Benchmark Assignment: Evidence-Based Practice Project; Literature Review| NUR-550

Assessment Description
The purpose of this assignment is to write a review of the research articles you evaluated in your Topic 5 “Evidence-Based Practice Project: Evaluation of Literature” assignment. If your instructor has directed you to select different articles in order to meet the requirements for a literature review or to support your evidence-based practice project proposal better, complete this step prior to writing your review.

ORDER A CUSTOMIZED, PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE

Good News For Our New customers . We can write this assignment for you and pay after Delivery. Our Top -rated medical writers will comprehensively review instructions , synthesis external evidence sources(Scholarly) and customize a quality assignment for you. We will also attach a copy of plagiarism report alongside and AI report. Feel free to chat Us

A literature review provides a concise comparison of the literature for the reader and explains how the research demonstrates support for your PICOT. You will use the literature review in this assignment in NUR-590, during which you will write a final paper detailing your evidence-based practice project proposal.

In a paper of 1,250-1,500, select eight of the ten articles you evaluated that demonstrate clear support for your evidence-based practice and complete the following for each article:

Introduction – Describe the clinical issue or problem you are addressing. Present your PICOT statement.
Search methods – Describe your search strategy and the criteria that you used in choosing and searching for your articles.
Synthesis of the literature – For each article, write a paragraph discussing the main components (subjects, methods, key findings) and provide rationale for how the article supports your PICOT.
Comparison of articles – Compare the articles (similarities and differences, themes, methods, conclusions, limitations, controversies).
Suggestions for future research: Based on your analysis of the literature, discuss identified gaps and which areas require further research.
Conclusion – Provide a summary statement of what you found in the literature.
Complete the “APA Writing Checklist” to ensure that your paper adheres to APA style and formatting criteria and general guidelines for academic writing. Include the completed checklist as an appendix at the end of your paper.
Refer to the “Evidence-Based Practice Project Proposal â€“ Assignment Overview” document for an overview of the evidence-based practice project proposal assignments.

You are required to cite eight peer-reviewed sources to complete this assignment. Sources must be published within the last 5 years and appropriate for the assignment criteria and nursing content.

Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center. An abstract is not required.

This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.

You are required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite. A link to the LopesWrite technical support articles is located in Class Resources if you need assistance.

Benchmark Information

This benchmark assignment assesses the following programmatic competencies:

MBA-MSN; MSN-Nursing Education; MSN Acute Care Nurse Practitioner-Adult-Gerontology; MSN Family Nurse Practitioner; MSN-Health Informatics; MSN-Health Care Quality and Patient Safety; MSN-Leadership in Health Care Systems; MSN-Public Health Nursing

3.2: Analyze appropriate research from databases and other information sources to improve health care practices and processes.

ORDER A CUSTOMIZED, PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE

Rubric Criteria

Introduction
8.75 points
Criteria Description
Introduction

5. Excellent
8.75 points
The clinical issue or problem and PICOT statement are thoroughly described.

4. Good
8.05 points
The clinical issue or problem and PICOT statement are adequately described.

3. Satisfactory
7.7 points
The clinical issue or problem and PICOT statement are presented. Some aspects are vague. There are minor inaccuracies.

2. Less Than Satisfactory
7 points
The clinical issue or problem and PICOT statement are incomplete or incorrect.

1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
The clinical issue or problem and PICOT statement are omitted.

Search Methods
17.5 points
Criteria Description
Search Methods

5. Excellent
17.5 points
The search strategy and criteria used in choosing and searching for articles is thoroughly described.

4. Good
16.1 points
The search strategy and criteria used in choosing and searching for articles are described. Some detail is needed for clarity or accuracy.

3. Satisfactory
15.4 points
The search strategy and criteria used in choosing and searching for articles are summarized. More information is needed.

2. Less Than Satisfactory
14 points
The search strategy and criteria used in choosing and searching for articles are only partially described.

1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
The search strategy and criteria used in choosing and searching for articles are omitted.

Synthesis of Literature
17.5 points
Criteria Description
Synthesis of Literature

5. Excellent
17.5 points
A well-developed paragraph for each article is presented. The main components (subjects, methods, key findings) are thoroughly discussed, and substantial rationale for how each article supports the PICOT is clearly provided.

4. Good
16.1 points
A paragraph for each article is presented. The main components (subjects, methods, key findings) are adequately discussed, and rationale for how each article supports the PICOT is provided. Some detail is needed for clarity or accuracy.

3. Satisfactory
15.4 points
A summary for each article is presented. The main components (subjects, methods, key findings) are generally discussed. General rationale for how each article supports the PICOT is provided. More information is needed.

2. Less Than Satisfactory
14 points
All articles are presented, but the synthesis of literature is incomplete.

1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
A paragraph for one or more article is missing.

Comparison of Articles
17.5 points
Criteria Description
Comparison of Articles

5. Excellent
17.5 points
A detailed comparison of the similarities, differences, themes, methods, conclusions, limitations, and controversies among the articles is thoroughly presented.

4. Good
16.1 points
A comparison of the similarities, differences, themes, methods, conclusions, limitations, and controversies among the articles is adequately presented. Some detail is needed for clarity or accuracy.

3. Satisfactory
15.4 points
A general comparison of the similarities, differences, themes, methods, conclusions, limitations, and controversies among the articles is presented. Some aspects are unclear. More information is needed.

