Evidence Review Part 3, Preparing for Synthesis
Order ID 53563633773 Type Essay Writer Level Masters Style APA Sources/References 4 Perfect Number of Pages to Order 5-10 Pages
Evidence Review Part 3:? Preparing for Synthesis
I. PICOT QUESTION
For adults in primary care settings (P), what is the effect of two-step depression screening PHQ-2 and PHQ-9 (I), compared to other validated depression screening, (C) on accuracy in identifying symptoms of depression (O)??
II, REFERENCE LIST (APA)
Update your reference list (the entire list from Evidence Review Part 2), making all corrections and adding resources as appropriate with your refined search.
III. CRITICAL APPRAISAL
Briefly appraise each keeper resource that will be included in your review using the appropriate criteria from Melnyk and Fineout-Overholt [Appendix B]. Include all CPGs, systematic reviews/meta-analyses, and individual studies that answer your PICOT do not include background articles in this analysis).
NOTE: you do not need to write this up for this assignment, but will need to have done it in order to complete your extraction tables as described below. You?must?appraise?each of your “keeper” sources?or you will not be able to complete the tables in this assignment. ?That is, to say, you will need to go through that process of appraising – and, it is a process.? But, you are not going to submit your entire appraisal/evaluation?(i.e., a narrative or completed critical analysis tables?as in the last assignment). Most of the results of your evaluation will be in the last column of the Evaluation Table.??
IV. DATA EXTRACTION
Using the tables on the next pages, extract information from each keeper resource. Place the resources in the table in hierarchical order, beginning with the highest level of evidence.?
The only resources you should put in these tables are the ones that you know answer your question after you have done rapid critical appraisal (i.e., the keeper studies)
Use abbreviations & create a legend for readers & yourself
Keep your descriptions brief there should be NO complete sentences
This evaluation is for the purpose of knowing your studies so you will be able to synthesize them.
Intervention Synthesis Table?
Evaluation of Studies Demonstrating [create your own title here – LOOK at example of evidence tables in published Reviews]
Strength of the Evidence
Identify the research design
State conceptual/ theoretical framework (if they identified one). If none of your sources identified a conceptual framework then do not include that information for any.
Number, characteristics, attrition rate & why?
Independent variable(s) with specifics
(e.g., IV1 =?
Dependent variables (e.g., DV = ) and how they were measured
Validity & reliability of Instruments used (as appropriate)
Stick to the analysis of your outcome only
How were the data analyzed (i.e., what stats)?
Your outcome of interest only include what was / was not significant and provide the stats
Statistical or qualitative findings (i.e., for every measurement you have in the measurement column, you should have a finding)
Stick to the analysis of your outcome per your PICOT
Strengths: Level of evidence,??
Use? the Jadad score (for experimental and quasi-experimental studies); the AMSTAR score for systematic reviews, and? the? AGREE II or USPSTF grading schema for clinical practice guidelines http://www.ahrq.gov/clinic/3rduspstf/ratings.htm
Risk of harm if study intervention or findings implemented
Feasibility of use in your practice?
Remember: level of evidence + quality of evidence = strength of evidence & confidence to act
Ex: Jones et al., 2016
45 RCTs; total 2,802 participants
Non-pregnant adults undergoing planned elective procedures requiring general anesthesia
Intervention- Perioperative administration of lidocaine.?
Control- Placebo (saline)
DV1: post-operative pain control. Measured by VAS.
DV2: opioid requirements
Random- effects model heterogeneity I2?
Lidocaine significantly reduced postoperative pain at 14 hours (MD ?0.84, 95% CI ?1.10 to ?0.59)?
24 hours after surgery (MD ?0.34, 95% CI ?0.57 to ?0.11) after surgery.
At 48 hours after surgery (MD ?0.22, 95% CI ?0.47 to 0.03), lidocaine infusion did not offer any additional pain relief compared to the control group.?
Sequential analysis: pain reduction with lidocaine for laparoscopic or open abdominal surgery, but not for patients undergoing other surgeries.?
Strengths: Level I evidence
Limitations: AMSTAR: Low quality review. Large and unexplained heterogeneity between studies.? Small trial sizes of the included studies may over or underestimate the underlying treatment effect.?
Risk of harm: Side effects if lidocaine; possible undertreatment of pain
Feasibility: Lidocaine readily available.
