Written Assignment

120 views 11:17 am 0 Comments July 6, 2023

2806NRS Research in Nursing – A3 Written Assignment – Report
1
2806NRS Research in Nursing
A3 Written Assignment – Critical Evaluation ReportHuman Computer Interaction
1500 words, Weighting 45 %; Marked out of 50%
Due Date: Week 11 May 24th, 5pm
Aim
In this summative assessment item, you will have the opportunity to build on the skills
developed in A2 Annotated Bibliography to assist you to critically evaluate a journal article.
It is expected you will refer to the feedback received in A2 Annotated Bibliography to
support the development of the skills and knowledge to be able to evaluate the quality and
relevance of research to your nursing practice.
This assessment item will assess –
• Learning Outcome 2: Evaluate the credibility of the information provided by
research studies.
• Learning Outcome 3: Demonstrate understanding of the major elements of the
research process that underpin translation to practice.
Instructions
For this assessment, you need to write a 1500-word critical evaluation report, in which you
critically evaluate the supplied journal article and discuss its relevance to clinical nursing
practice.
Specifically, in your critical evaluation report you need to:
1. Accurately identify and explain the different elements of the research process that
are evident in the article.
2. Critically evaluate the research elements using the appraisal guide with reference to
recent, relevant and scholarly literature.
3. Discuss the significant implications of the research for contemporary nursing
practice and standards of care.
2806NRS Research in Nursing – A3 Written Assignment – Report
2
You must use the following headings to structure your report.

PICO, journal quality and authors credentials (100 words)
PICO
What is the
problem?
What is the
intervention?
What is the
comparator?
What is the
primary
outcome?
What are the
secondary
outcome/s?
Journal 1. It is useful to know in which country the journal was published.
Review information about the journal publisher.
2. Is the journal article published in a quality publication?
Authors Once you have an overview of the journal (PICO) and an idea about
whether it is a quality source, ask yourself:
1. Are the authors’ experts in the field? How can you tell?
2. Are they researchers, academics, and clinical experts? Where do
they work?
3. Are they members of a reputed hospital, research centre or institute
where clinical research is conducted?
Title, Abstract and Literature Review (150 words)
a. What makes a good journal article title? Is the title of the research
paper consistent with the text? Describe how. Does the title clearly
reflect what the paper is about? Explain.
b. What are the aims and objectives of the research study? Purpose?
Are they clearly articulated?
c. What are the important features about an abstract? Describe the
elements of the abstract in this research study?
d. Is the literature cited in the background / literature review current,
relevant and comprehensive? What type of literature review has been
undertaken (integrative, narrative, systematic etc)?

2806NRS Research in Nursing – A3 Written Assignment – Report
3

Research Design (250 words)
a. What type of quantitative study design was used? What level of
evidence is this? Review Topic 2.3.
b. What are the research questions for this study?
c. Why was the study needed? State the reason.
d. Are hypotheses stated in this study? Describe.
e. Describe how the intervention(s) was carried out?
The Sample (150 words)
a. What was the population of interest?
b. Identify and describe the setting of the study. For example, the
hospital, home, community-based or residential care setting?
c. How were the participants accessed and recruited? Outline the
processes employed.
d. How was ethical approval was obtained? Who provided ethical
clearance (committees – university, health authority, care
organisation)? Why is ethical approval essential? Explain.
Data collection (200 words)
a. What data was collected? What outcome/s were measured?
Describe.
b. What tools were used to collect the data (surveys, questionnaires or
other data collection tools)?
d. Who collected the data and how?
e. What is bias and how is it avoided or minimised in this study?
Data Analysis (150 words)
a. What statistical methods were used? Broadly describe.
b. How were the quantitative results reported in this study?
Results (250 words)
Summarise the researcher’s report of the findings, including:
a. Were the research questions addressed by the study findings?
Justify your answer.
b. Were suggestions for further research made? If yes, what were
they? Why is this important?

