RUA: Analyzing Published Research The purpose of this paper is to interpret the two articles identified as most important to the group topic. Please see the attached rubric and documents for instructe

Hire our professional essay experts at Gradehunters.net who are available online 24/7 for an essay paper written to a high standard at an affordable cost.


Order a Similar Paper Order a Different Paper

RUA: Analyzing Published Research

The purpose of this paper is to interpret the two articles identified as most important to the group topic. Please see the attached rubric and documents for instructed requirements for completion of this assignment.

APA 7 FORMAT for entire paper and citations. 3-4 page body requirement to exclude title reference or additional contexts.

DUE: Tuesday, April 6, 202 @ 6 PM Eastern Standard Time. NO PLAGIARISM.

RUA: Analyzing Published Research The purpose of this paper is to interpret the two articles identified as most important to the group topic. Please see the attached rubric and documents for instructe
0 Scholarly Paper Phase 1 Your Name (without credentials) Chamberlain University College of Nursing Course Number: Course Name Name of Instructor Assignment Due Date Title of Your Paper in Upper and Lower Case (Centered, Bold) Type your introduction here and remove the instructions. Although the first paragraph after the paper title is the introduction, no heading labeled “Introduction” is used. Refer to your assignment instructions for the headings to be used for the body of the paper. There are additional resources located in your courses and the Chamberlain Library. Level 1 Paper Heading (Bold and centered) Begin to type the body of your paper here. Use as many paragraphs as needed to cover the content appropriately based on the assignment instructions. Level Two Heading (If required) (Bold and starts at left margin) Type additional content here if a section with a subheading is needed. Next Level Two Heading Continue to add content in this section. Next Level 1 Heading Levels of headings will depend on the length and organization of your paper. Use as many headings as necessary and required to organize your paper. Short papers may only have level 1 headings. Longer papers may require more organizational detail. See your APA Manual for additional instructions on formatting multiple levels of headings. Conclusion Papers should end with a conclusion or summary. The assignment directions will specify which is required. It should be concise and contain no new information. No matter how much space remains on the page, the references always start on a separate page (insert a page break after the conclusion so that the references will start on a new page). References (centered, bold) Type your reference here using hanging indent and double line spacing (under “Paragraph” on the Home toolbar ribbon). See your APA Manual and the resources in the APA section of Resources for reference formatting.
RUA: Analyzing Published Research The purpose of this paper is to interpret the two articles identified as most important to the group topic. Please see the attached rubric and documents for instructe
NR449 Evidence -Based Practice RUA: Analyzing Published Research Guidelines NR 449 _RUA_ Analyzing_Published_Research _Guideline s_Sept20 _v2 1 Purpose The purpose of this paper is to interpret the two articles identified as most important to the group topic. Course outcomes : This assignment enables the student to meet the following course outcome s. CO 2: Apply research principles to the interpretation of the content of published research studies. (POs 4 and 8) CO 4: Evaluate published nursing research for credibility and clinical significance related to evidence -based practice. (POs 4 and 8) Due date : Your faculty member will inform you when this assignment is due . The Late Assignment Policy applies to this assignment . Total points possible: 200 points Preparing the assignment 1. Follow these guidelines when completing this assignment. Speak with your faculty member if you have questions. 2. Please make sure you do not duplicate articles within your group. 3. The paper will include the following: a. Clinical Question ( 30 points/ 15 %) 1. Describe the problem : What is the focus of your group’s work? 2. Significance of problem : What health outcomes result from your problem? Or what statistics document this is a problem? You may find support on websites for government or professional organizations . 3. Purpose of the paper : What will your paper do or describe? ***Please note that although most of these questions are the same as you addressed in paper 1, the pur pose of this paper is different. You can use your paper 1 for items 1 & 2 above, including any faculty suggestions for improvement provided as feedback . b. Evidence Matrix Table : Data Summary (Appendix A) – (60 points/30%) Categorize items in the Matrix Table, including proper intext citations and reference list entries for each article. 