searching and appraising literature

/in /by

Home>Homework Answsers>Nursing homework help10 months ago24.10.202415Report issuefiles (5)WK8AssignAkonwahG.docxweek8Assignment2.docxAppendixG.docxAppendixF.docxAppendixE.docxWK8AssignAkonwahG.docx1Effective Search and Appraisal of Evidence for Reducing Hospital-Acquired InfectionsGeraldine AkonwahWalden UniversityDr Letha Thomas10/20/2024Effective Search and Appraisal of Evidence for Reducing Hospital-Acquired InfectionsA literature review is crucial in ensuring that practice gaps are filled, especially in healthcare, and outcomes are improved through evidence-based practice. One such gap is the perpetuation of HAIs, an outstanding challenge in many hospitals worldwide. This requires searching and appraising relevant literature to guide practice changes. The paper discusses evidence searching and appraising on reducing HAIs within a hospital setting, explaining various stages of identifying relevant databases, choosing appropriate keywords, and conducting critical analyses. The literature search is supposed to identify good-quality, peer-reviewed articles to highlight effective strategies for reducing HAIs in hospital settings.Organizational Type and Gap in PracticeThe type of organization in this literature review involves hospitals since the selected gap in practice was on HAIs. Hospital-acquired infections are preventable complications during patient care, usually occurring in the hospital setting. Even though infection control has transformed significantly, hospitals continue to grapple with these infections, which increase morbidity, length of stay, and healthcare costs (Gebregiorgis et al., 2020). The practice change the reviewer is seeking is the implementation of evidence-based interventions that could reduce the incidence of HAIs. The literature search was conducted to find recent studies presenting effective strategies to improve infection control practices.Search Process for EvidenceThe literature search also depends on the choice of databases and keywords. I have chosen CINAHL Complete and PubMed for this assignment. These are two of the most recognized databases with extensive access to peer-reviewed healthcare and medical research. The selection of these databases is based on their relevance to the control of infection in a healthcare setting, and they have been highly recognized as having comprehensive coverage of nursing and medical research. CINAHL is a very specific source of literature about nursing and allied health, while PubMed gives access to extensive clinical studies and systematic reviews.I decided on the following keywords: “hospital-acquired infections,” “infection control,” “evidence-based practice,” and “hospitals.” In selecting these terms, I tried to address the problem of hospital-acquired infections and its possible solution- infection control via evidence-based practice in a hospital setting. I used Boolean operators such as AND to combine terms such as “hospital-acquired infections AND infection control.” I selected filters to limit results to only peer-reviewed articles from the last five years. A search from CINAHL produced 12 articles, and PubMed produced 5 in total, further refined based on relevance and quality.Appraisal of EvidenceThe articles were then appraised to identify the most relevant and highest-quality studies. Regarding the articles identified, an appraisal was made based on methodological rigor, relevance to the practice gap, and source credibility. Regarding methodological rigor, only those studies with a very strong research design, such as RCTs, cohort studies, or systematic reviews, were considered. The relevance of the studies was assessed for those that would give actionable strategies to reduce HAIs in the hospitals, addressing the identified specific practice gap.The identified studies were appraised using the appraisal frameworks from the course. Specifically, Appendices E, F, and G. I identified, retrieved, and reviewed three recent, rigorous, relevant, and impactful articles using the search outcomes. They were listed in reputable and peer-reviewed journals whose recommendations were evidence-based, thus making them easy to apply in a hospital setup to bridge the existing gap in infection control practices. Thus, These criteria ensured that the selected studies would provide the most credible and actionable evidence for practice improvement.ConclusionA literature search and evidence appraisal has to be conducted properly if, on the one hand, a literature review is to provide helpful guidance toward changes in practice. This paper chose the appropriate databases and keywords which helped to identify relevant literature regarding hospital-acquired infections. Through a sound appraisal process, it selected only high-quality, peer-reviewed articles. These three selected articles provide insight into good practices for reducing hospital HAIs, thereby contributing to improving patient safety and outcomes. Thus, healthcare professionals bridge the gap in practice and establish appropriate interventions that will lead to better healthcare delivery following the structured approach.ReferencesGebregiorgis, B. G., Takele, G. M., Ayenew, K. D., & Amare, Y. E. (2020). Prevalence of hospital-acquired infections (HAIs) and associated factors in Ethiopia: a systematic review and meta-analysis protocol.BMJ open,10(12), e042111.https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/10/12/e042111.abstractweek8Assignment2.docxWhen conducting a literature review, what are the steps you should you take to successfully search the evidence? Once you have generated your results, how do you properly appraise the evidence, grade them, and select the ones you want to use?When conducting a literature review, the goal is to produce a set of results that match your search criteria. The results you get will vary dramatically depending on the search engine(s) you utilize and which key words you choose to enter. Selecting the right database(s) is one skill; selecting the best key words is another. In this Assignment, you will hone your skills in both of these important aspects of the search process.Keep in mind, the results of your search will vary in terms of quality, as well as appropriateness, and significance to your research goals. For this reason, searching is only the first step of the process. The second step is to appraise the results you identified, and based on your evaluations, select the literature that you will select.ResourcesBe sure to review the Learning Resources before completing this activity.
