NRS 433 PICOT Question and Literature Search
NRS 433 PICOT Question and Literature Search
NRS 433 PICOT Question and Literature Search
For this project, you will develop a question, which is a type of clinical guiding question. The PICOT question must be related to a problem in nursing practice. Identify six peer-reviewed research articles to support your PICOT question, as shown below. The PICOT question you choose, as well as six peer-reviewed research articles, will be used in later tasks.
The first step of the evidence-based practice process is to evaluate a nursing practice environment to identify a nursing problem in the clinical area. When a nursing problem is discovered, the nurse researcher develops a clinical guiding question to address that nursing practice problem.
Use the Literature Evaluation Table to complete this assignment.
Select a nursing practice problem of interest to use as the focus of your research. Start with the patient population and identify a clinical problem or issue that arises from the patient population. In 200250 words, provide a summary of the clinical issue.
Following the PICOT format, write a PICOT question in your selected nursing practice problem area of interest. The PICOT question should be applicable to your proposed capstone project (the project students must complete during their final course in the RN-BSN program of study).
The PICOT question will provide a framework for your capstone project.
Conduct a literature search to locate six research articles focused on your selected nursing practice problem of interest. This literature search should include three quantitative and three qualitative peer-reviewed research articles to support your nursing practice problem.
Note: To assist in your search, remove the words qualitative and quantitative and include words that narrow or broaden your main topic. For example: Search for diabetes and pediatric and dialysis. To determine what research design was used in the articles the search produced, review the abstract and the methods section of the article. The author will provide a description of data collection using qualitative or quantitative methods. Systematic Reviews, Literature Reviews, and Metanalysis articles are good resources and provide a strong level of evidence but are not considered primary research articles. Therefore, they should not be included in this assignment. NRS 433 PICOT Question and Literature Search
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.
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. NRS 433 PICOT Question and Literature Search
Attachments
Literature Search and PICOT Question
Issue or Problem of Interest
The hospital, clinics and nursing home facilities are encountering an expanding pace of falls of old patients and this is the issue for this situation Hence, instructing the older patient on technique they can actualize to diminish falls for a term of one year and a half is the proposed mediation that will help lessen falls with healthcare centers. Qualitative and quantitative investigations will be examined in this paper. The qualitative case study led by Al Tehewy, Amin, and Nassar (2015) and the qualitative investigation led by Pohl et al., (2015) will be broken down. As indicated by the investigation directed by Al Tehewy, Amin, and Nassar (2015), it is imperative to consider receiving measures that will help limit instances of falls and this should be possible my diminishing fall danger of patients experiencing diabetes and hypertension. The qualitative study directed by Pohl et al., (2015) centers around distinguishing proof of the measures that can be received so as to limit rates of falls among olderly patients. The study directed by Pohl et al., (2015) found that older patients are acquainted with information regarding to danger of falls. Therefore, the investigation performed by Pfortmueller, Lindner, Exadaktylos (2014) bolster the way that safety of old patent will be improved if avoidance measures are executed.
Falls among the old can be decreased through executing various measures. These measures should be executed in medical clinics or hospitals with the goal that the safety of patients can be improved. Prevention and identification of the hazard is one of the measures that ought to be executed. Other measure incorporates recognizable proof of embracing innovation in the distinguishing proof of the hazard utilizing technological gadgets. For this situation, sensor alarm innovation system will be utilized to reduce falls in the healthcare facilities.
