Assignment: Advanced Levels of Clinical Inquiry PPT
Assignment: Advanced Levels of Clinical Inquiry PPT
Assignment: Advanced Levels of Clinical Inquiry PPT
Assignment: Advanced Levels of Clinical Inquiry PPT
ORDER NOW FOR AN ORIGINAL PAPER ASSIGNMENT: Assignment: Advanced Levels of Clinical Inquiry PPT
Having Trouble Meeting Your Deadline?
Get your assignment on Assignment: Advanced Levels of Clinical Inquiry PPT completed on time. avoid delay and – ORDER NOW
Question Description
I’m working on a Health & Medical question and need guidance to help me study.
Your quest to purchase a new car begins with an identification of the factors important to you. As you conduct a search of cars that rate high on those factors, you collect evidence and try to understand the extent of that evidence. A report that suggests a certain make and model of automobile has high mileage is encouraging. But who produced that report? How valid is it? How was the data collected, and what was the sample size?
Struggling to Meet Your Deadline?
Get your assignment on Assignment: Advanced Levels of Clinical Inquiry PPT done on time by medical experts. Don’t wait – ORDER NOW!
In this Assignment, you will delve deeper into clinical inquiry by closely examining your PICO(T) question. You also begin to analyze the evidence you have collected.
To Prepare:
Review the Resources and identify a clinical issue of interest that can form the basis of a clinical inquiry.
Develop a PICO(T) question to address the clinical issue of interest you identified in Module 2 for the Assignment. This PICOT question will remain the same for the entire course.
Use the key words from the PICO(T) question you developed and search at least four different databases in the Walden Library. Identify at least four relevant systematic reviews or other filtered high-level evidence, which includes meta-analyses, critically-appraised topics (evidence syntheses), critically-appraised individual articles (article synopses). The evidence will not necessarily address all the elements of your PICO(T) question, so select the most important concepts to search and find the best evidence available.
Reflect on the process of creating a PICO(T) question and searching for peer-reviewed research.
The Assignment (Evidence-Based Project)
Part 3: Advanced Levels of Clinical Inquiry and Systematic Reviews
Create a 6- to 7-slide PowerPoint presentation in which you do the following:
Identify and briefly describe your chosen clinical issue of interest.
Describe how you developed a PICO(T) question focused on your chosen clinical issue of interest.
Identify the four research databases that you used to conduct your search for the peer-reviewed articles you selected.
Provide APA citations of the four relevant peer-reviewed articles at the systematic-reviews level related to your research question. If there are no systematic review level articles or meta-analysis on your topic, then use the highest level of evidence peer reviewed article.
Describe the levels of evidence in each of the four peer-reviewed articles you selected, including an explanation of the strengths of using systematic reviews for clinical research. Be specific and provide examples.
I UPLOADED MY ASSIGNMENTS FROM MODULE 2 WITH THE RESOURCES USED AND CLINICAL ISSUE. LOOKS LIKE SOME TWEAKS NEED TO BE MADE THIS IS THE FEEDBACK I RECEIVED:
Qualitative studies are not the best to use in EBP. Qualitative study the specific group of people but cannot be used to generalize results. You need quantitative studies for that. Some of the strengths you have in the first article are actually weaknesses for generalizability. For instance, samples should be random and purposeful can be biased. If the sample is from one hospital in one unit, it is difficult to generalize the results to a larger population.
Please select quantitative studies, this will assist you in determining if your PICOT is acceptable.
PART 3: ADVANCED LEVELS OF CLINICAL INQUIRY AND SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS
CREATE A 6- TO 7-SLIDE POWERPOINT PRESENTATION IN WHICH YOU DO THE FOLLOWING:
· IDENTIFY AND BRIEFLY DESCRIBE YOUR CHOSEN CLINICAL ISSUE OF INTEREST.
· DESCRIBE HOW YOU DEVELOPED A PICO(T) QUESTION FOCUSED ON YOUR CHOSEN CLINICAL ISSUE OF INTEREST.
· IDENTIFY THE FOUR RESEARCH DATABASES THAT YOU USED TO CONDUCT YOUR SEARCH FOR THE PEER-REVIEWED ARTICLES YOU SELECTED.
· PROVIDE APA CITATIONS OF THE FOUR PEER-REVIEWED ARTICLES YOU SELECTED.