Click the weekly resources link to access the resources.WEEKLY RESOURCESTo prepare:· Review the Learning Resources for this week which focus on how to successfully search and appraise search results.· Review the course textbook Appendices E, F, and G, located in the Learning Resources for this week, which you will be required to complete and submit as part of this Assignment.· Selectoneorganizational type andonegap in practice or practice change on which to focus for this Assignment.Note:You may select a new organizational type and gap in practice or practice change or, if you choose, you may reuse one on which you focused for a previous Assignment, Discussion, or Blog in this course.Also Note:These may or may not be the same organizational type and gap in practice or practice change as those you will focus on for your Practicum and DNP Project.· Consider all of the factors you should take into account when searching the evidence, then, using the Walden Library databases, conduct a search related to the organizational type and gap in practice or practice change you selected.· Consider all of the factors you should take into account when apprising evidence, then, using the course text Appendices E, F, and G, appraise the results of your search.· Based on your appraisals, identify thethreerecent (within the last five years), peer-reviewed articles that you think are most relevant to your research goals.Dang, D., Dearholt, S. L., Bissett, K., Ascenzi, J., & Whalen, M. (2021).Johns Hopkins evidence-based practice for nurses and healthcare professionals: Model and guidelines(4th ed.). Sigma Theta Tau International.· Chapter 5, “Searching for Evidence” (pp. 99–120)· Chapter 6, “Evidence Appraisal: Research” (pp. 129–162)· Chapter 7, “Evidence Appraisal: Nonresearch” (pp. 163–188)· Appendix D, “Hierarchy of Evidence Guide” (pp. 295–296)·Appendix E, “Research Evidence Appraisal Tool” (pp. 297–306)Download Appendix E, “Research Evidence Appraisal Tool” (pp. 297–306)·Appendix F, “Nonresearch Evidence Appraisal Tool” (pp. 307–314)Download Appendix F, “Nonresearch Evidence Appraisal Tool” (pp. 307–314)·Appendix G, “Individual Evidence Summary Tool” (pp. 315–316)Download Appendix G, “Individual Evidence Summary Tool” (pp. 315–316)Note:Be prepared to complete and submit Appendices E, F, and G for your Assignments this week.· Cancelliere, C., Cassidy, J. D., Ammendolia, C., & Côté, P. (2011). Figure 1.Flow diagram of literature search. In Are workplace health promotion programs effective at improving presenteeism in workers? A systematic review and best evidence synthesis of the literature.Links to an external site.BMC Public Health 11, Article 395. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-11-395Note:This resource is seminal to the field.Also Note:Review this example of the workflow process when conducting a literature search. You can use it as a model to guide your future literature searches.· Walden University Library. (n.d.).Ask a librarianLinks to an external site.. https://academicguides.waldenu.edu/library/askNote:Use this website to find answers to common questions or to contact a librarian directly.· Walden University Library. (n.d.).Subject research: NursingLinks to an external site..https://academicguides.waldenu.edu/library/subject/nursingNote:This database is a good starting point for nursing related searches.· Walden University Quick Answers. (n.d.).How do I verify that my article is peer reviewed?Links to an external site.[Multimedia]. https://academicanswers.waldenu.edu/faq/72613AppendixG.docxJohns Hopkins Evidence-Based Practice Model for Nursing and Healthcare ProfessionalsIndividual Evidence Summary ToolAppendix GJohns Hopkins Nursing Evidence-Based PracticeIndividual Evidence Summary Tool (Appendix G)EBP Question:Reviewer name(s)Article numberAuthor, date, and titleType of evidencePopulation, size, and settingInterventionFindings that help answer the EBP questionMeasures usedLimitationsEvidence level and qualityNotes to teamDirections for use of the Individual Evidence Summary ToolPurpose:Use this form to document and collate the results of the review and appraisal of each piece of evidence in preparation for evidence synthesis. The table headers indicate important elements of each article that will contribute to the synthesis process. The data in each cell should be complete enough that the other team members can gather all relevant information related to the evidence without having to go to each source article.See Chapter 11, Lessons from Practice, for examples of completed tools.Reviewer name(s):Record the member(s) of the team who are providing the information for each article. This will provide tracking if there are follow-up items or additional questions on an individual piece of evidence.Article number:Assign a number to each piece