NURS 6052 MODULE 3 WEEK 4 DISCUSSION: SEARCHING DATABASES

NURS 6052 MODULE 3 WEEK 4 DISCUSSION: SEARCHING DATABASES

NURS 6052 MODULE 3 WEEK 4 DISCUSSION: SEARCHING DATABASES

SEARCHING DATABASES
When you decide to purchase a new car, you first decide what is important to you. If mileage and dependability are the important factors, you will search for data focused more on these factors and less on color options and sound systems.

The same holds true when searching for research evidence to guide your clinical inquiry and professional decisions. Developing a formula for an answerable, researchable question that addresses your need will make the search process much more effective. One such formula is the PICO(T) format.

In this Discussion, you will transform a clinical inquiry into a searchable question in PICO(T) format, so you can search the electronic databases more effectively and efficiently. You will share this PICO(T) question and examine strategies you might use to increase the rigor and effectiveness of a database search on your PICO(T) question.

ORDER A CUSTOMIZED, PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE

Good News For Our New customers . We can write this assignment for you and pay after Delivery. Our Top -rated medical writers will comprehensively review instructions , synthesis external evidence sources(Scholarly) and customize a quality assignment for you. We will also attach a copy of plagiarism report alongside and AI report. Feel free to chat Us

RESOURCES

Be sure to review the Learning Resources before completing this activity.

Click the weekly resources link to access the resources.

WEEKLY RESOURCES

LEARNING RESOURCES
Required Readings
Melnyk, B. M., & Fineout-Overholt, E. (2018). Evidence-based practice in nursing & healthcare: A guide to best practice (4th ed.). Philadelphia, PA: Wolters Kluwer.
Chapter 2, “Asking Compelling Clinical Questions” (pp. 33–54)
Chapter 3, “Finding Relevant Evidence to Answer Clinical Questions” (pp. 55–92)
Davies, K. S. (2011). Formulating the evidence based practice question: A review of the frameworks

Links to an external site.
for LIS professionals. Evidence Based Library and Information Practice, 6(2), 75–80.
Library of Congress. (n.d.). Search/browse help – Boolean operators and nesting

Links to an external site.
. Retrieved September 19, 2018, from https://catalog.loc.gov/vwebv/ui/en_US/htdocs/help/searchBoolean.html
Stillwell, S. B., Fineout-Overholt, E., Melnyk, B. M., & Williamson, K. M. (2010). Evidence-based practice, step by step: Asking the clinical question: A key step in evidence-based practice.

Links to an external site.
American Journal of Nursing, 110(3), 58–61.
Melnyk, B. M., Fineout-Overholt, E., Stillwell, S. B., & Williamson, K. M. (2009).Evidence-based practice: Step by step: Igniting a spirit of inquiry

Links to an external site.
.

Links to an external site.
American Journal of Nursing, 109(11), 49–52. doi:10.1097/01.NAJ.0000363354.53883.58
Stillwell, S.B., Fineout-Overhold, E., Melnyk, B.M., & Williamson, K.M. (2010). Evidence-based practice step-by-step: Searching for evidence.

Links to an external site.
American Journal of Nursing, 110(5), 41-47.
Walden University Library. (n.d.-a). Databases A-Z: Nursing

Links to an external site.
. Retrieved September 6, 2019, from https://academicguides.waldenu.edu/az.php?s=19981
Walden University Library. (n.d.-c).Evidence-based practice research: CINAHL search help

Links to an external site.
. Retrieved September 6, 2019, from https://academicguides.waldenu.edu/library/healthevidence/cinahlsearchhelp
Walden University Library. (n.d.-d). Evidence-based practice research: Joanna Briggs Institute search help

Links to an external site.
. Retrieved September 6, 2019, from https://academicguides.waldenu.edu/library/healthevidence/jbisearchhelp
Walden University Library. (n.d.-e). Evidence-based practice research: MEDLINE search help

Links to an external site.
. Retrieved September 6, 2019, from https://academicguides.waldenu.edu/library/healthevidence/medlinesearchhelp
Walden University Library. (n.d.-f). Keyword searching: Finding articles on your topic: Boolean terms

Links to an external site.
. Retrieved September 19, 2018, from http://academicguides.waldenu.edu/library/keyword/boolean
Walden University Library. (n.d.-g). Keyword searching: Finding articles on your topic: Introduction to keyword searching

Links to an external site.
. Retrieved September 19, 2018, from http://academicguides.waldenu.edu/library/keyword/searching-basics
Walden University Library. (n.d.-h). Quick Answers: How do I find a systematic review article related to health, medicine, or nursing?

Links to an external site.
Retrieved September 6, 2019, from https://academicanswers.waldenu.edu/faq/72670
Walden University Library. (n.d.-i). Systematic review.

Links to an external site.
Retrieved January 22, 2020, from https://academicguides.waldenu.edu/library/healthevidence/types#s-lg-box-1520654
Required Media
Walden University, LLC. (Producer). (2018). Searching the Evidence [Video file]. Baltimore, MD: Author.

