Realtors rely on detailed property appraisals—conducted using appraisal tools—to assign market values to houses and other properties. These values are then presented to buyers and sellers to set prices and initiate offers.
Research appraisal is not that different. The critical appraisal process utilizes formal appraisal tools to assess the results of research to determine value to the context at hand. Evidence-based practitioners often present these findings to make the case for specific courses of action.
In this Assignment, you will use an appraisal tool to conduct a critical appraisal of published research. You will then present the results of your efforts.
To Prepare:
The Assignment (Evidence-Based Project)
Part 3A: Critical Appraisal of Research
Conduct a critical appraisal of the four peer-reviewed articles you selected by completing the Evaluation Table within the Critical Appraisal Tool Worksheet Template. Choose a total of four peer- reviewed articles that you selected related to your clinical topic of interest in Module 2 and Module 3.
Note: You can choose any combination of articles from Modules 2 and 3 for your Critical Appraisal. For example, you may choose two unfiltered research articles from Module 2 and two filtered research articles (systematic reviews) from Module 3 or one article from Module 2 and three articles from Module 3. You can choose any combination of articles from the prior Module Assignments as long as both modules and types of studies are represented.
Part 3B: Critical Appraisal of Research
Based on your appraisal, in a 1-2-page critical appraisal, suggest a best practice that emerges from the research you reviewed. Briefly explain the best practice, justifying your proposal with APA citations of the research.
Submit Part 3A and 3B of your Evidence-Based Project.
Resources provided
Melnyk, B. M., & Fineout-Overholt, E. (2018). Evidence-based practice in nursing & healthcare: A guide to best practice (4th ed.). Philadelphia, PA: Wolters Kluwer.
Chapter 5, “Critically Appraising Quantitative Evidence for Clinical Decision Making” (pp. 124–188)
Chapter 6, “Critically Appraising Qualitative Evidence for Clinical Decision Making” (pp. 189–218)
Fineout-Overholt, E., Melnyk, B. M., Stillwell, S. B., & Williamson, K. M. (2010a). Evidence-based practice step by step: Critical appraisal of the evidence: Part I. American Journal of Nursing, 110(7), 47–52. doi:10.1097/01.NAJ.0000383935.22721.9c
Note: You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.
Fineout-Overholt, E., Melnyk, B. M., Stillwell, S. B., & Williamson, K. M. (2010b). Evidence-based practice, step by step: Critical appraisal of the evidence: Part II: Digging deeper—examining the “keeper” studies. American Journal of Nursing, 110(9), 41–48. doi:10.1097/01.NAJ.0000388264.49427.f9
Note: You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.
Fineout-Overholt, E., Melnyk, B. M., Stillwell, S. B., & Williamson, K. M. (2010c). Evidence-based practice, step by step: Critical appraisal of the evidence: Part III: The process of synthesis: Seeing similarities and differences across the body of evidence. American Journal of Nursing, 110(11), 43–51. doi: 10.1097/01.NAJ.0000390523.99066.b5
Note: You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.
Williamson, K. M. (2009). Evidence-based practice: Critical appraisal of qualitative evidence. Journal of the American Psychiatric Nurses Association, 15(3), 202–207. doi:10.1177/1078390309338733
Note: You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.