of evidence included in the table. This organizes the individual evidence summary and provides an easy way to reference articles.Author, date, and title:Record the last name of the first author of the article, the publication/communication date, and the title. This will help track articles throughout the literature search, screening, and review process. It is also helpful when someone has authored more than one publication included in the review.Type of evidence:Indicate the type of evidence for each source. This should be descriptive of the study or project design (e.g., randomized control trial, meta-analysis, mixed methods, qualitative, systematic review, case study, literature review) and not simply the level on the evidence hierarchy.Population, size, and setting:For research evidence, provide a quick view of the population, number of participants, and study location. For non-research evidence, population refers to the target audience, patient population, or profession. Non-research evidence may or may not have a sample size and/or location as found with research evidence.Intervention:Record the intervention(s) implemented or discussed in the article. This should relate to the intervention or comparison elements of your PICO question.Findings that help answer the EBP question:List findings from the article that directly answer the EBP question. These should be succinct statements that provide enough information that the reader does not need to return to the original article. Avoid directly copying and pasting from the article.Measures used:These are the measures and/or instruments (e.g., counts, rates, satisfaction surveys, validated tools, subscales) the authors used to determine the answer to the research question or the effectiveness of their intervention. Consider these measures as identified in the evidence for collection during the implementation of the EBP team’s project.Limitations:Provide the limitations of the evidence—both as listed by the authors as well as your assessment of any flaws or drawbacks. Consider the methodology, quality of reporting, and generalizability to the population of interest. Limitations should be apparent from the team’s appraisals using the Research and Non-Research Evidence Appraisal Tools (Appendices E and F). It can be helpful to consider the reasons an article did not receive a “high” quality rating because these reasons are limitations identified by the team.Evidence level and quality:Using the Research and Non-Research Evidence Appraisal tools (Appendices E and F), record the level (I-V) and quality (A, B or C) of the evidence. When possible, at least two reviewers should determine the level and quality.Notes to team:The team uses this section to keep track of items important to the EBP process not captured elsewhere on this tool. Consider items that will be helpful to have easy reference to when conducting the evidence synthesis.© 2021 Johns Hopkins Health System/Johns Hopkins School of Nursing Page |1© 2022 Johns Hopkins Health System/Johns Hopkins School of Nursing Page |3image1.jpegAppendixF.docxThis file is too large to display.View in new windowAppendixE.docxThis file is too large to display.View in new windowAppendixE.docxThis file is too large to display.View in new windowWK8AssignAkonwahG.docx1Effective Search and Appraisal of Evidence for Reducing Hospital-Acquired InfectionsGeraldine AkonwahWalden UniversityDr Letha Thomas10/20/2024Effective Search and Appraisal of Evidence for Reducing Hospital-Acquired InfectionsA literature review is crucial in ensuring that practice gaps are filled, especially in healthcare, and outcomes are improved through evidence-based practice. One such gap is the perpetuation of HAIs, an outstanding challenge in many hospitals worldwide. This requires searching and appraising relevant literature to guide practice changes. The paper discusses evidence searching and appraising on reducing HAIs within a hospital setting, explaining various stages of identifying relevant databases, choosing appropriate keywords, and conducting critical analyses. The literature search is supposed to identify good-quality, peer-reviewed articles to highlight effective strategies for reducing HAIs in hospital settings.Organizational Type and Gap in PracticeThe type of organization in this literature review involves hospitals since the selected gap in practice was on HAIs. Hospital-acquired infections are preventable complications during patient care, usually occurring in the hospital setting. Even though infection control has transformed significantly, hospitals continue to grapple with these infections, which increase morbidity, length of stay, and healthcare costs (Gebregiorgis et al., 2020). The practice change the reviewer is seeking is the implementation of evidence-based interventions