1. Reference s (recent publication within the last 5 years) 2. Purpose/Hypothesis/Study Question(s) 3. Variables: Independent (I) and Dependent (D) 4. Study Design 5. Sample Size and Selection 6. Data Collection Methods 7. Major Findings (Evidence) c. Description of Findings (60 points/ 30% ) Describe the data in the Matrix Table , including proper intext citations and reference list entries for each article . 1. Compare and contrast variable s within each stu dy. 2. What are the study design and procedures used in each study ; qualitative, quantitative, or mixed method study, levels of confid ence in each study, etc. ? 3. Participant demographics and information . 4. Instruments used, including reliability and validity . 5. How do the research findings provide evidence to support your clinical problem , or what further evidence is needed to answer your question ? 6. Next steps: Identify two questions that can help guide the group’s work. d. Conclusion (20 points/ 10% ) Review major findings in a summary paragraph . 1. Evidence to address your clinical problem . 2. Make a connection back to all the included sections. 2 NR449 Evidence -Based Practice RUA: Analyzing Published Research Guidelines NR449_RUA_Analyzing_Published_Research_Guideline s_Sept20 _v2 2 3. Wrap up the assignment and give the reader something to think about. e. Format (30 points/15%) 1. Correct grammar and spelling 2. Include a title and reference page 3. Use of headings for each section : o Problem o Synthesis of the Literature − Variables − Methods − Participants − Instruments − Implications for Future Work 4. Conclusion 5. Adheres to current APA formatting and guidelines 6. Include at least two (2) scholarly, current (within 5 years) primary sources other than the textbook 7. 3-4 pages in length , excluding appendices, title and reference pages For writing assistance (APA, formatting, or grammar) visit the APA Citation and Writing page in the online library. Pleas e note that your instructor may provide you with additional assessments in any form to determine that you fully understand the concepts learned. NR449 Evidence -Based Practice RUA: Analyzing Published Research Guidelines NR449_RUA_Analyzing_Published_Research_Guideline s_Sept20 _v2 3 Grading Rubric Criteria are met when the student’s application of knowledge demonstrates achievement of the outcomes for this assignment. Assignment Section and Required Criteria (Points possible/% of total points available) Highest Level of Performance High Level of Performance Satisfactory Level of Performance Unsatisfactory Level of Performance Section not present in paper Clinical Question (30 points/ 15%) 30 points 26 points 24 points 11 points 0 points Required criteria 1. Describe the problem: What is the focus of your group’s work? 2. Significance of problem: What health outcomes result from your problem? Or what statistics document this is a problem? You may find support on websites for government or professional organizations . 3. Purpose of the paper: What will your paper do or describe? Includes 3 requiremen ts for section . Includes 2 requirements for section . Includes 1 requirement for section . Present, yet includes no required criteria . No requirements for this section presented. Evidence Matrix Table: Data Summary (Appendix A) (60 points/ 30%) 60 points 56 points 47 points 25 points 0 points Required criteria Categorize items in the Matrix Table, including proper intext citations and reference list entries for each article. 1. References (recent publication within the last 5 years) 2. Purpose/Hypothesis/Study Question(s) 3. Variables: Independent (I) and Dependent (D) 4. Study Design 5. Sample Size and Selection 6. Data Collection Methods 7. Major Findings (Evidence) Includes 7 requirements for section. Includes 6 requirements for section. Includes 5 requirements for section. Includes 4 or less requirements for section. No requirements for this section presented . Description of Findings (60 points/30%) 60 points 53 points 47 points 23 points 0 points Required criteria Describe the data in the Matrix Table, including proper intext citations and reference list entries for each article. 1. Compare and contrast variables within each study . 2. What are the study design and procedures used in each study; qualitative, quantitative, or mixed method study, levels of confidence in each study, etc. ? 3. Participant demographics and information . Includes 6 requirements for section. Includes 5 requirements for section. Includes 4 requirements for section. Includes 3 or less requirements for section. No requirements for this section presented . NR449 Evidence -Based Practice RUA: Analyzing Published Research Guidelines NR449_RUA_Analyzing_Published_Research_Guideline s_Sept20 _v2 4 Assignment Section and Required Criteria (Points possible/% of total points available) Highest Level of Performance High Level of Performance Satisfactory Level of Performance Unsatisfactory Level of Performance Section not present in paper 4. Instruments used, including reliability and validity . 