· DESCRIBE THE LEVELS OF EVIDENCE IN EACH OF THE FOUR PEER-REVIEWED ARTICLES YOU SELECTED, INCLUDING AN EXPLANATION OF THE STRENGTHS OF USING SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS FOR CLINICAL RESEARCH. BE SPECIFIC AND PROVIDE EXAMPLES.–
Excellent 81 (81%) – 90 (90%)
The presentation clearly and accurately identifies and describes in detail the chosen clinical issue of interest.
The presentation clearly and accurately describes in detail the developed PICO(T) question.
The presentation clearly and accurately identifies four or more research databases used to conduct a search for the peer-reviewed articles selected.
The presentation clearly and accurately provides full APA citations for at least four peer-reviewed articles selected, including a thorough and detailed explanation of the strengths of using systematic reviews for clinical research.
The presentation includes specific and relevant examples that fully support the research.
The presentation provides a complete, detailed, and accurate synthesis of two outside resources related to the peer-reviewed articles selected, and fully integrates at least two outside resources and two or three course-specific resources that fully support the presentation.
Good 72 (72%) – 80 (80%)
The presentation accurately identifies and describes the chosen clinical issue of interest.
The presentation accurately describes the developed PICO(T) question focused on the chosen clinical issue of interest.
The presentation accurately identifies at least four research databases used to conduct a search for the peer-reviewed articles selected.
The presentation accurately provides APA citations for at least four peer-reviewed articles selected, including an adequate explanation of the strengths of using systematic reviews for clinical research.
The presentation includes relevant examples that support the research presented.
The presentation provides an accurate synthesis of at least one outside resource related to the peer-reviewed articles selected. The response integrates at least one outside resource and two or three course-specific resources that may support the presentation.
Fair 63 (63%) – 71 (71%)
The presentation inaccurately or vaguely identifies and describes the chosen clinical issue of interest.
The presentation inaccurately or vaguely describes the developed PICO(T) question focused on the chosen clinical issue of interest.
The presentation inaccurately or vaguely identifies at least four research databases used to conduct a search for the peer-reviewed articles selected.
The presentation inaccurately or vaguely provides APA citations for at least four peer-reviewed articles selected, including an inaccurate or vague explanation of the strengths of using systematic reviews for clinical research.
The presentation includes inaccurate or vague examples to support the research presented.
The presentation provides a vague or inaccurate synthesis or outside resources related to the peer-reviewed articles selected. The response minimally integrates resources that may support the presentation.
Poor 0 (0%) – 62 (62%)
The presentation inaccurately and vaguely identifies and describes the chosen clinical issue of interest or is missing.
The presentation inaccurately and vaguely describes the developed PICO(T) question, or is missing.
The presentation inaccurately and vaguely identifies less than four research databases used to conduct a search for the peer-reviewed articles selected or is missing.
The presentation inaccurately and vaguely provides APA citations for at least four peer-reviewed articles selected, including an inaccurate and vague explanation of the strengths of using systematic reviews for clinical research, or is missing.
The presentation includes inaccurate and vague examples to support the research presented or is missing.
The presentation provides a vague and inaccurate synthesis of no outside resources related to the articles selected and fails to integrate any resources to support the presentation or is missing.
WRITTEN EXPRESSION AND FORMATTING—PARAGRAPH DEVELOPMENT AND ORGANIZATION:
PARAGRAPHS MAKE CLEAR POINTS THAT SUPPORT WELL-DEVELOPED IDEAS, FLOW LOGICALLY, AND DEMONSTRATE CONTINUITY OF IDEAS. SENTENCES ARE CAREFULLY FOCUSED—NEITHER LONG AND RAMBLING NOR SHORT AND LACKING SUBSTANCE. A CLEAR AND COMPREHENSIVE PURPOSE STATEMENT AND INTRODUCTION IS PROVIDED, WHICH DELINEATES ALL REQUIRED CRITERIA.–
Excellent 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity.
A clear and comprehensive purpose statement, introduction, and conclusion are provided, which delineates all required criteria.
Good 4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 80% of the time.
Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment is stated yet is brief and not descriptive.
Fair 3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%)
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 60–79% of the time.
Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment is vague or off topic.
Poor 0 (0%) – 3 (3%)
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity < 60% of the time.
No purpose statement, introduction, or conclusion are provided.
WRITTEN EXPRESSION AND FORMATTING—ENGLISH WRITING STANDARDS:
CORRECT GRAMMAR, MECHANICS, AND PROPER PUNCTUATION.–
Excellent 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors.
Good 4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Contains a few (one or two) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors.
Fair 3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%)
Contains several (three or four) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors.
Poor 0 (0%) – 3 (3%)
Contains many (five or more) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the reader’s understanding.
