Evidence-Based Practice Project Proposal PICOT Assignment
Evidence-Based Practice Project Proposal PICOT Assignment NUR 550
Evidence-Based Practice Project Proposal PICOT Assignment
ICOT Draft Name_____________________________________ Part 1: Propose a relevant problem for an evidence-based practice project. Explain why you selected this topic and how it is relevant to advance nursing practice. Include one research article that demonstrates support for the nursing practice problem. Incomprehensive handing off is one of the major nursing practice problems in the U. S. According to Roslan & Lim (2017), incomprehensive handoff implies communication breakdown during nurse-to-nurse shift change. This topic is chosen because it significantly impacts patients safety. It accounts for more than 70% of adverse medical events, and in-hospital deaths (Shahid & Thoman, 2018). The topic is relevant since inaccurate reporting of patient information can lead to medical errors, delay in treatment, and/or the formulation of inappropriate patients treatment pla
(Population/Problem, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome, and Time to achieve the outcome) is a method that helps clarify the qualities needed to create a good question out of a practice issue or problem affecting a population of focus.
The purpose of this assignment is to complete your for your selected nursing practice problem. Refer to your Evidence-Based Practice Project Proposal: Identification of Nursing Practice Problem assignment from Topic 1 to complete this
NUR 550 Evidence-Based Practice Project Proposal PICOT Assignment SLAYERS
assignment. If your nursing practice problem or PICOT required revision, include those revisions in this assignment. The final PICOT you develop in this assignment will provide the framework for developing your evidence-based practice project proposal. Use the PICOT-Final template to complete this assignment.
Refer to the Evidence-Based Practice Project Proposal Assignment Overview document for an overview of the evidence-based practice project proposal assignments.
You are required to cite at least four peer-reviewed sources to complete this assignment. Sources must be published within the last 5 years and appropriate for the assignment criteria and nursing content.
While APA style is not required for the body of this assignment, solid academic writing is expected, and documentation of sources should be presented using APA formatting guidelines, which can be found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center. NUR 550 Evidence-Based Practice Project Proposal PICOT Assignment
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
Course Code Class Code Assignment Title Total Points
NUR-550 NUR-550-O503 Evidence-Based Practice Project Proposal: PICOT 75.0
Criteria Percentage Unsatisfactory (0.00%) Less Than Satisfactory (80.00%) Satisfactory (88.00%) Blank (92.00%) Blank (100.00%)
Content 100.0%
Intervention (Revision) 8.0% The proposed intervention is not described, or the required revisions were not made for the described intervention. NA Revisions were made accordingly for the proposed intervention, but some information or detail is needed for accuracy or clarity. NA The proposed intervention is clearly described and relevant to the nursing practice problem and population. No revision was needed. NUR 550 Evidence-Based Practice Project Proposal PICOT Assignment
Population (Revision) 7.0% The population is not described, or the required revisions were not made for the population description. NA Revisions were made accordingly for the population description, but some information or detail is needed for accuracy or clarity. NA The population is thoroughly and accurately described. No revision was needed.
NUR 550 Evidence-Based Practice Project Proposal PICOT Assignment Comparison 10.0% A description of the comparison information is not included. A description of the comparison information is incomplete or incorrect. A description of the comparison information is included but lacks evidence and measurable outcomes. A description of the comparison information is complete and includes sufficient evidence and measurable outcomes. A description of the comparison information is extremely thorough with substantial evidence and measurable outcomes.
Outcome 10.0% A description of the outcome is not included. A description of the outcome is not included. A description of the outcome is included but lacks evidence. A description of the outcome is complete and includes sufficient evidence. A description of the outcome is extremely thorough with substantial evidence. NUR 550 Evidence-Based Practice Project Proposal PICOT Assignment
Timeline 10.0% A description of the timeline is not included. A description of the timeline is incomplete or incorrect. A description of the timeline is included but lacks evidence. A description of the timelines is complete and includes sufficient evidence. A description of the timeline is extremely thorough with substantial evidence.