5. How do the research findings provide evidence to support your clinic al problem, or what further evidence is needed to answer your question? 6. Next steps: Identify two questions that can help guide the group’s work. Conclusion (20 points/10%) 20 points 18 points 15 points 8 points 0 points Required criteria Review major findings in a summary paragraph . 1. Evidence to address your clinical problem. 2. Make a connection back to all the included sections. 3. Wrap up the assignment and give the reader something to think about. Includes 3 requirements for section . Includes 2 requirements for section . Includes 1 requirement for section . Present, yet includes no required criteria . No requirements for this section presented. Format (30 points/15%) 30 points 26 points 23 points 11 points 0 points Required criteria 1. Correct grammar and spelling 2. Include a title and reference page 3. Use of headings for each section : o Problem o Synthesis of the Literature ▪ Variables ▪ Methods ▪ Participants ▪ Instruments ▪ Implications for Future Work 4. Conclusion 5. Adheres to current APA formatting and guidelines 6. Includes at least two (2) scholarly, current (within 5 years) primary sources other than the textbook 7. 3-4 pages in length excluding appendices, title and reference pages Includes 8 requirements for section. Includes 7 requirements for section. Includes 6 requirements for section. Includes 5 or less requirements for section. No requirements for this section presented . Total Points Possible = 200 points NR449 Evidence -Based Practice RUA: Analyzing Published Research Guidelines NR449_RUA_Analyzing_Published_Research_Guideline s_Sept20 _v2 5 Appendix A E VIDENCE M ATRIX T ABLE Article References Purpose Hypothesis Study Question(s) Variables Independent(I) Dependent(D) Study Design Sample Size & Selection Data Collection Methods Major Finding (s) 1 (SAMPLE ARTICLE ) Smith, L . (2013) . What should I eat? A focus for those living with diabetes. Journal of Nursing Education, 1(4), 111 -112. How do educational support groups effect dietary modifications in patients with diabetes? D-Dietary modifications I-Education Quantitative N- 18 Convenience sample -selected from local support group in Pittsburgh, PA Focus Groups Support and education improved compliance with dietary modifications. 1 2 3 4 5
RUA: Analyzing Published Research The purpose of this paper is to interpret the two articles identified as most important to the group topic. Please see the attached rubric and documents for instructe
NR449 Evidence-Based Practice RUA: Analyzing Published Research Guidelines Evidence Matrix Table Article References Purpose Hypothesis Study Question(s) Variables Independent(I) Dependent(D) Study Design Sample Size & Selection Data Collection Methods Major Finding(s) 1 (SAMPLE ARTICLE) Smith, Lewis (2013), What should I eat? A focus for those living with diabetes. Journal of Nursing Education, 1 (4) 111-112. How do educational support groups effect dietary modifications in patients with diabetes? D-Dietary modifications I-Education Quantitative N- 18 Convenience sample-selected from local support group in Pittsburgh, PA Focus Groups Support and education improved compliance with dietary modifications. 1 2 3 4 5
RUA: Analyzing Published Research The purpose of this paper is to interpret the two articles identified as most important to the group topic. Please see the attached rubric and documents for instructe
Main Articles Holt, J. M. (2019). Patient Experience in Primary Care: A Systematic Review of CG-CAHPS Surveys. Journal of Patient Experience, 93–102. https://doi.org/10.1177/2374373518793143 Martino, S. C., Shaller, D., Schlesinger, M., Parker, A. M., Rybowski, L., Grob, R., Cerully, J. L., & Finucane, M. L. (2017). CAHPS and Comments: How Closed-Ended Survey Questions and Narrative Accounts Interact in the Assessment of Patient Experience. Journal of Patient Experience, 37–45. https://doi.org/10.1177/2374373516685940 Supplemental Information/Articles 1. Schlesinger M, Grob R, Shaller D, et al. A Rigorous Approach to Large-Scale Elicitation and Analysis of Patient Narratives. Medical Care Research and Review. 2020;77(5):416-427. doi:10.1177/1077558718803859
RUA: Analyzing Published Research The purpose of this paper is to interpret the two articles identified as most important to the group topic. Please see the attached rubric and documents for instructe
