Order ID 53563633773 Type Essay Writer Level Masters Style APA Sources/References 4 Perfect Number of Pages To Order 5-10 Pages Description/Paper Instructions
Discussion: Searching Databases
When you decide to purchase a new car, you first decide what is important to you. If mileage and dependability are the important factors, you will search for data focused more on these factors and less on color options and sound systems.The same holds true when searching for research evidence to guide your clinical inquiry and professional decisions. Developing a formula for an answerable, researchable question that addresses your need will make the search process much more effective. One such formula is the PICO(T) format.
In this Discussion, you will transform a clinical inquiry into a searchable question in PICO(T) format, so you can search the electronic databases more effectively and efficiently. You will share this PICO(T) question and examine strategies you might use to increase the rigor and effectiveness of a database search on your PICO(T) question.
To Prepare:
Review the materials offering guidance on using databases, performing keyword searches, and developing PICO(T) questions provided in the Resources.
Review the Resources for guidance and develop a PICO(T) question of interest to you for further study.
By Day 3 of Week 4 USE THE TOPIC MEDICATION ERRORS
Post your PICO(T) question, the search terms used, and the names of at least two databases used for your PICO(T) question. Then, describe your search results in terms of the number of articles returned on original research and how this changed as you added search terms using your Boolean operators. Finally, explain strategies you might make to increase the rigor and effectiveness of a database search on your PICO(T) question. Be specific and provide examples.
Required Readings
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 2, “Asking Compelling Clinical Questions” (pp. 33–54)
Chapter 3, “Finding Relevant Evidence to Answer Clinical Questions” (pp. 55–92)
Davies, 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), 75–80. https://doi.org/10.18438/B8WS5N
Note: You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.
Library of Congress. (n.d.). Search/browse help – Boolean operators and nesting. Retrieved September 19, 2018, from https://catalog.loc.gov/vwebv/ui/en_US/htdocs/help/searchBoolean.html
Stillwell, S. B., Fineout-Overholt, E., Melnyk, B. M., & Williamson, K. M. (2010a). Evidence-based practice, step by step: Asking the clinical question: A key step in evidence-based practice. American Journal of Nursing, 110(3), 58–61. doi:10.1097/01.NAJ.0000368959.11129.79
Note: You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.
Melnyk, B. M., Fineout-Overholt, E., Stillwell, S. B., & Williamson, K. M. (2009). Evidence-based practice: Step by step: Igniting a spirit of inquiry. American Journal of Nursing, 109(11), 49–52. doi:10.1097/01.NAJ.0000363354.53883.58
Note: You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.
Stillwell, S. B., Fineout-Overholt, E., Melnyk, B. M., & Williamson, K. M. (2010b). Evidence-based practice, step by step: Searching for the evidence. American Journal of Nursing, 110(5), 41–47. doi:10.1097/01.NAJ.0000372071.24134.7e
Note: You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.
Walden University Library. (n.d.-a). Databases A-Z: Nursing. Retrieved September 6, 2019, from https://academicguides.waldenu.edu/az.php?s=19981
Walden University Library. (n.d.-c). Evidence-based practice research: CINAHL search help. Retrieved September 6, 2019, from https://academicguides.waldenu.edu/library/healthevidence/cinahlsearchhelp
Walden University Library. (n.d.-d). Evidence-based practice research: Joanna Briggs Institute search help. Retrieved September 6, 2019, from https://academicguides.waldenu.edu/library/healthevidence/jbisearchhelp
Walden University Library. (n.d.-e). Evidence-based practice research: MEDLINE search help. Retrieved September 6, 2019, from https://academicguides.waldenu.edu/library/healthevidence/medlinesearchhelp
Walden University Library. (n.d.-h). Quick Answers: How do I find a systematic review article related to health, medicine, or nursing? Retrieved September 6, 2019, from https://academicanswers.waldenu.edu/faq/72670
Walden University Library. (n.d.-i). Systematic review. Retrieved January 22, 2020, from https://academicguides.waldenu.edu/library/healthevidence/types#s-lg-box-1520654
THIS IS AN EXAMPLEA Clinical Question
The best way to form clinical question is in the form of PICO(T) (Ask: Write a focused clinical question, 2020). I have done such a thing and have found that the question formulation and changes to it were not as challenging as finding research related to the question.