that could reduce the incidence of HAIs. The literature search was conducted to find recent studies presenting effective strategies to improve infection control practices.Search Process for EvidenceThe literature search also depends on the choice of databases and keywords. I have chosen CINAHL Complete and PubMed for this assignment. These are two of the most recognized databases with extensive access to peer-reviewed healthcare and medical research. The selection of these databases is based on their relevance to the control of infection in a healthcare setting, and they have been highly recognized as having comprehensive coverage of nursing and medical research. CINAHL is a very specific source of literature about nursing and allied health, while PubMed gives access to extensive clinical studies and systematic reviews.I decided on the following keywords: “hospital-acquired infections,” “infection control,” “evidence-based practice,” and “hospitals.” In selecting these terms, I tried to address the problem of hospital-acquired infections and its possible solution- infection control via evidence-based practice in a hospital setting. I used Boolean operators such as AND to combine terms such as “hospital-acquired infections AND infection control.” I selected filters to limit results to only peer-reviewed articles from the last five years. A search from CINAHL produced 12 articles, and PubMed produced 5 in total, further refined based on relevance and quality.Appraisal of EvidenceThe articles were then appraised to identify the most relevant and highest-quality studies. Regarding the articles identified, an appraisal was made based on methodological rigor, relevance to the practice gap, and source credibility. Regarding methodological rigor, only those studies with a very strong research design, such as RCTs, cohort studies, or systematic reviews, were considered. The relevance of the studies was assessed for those that would give actionable strategies to reduce HAIs in the hospitals, addressing the identified specific practice gap.The identified studies were appraised using the appraisal frameworks from the course. Specifically, Appendices E, F, and G. I identified, retrieved, and reviewed three recent, rigorous, relevant, and impactful articles using the search outcomes. They were listed in reputable and peer-reviewed journals whose recommendations were evidence-based, thus making them easy to apply in a hospital setup to bridge the existing gap in infection control practices. Thus, These criteria ensured that the selected studies would provide the most credible and actionable evidence for practice improvement.ConclusionA literature search and evidence appraisal has to be conducted properly if, on the one hand, a literature review is to provide helpful guidance toward changes in practice. This paper chose the appropriate databases and keywords which helped to identify relevant literature regarding hospital-acquired infections. Through a sound appraisal process, it selected only high-quality, peer-reviewed articles. These three selected articles provide insight into good practices for reducing hospital HAIs, thereby contributing to improving patient safety and outcomes. Thus, healthcare professionals bridge the gap in practice and establish appropriate interventions that will lead to better healthcare delivery following the structured approach.ReferencesGebregiorgis, B. G., Takele, G. M., Ayenew, K. D., & Amare, Y. E. (2020). Prevalence of hospital-acquired infections (HAIs) and associated factors in Ethiopia: a systematic review and meta-analysis protocol.BMJ open,10(12), e042111.https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/10/12/e042111.abstractweek8Assignment2.docxWhen conducting a literature review, what are the steps you should you take to successfully search the evidence? Once you have generated your results, how do you properly appraise the evidence, grade them, and select the ones you want to use?When conducting a literature review, the goal is to produce a set of results that match your search criteria. The results you get will vary dramatically depending on the search engine(s) you utilize and which key words you choose to enter. Selecting the right database(s) is one skill; selecting the best key words is another. In this Assignment, you will hone your skills in both of these important aspects of the search process.Keep in mind, the results of your search will vary in terms of quality, as well as appropriateness, and significance to your research goals. For this reason, searching is only the first step of the process. The second step is to appraise the results you identified, and based on your evaluations, select the literature that you will select.ResourcesBe sure to review the Learning Resources before completing this activity.
