Your Perfect Assignment is Just a Click Away

Starting at $8.00 per Page

100% Original, Plagiarism Free, Customized to Your instructions!

glass
pen
clip
papers
heaphones

Compare and contrast differences and similarities of qualitative, quantitative, and mixed method designs

Compare and contrast differences and similarities of qualitative, quantitative, and mixed method designs

 

The purpose of this assignment is to document sources of research evidence that address a national practice problem, including the level and quality of each source of research evidence. A synthesis of the evidence is conducted to determine the overall strength and quality of the evidence. The development of an evidence table and synthesis are foundational to inform actions and decisions to improve healthcare outcomes. Construction of an evidence table and synthesis supports professional formation of the DNP practice scholar.

Course Outcomes

This assignment enables the student to meet the following course outcomes.

  • Compare and contrast differences and similarities of qualitative, quantitative, and mixed method designs. (POs 3, 9)
  • Analyze qualitative and quantitative data for the purposes of critical appraisal of evidence. (POs 3, 9)
  • Appraise systematic reviews for translation science. (POs 3, 5, 9)
  • Evaluate selected statistical methods for the purposes of critical appraisal of evidence. (POs 3, 5, 9)
  • Synthesize literature relevant to practice problems. (POs 3, 5, 9)

PRACTICE PROBLEM WAS:  UNDER DIAGNOSIS OF DIABETES: CAUSE, EFFECTS AND RISK FACTORS

TOTAL POSSIBLE POINTS: 300

Preparing The Assignment

Follow these guidelines when completing each component of this assignment. Contact your course faculty if you have questions. It is each student’s responsibility to save and maintain all artifacts required in the e-Portfolio (Links to an external site.).

  1. The assignment will include the following components.
    1. Title Page
    2. Introduction
      1. Purpose Statement
      2. Practice Problem Identification (identified in Weeks 1, 2, and 3 Discussion) (cited)
      3. Sources of Research Evidence Identification (identified in Weeks 1, 2, and 3 Discussion) (cited)
    3. Implications of the Practice Problem at the National Level and Local Level (1–2 paragraphs)
      1. Significance
      2. Prevalence
      3. Economic Ramifications
    4. Synthesis of Evidence to Address the Selected Practice Problem, Including 2 Qualitative Research Studies, 2 Quantitative Research Studies, and 2 Systemactic Reviews (identified in Weeks 1, 2, and 3 Discussions) (2 paragraphs)
      1. Main Points/Salient Messages That Emerge From the Sources (Cited)
      2. Compare and Contrast Main Points From All Sources (Cited)
      3. Objective Discussion of Facts
    5. Appraisal of the Evidence to Address the Selected Practice Problem (1–2 paragraphs)
      1. Level of Evidence
      2. Quality Rating of Evidence
      3. Suitability of the Evidence to Address the Practice Problem
    6. Summary Tables of Evidence to Address the Selected Practice Problem Using the Johns Hopkins Nursing Evidence-Based Practice Evidence Summary Tool (Links to an external site.)
      1. 2 Qualitative Research Studies (identified in Week 1 Discussion)
      2. 2 Quantitative Research Studies (identified in Week 2 Discussion)
      3. 2 Systematic Reviews (identified in Week 3 Discussion)
    7. Conclusion
      1. Summation of the Impact of the Practice Problem at the National Level and Local Level
      2. Summation of the Appraisal of Evidence to Address the Practice Problem
      3. Summation of the Evidence Synthesis
    8. References
      1. Reference Page With Complete References for the 6 Sources of Research Evidence
    9. APA Style and Organization
      1. APA Standards for Scholarly Papers
      2. Grammar and Mechanics
      3. Level I Headings are included

All Chamberlain University policies related to plagiarism must be observed. This written assignment will be screened for originality by Turnitin.