2. Less Than Satisfactory
14 points
All articles are presented, but the comparison is incomplete.

1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
One or more article is missing in the comparison.

Suggestions for Future Research
17.5 points
Criteria Description
Suggestions for Future Research

5. Excellent
17.5 points
Identified gaps and areas requiring further research are thoroughly discussed and clearly based on the analysis of the literature. The narrative is insightful and demonstrates an understanding of research analysis necessary for future study.

4. Good
16.1 points
Identified gaps and areas requiring further research are adequately discussed. The narrative is based on the analysis of the literature. Some detail is needed for clarity or accuracy.

3. Satisfactory
15.4 points
Some identified gaps and areas requiring further research are generally discussed. The narrative is generally based on the analysis of the literature. More information is needed.

2. Less Than Satisfactory
14 points
Identified gaps and areas requiring further research are only partially presented.

1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Identified gaps and areas requiring further research are omitted.

Conclusion
8.75 points
Criteria Description
Conclusion

5. Excellent
8.75 points
The conclusion is well-developed and presents a clear and accurate summary statement of what was found in the literature.

4. Good
8.05 points
The conclusion presents an adequate summary statement of what was found in the literature.

3. Satisfactory
7.7 points
The conclusion presents a vague summary statement of was found in the literature. There are inaccuracies.

2. Less Than Satisfactory
7 points
A conclusion is presented but fails to present a summary statement of what was found in the literature.

1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
The conclusion is omitted.

Ability to Analyze (B)
17.5 points
Criteria Description
Ability to Analyze (C3.2)

5. Excellent
17.5 points
The literature review presented demonstrates a strong ability to analyze appropriate research from databases and other information sources to improve health care practices and processes.

4. Good
16.1 points
The literature review presented demonstrates an adequate ability to analyze appropriate research from databases and other information sources to improve health care practices and processes.

3. Satisfactory
15.4 points
The literature review presented demonstrates a general ability to analyze appropriate research from databases and other information sources to improve health care practices and processes.

2. Less Than Satisfactory
14 points
The literature review presented does not consistently demonstrate an ability to analyze appropriate research from databases and other information sources to improve health care practices and processes.

1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
The literature review presented does not demonstrate an ability to analyze appropriate research from databases and other information sources to improve health care practices and processes.

Appendix
8.75 points
Criteria Description
Appendix

5. Excellent
8.75 points
The APA Writing Checklist is attached in the appendix. It is clearly evident by the quality of the paper that the APA Writing Checklist was used in development.

4. Good
8.05 points
The APA Writing Checklist is attached in the appendix. It is apparent that the APA Writing Checklist was used in development of the paper.

3. Satisfactory
7.7 points
The APA Writing Checklist is attached and in the appendix. The APA Writing Checklist was generally used in development of the paper, but some aspects are inconsistent with the paper format or quality.

2. Less Than Satisfactory
7 points
The APA Writing Checklist is attached, but an appendix has not been created. The paper does not reflect the use of the APA Writing Checklist during development

1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
The appendix and required resources are omitted.

Required Sources
8.75 points
Criteria Description
Required Sources

5. Excellent
8.75 points
Number of required resources is met. Sources are current and appropriate for the assignment criteria and nursing content.

4. Good
8.05 points
Number of required sources is met. Sources are current, but not all sources are appropriate for the assignment criteria and nursing content.

3. Satisfactory
7.7 points
Number of required sources is met, but sources are outdated or inappropriate.

2. Less Than Satisfactory
7 points
Number of required sources is only partially met.

1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Sources are not included.

Thesis Development and Purpose
12.25 points
Criteria Description
Thesis Development and Purpose

5. Excellent
12.25 points
Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.

4. Good
11.27 points
Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper. Thesis is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose.

3. Satisfactory
10.78 points
Thesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose.

2. Less Than Satisfactory
9.8 points
Thesis is insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not clear.

1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.

Argument Logic and Construction
14 points
Criteria Description
Argument Logic and Construction

5. Excellent
14 points
Clear and convincing argument that presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative.

4. Good
12.88 points
Argument shows logical progressions. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative.

3. Satisfactory
12.32 points
Argument is orderly but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis.

2. Less Than Satisfactory
11.2 points
Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility.

1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources.

Mechanics of Writing
8.75 points
Criteria Description
Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)

5. Excellent
8.75 points
Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.

4. Good
8.05 points
Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. The writer uses a variety of effective sentence structures and figures of speech.

3. Satisfactory
7.7 points
Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct and varied sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are employed.

2. Less Than Satisfactory
7 points
Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) or word choice are present. Sentence structure is correct but not varied

1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is used.

Paper Format
8.75 points
Criteria Description
Paper Format (Use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)

5. Excellent
8.75 points
All format elements are correct.

4. Good
8.05 points
Template is fully used; There are virtually no errors in formatting style.

3. Satisfactory
7.7 points
Template is used, and formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present.

2. Less Than Satisfactory
7 points
Template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken; lack of control with formatting is apparent.

1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Template is not used appropriately or documentation format is rarely followed correctly.

Documentation of Sources
8.75 points
Criteria Description
Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style)

5. Excellent
8.75 points
Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error.

4. Good
8.05 points
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct.

3. Satisfactory
7.7 points
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present.

2. Less Than Satisfactory
7 points
Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.

1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Sources are not documented.

Total
175 points