With new information continually emerging, professional nurses must be equipped to critique scholarly literature and discern its value for practice.
Select one current, qualitative or mixed methods scholarly nursing article related to your PICOT question and determine its strengths, limitations, and potential application.
Complete the Johns Hopkins Nursing Evidence Based Practice Appendix E Evidence Appraisal Tool download. Once you’ve completed the tool, use your own words to summarize your appraisal of the article. Include the following:
- Description of the purpose
- Explanation of research design
- Discussion of sample
- Description of data collection methods
- Summary of findings
- Strengths of the study (minimum of 1)
- Limitations of the study (minimum of 1)
- Recommendations regarding potential application for future practice that are insightful and appropriate.
Attach the article to your post, in addition to including the full reference for the article in your post.
During the week, read a minimum of two articles posted by peers and add your thoughts about whether you feel their article would support an EBP change.
For full credit, submit your initial post by Wednesday at 11:59 PM MT. Complete your two responses to peers by Sunday at 11:59 PM MT.
**To view the grading criteria/rubric, please click on the 3 dots in the box at the end of the solid gray bar above the discussion board title and then Show Rubric.
Hello professor and class,
The qualitative study that I selected is by Blume et al. (2021). From the Johns Hopkins Nursing Evidence-Based Practice Appendix E Evidence Appraisal Tool, this article was rated high/good quality. The article stipulated the purpose of the article which was to retrieve comprehensive nursing-sensitive patient outcomes (NSPOs) from nurse staffing published journals and from healthcare professionals. The article did not have research questions. The research design that was used was umbrella reviews. According to Gray et al. (2017), umbrella reviews are the highest levels of evidence. They are overviews of systematic and meta-analysis reviews.
The article had a sample of 21 nurses and other healthcare professionals. These professionals were purposefully sampled. They knew the research area. They were not a representation of a population. They were characterized as experts with several years of practice, from different parts of Germany,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Kindly click the icon below to purchase the full sample at only $5