TRANSLATIONAL RESEARCH FOR PRACTICE AND POPULATIONS — C301

TRANSLATIONAL RESEARCH FOR PRACTICE AND POPULATIONS — C301

REQUIREMENTS
Your submission must be your original work. No more than a combined total of 30% of the submission and no more than a 10% match to any one individual source can be directly quoted or closely paraphrased from sources, even if cited correctly. An originality report is provided when you submit your task that can be used as a guide.

Professional Communications is a required aspect to pass this task. Completion of a spell check and grammar check prior to submitting your final work is strongly recommended.

You must use the rubric to direct the creation of your submission because it provides detailed criteria that will be used to evaluate your work. Each requirement below may be evaluated by more than one rubric aspect. The rubric aspect titles may contain hyperlinks to relevant portions of the course.

A. Identify a current nursing practice within your healthcare setting that requires change.

Note: You can describe your setting without identifying it by name and begin to introduce the specific problem that you will be addressing.

1. Describe the current nursing practice.

Note: Describe the current practice and what may be wrong with the current practice that is resulting in the identified problem.

2. Discuss why the current nursing practice needs to be changed.

B. Identify the key stakeholders within your healthcare setting who are part of the current nursing practice.

1. Describe the role each identified key stakeholder will play to support the proposed practice change.

Note: These are the individuals who will make up the team to plan, implement and evaluate the change.

C. Create an evidence critique table (see “Sample Evidence Critique Table”).

Note: Insert your evidence critique table into your paper.

1. Identify five sources from scholarly peer-reviewed journals, which adhere to the following standards:

a. Each source must be published within the past five years.

b. Each source must relate to the change identified in part A.

c. Each source must be listed in the table using APA format.

2. Identify the evidence strength of each chosen source, using the Strength of Evidence information in the study plan.

3. Identify the evidence hierarchy of each chosen source, using the Evidence Hierarchy information in the study plan.

D. Develop an evidence summary based on the findings from part C that includes each of the five sources used (suggested length of 1–2 pages for all sources).

Note: Create one well developed paragraph for each article which includes the purpose, methods or study design, results or conclusions and how the article supports the practice change recommendation.

E. Recommend a specific best practice based on the evidence summary developed in part D.

F. Identify a practice change model that is appropriate to apply to the proposed practice change.

Note: Identify the model that you have chosen and give a brief description of how it is generally used.

1. Justify why you chose the practice change model and how it is relevant to the proposed practice change.

2. Explain how to apply the identified model to guide the implementation of the proposed practice change.

Note: Clearly articulate how the model will be used to guide change and address each step individually and with specific detail.

G. Discuss possible barriers to successful implementation of the proposed practice change.

H. Discuss any possible ethical implications that may arise while planning or implementing the proposed practice change.

Note: Describe which ethical principle(s) or ANA Code of Ethics provision(s) speaks to, or supports, your practice change and why.

I. When you use sources, include all in-text citations and references in APA format.

Note: When using sources to support ideas and elements in an assessment, the submission MUST include APA formatted in-text citations with a corresponding reference list for any direct quotes or paraphrasing. It is not necessary to list sources that were consulted if they have not been quoted or paraphrased in the text of the assessment.

RUBRIC
ARTICULATION OF RESPONSE (CLARITY, ORGANIZATION, MECHANICS):
UNSATISFACTORY/NOT PRESENT

The candidate provides unsatisfactory articulation of response.

DOES NOT MEET STANDARD

The candidate provides weak articulation of response.

MINIMALLY COMPETENT

The candidate provides limited articulation of response.

COMPETENT

The candidate provides adequate articulation of response.

HIGHLY COMPETENT

The candidate provides substantial articulation of response.

A:NURSING PRACTICE IDENTIFICATION
UNSATISFACTORY/NOT PRESENT

The candidate does not identify a current nursing practice within the candidate’s healthcare setting that requires change.

DOES NOT MEET STANDARD

Not applicable.

MINIMALLY COMPETENT

Not applicable.

COMPETENT

Not applicable.

HIGHLY COMPETENT

The candidate identifies a current nursing practice within the candidate’s healthcare setting that requires change.

A1:NURSING PRACTICE DESCRIPTION
UNSATISFACTORY/NOT PRESENT

The candidate does not provide an appropriate description of the current nursing practice.

DOES NOT MEET STANDARD

The candidate provides an appropriate description, with no detail, of the current nursing practice.

MINIMALLY COMPETENT

The candidate provides an appropriate description, with limited detail, of the current nursing practice.

COMPETENT

The candidate provides an appropriate description, with adequate detail, of the current nursing practice.

HIGHLY COMPETENT

The candidate provides an appropriate description, with substantial detail, of the current nursing practice.

A2:WHY NURSING PRACTICE NEEDS TO CHANGE
UNSATISFACTORY/NOT PRESENT

The candidate does not provide a logical discussion of why the current nursing practice needs to be changed.

DOES NOT MEET STANDARD

The candidate provides a logical discussion, with no support, of why the current nursing practice needs to be changed.

MINIMALLY COMPETENT

The candidate provides a logical discussion, with limited support, of why the current nursing practice needs to be changed.

COMPETENT

The candidate provides a logical discussion, with adequate support, of why the current nursing practice needs to be changed.

HIGHLY COMPETENT

The candidate provides a logical discussion, with substantial support, of why the current nursing practice needs to be changed.

B:KEY STAKEHOLDERS
UNSATISFACTORY/NOT PRESENT

The candidate does not identify the key stakeholders within the healthcare setting who are part of the current nursing practice.

DOES NOT MEET STANDARD

Not applicable.

MINIMALLY COMPETENT

Not applicable.

COMPETENT

Not applicable.

HIGHLY COMPETENT

The candidate identifies the key stakeholders within the healthcare setting who are part of the current nursing practice.

B1:STAKEHOLDERS’ ROLES
UNSATISFACTORY/NOT PRESENT

The candidate does not provide an appropriate description of the role each identified key stakeholder will play to support the proposed practice change.

DOES NOT MEET STANDARD

The candidate provides an appropriate description, with no detail, of the role each identified key stakeholder will play to support the proposed practice change.

MINIMALLY COMPETENT

The candidate provides an appropriate description, with limited detail, of the role each identified key stakeholder will play to support the proposed practice change.

COMPETENT

The candidate provides an appropriate description, with adequate detail, of the role each identified key stakeholder will play to support the proposed practice change.

HIGHLY COMPETENT

The candidate provides an appropriate description, with substantial detail, of the role each identified key stakeholder will play to support the proposed practice change.

C:EVIDENCE CRITIQUE TABLE
UNSATISFACTORY/NOT PRESENT

The candidate does not provide an evidence critique table.

DOES NOT MEET STANDARD

Not applicable.

MINIMALLY COMPETENT

Not applicable.

COMPETENT

Not applicable.

HIGHLY COMPETENT

The candidate provides an evidence critique table.

C1:FIVE SOURCES
UNSATISFACTORY/NOT PRESENT

The candidate does not accurately identify 5 sources from scholarly peer-reviewed journals.

DOES NOT MEET STANDARD

Not applicable.

MINIMALLY COMPETENT

The candidate accurately identifies 1-2 sources from scholarly peer-reviewed journals.

COMPETENT

Not applicable.

HIGHLY COMPETENT

The candidate accurately identifies 5 sources from scholarly peer-reviewed journals.

C1A:SOURCES PUBLISHED WITHIN PAST 5 YEARS
UNSATISFACTORY/NOT PRESENT

The candidate does not provide sources from scholarly peer-reviewed journals published within the past 5 years

DOES NOT MEET STANDARD

Not applicable.

MINIMALLY COMPETENT

Not applicable.

COMPETENT

Not applicable.

HIGHLY COMPETENT

The candidate provides sources from scholarly peer-reviewed journals published within the past 5 years.

C1B:SOURCES PUBLISHED WITHIN THE PAST 5 YEARS THAT RELATE TO THE CHANGE IN PART A
UNSATISFACTORY/NOT PRESENT

The candidate does not provide sources from scholarly peer-reviewed journals published within the past 5 years that relate to the change in part A.

DOES NOT MEET STANDARD

Not applicable.

MINIMALLY COMPETENT

Not applicable.

COMPETENT

Not applicable.

HIGHLY COMPETENT

The candidate provides sources from scholarly peer-reviewed journals published within the past 5 years that relate to the change in part A.

C1C:APA FORMAT
UNSATISFACTORY/NOT PRESENT

The candidate does not provide 5 sources from scholarly peer-reviewed journals that are in APA format.

DOES NOT MEET STANDARD

The candidate provides 1–4 sources from scholarly peer-reviewed journals that are in APA format.

MINIMALLY COMPETENT

The candidate provides 5 sources from scholarly peer-reviewed journals that are in APA format, but with major deviations from APA style.

COMPETENT

The candidate provides 5 sources from scholarly peer-reviewed journals that are in APA format, but with minor deviations from APA style.

HIGHLY COMPETENT

The candidate provides 5 sources from scholarly peer-reviewed journals that are in APA format with no readily detectable deviations from APA style.

C2:EVIDENCE STRENGTH IN EVIDENCE CRITIQUE TABLE
UNSATISFACTORY/NOT PRESENT

The candidate does not accurately identify the evidence strength of each chosen source in the evidence critique table, using the Strength of Evidence information in the study plan.

DOES NOT MEET STANDARD

Not applicable.

MINIMALLY COMPETENT

Not applicable.

COMPETENT

Not applicable.

HIGHLY COMPETENT

The candidate accurately identifies the evidence strength of each chosen source in the evidence critique table, using the Strength of Evidence information in the study plan.

C3:EVIDENCE HIERARCHY IN EVIDENCE CRITIQUE TABLE
UNSATISFACTORY/NOT PRESENT

The candidate does not accurately identify the evidence hierarchy of each chosen source in the evidence critique table, using the Evidence Hierarchy information in the study plan.

DOES NOT MEET STANDARD

Not applicable.

MINIMALLY COMPETENT

Not applicable.

COMPETENT

Not applicable.

HIGHLY COMPETENT

The candidate accurately identifies the evidence hierarchy of each chosen source in the evidence critique table, using the Evidence Hierarchy information in the study plan.

D:EVIDENCE SUMMARY
UNSATISFACTORY/NOT PRESENT

The candidate does not provide an evidence summary based on the findings from part C that includes each of the 5 sources used.

DOES NOT MEET STANDARD

The candidate provides an evidence summary based on the findings from part C, with no detail, that includes each of the 5 sources used.

MINIMALLY COMPETENT

The candidate provides an evidence summary based on the findings from part C, with limited detail, that includes each of the 5 sources used.

COMPETENT

The candidate provides an evidence summary based on the findings from part C, with adequate detail, that includes each of the 5 sources used.

HIGHLY COMPETENT

The candidate provides an evidence summary based on the findings from part C, with substantial detail, that includes each of the 5 sources used.

E:RECOMMEND BEST PRACTICE
UNSATISFACTORY/NOT PRESENT

The candidate does not provide an appropriate recommendation for a specific best practice based on the evidence summary developed in part D.

DOES NOT MEET STANDARD

The candidate provides an appropriate recommendation, with no detail, of a specific best practice based on the evidence summary developed in part D.

MINIMALLY COMPETENT

The candidate provides an appropriate recommendation, with limited detail, of a specific best practice based on the evidence summary developed in part D.

COMPETENT

The candidate provides an appropriate recommendation, with adequate detail, of a specific best practice based on the evidence summary developed in part D.

HIGHLY COMPETENT

The candidate provides an appropriate recommendation, with substantial detail, of a specific best practice based on the evidence summary developed in part D.

F:PRACTICE CHANGE MODEL
UNSATISFACTORY/NOT PRESENT

The candidate does not identify a practice change model that is appropriate to apply to the proposed practice change.

DOES NOT MEET STANDARD

Not applicable.

MINIMALLY COMPETENT

Not applicable.

COMPETENT

Not applicable.

HIGHLY COMPETENT

The candidate identifies a practice change model that is appropriate to apply to the proposed practice change.

F1:MODEL JUSTIFICATION
UNSATISFACTORY/NOT PRESENT

The candidate does not provide a logical justification of why the practice change model was chosen.

DOES NOT MEET STANDARD

The candidate provides a logical justification, with no support, of why the practice change model was chosen.

MINIMALLY COMPETENT

The candidate provides a logical justification, with limited support, of why the practice change model was chosen.

COMPETENT

The candidate provides a logical justification, with adequate support, of why the practice change model was chosen.

HIGHLY COMPETENT

The candidate provides a logical justification, with substantial support, of why the practice change model was chosen.

F2:MODEL TO GUIDE IMPLEMENTATION
UNSATISFACTORY/NOT PRESENT

The candidate does not provide a logical explanation of how to apply the identified model to guide the implementation of the proposed practice change.

DOES NOT MEET STANDARD

The candidate provides a logical explanation, with no detail, of how to apply the identified model to guide the implementation of the proposed practice change.

MINIMALLY COMPETENT

The candidate provides a logical explanation, with limited detail, of how to apply the identified model to guide the implementation of the proposed practice change.

COMPETENT

The candidate provides a logical explanation, with adequate detail, of how to apply the identified model to guide the implementation of the proposed practice change.

HIGHLY COMPETENT

The candidate provides a logical explanation, with substantial detail, of how to apply the identified model to guide the implementation of the proposed practice change.

G:BARRIERS TO IMPLEMENTATION
UNSATISFACTORY/NOT PRESENT

The candidate does not provide a logical discussion of possible barriers to successful implementation of the proposed practice change.

DOES NOT MEET STANDARD

The candidate provides a logical discussion, with no detail, of possible barriers to successful implementation of the proposed practice change.

MINIMALLY COMPETENT

The candidate provides a logical discussion, with limited detail, of possible barriers to successful implementation of the proposed practice change.

COMPETENT

The candidate provides a logical discussion, with adequate detail, of possible barriers to successful implementation of the proposed practice change.

HIGHLY COMPETENT

The candidate provides a logical discussion, with substantial detail, of possible barriers to successful implementation of the proposed practice change.

H:ETHICAL IMPLICATIONS
UNSATISFACTORY/NOT PRESENT

The candidate does not provide a logical discussion of possible ethical implications that may arise while planning or implementing the proposed practice change.

DOES NOT MEET STANDARD

The candidate provides a logical discussion, with no support, of possible ethical implications that may arise while planning or implementing the proposed practice change.

MINIMALLY COMPETENT

The candidate provides a logical discussion, with limited support, of possible ethical implications that may arise while planning or implementing the proposed practice change.

COMPETENT

The candidate provides a logical discussion, with adequate support, of possible ethical implications that may arise while planning or implementing the proposed practice change.

HIGHLY COMPETENT

The candidate provides a logical discussion, with substantial support, of possible ethical implications that may arise while planning or implementing the proposed practice change.

I:SOURCES
UNSATISFACTORY/NOT PRESENT

When the candidate uses sources, the candidate does not provide in-text citations and references.

DOES NOT MEET STANDARD

When the candidate uses sources, the candidate provides only some in-text citations and references.

MINIMALLY COMPETENT

When the candidate uses sources, the candidate provides appropriate in-text citations and references with major deviations from APA style.

COMPETENT

When the candidate uses sources, the candidate provides appropriate in-text citations and references with minor deviations from APA style.

HIGHLY COMPETENT

When the candidate uses sources, the candidate provides appropriate in-text citations and references with no readily detectable deviations from APA style, OR the candidate does not use sources.

WEB LINKS
The Evidence Leveling Navigation Tool
Evaluation Method

SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS
Translational Research Sample Evidence Critique Table.docx

(Visited 3 times, 1 visits today)