NURS 6052 Post a Brief Description of your Clinical Issue of Interest

NURS 6052 Post a Brief Description of your Clinical Issue of Interest
The national health care issue I choose to talk about is the increase risk of suicide among nurses. in the first national study of its size, researchers at University of California San Diego School of Medicine and UC San Diego Health, Department of Nursing, have found that male and female nurses are at higher risk of suicide than the general population(Carr, 2020) Research has shown found that female nurse suicide rates from 2005 to 2016 were significantly higher (10 per 100,000) than the general female population (7 per 100,000). Similarly, male nurses (33 per 100,000) were higher than the general male population (27 per 100,000) for the same period (Carr, 2020). Nurses have studied suicide rates among other populations but have never focused on themselves . Nurses are known not to care for themselves as much as they care for others.
Before developing a PICOT question, I did some research on the topic. I experienced some initial difficulties with the search, but through the use of Boolean expressions, and some trial and error, the final search was successful. A common search string was used in all three research databases: (suicide AND nurses) OR healthcare. The searches in PubMed and CINAHL yielded very small results, even with filters, however the result from the search in ProQuest used filters to those with a better chance of meeting our objective. We used two of the three filters available: Peer reviewed and scholarly journals. All literature included in the study was independently read by at least three researchers and summarized. Before the researchers accepted the literature, it was evaluated to ensure it was relevant to the study. Literature was only rejected and excluded if at least two researchers agreed it was not relevant.
As an early and critical step in the EBP process, it is remarkable to discover how often PICOT questions are incorrectly written(Gallagher et al., 2019).The PICOT format contains the following five elements: Population or sample subjects that researcher wishes to recruit into the study; Intervention of interest; Comparator intervention or a control group to compare with the intervention of interest; Outcomes or results that will measure the effectiveness of intervention; and the Time-frame over which the outcomes are assessed(Abbade et al.,2017). My PICOT Does quarterly psychological checkin help decrease the risk of suicide of rate among nurses?
References
Carr, J. N. (2020, February 3). National Study Confirms Nurses at Higher Risk of Suicide than General Population. Retrieved March 23, 2021, from https://health.ucsd.edu/news/releases/Pages/2020-02-03-national-study-confirms-nurses-at-higher-risk-of-suicide.aspx
Abbade, L. P. F., Wang, M., Sriganesh, K., Jin, Y., Mbuagbaw, L., & Thabane, L. (2017). The framing of research questions using the PICOT format in randomized controlled trials of venous ulcer disease is suboptimal: A systematic survey. Wound Repair and Regeneration?: Official Publication of the Wound Healing Society [and] the European Tissue Repair Society, 25(5), 892–900. https://doi-org.ezp.waldenulibrary.org/10.1111/wrr.12592
Gallagher Ford, L., & Melnyk, B. M. (2019). The Underappreciated and Misunderstood PICOT Question: A Critical Step in the EBP Process. Worldviews on Evidence-Based Nursing, 16(6), 422–423. https://doi-org.ezp.waldenulibrary.org/10.1111/wvn.12408
NURS 6052 Post a Brief Description of your Clinical Issue of Interest
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.
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.
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.
NURS_6052_Module03_Week04_Discussion_Rubric
Grid View
List View
Excellent Good Fair Poor
Main Posting
Points Range: 45 (45%) – 50 (50%)
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.
Points Range: 40 (40%) – 44 (44%)
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.
Points Range: 35 (35%) – 39 (39%)
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.
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 34 (34%)
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.
Main Post: Timeliness
Points Range: 10 (10%) – 10 (10%)
Posts main post by day 3.
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Does not post by day 3.
First Response
Points Range: 17 (17%) – 18 (18%)
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.
Points Range: 15 (15%) – 16 (16%)
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.
Points Range: 13 (13%) – 14 (14%)
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.
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 12 (12%)
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.
Second Response
Points Range: 16 (16%) – 17 (17%)
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.
Points Range: 14 (14%) – 15 (15%)
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.
Points Range: 12 (12%) – 13 (13%)
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.
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 11 (11%)
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.
Participation
Points Range: 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Meets requirements for participation by posting on three different days.
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Does not meet requirements for participation by posting on 3 different days.
Total Points: 100
Name: NURS_6052_Module03_Week04_Discussion_Rubric