evidense base practice

Criteria Description

PICOT

5. Excellent

7.5 points

The PICOT is clearly and accurately presented.

4. Good

6.9 points

NA

3. Satisfactory

6.6 points

NA

2. Less Than Satisfactory

6 points

NA

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

The PICOT is omitted.

collapse Articles assessment

Articles

15 points

Criteria Description

Articles

5. Excellent

15 points

Sources are current and highly appropriate for the assignment criteria and nursing content. Article citations and permalinks are presented. Article citations are accurate.

4. Good

13.8 points

Sources are current and generally appropriate for the assignment criteria and nursing content. Article citations and permalinks are presented. Article citations are presented, but there are minor errors.

3. Satisfactory

13.2 points

Number of required sources is met, but some sources are outdated or inappropriate. Article citations and permalinks are presented. Article citations are presented, but there are errors.

2. Less Than Satisfactory

12 points

Number of required sources is only partially met. Article citations and permalinks are presented. One or more links do not lead to the intended article.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Required number of sources are not included. Article citations and permalinks are omitted.

collapse Research Question, Hypothesis, Purpose or Aim of Study assessment

Research Question, Hypothesis, Purpose or Aim of Study

15 points

Criteria Description

Research Question, Hypothesis, Purpose or Aim of Study

5. Excellent

15 points

A discussion on the research question, hypothesis, purpose or aim of study is thoroughly and accurately presented for each article.

4. Good

13.8 points

Research question, hypothesis, purpose or aim of study for each article is adequately presented. Minor detail is needed for accuracy or clarity.

3. Satisfactory

13.2 points

Research question, hypothesis, purpose or aim of study for each article is presented. Key aspects are missing for one or two articles. There are minor inaccuracies.

2. Less Than Satisfactory

12 points

Research question, hypothesis, purpose or aim of study for each article is presented, but key information is consistently omitted. There are inaccuracies throughout.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Research question, hypothesis, purpose or aim of study for one or more articles is omitted.

collapse Study Design assessment

Study Design

15 points

Criteria Description

Study Design

5. Excellent

15 points

A thorough and accurate discussion on the study design for each article is presented.

4. Good

13.8 points

The study design is adequately presented for each article. Minor detail is needed for accuracy or clarity.

3. Satisfactory

13.2 points

The study design is indicated for each article. Key aspects are missing for one or two articles. There are minor inaccuracies.

2. Less Than Satisfactory

12 points

The study design for each article is presented, but key information is consistently omitted. There are inaccuracies throughout.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

The study design for one or more article is omitted.

collapse Setting and Sample assessment

Setting and Sample

15 points

Criteria Description

Setting and Sample

5. Excellent

15 points

The setting and sample in which the researcher conducted the study are detailed and accurate for each article.

4. Good

13.8 points

The setting and sample are adequately presented for each article. Minor detail is needed for accuracy or clarity.

3. Satisfactory

13.2 points

The setting and sample are indicated for each article. Key aspects are missing for one or two articles. There are minor inaccuracies.

2. Less Than Satisfactory

12 points

The setting and sample are indicated for each article, but key information is consistently omitted. There are inaccuracies throughout.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

The setting and sample are omitted for one or more of the articles.

collapse Methods assessment

Methods

15 points

Criteria Description

Methods

5. Excellent

15 points

A thorough and accurate discussion on the method of study for each article is presented.

4. Good

13.8 points

An adequate discussion on the method of study for each article is presented. Minor detail is needed for accuracy or clarity.

3. Satisfactory

13.2 points

The method of study for each article is presented. Key aspects are missing for one or two articles. There are minor inaccuracies

2. Less Than Satisfactory

12 points

The method of study is presented for each article, but key information is consistently omitted. There are inaccuracies throughout.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Method of study for one or more articles is omitted. Overall, the methods of study are incomplete.

collapse Analysis and Data Collection assessment

Analysis and Data Collection

15 points

Criteria Description

Analysis and Data Collection

5. Excellent

15 points

A thorough and accurate discussion on the analysis and data collection for each article is presented.

4. Good

13.8 points

An adequate discussion on the method of study for each article is presented. Minor detail is needed for accuracy or clarity.

3. Satisfactory

13.2 points

Analysis and data collection for each article are presented. Key aspects are missing for one or two articles. There are minor inaccuracies.

2. Less Than Satisfactory

12 points

Analysis and data collection are presented for each article, but key information is consistently omitted. There are inaccuracies throughout.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Analysis and data collection for one or more articles is omitted. Overall, the analysis and data collection are incomplete.

collapse Outcomes and Key Findings assessment

Outcomes and Key Findings

15 points

Criteria Description

Outcomes and Key Findings

5. Excellent

15 points

A thorough and accurate discussion on the outcomes and key findings collection for each article are presented.

4. Good

13.8 points

An adequate discussion on outcomes and key findings for each article are presented. Minor detail is needed for accuracy or clarity.

3. Satisfactory

13.2 points

Outcomes and key findings for each article are presented. Key aspects are missing for one or two articles. There are minor inaccuracies.

2. Less Than Satisfactory

12 points

Outcomes and key findings are presented for each article, but key information is consistently omitted. There are inaccuracies throughout.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Outcomes and key findings for one or more articles are omitted. Overall, the outcomes and key findings are incomplete.

collapse Recommendations assessment

Recommendations

15 points

Criteria Description

Recommendations

5. Excellent

15 points

Researcher recommendations are accurately and thoroughly described for each article.

4. Good

13.8 points

Researcher recommendations for each article are accurately presented. Minor detail is needed for accuracy or clarity.

3. Satisfactory

13.2 points

Researcher recommendations for each article are presented. Researcher recommendations described for one article are inaccurate or incomplete.

2. Less Than Satisfactory

12 points

Researcher recommendations are indicated for each article. The researcher recommendations described for two of the articles are inaccurate or incomplete.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Researcher recommendations are omitted for one or more of the articles. The recommendations described for three or more articles are inaccurate or incomplete.

collapse Explanation of How Articles Support Proposed Evidence-Based Practice Project Proposal assessment

Explanation of How Articles Support Proposed Evidence-Based Practice Project Proposal

15 points

Criteria Description

Explanation of How Articles Support Proposed Evidence-Based Practice Project Proposal

5. Excellent

15 points

A detailed explanation for how each article supports the proposed evidence-based practice project proposal is presented. Support for the evidence-based project proposal is clearly evident.

4. Good

13.8 points

An explanation for how each article supports the proposed evidence-based practice project proposal is presented. Minor detail is needed for accuracy or clarity. Adequate support for the evidence-based project proposal is demonstrated.

3. Satisfactory

13.2 points

A general explanation for how each article supports the proposed evidence-based practice project proposal is presented. The explanation for one article is inaccurate or incomplete. Support for the evidence-based project proposal is generally evident.

2. Less Than Satisfactory

12 points

An explanation for how each article supports the proposed evidence-based practice project proposal is presented. The explanation for two of the articles is inaccurate or incomplete.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

An explanation of how the article supports the proposed evidence-based practice project proposal is omitted for one or more of the articles. The explanation for three or more articles is inaccurate or incomplete.

collapse Mechanics of Writing assessment

Mechanics of Writing

7.5 points

Criteria Description

Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, and language use)

5. Excellent

7.5 points

The writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.

4. Good

6.9 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

6.6 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

6 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 employed.