Module 5 EBP Assignment Worksheet: Literature Search & Evide…

Assignment Overview:

This assignment will guide you in applying evidence-based practice (EBP) skills through a focused literature search to support your approved PICO or PIO question. You’ll use scholarly databases (not Google) to locate and evaluate high-level research evidence relevant to your topic.

This activity will help you:

• Identify strong sources of evidence
• Organize findings using a standardized tool
• Prepare for your final paper by practicing synthesis and documentation

Youll complete the Johns Hopkins Evidence-Based Practice (JHEBP) Appendix G: Evidence Summary Table, which youll also use in your Signature Assignment. This is your opportunity to practice using this tool and connect research findings directly to nursing practice.

What You Will Do:

• Complete the Module 5 EBP Assignment Worksheet by typing directly into the provided spaces.
• Use scholarly databases such as CINAHL, PubMed, or the Cochrane Library to locate high-quality research related to your approved PICO/PIO question.
• Refer to the Directions for Completing the Appendix G Evidence Summary Tool for guidance as you complete the evidence table.
• Use the Appendix D: Evidence Level and Quality Guide to determine the strength of the evidence you find.
• Cite all sources in APA 7th edition format.
• Submit the completed worksheet by the due date.
• Review the grading rubric provided in the assignment module for evaluation criteria.

My approved PIO question: In hospitalized adult patients on a medical-surgical floor at high risk for skin breakdown with a Braden score below 18 (P), what is the effect of implementing twice-daily Kamishibai Card (K-Card) audits (I) on the rate of hospital-acquired pressure injuries (O)?

This assignment is designed to facilitate the achievement of: MOs 1, 2, & 3

Rubric

Module 5 EBP Assignment Grading Rubric

Module 5 EBP Assignment Grading Rubric

CriteriaRatingsPtsThis criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome

Section 1: PICO/PIO Question (10 points)

10 to >7.0 pts

Meets Expectations

Clearly written, specific, and appropriate for an EBP focus. Addresses population, issue, and outcomes well.

7 to >0 pts

Needs Improvement

Vague, incomplete, or lacks alignment with EBP. May be missing one or more PICO/PIO components.

10 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome

Section 2: Search Strategy (20 points)

Databases Used (5 points)

Search Terms/Boolean Operators (5 points)

Filters Applied (5 points)

Narrowing & Article Selection (5 points)

20 to >15.0 pts

Meets Expectations

At least 2 scholarly databases used. Logical, relevant terms and operators. Appropriate filters used. Clear explanation of how articles were chosen.

15 to >0 pts

Needs Improvement

Fewer than 2 databases used or includes non-scholarly. Incomplete, irrelevant, or incorrect operators. Inappropriate or missing filters. Vague or missing explanation.

20 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome

Section 3: Evidence Summary Table (60 points)

For each article (x3):

Author and Date (1 point)

Evidence Type & Design (3 points)

Sample Size & Setting (2 points)

Findings Relevant to EBP (3 points)

Measures Used (2 points)

Study Limitations (3 points)

Evidence Level (3 points)

Quality Rating (3 points)

60 to >49.0 pts

Meets Expectations

Evidence table includes complete and mostly accurate information for all 3 articles.

49 to >0 pts

Needs Improvement

Evidence table is missing required elements, contains multiple inaccuracies, or lacks clarity.

60 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome

APA Format of References (10 points)

10 to >7.0 pts

Meets Expectations

References are properly formatted in APA 7th edition.

7 to >0 pts

Needs Improvement

APA formatting is incomplete or incorrect.

10 pts

Total Points: 100