Click the weekly resources link to access the resources.WEEKLY RESOURCESTo prepare:· Review the Learning Resources for this week which focus on how to successfully search and appraise search results.· Review the course textbook Appendices E, F, and G, located in the Learning Resources for this week, which you will be required to complete and submit as part of this Assignment.· Selectoneorganizational type andonegap in practice or practice change on which to focus for this Assignment.Note:You may select a new organizational type and gap in practice or practice change or, if you choose, you may reuse one on which you focused for a previous Assignment, Discussion, or Blog in this course.Also Note:These may or may not be the same organizational type and gap in practice or practice change as those you will focus on for your Practicum and DNP Project.· Consider all of the factors you should take into account when searching the evidence, then, using the Walden Library databases, conduct a search related to the organizational type and gap in practice or practice change you selected.· Consider all of the factors you should take into account when apprising evidence, then, using the course text Appendices E, F, and G, appraise the results of your search.· Based on your appraisals, identify thethreerecent (within the last five years), peer-reviewed articles that you think are most relevant to your research goals.Dang, D., Dearholt, S. L., Bissett, K., Ascenzi, J., & Whalen, M. (2021).Johns Hopkins evidence-based practice for nurses and healthcare professionals: Model and guidelines(4th ed.). Sigma Theta Tau International.· Chapter 5, “Searching for Evidence” (pp. 99–120)· Chapter 6, “Evidence Appraisal: Research” (pp. 129–162)· Chapter 7, “Evidence Appraisal: Nonresearch” (pp. 163–188)· Appendix D, “Hierarchy of Evidence Guide” (pp. 295–296)·Appendix E, “Research Evidence Appraisal Tool” (pp. 297–306)Download Appendix E, “Research Evidence Appraisal Tool” (pp. 297–306)·Appendix F, “Nonresearch Evidence Appraisal Tool” (pp. 307–314)Download Appendix F, “Nonresearch Evidence Appraisal Tool” (pp. 307–314)·Appendix G, “Individual Evidence Summary Tool” (pp. 315–316)Download Appendix G, “Individual Evidence Summary Tool” (pp. 315–316)Note:Be prepared to complete and submit Appendices E, F, and G for your Assignments this week.· Cancelliere, C., Cassidy, J. D., Ammendolia, C., & Côté, P. (2011). Figure 1.Flow diagram of literature search. In Are workplace health promotion programs effective at improving presenteeism in workers? A systematic review and best evidence synthesis of the literature.Links to an external site.BMC Public Health 11, Article 395. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-11-395Note:This resource is seminal to the field.Also Note:Review this example of the workflow process when conducting a literature search. You can use it as a model to guide your future literature searches.· Walden University Library. (n.d.).Ask a librarianLinks to an external site.. https://academicguides.waldenu.edu/library/askNote:Use this website to find answers to common questions or to contact a librarian directly.· Walden University Library. (n.d.).Subject research: NursingLinks to an external site..https://academicguides.waldenu.edu/library/subject/nursingNote:This database is a good starting point for nursing related searches.· Walden University Quick Answers. (n.d.).How do I verify that my article is peer reviewed?Links to an external site.[Multimedia]. https://academicanswers.waldenu.edu/faq/72613AppendixG.docxJohns Hopkins Evidence-Based Practice Model for Nursing and Healthcare ProfessionalsIndividual Evidence Summary ToolAppendix GJohns Hopkins Nursing Evidence-Based PracticeIndividual Evidence Summary Tool (Appendix G)EBP Question:Reviewer name(s)Article numberAuthor, date, and titleType of evidencePopulation, size, and settingInterventionFindings that help answer the EBP questionMeasures usedLimitationsEvidence level and qualityNotes to teamDirections for use of the Individual Evidence Summary ToolPurpose:Use this form to document and collate the results of the review and appraisal of each piece of evidence in preparation for evidence synthesis. The table headers indicate important elements of each article that will contribute to the synthesis process. The data in each cell should be complete enough that the other team members can gather all relevant information related to the evidence without having to go to each source article.See Chapter 11, Lessons from Practice, for examples of completed tools.Reviewer name(s):Record the member(s) of the team who are providing the information for each article. This will provide tracking if there are follow-up items or additional questions on an individual piece of evidence.Article number:Assign a number to each piece of evidence included in the table. This organizes the individual evidence summary and provides an easy way to reference articles.Author, date, and title:Record the last name of the first author of the article, the publication/communication date, and the title. This will help track articles throughout the literature search, screening, and review process. It is also helpful when someone has authored more than one publication included in the review.Type of evidence:Indicate the type of evidence for each source. This should be descriptive of the study or project design (e.g., randomized control trial, meta-analysis, mixed methods, qualitative, systematic review, case study, literature review) and not simply the level on the evidence hierarchy.Population, size, and setting:For research evidence, provide a quick view of the population, number of participants, and study location. For non-research evidence, population refers to the target audience, patient population, or profession. Non-research evidence may or may not have a sample size and/or location as found with research evidence.Intervention:Record the intervention(s) implemented or discussed in the article. This should relate to the intervention or comparison elements of your PICO question.Findings that help answer the EBP question:List findings from the article that directly answer the EBP question. These should be succinct statements that provide enough information that the reader does not need to return to the original article. Avoid directly copying and pasting from the article.Measures used:These are the measures and/or instruments (e.g., counts, rates, satisfaction surveys, validated tools, subscales) the authors used to determine the answer to the research question or the effectiveness of their intervention. Consider these measures as identified in the evidence for collection during the implementation of the EBP team’s project.Limitations:Provide the limitations of the evidence—both as listed by the authors as well as your assessment of any flaws or drawbacks. Consider the methodology, quality of reporting, and generalizability to the population of interest. Limitations should be apparent from the team’s appraisals using the Research and Non-Research Evidence Appraisal Tools (Appendices E and F). It can be helpful to consider the reasons an article did not receive a “high” quality rating because these reasons are limitations identified by the team.Evidence level and quality:Using the Research and Non-Research Evidence Appraisal tools (Appendices E and F), record the level (I-V) and quality (A, B or C) of the evidence. When possible, at least two reviewers should determine the level and quality.Notes to team:The team uses this section to keep track of items important to the EBP process not captured elsewhere on this tool. Consider items that will be helpful to have easy reference to when conducting the evidence synthesis.