Rubric

Week 6—Evidence Synthesis Grading RubricWeek 6—Evidence Synthesis Grading RubricCriteriaRatingsPtsThis criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeIntroductionRequirements 1. Includes a focused purpose statement 2. Identifies selected practice problem 3. Identifies sources of research evidence30.0 ptsIncludes no fewer than 3 requirements.26.0 ptsIncludes no fewer than 2 requirements23.0 ptsIncludes no less than 1 requirements.0.0 ptsNo requirements for this section presented.30.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeImplications of the Practice Problem at the National Level and Local LevelRequirements 1. Describes the significance of the practice problem at the national level and local level 2. Discusses the prevalence of the practice problem at the national level and local level 3. Discusses the economic ramifications of the practice problem at the national level and local level40.0 ptsIncludes no fewer than 3 requirements35.0 ptsIncludes no fewer than 2 requirements31.0 ptsIncludes no fewer than 1 requirement0.0 ptsNo requirements for this section presented40.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeEvidence SynthesisRequirements 1. Describes scope of the evidence synthesis 2. Discusses the main points of sources (sources are cited) 3. Describes the relationship of sources to other selected sources (sources are cited) 4. Discusses facts objectively 5. Presents ideas and claims (sources are cited)50.0 ptsIncludes no fewer than 5 requirements43.0 ptsIncludes no fewer than 4 requirements38.0 ptsIncludes no fewer than 2 requirements0.0 ptsNo requirements for this section presented50.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeEvidence AppraisalRequirements 1. Describes the levels of evidence 2. Discusses the quality of evidence 3. Discusses the suitability of the evidence to address the practice problem50.0 ptsIncludes no fewer than 3 requirements43.0 ptsIncludes no fewer than 2 requirements38.0 ptsIncludes no fewer than 1 requirement0.0 ptsNo requirements for this section presented50.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeEvidence Summary ToolRequirements 1 Provides complete summary for first qualitative research study 2 Provides complete summary for second qualitative research study 3 Provides complete summary for first quantitative research study 4 Provides complete summary for second quantitative research study 5 Provides complete summary for first systematic review 6 Provides complete summary for second systematic review40.0 ptsIncludes no fewer than 6 requirements35.0 ptsIncludes no fewer than 5 requirements31.0 ptsIncludes no fewer than 4 requirements0.0 ptsNo requirements for this section presented40.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeConclusionRequirements 1. Includes a summation of the impact of the practice problem at the national level 2. Includes a summation of the evidence appraisal 3. Includes a summation of the evidence synthesis30.0 ptsIncludes no fewer than 3 requirements26.0 ptsIncludes no fewer than 2 requirements23.0 ptsIncludes no fewer than 1 requirement0.0 ptsNo requirements for this section presented30.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeReferencesRequirements 1. Cites and references for 6 selected sources of evidence30.0 ptsIncludes no fewer than 6 complete references26.0 ptsIncludes no fewer than 5 complete references23.0 ptsIncludes no fewer than 4 complete references0.0 ptsNo requirements for this section presented30.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAPA Style and OrganizationRequirements 1. Uses APA standards for scholarly papers 2. Grammar and mechanics are free of errors 3. Uses required evidence summary table 4. Uses required Level I Headings30.0 ptsIncludes no fewer than 4 requirements26.0 ptsIncludes no fewer than 3 requirements23.0 ptsIncludes no fewer than 1 requirement0.0 ptsNo requirements for this section presented30.0 pts
Total Points: 300.0PreviousNext


"Place your order now for a similar assignment and have exceptional work written by our team of experts, guaranteeing you A results."

Order Solution Now

Our Service Charter


1. Professional & Expert Writers: Ace Papers only hires the best. Our writers are specially selected and recruited, after which they undergo further training to perfect their skills for specialization purposes. Moreover, our writers are holders of masters and Ph.D. degrees. They have impressive academic records, besides being native English speakers.

2. Top Quality Papers: Our customers are always guaranteed of papers that exceed their expectations. All our writers have +5 years of experience. This implies that all papers are written by individuals who are experts in their fields. In addition, the quality team reviews all the papers before sending them to the customers.

3. Plagiarism-Free Papers: All papers provided by Ace Papers are written from scratch. Appropriate referencing and citation of key information are followed. Plagiarism checkers are used by the Quality assurance team and our editors just to double-check that there are no instances of plagiarism.

4. Timely Delivery: Time wasted is equivalent to a failed dedication and commitment. Ace Papers is known for the timely delivery of any pending customer orders. Customers are well informed of the progress of their papers to ensure they keep track of what the writer is providing before the final draft is sent for grading.

5. Affordable Prices: Our prices are fairly structured to fit in all groups. Any customer willing to place their assignments with us can do so at very affordable prices. In addition, our customers enjoy regular discounts and bonuses.

6. 24/7 Customer Support: At Ace Papers, we have put in place a team of experts who answer all customer inquiries promptly. The best part is the ever-availability of the team. Customers can make inquiries anytime.