回到网站

Queensland University of Technology NSB203

nsb203 inquiry in clinical practice

· 案例展示

NSB203
Inquiry into Clinical Practice
Assessment Task 3
NSB203 – Assessment Task 3 Page 2 of 10
NSB203 – Inquiry into Clinical Practice
Assessment Task 3

Assessment name:Individual poster
Task description:This assessment asks you to produce an informational poster
addressing a patient safety issue identified from clinical practice,
drawing upon evidence and using a structured inquiry-based
learning approach.
Your ability to define a practice-based practice issue, seek and
appraise relevant evidence to address this issue, and synthesise this
evidence to establish recommendations for practice will be
assessed.
The assessment addresses key components and skills developed
during this unit, which relate directly to your ability as future
registered nurses to think critically about the patient care you deliver,
to identify clinical questions for investigation, and your ability to
ensure the care you deliver is based upon sound evidence.
What you need to
do:
Read the Criterion Reference Assessment sheet for this task.
Prepare
To successfully complete the assessment, undertake the following
steps:
1. Identify a patient safety issue directly related to nursing
practice.
Tips:
• Choose a topic that interests you. This might relate to
your practice placement area OR workplace (if you
work clinically) OR experience as a patient, family
member or friend.
• For this assessment, you are encouraged to consider
an issue that focuses on an intervention.
• Excluded topics: hand hygiene; pharmacological
topics that do not directly relate to nursing practice;
Assessment 2 Clinical Practice Topics; topics used as
examples in Workshops or teaching resources.
2. Construct a clinical question: use PICO to clearly define all
elements of the patient safety issue.
3. Develop a strategy to address the clinical question and
examine the evidence related to your topic. You need to
consider the following questions:
a. What type of evidence will answer the question?

NSB203 – Assessment Task 3 Page 3 of 10
NSB203 – Inquiry into Clinical Practice
b. Which databases will you search to find this evidence?
c. How will you establish the keywords and limits for the
searches?
d. How will you manage and organize the evidence you find?
e. How will you decide on the level of evidence for each
source?
f. How you will decide which papers are of sufficient quality
to use in your assignment ? Which critical appraisal tool(s)
will you use?
4. Collate, summarise and analyse the evidence. Choose the
five papers at the highest level of evidence on which to base
your recommendations. Consider any gaps or limitations to
the available evidence you found. Use the information at this
step to populate the Literature Matrix.
5. Synthesise the five highest level pieces of evidence to
establish recommendations for practice and create an
evidence ‘bottom line’ statement that answers your clinical
question.
6. Consider how you would approach implementation of the
recommendations – for this, you will need to identify potential
barriers and strategies.
7. Create a A1 size digital poster using Powerpoint that
summarises your work and the recommendations for patient
care, for an audience comprising of health care professionals.
Your poster should communicate all of the following elements:
a. A title which clearly communicates the patient safety issue
b. The clinical question: structured using the PICO acronym
c. A brief background to the topic
d. Details of the search strategy
e. A summary of the evidence found to answer the
question.
f. Details of the critical appraisal tool used and the quality
of the evidence utilised.
g. An explanation of any gaps or limitations to the evidence
h. An evidence ‘bottom line’ statement.

NSB203 – Assessment Task 3 Page 4 of 10
NSB203 – Inquiry into Clinical Practice
i. A table detailing potential barriers to implementation of
the recommendations, as well as strategies to overcome
these barriers.
j. References (presented on the first side of the poster)
k. The literature matrix on the second page detailing the
relevant details from the included studies (see the
template).
8. Upload your poster to Turnitin by the due date and time
Pictures or illustrations may be used to enhance your poster.
Length:1100 words +/- 10% (excluding reference list)
Estimated time to
complete task:
Allocate time weekly during the semester for addressing the tasks
necessary to complete the assessment.
Weighting:40%
How will I be
assessed:
7 point grading scale using a rubric
Due date:Poster to be submitted via Turnitin in your NSB203 Blackboard site
by 11.59pm on Friday 16th October (Week 12). More information
about Turnitin is available on the FAQs about Turnitin page.
Presentation
requirements:
This assessment task must:
• Be presented as a digital A1 or A0 size poster (with literature
matrix on second page) using Powerpoint
• Use Vancouver referencing for citing academic literature.
Refer to QUT Cite Write for guidance.
• Be submitted in electronic format via Turnitin.
Learning
outcomes
assessed:
1. Explain the key concepts and principles of the research
process and outline the importance of evidence-based
practice approaches for the provision of safe and quality
health care and for the global health research agenda.
2. Apply key literacy and critical thinking skills to locate, seek,
interpret, analyse, synthesise and integrate evidence into
practice.
3. Apply knowledge of quantitative and qualitative approaches to
explain their role in research of contemporary, global health
care issues.
What you need to
submit:
An A1 or A0 size Powerpoint poster with the literature matrix on the
second page (via Turnitin).