Week Five Assignment Tips! Hi, I want to provide you with some clarification about the next written assignment, due this upcoming Sunday, April 4. This is an INDIVIDUAL assignment. Check out the recording of last evening’s WebEx for an overview of this assignment! The purpose of this week’s (Five) assignment is to now interpret and analyze those same two articles you utilized for our last written assignment.   You will do this by: filling out the matrix ( available as a link when you click on the assignment in this week’s module, or in our Files section), then summarize your findings in the body of the paper. The matrix can be included as an appendix to your paper, or you can post that separately in addition to the paper.  Here’s some clarification of the rubric: Description of Findings: Summary  means the information you will provide in the matrix Description of Findings: Description   is your narrative (the paper) that includes those points in the rubric.  Look at the Directions and Assignment Criteria and you will find the required information to include in that summary description. This is in addition to the matrix.  At the very top of the document is the actual purpose of the paper. Follow the template/outline provided and you will be fine! Remember, each of you in your teams are working on two different articles for the group project! These articles are the basis for this assignment. And last, you will also see  in the assignment directions, that you may utilize the first paper to provide some of this week’s requirements. If I had any feedback for you in that paper, feel free to revise and include that in this paper. Please reach out to me if you have any questions!   https://lms.courselearn.net/lms/content/1590/59482/NR449/NR449_RUA_Analyzing_Published_Research_Sept20_v2.pdf
RUA: Analyzing Published Research The purpose of this paper is to interpret the two articles identified as most important to the group topic. Please see the attached rubric and documents for instructe
0 Seeking an Examined Scope of Patient Interactions Adrianna F. Pierson Chamberlain University College of Nursing NR 449-62369: Evidence-Based Practice Professor K. Cross March 22, 2021 Seeking an Examined Scope of Patient Interactions The systematic analysis of any clinical issue functions minimally to institute facts, draw inferences, and broaden knowledge. The major talking points associated with clinical cases prove inherently valuable in support of health reformation and outcomes. The macro and micro viewpoints of a specified research design collectively pinpoint a result of optimal credibility. The independent researcher’s skill in performing the systematic review will lend to the clinical query’s quality and validity. (Houser, 2018) Clinical Question The content set apart to the cohort distinctly originates from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ). According to the AHRQ (2018), the Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS) strategically acts to resolve or improve the aggregation of relations patients face within a healthcare system. Since its inception, CAHPS promotes and utilizes independent research to study client interactions, evaluate data collections, and employ outcomes toward superior care standards. Furthermore, the Consumer Assessments of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS) is a program that notably produces the most accomplished implement to measure patient experience. (AHRQ, 2018) Specifically, the Clinician and Group (CG)-CAHPS survey is the elected patient experience study in patients’ primary care (Holt, 2019). The overall patient experience is an essential talking point in the initiative toward resolving or improving client-centered care issues. (AHRQ, 2018) In viewing healthcare as a business, the growing need for better patient experiences has sparked the shrewd business acumen of those individuals serving in the environment. The profession of care profits from evidence-based practices that prompts innovation and growth. Patients’ interactions directly correlate to the quality, safety, and efficiency of clinical processes and health outcomes. Some examples may include measures of the level of communication, management, prevention, intervention, performance, and turnaround times. Consequently, the cohort investigates the relationship between patient experience and the accountability, advancement, quality, and perspective of care provided in varying healthcare environments. (AHRQ, 2018) The framework and response to the inquiry regarding the examination and treatment of patients will explicate from the progression of the following elements: population, intervention, comparison, outcome, and time (PICOT). (Houser, 2018) The population applies to a sample of patients influenced by primary care providers’ vast roles and responsibilities throughout the lifespan. The intervention entails implementing tools to assess patient experiences toward modifications that improve standards of care and treatment. The comparison is to evaluate the original assessment tool in contrast to a new implement that skillfully communicates the facilitation of a therapeutic relationship that sparks a continuum of innovative development. The outcome is to refine the capacity to engage and perpetuate patients within a high-value health care system. Time will reflect the duration of related data