NRS 493 Assignment: Literature Evaluation Table

Assessment Description

In nursing practice, accurate identification and application of research is essential to achieving successful outcomes. The ability to articulate research data and summarize relevant content supports the student’s ability to further develop and synthesize the assignments that constitute the components of the capstone project.

The assignment will be used to develop a written implementation plan.

ORDER A CUSTOMIZED, PLAGIARISM-FREE NRS 493 Assignment: Literature Evaluation Table HERE

Thanks for stopping by this assessment. We can assist you in completing it and other subsequent ones. Our expert writers will comprehensively review instructions, synthesize external evidence sources, and customize an A-grade paper for YOU!!!

For this assignment, provide a synopsis of the review of the research literature. Using the “Literature Evaluation Table,” determine the level and strength of the evidence for each of the eight research articles you have selected. The articles should be current (within the last 5 years) and closely relate to the PICOT question developed earlier in this course. The articles may include quantitative research, descriptive analyses, longitudinal studies, or meta-analysis articles. A systematic review may be used to provide background information for the purpose or problem identified in the proposed capstone project.

While APA style is not required for the body of this assignment, solid academic writing is expected, and in-text citations and references should be presented using APA documentation guidelines, which can be found in the APA Style Guide, 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 not required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite.

Attachments

NRS-493-RS4-LiteratureEvaluationTable.docx

Literature Evaluation Table – Rubric

LISTGRID

PRINT TO PDF

Rubric Criteria

Total50 points

Criterion

1. Unsatisfactory

2. Insufficient

3. Approaching

4. Accpetable

5. Target

Author, Journal (Peer-Reviewed), and Permalink or Working Link to Access Article

0 points

Author, journal (peer-reviewed), and permalink or working link to access article section is not included.

1.88 points

Author, journal (peer-reviewed), and permalink or working link to access article section is present, but it lacks detail or is incomplete.

1.98 points

Author, journal (peer-reviewed), and permalink or working link to access article section is present.

2.23 points

Author, journal (peer-reviewed), and permalink or working link to access article section is clearly provided and well developed.

2.5 points

Author, journal (peer-reviewed), and permalink or working link to access article section is comprehensive and thoroughly developed with supporting details.

Article Title and Year Published

0 points

Article title and year published section is not included.

1.88 points

Article title and year published section is present, but it lacks detail or is incomplete.

1.98 points

Article title and year published section is present.

2.23 points

Article title and year published section is clearly provided and well developed.

2.5 points

Article title and year published section is comprehensive and thoroughly developed with supporting details.

Research Questions (Qualitative) or Hypothesis (Quantitative), and Purposes or Aim of Study

0 points

Research questions (qualitative) or hypothesis (quantitative), and purposes or aim of study section is not included.

3.75 points

Research questions (qualitative) or hypothesis (quantitative), and purposes or aim of study section is present, but it lacks detail or is incomplete.

3.95 points

Research questions (qualitative) or hypothesis (quantitative), and purposes or aim of study section is present.

4.45 points

Research questions (qualitative) or hypothesis (quantitative), and purposes or aim of study section is clearly provided and well developed.
5 points

Research questions (qualitative) or hypothesis (quantitative), and purposes or aim of study section is comprehensive and thoroughly developed with supporting details.

Design (Type of Quantitative, or Type of Qualitative)

Design (Type of Quantitative, or Type of Qualitative)
0 points

Design (type of quantitative, or type of qualitative) section is not included.
1.88 points

Design (type of quantitative, or type of qualitative) section is present, but it lacks detail or is incomplete.

1.98 points

Design (type of quantitative, or type of qualitative) section is present.
2.23 points

Design (type of quantitative, or type of qualitative) section is clearly provided and well developed.
2.5 points

Design (type of quantitative, or type of qualitative) section is comprehensive and thoroughly developed with supporting details.

Setting or Sample

0 points

Setting or sample section is not included.
1.88 points

Setting or sample section is present, but it lacks detail or is incomplete.
1.98 points

Setting or sample section is present.

2.23 points

Setting or sample section is clearly provided and well developed.

2.5 points

Setting or sample section is comprehensive and thoroughly developed with supporting details.

Methods: Intervention or Instruments

Methods: Intervention or Instruments
0 points

Methods: Intervention or Instruments section is not included.
1.88 points

Methods: Intervention or Instruments section is present, but it lacks detail or is incomplete.

1.98 points

Methods: Intervention or Instruments section is present.

2.23 points

Methods: Intervention or Instruments section is clearly provided and well developed.

2.5 points

Methods: Intervention or Instruments section is comprehensive and thoroughly developed with supporting details.

Analysis

Analysis
0 points

Analysis section is not included.

3.75 points

Analysis section is present, but it lacks detail or is incomplete.
3.95 points

Analysis section is present.

4.45 points

Analysis section is clearly provided and well developed.
5 points

Analysis section is comprehensive and thoroughly developed with supporting details.

Key Findings

Key Findings
0 points

Key findings section is not included.
3.75 points

Key findings section is present, but it lacks detail or is incomplete.
3.95 points

Key findings section is present.
4.45 points

Key findings section is clearly provided and well developed.

5 points

Key findings section is comprehensive and thoroughly developed with supporting details.

Recommendations

Recommendations
0 points

Recommendations section is not included.

3.75 points

Recommendations section is present, but it lacks detail or is incomplete.

3.95 points

Recommendations section is present.

4.45 points

Recommendations section is clearly provided and well developed.

5 points

Recommendations section is comprehensive and thoroughly developed with supporting details.

Explanation of How the Article Supports EBP or Capstone

Explanation of How the Article Supports EBP or Capstone
0 points

Explanation of how the article supports EBP or capstone section is not included.

3.75 points

Explanation of how the article supports EBP or capstone section is present, but it lacks detail or is incomplete.
3.95 points

Explanation of how the article supports EBP or capstone section is provided.
4.45 points

Explanation of how the article supports EBP or capstone section is clearly provided and well developed.

5 points

Explanation of how the article supports EBP or capstone section is comprehensive and thoroughly developed with supporting details.

Presentation

Presentation
0 points

The piece is not neat or organized, and it does not include all required elements.
3.75 points

The work is not neat and includes minor flaws or omissions of required elements.
3.95 points

The overall appearance is general, and major elements are missing.
4.45 points

The overall appearance is generally neat, with a few minor flaws or missing elements.
5 points

The work is well presented and includes all required elements. The overall appearance is neat and professional.

Mechanics of Writing

Includes spelling, capitalization, punctuation, grammar, language use, sentence structure, etc.

0 points

Errors in grammar or syntax are pervasive and impede meaning. Incorrect language choice or sentence structure errors are found throughout.
3.75 points

Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors are present. Inconsistencies in language choice or sentence structure are recurrent.

3.95 points

Occasional mechanical errors are present. Language choice is generally appropriate. Varied sentence structure is attempted.

4.45 points

Few mechanical errors are present. Suitable language choice and sentence structure are used.

5 points

No mechanical errors are present. Appropriate language choice and sentence structure are used throughout.

Format/Documentation

Uses appropriate style, such as APA, MLA, etc., for college, subject, and level; documents sources using citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., appropriate to assignment and discipline.
0 points

Appropriate format is not used. No documentation of sources is provided.

1.88 points

Appropriate format is attempted, but some elements are missing. Frequent errors in documentation of sources are evident.
1.98 points

Appropriate format and documentation are used, although there are some obvious errors.

2.23 points

Appropriate format and documentation are used with only minor errors.

2.5 points

No errors in formatting or documentation are present.

NRS 493 Assignment: Literature Evaluation Table