© 2021 Johns Hopkins Health System/Johns Hopkins School of Nursing Page |1© 2022 Johns Hopkins Health System/Johns Hopkins School of Nursing Page |3image1.jpegAppendixF.docxThis file is too large to display.View in new windowAppendixE.docxThis file is too large to display.View in new windowWK8AssignAkonwahG.docx1Effective Search and Appraisal of Evidence for Reducing Hospital-Acquired InfectionsGeraldine AkonwahWalden UniversityDr Letha Thomas10/20/2024Effective Search and Appraisal of Evidence for Reducing Hospital-Acquired InfectionsA literature review is crucial in ensuring that practice gaps are filled, especially in healthcare, and outcomes are improved through evidence-based practice. One such gap is the perpetuation of HAIs, an outstanding challenge in many hospitals worldwide. This requires searching and appraising relevant literature to guide practice changes. The paper discusses evidence searching and appraising on reducing HAIs within a hospital setting, explaining various stages of identifying relevant databases, choosing appropriate keywords, and conducting critical analyses. The literature search is supposed to identify good-quality, peer-reviewed articles to highlight effective strategies for reducing HAIs in hospital settings.Organizational Type and Gap in PracticeThe type of organization in this literature review involves hospitals since the selected gap in practice was on HAIs. Hospital-acquired infections are preventable complications during patient care, usually occurring in the hospital setting. Even though infection control has transformed significantly, hospitals continue to grapple with these infections, which increase morbidity, length of stay, and healthcare costs (Gebregiorgis et al., 2020). The practice change the reviewer is seeking is the implementation of evidence-based interventions that could reduce the incidence of HAIs. The literature search was conducted to find recent studies presenting effective strategies to improve infection control practices.Search Process for EvidenceThe literature search also depends on the choice of databases and keywords. I have chosen CINAHL Complete and PubMed for this assignment. These are two of the most recognized databases with extensive access to peer-reviewed healthcare and medical research. The selection of these databases is based on their relevance to the control of infection in a healthcare setting, and they have been highly recognized as having comprehensive coverage of nursing and medical research. CINAHL is a very specific source of literature about nursing and allied health, while PubMed gives access to extensive clinical studies and systematic reviews.I decided on the following keywords: “hospital-acquired infections,” “infection control,” “evidence-based practice,” and “hospitals.” In selecting these terms, I tried to address the problem of hospital-acquired infections and its possible solution- infection control via evidence-based practice in a hospital setting. I used Boolean operators such as AND to combine terms such as “hospital-acquired infections AND infection control.” I selected filters to limit results to only peer-reviewed articles from the last five years. A search from CINAHL produced 12 articles, and PubMed produced 5 in total, further refined based on relevance and quality.Appraisal of EvidenceThe articles were then appraised to identify the most relevant and highest-quality studies. Regarding the articles identified, an appraisal was made based on methodological rigor, relevance to the practice gap, and source credibility. Regarding methodological rigor, only those studies with a very strong research design, such as RCTs, cohort studies, or systematic reviews, were considered. The relevance of the studies was assessed for those that would give actionable strategies to reduce HAIs in the hospitals, addressing the identified specific practice gap.The identified studies were appraised using the appraisal frameworks from the course. Specifically, Appendices E, F, and G. I identified, retrieved, and reviewed three recent, rigorous, relevant, and impactful articles using the search outcomes. They were listed in reputable and peer-reviewed journals whose recommendations were evidence-based, thus making them easy to apply in a hospital setup to bridge the existing gap in infection control practices. Thus, These criteria ensured that the selected studies would provide the most credible and actionable evidence for practice improvement.ConclusionA literature search and evidence appraisal has to be conducted properly if, on the one hand, a literature review is to provide helpful guidance toward changes in practice. This paper chose the appropriate databases and keywords which helped to identify relevant literature regarding hospital-acquired infections. Through a sound appraisal process, it selected only high-quality, peer-reviewed articles. These three selected articles provide insight into good practices for reducing hospital HAIs, thereby contributing to improving patient safety and outcomes. Thus, healthcare professionals bridge the gap in practice and establish appropriate interventions that will lead to better healthcare delivery following the structured approach.ReferencesGebregiorgis, B. G., Takele, G. M., Ayenew, K. D., & Amare, Y. E. (2020). Prevalence of hospital-acquired infections (HAIs) and associated factors in Ethiopia: a systematic review and meta-analysis protocol.BMJ open,10(12), e042111.https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/10/12/e042111.abstractweek8Assignment2.docxWhen conducting a literature review, what are the steps you should you take to successfully search the evidence? Once you have generated your results, how do you properly appraise the evidence, grade them, and select the ones you want to use?When conducting a literature review, the goal is to produce a set of results that match your search criteria. The results you get will vary dramatically depending on the search engine(s) you utilize and which key words you choose to enter. Selecting the right database(s) is one skill; selecting the best key words is another. In this Assignment, you will hone your skills in both of these important aspects of the search process.Keep in mind, the results of your search will vary in terms of quality, as well as appropriateness, and significance to your research goals. For this reason, searching is only the first step of the process. The second step is to appraise the results you identified, and based on your evaluations, select the literature that you will select.ResourcesBe sure to review the Learning Resources before completing this activity.