NSB203 – Assessment Task 3 Page 5 of 10
NSB203 – Inquiry into Clinical Practice
Resources needed
to complete task:
• QUT Cite/Write guide
• Example of a digital poster
• Digital Poster template (available in Blackboard site)
Academic Integrity
The School of Nursing takes academic integrity very seriously. All work
submitted must be your own work and work not previously submitted
for other study. The work of others needs to be correctly
acknowledged and referenced according to the CiteWrite APA
guidelines.
There are serious consequences that will be imposed should you be
found to breach academic integrity. Make sure you are familiar with the
MOPP C/5.3 Academic Integrity and view the Academic Integrity video
and explore the Academic Case Studies available on your Blackboard
site.
Maintaining academic integrity is your responsibility. If in doubt,
check it carefully.

NSB203 – Assessment Task 3 Page 6 of 10
NSB203 – Inquiry into Clinical Practice
Digital Poster Example
This is an example to provide you with some inspiration for your poster design. Your
poster must not be a direct copy of this layout – this poster also contains information
boxes to assist you in developing your poster. You do not need to include these.
Poster Front Example
NSB203 – Assessment Task 3 Page 7 of 10
NSB203 – Inquiry into Clinical Practice
Poster Back Example (Literature Matrix)
NSB203 – Assessment Task 3 Page 8 of 10
NSB203 – Inquiry into Clinical Practice
NSB203 Inquiry into Clinical Practice Rubric Assessment 3
Learning outcomes assessed: 1, 2 and 3 Assessment 3 Weighting: 40%
Criteria - 50% total7654321
Informational Poster
Knowledge
and
understanding
of research
and EBP
processes #1
Weighting: 10%
Clearly articulated,
relevant and focused
clinical practice
question.
All PICO elements
defined succinctly.
Clearly articulated
and relevant clinical
practice question.
All PICO elements
clearly defined.
Clearly focused
clinical practice
question.
All PICO elements
defined.
Clearly identified,
but obvious,
clinical practice
question.
All necessary
PICO elements
evident.
Clinical practice
question lacks
focus or clarity:
some areas may
require further
development.
PICO elements
undefined or
absent.
Clinical practice
question lacks
focus, clarity and
components of
the question are
absent.
PICO elements
unclear or
absent.
Clinical practice
question is
absent.
No PICO
elements evident.
Knowledge
and
understanding
of research
and EBP
processes #2
Weighting: 30%
Demonstrates an in
depth knowledge of
the key concepts of
research processes,
and a high level,
comprehensive
understanding of
utilising the EBP
process. Includes
and explains, in
depth, all required
steps of the EBP
process.
Fully and accurately
applies and
seamlessly
integrates this
knowledge in the
context of the
practice issue.
Demonstrates a
comprehensive
knowledge of the
key concepts of
research
processes, and a
comprehensive
understanding of
utilising the EBP
process. Includes
and clearly explains
all required steps of
the EBP process.
Applies and
attempts to
integrate this
knowledge in the
context of the
practice issue.
Demonstrates a
sound level of
knowledge of the
key concepts of
research
processes, and a
sound
understanding of
utilising the EBP
process.
Includes and
explains all
required steps of
the EBP process.
Applies some of
this knowledge in
the context of the
practice issue.
Demonstrates a
basic level of
knowledge of the
key concepts of
research
processes, and a
basic
understanding of
the EBP process.
Includes and
explains all
required steps of
the EBP process
with up to one
minor omission.
Applies some
basic knowledge
in the context of
the practice
issue.
Demonstrates a
limited level of
knowledge of the
key concepts of
research
processes, and
limited
understanding of
utilsing the EBP
process.
Does not include
or explain two
required steps of
the EBP process.
Some
rudimentary but
limited application
of this knowledge
in the context of
the process.
Demonstrates a
very limited level
of knowledge of
the key concepts
of research
processes, and a
very limited
understanding of
utilising the EBP
process.
Does not include
or explains three
required steps of
the EBP process.
Very limited
application of the
knowledge of
research
processes to the
practice issue.
Knowledge of the
key concepts of
research
processes is not
demonstrated; no
understanding of
utilising the EBP
process.
Does not include
or explains more
than three
required steps of
the EBP process.
Does not apply
knowledge of
research
proceses to the
practice issue.

