(Solution) NR716 Week 4 Assignment Evidence Synthesis

NR716 Week 4 Assignment Evidence Synthesis

Purpose

The purpose of this assignment is to develop a synthesis of evidence using three quantitative research articles and three non-research evidence sources. The development of the Johns Hopkins Individual Evidence Summary Tool builds a body of research evidence about a practice problem and evidence-based intervention for implementation in a practice change project. Continually adding research studies to the Johns Hopkins Individual Evidence Summary Tool builds the foundation for the synthesis of research evidence for a practice change.

Please note that this is the first part of a 2-part assignment. You will receive feedback from your course faculty on this assignment and will be required to use the feedback to revise this paper. In Week 6, you will add to this paper and submit as the Week 6 Assignment.

Instructions

Follow these guidelines when completing the assignment. Contact your course faculty if you have any questions.

  1. Review the directions for completing each column of the Johns Hopkins Individual Evidence Summary ToolLinks to an external site.Open this document with ReadSpeaker docReader (located in the Week 2 lesson).
  2. Use the two quantitative research studies from NR715 that are already on your expanding Johns Hopkins Individual Evidence Summary Tool. Add the quantitative research study appraised in Week 1 of this course to your Johns Hopkins Individual Evidence Summary Tool. All articles must be recent research articles less than 5 years old, and be related to your selected National Practice Problem. Two of the quantitative research studies support your introduction and analysis of the selected practice problem. The quantitative study appraised in NR716 has tested the evidence-based intervention.
    1. If any of your quantitative research studies do not meet these requirements, you need to find replacement quantitative research studies and update the Johns Hopkins Evidence Summary Tool after you appraise, level the evidence, and grade the quality of the replacement study or studies.
  3. Locate three non-research evidence sources to support the introduction and analysis of the practice problem.
  4. Use a synthesis style of writing in every section (1, 2, 3, & 4) of the paper when incorporating research evidence and non-research evidence.
  5. Use the most current version of Microsoft Word, which is the format for all Chamberlain University College of Nursing. You can tell the document is saved as the current version because it will end in “docx.”
  6. All Chamberlain University policies related to plagiarism must be observed.
  7. Review the rubric for the grading criteria.

The assignment includes the following components:

  1. Introduction (1-2 paragraphs, cited)
    1. Use the title of your paper for the header above the introduction section.
    2. Use a synthesis of research evidence and non-research evidence when writing this section of the paper.
    3. Write a one-sentence purpose statement.
    4. Introduce the practice problem.
    5. Introduce an evidence-based intervention using research evidence to support the intervention.
  2. Analysis of the Practice Problem (1-2 paragraphs, cited)
    1. Use a synthesis of research evidence and non-research evidence when writing this section of the paper.
    2. Present the following at the national and local levels:
      1. Significance
      2. Prevalence
      3. Mortality
      4. Economic ramifications of the practice problem
  3. Evidence Synthesis (minimum of 3 quantitative research articles; 2-3 paragraphs)
    1. Use a synthesis of research evidence when writing this section of the paper.
    2. Identify the main themes and salient points that emerge from a synthesis of research evidence (cited).
    3. Compare and contrast the main points from a synthesis of research evidence (cited).
    4. Present an objective overarching synthesis of the research intervention (cited).
    5. This synthesis must be a summary of the merged themes and findings of the two articles and cannot be a review of each article separately.
  4. Conclusion (1 paragraph, cited)
    1. Use a synthesis of research evidence when writing this section of the paper.
    2. Write one concise paragraph providing a clear and logical summation of the paper.
  5. References
    1. Include a list of all references in APA format.
  6. Johns Hopkins Individual Evidence Summary Tool Requirements:
    1. Includes the completed Johns Hopkins Individual Evidence Summary Tool with the assignment. Do not embed the document in the paper.
    2. Includes a minimum of two quantitative descriptive research studies and one quantitative randomized control trial/quasi-experimental study.
    3. Complete all columns entirely and identify the quality and the levels of evidence accurately.

Writing Requirements (APA format)

  • Length: 4-6 pages (not including title page, reference page, or appendix)
  • 1-inch margins
  • Double-spaced pages
  • 12-point Times New Roman or 11-point Arial font
  • Level 1 Headings
  • In-text citations
  • Title page
  • Reference page
  • Standard English usage and mechanics

Solution: NR716 Week 4 Assignment Evidence Synthesis

Evidence Synthesis

With the increasing focus on disease prevention and health promotion, healthcare organizations and professionals must find and implement evidence-based interventions. The key components of evidence-based practice (EBP) are current and available research evidence, patient values and preferences, and clinical expertise (Kawar et al., 2023). Evidence synthesis allows for the systematic collection and analysis of multiple research evidence, offering an in-depth overview of current knowledge to identify research gaps, inform decision-making, and guide the design and implementation of EBPs (Murad et al., 2021). This paper is an evidence synthesis for three quantitative articles, George et al. (2021); Suarningsih and Suindrayasa (2020); and Man et al. (2024). These studies focus on a chronic problem affecting the United States (U.S) community, heart failure (HF), and recommend an evidence-based intervention, patient education, and awareness creation. The sections covered include an analysis of HF as the practice problem and evidence synthesis. The Johns Hopkins individual evidence summary tool including the three studies is included in Appendix A.

Analysis of the Practice Problem

Heart failure (HF) is a significant contributor to the global burden of cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) and a leading morbidity and mortality cause (Martin et al., 2024). It is responsible for approximately 1 in 5 deaths (one death per 33 seconds) and claimed 702,880 lives in the U.S. in 2022 (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [CDC], 2024). HF affects over 64 million individuals worldwide, with increasing prevalence due to aging populations and higher survival rates from acute cardiac events (CDC, 2024; Kaminsky et al., 2022). George et al. (2021) and Suarningsih and Suindrayasa (2020) stress that the high prevalence of modifiable risk factors such as smoking, high cholesterol, hypertension, and poor physical activity, coupled with knowledge gaps further exacerbate the problem. Heart disease imposes a significant economic burden on healthcare systems. In the U.S., annual costs related to heart disease (both direct and indirect/lost productivity) exceed $252.2 billion (CDC, 2024). HF care is particularly resource-intensive, with frequent hospitalizations and costly therapies (Man et al., 2024). The high mortality rates and economic burden associated with HF highlight the urgent need for improved prevention and management strategies (George et al., 2021; Man et al., 2024; Suarningsih & Suindrayasa, 2020). Man et al. (2024) support the cost-effectiveness of digital consults (DC) in improving medication adherence and optimizing guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT).

Evidence Synthesis

A synthesis of the three quantitative research articles, George et al. (2021), Suarningsih & Suindrayasa (2020), and Man et al. (2024) reveals the key themes of HF prevention and management. These include (i) knowledge gaps in CVD risk factors, (ii) the impact of patient education and awareness, (iii) the role of digital health interventions in improving outcomes, and (iv) multilevel approaches to HF management.

For the first theme, knowledge gaps, the studies highlight knowledge deficits as a major barrier to HF prevention and management, with George et al. (2021) and Suarningsih and…….Click on the PayPal icon below to purchase full solution for $10

Related:(Solution) NR716 Week 5 Discussion Analyzing Descriptive Statistics