NR 716 Johns Hopkins Individual Evidence Summary & Evidence Appraisal Tool

Johns Hopkins Nursing Evidence-Based Practice

Appendix E: Research Evidence Appraisal Tool

Article Title:

Evidence Level and Quality:_______________________

Number:

Author(s):

Publication Date:

Journal:

Setting:

Sample

(Composition & size):

Does this evidence address my EBP question?

Yes

Do not proceed with appraisal of this evidence

Level of Evidence (Study Design)

A. Is this a report of a single research study? If No, go to B.

1. Was there manipulation of an independent variable?

2. Was there a control group?

3. Were study participants randomly assigned to the intervention and control groups?

If Yes to all three, this is a Randomized Controlled Trial (RCT) or Experimental Study

If Yes to #1 and #2 and No to #3, OR Yes to #1 and No to #2 and #3, this is Quasi Experimental (some degree of investigator control, some manipulation of an independent variable, lacks random assignment to groups, may have a control group)

If No to #1, #2, and #3, this is Non-Experimental (no manipulation of independent variable, can be descriptive, comparative, or correlational, often uses secondary data) or Qualitative (exploratory in nature such as interviews or focus groups, a starting point for studies for which little research currently exists, has small sample sizes, may use results to design empirical studies)

NEXT, complete THE bOTTOM SECTION ON THE Following PAGE, “STUDY FINDINGS THAT HELP YOU ANSWER THE EBP QUESTION”

LEVEL I

LEVEL II

LEVEL III

Yes

B. Is this a summary of multiple research studies? If No, go to Non-Research Evidence Appraisal Form.

1. Does it employ a comprehensive search strategy and rigorous appraisal method (Systematic Review)? If No, use Non-Research Evidence Appraisal Tool; if Yes:

a. Does it combine and analyze results from the studies to generate a new statistic (effect size)? (Systematic review with meta-analysis)

b. Does it analyze and synthesize concepts from qualitative studies? (Systematic review with meta-synthesis)

If Yes to either a or b, go to #2B below.

2. For Systematic Reviews and Systematic Reviews with meta-analysis or meta-synthesis:

a. Are all studies included RCTs?

b. Are the studies a combination of RCTs and quasi-experimental or quasi-experimental only?

c. Are the studies a combination of RCTs, quasi-experimental and non-experimental or non-experimental only?

d. Are any or all of the included studies qualitative?

complete THE NEXT SECTION, “STUDY FINDINGS THAT HELP YOU ANSWER THE EBP QUESTION”

LEVEL I

LEVEL II

LEVEL IIl

Yes

Study findings that help you answer the EBP question:

NOW COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING PAGE, “QUALITY APPRAISAL OF RESEARCH STUDIES”, AND ASSIGN A QUALITY SCORE TO YOUR ARTICLE

Quality Appraisal of Research Studies

· Does the researcher identify what is known and not known about the problem and how the study will address any gaps in knowledge?

· Was the purpose of the study clearly presented?

· Was the literature review current (most sources within last 5 years or classic)?

· Was sample size sufficient based on study design and rationale?

· If there is a control group:

· Were the characteristics and/or demographics similar in both the control and intervention groups?

· If multiple settings were used, were the settings similar?

· Were all groups equally treated except for the intervention group(s)?

· Are data collection methods described clearly?

· Were the instruments reliable (Cronbach’s α [alpha] > 0.70)?

· Was instrument validity discussed?

· If surveys/questionnaires were used, was the response rate > 25%?

· Were the results presented clearly?

· If tables were presented, was the narrative consistent with the table content?

· Were study limitations identified and addressed?

· Were conclusions based on results?

Yes

Quality Appraisal of Systematic Review with or without Meta-Analysis or Meta-Synthesis

· Was the purpose of the systematic review clearly stated?

· Were reports comprehensive, with reproducible search strategy?

· Key search terms stated

· Multiple databases searched and identified

· Inclusion and exclusion criteria stated

· Was there a flow diagram showing the number of studies eliminated at each level of review?

· Were details of included studies presented (design, sample, methods, results, outcomes, strengths and limitations)?

· Were methods for appraising the strength of evidence (level and quality) described?

· Were conclusions based on results?

· Results were interpreted

· Conclusions flowed logically from the interpretation and systematic review question

· Did the systematic review include both a section addressing limitations and how they were addressed?

