Description
This is a Collaborative Learning Community (CLC)assignment.
Locate no more than 10 research articles related to your EBPproject.( We are only doing 3 articles as part on this and is copied below)
Reddy, A., Yennurajalingam, S., & Bruera, E. (n.d). “Whatever my mother wants”: Barriers to adequate pain management. Journal of Palliative Medicine, 16(6), 709-712. doi:10.1089/jpm.2012.0189
Reynolds, J., Drew, D., & Dunwoody, C. (2013). American society for pain management nursing position statement: Pain management at the end of life. Pain Management Nursing, (3), 172. doi:10.1016/j.pmn.2013.07.002
Sanders, S., Herr, K. A., Fine, P. G., Fiala, C., Tang, X., & Forcucci, C. (2013). An examination of adherence to pain medication plans in older cancer patients in hospice care. Journal of Pain and Symptom Management, (1), 43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2012.01.007
Use the assigned Topic Materials “CLC: EBP ResearchTable”(ATTACHED). and “CLCAssignment: Evidence-Based Practice (EBP) Project Student Guide.” (ATTACHED).
You will use the “CLC: EBP Research Table” toconsolidate and present the findings. Pay attention to the prompts for eachcolumn.
This assignment uses a rubric (ATTACHED). Please review therubric prior to beginning the assignment
CLC – EBP Literature Search/Appraisal of Evidence
|
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
70.0 %Content |
|||||||
|
35.0 %Appraisal of Literature |
None |
Review of literature is minimal and not all relevant. Table displaying information are missing or missing most required information. Appraisal of evidence is inaccurate. Conclusions are not justified. |
Review of literature is inadequate. Table displaying articles has minimal information making it difficult for the reader to evaluate the appraisal of evidence. Conclusions drawn are questionable. |
Adequate review of literature. Table displaying articles reviewed has adequate detail to evaluate information and portray a mostly accurate appraisal of the value of the evidence. Conclusions drawn not fully justified. |
Adequate review of literature. Table displaying articles reviewed has adequate detail to evaluate information and portray an accurate appraisal of the value of the evidence. Conclusions drawn are justifiable. |
Thorough review of literature. Table displaying articles reviewed has adequate detail to evaluate information and portray an accurate appraisal of the value of the evidence. Conclusions drawn are justifiable. |
|
|
35.0 %Synthesis of Findings |
None |
Content is incomplete or omits most of the requirements stated in the assignment criteria. |
Synthesis of literature does not provide an adequate justification for changing practice. |
Synthesis of reviewed literature is clear and mostly accurate. |
Synthesis of reviewed literature is clear, well integrated, and accurate. |
Synthesis of reviewed literature is clear, well integrated, accurate and reported in precise research language. |
|
|
5.0 %Organization and Effectiveness |
|||||||
|
5.0 %Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use) |
None |
Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice and/or sentence construction are employed. |
Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) and/or word choice are present. |
Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but are not overly distracting to the reader. Audience-appropriate language is employed. |
Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. The writer uses a variety of sentence structures and effective figures of speech. |
The writer is clearly in command of standard, written academic English. |
|
|
25.0 %Format |
|||||||
|
5.0 %Research Citations (in-text citations for paraphrasing and direct quotes, and references page listing and formatting, as appropriate to assignment and style) |
None |
No references page and no citations are included. |
References page is present, but citations are inconsistently used. |
References page is included. Sources are appropriately documented, although some errors may be present. |
References page is present and fully inclusive of all cited sources. Documentation is appropriate and citation style is usually correct. |
In-text citations and a references page are complete. The documentation of cited sources is free of errors. |
|
|
20.0 %Participation |
None |
Participation is not evident. |
Posts do not encourage further discussion and dialogue with other students in the class. Posts are critical, argumentative, or confrontational. Individual group contributions are submitted extremely late, affecting the group’s ability to accomplish a successful task. Cooperative teamwork is not evident. |
Most posts encourage further discussion and dialogue with other students in the class. Posts are professional and exhibit a positive attitude that is respectful of others. Individual contributions are submitted but not on time. Cooperative teamwork is exhibited but limited. |
All posts encourage further discussion and dialogue with other students in the class. Posts are professional and exhibit a positive attitude that is respectful of others. Individual contributions are provided by the designated timeline. Cooperative teamwork is exhibited but not consistently. |
All posts encourage further discussion and extensive dialogue with other students in the class. Posts demonstrate a critical analysis of classmates’ postings and provide relevant and constructive feedback. Individual contributions are provided before the designated timeline. Cooperative teamwork is exhibited in order to complete the project. |
|
|
100 %Total Weightage |
|||||||