The Question:
(P) In the hospital or clinical acute care setting, (I) is a 2 person double-check of insulin, (C) compared to a single person double-check of 5 rights, (O) more effective in the improvement of (01) insulin medication errors, (02) nurse satisfaction during a (T) 30-day term of observation?
Databases Used
The Walden University database was used to search databases for nursing. Of those available Science Direct, CINAHL, and Cochrane, and PubMed were used. Background questions were first asked to get a sense of what has been studied in this area. It was important to understand when and why this practice first started to determine the relevance of data acquired and to determine how recently we needed to search. Then, foreground questions began to form until finally the PICO(T) question.
During the background question period, the terms ‘double-check’ became the preferred terminology for the practice I wished to study. So using this ‘double-check’ in the PubMed database, 244 articles were found but not all pertained to my topic. Changing the text to be included only in the title or abstract, the same result achieved. Adding ‘medication errors’ reduced the yield to 21 results. At this level, the evidence is available on the basic topic of using the double-check to prevent all medication errors and relates often to high-risk medications. However, I want to know about the labor-intensive practice of using a 2 nurse double-check for subcutaneous injection of insulin. Adding a level of inquiry which includes insulin, this yielded 2 studies. One from 1983, and one from 2009. Neither of which addresses the current question other than provides background for why the practice may exist in the first place. Changing terms to highlight ‘insulin double-check” yielded two results, both relevant, and one is the most current and referred to peer-reviewed study on this topic.
Affecting Rigor and Effectiveness
To improve the effectiveness and rigor of a database search one much identify proper and strong keywords in the question or relating to the question. Use filters to find peer-reviewed data first. Use filters for the type of study if possible, including systematic studies, and work your way down the pyramid for strength of research available. If the question is somewhat original, there may not be much evidence. This is the case here. Other filters and Boolean operator’s include dates of publication, with the last 5 years preferred as ‘current’, using ‘and’ and ‘or’ and ‘not’ to include or exclude words in the title, abstract, text, or any part of the article or work.
References
Ask: Write a focused clinical question. (2020). Retrieved from Northern Arizona University: https://libraryguides.nau.edu/c.php?g=665927&p=4682772Berdot, S., & Sabatier, B. (2018). Medication errors may be reduced by double-checking method. Evidence Based Nursing, 18(21), 67. doi:10.1136/eb-2018-102901
Chua, G., Lee, K., Peralta, G., & Heng Chi Lim, J. (2019). Medication Safety: A Need to Relook at Double-Checking Medicines? Asia-Pacific Journal of Oncology Medicine, 6(3), 246-252. doi:10.4103/apjon.apjon_2_19
Modic, B., Alber, N., Bena, J., Yager, C., Cary, T., Zhiyuan, S., . . . Kissinger, B. (2016). Does an Insulin Double-Checking Procedure Improve Patient Safety? JONA: The Journal of Nursing Administration, 46(3), 154-160. doi:10.1097/NNA.0000000000000314
Sentinel event alert: High-alert medications and patient safety. (1999, November). The Joint Commission: https://www.jointcommission.org/-/media/deprecated-unorganized/imported-assets/tjc/system-folders/topics-library/sea_11pdf.pdf?db=web&hash=CA29CB641C8749521733A05716852A1F
Westbrook, J., Ling, L., Raban, M., Woods, A., Koyama, A., Baysari, M., . . . White, L. (2020, August). Associations between double-checking and medication administration errors: a direct observational study of pediatric inpatients. BMJ Quality and Safety. doi:10.1136/bmjqs-2020-011473
RUBRIC
QUALITY OF RESPONSE NO RESPONSE POOR / UNSATISFACTORY SATISFACTORY GOOD EXCELLENT Content (worth a maximum of 50% of the total points) Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. 20 points out of 50: The essay illustrates poor understanding of the relevant material by failing to address or incorrectly addressing the relevant content; failing to identify or inaccurately explaining/defining key concepts/ideas; ignoring or incorrectly explaining key points/claims and the reasoning behind them; and/or incorrectly or inappropriately using terminology; and elements of the response are lacking. 30 points out of 50: The essay illustrates a rudimentary understanding of the relevant material by mentioning but not full explaining the relevant content; identifying some of the key concepts/ideas though failing to fully or accurately explain many of them; using terminology, though sometimes inaccurately or inappropriately; and/or incorporating some key claims/points but failing to explain the reasoning behind them or doing so inaccurately. Elements of the required response may also be lacking. 