2806NRS Research in Nursing – A3 Written Assignment – Report
4

Relevance to nursing practice (250 words)
Critically evaluate, with reference to a range of recent, scholarly
literature, how this research is relevant to the clinical nursing setting
using the principles of evidence-based practice.
These include:
• Patient values – is this useful for patients? Do they accept it? Are
there negative outcomes or side-affects for the patient?
• Clinical expertise –Is this always useful? If the context changes is the
response or evidence based practice still usable?
• Available evidence- What other evidence exists that support this?

Please note, the suggested word count for each section is only approximate.
• PICO, journal quality and authors credentials (100 words)
• Title Abstract and literature review (150 words)
• Research Design (250 words)
• The Sample (150 words)
• Data Collection (200 words)
• Data Analysis (150 words)
• Results (250 words)
• Relevance to clinical nursing practice (250 words)
• You need to include a reference list (not included in word count) on a
separate page.
Journal Article:
Gavin, N. C., Kleidon, T. M., Larsen, E., O’Brien, C., Ullman, A., Northfield, S., Mihala, G., Runnegar, N.,
Marsh, N., & Rickard, C. M. (2020). A comparison of hydrophobic polyurethane and
polyurethane peripherally inserted central catheter: results from a feasibility randomized
controlled trial. Trials, 21(1), 787-787. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-020-04699-z
Other elements:
• Word limit of 1500 words needs to be strictly adhered to. The word limit for an
assessment item includes in text citations, tables and quotations. The word limit
DOES NOT include the reference list. Please note the marker will cease marking your
submitted work once they have reached the allocated word limit.
• Always refer to the Griffith Health Writing and Referencing Guide. Ensure your
assignment format strictly adheres to these guidelines.
2806NRS Research in Nursing – A3 Written Assignment – Report
5
• Ensure that you use scholarly literature1 (digitized readings, research articles,
relevant Government reports and textbooks) that has been published within the last
five [5] years (between 2015– 2020 (inclusive).
• Use the APA 7 referencing style.
• Provide a clear introduction and conclusion to your paper.
• You may use headings to organise your essay.
• Unless otherwise instructed, write in the third person.
• Use academic language2 throughout.
• Refer to the marking rubric when writing your assignment. This will assist you in
calculating the weightings of the sections for your assignment.
• Submit your assignment via Turnitin as per the instructions on your
Learning@Griffith course site. [Submit in the ‘FINAL Written Essay’ assessment tab].
1
Scholarly or peer-reviewed journal articles are written by scholars or professionals who are experts in their field, as opposed to literature
such as magazine articles, which reflect the taste of the general public and are meant as entertainment.
2
Everyday language is predominately subjective. It is mainly used to express opinions based on personal preference or belief rather than
evidence. Written academic English is formal. It avoids colloquialisms and slang, which may be subjective to local and social variations.
Formal language is more precise and stable, and therefore more suitable for the expression of complex ideas and the development of
reasoned argumentation.
2806NRS Research in Nursing – A3 Written Assignment – Report
6
2806NRS Research in Nursing – A3 Critical Evaluation Report MARKING RUBRIC

