Grand Canyon University Synopsis Review Research Literature Essay 1 – In nursing practice, accurate identification and application of research is essential

Grand Canyon University Synopsis Review Research Literature Essay 1 – 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.

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.

In addition, I have this small assignment as well… Willing to help?

2 – After working with your preceptor to assess organizational policies, create a list of measurable outcomes for your capstone project intervention. Write a list of three to five outcomes for your proposed intervention. Below each outcome, provide a one or two sentence rationale.

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

APA style is not required, but solid academic writing is expected.

I will send policies as soon as I gather them. Course Code
NRS-493
Class Code
NRS-493-O507
Criteria
Content
Percentage
100.0%
Author, Journal (Peer-Reviewed), and Permalink
or Working Link to Access Article
5.0%
Article Title and Year Published
5.0%
Research Questions (Qualitative) or Hypothesis
(Quantitative), and Purposes or Aim of Study
10.0%
Design (Type of Quantitative, or Type of
Qualitative)
5.0%
Setting or Sample
5.0%
Methods: Intervention or Instruments
5.0%
Analysis
10.0%
Key Findings
10.0%
Recommendations
10.0%
Explanation of How the Article Supports EBP or
Capstone
10.0%
Presentation
10.0%
Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling,
punctuation, grammar, and language use)
10.0%
Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes,
references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to
assignment and style
5.0%
Total Weightage
100%
Assignment Title
Literature Evaluation Table
1: Unsatisfactory (0.00%)
Author, journal (peer-reviewed), and permalink or working
link to access article section is not included.
Article title and year published section is not included.
Research questions (qualitative) or hypothesis (quantitative),
and purposes or aim of study section is not included.
Design (type of quantitative, or type of qualitative) section is
not included.
Setting or sample section is not included.
Methods: Intervention or Instruments section is not included.
Analysis section is not included.
Key findings section is not included.
Recommendations section is not included.
Explanation of how the article supports EBP or capstone
section is not included.
The piece is not neat or organized, and it does not include all
required elements.
Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede
communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or
sentence construction is employed.
Sources are not documented.
Total Points
50.0
2: Less Than Satisfactory (75.00%)
Author, journal (peer-reviewed), and permalink or working
link to access article section is present, but it lacks detail or is
incomplete.
Article title and year published section is present, but it lacks
detail or is incomplete.
Research questions (qualitative) or hypothesis (quantitative),
and purposes or aim of study section is present, but it lacks
detail or is incomplete.
Design (type of quantitative, or type of qualitative) section is
present, but it lacks detail or is incomplete.
Setting or sample section is present, but it lacks detail or is
incomplete.
Methods: Intervention or Instruments section is present, but
it lacks detail or is incomplete.
Analysis section is present, but it lacks detail or is incomplete.
Key findings section is present, but it lacks detail or is
incomplete.
Recommendations section is present, but it lacks detail or is
incomplete.
Explanation of how the article supports EBP or capstone
section is present, but it lacks detail or is incomplete.
The work is not neat and includes minor flaws or omissions of
required elements.
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.
Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as
appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous
formatting errors.
3: Satisfactory (79.00%)
Author, journal (peer-reviewed), and permalink or working
link to access article section is present.
Article title and year published section is present.
Research questions (qualitative) or hypothesis (quantitative),
and purposes or aim of study section is present.
Design (type of quantitative, or type of qualitative) section is
present.
Setting or sample section is present.
Methods: Intervention or Instruments section is present.
Analysis section is present.
Key findings section is present.
Recommendations section is present.
Explanation of how the article supports EBP or capstone
section is provided.
The overall appearance is general, and major elements are
missing.
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.
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and
style, although some formatting errors may be present.
4: Good (89.00%)
Author, journal (peer-reviewed), and permalink or working
link to access article section is clearly provided and well
developed.
Article title and year published section is clearly provided and
well developed.
Research questions (qualitative) or hypothesis (quantitative),
and purposes or aim of study section is clearly provided and
well developed.
Design (type of quantitative, or type of qualitative) section is
clearly provided and well developed.
Setting or sample section is clearly provided and well
developed.
Methods: Intervention or Instruments section is clearly
provided and well developed.
Analysis section is clearly provided and well developed.
Key findings section is clearly provided and well developed.
Recommendations section is clearly provided and well
developed.
Explanation of how the article supports EBP or capstone
section is clearly provided and well developed.
The overall appearance is generally neat, with a few minor
flaws or missing elements.
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.
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and
style, and format is mostly correct.
5: Excellent (100.00%)
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 section is comprehensive and
thoroughly developed with supporting details.
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) section is
comprehensive and thoroughly developed with supporting
details.
Setting or sample section is comprehensive and thoroughly
developed with supporting details.
Methods: Intervention or Instruments section is
comprehensive and thoroughly developed with supporting
details.
Comments
Analysis section is comprehensive and thoroughly developed
with supporting details.
Key findings section is comprehensive and thoroughly
developed with supporting details.
Recommendations section is comprehensive and thoroughly
developed with supporting details.
Explanation of how the article supports EBP or capstone
section is comprehensive and thoroughly developed with
supporting details.
The work is well presented and includes all required
elements. The overall appearance is neat and professional.
The writer is clearly in command of standard, written,
academic English.
Sources are completely and correctly documented, as
appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of
error.
Points Earned

Purchase answer to see full
attachment