Assignment Prompt & Instructions
– ## pic.pdf
– ## picAppendix_G_Individual_Evidence_Summary_Tool_20225.docx
**## pic.pdf**
1. Using your selected practice problem, the appraised quantitative research study
used previously, and the evidence-based intervention from the research study, write
a one-sentence practice question.
2. Use the format tool (PICOT), john Hopkins summary tool, and the quantitative
research study used previously to determine if your practice question is feasible in a
practice setting.
a. Identify the evidence-based intervention from the study.
b. Identify the specific patient population who would benefit from this
evidence-based intervention in a practice setting.
c. Identify the outcomes specific to the evidence-based intervention.
d. Describe all biophysiological measures, any surveys or questionnaires, and
the timing of when the outcomes were measured by the Ph.D. researchers.
As an example, were the outcomes measured every other week?
Instructions-
Application of Knowledge
a. Address all bullet points in the weekly discussion accurately and thoroughly with a
substantive, in-depth discussion in the initial post.
Incorporate three (3) diOerent sources: two (2) of the three (3) should be scholarly. A
scholarly source is (a) evidence-based, (b) peer-reviewed, and (c) published in the last five
(5) years.
– Professionalism in Communication
a. References are consistent with APA style/formatting with no error patterns; the hanging
indent is not required.
b. Presents information in an organized manner.
c. Uses clear and concise language.
d. Communicates with no error patterns in English grammar, spelling, syntax, and
punctuation.
Complete the john Hopkins summary tools that’s attached
Almost every sentence should have 2 or more citations; blend those ideas together….
**## picAppendix_G_Individual_Evidence_Summary_Tool_20225.docx**
Johns Hopkins Evidence-Based Practice Model for Nursing and Healthcare Professionals
Individual Evidence Summary Tool
Appendix G
Johns Hopkins Nursing Evidence-Based Practice
Individual Evidence Summary Tool (Appendix G)
| | | | | | | | | | | |
| — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| ## EBP Question: |
| ## Reviewer name(s) | ## Article number | ## Author, date, and title | ## Type of evidence | ## Population, size, and setting | ## Intervention | ## Findings that help answer the EBP question | ## Measures used | ## Limitations | ## Evidence level and quality | ## Notes to team |
| | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | |
**Directions for use of the Individual Evidence Summary Tool**
**Purpose:** Use this form to document and collate the results of the review and appraisal of each piece of evidence in preparation for evidence synthesis. The table headers indicate important elements of each article that will contribute to the synthesis process. The data in each cell should be complete enough that the other team members are able to gather all relevant information related to the evidence without having to go to each source article.
**See Chapter 11, Lessons from Practice, for examples of completed tools.**
**Reviewer name(s):**
Record the member(s) of the team who are providing the information for each article. This will provide tracking if there are follow-up items or additional questions on an individual piece of evidence.
**Article number:**
Assign a number to each piece of evidence included in the table. This organizes the individual evidence summary and provides an easy way to reference articles.
**Author, date, and title:**
Record the last name of the first author of the article, the publication/communication date, and the title. This will help track articles throughout the literature search, screening, and review process. It is also helpful when someone has authored more than one publication included in the review.
**Type of evidence:**
Indicate the type of evidence for each source. This should be descriptive of the study or project design (e.g., randomized control trial, meta-analysis, mixed methods, qualitative, systematic review, case study, literature review) and not simply the level on the evidence hierarchy.
**Population, size, and setting:**
For research evidence, provide a quick view of the population, number of participants, and study location. For non-research evidence population refers to target audience, patient population, or profession. Non-research evidence may or may not have a sample size and/or location as found with research evidence.
**Intervention:**
Record the intervention(s) implemented or discussed in the article. This should relate to the intervention or comparison elements of your PICO question.
**Findings that help answer the EBP question:**
List findings from the article that directly answer the EBP question. These should be succinct statements that provide enough information that the reader does not need to return to the original article. Avoid directly copying and pasting from the article.
**Measures used**:
These are the measures and/or instruments (e.g., counts, rates, satisfaction surveys, validated tools, subscales) the authors used to determine the answer to the research question or the effectiveness of their intervention. Consider these measures as identified in the evidence for collection during implementation of the EBP team’s project.
**Limitations:**
Provide the limitations of the evidence—both as listed by the authors as well as your assessment of any flaws or drawbacks. Consider the methodology, quality of reporting, and generalizability to the population of interest. Limitations should be apparent from the team’s appraisals using the Research and Non-Research Evidence Appraisal Tools (Appendices E and F). It can be helpful to consider the reasons an article did not receive a “high” quality rating because these reasons are limitations identified by the team.
**Evidence level and quality:**
Using the Research and Non-Research Evidence Appraisal tools (Appendices E and F), record the level (I-V) and quality (A, B or C) of the evidence. When possible, at least two reviewers should determine the level and quality.