QUALITY OF RESPONSE NO RESPONSE POOR / UNSATISFACTORY SATISFACTORY GOOD EXCELLENT Content (worth a maximum of 50% of the total points) Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. 20 points out of 50: The essay illustrates poor understanding of the relevant material by failing to address or incorrectly addressing the relevant content; failing to identify or inaccurately explaining/defining key concepts/ideas; ignoring or incorrectly explaining key points/claims and the reasoning behind them; and/or incorrectly or inappropriately using terminology; and elements of the response are lacking. 30 points out of 50: The essay illustrates a rudimentary understanding of the relevant material by mentioning but not full explaining the relevant content; identifying some of the key concepts/ideas though failing to fully or accurately explain many of them; using terminology, though sometimes inaccurately or inappropriately; and/or incorporating some key claims/points but failing to explain the reasoning behind them or doing so inaccurately. Elements of the required response may also be lacking. 40 points out of 50: The essay illustrates solid understanding of the relevant material by correctly addressing most of the relevant content; identifying and explaining most of the key concepts/ideas; using correct terminology; explaining the reasoning behind most of the key points/claims; and/or where necessary or useful, substantiating some points with accurate examples. The answer is complete. 50 points: The essay illustrates exemplary understanding of the relevant material by thoroughly and correctly addressing the relevant content; identifying and explaining all of the key concepts/ideas; using correct terminology explaining the reasoning behind key points/claims and substantiating, as necessary/useful, points with several accurate and illuminating examples. No aspects of the required answer are missing. Use of Sources (worth a maximum of 20% of the total points). Zero points: Student failed to include citations and/or references. Or the student failed to submit a final paper. 5 out 20 points: Sources are seldom cited to support statements and/or format of citations are not recognizable as APA 6th Edition format. There are major errors in the formation of the references and citations. And/or there is a major reliance on highly questionable. The Student fails to provide an adequate synthesis of research collected for the paper. 10 out 20 points: References to scholarly sources are occasionally given; many statements seem unsubstantiated. Frequent errors in APA 6th Edition format, leaving the reader confused about the source of the information. There are significant errors of the formation in the references and citations. And/or there is a significant use of highly questionable sources. 15 out 20 points: Credible Scholarly sources are used effectively support claims and are, for the most part, clear and fairly represented. APA 6th Edition is used with only a few minor errors. There are minor errors in reference and/or citations. And/or there is some use of questionable sources. 20 points: Credible scholarly sources are used to give compelling evidence to support claims and are clearly and fairly represented. APA 6th Edition format is used accurately and consistently. The student uses above the maximum required references in the development of the assignment. Grammar (worth maximum of 20% of total points) Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. 5 points out of 20: The paper does not communicate ideas/points clearly due to inappropriate use of terminology and vague language; thoughts and sentences are disjointed or incomprehensible; organization lacking; and/or numerous grammatical, spelling/punctuation errors 10 points out 20: The paper is often unclear and difficult to follow due to some inappropriate terminology and/or vague language; ideas may be fragmented, wandering and/or repetitive; poor organization; and/or some grammatical, spelling, punctuation errors 15 points out of 20: The paper is mostly clear as a result of appropriate use of terminology and minimal vagueness; no tangents and no repetition; fairly good organization; almost perfect grammar, spelling, punctuation, and word usage. 20 points: The paper is clear, concise, and a pleasure to read as a result of appropriate and precise use of terminology; total coherence of thoughts and presentation and logical organization; and the essay is error free. Structure of the Paper (worth 10% of total points) Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. 3 points out of 10: Student needs to develop better formatting skills. The paper omits significant structural elements required for and APA 6th edition paper. Formatting of the paper has major flaws. The paper does not conform to APA 6th edition requirements whatsoever. 5 points out of 10: Appearance of final paper demonstrates the student’s limited ability to format the paper. There are significant errors in formatting and/or the total omission of major components of an APA 6th edition paper. They can include the omission of the cover page, abstract, and page numbers. Additionally the page has major formatting issues with spacing or paragraph formation. Font size might not conform to size requirements. The student also significantly writes too large or too short of and paper 7 points out of 10: Research paper presents an above-average use of formatting skills. The paper has slight errors within the paper. This can include small errors or omissions with the cover page, abstract, page number, and headers. There could be also slight formatting issues with the document spacing or the font Additionally the paper might slightly exceed or undershoot the specific number of required written pages for the assignment. 10 points: Student provides a high-caliber, formatted paper. This includes an APA 6th edition cover page, abstract, page number, headers and is double spaced in 12’ Times Roman Font. Additionally, the paper conforms to the specific number of required written pages and neither goes over or under the specified length of the paper.
GET THIS PROJECT NOW BY CLICKING ON THIS LINK TO PLACE THE ORDER
CLICK ON THE LINK HERE: https://essaybasket.com/orders/ordernow
Also, you can place the order at www.collegepaper.us/orders/ordernow / www.phdwriters.com/orders/ordernow
Do You Have Any Other Essay/Assignment/Class Project/Homework Related to this? Click Here Now [CLICK ME] and Have It Done by Our PhD Qualified Writers!!
Tired of getting an average grade in all your school assignments, projects, essays, and homework? Try us today for all your academic schoolwork needs. We are among the most trusted and recognized professional writing services in the market.
We provide unique, original and plagiarism-free high quality academic, homework, assignments and essay submissions for all our clients. At our company, we capitalize on producing A+ Grades for all our clients and also ensure that you have smooth academic progress in all your school term and semesters.
High-quality academic submissions, A 100% plagiarism-free submission, Meet even the most urgent deadlines, Provide our services to you at the most competitive rates in the market, Give you free revisions until you meet your desired grades and Provide you with 24/7 customer support service via calls or live chats.