Total Points: 100
wk3assgnsingletaryn2.doc
wk3assgnsingletaryn
You must proofread your paper. But do not strictly rely on your computer’s spell-checker and grammar-checker; failure to do so indicates a lack of effort on your part and you can expect your grade to suffer accordingly. Papers with numerous misspelled words and grammatical mistakes will be penalized. Read over your paper – in silence and then aloud – before handing it in and make corrections as necessary. Often it is advantageous to have a friend proofread your paper for obvious errors. Handwritten corrections are preferable to uncorrected mistakes.
Use a standard 10 to 12 point (10 to 12 characters per inch) typeface. Smaller or compressed type and papers with small margins or single-spacing are hard to read. It is better to let your essay run over the recommended number of pages than to try to compress it into fewer pages.
Likewise, large type, large margins, large indentations, triple-spacing, increased leading (space between lines), increased kerning (space between letters), and any other such attempts at “padding” to increase the length of a paper are unacceptable, wasteful of trees, and will not fool your professor.
The paper must be neatly formatted, double-spaced with a one-inch margin on the top, bottom, and sides of each page. When submitting hard copy, be sure to use white paper and print out using dark ink. If it is hard to read your essay, it will also be hard to follow your argument.
ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE CLASS
Discussion Questions (DQ)
Initial responses to the DQ should address all components of the questions asked, include a minimum of one scholarly source, and be at least 250 words.
Successful responses are substantive (i.e., add something new to the discussion, engage others in the discussion, well-developed idea) and include at least one scholarly source.
One or two sentence responses, simple statements of agreement or “good post,” and responses that are off-topic will not count as substantive. Substantive responses should be at least 150 words.
I encourage you to incorporate the readings from the week (as applicable) into your responses.
Weekly Participation
Your initial responses to the mandatory DQ do not count toward participation and are graded separately.
In addition to the DQ responses, you must post at least one reply to peers (or me) on three separate days, for a total of three replies.
Participation posts do not require a scholarly source/citation (unless you cite someone else’s work).
Part of your weekly participation includes viewing the weekly announcement and attesting to watching it in the comments. These announcements are made to ensure you understand everything that is due during the week.
APA Format and Writing Quality
Familiarize yourself with APA format and practice using it correctly. It is used for most writing assignments for your degree. Visit the Writing Center in the Student Success Center, under the Resources tab in LoudCloud for APA paper templates, citation examples, tips, etc. Points will be deducted for poor use of APA format or absence of APA format (if required).
Cite all sources of information! When in doubt, cite the source. Paraphrasing also requires a citation.
I highly recommend using the APA Publication Manual, 6th edition.
Use of Direct Quotes
I discourage overutilization of direct quotes in DQs and assignments at the Masters’ level and deduct points accordingly.
As Masters’ level students, it is important that you be able to critically analyze and interpret information from journal articles and other resources. Simply restating someone else’s words does not demonstrate an understanding of the content or critical analysis of the content.
It is best to paraphrase content and cite your source.
LopesWrite Policy
For assignments that need to be submitted to LopesWrite, please be sure you have received your report and Similarity Index (SI) percentage BEFORE you do a “final submit” to me.
Once you have received your report, please review it. This report will show you grammatical, punctuation, and spelling errors that can easily be fixed. Take the extra few minutes to review instead of getting counted off for these mistakes.
Review your similarities. Did you forget to cite something? Did you not paraphrase well enough? Is your paper made up of someone else’s thoughts more than your own?
Visit the Writing Center in the Student Success Center, under the Resources tab in LoudCloud for tips on improving your paper and SI score.
Late Policy
The university’s policy on late assignments is 10% penalty PER DAY LATE. This also applies to late DQ replies.
Please communicate with me if you anticipate having to submit an assignment late. I am happy to be flexible, with advance notice. We may be able to work out an extension based on extenuating circumstances.
If you do not communicate with me before submitting an assignment late, the GCU late policy will be in effect.
I do not accept assignments that are two or more weeks late unless we have worked out an extension.
As per policy, no assignments are accepted after the last day of class. Any assignment submitted after midnight on the last day of class will not be accepted for grading.
Communication
Communication is so very important. There are multiple ways to communicate with me:
Questions to Instructor Forum: This is a great place to ask course content or assignment questions. If you have a question, there is a good chance one of your peers does as well. This is a public forum for the class.
Individual Forum: This is a private forum to ask me questions or send me messages. This will be checked at least once every 24 hours.
Don’t wait until the last minute
Fill in your requirements and let our experts deliver your work asap.