There is critical need to think of modalities that will help upgrade safety of the old through diminishing fall hazard. As such, the qualitative and quantitative research will assume a basic job during advancement of the effective aversion measures. As per Al Tehewy, Amin, and Nassar (2015), distinguishing proof and aversion of danger of fall is one of the measures that can be actualized. Moreover, old patient inside healthcare settings can be taken through preparation and training programs that will help them know techniques that they can embrace so as to limit falls hazard
Course Code Class Code Assignment Title Total Points
NRS-433V NRS-433V-O500 PICOT Question and Literature Search 120.0
Criteria Percentage 1: Unsatisfactory (0.00%) 2: Less Than Satisfactory (75.00%) 3: Satisfactory (83.00%) 4: Good (94.00%) 5: Excellent (100.00%)
Content 80.0%
Summary of Clinical Issue 5.0% A clinical issue is omitted or is not relevant to nursing practice. A clinical issue is partially presented. It is unclear how the clinical issue relates to nursing practice. Significant aspects are missing, or there are inaccuracies. A clinical issue is summarized. The issue generally relates to nursing practice. A clinical issue is presented. The issue relates to nursing practice. Minor detail is needed for clarity. A clinical issue is thoroughly described. The issue relates to nursing practice.
PICOT Question 10.0% A PICOT question is not included. A PICOT question is provided but is incomplete. The PICOT question format is used incorrectly. A PICOT question is provided. The PICOT question format is generally applied. Some information or revision is needed. A PICOT question is provided. The PICOT question format is applied accurately. Some detail is need for support or clarity. A PICOT question is clearly presented. The PICOT question format is applied accurately and presents an answerable and researchable question.
APA-Formatted Article Citations With Permalinks 5.0% Article citations and permalinks are omitted. Article citations and permalinks are presented. There are significant errors in the APA format. One or more links do not lead to the intended article. Article citations and permalinks are presented. Article citations are presented in APA format, but there are errors. Article citations and permalinks are presented. Article citations are presented in APA format. There are minor errors. Article citations and permalinks are presented. Article citations are accurately presented in APA format.NRS 433 PICOT Question and Literature Search
Relationship of Articles to the PICOT Question 10.0% Three or more articles do not relate to the PICOT question. At least two articles do not relate to the PICOT question. The remaining articles provide a small degree of support for the PICOT question. Different articles are needed to provide better support for the PICOT question. At least one articles does not relate to the PICOT question. The remaining articles provide general support for the PICOT question. One or two different articles are needed to provide better support for the PICOT question. Each article relates to the PICOT question. The articles provide support for the PICOT question. Each article clearly relates to the PICOT question. The articles provide strong support for the PICOT question.
Quantitative and Qualitative Articles 10.0% Fewer than six research articles are presented. Four or more articles do not meet the assignment criteria for a quantitative, qualitative, Six research articles are presented. Three articles do not meet the assignment criteria for a quantitative, qualitative Six research articles are presented. Two articles do not meet the assignment criteria for a quantitative, qualitative, or mixed study. Some ability to identify the type of research design used in a study is demonstrated. Six research articles are presented. One article does not meet the assignment criteria for a quantitative, qualitative, or mixed study. A general ability to identify the type of research design used in a study is demonstrated. Six research articles are presented. Each article meets the assignment criteria for a quantitative, qualitative, or mixed study. An ability to identify the different types of research design used in a study is consistently demonstrated. NRS 433 PICOT Question and Literature Search
Purpose Statements 5.0% Purpose statements are omitted or are incomplete overall. Purpose statements are referenced but are incomplete in some areas. Purpose statements are presented. There are minor omissions in some areas, or major inaccuracies. Purpose statements summarized. There are some minor inaccuracies in some. Purpose statements are accurate and clearly summarized.
Research Questions 5.0% Research questions are omitted or are incomplete overall. Research question is presented for each article. The research question has been misidentified or misinterpreted for at least two of the articles. Additional information is needed to fully illustrate the research question for several of the articles. Research questions are presented. The research question has been misidentified or misinterpreted for one of the articles. Some detail is needed to fully illustrate the research question for one or two articles. Research questions are presented. Minor detail is needed for clarity in some areas. Research questions are accurate and capture the fundamental question posed by the researchers in each study.
Outcome 5.0% Research outcomes are omitted or are incomplete overall. Research outcome is presented for each article. The research outcome has been misidentified or misinterpreted for at least two of the articles. Additional information is needed to fully illustrate the research outcomes for several of the articles. Research outcomes are presented. The research outcome has been misidentified or misinterpreted for one of the articles. Some detail is needed to fully illustrate the research outcomes for one or two articles. Research outcomes are presented. Minor detail is needed for clarity in some areas. Research outcomes are accurate and described in detail for each article.
