Literature review of picot question;
In patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), how does treatment with empagliflozin (Jardiance), compared with metformin, affect glycemic control as measured by hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) reduction within a 3–12-mont
Assignment 3: Literature Evaluation Matrix Table Guidelines and Rubric
Conducting an organized and comprehensive search of the literature is necessary to find all relevant evidence on your topic (PICOT) of interest. Once you have located several research articles, the creation of a matrix evaluation table is essential to understand and organize research evidence. You will complete this assignment by offering a summary of your search strategy, and then fill in a matrix table using the primary and secondary research studies/articles identified throughout this course. Completing this table will help you identify the following:
(1) what is known about the topic,
(2) the quality of what is known (the strength of evidence supporting each of your major conclusions about that narrowly defined topic), and
(3) what still needs to be known.
For this assignment, you will include five articles in the matrix table (4 primary research and 1 secondary research articles). The assignment must also include a reference list for the articles included in the matrix. Do not include QI projects, EBP projects, policies, procedures, protocols or guidelines in the evaluation table, ONLY research articles. PDF copies of the 5 articles included should be submitted.
In addition to the matrix table, provide a 1–2-page summary with the following information:
· Introduction to the problem.
· Purpose of your work (PICO question)
· Summary of your search strategy and results.
Matrix Evaluation Table Assignment: After completing your review of the databases and the search strategy worksheet you will summarize your search and then assemble the matrix table (provided in Blackboard). The matrix table must summarize the important information about the design of each study. Column headers include author/year, purpose/research question, design/level of evidence, results, and key take-aways.
Reference List: Include of all articles included in the matrix.
Please follow these instructions when saving all documents for this assignment:
· Your summary and reference list should be saved as:
o LastName_Assignment 3
o Example: Shaw_Assignment 3
· Your matrix table should be saved as:
o LastName_Matrix
o Example: Shaw_Matrix
· Each article should be saved as: LastName (of first author only) Year of publicationPrimary/Secondary
o Example: Gaehle_018_Primary
Assignment 3: Literature Evaluation Matrix Table Rubric
|
|
Novice (0-14) |
Competent (15-17) |
Proficient (18-20) |
|
Summary of Search Strategy and Results |
Does not include a sufficient description of the literature search, or describes a search process insufficient for DNP level work (i.e. Google Search). |
Includes a description of literature search process but with limited detail and lack of clarity on how sources were identified. |
Detailed description of the literature search process including but not limited to: databases, key terms, years, inclusion/exclusion criteria. |
|
|
Novice (0-2) |
Competent (3-4) |
Proficient (5) |
|
Selection and Inclusion of Relevant Research Articles |
Fewer than 4 articles are included. Appraisal of articles as primary or secondary is incomplete or incorrect. |
Includes 4 or 5 research articles. Articles are mostly identified accurately as primary or secondary. |
Includes 5 research articles. All articles are appropriately identified as either primary or secondary. |
|
|
Novice (0-2) |
Competent (3-4) |
Proficient (5) |
|
Identification of Article Purpose or Research Question |
Appropriately identifies the purpose statement or research question for 0-2 articles included. |
Appropriately identifies the purpose statement or research question for 3-4 articles included. |
Appropriately identifies the purpose statement or research question for all 5 articles included. |
|
|
Novice (0-10) |
Competent (11-12) |
Proficient (13-15) |
|
Design/Level of Evidence/Quality Appraisal |
Does not accurately identify the design, level of evidence, and quality of most articles included. |
Appropriately identifies the design, level of evidence, and quality of most articles included. |
Appropriately identifies the design, level of evidence, and quality of 5 articles included. |
|
|
Novice (0-10) |
Competent (11-12) |
Proficient (13-15) |
|
Summary of included article sample |
Restates the inclusion criteria for some or most of the articles included. |
Identifies and summarizes a combination of the inclusion criteria and the actual the study sample for most of the articles included. |
Appropriately identifies and summarizes the study sample for all 5 articles included. |
|
|
Novice (0-22) |
Competent (23-26) |
Proficient (27-30) |
|
Summary of Results |
Provides an insufficient summary of the study results using limited paraphrasing and own words. Copies statistical outcomes or offers limited to no interpretation of the results. |
Provides a summary of the study results using paraphrasing and own words. Includes vague statements demonstrating understanding of the outcomes of statistical tests without reporting or documentation of actual values. |
Provides a detailed summary of the study results using paraphrasing and own words. Includes statements demonstrating interpretation of the purpose and significance of statistical tests with reference and documentation of actual results. |
|
|
Novice (0-22) |
Competent (23-26) |
Proficient (27-30) |
|
Identification of Implications |
Discussion is limited in development and does not provide any interpretation for how the evidence will be used in nursing practice. Lacks critical thinking or clinical judgment. |
Paraphrases the main sub-sections of the results without evaluation or interpretation of how the evidence is important for nursing practice. Does not provide clear implications from the findings. |
Develops rigorous evaluation and interpretation of the body of literature included. Clearly articulates the implications of findings on future nursing practice. |
|
|
Novice (0-14) |
Competent (15-17) |
Proficient (18-20) |
|
APA Reference List and Citations |
Reference list is incomplete. The references are not in 7th edition APA format or include greater than 3 unique errors throughout. Fails to include in- text citations throughout table. |
Reference list includes all or most of the research articles included. References are in 7th edition APA, however, more than 1 but fewer than 3 unique errors exist throughout. Includes some in-text citations throughout table. |
Reference list includes all 5 identified research articles. The reference list is formatted in 7th edition APA. Reference list includes minimal to no errors (defined as fewer than 1 unique error throughout). Includes appropriate in- text citations throughout table. |
|
|
Novice (0-6) |
Competent (7-8) |
Proficient (9-10) |
|
PDF Copy of Articles Submitted |
PDF full-text copy of 2 or fewer articles submitted and accurately labeled. |
PDF full-text copy of 3-4 articles submitted and accurately labeled. |
PDF full-text copy of 5 articles submitted and accurately labeled. |
|
Total Points Possible |
150 |
||