collections and the anticipated monitoring of results (Houser, 2018). In this instance, the following PICOT question comes to mind: In primary care patients, what effect does the closed-ended questions of the (CG)-CAHPS survey have on improving patient experience and population toward better standards of care and treatment compared with arranging closed- and open-ended questions to the survey within a one-month duration? The paper aims to report the key concepts utilized to search databases for two articles that involve the subject, CAHPS, assigned to the cohort specifically. Levels of Evidence The two variations of the (CG)-CAHPS survey are interventions implemented to contrast for some time. Therefore, this clinical query classifies as a therapy type that includes the concept of intervention. Additionally, this highlighted matter of interest integrates both a qualitative and quantitative design approach. To exemplify, the synthesis of objectives and conclusions may include any combination of social reactions and interactions or the measurement of the intervention’s effect. A systematic review and meta-analysis of a random control trial would optimally produce an outcome within this evidence-based practice guideline with a high level of evidence. All credible data and research would need examining for use. Mixed methods of research enhance the production of thematic analysis and hypothesis. (Houser, 2018) Search Strategy Upon locating the Chamberlain University library, the research included identifying the following key concepts of terminology associated with the assigned subject: CAHPS and patient experience. The database search uses a good database selection. By utilizing the above terminologies in a separate order within the SAGE Journals database, the scholarly search led interactively to no access barriers to initial research and review articles. Several journal articles were populated. As a result, 312 articles and a whopping 407, 974 articles compiled in a respective order of terminology. A couple articles were initially used to gather and support understanding of the assigned topic. By placing both search terminologies together, the result reduced to 259 articles for review. Refining search results to the currency of Chamberlain University policy narrows publication dates to the last five years and decreases results to 104 articles for review. By limiting the search to only research articles, results decreased to 83 articles for review. Articles without barriers to access decreased the results to 37 articles for review. Lastly, through the remaining journal articles, a manual filter led to finding two corresponding articles that relationally contrasted two varying interventions. This, in turn, sparked the formation of the components expressed in the PICOT question that postulates a comparison in support of the cohorts’ goals. The first article, “Patient Experience in Primary Care: A Systematic Review of CG-CAHPS Surveys,” highlights the use of only close-ended questions on the survey tool implemented to measure patient experience (Holt, 2019). The second article, “CAHPS and Comments: How Closed-Ended Survey Questions and Narrative Accounts Interact in the Assessment of Patient Experience,” evaluates arranging both open- and close-ended questions on the same survey tool (Martino et al., 2017). Conclusion The paradigm of research the cohort makes practical and effective for use is ultimately dependent upon several factors. Initially, the interpretation of the perception of self about clinical and global issues is essential. This fact imposes a dramatic impact upon the views and thoughts applied to processes toward establishing credible research. The PICOT process to establish a clinical query exemplifies this reality. By applying this conscious viewpoint and a mixed research method, the cohort will discover appropriate resolutions and interventions to problems stemming from patient experience. References Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. (2018). The CAHPS Program. AHRQ. https://www.ahrq.gov/cahps/about-cahps/cahps-program/index.html. Holt, J. M. (2019). Patient Experience in Primary Care: A Systematic Review of CG-CAHPS Surveys. Journal of Patient Experience, 93–102. https://doi.org/10.1177/2374373518793143 Houser, J. (2018). Nursing research: Reading, using, and creating evidence (4th ed.). Jones & Bartlett. Martino, S. C., Shaller, D., Schlesinger, M., Parker, A. M., Rybowski, L., Grob, R., Cerully, J. L., & Finucane, M. L. (2017). CAHPS and Comments: How Closed-Ended Survey Questions and Narrative Accounts Interact in the Assessment of Patient Experience. Journal of Patient Experience, 37–45. https://doi.org/10.1177/2374373516685940

Writerbay.net

Everyone needs a little help with academic work from time to time. Hire the best essay writing professionals working for us today!

Get a 15% discount for your first order


Order a Similar Paper Order a Different Paper