Setting 5.0% The setting is omitted for one or more of the articles. The setting described for three or more articles is inaccurate or incomplete. The setting is indicated for each article. The setting described for two of the articles is inaccurate or incomplete. The setting is indicated for each article. The setting described for one article is inaccurate or incomplete. The setting is indicated for each article. Some detail is needed to fully illustrate the physical, social, or cultural site in which the researcher conducted the study. The setting in which the researcher conducted the study is detailed and accurate for each article.
Sample 5.0% The sample is omitted for one or more of the articles. The sample described for three or more articles is inaccurate or incomplete. The sample is indicated for each article. The sample described for at least two of the articles is inaccurate or incomplete. The sample is indicated for each article. The sample described for one article is inaccurate or incomplete. The sample is indicated for each article. Minor detail is needed for accuracy. The sample is indicated and accurate for each article.
Method 5.0% Method of study for one or more articles is omitted. Overall, the methods of study are incomplete. The method of study is partially presented for each article. Key information is consistently omitted. Overall, the methods reported contain inaccuracies. The method of study for each article is presented. Some key aspects are missing for one or two articles, or there are some inaccuracies for the methods reported. A discussion on the method of study for each article is presented. A thorough discussion on the method of study for each article is presented.
Key Findings of the Study 5.0% Discussion of study results, including findings and implications for nursing practice, is incomplete. A summary of the study results includes findings and implications for nursing practice but lacks relevant details and explanation. There are some omissions or inaccuracies. Discussion of study results, including findings and implications for nursing practice, is generally presented for each article. Overall, the discussion includes some relevant details and explanation. Discussion of study results, including findings and implications for nursing practice, is complete and includes relevant details and explanation. Discussion of study results, including findings and implications for nursing practice, is thorough with relevant details and extensive explanation.
Recommendations of the Researcher 5.0% Researcher recommendations are omitted for one or more of the articles. The recommendations described for three or more articles are inaccurate or incomplete. Researcher recommendations are indicated for each article. The researcher recommendations described for two of the articles are inaccurate or incomplete. Researcher recommendations for each article are presented. Researcher recommendations described for one article are inaccurate or incomplete. Researcher recommendations for each article are accurately presented. Minor detail is needed for accuracy. Researcher recommendations accurate are thoroughly described for each article.
Organization and Effectiveness 10.0%
Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use) 10.0% Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is used. Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register), sentence structure, or word choice are present. Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are used. Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. A variety of sentence structures and effective figures of speech are used. Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.
Format 10.0%
Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style) 10.0% 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.
Resources
Collapse All ResourcesCollapse All
Literature Evaluation Table
Use the Literature Evaluation Table resource to complete the PICOT Question and Literature Search assignment.
Plagiarism
Read Plagiarism, located on the GCU Library website, for information on how to avoid plagiarism.
To Make Your Case, Start with a PICOT Question
Read To Make Your Case, Start with a PICOT Question, by Echevarria and Walker, from Nursing 2014 (2014).
Exploring the Evidence. Focusing on the Fundamentals: A Simplistic Differentiation Between Qualitative and Quantitative Research
Read Exploring the Evidence. Focusing on the Fundamentals: A Simplistic Differentiation Between Qualitative and Quantitative Researc
Read More
Adopting Evidence-Based Practice in Clinical Decision Making: Nurses Perceptions, Knowledge, and Barriers
Read Adopting Evidence-Based Practice in Clinical Decision Making: Nurses Perceptions, Knowledge, and Barriers, by Majid et al
Read More
Nursing Research: Understanding Methods for Best Practice
Read Chapter 1 in Nursing Research: Understanding Methods for Best Practice.
Writing in APA
View the Writing in APA tutorial, located in the Writing Center in the Student Success Center.