Assessable
Elements		 EXEMPLARY
Exceptionally high quality of
performance or standard of
learning achievement.		 ACCOMPLISHED
High quality performance or
standard of learning
achievement.		 DEVELOPING
Satisfactory quality of
performance or standard of
learning achievement.		 BEGINNING
Unsatisfactory quality of
performance or standard of
learning achievement.		 TOTAL MARK
Criterion One
Accurately identify and
explain the different
elements of the
research process that
are evident in the
article.		 Exceptionally high standard as
evidenced by an accurate
identification and
comprehensive explanation
of all the elements of the
research process that are
evident in the article; multiple,
specific examples and
references to the
article support the explanation.		 High standard as evidenced by
an accurate identification and
broad explanation of a range of
elements of the research
process that are evident in the
article; explanation is supported
by examples from the article.		 Satisfactory standard as
evidenced by an accurate
identification and sufficient
explanation of the different
elements of the research
process that are evident in the
article; there may be some
general discussion about
research without reference to
the elements evident in the
article.		 Unsatisfactory standard as
evidenced by inaccurate
identification of the different
elements of the research
process that are evident in
the article. Explanation of
elements of the research
process is inadequate or
vague/too general		 /10
Mark allocation 9-10 7-8 5-6 <5
Criterion Two
Critically evaluate the
research elements
using the appraisal
guide.		 Exceptionally high standard as
evidenced by a clear and
comprehensive evaluation of
all the research elements
using the appraisal guide.		 High standard as evidenced by
a broad evaluation of
the research elements using the
appraisal guide.		 Satisfactory standard as
evidenced by a brief but
sufficient evaluation of
the research elements using the
appraisal guide.		 Unsatisfactory standard as
evidenced by a flawed
evaluation of
the research elements using
the guide.		 /10
Mark allocation 9-10 7-8 5-6 <5
Criterion Three
Discuss the significant
implications of the
research for
contemporary nursing
practice and standards
of care.		 Exceptionally high standard as
evidenced by an insightful
and comprehensive
discussion that includes
multiple relevant examples
regarding the significant
implications of the research for
contemporary nursing practice
and standards of care.		 High standard as evidenced by
a broad discussion supported
by a range of examples
regarding the significant
implications of the research for
contemporary nursing practice
and standards of care.		 Satisfactory standard as
evidenced by a brief but
sufficient discussion with some
examples regarding the
significant implications of the
research for contemporary
nursing practice and standards
of care.		 Unsatisfactory standard as
evidenced by an
underdeveloped discussion
with too few examples
regarding the significant
implications of the research
for contemporary nursing
practice and standards of
care.		 /10
Mark allocation 9-10 7-8 5-6 <5
Criterion Four
Use of the literature		 Exceptionally high standard as
evidenced by synthesis and
accurate integration of a		 High standard as evidenced by
synthesis and integration of a
range of good quality, credible		 Satisfactory standard as
evidenced by synthesis or
analysis and integration of some		 Unsatisfactory standard as
evidenced by a lack of
synthesis and integration of		 /8

2806NRS Research in Nursing – A3 Written Assignment – Report
7

Assessable
Elements		 EXEMPLARY
Exceptionally high quality of
performance or standard of
learning achievement.		 ACCOMPLISHED
High quality performance or
standard of learning
achievement.		 DEVELOPING
Satisfactory quality of
performance or standard of
learning achievement.		 BEGINNING
Unsatisfactory quality of
performance or standard of
learning achievement.		 TOTAL MARK
wide range of high quality,
credible evidence to support
ideas that are relevant to the
topic.		 evidence to support ideas that
are relevant to the topic.		 quality, credible evidence to
support ideas that are relevant
to the topic.		 poor-quality evidence
resulting a lack of support for
ideas that may not be
relevant to the topic.
Mark allocation 7 – 8 5 – 6 4 <4
Criterion Five
Presentation, grammar
and academic writing		 Exemplary demonstration of
academic writing standards;
Exemplary sentence and
paragraph structure, with few,
if any errors, exemplary and
overall logical flow, that
indicates a sophisticated
ability to communicate ideas
effectively.		 Sufficient demonstration of
academic writing standards;
appropriate sentence and
paragraph structure, with some
error and overall logical flow,
that indicates an effective ability
to communicate ideas
effectively.		 Some attempt to comply with
academic writing standards;
Developing sentence and
paragraph structure, and/or
there are some errors that
disrupt the logical flow or
communication of ideas.		 Does not comply with
academic writing
standards;
Poor sentence and
paragraph structure, and
poor logical flow
demonstrates an inability to
communicate ideas
effectively.		 /8
Mark allocation 7 – 8 5 – 6 4 <4
Criterion Six
Referencing		 Exceptionally high standard as
evidenced by exemplary use
of APA 7 format in-text and
reference list with no errors.		 High standard as evidenced by
the consistent use of APA 7
format in-text and reference list
with minimal errors.		 Satisfactory standard as
evidenced by the developing
use of APA 7 format in-text and
reference list, but with several
errors.		 Unsatisfactory standard as
evidenced by the beginning
or absent use of APA 7
format in-text and reference
list with many errors.		 /4
Mark allocation 4 3 2 <2
TOTAL /50

 

Tags: , , , , , , ,