NR505: Week 4: State of the Science Quality Improvement Paper Part 1

NR505: Week 4: State of the Science Quality Improvement Paper Part 1

NR505: Week 4: State of the Science Quality Improvement Paper Part 1

Purpose

This assignment provides the opportunity for the graduate nurse practitioner student to become familiar with research processes which are specific to quality improvement. The graduate nursing student will develop a State of the Science Evidence-Based Practice Project that is focused on quality improvement. The process begins in Week 2 with the formation of a PICO question that will shape the problem and define the focus of the project. Part 1 lays the ground work for the project by focusing on the problem statement, purpose, introduction and overview of literature search strategy with the development of an article matrix using the Johns Hopkins Individual Evidence Summary Tool.

Part 2 of the Project adds the following elements: Abstract, Review of the Literature (State of the Science), strengths and limitations of current evidence, and development of a quality enhancement (improvement) plan that addresses limitations of current practice evidence.

Course Outcomes: NR505: Week 4: State of the Science Quality Improvement Paper Part 1

CO#1 Integrate evidence-based practice and research to support advancement of holistic nursing care in diverse healthcare settings. PO 1

CO#2 Integrate knowledge related to evidence-based practice and person-centered care to improve healthcare outcomes. PO 2, 5

CO#4 Develop knowledge related to research and evidence-based practice as a basis for designing and critiquing research studies. PO 1, 2, 3, 5

Due Date: Part I Sunday 11:59 PM MT at the end of Week 4.

Total Points Possible: 350 Points Total (Part I: 150 points Part II: 200 Points)

Requirements for Part 1 (150 points)

Part 1: Criteria for Content: Sections: All sections should have scholarly resources integrated as in-text citations that support the content. APA current edition is required for all elements of the paper.

1. Introduction: Overview of Selected Evidenced-Based Practice Quality Improvement Project. Overview should include rationale for selection of the project topic based upon scholarly resources. The introduction should also include an overview of the purpose or aim of the paper.
2. Problem Discussion:

Identification of the selected problem for the quality improvement project: A comprehensive discussion of the selected problem should be included. It should contain the following elements:

• Explanation of the selected problem in detail.
• Identify the stakeholders impacted by the concern.
• Identify the consequences/importance of the selected concern; state rationale for selection of the topic.
• Identify a purpose statement (the specific aim) for this EBP proposal.

1. PICO question and Literature Search Process: This section identifies the PICO question that will used for this EBP proposal. The literature search parameters will also be identified. It should contain the following elements:

• Identify the PICO question in correct format with all required elements
• Identify the steps used to conduct a literature review for this EBP proposal by including:
  • The specific library databases used
  • The key search terms and phrases used
  • The minor (additional) search terms and phrases used
  • Identify any specialty organization that is relevant to this EBP proposal
  • Include the following documents in your appendix:
    • Johns Hopkins Question Development Tool

1. Theoretical Framework: This section presents the theoretical framework that will used in this Quality Improvement Project. It should contain the following section:

• Explain the theoretical framework to be used in this EBP proposal. Has this theory been used, tested, in your topic area? Be sure to include references that support your choice of theory.
• Describe how the identified theoretical framework is to be applied to this Quality Improvement Projectl.

Preparing the Assignment

Criteria for Format and Special Instructions

1. Page Length: Part 1 of the paper (excluding the title page and reference page) should be at 5-6 pages maximum. Points may be lost for not meeting these length requirements. Up to five (5) extra points may be deducted for page length issues as determined by your course faculty. This is relative to each section of the paper.
2. Title page, running head, body of paper, and reference page must follow APA guidelines as found in the current edition of the manual. This includes the use of headings for each section of the paper except for the introduction where no heading is used.
3. A minimum of 6 (six) topic related research-based scholarly references(articles) must be used. Required textbook for this course, dictionary and Chamberlain College of Nursing lesson information may be used but will NOT count as scholarly references for this assignment. For additional assistance regarding scholarly nursing references, please see “What is a scholarly source” located in the Library Guide Course Resources tab. Be aware that information from .com websites may be incorrect and should be avoided. References are current – within a 5-year time frame unless a valid rationale is provided and the instructor has approved them prior to submission of the assignment.
4. Complete the Johns Hopkins Review of the LIterature Table (ROL) for the articles you have chosen for your SOS QI Paper. The ROL Table can be found in Week 2. The ROL table should be included in the Appendix of the SOS QI Paper along with your PICO Question Development Tool. Please be sure to review the rubric for both Part 1 and Part 2 of the SOS QI Paper.
5. Ideas and information from scholarly, peer reviewed, sources must be cited and referenced correctly throughout the paper to include the reference list.
6. Rules of grammar, spelling, word usage, and punctuation are to be followed and consistent with formal, scientific, scholarly writing. First person writing should not be utilized.

Rubric Glossary of Achievement Terms

Comprehensive: 

1. Of Large Scope, Covering or Involving Much; Inclusive
2. Comprehending or thoroughly understanding with one’s mind; having an extensive mental range or grasp of a particular subject.

Thorough: 

Superficial:

1. Not thorough, on the surface
2. Of little substance, lacking thoroughness

Ill-Prepared / Un-structured:

1. Inadequately prepared, lack of care for detail
2. Lacking organization, disorganized

Succinct

1. Expressed in few words, verbal brevity
2. Compressed expression

Webster’s Online Dictionary: Retrieved from https://www.dictionary.com/

Rubric – NR505: Week 4: State of the Science Quality Improvement Paper Part 1

NR505NP SOS Rubric Part 1_SEPT19

NR505NP SOS Rubric Part 1_SEPT19

Criteria Ratings Pts This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Introduction

Overview of Selected Evidenced-Based Practice Quality Improvement Project. Overview should include rationale for selection of the project topic based upon scholarly resources. The introduction should also include an overview of the purpose or aim of the paper.