APA Basics
Reference the APA Basics information, located on the GCU Library website, to assist with the APA format and documentation of so
Read More
EBP: Evidence Based Practice
Read EBP: Evidence Based Practice, located in the Student Success Center.
Formulating a Researchable Question: A Criticle Step for Facilitating Good Clinical Research
Read Formulating a Researchable Question: A Criticle Step for Facilitating Good Clinical Research, by Aslam and Emmanuel, from
Read More
Searching Nursing Databases
Read the strategies and tips located on Searching Nursing Databases on the GCU Library website to assist you in searching the m
Read More
GCU Library Research Guides: Citing Sources
Reference the GCU Library Research Guides: Citing Sources resource for information on how to cite sources properly.
Chapter 7: The Evidence for Evidence-Based Practice Implementation
Read Chapter 7: The Evidence for Evidence-Based Practice Implementation, by Titler, from the online eBook, Patient Saf
Read More
Library Walk Through Tutorial
View the Library Walk Through Tutorial.
PICOT Question and Literature Search Rubric
Collapse All PICOT Question And Literature Search RubricCollapse All
Summary of Clinical Issue
6 points
Criteria Description
Summary of Clinical Issue
5. 5: Excellent
6 points
A clinical issue is thoroughly described. The issue relates to nursing practice.
4. 4: Good
5.64 points
A clinical issue is presented. The issue relates to nursing practice. Minor detail is needed for clarity.
3. 3: Satisfactory
4.98 points
A clinical issue is summarized. The issue generally relates to nursing practice.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory
4.5 points
A clinical issue is partially presented. It is unclear how the clinical issue relates to nursing practice. Significant aspects are missing, or there are inaccuracies.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
A clinical issue is omitted or is not relevant to nursing practice.
PICOT Question
12 points
Criteria Description
PICOT Question
5. 5: Excellent
12 points
A PICOT question is clearly presented. The PICOT question format is applied accurately and presents an answerable and researchable question.
4. 4: Good
11.28 points
A PICOT question is provided. The PICOT question format is applied accurately. Some detail is need for support or clarity.
3. 3: Satisfactory
9.96 points
A PICOT question is provided. The PICOT question format is generally applied. Some information or revision is needed.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory
9 points
A PICOT question is provided but is incomplete. The PICOT question format is used incorrectly.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
A PICOT question is not included.
APA-Formatted Article Citations With Permalinks
6 points
Criteria Description
APA-Formatted Article Citations With Permalinks
5. 5: Excellent
6 points
Article citations and permalinks are presented. Article citations are accurately presented in APA format.
4. 4: Good
5.64 points
Article citations and permalinks are presented. Article citations are presented in APA format. There are minor errors.
3. 3: Satisfactory
4.98 points
Article citations and permalinks are presented. Article citations are presented in APA format, but there are errors.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory
4.5 points
Article citations and permalinks are presented. There are significant errors in the APA format. One or more links do not lead to the intended article.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
Article citations and permalinks are omitted.
Relationship of Articles to the PICOT Question
12 points
Criteria Description
Relationship of Articles to the PICOT Question
5. 5: Excellent
12 points
Each article clearly relates to the PICOT question. The articles provide strong support for the PICOT question.
4. 4: Good
11.28 points
Each article relates to the PICOT question. The articles provide support for the PICOT question.
3. 3: Satisfactory
9.96 points
At least one articles does not relate to the PICOT question. The remaining articles provide general support for the PICOT question. One or two different articles are needed to provide better support for the PICOT question.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory
9 points
At least two articles do not relate to the PICOT question. The remaining articles provide a small degree of support for the PICOT question. Different articles are needed to provide better support for the PICOT question.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
Three or more articles do not relate to the PICOT question.
Quantitative and Qualitative Articles
12 points
Criteria Description
Quantitative and Qualitative Articles
5. 5: Excellent
12 points
Six research articles are presented. Each article meets the assignment criteria for a quantitative, qualitative, or mixed study. An ability to identify the different types of research design used in a study is consistently demonstrated.