Yes

Quality Rating Based on quality appraisal

A High quality: consistent, generalizable results; sufficient sample size for the study design; adequate control; definitive conclusions; consistent recommendations based on comprehensive literature review that includes thorough reference to scientific evidence

B Good quality: reasonably consistent results; sufficient sample size for the study design; some control, and fairly definitive conclusions; reasonably consistent recommendations based on fairly comprehensive literature review that includes some reference to scientific evidence

C Low quality or major flaws: little evidence with inconsistent results; insufficient sample size for the study design; conclusions cannot be drawn

I need correction for the last work. its attached.

(comment from professor)

Hello:

I enjoyed reading your selected research study which addresses hospitalized patients with substance abuse disorders. You have offered some pertinent points in your discussion (good job!), but a few areas are still incomplete and will need to be better addressed for this week’s assignment. Allow me to offer some helpful guidance. For example, it is important to provide more specifics about the actual study, such as what type of qualitative study was conducted or at a minimum, how the data collection process occurred. There also appears to be an omission of the actual data findings which need to be added. You do accurately note that a data analysis occurred, but the details of this are missing. As you likely know, in qualitative studies, the findings are confirmed with the pertinent themes and/or patterns which emerged from the completed data analysis. In your selected article, three major themes were identified and discussed. Of these, which one do you believe was the most relevant and why? Your thoughts are important and will fully answer how the research design answered the scientific question(s). Additionally, more details of the limitations of the study should be discussed. Please refer to your Polit & Beck textbook for guidance.

Another helpful suggestion…When you are discussing details of the study, please be sure to reference the authors’/researchers’ names as in-text citations for the sake of clarity in the sentences which will also meet APA requirements.

JH Evidence Summary Tool

You are off to a nice start, but a few of the columns are still incomplete. One helpful recommendation is that in the second column, be sure to add the doi locator number and the name of the database where you retrieved the article after it. Second, be sure your font and font size are consistent throughout the tool. Please be sure to watch the Course Orientation presentation by Dr. Olson that has been posted in the Announcements area this week. That information shows some excellent examples of what this tool should look like for a successful grade in this course. Please add the required information and repost this tool as soon as possible and let me know if you have questions.

You will not regret the investment made in developing a thorough JH Evidence Summary Tool as it will help you as you progress in the DNP program.

APA Formatting

Your APA formatting is good with a few minor errors noted. Continue to use the APA resources located under the Resource tile on the course homepage to assist you with discussions and the important week 6 paper.

Thank you and please let me know if you have any questions.

Kindly,

professor

References

Purdue Online Writing Lab. (2019). APA formatting and style guide. Retrieved from /orders/owl.purdue.edu/owl/research_and_citation/apa_style/apa_formatt (Links to an external site.)ing_and_style_guide/general_format.html (Links to an external site.)

Edited by Theresa Kyzar on Jan 10 at 2:59pm Reply

Practice Question: What is the cause of frequently hospitalization for addict patients?

Date:01/06/2021

Article Number	Author and Date	Evidence Type	Sample, Sample Size, Setting	Findings That Help Answer the EBP Question	Observable Measures	Limitations	Evidence Level, Quality
DOI: 10.1007/s11606-016-3919-4 ©	Velez, C. M., Nicolaidis, C., Korthuis, P. T., & Englander, H. (2017). “It’s been an experience, a life learning experience”: a qualitative study of hospitalized patients with substance use disorders. Journal of general internal medicine, 32(3), 296-303.	Building knowledge	There were 32 participants who reported high to moderate use of alcohol (39%), amphetamine (46%), and opiods (65%). The study was conducted in an urban medical centre. N/A	Addiction is a common issue in society and hospitalization of addicts is a wake up for call. Hospitalization provides an opportunity to initiate coordinated care for addicts. Most of the victims attribute their addiction to homelessness, pain, trauma, and other social chaos. The participants revealed that they prefer healthcare providers who understood SUD and initiate the best treatment options that support change and enhance patient outcomes. From the interviews, effective strategies include involving peers in the treatment process, coordinated care after patient discharge, and access to medical-assisted intervention strategies.	Interview questions.	There is influence of personal biases from respondents. Since interviews are less anonymous, they may be a concern for respondents who may conceal useful information.	Good quality evidence. Level II.1
			N/A
			N/A
			N/A
			N/A
			N/A
			N/A

Attach a reference list with full citations of articles reviewed for this Practice question.