**Notes to team:**
The team uses this section to keep track of items important to the EBP process not captured elsewhere on this tool. Consider items that will be helpful to have easy reference to when conducting the evidence synthesis.
© 2022 Johns Hopkins Health System/Johns Hopkins School of Nursing Page |
**1**
© 2022 Johns Hopkins Health System/Johns Hopkins School of Nursing Page |
**3**
## image1.jpeg
**## picAppendix_G_Individual_Evidence_Summary_Tool_20225.docx**
Johns Hopkins Evidence-Based Practice Model for Nursing and Healthcare Professionals
Individual Evidence Summary Tool
Appendix G
Johns Hopkins Nursing Evidence-Based Practice
Individual Evidence Summary Tool (Appendix G)
| | | | | | | | | | | |
| — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| ## EBP Question: |
| ## Reviewer name(s) | ## Article number | ## Author, date, and title | ## Type of evidence | ## Population, size, and setting | ## Intervention | ## Findings that help answer the EBP question | ## Measures used | ## Limitations | ## Evidence level and quality | ## Notes to team |
| | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | |
**Directions for use of the Individual Evidence Summary Tool**
**Purpose:** Use this form to document and collate the results of the review and appraisal of each piece of evidence in preparation for evidence synthesis. The table headers indicate important elements of each article that will contribute to the synthesis process. The data in each cell should be complete enough that the other team members are able to gather all relevant information related to the evidence without having to go to each source article.
**See Chapter 11, Lessons from Practice, for examples of completed tools.**
**Reviewer name(s):**
Record the member(s) of the team who are providing the information for each article. This will provide tracking if there are follow-up items or additional questions on an individual piece of evidence.
**Article number:**
Assign a number to each piece of evidence included in the table. This organizes the individual evidence summary and provides an easy way to reference articles.
**Author, date, and title:**
Record the last name of the first author of the article, the publication/communication date, and the title. This will help track articles throughout the literature search, screening, and review process. It is also helpful when someone has authored more than one publication included in the review.
**Type of evidence:**
Indicate the type of evidence for each source. This should be descriptive of the study or project design (e.g., randomized control trial, meta-analysis, mixed methods, qualitative, systematic review, case study, literature review) and not simply the level on the evidence hierarchy.
**Population, size, and setting:**
For research evidence, provide a quick view of the population, number of participants, and study location. For non-research evidence population refers to target audience, patient population, or profession. Non-research evidence may or may not have a sample size and/or location as found with research evidence.
**Intervention:**
Record the intervention(s) implemented or discussed in the article. This should relate to the intervention or comparison elements of your PICO question.
**Findings that help answer the EBP question:**
List findings from the article that directly answer the EBP question. These should be succinct statements that provide enough information that the reader does not need to return to the original article. Avoid directly copying and pasting from the article.
**Measures used**:
These are the measures and/or instruments (e.g., counts, rates, satisfaction surveys, validated tools, subscales) the authors used to determine the answer to the research question or the effectiveness of their intervention. Consider these measures as identified in the evidence for collection during implementation of the EBP team’s project.
**Limitations:**
Provide the limitations of the evidence—both as listed by the authors as well as your assessment of any flaws or drawbacks. Consider the methodology, quality of reporting, and generalizability to the population of interest. Limitations should be apparent from the team’s appraisals using the Research and Non-Research Evidence Appraisal Tools (Appendices E and F). It can be helpful to consider the reasons an article did not receive a “high” quality rating because these reasons are limitations identified by the team.
**Evidence level and quality:**
Using the Research and Non-Research Evidence Appraisal tools (Appendices E and F), record the level (I-V) and quality (A, B or C) of the evidence. When possible, at least two reviewers should determine the level and quality.
**Notes to team:**
The team uses this section to keep track of items important to the EBP process not captured elsewhere on this tool. Consider items that will be helpful to have easy reference to when conducting the evidence synthesis.
© 2022 Johns Hopkins Health System/Johns Hopkins School of Nursing Page |
**1**
© 2022 Johns Hopkins Health System/Johns Hopkins School of Nursing Page |
**3**
## image1.jpeg
**## pic.pdf**
1. Using your selected practice problem, the appraised quantitative research study
used previously, and the evidence-based intervention from the research study, write
a one-sentence practice question.
2. Use the format tool (PICOT), john Hopkins summary tool, and the quantitative
research study used previously to determine if your practice question is feasible in a
practice setting.
a. Identify the evidence-based intervention from the study.
b. Identify the specific patient population who would benefit from this
evidence-based intervention in a practice setting.
c. Identify the outcomes specific to the evidence-based intervention.
d. Describe all biophysiological measures, any surveys or questionnaires, and
the timing of when the outcomes were measured by the Ph.D. researchers.