Click the weekly resources link to access the resources.WEEKLY RESOURCESTo prepare:· Review the Learning Resources for this week which focus on how to successfully search and appraise search results.· Review the course textbook Appendices E, F, and G, located in the Learning Resources for this week, which you will be required to complete and submit as part of this Assignment.· Selectoneorganizational type andonegap in practice or practice change on which to focus for this Assignment.Note:You may select a new organizational type and gap in practice or practice change or, if you choose, you may reuse one on which you focused for a previous Assignment, Discussion, or Blog in this course.Also Note:These may or may not be the same organizational type and gap in practice or practice change as those you will focus on for your Practicum and DNP Project.· Consider all of the factors you should take into account when searching the evidence, then, using the Walden Library databases, conduct a search related to the organizational type and gap in practice or practice change you selected.· Consider all of the factors you should take into account when apprising evidence, then, using the course text Appendices E, F, and G, appraise the results of your search.· Based on your appraisals, identify thethreerecent (within the last five years), peer-reviewed articles that you think are most relevant to your research goals.Dang, D., Dearholt, S. L., Bissett, K., Ascenzi, J., & Whalen, M. (2021).Johns Hopkins evidence-based practice for nurses and healthcare professionals: Model and guidelines(4th ed.). Sigma Theta Tau International.· Chapter 5, “Searching for Evidence” (pp. 99–120)· Chapter 6, “Evidence Appraisal: Research” (pp. 129–162)· Chapter 7, “Evidence Appraisal: Nonresearch” (pp. 163–188)· Appendix D, “Hierarchy of Evidence Guide” (pp. 295–296)·Appendix E, “Research Evidence Appraisal Tool” (pp. 297–306)Download Appendix E, “Research Evidence Appraisal Tool” (pp. 297–306)·Appendix F, “Nonresearch Evidence Appraisal Tool” (pp. 307–314)Download Appendix F, “Nonresearch Evidence Appraisal Tool” (pp. 307–314)·Appendix G, “Individual Evidence Summary Tool” (pp. 315–316)Download Appendix G, “Individual Evidence Summary Tool” (pp. 315–316)Note:Be prepared to complete and submit Appendices E, F, and G for your Assignments this week.· Cancelliere, C., Cassidy, J. D., Ammendolia, C., & Côté, P. (2011). Figure 1.Flow diagram of literature search. In Are workplace health promotion programs effective at improving presenteeism in workers? A systematic review and best evidence synthesis of the literature.Links to an external site.BMC Public Health 11, Article 395. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-11-395Note:This resource is seminal to the field.Also Note:Review this example of the workflow process when conducting a literature search. You can use it as a model to guide your future literature searches.· Walden University Library. (n.d.).Ask a librarianLinks to an external site.. https://academicguides.waldenu.edu/library/askNote:Use this website to find answers to common questions or to contact a librarian directly.· Walden University Library. (n.d.).Subject research: NursingLinks to an external site..https://academicguides.waldenu.edu/library/subject/nursingNote:This database is a good starting point for nursing related searches.· Walden University Quick Answers. (n.d.).How do I verify that my article is peer reviewed?Links to an external site.[Multimedia]. https://academicanswers.waldenu.edu/faq/72613AppendixG.docxJohns Hopkins Evidence-Based Practice Model for Nursing and Healthcare ProfessionalsIndividual Evidence Summary ToolAppendix GJohns Hopkins Nursing Evidence-Based PracticeIndividual Evidence Summary Tool (Appendix G)EBP Question:Reviewer name(s)Article numberAuthor, date, and titleType of evidencePopulation, size, and settingInterventionFindings that help answer the EBP questionMeasures usedLimitationsEvidence level and qualityNotes to teamDirections for use of the Individual Evidence Summary ToolPurpose:Use this form to document and collate the results of the review and appraisal of each piece of evidence in preparation for evidence synthesis. The table headers indicate important elements of each article that will contribute to the synthesis process. The data in each cell should be complete enough that the other team members can gather all relevant information related to the evidence without having to go to each source article.See Chapter 11, Lessons