Nurses’ role in research
Nurses play a vital role in research and its effect on evidence-based practice (Gray, 2021, p. 14). With the ever-changing and dynamic diseases and disease processes, nurses need to develop evidence-based practices to guide nursing practice (Gray, 2021, p. 14). The ability to find and identify current creditable literature is essential to the research and development of evidence-based practice (Gray, 2021, p. 19).
The safety problem that I identified in my discussion post last week was a distraction during the report at shift change. Distractions during a report at shift change could potentially lead to adverse patient outcomes. After watching the webinar assigned for week two, I felt confident and well equipped to find plenty of resources related to my safety problem.
I used the CINAHL database to search for my topic. Looking at the different databases, CINAHL had a flag recommending using it; this is why I chose this database. I decided that I wanted to use “distractions” AND “shift report.” When I typed these words into the search, it auto-populated “distraction OR interruptions OR disruptions” and “shift report OR nursing handoff.” I used the auto-populated suggestion for my search because I was more likely to find more topics, according to Walden University (n.d.).
Using these keywords, I was able to find 62 results. I then clicked on the refine search drop down on the left side of the screen and limited the search to topics published in the last five years, leaving me with 27 topics. Identifying current literature was a problem that I encountered. I began by looking at each piece of literature, determining the published data, and then counting how many pieces of literature have been published since 2017. After losing count and restarting several times, I concluded that there must be a way to narrow my search to topics published in the last five years. After familiarizing myself with the search engine, I discovered the steps I described above to refine my search.
BUY A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE
I am fortunate to have open communication with the providers in my workplace. Dr. Parker, MD, and Dr. Dies, MD, are well-read and up to date on the latest research and implications in medicine. Both doctors support the staff continuing education and use examples to teach when possible. I feel like either one of these providers would be an excellent resource to help me with difficulties I may encounter with literature searches.
Resources:
Gray, J., Grove, S. K., & Burns, N. (2021). chapter 2. In Burns and Grove’s the practice of nursing research: Appraisal, synthesis, and generation of evidence (9th ed., p. 34). essay, Elsevier.
Walden University. (n.d.). Tutorial: Choosing search terms. http://waldencss.adeobeconnect.com/choosingsearchterms/
| Excellent | Proficient | Basic | Needs Improvement | ||
| Describes the data bases, search engines, and search terms used in the literature search. Describes the number of research articles found on the patient safety problem published in the last five years. Describes the challenges encountered in locating research articles and how they were overcome. Describes who might help with literature searches in the work setting if needed. | 18 (36%) – 20 (40%)
Initial post is exceptional containing well developed and insightful analysis that makes connections to nursing practice into the discussion. |
16 (32%) – 17 (34%)
Initial post contains reasonable analysis that brings insight into the discussion. |
14 (28%) – 15 (30%)
Initial post contains minimal analysis that brings limited insight into the discussion. |
0 (0%) – 13 (26%)
Initial post lacks analysis and/or that brings little or no insight into the discussion. |
|
| Entered the discussion thread on 3 separate days. Wrote at least two posts to two separate peers. Responses are appropriate to the topic, substantive, and promoted discussion by one or more of the following: • contributing insight to move the discussion forward • offering substantial and/or different points of view and asks questions to add to discussion • including extra references or websites for peers to consider • relating discussion to different areas of practice and applying concepts to practice **Additional points may be deducted for late posting per the University late policy. |
14 (28%) – 15 (30%)
Response posts add substantive ideas and perspectives that invite further analysis and discussion. Participated 3 or more days in the classroom and responded to more than 2 classmates. |
12 (24%) – 13 (26%)
Response posts are proficient and provide adequate analysis and discussion. Participated 3 days in the classroom and responds to at least two classmates. |
11 (22%) – 11 (22%)
Response posts are limited and provide minimal analysis and discussion. Participated less than 3 days in the classroom and/or responds to less than two classmates. |
0 (0%) – 10 (20%)
Response posts are inadequate and provide no analysis of discussion and/ or there is no participation in the classroom. |
|
| Professional Writing: Clarity, Flow, and Organization | 4.5 (9%) – 5 (10%)