As an example, were the outcomes measured every other week?
Instructions-
Application of Knowledge
a. Address all bullet points in the weekly discussion accurately and thoroughly with a
substantive, in-depth discussion in the initial post.
Incorporate three (3) diOerent sources: two (2) of the three (3) should be scholarly. A
scholarly source is (a) evidence-based, (b) peer-reviewed, and (c) published in the last five
(5) years.
– Professionalism in Communication
a. References are consistent with APA style/formatting with no error patterns; the hanging
indent is not required.
b. Presents information in an organized manner.
c. Uses clear and concise language.
d. Communicates with no error patterns in English grammar, spelling, syntax, and
punctuation.
Complete the john Hopkins summary tools that’s attached
Almost every sentence should have 2 or more citations; blend those ideas together….
**## picAppendix_G_Individual_Evidence_Summary_Tool_20225.docx**
Johns Hopkins Evidence-Based Practice Model for Nursing and Healthcare Professionals
Individual Evidence Summary Tool
Appendix G
Johns Hopkins Nursing Evidence-Based Practice
Individual Evidence Summary Tool (Appendix G)
| | | | | | | | | | | |
| — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| ## EBP Question: |
| ## Reviewer name(s) | ## Article number | ## Author, date, and title | ## Type of evidence | ## Population, size, and setting | ## Intervention | ## Findings that help answer the EBP question | ## Measures used | ## Limitations | ## Evidence level and quality | ## Notes to team |
| | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | |
**Directions for use of the Individual Evidence Summary Tool**
**Purpose:** Use this form to document and collate the results of the review and appraisal of each piece of evidence in preparation for evidence synthesis. The table headers indicate important elements of each article that will contribute to the synthesis process. The data in each cell should be complete enough that the other team members are able to gather all relevant information related to the evidence without having to go to each source article.
**See Chapter 11, Lessons from Practice, for examples of completed tools.**
**Reviewer name(s):**
Record the member(s) of the team who are providing the information for each article. This will provide tracking if there are follow-up items or additional questions on an individual piece of evidence.
**Article number:**
Assign a number to each piece of evidence included in the table. This organizes the individual evidence summary and provides an easy way to reference articles.
**Author, date, and title:**
Record the last name of the first author of the article, the publication/communication date, and the title. This will help track articles throughout the literature search, screening, and review process. It is also helpful when someone has authored more than one publication included in the review.
**Type of evidence:**
Indicate the type of evidence for each source. This should be descriptive of the study or project design (e.g., randomized control trial, meta-analysis, mixed methods, qualitative, systematic review, case study, literature review) and not simply the level on the evidence hierarchy.
**Population, size, and setting:**
For research evidence, provide a quick view of the population, number of participants, and study location. For non-research evidence population refers to target audience, patient population, or profession. Non-research evidence may or may not have a sample size and/or location as found with research evidence.
**Intervention:**
Record the intervention(s) implemented or discussed in the article. This should relate to the intervention or comparison elements of your PICO question.
**Findings that help answer the EBP question:**
List findings from the article that directly answer the EBP question. These should be succinct statements that provide enough information that the reader does not need to return to the original article. Avoid directly copying and pasting from the article.
**Measures used**:
These are the measures and/or instruments (e.g., counts, rates, satisfaction surveys, validated tools, subscales) the authors used to determine the answer to the research question or the effectiveness of their intervention. Consider these measures as identified in the evidence for collection during implementation of the EBP team’s project.
**Limitations:**
Provide the limitations of the evidence—both as listed by the authors as well as your assessment of any flaws or drawbacks. Consider the methodology, quality of reporting, and generalizability to the population of interest. Limitations should be apparent from the team’s appraisals using the Research and Non-Research Evidence Appraisal Tools (Appendices E and F). It can be helpful to consider the reasons an article did not receive a “high” quality rating because these reasons are limitations identified by the team.
**Evidence level and quality:**
Using the Research and Non-Research Evidence Appraisal tools (Appendices E and F), record the level (I-V) and quality (A, B or C) of the evidence. When possible, at least two reviewers should determine the level and quality.
**Notes to team:**
The team uses this section to keep track of items important to the EBP process not captured elsewhere on this tool. Consider items that will be helpful to have easy reference to when conducting the evidence synthesis.
© 2022 Johns Hopkins Health System/Johns Hopkins School of Nursing Page |
**1**
© 2022 Johns Hopkins Health System/Johns Hopkins School of Nursing Page |
**3**
## image1.jpeg
**## pic.pdf**
1. Using your selected practice problem, the appraised quantitative research study
used previously, and the evidence-based intervention from the research study, write
a one-sentence practice question.