Johns Hopkins Nursing Evidence-Based Practice

Appendix G: Individual Evidence Summary Tool

The Johns Hopkins Hospital/ The Johns Hopkins University

Directions for Use of the Individual Evidence Summary Tool

Purpose

This form is used to document the results of evidence appraisal in preparation for evidence synthesis. The form provides the EBP team with documentation of the sources of evidence used, the year the evidence was published or otherwise communicated, the information gathered from each evidence source that helps the team answer the EBP question, and the level and quality of each source of evidence.

Article Number

Assign a number to each reviewed source of evidence. This organizes the individual evidence summary and provides an easy way to reference articles.

Author and Date

Indicate the last name of the first author or the evidence source and the publication/communication date. List both author/evidence source and date.

Evidence Type

Indicate the type of evidence reviewed (for example: RCT, meta-analysis, mixed methods, quaLitative, systematic review, case study, narrative literature review).

Sample, Sample Size, and Setting

Provide a quick view of the population, number of participants, and study location.

Findings That Help Answer the EBP Question

Although the reviewer may find many points of interest, list only findings that directly apply to the EBP question.

Observable Measures

QuaNtitative measures or variables are used to answer a research question, test a hypothesis, describe characteristics, or determine the effect, impact, or influence. QuaLitative evidence uses cases, context, opinions, experiences, and thoughts to represent the phenomenon of study.

Limitations

Include information that may or may not be within the text of the article regarding drawbacks of the piece of evidence. The evidence may list limitations, or it may be evident to you, as you review the evidence, that an important point is missed or the sample does not apply to the population of interest.

Evidence Level and Quality

Using information from the individual appraisal tools, transfer the evidence level and quality rating into this column.

ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE CLASS

Who We Are

We are a professional custom writing website. If you have searched for a question and bumped into our website just know you are in the right place to get help with your coursework.

Do you handle any type of coursework?

Yes. We have posted our previous orders to display our experience. Since we have done this question before, we can also do it for you. To make sure we do it perfectly, please fill out our Order Form. Filling the order form correctly will assist our team in referencing, specifications, and future communication.

Is it hard to Place an Order?

1. Click on “Order Now” on the main Menu and a new page will appear with an order form to be filled.
2. Fill in your paper’s requirements in the “PAPER INFORMATION” section and the system will calculate your order price/cost.
3. Fill in your paper’s academic level, deadline, and the required number of pages from the drop-down menus.
4. Click “FINAL STEP” to enter your registration details and get an account with us for record-keeping and then, click on “PROCEED TO CHECKOUT” at the bottom of the page.
5. From there, the payment sections will show, follow the guided payment process and your order will be available for our writing team to work on it.

SCORE A+ WITH HELP FROM OUR PROFESSIONAL WRITERS – NR 716 Johns Hopkins Individual Evidence Summary & Evidence Appraisal Tool

We will process your orders through multiple stages and checks to ensure that what we are delivering to you, in the end, is something that is precise as you envisioned it. All of our essay writing service products are 100% original, ensuring that there is no plagiarism in them. The sources are well-researched and cited so it is interesting. Our goal is to help as many students as possible with their assignments, i.e. our prices are affordable and services premium.

Discussion Questions (DQ)

Initial responses to the DQ should address all components of the questions asked, including 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 the 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 Loud-cloud 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 over-utilization of direct quotes in DQs and assignments at the Master’s 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. NR 716 Johns Hopkins Individual Evidence Summary & Evidence Appraisal Tool

LopesWrite Policy

For assignments that need to be submitted to Lopes Write, 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 Loud-cloud for tips on improving your paper and SI score.

Late Policy

The university’s policy on late assignments is a 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. NR 716 Johns Hopkins Individual Evidence Summary & Evidence Appraisal Tool

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. NR 716 Johns Hopkins Individual Evidence Summary & Evidence Appraisal Tool

Guarantee
NR 716 Johns Hopkins Individual Evidence Summary & Evidence Appraisal Tool

Zero Plagiarism
On-time delivery
A-Grade Papers
Free Revision
24/7 Support
100% Confidentiality
Professional Writers

Services Offered

Custom paper writing
Question and answers
Essay paper writing
Editing and proofreading
Plagiarism removal services
Multiple answer questions

SCORE A+ WITH HELP FROM OUR PROFESSIONAL WRITERS

Looking for a Similar Assignment? Order a custom-written, plagiarism-free paper

Nursing Assignment Owl

NR 716 Johns Hopkins Individual Evidence Summary Tool