To Prepare:

Review the Resources and identify a clinical issue of interest that can form the basis of a clinical inquiry.
Review the materials offering guidance on using databases, performing keyword searches, and developing PICO(T) questions provided in the Resources.
Based on the clinical issue of interest and using keywords related to the clinical issue of interest, search at least two different databases in the Walden Library to identify at least four relevant peer-reviewed articles related to your clinical issue of interest. You should not be using systematic reviews for this assignment, select original research articles.
Review the Resources for guidance and develop a PICO(T) question of interest to you for further study. It is suggested that an Intervention-type PICOT question be developed as these seem to work best for this course.
*Library tip:

Walden Library recommends starting your search broadly with one concept or search word and adding more elements one at a time. Depending on your topic, the evidence will not necessarily address all the aspects of your PICO(T) question in one article. Select the most important concepts to search and find the best evidence available, even if that means assembling evidence from multiple articles.

Nursing Research Page

Links to an external site.
– databases and resources specifically for Nursing
Evidence-Based Practice guide: Evidence Types
Links to an external site.
Nursing and Health research videos

Links to an external site.
, including a 15-minute introduction
Get Help

Links to an external site.
page, including Ask a Librarian

Links to an external site.
service
Quick Answers:

How do I find an article that reports on research that uses a specific methodology?
Links to an external site.
How do I find original or primary research that analyzes empirical data?
Links to an external site.
What is the Find at Walden button?
Links to an external site.
BY DAY 3 OF WEEK 4
Post a brief description of your clinical issue of interest. This clinical issue will remain the same for the entire course and will be the basis for the development of your PICOT question. Describe your search results in terms of the number of articles returned on original research and how this changed as you added search terms using your Boolean operators. Finally, explain strategies you might make to increase the rigor and effectiveness of a database search on your PICO(T) question. Be specific and provide examples.

BY DAY 6 OF WEEK 4
Respond to at least two of your colleagues on two different days and provide further suggestions on how their database search might be improved.

ORDER A CUSTOMIZED, PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE

NURS_6052_Module03_Week04_Discussion_Rubric

NURS_6052_Module03_Week04_Discussion_Rubric

CriteriaRatingsPtsThis criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome

Main Posting50 to >44.0 pts

Excellent

Answers all parts of the discussion question(s) expectations with reflective critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources. … Supported by at least three current, credible sources. … Written clearly and concisely with no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.

44 to >39.0 pts

Good

Responds to the discussion question(s) and is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module. … At least 75% of post has exceptional depth and breadth. … Supported by at least three credible sources. … Written clearly and concisely with one or no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.

39 to >34.0 pts

Fair

Responds to some of the discussion question(s). … One or two criteria are not addressed or are superficially addressed. … Is somewhat lacking reflection and critical analysis and synthesis. … Somewhat represents knowledge gained from the course readings for the module. … Post is cited with two credible sources. … Written somewhat concisely; may contain more than two spelling or grammatical errors. … Contains some APA formatting errors.

34 to >0 pts

Poor

Does not respond to the discussion question(s) adequately. … Lacks depth or superficially addresses criteria. … Lacks reflection and critical analysis and synthesis. … Does not represent knowledge gained from the course readings for the module. … Contains only one or no credible sources. … Not written clearly or concisely. … Contains more than two spelling or grammatical errors. … Does not adhere to current APA manual writing rules and style.

50 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome

Main Post: Timeliness10 to >0.0 pts

Excellent

Posts main post by day 3.

0 pts

Poor

Does not post by day 3.

10 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome

First Response18 to >16.0 pts

Excellent

Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings. … Responds fully to questions posed by faculty. … Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources. … Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives. … Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues. … Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed. … Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.

16 to >14.0 pts

Good

Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings. … Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues. … Responses to faculty questions are answered, if posed. … Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources. … Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.

14 to >12.0 pts

Fair

Response is on topic and may have some depth. … Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication. … Responses to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed. …Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and a few or no credible sources are cited.

12 to >0 pts

Poor

Response may not be on topic and lacks depth. …Responses posted in the discussion lack effective professional communication. … Responses to faculty questions are missing. … No credible sources are cited.

18 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome

Second Response17 to >15.0 pts

Excellent

Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings. … Responds fully to questions posed by faculty. … Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources. … Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives. … Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues. … Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed. … Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.

15 to >13.0 pts

Good

Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings. … Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues. … Responses to faculty questions are answered, if posed. … Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources. … Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.

13 to >11.0 pts

Fair

Response is on topic and may have some depth. … Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication. … Responses to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed. … Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and a few or no credible sources are cited.

11 to >0 pts

Poor

Response may not be on topic and lacks depth. … Responses posted in the discussion lack effective professional communication. … Responses to faculty questions are missing. … No credible sources are cited.

17 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome

Participation5 to >0.0 pts

Excellent

Meets requirements for participation by posting on three different days.

0 pts

Poor

Does not meet requirements for participation by posting on 3 different days.

5 pts

Total Points: 100