Problem Statement 20.0% A problem statement is not included. The problem statement is incomplete. The problem statement is generally presented. There are some inaccuracies. More support is needed to justify or rationalize the problem. The problem statement is presented. Adequate support is provided to justify or rationalize the problem. The problem statement concisely describes the issue using strong support to rationalize and justify the problem.
PICOT 20.0% The PICOT statement is omitted. The PICOT statement is incomplete. The PICOT statement is presented but there some inaccuracies. The PICOT statement is presented. Some detail is needed. The PICOT statement concisely and accurately describes the problem.
Required Sources 5.0% Sources are not included. Number of required sources is only partially met. Number of required sources is met, but sources are outdated or inappropriate. Number of required sources is met. Sources are current, but not all sources are appropriate for the assignment criteria and nursing content. Number of required resources is met. Sources are current and appropriate for the assignment criteria and nursing content.
Topic 3 DQ 1
Discuss the ethical guidelines that would need to be implemented when conducting translational research. What are the ethical and legal considerations related to translating research into practice? Discuss what steps you would take as a member of a translational research team in order to establish ethical guidelines for conducting translational research.
Re: Topic 3 DQ 1
There are many ethical considerations when conducting translational research studies. The Health Care Research and Quality Act has developed guidelines to help lessen the risk of ethical issues from occurring. These guidelines include a focus on patient safety, quality of patient care and improving clinical practices while still trying to keep the costs low (DeNisco, 2021). As nurses we have agreed to an ethical duty to do no harm, and this applies just as much to research studies.
One of the biggest ethical considerations with translational research is the patient safety aspect. In my field of oncology, we have numerous clinical trials where we are comparing a new medication to the current standard of care. Although we still need a control arm to really assess the efficacy of the new medication, we hardly ever put the patient on a placebo. We cannot risk the patient who needs therapy right now to be not be given anything at all. That is why the oncology trials usually consist of the control arm with the patients receiving the current standard of care. Often times the trials also have a caveat where if the patient progresses on the standard of care, they can roll over into the other treatment arm which most likely is going to have better efficacy. There are also legal considerations with translational research such as patients informed consent and proper and accurate documentation.
As part of the research team, I would ensure that the research study has met certain core values such a merit and integrity, justice, beneficence, and respect. Merit and integrity will ensure the research is ethically designed. Justice will ensure the trial is equally distributed and diverse. We will weigh the risk versus benefit for beneficence and of course provide the utmost respect to the patients (A Congress Resource for Oncology and Haematology Specialists, 2020).
References
A Congress Resource for Oncology and Haematology Specialists. (2020, March 27). Ethical considerations in clinical trials, and responsibilities of a principal investigator. memoinOncology. Retrieved July 1, 2021, from https://memoinoncology.com/clinical-trials/ethical-considerations-in-clinical-trials-and-responsibilities-of-a-principal-investigator/
DeNisco, S. M. (2021). Advanced Practice Nursing: Essential Knowledge for the Profession (4th ed.). Jones & Bartlett Learning.
Re: Topic 3 DQ 1
Hi Kellie! I enjoyed reading your post and agree that oncology patients should not receive placebos given their state of health. I was once involved in a randomized research study as a participant. It actually involved a weight loss drug vs a placebo. As participants, we received detailed information regarding the research study and of course we were required to sign an informed consent and routinely had blood drawn. In addition, we were required to weigh whenever we were scheduled to meet with the researchers or nurses. Unfortunately, I developed a minor health issue and the principal investigator (PI) could not determine whether it was related to the study drug or not, so I had to withdraw from the study. As highlighted by Barrow et al. (2020), research participants have the right to withdraw from a study at any time without being subjected to repercussions.
References
Barrow, J.M., Brannan, G. D. & Khandhar, P. B. (2020). Research Ethics. StatPearls. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK459281/
Topic 3 DQ 2
Discuss the role of the Institutional Review Board. Discuss ethical research considerations specific to population health. How are respect for the persons, potential benefits and burdens of the research, and justice kept in balance? Provide an example.