Content is free from spelling, punctuation, and grammar/syntax errors. Writing demonstrates very well-formed sentence and paragraph structure. Content presented is completely clear, logical, and well-organized. |
4 (8%) – 4 (8%)
Content contains minor spelling, punctuation, and/or grammar/syntax errors. Writing demonstrates appropriate sentence and paragraph structure. Content presented is mostly clear, logical, and well-organized. |
3.5 (7%) – 3.5 (7%)
Content contains moderate spelling, punctuation, and/or grammar/syntax errors. Writing demonstrates adequate sentence and paragraph structure and may require some editing. Content presented is adequately clear, logical, and/or organized, but could benefit from additional editing/revision. |
0 (0%) – 3 (6%)
Content contains significant spelling, punctuation, and/or grammar/syntax errors. Writing does not demonstrate adequate sentence and paragraph structure and requires additional editing/proofreading. Key sections of presented content lack clarity, logical flow, and/or organization. |
|
| Professional Writing: Context, Audience, Purpose, and Tone | 4.5 (9%) – 5 (10%)
Content clearly demonstrates awareness of context, audience, and purpose. Tone is highly professional, scholarly, and free from bias, and style is appropriate for the professional setting/workplace context. |
4 (8%) – 4 (8%)
Content demonstrates satisfactory awareness of context, audience, and purpose. Tone is adequately professional, scholarly, and/or free from bias, and style is consistent with the professional setting/workplace context. |
3.5 (7%) – 3.5 (7%)
Content demonstrates basic awareness of context, audience, and purpose. Tone is somewhat professional, scholarly, and/or free from bias, and style is mostly consistent with the professional setting/workplace context. |
0 (0%) – 3 (6%)
Content minimally or does not demonstrate awareness of context, audience, and/or purpose. Writing is not reflective of professional/scholarly tone and/or is not free of bias. Style is inconsistent with the professional setting/workplace context and reflects the need for additional editing. |
|
| Professional Writing: Originality, Source Credibility, and Attribution of Ideas | 4.5 (9%) – 5 (10%)
Content reflects original thought and writing and proper paraphrasing. Writing demonstrates full adherence to reference requirements, including the use of credible evidence to support a claim, with appropriate source attribution (when applicable) and references. |
4 (8%) – 4 (8%)
Content adequately reflects original writing and paraphrasing. Writing demonstrates adequate adherence to reference requirements, including the use of credible evidence to support a claim, with appropriate source attribution (when applicable) and references. |
3.5 (7%) – 3.5 (7%)
Content somewhat reflects original writing and paraphrasing. Writing somewhat demonstrates adherence to reference requirements, including the use of credible evidence to support a claim, with appropriate source attribution (when applicable) and references. |
0 (0%) – 3 (6%)
Content does not adequately reflect original writing and/or paraphrasing. Writing demonstrates inconsistent adherence to reference requirements, including the use of credible evidence to support a claim, with appropriate source attribution (when applicable) and reference. |
|
| Total Points: 50 | |||||
Response to discussion post
For this assignment, I will respond to my other students post based on a literature search on patient falls in the critical care units and the influence of the nurse staff ratio on accidental patient falls. As mentioned, when searching for literature on a specific topic in Walden university, a key word is entered in the search box. Besides, the use of CINAHL is essential in enhancing effective literature search because it enables access to full literature articles and journals, which is contrary to other databases that may give the abstract only. Also, it is essential to use multiple text boxes because it helps to improve the search results. In the case of this assignment, it was ideal for the student to use two key phases; patient falls and nurse staff ration. It is also true that the more you narrow your search, the fewer the number of results. For instance, peer reviewed literature depicting peer reviewed articles published within the past five years will be less than all literature on patient falls without any filters.
As mentioned, it is true that finding full text articles is the main challenge when performing a literature search. A good number of resources gives only the abstract part of the article which limits the effectiveness and usefulness of the article. Besides, the user-friendly interface provided for by Walden university offers a great opportunity to navigate easily while performing a literature search. Further, the tutorials and other resources available within the Walden university search interface helps in easy navigation (Walden University Library, 2019).
References
Walden University Library. (2019, June). Introduction to nursing research in the Walden Library [Webinar]. Retrieved from https://academicguides.waldenu.edu/nurs3150/week2discussion