Discussion: Using the Walden Library
Discussion: Using the Walden Library
The nursing profession is continuously evolving in its approach to patient care, and outcomes as members continue to undertake research, leading to evidence-based practice. For the scope of this discussion the peer-review article selected which relates to my current job as a dialysis nurse and interest is “Improving Patient Experience and Treatment Adherence in the Adult, Outpatient Hemodialysis Population” (Saunders et al., 2019). When searching for this article, the database used was CINAHL Plus with Full Text. I chose this database because it encompasses many nursing journals, standards of practice, and allied health evidence-based practice; therefore, I recommend its’ use. Also,
Discussion Using the Walden Library NURS 6003the database holds familiarity since I used it during my undergraduate BSN program. There were no significant difficulties during the search for my article. I ensured that I did not use full sentences in the search fields but keywords related to my particular interest. To assess if a journal article was peer-reviewed, I utilize the periodical directory, Ulrich’s. This software does not contain stored articles but verifies if a journal uses peer-review. Besides using Ulrich’s software, I selected on the database the option to narrow search options to peer-reviewed journals only (Walden Library, 2020).
As a scholarly writer, the use of peer-review articles is an asset. Scholarly papers referenced with peer review articles provide expert verification of thoughts since experts review peer-review articles within their discipline (Glasgow Caledonian University, n.d.).
Peer-review research also forms an integral part in the development of the professional practice of nursing. History shows that nurses previously depended on individual experience, advice from senior nurses, and potentially outdated educational information, which led to varying patient outcomes. Due to the inconsistency in patient outcomes, physician David L. Sackett developed evidence-based practice. Patient care and treatment are based on research; current evidence, so optimal care can be provided. Therefore, since peer-reviewed research involves verifying information by established experts in the nursing field, information validity is increased (St. Thomas University, 2019).
References
Glasgow Caledonian University. (n.d.). Peer review | PILOT.
Glasgow Caledonian University: The University for the Common Good GCU. https://www.gcu.ac.uk/library/pilot/publication/peerreview/
Saunders, J., Ahmadzadeh, S., Bush, M., Wright, R., & Granger, B. (2019). Improving patient
experience and treatment adherence in the adult, outpatient hemodialysis population. Journal of Nursing Care Quality, 34(4), 330-336. https://doi.org/10.1097/ncq.0000000000000373
St. Thomas University. (2019, March 23). What You Need to Know About Evidence-
Based Practice in Nursing. https://online.stu.edu/articles/nursing/about-evidence-based-practice-in-nursing
Walden Library. (2020, March 26). How do I verify that my article is peer reviewed? – Quick answers. Quick Answers – Quick Answers. https://academicanswers.waldenu.edu/faq/72613
RESPOND TO G….
This is insightful Gail-Ann. Peer reviewed research articles are important components of learning processes. Learning processes require conclusive research processes to make reference and to retrieve data that may be useful in making some conclusions. Scholarly journals and peer-reviewed articles have been written and proven by different professionals in different fields of study. These resources therefore act as rich sources of information and knowledge in various fields of study (Walden University Library, n.d). Nurses need to engage in the research processes to ensure that they understand different aspects of healthcare system. Research processes and scholarly writings improves communication and clinical skills that are important for healthcare professionals. Also, with the current healthcare practices, there is always application of evidence-based practices which are important in ensuring effective patient outcomes. All these approaches require the knowledge of research processes during learning.
To find effective and relevant peer-reviewed research articles and other sources of information for the research processes, it is necessary to consider different databases (Thomas, Ciliska, Dobbins, & Micucci, 2018). Walden University has various databases containing millions of articles, journals, books, and other sources of information that can be integrated in the learning processes. Cumulative Index to Nursing & Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) is one of the databases used by Walden University students to retrieve different forms of information in the research process. In other words, the database consists of different peer-reviewed articles that have been published over the years by different professionals. These articles are on different topics and are related to nursing practices. Also, Medline integrates different research articles and journals that help learners in the research process. Medline integrate search from Walden University, as well as from other publications that are relevant to the nursing processes.
References
Walden University Library. (n.d.) Database: Nursing. Retrieved February 1, 2021, from https://academicguides.waldenu.edu/library/subject/nursing
Thomas, B. H., Ciliska, D., Dobbins, M., & Micucci, S. (2018). A process for systematically reviewing the literature: providing the research evidence for public health nursing interventions. Worldviews on Evidence‐Based Nursing, 1(3), 176-184. Retrieved from: https://sigmapubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1524-475X.2004.04006.x
Where can you find evidence to inform your thoughts and scholarly writing? Throughout your degree program, you will use research literature to explore ideas, guide your thinking, and gain new insights. As you search the research literature, it is important to use resources that are peer-reviewed and from scholarly journals. You may already have some favorite online resources and databases that you use or have found useful in the past. For this Discussion, you explore databases available through the Walden Library.
To Prepare:
- Review the information presented in the Resources for using the Walden Library, searching the databases, and evaluating online resources.
- Begin searching for a peer-reviewed article that pertains to your practice area and is of particular interest to you.
By Day 3
Post the following:
Using proper APA formatting, cite the peer-reviewed article you selected that pertains to your practice area and is of particular interest to you and identify the database that you used to search for the article. Explain any difficulties you experienced while searching for this article. Would this database be useful to your colleagues? Explain why or why not. Would you recommend this database? Explain why or why not
Support main post with 3 of more current, credible sources and cite source within content of posting and on a reference list in proper APA.
By Day 6
Respond to at least two of your colleagues on two different days, by offering suggestions/strategies for working with this database from your own experience, or offering ideas for use of alternative resources.