40 points out of 50: The essay illustrates solid understanding of the relevant material by correctly addressing most of the relevant content; identifying and explaining most of the key concepts/ideas; using correct terminology; explaining the reasoning behind most of the key points/claims; and/or where necessary or useful, substantiating some points with accurate examples. The answer is complete. 50 points: The essay illustrates exemplary understanding of the relevant material by thoroughly and correctly addressing the relevant content; identifying and explaining all of the key concepts/ideas; using correct terminology explaining the reasoning behind key points/claims and substantiating, as necessary/useful, points with several accurate and illuminating examples. No aspects of the required answer are missing. Use of Sources (worth a maximum of 20% of the total points). Zero points: Student failed to include citations and/or references. Or the student failed to submit a final paper. 5 out 20 points: Sources are seldom cited to support statements and/or format of citations are not recognizable as APA 6th Edition format. There are major errors in the formation of the references and citations. And/or there is a major reliance on highly questionable. The Student fails to provide an adequate synthesis of research collected for the paper. 10 out 20 points: References to scholarly sources are occasionally given; many statements seem unsubstantiated. Frequent errors in APA 6th Edition format, leaving the reader confused about the source of the information. There are significant errors of the formation in the references and citations. And/or there is a significant use of highly questionable sources. 15 out 20 points: Credible Scholarly sources are used effectively support claims and are, for the most part, clear and fairly represented. APA 6th Edition is used with only a few minor errors. There are minor errors in reference and/or citations. And/or there is some use of questionable sources. 20 points: Credible scholarly sources are used to give compelling evidence to support claims and are clearly and fairly represented. APA 6th Edition format is used accurately and consistently. The student uses above the maximum required references in the development of the assignment. Grammar (worth maximum of 20% of total points) Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. 5 points out of 20: The paper does not communicate ideas/points clearly due to inappropriate use of terminology and vague language; thoughts and sentences are disjointed or incomprehensible; organization lacking; and/or numerous grammatical, spelling/punctuation errors 10 points out 20: The paper is often unclear and difficult to follow due to some inappropriate terminology and/or vague language; ideas may be fragmented, wandering and/or repetitive; poor organization; and/or some grammatical, spelling, punctuation errors 15 points out of 20: The paper is mostly clear as a result of appropriate use of terminology and minimal vagueness; no tangents and no repetition; fairly good organization; almost perfect grammar, spelling, punctuation, and word usage. 20 points: The paper is clear, concise, and a pleasure to read as a result of appropriate and precise use of terminology; total coherence of thoughts and presentation and logical organization; and the essay is error free. Structure of the Paper (worth 10% of total points) Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. 3 points out of 10: Student needs to develop better formatting skills. The paper omits significant structural elements required for and APA 6th edition paper. Formatting of the paper has major flaws. The paper does not conform to APA 6th edition requirements whatsoever. 5 points out of 10: Appearance of final paper demonstrates the student’s limited ability to format the paper. There are significant errors in formatting and/or the total omission of major components of an APA 6th edition paper. The can include the omission of the cover page, abstract, and page numbers. Additionally the page has major formatting issues with spacing or paragraph formation. Font size might not conform to size requirements. The student also significantly writes too large or too short of and paper 7 points out of 10: Research paper presents an above-average use of formatting skills. The paper has slight errors within the paper. This can include small errors or omissions with the cover page, abstract, page number, and headers. There could be also slight formatting issues with the document spacing or the font Additionally the paper might slightly exceed or undershoot the specific number of required written pages for the assignment. 10 points: Student provides a high-caliber, formatted paper. This includes an APA 6th edition cover page, abstract, page number, headers and is double spaced in 12’ Times Roman Font. Additionally the paper conforms to the specific number of required written pages and neither goes over or under the specified length of the paper. GET THIS PROJECT NOW BY CLICKING ON THIS LINK TO PLACE THE ORDER
CLICK ON THE LINK HERE: https://www.perfectacademic.com/orders/ordernow
Do You Have Any Other Essay/Assignment/Class Project/Homework Related to this? Click Here Now [CLICK ME] and Have It Done by Our PhD Qualified Writers!!