Reference no: EM133786426

Identifying the following sections of your paper:

• Background or introduction of the population, strategies, and outcome - in this general information section of your paper you discuss why your PICOT population should have an intervention strategy and comparison strategy reviewed for their effect on the outcome. You may want to define terminology your paper will be using. The background will identify and describe the history and nature of your population related to the outcome, referencing existing literature, appropriate context of the problem in relation to theory, research, and/or practice, its scope. Background information does not replace the evaluation of literature section; it is intended to place the research population/problem in a proper context without bias towards either strategy. You may find research studies which examine the two strategies you have identified; these can be referenced in the background. There should be no bias, or suggestion that one strategy is more effective than the other in this section. APA 7th ed. in-text references should be used.
• PICOT question - state your approved PICOT question here, this is not a problem statement. (Groves & Gray, p390-391)
• Purpose of the paper - This section of your systematic review states the purpose, which is to conduct evidence-based literature research and analysis to answer your PICOT question. This will be accomplished by comparing what evidence-based literature has to say about your I (intervention) strategy and your C (comparison) strategy. Your purpose statement presents the reason, scope, and direction of the paper. It tells the reader what to expect in a paper and what the specific focus will be. To minimize bias, you should not state an opinion in this section. This section is not long. Please note, you are not conducting original research.
• Literature search strategy- this section includes the names of databases you used, search terms you used to find original studies, search terms you eliminated in the search (and why), search terms you included (and why), years of research included (within 7 years), types of scholarly sources reviewed, the type of studies, the number of studies reviewed, and identify limitations to your search..... (Groves & Gray, Table 13.1, p391-392). This section should be written so a peer could duplicate the process.
• Evaluation of the Literature- in this section you will summarize at least three (3) original research/studies from primary sources which examine the I (intervention) strategy and at least three (3) different original research/studies from primary sources which examine the C (comparison) strategy.
**A meta-analysis or systematic review cannot be used in the Evaluation of Literature section as these studies are similar to what you are writing.**
•
o Intervention Strategy - You should summarize each (at least 3) original/primary research/study in separate paragraphs. Provide a brief overview of what the study (researchers, date) was trying to do (i.e., the problem), identify the methods used, sample size, the measurement tools, and the thesis/PICOT question/hypothesis if available.
o Consider the following guiding questions to help you think of what to write in your summary for each of the three original research/studies:
•
•
• Did the article ask the right question in the first place? How does it fit with other articles on the same topic? Did it miss any important studies it should have considered?
• Did the problem match the methods? For example, to understand student behavior, were students observed or interviewed, or did all the data come from teachers?
• Clarify the method used in the collection of information in the research/study.
• Were the findings reported in a consistent and clear format? Did you notice problems in the data that the article overlooked? Did the article fail to acknowledge and explain any limitations?
• Give the samples used - in research, there have to be samples taken to help in making conclusions, state the samples to persuade your readers on your objective.
• What were the findings? State the findings of the research.
• The evidence - identify the evidence that the author used in the research/study for support. Is it factual evidence or it is personal judgments? Was the logic clear and were claims properly supported with convincing data? Did you spot any fallacies?
• The validity of the argument - a writer might use many pieces of evidence to support their claims but you need to identify the sources they use and determine whether they are credible or not.
• How convictive are the arguments? If the research/study does not convince, you should be able to critique that and illustrate the same. Your estimation of the article's contribution to knowledge and its implications or applications to our world.
Then, in another paragraph (two or three) analyze/assess/interpret/critically appraise the three original intervention strategy research/studies for their effect on the outcome. For example, compare/analyze the three studies collectively for their similarities (sample size, location, tool used for measurement, population....), differences, strengths and weaknesses, for their credibility & meaning of the study findings as they relate to your PICOT question.
•
o Comparison Strategy - You should summarize each (at least 3) original/primary research/study in separate paragraphs. Provide a brief overview of what the study (researchers, date) was trying to do (i.e., the problem), identify the methods used, sample size, the measurement tools, and the thesis/PICOT question/hypothesis if available.
Consider the following guiding questions to help you think of what to write in your summary and for your analysis:

• Did the article ask the right question in the first place? How does it fit with other articles on the same topic? Did it miss any important studies it should have considered?
• Did the problem match the methods? For example, to understand student behavior, were students observed or interviewed, or did all the data come from teachers?
• Clarify the method used in the collection of information in the research/study.
• Were the findings reported in a consistent and clear format? Did you notice problems in the data that the article overlooked? Did the article fail to acknowledge and explain any limitations?
• Give the samples used - in research, there have to be samples taken to help in making conclusions, state the samples to persuade your readers on your objective.
• What were the findings? State the findings of the research.
• The evidence - identify the evidence that the author used in the research/study for support. Is it factual evidence or it is personal judgments? Was the logic clear and were claims properly supported with convincing data? Did you spot any fallacies?
• The validity of the argument - a writer might use many pieces of evidence to support their claims but you need to identify the sources they use and determine whether they are credible or not.
• How convictive are the arguments? If the research/study does not convince, you should be able to critique that and illustrate the same. Your estimation of the article's contribution to knowledge and its implications or applications to our world.
Then, in another paragraph (two or three) analyze/assess/interpret/critically appraise the three original comparison strategy research/studies for their effect on the outcome. For example, compare/analyze the three studies collectively for their similarities (sample size, location, tool used for measurement, population....), differences, strengths and weaknesses, for their credibility & meaning of the study findings as they relate to your PICOT question.
By investigating, reading, critically appraising, and interpreting EB research/studies which discuss the intervention strategy independently or the the comparison strategy independently, you minimize bias (Groves & Gray, Ch12).
**A meta-analysis or systematic review cannot be used in the Evaluation of Literature section as these studies are similar to what you are writing and are secondary sources.**

• Conclusion of findings from of the evaluation of literature - in this section you clearly state the results of your evaluation of literature, whether the intervention strategy or the comparison strategy is better and why. This section restates the main elements or attributes of the evaluation section which have been discussed already.

• Implementing change in healthcare - Include/identify an evidence-based practice model for employing evidence in clinical practice. For this section you may choose to have personal communications with your leaders in your organization about implementing change related to your findings from you systematic review, OR you can write generically about implementing change in healthcare. If you write specific to change in your organization, include information on what the process is to implement change at your healthcare facility by asking your Unit Practice Council or Unit Manager about the change process. Identify the evidence-based practice model your healthcare organization uses for employing evidence in clinical practice. Use APA 7th ed. format to CITE personal communication! Support the findings with current literature on implementing change and a model for change.

• Nurse-sensitive quality marker - in this section introduce your peers to a nurse-sensitive quality marker, explaining the importance the measuring of this data has in assessing quality of care. The nurse-sensitive quality marker may be related to your PICOT question, may be one your unit monitors, may be one your unit could begin to monitor, or may be one of interest. Questions to address when introducing the nurse-sensitive quality marker: why is this nurse-sensitive quality marker important? does it tie to your PICOT question? if so, how? if not, why did you select this nurse-sensitive quality marker? OR is your unit monitoring nurse-sensitive quality marker? how is/would data collected? how often is/would data collected? who is part of the assessment team? what is your role as an RN in addressing a nurse-sensitive quality marker? how does or could this data impact your unit's function? how do you see this nurse-sensitive quality marker effecting practice and/or future research? Cite with a scholarly source or personal communication to support.

• Summary - This section has three to four paragraphs, synthesizing and wrapping up the topic: restating the PICOT question, restating the analysis/evaluation of literature research findings, how change can or may occur and a brief reminder of the nurse-sensitive quality marker. You present the implications, recommendations, findings, gaps in research identified, next step/areas of needed research or future areas to be examined and lessons learned from your evaluation/analysis, change discussion, and barriers discussion.
Reference page and in text citations formatted in APA 7th edLinks to an external site.. - ten (10) or more scholarly references.
A reminder, your systematic review paper should be APA 7th edition formatted, use headings, use APA 7th edition format in text references, and be 5-10 pages (double spaced) long. Not included in the page count, but required, an APA 7th edition formatted title page and APA 7th ed. formatted reference(s) page.