Re: Topic 3 DQ 2
Institutional Review Board (IRB) was formed under the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to review and monitor translational research using human beings as subjects. IRB plays several roles not limited to approving or disapproving research proposals (Nurunnabi, 2014). For instance, for a study to be approved by IRB, some of the ethical requirements must be met, including informed consent, scientific validity, fair subject selection, respect for subjects, and many others. If the research lacks or fails to meet IRB requirements, the study can be disapproved or required to modify the design. Further, IRB has been assigned to offer training on how investigators can protect human subjects against harm during the research (Nurunnabi, 2014). Also, before investigators submit research proposals for funding, IRB must review the research proposals to determine whether ethical principles have been followed or not. Among the ethical research considerations specific to population health include fidelity, non-maleficence, and beneficence (DeCamp et al., 2018). Fidelity entails an individuals respect, trust, and autonomy that the investigator should consider before starting the research. Non-maleficence means do no harm to human subjects, and beneficence implies that the study should act in the patients best interests (DeCamp et al., 2018).
Indeed, investigators should ensure respect for the persons, potential benefits, and burden of the research, and justice is kept balance during translation research. For example, selected individuals should be treated as autonomous subjects and are entitled to absolute protection from harm. Investigators should ensure the research is in the patients best interests; that is, the findings will improve population health. Again, the cost associated with research should be reasonable and affordable. After the research, participants should be distributed with benefits of research fairly and equitably. Once an investigator puts all these factors into consideration, the research has been kept balance from an ethical point of view.
References
Dong, Y. (2017). Translational Research: Ethical Considerations. Sound Decisions: An
Undergraduate Bioethics Journal, 3(1), 2.
Hostiuc, S., Moldoveanu, A., Dasc?lu, M. I., Unnthorsson, R., Jóhannesson, Ó. I., & Marcus, I.
(2016). Translational researchthe need for a new bioethics approach. Journal of Translational Medicine, 14(1), 1-10.
Re: Topic 3 DQ 2
Listra,
It is notable that the four principles of medical ethics which are justice, nomaleficence, beneficence and autonomy have similarly been used in research projects all along. These principles are important and always act as a guide for clinicians and researchers as well when they are supposed to make decisions. Basically, the principle of non maleficience which states that one should do no harm plays a critical role in both fields (Carrese, et al., 2015). In the research field, this principle guides researchers that they should not subject participants to any harm which is an important guide especially when dealing with humans. This helps ensure that the researcher is fully aware of his research project and also ensures that he or she has carried out enough preparation such as literature review in the research project. Also, the principle of beneficence as you have stated, in research projects should always be focused on; by ensuring that the research findings are meant to benefit the participants. A good example of this is when carrying out research on a certain treatment option. This is one way that can help population health especially in times of a pandemic and they are seeking either treatment option or vaccination.
Reference
Carrese, J. A., Malek, J., Watson, K., Lehmann, L. S., Green, M. J., McCullough, L. B.,
& Doukas, D. J. (2015). The essential role of medical ethics education in achieving professionalism: the Romanell Report. Academic Medicine, 90(6), 744-752.
PICOT Final
Name_____________________________________
PICOT Question
P Population School-age children with obesity
Obesity among school-age children has reached epidemic levels in the United States. De Lorenzo et al. (2019) described obesity as significant public health concern since it affects the physical, psychological, and cardiovascular health of the affected populations. Data from 2015-2016 shows that 1 in 5 children in the United States aged 6 to 19 years has obesity, and the rate has tripled since the 1970s (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2018). Risk factors include poor eating habits, lack of physical activity, genetics, and negative childhood events. Therefore, immediate, evidence-based, and population-driven interventions are necessary to reduce the surging rates.