Document: Critical Appraisal Tool Worksheet Template (Word document)
Evaluation Table
Use this document to complete the
evaluation table
requirement of the Module 4 Assessment,
Evidence-Based Project, Part 4A: Critical Appraisal of Research
|
Full APA formatted citation of selected article. |
Article #1 |
Article #2 |
Article #3 |
Article #4 |
|
Evidence Level * (I, II, or III) |
||||
|
Conceptual Framework Describe the theoretical basis for the study (If there is not one mentioned in the article, say that here).** |
||||
|
Design/Method Describe the design and how the study was carried out (In detail, including inclusion/exclusion criteria). |
||||
|
Sample/Setting The number and characteristics of patients, attrition rate, etc. |
||||
|
Major Variables Studied List and define dependent and independent variables |
||||
|
Measurement Identify primary statistics used to answer clinical questions (You need to list the actual tests done). |
||||
|
Data Analysis Statistical or Qualitative findings (You need to enter the actual numbers determined by the statistical tests or qualitative data). |
||||
|
Findings and Recommendations General findings and recommendations of the research |
||||
|
Appraisal and Study Quality Describe the general worth of this research to practice. What are the strengths and limitations of study? What are the risks associated with implementation of the suggested practices or processes detailed in the research? What is the feasibility of use in your practice? |
||||
|
Key findings |
||||
|
Outcomes |
||||
|
General Notes/Comments |
*
These levels are from the Johns Hopkins Nursing Evidence-Based Practice: Evidence Level and Quality Guide
· Level I
Experimental, randomized controlled trial (RCT), systematic review RTCs with or without meta-analysis
· Level II
Quasi-experimental studies, systematic review of a combination of RCTs and quasi-experimental studies, or quasi-experimental studies only, with or without meta-analysis
· Level III
Nonexperimental, systematic review of RCTs, quasi-experimental with/without meta-analysis, qualitative, qualitative systematic review with/without meta-synthesis
· Level IV
Respected authorities’ opinions, nationally recognized expert committee/consensus panel reports based on scientific evidence
· Level V
Literature reviews, quality improvement, program evaluation, financial evaluation, case reports, nationally recognized expert(s) opinion based on experiential evidence
**Note on Conceptual Framework
· The following information is from Walden academic guides which helps explain conceptual frameworks and the reasons they are used in research. Here is the link
https://academicguides.waldenu.edu/library/conceptualframework
· Researchers create theoretical and conceptual frameworks that include a philosophical and methodological model to help design their work. A formal theory provides context for the outcome of the events conducted in the research. The data collection and analysis are also based on the theoretical and conceptual framework.
· As stated by Grant and Osanloo (2014), “Without a theoretical framework, the structure and vision for a study is unclear, much like a house that cannot be constructed without a blueprint. By contrast, a research plan that contains a theoretical framework allows the dissertation study to be strong and structured with an organized flow from one chapter to the next.”
· Theoretical and conceptual frameworks provide evidence of academic standards and procedure. They also offer an explanation of why the study is pertinent and how the researcher expects to fill the gap in the literature.
· Literature does not always clearly delineate between a theoretical or conceptual framework. With that being said, there are slight differences between the two.
References
The Johns Hopkins Hospital/Johns Hopkins University (n.d.). Johns Hopkins nursing dvidence-based practice: appendix C: evidence level and quality guide. Retrieved October 23, 2019 from
https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/evidence-based-practice/_docs/appendix_c_evidence_level_quality_guide
Grant, C., & Osanloo, A. (2014). Understanding, Selecting, and Integrating a Theoretical Framework in Dissertation Research: Creating the Blueprint for Your” House”. Administrative Issues Journal: Education, Practice, and Research, 4(2), 12-26.
Walden University Academic Guides (n.d.). Conceptual & theoretical frameworks overview. Retrieved October 23, 2019 from https://academicguides.waldenu.edu/library/conceptualframework
Critical Appraisal Tool Worksheet Template
© 2018 Laureate Education Inc.
