EBP Project Proposal: Research Design Comparison

The purpose of this assignment is to conduct a comparison on different research designs to better understand their designs and application. Understanding the different types of research design is important so that nurses can effectively apply evidence-based research into practice to address issues and offer better patient care.

ORDER NOW FOR COMPREHENSIVE, PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPERS

You will utilize your approved nursing practice problem to complete the evidence-based practice project proposal assignments for this course and NUR-590, during which you will synthesize all of the sections into a final written paper detailing your evidence-based practice project proposal.

Conduct a literature search on your approved nursing practice problem. Find two translational research articles, one quantitative article, and one qualitative article. Using the “Translational Research Graphic Organizer,” present your proposed topic and, in the tables provided, compare one translational study to the quantitative study, and one translational study to the qualitative study.

Refer to the “Evidence-Based Practice Project Proposal – Assignment Overview” document for an overview of the evidence-based practice project proposal assignments. EBP Project Proposal: Research Design Comparison

You are required to cite 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.

This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.

Rubric_Print_Format-2.xlsx

Rubic_Print_Format

Course Code	Class Code	Assignment Title	Total Points
NUR-550	NUR-550-O500	Evidence-Based Practice Project Proposal: Research Design Comparison	100.0
Criteria	Percentage	Unsatisfactory (0.00%)	Less Than Satisfactory (80.00%)	Satisfactory (88.00%)	Good (92.00%)	Excellent (100.00%)	Comments	Points Earned
Content	100.0%
Nursing Practice Problem (Revision)	10.0%	The nursing practice problem was not included, or the required revisions were not made.	The changes failed to meet the criteria for a relevant nursing practice problem for an evidence-based practice project proposal. Additional revisions are still required for approval.	Revisions were made accordingly to improve the proposed nursing practice problem, but some aspects are inaccurate or unclear. Additional revisions are still required for approval.	NA	The nursing practice problem is clearly presented and approved. No revision was required, or all necessary revisions are were made.
Translational and Traditional Articles	15.0%	More than two articles selected do not meet the assignment criteria. At least one article is omitted.	Two articles do not meet the assignment criteria. It is unclear how one or two of the articles support the proposed nursing practice problem.	One article does not meet the assignment criteria. Overall, the articles generally support the proposed nursing practice problem. The proposed problem would be better supported with the selection of one or two different articles.	The articles meet the assignment criteria and provide adequate support for the proposed nursing practice problem.	A quantitative article and a qualitative article were each compared to a translational research article. The articles are peer-reviewed, published within the last five years, and pertain to the nursing practice problem. The assignment criteria are fully met.
Comparison of Methodology Between Translational and Traditional Research	15.0%	The comparison between translational and quantitative and translational and qualitative methodologies is omitted.	The comparison between translational and quantitative and translational and qualitative methodologies is incomplete. There are significant inaccuracies.	A summary comparison between translational and quantitative and translational and qualitative methodologies is presented. Some aspects are incorrect or unclear.	The comparison between translational and quantitative and translational and qualitative methodologies is adequately presented. Some aspects require more detail for accuracy or clarity.	The comparison between translational and quantitative and translational and qualitative methodologies is thorough and accurate. A clear understanding of translational and traditional methodologies is demonstrated.
Comparison of Goals Between Translational and Traditional Research	15.0%	The comparison of goals between translational and quantitative and translational and qualitative research is omitted.	The comparison of goals between translational and quantitative and translational and qualitative research is incomplete. There are significant inaccuracies.	A summary comparison of goals between translational and quantitative and translational and qualitative research is presented. Some aspects are incorrect or unclear.	A comparison of goals between translational and quantitative and translational and qualitative research is adequately presented. Some aspects require more detail for accuracy or clarity.	The comparison of goals between translational and quantitative and translational and qualitative research is thorough and accurate. An understanding of goals between traditional and translational research is evident.
Comparison of Data Collection Between Translational and Traditional Research	15.0%	The comparison of data collection between translational and quantitative and translational and qualitative research is omitted.	The comparison of data collection between translational and quantitative and translational and qualitative research is incomplete. There are significant inaccuracies.	A summary comparison of data collection between translational and quantitative and translational and qualitative research is presented. Some aspects are incorrect or unclear.	The comparison of data collection between translational and quantitative and translational and qualitative research is adequately presented. Some aspects require more detail for accuracy or clarity.	The comparison of data collection between translational and quantitative and translational and qualitative research is thorough and accurate. An understanding of goals between traditional and translational research is evident.
Observations (Similarities and Differences)	20.0%	The similarities and differences between translational and quantitative and translational and qualitative research are not discussed.	The similarities and differences between translational and quantitative and translational and qualitative research are only partially discussed. The narrative is vague and contains inaccuracies.	The similarities and differences between translational and quantitative and translational and qualitative research are summarized. More information is needed. There are minor inaccuracies.	The similarities and differences between translational and quantitative and translational and qualitative research are presented. Some detail is needed for clarity or accuracy	The similarities and differences between translational and quantitative and translational and qualitative research are detailed and informative.
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.
Total Weightage	100%

