Include a copy of the completed critical appraisal tool as an appendix and i have also uploaded the article that is being used in the assignment and everything else the instructions are in the assignment brief
EBP107_Assessment Brief 3_Journal Evaluation Page 1 of 6 ASSESSMENT 3 BRIEF Subject Code and Title EBP107 Evidence-Based Practice Assessment Assessment 3: Journal Article Evaluation: Using a critical appraisal tool Individual/Group Individual Length 1,500 words (+/- 10%) Learning Outcomes This assessment addresses the Subject Learning Outcomes outlined at the bottom of this document. Submission By 11:55pm AEST/AEDT Sunday of Module 5.2 (week 10) Weighting 45% Total Marks 100 marks EBP107_Assessment Brief 3_Journal Evaluation Page 2 of 6 Context: This assessment enables students to demonstrate their ability to evaluate and appraise evidence in healthcare research, an essential component of evidence-based practice and the exercise of clinical judgement in the delivery of quality healthcare. Students will use a critical appraisal tool and other supporting references to appraise and interpret the sections and methodological quality of a research article including how well the evidence may be applied in evidence-based practice. Instructions: Students are required to conduct an evaluation of one journal article in an essay format. The article may be the selected one used in Assessment 2 Article Summary task. Alternatively, you may choose to select an article of your choice from the range of research articles supplied for the previous Assessment 2 assignment. This task requires using one of the critical appraisal tools supplied from a link below. Choose an appraisal tool that fits the chosen article to evaluation. CASP. (n.d.). CASP Checklists. Retrieved from https://casp-uk.net/casp-tools-checklists/ Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine (CEBM). (2014). Critical Appraisal Tools. Retrieved from https://www.cebm.net/2014/06/critical-appraisal/ Equator Network.(n.d.). Reporting guidelines for main study types. Retrieved from http://www.equator-network.org/ Joanna Briggs Institute (n.d). Critical appraisal tools. Retrieved from http://joannabriggs.org/research/critical-appraisal-tools.html Essay Format: The article evaluation must be presented in an essay format, with an introduction, body and conclusion. Introduction: The introduction must introduce the article, including proper referencing of the article, and a discussion about why you chose that article to evaluate. Body: In the body of your essay you must: 1. Use the critical appraisal tool you have chosen to evaluate all the sections of the research study, including the title, abstract and declarations. 2. Throughout the body of your essay you are to refer to the chosen critical appraisal tool and use additional references to support your evaluation. Subheadings may be used. 3.. Provide a referenced definition of Evidence Based Practice (EBP), and a recommendation as to how well the findings from this study may be incorporated into EBP. Give reasons and offer evidence to support your evaluation. https://casp-uk.net/casp-tools-checklists/ https://www.cebm.net/2014/06/critical-appraisal/ http://www.equator-network.org/ http://joannabriggs.org/research/critical-appraisal-tools.html EBP107_Assessment Brief 3_Journal Evaluation Page 3 of 6 Conclusion: A brief discussion of the overall quality of the study with reference to the strengths and weaknesses as outlined in the body of the essay. Referencing: APA style of referencing is required. Refer to Library Academic and Referencing Guidelines. Word count: Please include the word count - excluding in‐text citations and reference list at the end of the assessment. Please adhere to the word count, if you exceed 1,500 words (+10%), the excess may not be graded. Appendix: Include a copy of the completed critical appraisal tool as an appendix. Submission Instructions: Submit via the Assessment 3: Journal Article Evaluation link in the main navigation menu in EBP107 Evidence-Based Practice. The Learning Facilitator will provide feedback via the Grade Centre in the LMS portal. Feedback can be viewed in My Grades. EBP107_Assessment Brief 3_Journal Evaluation Page 4 of 6 Learning Rubric: Assessment 3 Journal Article Evaluation: using a critical appraisal tool Assessment Attributes Fail (Unacceptable) 0-49% Pass (Functional) 50-64% Credit (Proficient) 65-74% Distinction (Advanced) 75 -84% High Distinction (Exceptional) 85-100% Knowledge and understanding Review and introduction provided for a chosen article. Percentage for this criterion: 20% The chosen article being reviewed has not been clearly identified, information is disjointed or irrelevant comments are present. The article being reviewed has been identified, however, appropriate referencing is not included and introduction provided is limited. The article being reviewed is identified, referenced and clear introduction is provided. The article being reviewed is identified, referenced and a succinct introduction is provided. The article being reviewed is identified, referenced and thorough and succinct introduction is provided. Application of new knowledge. Evaluation of journal article and adherence to the critical appraisal tool. Percentage for this criterion: 30% Lack of application of new knowledge is evident. No reference to the critical appraisal tool. Demonstrated application of new knowledge in evaluating a chosen journal article. Lacks reference to the critical appraisal tool. Well-developed application of new knowledge and evaluation of chosen article with reference to the critical appraisal tool. Thoroughly developed evaluation of chosen article with clear reference to the critical appraisal tool. Highly sophisticated and creative evaluation of chosen article with thorough application of the critical appraisal tool. Excellent description and critique of each section. Reasoning and presentation of argument and/or position. Limited understanding of key concepts required to support discussion. Resembles a recall or summary of key ideas. Often conflates/confuses assertion of personal opinion with information Supports personal opinion and information substantiated by evidence from the research/course materials. Discriminates between assertion of personal opinion and information substantiated by robust evidence from the research/course Clearly discriminates between assertion of personal opinion and Information that is substantiated by robust evidence from the EBP107_Assessment Brief 3_Journal Evaluation Page 5 of 6 Key concepts of discussion presented. Discriminates between personal opinion and substantiated information. Percentage for this criterion: 25% Confuses logic and emotion. Information taken from reliable sources but without comments to support. substantiated by evidence from the research/course materials. Demonstrates a capacity to explain and apply relevant concepts, with a good description of the overall quality of research. Clear definition of Evidence Based Practice provided. materials and extended reading. Well demonstrated capacity to explain and apply relevant concepts, with a very good description and critique of the overall quality of research. Relevant and thorough definition of Evidence Based Practice. research/course materials and extended reading. Information is taken from sources with a high level of interpretation/evaluatio n to develop a comprehensive analysis or synthesis. An excellent description of overall quality of research, including succinct and thorough definition of Evidence Based Practice provided. Structure and writing style. Clarity of expression, planning and flow of work 15% No evidence of planning. Inappropriate writing style. Needs work on structure, flow and order. Report missing structure of introduction, body and conclusion. Adequate academic writing style. Basic structure, some areas may lack flow or order. Some aspects of report structure missing, lacking complete introduction, body and conclusion. Good academic writing style. Logical sequence with clear structure. Report structure includes flow of introduction, body and conclusion. Well-developed academic writing style. Clear expression with logical sequencing, flow and structure. Report structure includes clear presentation of introduction, body and conclusion. Highly developed academic writing style. Clear and concise. Structure and sequencing effectively supports discussion, drawing concepts together. Report structure includes succinct presentation of introduction, body and conclusion. EBP107_Assessment Brief 3_Journal Evaluation Page 6 of 6 Correct citation of key resources and evidence 10% Demonstrates inconsistent use of good quality, credible and relevant resources to support and develop ideas. Demonstrates use of credible and relevant resources to support and develop ideas, but these are not always explicit or well developed. Demonstrates use of credible resources to support and develop ideas. Demonstrates use of good quality, credible and relevant resources to support and develop arguments and position statements. Shows evidence of wide scope within the organisation for sourcing evidence. Demonstrates use of high-quality, credible and relevant resources to support and develop arguments and position statements. Show evidence of wide scope within and without the