2
Evaluation Table
Use this document to complete the
evaluation table
requirement of the Module 4 Assessment, Evidence-Based Project, Part 4A: Critical Appraisal of Research
|
Full APA formatted citation of selected article. |
Article #1 |
Article #2 |
Article #3 |
Article #4 |
|
Evidence Level * (I, II, or III) |
Example; level 1 review according to Johns Hopkins University |
|||
|
Conceptual Framework Describe the theoretical basis for the study (If there is not one mentioned in the article, say that here).** |
||||
|
Design/Method Describe the design and how the study was carried out (In detail, including inclusion/exclusion criteria). |
||||
|
Sample/Setting The number and characteristics of patients, attrition rate, etc. |
||||
|
Major Variables Studied List and define dependent and independent variables |
||||
|
Measurement Identify primary statistics used to answer clinical questions (You need to list the actual tests done). |
||||
|
Data Analysis Statistical or Qualitative findings (You need to enter the actual numbers determined by the statistical tests or qualitative data). |
||||
|
Findings and Recommendations General findings and recommendations of the research |
||||
|
Appraisal and Study Quality Describe the general worth of this research to practice. What are the strengths and limitations of study? What are the risks associated with implementation of the suggested practices or processes detailed in the research? What is the feasibility of use in your practice? |
||||
|
Key findings |
||||
|
Outcomes |
||||
|
General Notes/Comments |
*
These levels are from the Johns Hopkins Nursing Evidence-Based Practice: Evidence Level and Quality Guide
· Level I
Experimental, randomized controlled trial (RCT), systematic review RTCs with or without meta-analysis
· Level II
Quasi-experimental studies, systematic review of a combination of RCTs and quasi-experimental studies, or quasi-experimental studies only, with or without meta-analysis
· Level III
Nonexperimental, systematic review of RCTs, quasi-experimental with/without meta-analysis, qualitative, qualitative systematic review with/without meta-synthesis
· Level IV
Respected authorities’ opinions, nationally recognized expert committee/consensus panel reports based on scientific evidence
· Level V
Literature reviews, quality improvement, program evaluation, financial evaluation, case reports, nationally recognized expert(s) opinion based on experiential evidence
**Note on Conceptual Framework
· The following information is from Walden academic guides which helps explain conceptual frameworks and the reasons they are used in research. Here is the link
https://academicguides.waldenu.edu/library/conceptualframework
· Researchers create theoretical and conceptual frameworks that include a philosophical and methodological model to help design their work. A formal theory provides context for the outcome of the events conducted in the research. The data collection and analysis are also based on the theoretical and conceptual framework.
· As stated by Grant and Osanloo (2014), “Without a theoretical framework, the structure and vision for a study is unclear, much like a house that cannot be constructed without a blueprint. By contrast, a research plan that contains a theoretical framework allows the dissertation study to be strong and structured with an organized flow from one chapter to the next.”
· Theoretical and conceptual frameworks provide evidence of academic standards and procedure. They also offer an explanation of why the study is pertinent and how the researcher expects to fill the gap in the literature.
· Literature does not always clearly delineate between a theoretical or conceptual framework. With that being said, there are slight differences between the two.
References
The Johns Hopkins Hospital/Johns Hopkins University (n.d.). Johns Hopkins nursing dvidence-based practice: appendix C: evidence level and quality guide. Retrieved October 23, 2019 from https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/evidence-based-practice/_docs/appendix_c_evidence_level_quality_guide
Grant, C., & Osanloo, A. (2014). Understanding, Selecting, and Integrating a Theoretical Framework in Dissertation Research: Creating the Blueprint for Your” House”. Administrative Issues Journal: Education, Practice, and Research, 4(2), 12-26.
Walden University Academic Guides (n.d.). Conceptual & theoretical frameworks overview. Retrieved October 23, 2019 from https://academicguides.waldenu.edu/library/conceptualframework
Critical Appraisal Tools Worksheet Template
© 2018 Laureate Education Inc.
2
|
Category of article |
Type of Articles |
|
Article reporting on Original Research |
These types of articles are primary research and will report on 3 major types of research which also have subcategories which I have given you some examples
· Quantitative · Quantitative research uses numbers to provides objective measurements using statistics and mathematics to analyze data. There are 4 basic types of quantitative research methods. · Experimental · Experimental studies are the gold standard of research, investigator controls the independent variable and randomly assigns subjects to different conditions. · Quasi-experimental · This type of research involves the manipulation of a variable but does not randomize subjects · Correlational · Usually these studies will use a survey or questionnaire and use statistics to show interrelationships among variable, but do not suggest causality. · Descriptive · These studies just offer information without suggesting any relationships of any kind. For example just gathering data and stating the mean (average) age of a population · Qualitative · Qualitative research is an inductive process using a narrative descriptive approach to organize data into categories and identify patterns among the categories. · Phenomenological · This method allow a way to understand an event, situation, experience, or concept · Grounded theory · This research follows a systematic flexible way for theories to emerge · Ethnographic · Describes cultures and peoples · Case studies · These explanatory or descriptive studies are an analysis of persons, events, decisions, periods, projects, policies, institutions, or other systems. · Mixed Method · Mixed method research uses both quantitative and qualitative methods to conduct research · Usually these types of studies will use a quantitative data instrument to collect data and conduct interviews to explore how individuals feel about a particular topic. · Example: The research may be planning to use quanititative methods to assess the impact of a particular treatment plan. Then conduct interviews to better understand a problem that was identified. · Another example: Conduct focus groups which lead to discovery or a trend of a problem, then do a quantitative survey to learn if this a problem in the population.
|
|
Articles reporting on secondary research or also called Review Article |
These types of articles are secondary literature because on other published work. There are basically 3 types of review articles, systematic reviews, literature reviews, or narrative reviews
· Systematic review · From https://academicguides.waldenu.edu/library/healthevidence/evidencepyramid · “Authors of a systematic review ask a specific clinical question, perform a comprehensive literature review, eliminate the poorly done studies, and attempt to make practice recommendations based on the well-done studies. Systematic reviews include only experimental, or quantitative, studies, and often include only randomized controlled trials.” · Literature reviews · Form https://guides.library.bloomu.edu/litreview · A literature review is a comprehensive summary of previous research on a topic. The literature review surveys scholarly articles, books, and other sources relevant to a particular area of research. The review should enumerate, describe, summarize, objectively evaluate and clarify this previous research. It should give a theoretical base for the research and help you (the author) determine the nature of your research. The literature review acknowledges the work of previous researchers, and in so doing, assures the reader that your work has been well conceived. It is assumed that by mentioning a previous work in the field of study, that the author has read, evaluated, and assimiliated that work into the work at hand. · Narrative Review · This is from https://www.editage.com/insights/secondary-research-the-basics-of-narrative-reviews-systematic-reviews-and-meta-analysis · These reviews typically provide an overview of the current knowledge in a given field or topic. They are written with the idea of summarizing what is known and highlighting either new perspectives in the field, or drawing out pending questions that are yet to be unanswered. There is no new analysis in these reviews and depending on the topic, may be quite exhaustive, with a long list of references. Most journals allow for longer review articles – even longer than original primary research articles–often ranging from 5000-10000 words.
|
|
Report on Clinical Case Study |
This is from https://www.editage.com/insights/a-young-researchers-guide-to-writing-a-clinical-case-report
Clinical case reports have been the earliest form of medical communication. A clinical case report or case study is a means of disseminating new knowledge gained from clinical practice. Medical practitioners often come across patient cases that are different or unusual such as a previously unknown condition, a complication of a known disease, an unusual side effect or adverse response to a mode of treatment, or a new approach to a common medical condition. Thus, a clinical case report is expected to discuss the signs, symptoms, diagnosis, and treatment of a disease.
Clinical case reports are the first-line evidence in medical literature as they present original observations and can be an excellent way for medical students and practitioners to get started with academic writing. Additionally, a published case report is definitely a contribution to medical science and a great addition to a CV.
|
|
Validity and Reliability |
· Validity- the extent researchers can be confident that the cause and effect they identify in their research are in fact causal relationships:
So what is validity, really It is the extent to which a concept is accurately measured in a quantitative study. For example, if a study is designed to evaluate depression yet it actually measures insomnia, it’s not considered valid. It’s that simple. And this “thing” called reliability? Well, let’s say your alarm clock rings at 6am each day, yet it’s set for 5:30am. It’s reliable (it rings every day, right?), yet is not valid (it’s not ringing at the desired time). It’s vital to consider validity and reliability of the data collection tools (instruments, measures) when either conducting or critiquing research. A researcher should always include a discussion of the tools they have utilized and the associated testing those tools have undergone. There are three major types of validity: · Construct validity— do the study and tests or instruments used measure what they purport to measure? · External validity— can the causal relationships be generalized to different measures, persons, settings, and times? · Internal validity— is there is evidence that what you did in your study caused what you observed to happen? Was there another possible cause of the study outcome? While internal validity has historically been a priority in study design, external validity is equally important to improving the health of the public. For instance, if your study is performed at an urban academic center where 90% of the participants in the study is Caucasian, how is that work generalizable to the public at large? To other populations or settings? It isn’t! Resources on Reliability and Validity are found at the Walden Library: https://academicguides.waldenu.edu/library/testsmeasures/reliability |
EVIDENCE BASED PRACTICEEVIDENCE BASED PRACTICE
Name: Lilian Vende
Date: January 1, 2021
Name: Lilian Vende
Date: January 1, 2021
Introduction
Majority of the health care facilities have implemented Evidence
Based practices especially in nursing.
EBP is the integration of research evidence, clinical expertise and
patient’s preferences.
There is confusion on the advantages and disadvantages of EBP in
nursing (Eastern Illinois University, 2018).
Therefore, our PICOT question will be based on the use of evidence-
based practice in everyday nursing practice.
Majority of the health care facilities have implemented Evidence
Based practices especially in nursing.
EBP is the integration of research evidence, clinical expertise and
patient’s preferences.
There is confusion on the advantages and disadvantages of EBP in
nursing (Eastern Illinois University, 2018).
Therefore, our PICOT question will be based on the use of evidence-
based practice in everyday nursing practice.
Debra Sullivan
I could not fine where you identified or described in detail your chosen clinical issue of interest.
Debra Sullivan
To be clear, you discussion EBP but not your clinical area of interest
PICOT Question
In nurses that work in acute care setting, does the implementation of a
culture of Evidence Based Practice compared to the use of traditional
policies and procedures have an effect on nurse satisfaction
scores
?
Population
Comparison
Intervention
Outcome
In nurses that
work in acute
care setting
Evidence
Based
Practice
traditional
policies and
procedures
nurse
satisfaction
scores
Debra Sullivan
You did a nice job on developing your PICOT question focused on your chosen clinical issue of interest
Databases Used for the Research
PubMed
This database ensures easy search per topic using search terms in order to filter
results and find certain peer reviewed articles.
Google Scholar
Enables me to easily navigate and filter the results to suit my research.
Cochrane Library
The database provides a wide range of systematic reviews and peer reviewed
articles
CINAHL
Gives access to related health topics and nursing based literature through the use
of electronic books as well as journals
PubMed
This database ensures easy search per topic using search terms in order to filter
results and find certain peer reviewed articles.
Google Scholar
Enables me to easily navigate and filter the results to suit my research.
Cochrane Library
The database provides a wide range of systematic reviews and peer reviewed
articles
CINAHL
Gives access to related health topics and nursing based literature through the use
of electronic books as well as journals
Debra Sullivan
Since Joanna Briggs database houses systematic review filters, it would have been a good idea to explore them
Peer Reviewed Articles used for the
Research
Peer Reviewed Articles used for the
Research
Black, A., Balneaves, L., Garossino, C., Puyat, J., & Qian, H. (2015).
Promoting Evidence-Based Practice Through a Research Training
Program for Point-of-Care Clinicians. The Journal of Nursing
Administration, 45(1), 14-20. Doi: 10.1097/NNA.0000000000000151
Flodgren, G., Rojas-Reyes, M., Cole, N., & Foxcroft, D. (2012).
Effectiveness of organisational infrastructures to promote evidence‐
based nursing practice. Conchrane Database of Systematic
Reviews. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD002212.pub2
Black, A., Balneaves, L., Garossino, C., Puyat, J., & Qian, H. (2015).
Promoting Evidence-Based Practice Through a Research Training
Program for Point-of-Care Clinicians. The Journal of Nursing
Administration, 45(1), 14-20. Doi: 10.1097/NNA.0000000000000151
Flodgren, G., Rojas-Reyes, M., Cole, N., & Foxcroft, D. (2012).
Effectiveness of organisational infrastructures to promote evidence‐
based nursing practice. Conchrane Database of Systematic
Reviews. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD002212.pub2
https://dx.doi.org/10.1097%2FNNA.0000000000000151
https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD002212.pub2
https://dx.doi.org/10.1097%2FNNA.0000000000000151
https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD002212.pub2
continuation
Skela-Savic, B., Gotlin, J., Panczyk, M., Patelarou, A., Bole, U.,
Ramos-Morcillo, A., Finotto, S., Mecugni, D., Jarosova, D., Patelarou,
E., Dolezel, J., & Ruzafa-Martinez, M. (2020). Teaching evidence-
based practice (EBP) in nursing curricula in six European countries—
A descriptive study. Nurse Education Today, 94.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2020.104561
Warren, J., MxLaughlin, M., Bardsley, J., Eich, J., Esche, C.,
Kropkowski, L., & Risch, S. (2016). The Strengths and Challenges of
Implementing EBP in Healthcare Systems. Worldviews on Evidence-
Based Nursing, 13(1), 15-24. DOI: 10.1111/wvn.12149
Skela-Savic, B., Gotlin, J., Panczyk, M., Patelarou, A., Bole, U.,
Ramos-Morcillo, A., Finotto, S., Mecugni, D., Jarosova, D., Patelarou,
E., Dolezel, J., & Ruzafa-Martinez, M. (2020). Teaching evidence-
based practice (EBP) in nursing curricula in six European countries—
A descriptive study. Nurse Education Today, 94.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2020.104561
Warren, J., MxLaughlin, M., Bardsley, J., Eich, J., Esche, C.,
Kropkowski, L., & Risch, S. (2016). The Strengths and Challenges of
Implementing EBP in Healthcare Systems. Worldviews on Evidence-
Based Nursing, 13(1), 15-24. DOI: 10.1111/wvn.12149
Debra Sullivan
These articles is a single studies and not at the systematic-reviews level related to your research question as was required for this assignment expectation. The types of articles needed for this assignment are review type articles which are secondary literature because they are based on other published works. There are basically 3 types of review articles, systematic reviews, literature reviews, or narrative reviews
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2020.104561
https://doi.org/10.1111/wvn.12149
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2020.104561
https://doi.org/10.1111/wvn.12149
Levels of evidence for the articles
The level evidence for the article by Skela-Savic and his associates
(2020) is level V since it involves a descriptive study design
The level of evidence for the article by Flodgren, and his associates
(2012), is level I since it involved a randomized controlled trial
The level of evidence for the study by Warren and his associates
(2016), is level IV since evidence is based on cross sectional studies
The level of evidence for the study by Black, et al., (2015), is level I
since it involves evidence from mixed methods systematic review
The level evidence for the article by Skela-Savic and his associates
(2020) is level V since it involves a descriptive study design
The level of evidence for the article by Flodgren, and his associates
(2012), is level I since it involved a randomized controlled trial
The level of evidence for the study by Warren and his associates
(2016), is level IV since evidence is based on cross sectional studies
The level of evidence for the study by Black, et al., (2015), is level I
since it involves evidence from mixed methods systematic review
Debra Sullivan
Levels of evidence are defined differently by various resources. It is important that when you are citing levels, that you also state your resource with a reference. For example, if you used the levels as described by Melynk and Fineout-Overholt (2019) you could cite the authors and reference it on the reference slide. If you used the Johns Hopkins Nursing Evidence-Based Practice: Evidence Level and Quality Guide
Johns Hopkins Hospital/Johns Hopkins University (n.d.) Johns Hopkins Nursing Evidence-Based Practice: Evidence Level and Quality Guide. https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/evidence-based-practice/_docs/appendix_c_evidence_level_quality_guide
Melnyk, B. M., & Fineout-Overholt, E. (2019). Evidence-based practice in nursing & healthcare: A guide to best practice (4th ed.). Philadelphia, PA: Wolters Kluwer.
