Select Page

Step 1. Place your order

Fill in the order form and provide all details of your assignment.

Step 2. Make Payment

Choose the payment system that suits you most.

Step 3. Receive your paper

Once your paper is ready, we will email it to you.

You will begin to examine quantitative literature, determine level of evidence,

by | Jun 25, 2021 | Nursing | 0 comments


Place your order now for a similar assignment and have exceptional work written by our team of experts, At affordable rates

For This or a Similar Paper Click To Order Now

You will begin to examine quantitative literature, determine level of evidence, quality of study methods, biases, strengths & limitations, and all elements that affect the quality of a study. You will continue the articles series to learn the processes of evidence appraisal (articles are posted in Readings.
Quantitative Research Analysis
Critical analysis is dependent on the type of research conducted. Utilize a mechanism for evaluating the worth of a study. Although an RCT study has long been considered the “gold standard” of quantitative research, RCTs do not always provide depth and variety of response to a given research question. In fact, meta-analyses and systematic reviews of RCTs provide the highest level of research evidence and provide much information when evaluating research for evidence-based practice changes. Not all systematic reviews, meta-analyses or RCTs are of high quality. You will learn to look at this research with a critical eye in evaluating the evidence for use in practice.
You will also create an evaluation table for the article you use in your assignment. An evaluation template is provided for you. It is also recommended that you view the video provided about how to develop an evaluation table.
Describe how different quantitative research designs best answer different types of clinical questions.
Explain the four phases of critical appraisal.
List the three key questions to ask of all studies.
Explain the markers of good research for different types of quantitative research.
Discuss the role of interpreted statistics in clinical decision making.
Discuss how recommendations for practice come from a body of evidence.
Critique a randomized clinical trail article using the information learned from chapters 4 & 5.
Chapters 4 & 5 in textbook.
Appendix B for the RCT rapid critical Appraisal (RCA) questions for randomized clinical trials.
EBP Critical Appraisal Step II.pdf download
EBP Critical Apprailsal of the Evidence Part III.pdf download
Quantitative Article Evaluation Assignment Evidence Table Template Resources
Video of Evaluation Table Example
(Links to an external site.)
Evaluation Tables.pptx download
BF Article for Evaluation Table Example.pdf download
The purpose of this assignment is to assist the DNP student in taking a critical look at a quantitative study and evaluating the quality of the research done for recommendation as use of evidence for practice/policy change.
Obtain an original research article that is a randomized control trial (RCT) in a reputable journal. The RCT should be relevant to your DNP project. Use the RCT Rapid Critical Checklist (RCA) in Appendix B to critique your article
Use short descriptors when answering questions. ****Do not copy/paste the long questions from Appendix B and give one sentence answers. Your critique must provide the why/how? Specifically describe why you think the article does/does not meet each area of evaluation. Faculty are looking for in-depth evaluation of the evidence at the doctoral level. For example, it is not acceptable to simply mention that the sampling was adequate. Detail how or why the sample was adequate, describe the inclusion and exclusion criteria, sample size calculation, power calculations, etc.
The critique is the main body of your paper. Use the grading rubric and RCT Rapid Critical Checklist (RCA) as a guide to structuring your paper.
Unit 2/Chapter 5 walks you through the evaluation of a quantitative article. Please read/review this information before beginning the assignment.
Identify applicability of the study to your patient population and practice area.
Summarize evaluation and provide recommendations for use as evidence. Remember that the point of this paper is a critique/appraisal of the study. Summarize the mains points of your critique and give your overall conclusion for the quality of the study you appraised.
Place article in an evaluation table. Read chapter 5 for information regarding evaluation tables. A template for the evaluation table can be found in the Canvas module
Use APA format with level one headings (Please do not copy/paste the long RCA questions for headings) – For example, for the question Are the Results Valid? Use the heading Validity. Professional writing is expected. Make sure that tables are APA formatted. Table titles need to be in APA format: Do not use “Evidence Table” as your title. The title should reflect what you are presenting in the table. See “General Guidance on Tables and Figures” in your APA textbook. Upload both the article used for the assignment and the assignment into the Canvas dropbox
Quantitative Article Evaluation (1)
Criteria Ratings Pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome
15 pts
Full Marks
Provides a rationale for article selection and correctly identifies the method of research used. Chooses RCT checklist from textbook to use to evaluate the chosen article.
7.5 pts
Needs Improvement.
Limited rationale given for article selection or not addressed. Study type is not correctly identified. Poor choice/rationale for checklist type chosen.
15 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome
Critique of Article
This is the main body of your paper. Where the detailed critique should be.
25 pts
Full Marks
Uses the checklist questions as guide to APA level I and/or II headings (Does NOT cut and paste long questions for use as headings) Each question in RCA Checklist is answered with a short summary and detailed rationale for each question in the RCA.
13 pts
Needs Improvement
Choice of checklist is not appropriate for type of study and/or paragraph headings are not appropriate. Questions are answered with simple one-sentence descriptors – lacking any detailed information on sample, methods, strengths & limitations, potential or real bias, results.
6 pts
Needs Much Improvement
Checklist questions are copied and pasted for headings. Check list answers are too brief are lacking any detail. Work is incomplete (sample, bias, methods, analysis not evaluated in detail)
25 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome
Evaluation table
20 pts
Full Marks
Article is placed in evaluation table with appropriate headings as outlined in template. Columns contain appropriate information.
10 pts
Needs Improvement
Evidence table lacking important headings, methods and findings are lacking details important in relation to the article and practice.
20 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome
Summary/Conclusion statement
Summarizes key elements of paper.
20 pts
Full Marks
Summarizes research evaluation that provides reader with key elements of critique that is organized in logical order. Also applies evidence to clinical practice and gives rationale if evidence should or should not be applied clinically.
10 pts
Needs Improvement
Summary is brief and lacking important details. Evidence is not applied clinically or no explanation as to why evidence cannot be applied.
20 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome
APA style
15 pts
Full Marks
Title page, section headings, evidence table, citations, and references are all in correct APA format
7 pts
Needs Improvement
Areas of paper are lacking appropriate APA formatting
15 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome
Article posted with the assignment and easily available to faculty.
5 pts
Full Marks
Posted for faculty per directions.
0 pts
No Marks
Not posted per directions
5 pts
Total Points: 100

For This or a Similar Paper Click To Order Now


We encrypt everything. It’s all confidential.

Secure Payment

Sleep tight: each transaction is encrypted and 100% secure.

Ready to get started?