2. Use the format tool (PICOT), john Hopkins summary tool, and the quantitative
research study used previously to determine if your practice question is feasible in a
practice setting.
a. Identify the evidence-based intervention from the study.
b. Identify the specific patient population who would benefit from this
evidence-based intervention in a practice setting.
c. Identify the outcomes specific to the evidence-based intervention.
d. Describe all biophysiological measures, any surveys or questionnaires, and
the timing of when the outcomes were measured by the Ph.D. researchers.
As an example, were the outcomes measured every other week?
Instructions-
Application of Knowledge
a. Address all bullet points in the weekly discussion accurately and thoroughly with a
substantive, in-depth discussion in the initial post.
Incorporate three (3) diOerent sources: two (2) of the three (3) should be scholarly. A
scholarly source is (a) evidence-based, (b) peer-reviewed, and (c) published in the last five
(5) years.
– Professionalism in Communication
a. References are consistent with APA style/formatting with no error patterns; the hanging
indent is not required.
b. Presents information in an organized manner.
c. Uses clear and concise language.
d. Communicates with no error patterns in English grammar, spelling, syntax, and
punctuation.
Complete the john Hopkins summary tools that’s attached
Almost every sentence should have 2 or more citations; blend those ideas together….
**## picAppendix_G_Individual_Evidence_Summary_Tool_20225.docx**
Johns Hopkins Evidence-Based Practice Model for Nursing and Healthcare Professionals
Individual Evidence Summary Tool
Appendix G
Johns Hopkins Nursing Evidence-Based Practice
Individual Evidence Summary Tool (Appendix G)
| | | | | | | | | | | |
| — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| ## EBP Question: |
| ## Reviewer name(s) | ## Article number | ## Author, date, and title | ## Type of evidence | ## Population, size, and setting | ## Intervention | ## Findings that help answer the EBP question | ## Measures used | ## Limitations | ## Evidence level and quality | ## Notes to team |
| | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | |
**Directions for use of the Individual Evidence Summary Tool**
**Purpose:** Use this form to document and collate the results of the review and appraisal of each piece of evidence in preparation for evidence synthesis. The table headers indicate important elements of each article that will contribute to the synthesis process. The data in each cell should be complete enough that the other team members are able to gather all relevant information related to the evidence without having to go to each source article.
**See Chapter 11, Lessons from Practice, for examples of completed tools.**
**Reviewer name(s):**
Record the member(s) of the team who are providing the information for each article. This will provide tracking if there are follow-up items or additional questions on an individual piece of evidence.
**Article number:**
Assign a number to each piece of evidence included in the table. This organizes the individual evidence summary and provides an easy way to reference articles.
**Author, date, and title:**
Record the last name of the first author of the article, the publication/communication date, and the title. This will help track articles throughout the literature search, screening, and review process. It is also helpful when someone has authored more than one publication included in the review.
**Type of evidence:**
Indicate the type of evidence for each source. This should be descriptive of the study or project design (e.g., randomized control trial, meta-analysis, mixed methods, qualitative, systematic review, case study, literature review) and not simply the level on the evidence hierarchy.
**Population, size, and setting:**
For research evidence, provide a quick view of the population, number of participants, and study location. For non-research evidence population refers to target audience, patient population, or profession. Non-research evidence may or may not have a sample size and/or location as found with research evidence.
**Intervention:**
Record the intervention(s) implemented or discussed in the article. This should relate to the intervention or comparison elements of your PICO question.
**Findings that help answer the EBP question:**
List findings from the article that directly answer the EBP question. These should be succinct statements that provide enough information that the reader does not need to return to the original article. Avoid directly copying and pasting from the article.
**Measures used**:
These are the measures and/or instruments (e.g., counts, rates, satisfaction surveys, validated tools, subscales) the authors used to determine the answer to the research question or the effectiveness of their intervention. Consider these measures as identified in the evidence for collection during implementation of the EBP team’s project.
**Limitations:**
Provide the limitations of the evidence—both as listed by the authors as well as your assessment of any flaws or drawbacks. Consider the methodology, quality of reporting, and generalizability to the population of interest. Limitations should be apparent from the team’s appraisals using the Research and Non-Research Evidence Appraisal Tools (Appendices E and F). It can be helpful to consider the reasons an article did not receive a “high” quality rating because these reasons are limitations identified by the team.
**Evidence level and quality:**
Using the Research and Non-Research Evidence Appraisal tools (Appendices E and F), record the level (I-V) and quality (A, B or C) of the evidence. When possible, at least two reviewers should determine the level and quality.
**Notes to team:**
The team uses this section to keep track of items important to the EBP process not captured elsewhere on this tool. Consider items that will be helpful to have easy reference to when conducting the evidence synthesis.
© 2022 Johns Hopkins Health System/Johns Hopkins School of Nursing Page |
**1**
© 2022 Johns Hopkins Health System/Johns Hopkins School of Nursing Page |
**3**
## image1.jpeg
– 1
– 2