Will giving a monetary award to CNAs/GNAs on a quarterly basis promote maintenance of skin integrity as compared to not giving award?
Practice Proposal (20 %)
Each student may assume that he or she has the time, personnel and finances to carry out an evidence based practice change project. Based on the literature review conducted, the student will draw up a formal research plan to change practice, (4 to 8 pages). The paper must follow APA format, including citations and reference page. The proposal should include:
1. PICOT formatted question
2. An introduction
3. Review of relevant literature
4. Description of design
5. Description of sample
6. Protection of human subjects
7. Description of intervention
8. Method for data collection and analysis
9. Identification of strengths and limitations.
The research question is: Will giving a monetary award to CNAs/GNAs on a quarterly basis promote maintenance of skin integrity as compared to not giving award.
Practice Proposal Rubric
Criteria Incomplete Complete Exemplary
Research question or Clinical Problem
5 points Missing elements
0-2 (pts) Meets PICOT standard
3-4 (pts) Meets PICOT standard and is well articulated with mutually supported elements connected to literature 5 (pts)
Introduction
10 points Minimally connected to problem. Support or logic unclear
0-6 (pts) Basic concepts and background explained. Support of problem partially provided
7-9 (pts) Connects problem to the literature. Logically leads to question. Significance and “so what” is clear (10 pts)
Significance
5 points Does not clearly identify a gap in knowledge 0-2 (pts) Identifies a gap in knowledge and change or potential for improved outcome 3-4 (pts) Clearly expressed potential for benefit or change in practice
(5 pts)
Theoretical or conceptual framework
5 points Stated but not supportive of proposed study
0-2 (pts) Derived from recognized source.
Supports intervention.
3-4 (pts) Clearly supports intervention. Selection is logical and supports rigor. (5 pts)
Literature Review
10 points Predominant use of secondary sources and/or outdated sources.
Minimal critical review.
0-6 (pts) Uses clinically relevant and current literature. Predominance of primary sources. Needs more critical review.
7 – 9 (pts) Uses peer reviewed , primary sources. Integrates critical and logical details. Clearly supports variables. Without bias. (10 pts)
Describes design of study
5 points Study design unclear or not evident or inappropriate
0-3 (pts) Design is identified and described sufficiently.
4 (pts) Design is supportive and coherent. Threats to validity are reduced.(5 pts)
Describes the sample
10 points Sample not appropriate to variables identified in problem or intervention. Lack of comparison group. 0 – 7 (pts) Comparison group identified as well
8-9 (pts) Sample (intervention and comparison) identified and described. Reasonable and realistic. (10 pts)
Describes informed consent/protection of subjects
5 points Omits ethical concerns
0 (pts) Aspects of Protection of human subjects identified. Informed consent appropriately identified.
3-4 (pts) Aspects of Protection of human subjects identified. Informed consent appropriately identified. Proposed methods for seeking permissions discussed
(5 pts)
Describes evidence based intervention plan
15 points Intervention unclear, not realistic, unclear expected outcomes
0-9 (pts) Intervention clearly defined. Supported by literature
10-14 (pts) Intervention clearly defined. Supported by literature. Safety factors and integration of participants considered. Practical and based on evidence (15 pts)
Describe data collection and analysis methods
5 points Will not answer the question or support desired outcome
(1 pt) Supportive of question and expected outcomes of interventions. Replicable (3 pts) Manageable, coherent, and powerful for generating valid and reliable data. (5 pts)
Identify strengths and limitations
10 points Not relevant to proposed study
4 (pts) Clearly identified
8 (pts) Demonstrates clear understanding of proposed design. Promotes improved replication. Supports rigor. (10 pts)
APA format
5 points Does not follow APA guidelines (0 pts) Conforms to most APA guidelines (3 pts) Follows APA guidelines consistently (5 pts)
Grammar, syntax, organization
10 points Need improvement
0 – 7 (pts) Organized, appropriate grammar, and syntax
8 – 9 (pts) Organized. Reader is clear about proposal. Flows from step to step in coherent, logical fashion. (10 pts)
