Journal Response MODULE 6
nikkyvuTaking into consideration the three types of necessary CQI planning:
2 months ago
5
files (2)JournalQuestion_WEEK6.docx
Module6RUBRIC-DNP860.docx
JournalQuestion_WEEK6.docx
Appraising research quality is essential in ensuring that you make changes based on reliable, up-to-date information. Pay attention to what is being said by the researcher while being mindful of the study's design and the steps the researcher took to ensure that they followed tight established protocols to reduce potential bias. As a Doctorate in Nursing Practice (DNP) change agent, it is your responsibility to ensure that you are selecting recent evidence that offers a high level of certainty that the recommendations are valid and worth following. An essential step in writing your literature review is showing the strength of the evidence you have chosen and explaining the rationale for selecting that study to support your recommendation. This week, you will build off your Module 2 assignment and dive further into finding sound studies to support your quality improvement project. You will be crafting an Evidence-Based Table and declaring the strength/quality of those studies. This table will help you develop the literature review that you will be constructing in Module 7.
Journal Question:
Many types of continuous quality improvement (CQI) methodologies are available for project implementation. Please ensure your selection is appropriate to healthcare and your project. Some healthcare-appropriate method examples are Lean, Six Sigma, Plan Do Study Act (PDSA), and Baldrige Award Criteria.
Taking into consideration the three types of necessary CQI planning:
1. strategic,
2. operational,
3. project plans,
Reflect on your readings. Explain the continuous quality improvement planning methodology that might be a good fit for carrying out your project. Describe how this method/framework would be used to meet the “project planning” stage of your CQI process.
Each short-answer Journal response will be a minimum of 300 words.
No citation, reference, or APA style is necessary.
This is my Topic
“ This quality improvement project is to implement the use of an evidence-based self-care tool, Summary of Diabetes Self-Care Activities (SDSCA), to improve diabetes self-care behaviors among adults with type 2 diabetes.”
Reference
Schmidt, N. A., & Brown, J. M. (2021). Evidence-based practice for nurses: Appraisal and application of research (5th ed.). Jones and Bartlett Learning. IBSN:978-1-274-22632-4. Read chapter 15.
Schmidt, N. A., & Brown, J. M. (2021). Evidence-based practice for nurses: Appraisal and application of research (5th ed.). Jones and Bartlett Learning. IBSN:978-1-274-22632-4. Read chapter 15.
Additional Resources
Top Tip Bio. (2021). How to landscape one page [Video]. YouTube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=31RvJJ-4TF4&t=102s
Fineout-Overholt, E., Melnyk, B. M., Stillwell, S. B., & Williamson, K. M. (2010). Evidence-based practice, step by step: Critical appraisal of the evidence: part III. The American Journal of Nursing, 110(11), 43–51. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.NAJ.0000390523.99066.b5
O'Donnell, B., Gupta, V. (2022). Continuous quality improvement. StatPearls. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK559239/
Fineout-Overhault, E., Mazurek Melnyk, B., Stillwell, S., & Williamson, K. M. (2010). Critical Appraisal of the Evidence: Part III. American Journal of Nursing, 110(11). https://classroom.aspen.edu/content/enforced/33541-DNP810-MG8-06-12-18/DNP810Modules4%20and%208-Critical%20Appraisal%20of%20the%20Evidence%20Part%20III%20(1).pdf?_&d2lSessionVal=54vJ8eGQmLNBzSZzybxXlJe4N&ou=77571
Module6RUBRIC-DNP860.docx
4/12/26, 8:43 PM Preview Rubric: Graduate Simple Essay Rubric v1 - DNP860 Sect1 Evidence-Based Practice for Quality Improvement - Aspen University Classroom
4/12/26, 8:43 PM Preview Rubric: Graduate Simple Essay Rubric v1 - DNP860 Sect1 Evidence-Based Practice for Quality Improvement - Aspen University Classroom
Graduate Simple Essay Rubric v1
Course: DNP860 Sect1 Evidence-Based Practice for Quality Improvement
Criteria
Does Not Meet 0%
Approaches 70%
Meets 80%
Exceeds 100%
Criterion Score
Content Weight:
30
%
/ 30
0
points
Topic is inappropri
-
ate to assignment,
inaccurate under
-
standing of con
-
cepts, unclear and
difficult to under
-
stand; does not ad
-
dress many assign
-
ment requirements.
Information has
weak or no connec
-
tion to the assign
-
ment topic.
21
points
Topic is mostly cov
-
ered and appropri
-
ate to assignment,
but does not ade
-
quately demonstrate
accurate under
-
standing of con
-
cepts; mostly clear
and understandable;
lacks some of the
requirements of the
assignment descrip
-
tion and/or provides
little detail;
Information relates
to the main topic,
but few details
and/or examples are
given.
points
24
Topic is covered
completely and ap
-
propriate to assign
-
ment; overview of
key concept dimen
-
sions is evident;
clear and under
-
standable; ad
-
dresses all of the re
-
quirements of the
assignment descrip
-
tion, with adequate
attention to detail.