Be sure to offer support from at least 2 current, credible sources in each required response to classmates’ main post and cite per APA.
Submission and Grading Information
Grading Criteria
To access your rubric:
Week 4 Discussion Rubric
Post by Day 3 and Respond by Day 6
To participate in this Discussion:
Week 4 Discussion
Learning Resources
Required Readings
Al-Jundi, A., & Sakka, S. (2017). Critical appraisal of clinical research. Journal of Clinical and
Diagnostic Research: JCDR, 11(5), JE01–JE05. https://doi.org/10.7860/JCDR/2017/26047.9942
Shellenbarger, T. (2016). Simplifying synthesis. Nurse Author & Editor, 26(3). Retrieved from
http://naepub.com/reporting-research/2016-26-3-3/
Walden University Library. (n.d.). Databases A-Z: Nursing. Retrieved October 4, 2019 from
https://academicguides.waldenu.edu/az.php?s=19981
Discussion: Using the Walden Library
Discussion: Using the Walden Library
Walden University Library. (n.d.). Evaluating resources: Journals. Retrieved October 4, 2019,
from https://academicguides.waldenu.edu/library/evaluating/resource-types/journals
Walden University Library. (n.d.). Instructional media: Fundamentals of library research.
Retrieved October 4, 2019 from
https://academicguides.waldenu.edu/library/instructionalmedia/researchfundamentals
Walden University Writing Center. (n.d.). Retrieved October 12, 2018, from
https://academicguides.waldenu.edu/writingcenter/home
Walden University Writing Center. (n.d.). Common assignments: Synthesizing your
sources. https://academicguides.waldenu.edu/writingcenter/assignments/literaturereview/synthesi
zing
Discussion: Using the Walden Library
Discussion: Using the Walden Library
Walden University Writing Center. (n.d.). Scholarly writing: Overview. Retrieved October 12,
2018, from https://academicguides.waldenu.edu/writingcenter/scholarly
Walden University. (n.d.). Subject Research: Nursing. Retrieved November 9, 2018, from
https://academicguides.waldenu.edu/library/subject/nursing
Walden University Writing Center. (n.d.). Webinars: Technical information. Retrieved October
12, 2018, from https://academicguides.waldenu.edu/writingcenter/webinars/technical
Document: Academic Success and Professional Development Plan Template (Word document)
Document: Introduction to scholarly writing: Tips for success (PDF)
Required Media
Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer). (2018). Introduction to Scholarly Writing:
Purpose, Audience, and Evidence [Video file]. Baltimore, MD: Author.
Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer). (2018). Introduction to Scholarly Writing: Tips
for Success [Video file]. Baltimore, MD: Author.
Rubric Detail
Select Grid View or List View to change the rubric’s layout.
Name: NURS_6002_Week_4_Discussion_Rubric
• Grid View
• List View
Excellent Good Fair Poor
Main Posting 45 (45%) – 50 (50%)
Answers all parts of the discussion question(s) expectations with reflective critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources.
Supported by at least three current, credible sources.
Written clearly and concisely with no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style. 40 (40%) – 44 (44%)
Responds to the discussion question(s) and is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.
At least 75% of post has exceptional depth and breadth.
Supported by at least three credible sources.
Written clearly and concisely with one or no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style. 35 (35%) – 39 (39%)
Responds to some of the discussion question(s).
One or two criteria are not addressed or are superficially addressed.
Is somewhat lacking reflection and critical analysis and synthesis.
Somewhat represents knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.
Post is cited with two credible sources.
Written somewhat concisely; may contain more than two spelling or grammatical errors.
Contains some APA formatting errors. 0 (0%) – 34 (34%)
Does not respond to the discussion question(s) adequately.
Lacks depth or superficially addresses criteria.
Lacks reflection and critical analysis and synthesis.
Does not represent knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.
Contains only one or no credible sources.
Not written clearly or concisely.
Contains more than two spelling or grammatical errors.
Does not adhere to current APA manual writing rules and style.
Main Post: Timeliness 10 (10%) – 10 (10%)
Posts main post by day 3. 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Does not post by day 3.
First Response 17 (17%) – 18 (18%)
Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings.
Responds fully to questions posed by faculty.
Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources.
Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.
Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed.
Response is effectively written in standard, edited English. 15 (15%) – 16 (16%)
Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings.
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.
Responses to faculty questions are answered, if posed.
Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources.
Response is effectively written in standard, edited English. 13 (13%) – 14 (14%)
Response is on topic and may have some depth.
Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication.
Responses to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed.
Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and a few or no credible sources are cited. 0 (0%) – 12 (12%)
Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.
Responses posted in the discussion lack effective professional communication.
Responses to faculty questions are missing.
No credible sources are cited.
Second Response 16 (16%) – 17 (17%)
Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings.
Responds fully to questions posed by faculty.
Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources.
Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.
Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed.
Response is effectively written in standard, edited English. 14 (14%) – 15 (15%)
Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings.
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.
Responses to faculty questions are answered, if posed.
Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources.
Response is effectively written in standard, edited English. 12 (12%) – 13 (13%)
Response is on topic and may have some depth.
Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication.
Responses to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed.
Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and a few or no credible sources are cited. 0 (0%) – 11 (11%)
Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.
Responses posted in the discussion lack effective professional communication.
Responses to faculty questions are missing.
No credible sources are cited.
Participation 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Meets requirements for participation by posting on three different days. 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Does not meet requirements for participation by posting on 3 different days.
Total Points: 100
Name: NURS_6002_Week_4_Discussion_Rubric