PLEASE CHECK THE ATTACHMENT

Step 1. Critical:  all else depends on your finding a Randomized Controlled (Clinical) Trial Peer-Reviewed Journal Article (Level II Evidence)  Review Figure 1.1,~ p. 13 of your textbook for the Level of Evidence Pyramid, which shows an RCT is at Level II. When you communicate with physicians about an article, they respect the article more when it is at least on the Level II evidence pyramid, which suggests more credibility and possibly better input regarding outcomes of care.  Find your peer-reviewed Randomized Controlled Trial (RCT) article related to your area of interest.  

Step 2.  Once you have your article, read it, and then look at the CONSORT Checklist, and write the page number in the article that has the information the checklist requires. (FYI, researchers who publish their research use this checklist to be sure they have everything in their article, or it is often not accepted by premier scholarly publishers). The checklist is worth 25 points, as it takes time and discernment to do it correctly.

Step 3:  Once your fill out the CONSORT CHECKLIST (25 points), you must then write a formal summary of the Analysis of Strengths and Weaknesses (worth 8 points) that you will notice is on the CONSORT checklist. The following steps are to assist you in distilling the specifics for what is required in the Analysis of Strengths and Weaknesses for the CONSORT checklist. .

Step 4  Specifics of the ANALYSIS OF STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES.  Review ~p. 9 of your research textbook, and then note how to write
 

1. Introduction  (1 point)

                   + Purpose of the RCT (discuss)

1. Overall Strengths and Weaknesses  (1 point) 

                  +  Research Design (Discuss)

                  +  Important Findings

1. Reliability and Validity  (2 points) (Check the

     methods, instruments, measurements or

     procedures sections of article); statistics; Level of Evidence and

     implications; cause-effect measurement; any threats to internal

     or external validity

1. Ethics (1 point)

                  +  IRB? +Conflict of Interest +Informed Consent Signed

1. Topic/Summary  (2 points)

                 + Implications

                 + Limitations

                 + Recommendation(s)

Step 5  Proofread, check for accuracy of information, grammar, and proper use of APA guidelines (worth 1 point)

Step 6:  Now look at the exemplar for the CHECKLIST and Analysis of Strengths of Weaknesses. 

Step 7: Calculate your grade: 25 possible points for CONSORT CHECKLIST being accurate and 8 points for Analysis of Strengths and

Weaknesses = 33 possibles
 

Specifications for Annotated Bibliography

Your annotated bibliography (20 points) must have eight entries, one for each source. Each entry is worth 2.5 points and needs to include:

· Reference entry (must be in proper APA format)  (.5 points per entry)

· Annotation which includes:

· Summary of source content & overview of argument (.5 points per entry)

· Evaluation of content: bias & objectivity (.5 points per entry)

· Evaluation of source: author(s) & publication (.5 points per entry)

· Relevance to your paper topic (.5 points per entry)

Color-Coded Examples

Fitzpatrick, J. (2016). Helping nursing students develop and expand their emotional intelligence. Nursing Education Perspectives 37(3), 124. doi:10.1097/01.NEP.0000000000000020

Fitzpatrick discusses the need for nurses to have emotional intelligence (EI). This assertion is backed by evidence from previous studies. Fitzpatrick’s study focuses on the way in which nursing students’ emotional intelligence can be developed through reflective writing. The study was conducted at multiple nursing colleges using objective data from EI test scores. Joyce J. Fitzpatrick, PhD, MBA, RN, FAAN, is a reputable scholar in her field as she is the Elizabeth Brooks Ford Professor of Nursing, Frances Payne Bolton School of Nursing, Case Western Reserve University. Additionally, the journal is peer-reviewed, so the source is sound. Fitzpatrick does not present any observable bias in her study. Through results of the study, Fitzpatrick reveals that nursing students’ EI can be improved through her prescribed methodology for guided reflection. This source is applicable and valuable to my research, as it reinforces the need for EI and the benefits of reflective writing.

Gustin, L. W. and Wagner, L. (2012). The butterfly effect of caring: Clinical nursing teachers’ understanding of self-compassion as a source to compassionate care. Scandinavian Journal of Caring Sciences 27(1), 175-183. doi:10.1111/j.1471-6712.2012.01033.x

Gustin and Wagner present the “butterfly effect” of how nursing students learning self-compassion translates to them giving more compassionate care to their patients. Their study is qualitative and does not appear to contain any bias. Lena Wiklund Gustin PhD, RN is an Associate Professor of the School of Health, Care, and Social Welfare at Mälardalen University, and Lynne Wagner EdD, MSN, RN is a Nurse Consultant and Nurse Educator at Watson Caring Science Institute.  Additionally, the publication is a peer-reviewed journal; therefore, the source is sound. This source is very relevant to my research because the main focus of my paper is the need for nurses to have an ethic of self-care in order to be effective health care providers. 