30
points
In-depth coverage
of topic; outstand
-
ing clarity and ex
-
planation of con
-
cepts demonstrated
in information pre
-
sented; approaches
assignment with
depth and breadth,
without redundancy,
using clear and fo
-
cused details.
|
Organization Weight: 25% |
0 points Organization is confusing and interferes with reader’s ability to follow ideas. Weak or no introduction of topic or purpose is unclear, weak, or missing. Conclusion lacks a summary of topic, or is missing or irrelevant. |
17.5 points Ideas are sometimes disorganized or irrelevant; Flow is sometimes choppy; somewhat clear organization. Basic introduction that states topic but is presented in an uninteresting way. Conclusion contains basic summary of topic without final concluding ideas, may inappropriately introduces new information. |
20 points Structures ideas in a coherent, organized order that has good flow and an obvious framework. Proficient introduction that is interesting and states topic. Conclusion contains good summary of topic with credible concluding ideas and introduces no new information. |
25 points Exceptionally clear, logical, mature, and thorough organization permitting smooth flow of ideas; Introduction that grabs interest of reader and states topic in clear, unambiguous terms. Excellent concluding summary with succinct and precise ideas that impact reader. |
/ 25 |
|
Logic/Argument Weight: 15% |
0 points Demonstrates little logical reasoning for the claims and thoughts within assignment; Many claims are weak or illogical. |
10.5 points Lacks some logical reasoning for the claims and thoughts within the assignment; Some claims are weak. |
12 points Uses solid logical reasoning for the claims and thoughts within the assignment. |
15 points Provides exemplary logical reasoning for the claims and thoughts within the assignment. |
/ 15 |
|
Support Weight: 20% |
0 points Lacks support; Uses poor sources for references; Citations lack credibility, relevance, or academic quality or are not current; Does not meet the minimum number of required citations in assignment description. APA format and style are not evident. |
14 points Provides weak support or not enough support; Citations are not consistently credible, current, relevant or academic; Meets the minimum number of required citations in assignment description Missing APA elements; in-text citations, where necessary, are used but formatted inaccurately and not referenced. |
16 points Provides sufficient support with credible, current, relevant academic citations; Meets the minimum number of required citations in assignment description. ; In-text citations and a reference page are present with few format errors. Mechanics of writing are reflective of APA style. |
20 points Provides very strong support from credible, current, relevant, academic citations; Meets or exceeds the minimum number of required citations in assignment description. Accurate citations and references are presented. No APA errors are evident. |
/ 20 |
Total
/ 100
Quality of
Written
Communication
Weight: 10%
/ 10
0
points
Style and voice inap
-
propriate or do not
address given audi
-
ence, purpose, etc.
Word choice is ex
-
cessively redundant,
clichéd, and unspe
-
cific. Inconsistent
grammar, spelling,
punctuation, and
paragraphing.
Surface errors are
pervasive enough
that they impede
communication of
meaning.
points
7
Style and voice are
somewhat appropri
-
ate to given audi
-
ence and purpose.
Word choice is of
-
ten unspecific,
generic, redundant,
and clichéd.
Repetitive mechani
-
cal errors distract
the reader.
Inconsistencies in
language, sentence
structure, and/or
word choice are
present.
8
points
Style and voice are
appropriate to the
given audience and
purpose. Word
choice is specific
and purposeful, and
somewhat varied
throughout. Minimal
mechanical or typo
-
graphical errors are
present, but are not
overly distracting to
the reader. Correct
sentence structure
and audience-appro
-
priate language are
used.
points
10
Style and voice are
not only appropriate
to the given audi
-
ence and purpose,
but also show origi
-
nality and creativity.
Word choice is spe
-
cific, purposeful, dy
-
namic and varied.
Free of mechanical
and typographical
errors. A variety of
sentence structures
and effective figures
of speech are used.
Writer is clearly in
command of stan
-
dard, written, aca
-
demic English.
4/12/26, 8:43 PM Preview Rubric: Graduate Simple Essay Rubric v1 - DNP860 Sect1 Evidence-Based Practice for Quality Improvement - Aspen University Classroom
Criteria
Does Not Meet 0%
Approaches 70%
Meets 80%
Exceeds 100%
Criterion Score
4/
Criteria
Does Not Meet 0%
Approaches 70%
Meets 80%
Exceeds 100%
Criterion Score
1/5
https://classroom.aspen.edu/d2l/le/content/118315/viewContent/6269462/View 1/5
1/5
Overall Score
Level 1
0
points minimum
Level 2
70
points minimum
Level 3
80
points minimum
Level 4
100
points minimum
https://classroom.aspen.edu/d2l/le/content/118315/viewContent/6269462/View 1/5
https://classroom.aspen.edu/d2l/le/content/118315/viewContent/6269462/View 1/5
https://classroom.aspen.edu/d2l/le/content/118315/viewContent/6269462/View 1/5
