incomplete.

4.5 points

A summary of the study results includes findings and implications for nursing practice but lacks relevant details and explanation. There are some omissions or inaccuracies.

4.98 points

Discussion of study results, including findings and implications for nursing practice, is generally presented for each article. Overall, the discussion includes some relevant details and explanation.

5.64 points

Discussion of study results, including findings and implications for nursing practice, is complete and includes relevant details and explanation.

6 points

Discussion of study results, including findings and implications for nursing practice, is thorough with relevant details and extensive explanation.

Research Questions

Research Questions

0 points

Research questions are omitted or are incomplete overall.

4.5 points

Research question is presented for each article. The research question has been misidentified or misinterpreted for at least two of the articles. Additional information is needed to fully illustrate the research question for several of the articles.

4.98 points

Research questions are presented. The research question has been misidentified or misinterpreted for one of the articles. Some detail is needed to fully illustrate the research question for one or two articles.

5.64 points

Research questions are presented. Minor detail is needed for clarity in some areas.

6 points

Research questions are accurate and capture the fundamental question posed by the researchers in each study.

Documentation of Sources

Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style)

0 points

Sources are not documented.

9 points

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

9.96 points

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

11.28 points

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

12 points

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

Outcome

Outcome

0 points

Research outcomes are omitted or are incomplete overall.

4.5 points

Research outcome is presented for each article. The research outcome has been misidentified or misinterpreted for at least two of the articles. Additional information is needed to fully illustrate the research outcomes for several of the articles.

4.98 points

Research outcomes are presented. The research outcome has been misidentified or misinterpreted for one of the articles. Some detail is needed to fully illustrate the research outcomes for one or two articles.

5.64 points

Research outcomes are presented. Minor detail is needed for clarity in some areas.

6 points

Research outcomes are accurate and described in detail for each article.

Did you find apk for android? You can find new Free Android Games and apps.
error: