DNP-820 Topic 6: Synthesizing Research Assignment

DNP-820 Topic 6: Synthesizing Research Assignment

DNP-820 Topic 6: Synthesizing Research Assignment

Topic 6: Synthesizing Research
Max Points:
240
Objectives:

Don't use plagiarized sources. Get Your Custom Essay on
DNP-820 Topic 6: Synthesizing Research Assignment
Just from $13/Page
Order Essay

Evaluate the main components of evidence-based practice.
Synthesis literature for a proposed practice intervention.
Assessments
Topic 6 DQ 1
Points
5
Status
Upcoming
Assessment Description
What effect does a meta-synthesis or meta-analysis have on research translation? Describe a clinical practice in place that is supported by this level of evidence. Provide relevant literature to support your response.

Topic 6 DQ 2
Points
5
Status
Upcoming
Assessment Description
The three main components of evidence-based practice are clinical expertise, best evidence, and patient preference. However, patient preference and clinical expertise are often at odds with each other. Provide an example of an instance in which you would need to mediate this issue and what interprofessional collaboration might be needed. Explain how you would handle the situation. Provide relevant literature to support your response.

Literature Synthesis for Proposed Intervention

ORDER A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE

210
Rubric
View Rubric
Status
Upcoming
Assessment Traits
Requires Lopeswrite
Assessment Description
The purpose of this assignment is for learners to synthesize the literature from the “Literature Evaluation Table – DPI Intervention” into a written paper.

The literature synthesis from this assignment will be used as support for your DPI Project. Be prepared to review and incorporate instructor feedback from this assignment.

General Requirements

Refer to the “Literature Evaluation Table – DPI Intervention” completed in Topic 4 to complete this assignment.
Doctoral learners are required to use APA style for their writing assignments. The APA Style Guide is located in the Student Success Center.
This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.
You are required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite. A link to the LopesWrite technical support articles is located in Class Resources if you need assistance.
Learners will submit this assignment using the assignment dropbox in the digital classroom. In addition, learners must upload this deliverable to the Learner Dissertation Page (LDP) in the DNP PI Workspace for later use.
Directions

Refer to the 15 research articles from your “Literature Evaluation Table – DPI Intervention” in Topic 4 to complete this assignment. Be sure to make any required changes or revisions prior to completing this assignment.

Write a 2,000-2,500-word syntheses of articles. Do not copy/paste the abstract. A synthesis is an integrative summary, in your own words, of the articles, their findings and a justification for how they support your intervention.

Include the following:

Introduction – Describe the clinical issue or problem you are addressing. Present your problem statement.
Search methods – Describe search strategy and the criteria you used to find and select the articles that support your intervention (e.g., data bases, limitations of the search, full text, peer-reviewed, English language).
Synthesis of the literature – For each research article, write a paragraph discussing the main components (subjects, methods, key findings) and provide rationale for how the article supports your intervention.
Comparison of articles – Compare the articles (similarities and differences, common themes, methods, conclusions, limitations, controversies).
Recommendations for future research: Based on your analysis of the literature, discuss identified gaps and which areas require further research. Describe how the gaps would impact your intervention and what specific research would be needed in this context.
Conclusion – Provide a summary statement of what you found in the literature.

Rubric Criteria
Total
210 points
Criterion

1. Unsatisfactory

2. Less Than Satisfactory

3. Satisfactory

4. Good

5. Excellent

Thesis Development and Purpose

Thesis Development and Purpose

0 points

Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.

8.4 points

Thesis is insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not clear.

9.24 points

Thesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose.

9.66 points

Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper. Thesis is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose.

10.5 points

Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.

Paper Format

Includes the use of appropriate style for the major and assignment.

0 points

Template is not used appropriately, or documentation format is rarely followed correctly.

13.44 points

Template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken; lack of control with formatting is apparent.

14.78 points

Template is used and formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present.

15.46 points

Template is fully used; there are virtually no errors in formatting style.

16.8 points

All format elements are correct.

Synthesis of Literature

Integration of components of each article integrated in concise summary. Includes rationale for how each article supports intervention.

0 points

The literature synthesis is omitted.

25.2 points

The literature synthesis is incomplete.

27.72 points

The literature synthesis summarizes most of the main components from the articles. General rationale is provided for how each article supports the intervention, but some aspects are unclear. There are minor inaccuracies.

28.98 points

The literature synthesis discusses the main components from the articles. Rationale is provided for how each article supports the intervention, but minor detail is needed for clarity or accuracy.

31.5 points

The literature synthesis thoroughly discusses the main components from the articles. Strong and clear rationale is provided for how each article supports the intervention.

Comparison of Articles

Comparison of the articles includes similarities and differences, common themes, methods, conclusions, limitations, and controversies.

0 points

The comparison of the articles is omitted.

16.8 points

The comparison of the articles is incomplete.

18.48 points

The comparison of the articles is adequate. It generally identifies and discusses most of the similarities and differences, common themes, methods, conclusions, limitations, and controversies among the articles. There are minor inaccuracies or omissions.

19.32 points

The comparison of the articles is good. It identifies and discusses the similarities and differences, common themes, methods, conclusions, limitations, and controversies among the articles. Minor detail is needed for clarity or accuracy.

21 points

The comparison of the articles is excellent. It thoroughly identifies and discusses the similarities and differences, common themes, methods, conclusions, limitations and controversies among the articles.

Overall Synthesis

Integration of concepts, information, and different aspects of the articles by the learner using their own words.

0 points

The overall paper is not a synthesis. Most sections are a copy and paste of the article sections or article abstracts.

16.8 points

Synthesis of concepts, information, or ideas is intermittent. The paper relies mostly on direct quotes or a listing of information from the articles.

18.48 points

Synthesis of concepts, information, or ideas is generally evident, but the paper still utilizes direct quotes or the listing of information when it could be presented by the learner in their own words.

19.32 points

The integration of concepts, information, and different aspects of the paper is good. The learner presents the information in their own words, using direct quotes or listing information sparingly.

21 points

The integration of concepts, information, and different aspects of the paper is excellent. The learner effectively and clearly presents the information in their own words, using direct quotes only when necessary.

Mechanics of Writing

Includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use.

0 points

Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is used.

8.4 points

Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) or word choice are present. Sentence structure is correct, but not varied.

9.24 points

Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct and varied sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are employed.

9.66 points

Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. The writer uses a variety of effective sentence structures and figures of speech.

10.5 points

Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.

Empirical Research Supporting the Intervention

Empirical Research Supporting the Intervention

0 points

Fewer than three primary studies demonstrate a good or high level of evidence. Fewer than seven of the additional primary and secondary studies demonstrate a good or high level of evidence. More than three of the articles selected fail to meet the required criteria regarding publication date and country.

16.8 points

Only four of the primary studies demonstrate a good or high level of evidence. Eight of the additional primary and secondary studies demonstrate a good or high level of evidence. One or two of the articles used for additional support do not meet the required criteria regarding publication date and country.

18.48 points

The five primary studies demonstrate good level of evidence and demonstrate adequate support for the intervention. Nine of the 10 additional primary and secondary studies provide good support for the intervention. All 15 articles meet the required criteria regarding publication date and country.

19.32 points

The five primary studies demonstrate a good or high level of evidence and demonstrate support for the intervention. The 10 additional primary and secondary studies contain a sufficient level of evidence to provide support for the intervention. All 15 articles meet the required criteria regarding publication date and country.

21 points

The five primary studies demonstrate a high level of evidence and provide excellent support for the intervention. The 10 additional primary and secondary studies contain a high level of evidence and provide clear support for the intervention, or different aspects of the intervention. All 15 articles meet the required criteria regarding publication date and country.

Argument Logic and Construction

Argument Logic and Construction

0 points

Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources.

8.4 points

Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility.

9.24 points

Argument is orderly but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis.

9.66 points

Argument shows a logical progression. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative.

10.5 points

Argument is clear and convincing and presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative.

Search Methods

Search strategy and criteria for identifying articles supporting intervention.

0 points

The search methods are omitted.

8.4 points

The search methods and strategies and criteria for identifying articles supporting intervention are incomplete.

9.24 points

The search methods and strategies and criteria for identifying articles supporting the intervention are outlined. More information is needed.

9.66 points

The search methods and strategies and criteria for identifying articles supporting the intervention described. Minor detail is needed for clarity.

10.5 points

The search methods and strategies and criteria for identifying articles supporting the intervention are thoroughly described.

Recommendations for Future Research

Recommendations for future research based on analysis of literature.

0 points

Recommendations for future research are omitted.

16.8 points

Recommendations for future research are incomplete.

18.48 points

Recommendations for future research outline identified gaps, areas that require further research, how these would impact the proposed intervention, and what specific research would be needed in that context. Some aspects are unclear. There are minor inaccuracies.

19.32 points

Recommendations for future research describe identified gaps, areas that require further research, how these would impact the proposed intervention, and what specific research would be needed in that context. Minor detail is needed for clarity or accuracy.

21 points

Recommendations for future research thoroughly discuss identified gaps, areas that require further research, how these would impact the proposed intervention, and what specific research would be needed in that context.

Conclusion

The conclusion is omitted.

0 points

The conclusion is omitted.

8.4 points

The conclusion is incomplete or inaccurate.

9.24 points

The conclusion provides a general summary statement about what was found in the literature.

9.66 points

The conclusion provides an adequate summary about what was found in the literature.

10.5 points

The conclusion provides a clear and concise summary about what was found in the literature.

Documentation of Sources

Documentation of Sources Includes citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style.

0 points

Sources are not documented..

11.76 points

Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.

12.94 points

Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present.

13.52 points

Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct.

14.7 points

Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of errors.

Introduction

Description of clinical issue or problem; Problem statement.

0 points

The introduction is omitted.

8.4 points

The introduction is incomplete.

9.24 points

The introduction outlines the clinical issue or problem and the problem statement, but some aspects are vague or there are minor inaccuracies.

9.66 points

The clinical issue or problem and problem statement are accurately described in the introduction. Minor detail is needed for clarity or accuracy.

10.5 points

The clinical issue or problem is thoroughly described. The problem statement is accurately and clearly presented. The introduction is well-developed.

Calculate the price
Make an order in advance and get the best price
Pages (550 words)
$0.00
*Price with a welcome 15% discount applied.
Pro tip: If you want to save more money and pay the lowest price, you need to set a more extended deadline.
We know how difficult it is to be a student these days. That's why our prices are one of the most affordable on the market, and there are no hidden fees.

Instead, we offer bonuses, discounts, and free services to make your experience outstanding.
How it works
Receive a 100% original paper that will pass Turnitin from a top essay writing service
step 1
Upload your instructions
Fill out the order form and provide paper details. You can even attach screenshots or add additional instructions later. If something is not clear or missing, the writer will contact you for clarification.
Pro service tips
How to get the most out of your experience with Proscholarly
One writer throughout the entire course
If you like the writer, you can hire them again. Just copy & paste their ID on the order form ("Preferred Writer's ID" field). This way, your vocabulary will be uniform, and the writer will be aware of your needs.
The same paper from different writers
You can order essay or any other work from two different writers to choose the best one or give another version to a friend. This can be done through the add-on "Same paper from another writer."
Copy of sources used by the writer
Our college essay writers work with ScienceDirect and other databases. They can send you articles or materials used in PDF or through screenshots. Just tick the "Copy of sources" field on the order form.
Testimonials
See why 20k+ students have chosen us as their sole writing assistance provider
Check out the latest reviews and opinions submitted by real customers worldwide and make an informed decision.
Medicine
Good work. Will be placing another order tomorrow
Customer 452441, November 11th, 2022
Medicine
This was done very well. Thank you!
Customer 452441, November 11th, 2022
Medicine
Very fond of the paper written. The topic chosen is defiantly trending at this time
Customer 452495, July 27th, 2023
Medicine
Well researched paper. Excellent work
Customer 452441, November 11th, 2022
DESIGN AND IMPLEMENTATION OF NURSE ADVOCATE HEALTHCARE PROGRAM
The absolute best ! Thanks for great communication, quality papers, and amazing time delivery!
Customer 452467, November 14th, 2022
Medicine
Great work, Thank you, will come back with more work
Customer 452441, November 11th, 2022
11,595
Customer reviews in total
96%
Current satisfaction rate
3 pages
Average paper length
37%
Customers referred by a friend
OUR GIFT TO YOU
15% OFF your first order
Use a coupon FIRST15 and enjoy expert help with any task at the most affordable price.
Claim my 15% OFF Order in Chat