25.0 pts

Excellent

There is a comprehensive introduction addressing all criteria.

23.0 pts

V. Good

There is a thorough Introduction which addresses the criteria AND/OR the introduction may be comprehensive yet be missing an element, such as rationale or purpose.

21.0 pts

Satisfactory

There is a superficial introduction regarding criteria AND/OR the introduction is missing elements.

13.0 pts

Needs Improvement

There is an ill-prepared or unstructured Introduction.

0.0 pts

Unsatisfactory

The Introduction is missing completely OR it is of such brevity it lacks connection, or congruity to the topic.

25.0 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Problem Discussion

Identification of the selected problem for the quality improvement project: A comprehensive discussion of the selected problem should be included. It should contain the following elements: 
• Explanation of the selected problem in detail.
• Identify the stakeholders impacted by the concern.
• Identify the consequences/importance of the selected concern; state rationale for selection of the topic.
• Identify a purpose statement (the specific aim) for this EBP proposal.

40.0 pts

Excellent

There is a comprehensive problem discussion addressing all criteria of the section.

36.0 pts

V. Good

There is a thorough problem discussion which addresses all the criteria OR the Problem Overview may be comprehensive in areas yet be missing or scant in one area, such as the problem discussion or identification of stakeholders.

33.0 pts

Satisfactory

There is in general a superficial problem discussion which addresses all the criteria OR the Problem Overview may be thorough in areas but may be missing other content areas (such as stakeholders or rationale).

20.0 pts

Needs Improvement

There is an ill-prepared or unstructured problem discussion.

0.0 pts

Unsatisfactory

The problem discussion is missing OR it is of such brevity it lacks connection or congruity to the topic.

40.0 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome PICO Question and ROL Search Parameters

1. PICO question is identified
2. The specific library databases used for literature review are included
3. Literature review search is identified and includes the key search terms and phrases used. Any additional search terms or phrases are also included (if applicable).
4. Specialty organizations that are relevant to this EBP proposal are identified
5. A minimum of 6 (six) topic related research-based scholarly references (articles) are utilized  
6. The Johns Hopkins Question Development Tool is included in the appendix
7. The Johns Hopkins ROL Table is included in the appendix

(7 required elements)

45.0 pts

Excellent

All elements are included and accurate

41.0 pts

V. Good

1 element is missing or inaccurate

37.0 pts

Satisfactory

2-3 elements are missing or inaccurate

23.0 pts

Needs Improvement

4-6 elements are missing or inaccurate

0.0 pts

Unsatisfactory

All elements are missing or inaccurate

45.0 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Theoretical Framework

This section presents the theoretical framework that will be used in this Quality Improvement Project. It should contain the following sections:
• Explain the theoretical framework to be used in this Quality Project. Has this theory been used, tested, in your topic area? Be sure to include references that support your choice of theory.
• Describe how the identified theoretical framework is to be applied to this Quality Improvement Project.

25.0 pts

Excellent

There is a comprehensive explanation of the theoretical framework that answers all questions and criteria of the section.

23.0 pts

V. Good

There is a thorough explanation of the theoretical framework that answers all questions of the section OR There is a comprehensive explanation of the theoretical framework itself, but the section is missing elements of the criteria (for example, application to the Quality Improvement Project)

20.0 pts

Satisfactory

There is a superficial explanation of the theoretical framework that answers all questions of the section OR There is a thorough explanation of the theoretical framework itself, but the section is missing elements of the criteria (for example, application to the Quality Improvement Project.)

13.0 pts

Needs Improvement

There is an ill-structured or ill prepared theoretical framework explanation which includes all section content.

0.0 pts

Unsatisfactory

The Theoretical Framework and section 1 & 2 are missing OR it is included with such brevity it lacks connection or congruity to the topic.

25.0 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome APA/Syntax/Grammar/ Spelling

Current edition for formatting, scholarly syntax is maintained throughout paper without use of first person, grammar and spelling are correct throughout.
1. Page Length: Part 1 of the paper (excluding the title page and reference page) should be at 5 pages minimum and 6 pages maximum. Points may be lost for not meeting these length requirements.  
2. Title page, running head, body of paper, and reference page must follow APA guidelines as found in the current edition of the manual. This includes the use of headings for each section of the paper except for the introduction where no heading is used.
3. Ideas and information from scholarly, peer reviewed, sources must be cited and referenced correctly throughout the paper to include the reference list.
4. Rules of grammar, spelling, word usage, and punctuation are to be followed and consistent with formal, scientific, scholarly writing. First person writing should not be utilized.
Remember: All sections should have scholarly resources integrated as in-text citations that support the content. APA current edition is required for all elements of the paper.

15.0 pts

Excellent

1 error total in any area.

14.0 pts

V. Good

2-4 errors total in any area.

12.0 pts

Satisfactory

5-7 errors total in any area.

8.0 pts

Needs Improvement

8-10 errors total in any area.

0.0 pts

Unsatisfactory

10 or more errors total in any area.

15.0 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Late penalty deductions

Students are expected to submit assignments by the time they are due. Assignments submitted after the due date and time will receive a deduction of 10% of the total points possible for that assignment for each day the assignment is late. Assignments will be accepted, with penalty as described, up to a maximum of three days late, after which point a zero will be recorded for the assignment.
Quizzes and discussions are not considered assignments and are not part of the late assignment policy.

0.0 pts

Manual Deductions