I Intervention Educating parents and children
Parents can help to reduce obesity rates by modeling healthy living among children. The outcomes can be improved when children understand the risks and can actively participate in obesity prevention activities. Educating parents and children on the benefits of reducing screen time is a practical nursing intervention since its goal is to promote healthy living by keeping children free from sedentary living. Parents and children should understand the risks that too much screen time poses and the need to be more physically active.
C Comparison No education
The comparison considered is no education for parents and children on the need to minimize screen time and regulation strategies. In this case, parents will apply self-taught strategies or knowledge acquired from social and mainstream media to control obesity. In this case, the difference in outcomes after educating parents and children, if any, would be primarily attributed to the nursing intervention.
O Outcome Reduced obesity rates
Educating parents and children on the implications of too much screen time is expected to be the foundation of behavior change. As a nursing intervention, the education program will improve knowledge on the connection between obesity in children and screen time as a risk factor. Minimizing screen time will lead to a proportional reduction in obesity rates among children, which has become a public health concern since its trend has taken an upward trajectory in the past decade (Skinner et al., 2018). Reducing obesity rates will also improve productivity in children and reduce overall health care costs since obesity is a leading cause of psychological and cardiovascular health problems (Sanyaolu et al., 2019). The overall outcome is creating a healthy populace by reducing obesity rates among school-age children.
T Timeframe Six months
It is possible to achieve the targeted outcome in six months. Parents are expected to start implementing the knowledge acquired immediately, and children are expected to change their behaviors instantly as far as screen time is concerned.
PICOT
Create a complete PICOT statement. In school-age children with obesity (P), can educating parents and children (I) compared to no education (C) reduce obesity rates (O) in six months (T)?
Problem Statement
Create a problem statement for your PICOT. You will use this problem statement throughout your final written paper.
School-age children are a vulnerable population at high risk of obesity. A significant proportion spends a lot of time on screens watching television, gaming, and social interaction, among other ways. Increased screen time is a leading cause of obesity due to intake of too much energy and lack of physical activity (Fang et al., 2019). Obesity puts children at risk of diabetes and cardiovascular, physical, and mental health problems. The increased illness burden increases health care costs and nurses workload, and evidence-based interventions are necessary.
References
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2018, Sep 18). Obesity. https://www.cdc.gov/healthyschools/obesity/index.htm
De Lorenzo, A., Gratteri, S., Gualtieri, P., Cammarano, A., Bertucci, P., & Di Renzo, L. (2019). Why primary obesity is a disease? Journal of Translational Medicine, 17(1), 1-13. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12967-019-1919-y
Fang, K., Mu, M., Liu, K., & He, Y. (2019). Screen time and childhood overweight/obesity: A systematic review and meta?analysis. Child: Care, Health and Development, 45(5), 744-753. https://doi.org/10.1111/cch.12701
Sanyaolu, A., Okorie, C., Qi, X., Locke, J., & Rehman, S. (2019). Childhood and adolescent obesity in the United States: A public health concern. Global Pediatric Health, 6, 2333794X19891305. https://doi.org/10.1177/2333794X19891305
Skinner, A. C., Ravanbakht, S. N., Skelton, J. A., Perrin, E. M., & Armstrong, S. C. (2018). Prevalence of obesity and severe obesity in US children, 19992016. Pediatrics, 141(3). https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2017-3459
Re: Topic 3 DQ 2
Under FDA regulations, an Institutional Review Board is group that has been formally designated to review and monitor biomedical research involving human subjects. The purpose of IRB review is to assure, both in advance and by periodic review, that appropriate steps are taken to protect the rights and welfare of humans participating as subjects in the research. To accomplish this purpose, IRBs use a group process to review research protocols and related materials (e.g., informed consent documents and investigator brochures) to ensure protection of the rights and welfare of human subjects of research (FDA, n.d).
