Develop knowledge related to research and evidence-based practice as a basis for designing and critiquing research studies.

Week 8 Discussion: Peer ReviewNo unread replies.No replies.PurposeThe purpose of the graded collaborative peer review is to provide students with the opportunity to engage in the critique of peers’ week 7 evidence-based presentation. Scholarly information obtained from credible sources as well as professional communication are required. Meaningful dialogue among students fosters the development of a learning community as ideas, perspectives, and knowledge are shared.Activity Learning OutcomesThrough this peer review discussion, the student will demonstrate the ability to:CO3: Demonstrate professional and personal growth through a spirit of inquiry, scholarship, and service in diverse healthcare settings. (PO 3, 4)CO4: Develop knowledge related to research and evidence-based practice as a basis for designing and critiquing research studies. (PO 1, 5)CO5: Analyze research findings and evidence-based practice to advance holistic care initiatives that promote positive healthcare outcomes. (PO 1, 2, 5) Due Date: Upload Week 7 Kaltura Presentation to Week 8 discussion by Sunday 11:59 p.m. MT at the end of Week 7. Post two responses to peer presentations by Saturday 11:59 p.m. MT of Week 8. Total Points Possible: 100Requirements:Upload the Kaltura presentation you created in week 7 to the week 8 discussion area. Please post the presentation to the discussion area by Sunday 11:59 p.m. MT at the end of Week 7.Participating in the Discussion: View and provide feedback on a minimum of 2 peer presentations. You may address some of the following questions in your responses:Is the PICOT question original, relevant, and interesting?Is the presentation clear and easy to follow?Did the presentation provide sufficient evidence to support the presenter’s recommendations?Are references accurate, adequate, and balanced?Does the presentation add to nursing knowledge?What applications do you see for the content of this presentation to your practice as an NP?Your peer posts should add to the dialogue or ask questions about the presentation. Provide support from the readings or lesson from any week in the course and at least one scholarly resource.Responses to two different peer presentations are due by Saturday 11:59 p.m. MT of Week 8.**To view the grading criteria/rubric, please click on the 3 dots in the box at the end of the solid gray bar above the discussion board title and then Show Rubric.Peer Review Discussion RubricNR505NP Week 8 Peer Review Discussion RubricCriteriaRatingsPtsThis criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeParticipating in the DiscussionResponds substantively to at least two different peer presentations by Saturday 11:59 PM MT60.0 ptsExcellentStudent responds substantively to at least two different peer presentations by Saturday 11:59 p.m. MT.52.0 ptsVery GoodStudent responds adequately to at least two different peer presentations by Saturday 11:59 p.m. MT.46.0 ptsSatisfactoryStudent responds substantively to at least one peer presentation by Saturday 11:59 p.m. MT.23.0 ptsNeeds ImprovementStudent responds minimally to at least one different peer presentation by Saturday 11:59 p.m. MT.0.0 ptsUnsatisfactoryStudent does not participate60.0 ptsThis criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeIntegration of EvidenceAssigned readings OR online lesson AND at least one outside scholarly source are included. The scholarly source is:1) evidence-based, 2) scholarly in nature, 3) published within the last 5 years20.0 ptsExcellentIntegrates evidence from: • assigned readings OR online lessons AND • at least one outside scholarly source. Sources are credited.*17.0 ptsVery GoodIntegrates evidence from: • no assigned readings OR online lesson is included • at least one outside scholarly source is included. Sources are credited.*15.0 ptsSatisfactoryIntegrates evidence from: • assigned readings OR online lesson • no outside scholarly source is included. Sources are credited.*8.0 ptsNeeds ImprovementIntegrates evidence from: • assigned readings OR online lesson • no outside scholarly source is included. Sources are not credited.*0.0 ptsUnsatisfactoryDoes not integrate any evidence.20.0 ptsThis criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeGrammar and Communication10.0 ptsExcellentPresents information using clear and concise language in an organized manner (0–1 error in English grammar, spelling, syntax, and punctuation).9.0 ptsVery GoodPresents information using clear and concise language in an organized manner (2–3 errors in English grammar, spelling, syntax, and punctuation).8.0 ptsSatisfactoryPresents information using understandable language; information is not organized (3–4 errors in English grammar, spelling, syntax, and punctuation).4.0 ptsNeeds ImprovementPresents information using understandable language; information is not organized (5-6 errors in English grammar, spelling, syntax, and punctuation).0.0 ptsUnsatisfactoryPresents information that is not clear, logical, professional, or organized to the point that the reader has difficulty understanding the post (7 or more errors in English grammar, spelling, syntax, and/or punctuation).10.0 ptsThis criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeReference Citation10.0 ptsExcellentReferences have complete information as required by APA (0-1 errors) In-text citations included for all references AND references included for all in-text citations (0 errors)9.0 ptsVery GoodReferences have most information as required by APA (2 errors) In-text citations included for all references AND references included for all in-text citations (0 errors)8.0 ptsSatisfactoryReferences have some information as required by APA (3 errors) In-text citations included for all references AND references included for all in-text citations (0 errors)4.0 ptsNeeds ImprovementReferences have some information as required by APA (4 errors) In-text citations included for all references AND references included for all in-text citations (0 errors)0.0 ptsUnsatisfactoryReferences missing 5 or more elements AND/OR In-text citations missing OR final references not included for in-text citations10.0 ptsThis criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeTotal Participation Responses0.0 pts5 Points DeductedA 10% penalty will be imposed for not entering at least TWO posts on the minimum of TWO separate days. NOTHING will be accepted after 11:59pm MT on Saturday (i.e. student will receive an automatic 0).0.0 ptsNo Points DeductedNo points deducted.0.0 ptsTotal Points: 100.0Week 8: ReadingDue Aug 29 by 11:59pm Points NoneRequired ReadingsTextbookDang, D., & Dearholt, S. (2018). Johns Hopkins Nursing Evidence-Based Practice: Model & Guidelines. Sigma Theta Tau International.Ch 9: Creating a supportive EBP environmentGray, J. R., Grove, S. K., & Sutherland, S. (2017). Burns and Grove’s the practice of nursing research: Appraisal, synthesis, and generation of evidence (8th ed.). Elsevier.Ch. 27: Disseminating research findings p. 614-616ArticlesAli, P. A., & Watson, R. (2016). Peer review and the publication process. Nursing Open, 3(4), 193-202. https://doi: 10.1002/nop2.51Edie, A. H., & Conklin, J. L. (2019). Avoiding predatory journals: Quick peer review processes too good to be true. Nursing Forum, 54(3), 336-339. https://doi: 10.1111/nuf.12333Textbooks and ResourcesRequired TextbooksThe following books are required for this course:Dang, D., & Dearholt, S. (2018). Johns Hopkins Nursing Evidence-Based Practice: Model & Guidelines. Sigma Theta Tau International.The following book is available through Chamberlain Library via eBookGreenhalgh, T. (2014) How to Read a Paper: The Basics of Evidence-Based Medicine. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-BlackwellThe following book is available through Chamberlain Library via eBookGray, J. R., Grove, S. K., & Sutherland, S. (2017). Burns and Grove’s the practice of nursing research: Appraisal, synthesis, and generation of evidence (8th ed.). Elsevier.This textbook is available as an e-book and can be accessed from the module view.