NUR-550-RS2-TranslationalResearchGraphicOrganizer.docx

Translational Research Graphic Organizer

State the nursing practice problem for your evidence-based practice project. If your nursing problem has not yet been approved, make any required changes or revisions to your nursing practice problem prior to starting the assignment. Using your proposed topic, conduct a literature search and complete the tables below.

Nursing Practice Problem:

Comparison 1: Translational Research vs. Qualitative Research

Criteria	Peer-Reviewed Translational Article and Permalink/Working Link: Translational Research Type:	Peer-Reviewed Traditional Article and Permalink/Working Link: Traditional Qualitative Research Type:	Observations (Similarities/Differences)
Methodology
Goals
Data Collection

Comparison 2: Translational Research vs. Quantitative Research

Criteria	Peer-Reviewed Translational Article and Permalink/Working Link: Translational Research Type:	Peer-Reviewed Traditional Article and Permalink/Working Link: Traditional Quantitative Research Type:	Observations (Similarities/Differences)
Methodology
Goals
Data Collection

References

PICOTQuestion.docx

PICOT Draft

Name_____________________________________

Part 1: A Relevant Nursing Practice Problem

Emergency department (ED) declining patient satisfaction.

This topic remains significantly relevant to advancing nursing practice. In all primary care settings, ED serves as a primary entry point into hospitals and reflects the performance of the entire healthcare facility in terms of patient satisfaction scores, financial performance, time patients take to get admitted or discharged, and delivery of quality care. Thus, selecting this topic becomes crucial in understanding the efficiency of delivering emergency services at ED. According to Asheim et al., (2019), ED delays adversely impact patient safety and satisfaction levels and increase the needed time in-hospital treatment. Despite the prioritization of patients with acute conditions, ED crowding has led to delay in admission and treatment, resulting in prolonged wait times and even death of critically ill and injured patients. EBP Project Proposal: Research Design Comparison

Part II: PICOT Question

PICOT Question
P	Population	Patients experiencing decreasing satisfaction levels at ED
I	Intervention	Real-time location systems
C	Comparison	manually entered status updates to track patients
O	Outcome	Decreased rate of Left Without Being Treated (LWBT) and raising revenue collection
T	Timeframe	Six months
PICOT	For patients (P) with decreasing levels of satisfaction, the utilization of real-time location systems (RTLS) in the hospital’s ED (I), compared to manually entered status updates to track patients, help to decrease the rate of LWBT and to raise revenue collection for one year?
Problem Statement	The current delays, long waits, leaving without being treated, decreased revenue collection from the ED unit, and reduced patient satisfaction scores have negatively portrayed the hospital’s reputation to the public. As a result, the daily patient visits have continued to decrease as people attribute the facility to poor emergency care services delivery. All these complications result from the use of combined data resources and manual entry status updates when tracking patient records. This manual tracking cannot meet the demand for many patients and leads to overcrowding due to and reduced patient flow in the ED. Therefore, there is a need to install an automatic patient tracking system to increase the flow.

References

Asheim, A., Nilsen, S. M., Carlsen, F., Næss-Pleym, L. E., Uleberg, O., Dale, J., … & Bjørngaard, J. H. (2019). The effect of emergency department delays on 30-day mortality in Central Norway. European Journal of Emergency Medicine, 26(6), 446-452.