4. 4: Good
11.28 points
Six research articles are presented. One article does not meet the assignment criteria for a quantitative, qualitative, or mixed study. A general ability to identify the type of research design used in a study is demonstrated.
3. 3: Satisfactory
9.96 points
Six research articles are presented. Two articles do not meet the assignment criteria for a quantitative, qualitative, or mixed study. Some ability to identify the type of research design used in a study is demonstrated.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory
9 points
Six research articles are presented. Three articles do not meet the assignment criteria for a quantitative, qualitative
1. 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
Fewer than six research articles are presented. Four or more articles do not meet the assignment criteria for a quantitative, qualitative,
Purpose Statements
6 points
Criteria Description
Purpose Statements
5. 5: Excellent
6 points
Purpose statements are accurate and clearly summarized.
4. 4: Good
5.64 points
Purpose statements summarized. There are some minor inaccuracies in some.
3. 3: Satisfactory
4.98 points
Purpose statements are presented. There are minor omissions in some areas, or major inaccuracies.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory
4.5 points
Purpose statements are referenced but are incomplete in some areas.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
Purpose statements are omitted or are incomplete overall.
Research Questions
6 points
Criteria Description
Research Questions
5. 5: Excellent
6 points
Research questions are accurate and capture the fundamental question posed by the researchers in each study.
4. 4: Good
5.64 points
Research questions are presented. Minor detail is needed for clarity in some areas.
3. 3: Satisfactory
4.98 points
Research questions are presented. The research question has been misidentified or misinterpreted for one of the articles. Some detail is needed to fully illustrate the research question for one or two articles.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory
4.5 points
Research question is presented for each article. The research question has been misidentified or misinterpreted for at least two of the articles. Additional information is needed to fully illustrate the research question for several of the articles.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
Research questions are omitted or are incomplete overall.
Outcome
6 points
Criteria Description
Outcome
5. 5: Excellent
6 points
Research outcomes are accurate and described in detail for each article.
4. 4: Good
5.64 points
Research outcomes are presented. Minor detail is needed for clarity in some areas.
3. 3: Satisfactory
4.98 points
Research outcomes are presented. The research outcome has been misidentified or misinterpreted for one of the articles. Some detail is needed to fully illustrate the research outcomes for one or two articles.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory
4.5 points
Research outcome is presented for each article. The research outcome has been misidentified or misinterpreted for at least two of the articles. Additional information is needed to fully illustrate the research outcomes for several of the articles.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
Research outcomes are omitted or are incomplete overall.
Setting
6 points
Criteria Description
Setting
5. 5: Excellent
6 points
The setting in which the researcher conducted the study is detailed and accurate for each article.
4. 4: Good
5.64 points
The setting is indicated for each article. Some detail is needed to fully illustrate the physical, social, or cultural site in which the researcher conducted the study.
3. 3: Satisfactory
4.98 points
The setting is indicated for each article. The setting described for one article is inaccurate or incomplete.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory
4.5 points
The setting is indicated for each article. The setting described for two of the articles is inaccurate or incomplete.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
The setting is omitted for one or more of the articles. The setting described for three or more articles is inaccurate or incomplete.
Sample
6 points
Criteria Description
Sample
5. 5: Excellent
6 points
The sample is indicated and accurate for each article.
4. 4: Good
5.64 points
The sample is indicated for each article. Minor detail is needed for accuracy.
3. 3: Satisfactory
4.98 points
The sample is indicated for each article. The sample described for one article is inaccurate or incomplete.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory
4.5 points
The sample is indicated for each article. The sample described for at least two of the articles is inaccurate or incomplete.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
The sample is omitted for one or more of the articles. The sample described for three or more articles is inaccurate or incomplete.
Method
6 points
Criteria Description
Method
5. 5: Excellent
6 points
A thorough discussion on the method of study for each article is presented.