 You have now been exposed to various world-views of well known theorists and their nursing philosophies/theories, including other disciplines’ philosophies.In this project, you will write your own philosophy of nursing unique to your own current practice of nursing.Writing a philosophy is time-consuming, and requires much self-introspection. It involves writing down your beliefs and values about nursing. Often you ask the questions: ” What is nursing?” and “Why do I practice nursing the way I do it now?”Remember, there is no right or wrong philosophy! The goal here is to expound on your philosophy based on the knowledge you obtained or have understood or learned through the study of other theorists/philosophers.Steps to follow:

1. Before beginning this project, review  MDC School of Nursing BSN Philosophy MDC School of Nursing BSN Philosophy – Alternative Formats . (This is an example of how concepts and philosophy guides and directs curriculum.)
2. Your Personal Philosophy must address the five (5) topics as shown in the  Personal Nursing Philosophy Rubric (MP1) Personal Nursing Philosophy Rubric (MP1) – Alternative Formats
3. It must be your original work.
4. It should be no more than four pages long, double spaced, and typed in a MS WORD file.
5. It should adhere to APA style (includes introduction, body, conclusion) with correct grammar and spelling are expected.

Personal Nursing Philosophy

Your Personal Philosophy must address and have the following Topics \ Headings:

Topic

Description

Key Concepts (20 pts.)

Explain   the key concepts of your philosophy/theory.

Metaparadigms

(20 pts.)

Describe   the four (4) Metaparadigms of nursing as you view them and how they apply in   your own practice area. 

Nursing Process – Philosophy

(15 pts.)

Express   how your philosophy could be applied to your present nursing practice,   research, administration and/or education. 

Nursing Process – Strengths & Limitations 

(15 pts.)

Elaborate   on your philosophy’s strength and limitations. 

Original Work

(10 pts.)

Paper   must be your original work. 

Paper Format

(10 pts.)

Paper   should be no more than four (4) pages long, double space and typed in   Microsoft WORD file. 

APA Style

(10 pts.)

Paper   should adhere to APA style (includes introduction, body, conclusion) with   correct grammar spelling are expected. 

• Review the Learning Resources.

Post:

• Explain the Diagnostic Criteria for the Sexual  Dysfunction you selected.

• Explain the Evidenced-Based Psychotherapy and Psychopharmacologic Treatment for the Sexual  Dysfunction you selected.

• Support your rationale with References to the Learning Resources or other academic resource.

 HA4050D – Healthcare Law 

Discussion 05.2: Sexual Assault

  Read the Discussion 05.2 Scenario. We will debate the question:

.Was the nurse acting within the course and scope of employment, such that the hospital should be liable? Or, were his outrageous actions toward the patient so far removed from his job duties that it would be unfair to hold the hospital liable in this case?

We will divide the class into two groups:

.Group 1:  Students with last names starting with the letters N-Z will argue that the nurse acted within his course and scope of employment and that the plaintiff should win.

.Group 2:  Students with last names starting with the letters A-M will argue that the nurse’s conduct was outside his course and scope of employment and the defendant should win.

Each group member is required to debate their position based upon facts and research. Fully explain your reasoning, using legal principles you have learned and applying them to the facts of this case. Opinions offered without evidence do not belong in this debate. Defend your position by citing research, such as a page of the textbook or an outside source. 

    DISCUSSION 05.2: SEXUAL ASSAULT

SCENARIO (BASED ON A REAL GEORGIA CASE)

A male patient underwent a surgical procedure at a hospital to insert a sheath into an artery of his

groin. A male nurse who was an employee the hospital was instructed to attend to the patient postsurgery to check the groin area for complications and to clean the area as necessary.

While in the room alone with the patient, the nurse sexually molested the patient. The patient awoke to

discover the nurse rubbing his penis with both hands. The patient screamed, and multiple employees

quickly arrived, catching the nurse in the act. The nurse was arrested and convicted of sexual assault in

a criminal proceeding.

In a separate civil suit, the patient and his wife sued the hospital under the doctrine of respondeat

superior for assault, battery, and loss of consortium.

Obviously the nurse himself is civilly (and criminally) liable in this case. However, the only question

before us now is the liability of the hospital, the nurse’s employer. To state a claim under respondeat

superior, the plaintiff must prove BOTH:

1. That the nurse was an employee of the hospital (this is not in dispute), AND

2. At the time of the incident, the nurse was acting within the course and scope of his

employment (very much in dispute).

This is actually a close case. The hospital argues that the nurse’s job duties obviously did not include

molesting patients. The plaintiff argues that the nurse was expected to attend to the patient’s genital

area and that this kind of incident was clearly foreseeable by the hospital.

(Note: If you would like to see the real case this scenario is based upon, check out Piedmont Hosp., Inc.

v. Palladino, 580 S.E.2d 215 (Ga. 2003). Be warned—the scenario has altered the facts from the original

case. Do not rely upon the real case opinion in formulating your answer to the fictional scenario in the

discussion question.)