from Practice, for examples of completed tools.Reviewer name(s):Record the member(s) of the team who are providing the information for each article. This will provide tracking if there are follow-up items or additional questions on an individual piece of evidence.Article number:Assign a number to each piece of evidence included in the table. This organizes the individual evidence summary and provides an easy way to reference articles.Author, date, and title:Record the last name of the first author of the article, the publication/communication date, and the title. This will help track articles throughout the literature search, screening, and review process. It is also helpful when someone has authored more than one publication included in the review.Type of evidence:Indicate the type of evidence for each source. This should be descriptive of the study or project design (e.g., randomized control trial, meta-analysis, mixed methods, qualitative, systematic review, case study, literature review) and not simply the level on the evidence hierarchy.Population, size, and setting:For research evidence, provide a quick view of the population, number of participants, and study location. For non-research evidence, population refers to the target audience, patient population, or profession. Non-research evidence may or may not have a sample size and/or location as found with research evidence.Intervention:Record the intervention(s) implemented or discussed in the article. This should relate to the intervention or comparison elements of your PICO question.Findings that help answer the EBP question:List findings from the article that directly answer the EBP question. These should be succinct statements that provide enough information that the reader does not need to return to the original article. Avoid directly copying and pasting from the article.Measures used:These are the measures and/or instruments (e.g., counts, rates, satisfaction surveys, validated tools, subscales) the authors used to determine the answer to the research question or the effectiveness of their intervention. Consider these measures as identified in the evidence for collection during the implementation of the EBP team’s project.Limitations:Provide the limitations of the evidence—both as listed by the authors as well as your assessment of any flaws or drawbacks. Consider the methodology, quality of reporting, and generalizability to the population of interest. Limitations should be apparent from the team’s appraisals using the Research and Non-Research Evidence Appraisal Tools (Appendices E and F). It can be helpful to consider the reasons an article did not receive a “high” quality rating because these reasons are limitations identified by the team.Evidence level and quality:Using the Research and Non-Research Evidence Appraisal tools (Appendices E and F), record the level (I-V) and quality (A, B or C) of the evidence. When possible, at least two reviewers should determine the level and quality.Notes to team:The team uses this section to keep track of items important to the EBP process not captured elsewhere on this tool. Consider items that will be helpful to have easy reference to when conducting the evidence synthesis.© 2021 Johns Hopkins Health System/Johns Hopkins School of Nursing Page |1© 2022 Johns Hopkins Health System/Johns Hopkins School of Nursing Page |3image1.jpegAppendixF.docxThis file is too large to display.View in new windowAppendixE.docxThis file is too large to display.View in new window12345Bids(66)Dr. Ellen RMMISS HILLARY A+Dr. Aylin JMnicohwilliamProf Double RProf. TOPGRADEEmily ClareDr. Sarah Blakefirstclass tutorMUSYOKIONES A+Dr CloverDiscount AssigngrA+de plusSheryl HoganProWritingGuruDr. Everleigh_JKColeen AndersonIsabella HarvardBrilliant GeekTutor Cyrus KenShow All Bidsother Questions(10)2000 word essay – Logistic (Need in 2 days!)Information Security Policy – Network Security PolicyProve the following: Let a, b, and c be any integers.  If a | b, then a | bc.Question part 2Strategy Plan- Digital Music Distribution Industry*****A++ Rated Tutorial Already***** Use as a Guide Paper*****Workforce RetentionBetween which two consecutive whole numbers is square root of 30case the Purchasing and Supply ManagementFactoringIndividual Problem Set Fall SPSS

Needs help with similar assignment?

We are available 24x7 to deliver the best services and assignment ready within 3-4 hours? Order a custom-written, plagiarism-free paper

Get Answer Over WhatsApp Order Paper Now