NSB203 – Assessment Task 3 Page 9 of 10
NSB203 – Inquiry into Clinical Practice
Critical
Thinking #1
Weighting: 15%
Sophisticated critical
thinking skills utilised
to analyse and
synthesise evidence
to establish clear
and justified best
practice
recommendations.
A high level of
critical thinking
skills utilised to
analyse and
synthesise
evidence to
establish clear and
justified best
practice
recommendations.
Evidence of critical
thinking skills
utilised to analyse
and synthesise
evidence to
establish justified
and clear best
practice
recommendations.
Evidence of
critical thinking
skills to analyse
and synthesise
evidence to
establish justified
best practice
recommendations
Limited
application of
critical thinking
skills to analyse
and synthesise
evidence.
Best practice
recommendations
only partially
developed.
Very limited
application of
critical thinking
skills to analyse
and synthesise
evidence. Best
practice
recommendations
only partially
developed or
incorrect.
Does not apply
critical thinking
skills to analyse
and synthesise
evidence.
Best practice
recommendation
s absent.
Critical
thinking #2:
literature
Weighting: 15%
Work is thoroughly
supported by wholly
relevant, high quality
scholarly literature,
with clear and
accurate application
of levels of evidence
throughout.
Work is consistently
supported by
relevant, high
quality scholarly
literature with
accurate and clear
application of levels
of evidence.
Work is supported
by relevant, high
quality scholarly
literature with
accurate
application
applying levels of
evidence.
Work is
supported by
relevant literature
with accurate
consideration of
levels of
evidence.
Work lacks
support, with
limited relevant
scholarly
literature. Limited
application of
levels of evidence
or levels
incorrectly
applied on up to
two occasions.
Work lacks
support, with very
limited relevant
scholarly
literature. Limited
or no application
of levels of
evidence, or
levels incorrectly
applied on more
than two
occasions.
No support from
relevant scholarly
literature or
application of
levels of
evidence. Levels
of evidence
absent.
Presentation:
Weighting: 5%
Poster content and
literature matrix has
a high level of clarity
and organisation,
with logical flow
throughout.
No errors in
Vancouver
referencing.
Poster content and
literature matrix is
clear and
organised, with
logical flow.
Few and minor
errors (up to one
error) in Vancouver
referencing.
Poster content and
literature matrix is
clear and
organised. Flow is
generally logical.
Few errors (up to
one) in Vancouver
referencing.
Organisation and
adequate clarity
evident. Flow is
generally logical.
Some consistent
errors (up to two
errors) in
Vancouver
referencing.
Several areas of
the poster
content lack
clarity and
organisation.
Major errors (>2)
in Vancouver
referencing.
Poorly organised
or cluttered
poster, with
unclear content.
Major errors (>3)
in Vancouver
referencing.
Very poorly
organised or
cluttered poster,
with unclear
content.
Many and major
errors (>5) in
Vancouver
referencing
throughout.

NSB203 – Assessment Task 3 Page 10 of 10
NSB203 – Inquiry into Clinical Practice
Academic
writing and
presentation:
Weighting: 5%
Consistently high,
and well-structured,
academic writing
skills, and logical
organisations of
ideas is evident.
Accurate grammar,
spelling and
professional
vocabulary.
Well-developed and
structured
academic writing
skills and clear
organisation
evident.
Mostly consistent
and accurate use of
grammar, spelling
and professional
vocabulary.
Sound academic
writing skills and
work is mainly
well-organised.
Some minor errors
in grammar,
spelling and
professional
vocabulary.
A basic level of
academic writing
skills.
Some errors in
grammar, spelling
and professional
vocabulary are
evident.
A basic level of
academic writing
skills, however
structure and
organisation is
lacking.
Significant errors
in grammar,
spelling and the
use of
professional
vocabulary, which
affects clarity.
Poor organisation
and academic
writing skills are
evident.
Significant errors
in grammar,
spelling and the
use of
professional
vocabulary, which
affects clarity.
Very poor
organisation and
academic writing
skills are evident.
Many, significant
errors in
grammar,
spelling and the
use of
professional
vocabulary,
which affects
clarity.
Critical
thinking #3:
Weighting: 15%
Clearly, concisely
and insightfully
considers highly
relevant barriers and
enablers to
implementation.
Thoroughly
considers and
logically matches
enablers to address
barriers.
Clearly and
concisely considers
relevant barriers
and enablers to
implementation.
Considers and
logically matches
enablers to address
barriers.
Sound
consideration of
relevant barriers
and enablers to
implementation.
Considers and
matches enablers
to address
barriers.
Adequate
consideration of
relevant barriers
and enablers to
implementation.
Basic
consideration and
matching of
enablers to
address barriers.
Limited
description of
relevant barriers
and enablers to
implementation.
Limited
consideration or
no matching of
enablers to
address barriers.
Very limited
description of, or
irrelevant,
barriers and
enablers to
implementation.
Very limited
consideration or
no matching of
enablers to
address barriers.
No description of
barriers and
enablers to
implementation.
No consideration
enablers to
address barriers.
 Satisfactorily complied with the Academic Integrity standards outlined in the MOPP C/5.3 Academic Integrity.
所有文章
×

快要完成了!

我们刚刚发给你了一封邮件。 请点击邮件中的链接确认你的订阅。

好的