From a public health perspective, it is important to recognize an ethical standard that respects community autonomy. This standard can be achieved by requiring community collaboration (ie, at a minimum, establishing a community advisory board) to protect against exploiting vulnerable populations, to ensure fair terms of cooperation, to ratify that the interventions to be tested are acceptable to community members, and to minimize potential misunderstandings about the research. Such community advisory boards should have responsibility for determining whether the research goals are valuable to local community members and the methods are acceptable before the research is allowed to proceed (Buchanan & Miller, 2006).
In this era of translational research, social injustice is one of the crucial ethical concerns. Resource-rich countries conducting translational medical research in resource-poor countries are common and if the results of the research are not expected to be beneficial/less beneficial to the resource-poor country, then arises the issue of social injustice and disparity. Examples include research undertaken on diseases that are rare or the resulting intervention/product is too expensive to implement, in developing countries (Mandal et al., 2017).
References
Buchanan, D. R., & Miller, F. G. (2006). A public health perspective on research ethics. Journal of medical ethics, 32(12), 729733. https://doi.org/10.1136/jme.2006.015891
Mandal, J., Ponnambath, D. K., & Parija, S. C. (2017). Ethics of translational medical research. Tropical parasitology, 7(2), 6264.
FDA (n.d). Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) and Protection of Human Subjects in Clinical Trials. Retrieved from https://www.fda.gov/about-fda/center-drug-evaluation-and-research-cder/institutional-review-boards-irbs-and-protection-human-subjects-clinical-trials
Course Code Class Code Assignment Title Total Points
NUR-550 NUR-550-O503 Evidence-Based Practice Project Proposal: PICOT 75.0
Criteria Percentage Unsatisfactory (0.00%) Less Than Satisfactory (80.00%) Satisfactory (88.00%) Blank (92.00%) Blank (100.00%)
Content 100.0%
Population (Revision) 7.0% The population is not described, or the required revisions were not made for the population description. NA Revisions were made accordingly for the population description, but some information or detail is needed for accuracy or clarity. NA The population is thoroughly and accurately described. No revision was needed.
Intervention (Revision) 8.0% The proposed intervention is not described, or the required revisions were not made for the described intervention. NA Revisions were made accordingly for the proposed intervention, but some information or detail is needed for accuracy or clarity. NA The proposed intervention is clearly described and relevant to the nursing practice problem and population. No revision was needed.
Comparison 10.0% A description of the comparison information is not included. A description of the comparison information is incomplete or incorrect. A description of the comparison information is included but lacks evidence and measurable outcomes. A description of the comparison information is complete and includes sufficient evidence and measurable outcomes. A description of the comparison information is extremely thorough with substantial evidence and measurable outcomes.
Outcome 10.0% A description of the outcome is not included. A description of the outcome is not included. A description of the outcome is included but lacks evidence. A description of the outcome is complete and includes sufficient evidence. A description of the outcome is extremely thorough with substantial evidence
Timeline 10.0% A description of the timeline is not included. A description of the timeline is incomplete or incorrect. A description of the timeline is included but lacks evidence. A description of the timelines is complete and includes sufficient evidence. A description of the timeline is extremely thorough with substantial evidence.
PICOT 20.0% The PICOT statement is omitted. The PICOT statement is incomplete. The PICOT statement is presented but there some inaccuracies. The PICOT statement is presented. Some detail is needed. The PICOT statement concisely and accurately describes the problem.
Problem Statement 20.0% A problem statement is not included. The problem statement is incomplete. The problem statement is generally presented. There are some inaccuracies. More support is needed to justify or rationalize the problem. The problem statement is presented. Adequate support is provided to justify or rationalize the problem. The problem statement concisely describes the issue using strong support to rationalize and justify the problem.
Required Sources 5.0% Sources are not included. Number of required sources is only partially met. Number of required sources is met, but sources are outdated or inappropriate. Number of required sources is met. Sources are current, but not all sources are appropriate for the assignment criteria and nursing content. Number of required resources is met. Sources are current and appropriate for the assignment criteria and nursing content.
Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, and language use) 5.0% Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is employed. 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. 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. 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. The writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.
Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style) 5.0% Sources are not documented. Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors. Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present. Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct. Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error.