Strengths of Systematic Reviews for
Clinical Research
Strengths of Systematic Reviews for
Clinical Research
Systematic reviews aids in making the available evidence
more accessible to decision makers
They are the most reliable forms of study since they
appear to the top of the hierarchy of evidence.
Systematic reviews tends to be more comprehensive.
They provide up to date and systematic summary for the
current evidence
Systematic reviews aids in making the available evidence
more accessible to decision makers
They are the most reliable forms of study since they
appear to the top of the hierarchy of evidence.
Systematic reviews tends to be more comprehensive.
They provide up to date and systematic summary for the
current evidence
Debra Sullivan
Nice work explaining the strengths of using systematic reviews for clinical research and providing examples
References
Eastern Illinois University. (2018). Why Is Evidence-Based Practice In Nursing So Important?
Retrieved from
https://learnonline.eiu.edu/articles/rnbsn/evidence-based-practice-important.aspx
Davis, K, S. (2011). Formulating the evidence-based practice question: A review of the
frameworks for LIS professionals. Evidence Based Library and Information Practice, 6(2), 27-
80. https://doi.org/10.18438/B8WS5N
Eastern Illinois University. (2018). Why Is Evidence-Based Practice In Nursing So Important?
Retrieved from
https://learnonline.eiu.edu/articles/rnbsn/evidence-based-practice-important.aspx
Davis, K, S. (2011). Formulating the evidence-based practice question: A review of the
frameworks for LIS professionals. Evidence Based Library and Information Practice, 6(2), 27-
80. https://doi.org/10.18438/B8WS5N
https://learnonline.eiu.edu/articles/rnbsn/evidence-based-practice-important.aspx
https://doi.org/10.18438/B8WS5N
https://learnonline.eiu.edu/articles/rnbsn/evidence-based-practice-important.aspx
https://doi.org/10.18438/B8WS5N
Introduction
PICOT Question
Databases Used for the Research
continuation
Levels of evidence for the articles
References
Essay Writing Service Features
Our Experience
No matter how complex your assignment is, we can find the right professional for your specific task. Achiever Papers is an essay writing company that hires only the smartest minds to help you with your projects. Our expertise allows us to provide students with high-quality academic writing, editing & proofreading services.
Free Features
Free revision policy
$10Free bibliography & reference
$8Free title page
$8Free formatting
$8How Our Dissertation Writing Service Works
First, you will need to complete an order form. It's not difficult but, if anything is unclear, you may always chat with us so that we can guide you through it. On the order form, you will need to include some basic information concerning your order: subject, topic, number of pages, etc. We also encourage our clients to upload any relevant information or sources that will help.
Complete the order form
Once we have all the information and instructions that we need, we select the most suitable writer for your assignment. While everything seems to be clear, the writer, who has complete knowledge of the subject, may need clarification from you. It is at that point that you would receive a call or email from us.
Writer’s assignment
As soon as the writer has finished, it will be delivered both to the website and to your email address so that you will not miss it. If your deadline is close at hand, we will place a call to you to make sure that you receive the paper on time.
Completing the order and download