4. 4: Good
5.64 points
A discussion on the method of study for each article is presented.
3. 3: Satisfactory
4.98 points
The method of study for each article is presented. Some key aspects are missing for one or two articles, or there are some inaccuracies for the methods reported.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory
4.5 points
The method of study is partially presented for each article. Key information is consistently omitted. Overall, the methods reported contain inaccuracies.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
Method of study for one or more articles is omitted. Overall, the methods of study are incomplete.
Key Findings of the Study
6 points
Criteria Description
Key Findings of the Study
5. 5: Excellent
6 points
Discussion of study results, including findings and implications for nursing practice, is thorough with relevant details and extensive explanation.
4. 4: Good
5.64 points
Discussion of study results, including findings and implications for nursing practice, is complete and includes relevant details and explanation.
3. 3: Satisfactory
4.98 points
Discussion of study results, including findings and implications for nursing practice, is generally presented for each article. Overall, the discussion includes some relevant details and explanation.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory
4.5 points
A summary of the study results includes findings and implications for nursing practice but lacks relevant details and explanation. There are some omissions or inaccuracies.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
Discussion of study results, including findings and implications for nursing practice, is incomplete.
Recommendations of the Researcher
6 points
Criteria Description
Recommendations of the Researcher
5. 5: Excellent
6 points
Researcher recommendations accurate are thoroughly described for each article.
4. 4: Good
5.64 points
Researcher recommendations for each article are accurately presented. Minor detail is needed for accuracy.
3. 3: Satisfactory
4.98 points
Researcher recommendations for each article are presented. Researcher recommendations described for one article are inaccurate or incomplete.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory
4.5 points
Researcher recommendations are indicated for each article. The researcher recommendations described for two of the articles are inaccurate or incomplete.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
Researcher recommendations are omitted for one or more of the articles. The recommendations described for three or more articles are inaccurate or incomplete.
Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)
12 points
Criteria Description
Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)
5. 5: Excellent
12 points
Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.
4. 4: Good
11.28 points
Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. A variety of sentence structures and effective figures of speech are used.
3. 3: Satisfactory
9.96 points
Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are used.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory
9 points
Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register), sentence structure, or word choice are present.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is used.
Documentation of Sources
12 points
Criteria Description
Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style)
5. 5: Excellent
12 points
Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error.
4. 4: Good
11.28 points
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct.
3. 3: Satisfactory
9.96 points
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present.
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory
9 points
Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.
1. 1: Unsatisfactory
0 points
Sources are not documented.
Total 120 points
Rubric Criteria
Total 120 points
Criterion
1. 1: Unsatisfactory
2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory
3. 3: Satisfactory
4. 4: Good
5. 5: Excellent
PICOT Question
PICOT Question
0 points
A PICOT question is not included.
9 points
A PICOT question is provided but is incomplete. The PICOT question format is used incorrectly.
9.96 points
A PICOT question is provided. The PICOT question format is generally applied. Some information or revision is needed.
11.28 points
A PICOT question is provided. The PICOT question format is applied accurately. Some detail is need for support or clarity.
12 points
A PICOT question is clearly presented. The PICOT question format is applied accurately and presents an answerable and researchable question.
Relationship of Articles to the PICOT Question
Relationship of Articles to the PICOT Question
0 points
Three or more articles do not relate to the PICOT question.
9 points
At least two articles do not relate to the PICOT question. The remaining articles provide a small degree of support for the PICOT question. Different articles are needed to provide better support for the PICOT question.
9.96 points
At least one articles does not relate to the PICOT question. The remaining articles provide general support for the PICOT question. One or two different articles are needed to provide better support for the PICOT question.
11.28 points
Each article relates to the PICOT question. The articles provide support for the PICOT question.
12 points
Each article clearly relates to the PICOT question. The articles provide strong support for the PICOT question.
Setting
Setting
0 points
The setting is omitted for one or more of the articles. The setting described for three or more articles is inaccurate or incomplete.
4.5 points
The setting is indicated for each article. The setting
