There are 2 attachments: one is guidelines and requirements for the assignment and the rubric that is here, the other are the approved articles. If more scholarly articles are included they have to be less than 5 years old. NO DIRECT QUOTES!!!! they have to be worded in your own words and then cited. PLEASE READ Guidelines.
PICOT question: In children ages 5 -18, what is the effect of nutritional education in school, in comparison to children without nutritional education in school, on a healthy BMI?
References (included in PDF): References
Benjamin Neelon, S. E., Østbye, T., Hales, D., Vaughn, A., & Ward, D. S. (2016). Preventing childhood obesity in early care and education settings: lessons from two intervention studies. Child: Care, Health and Development, 42(3), 351–358. https://doi.org/10.1111/cch.12329
Delisle Nyström, C., Sandin, S., Henriksson, P., Henriksson, H., Maddison, R., & Löf, M. (2018). A 12-month follow-up of a mobile-based (mHealth) obesity prevention intervention in pre-school children: the MINISTOP randomized controlled trial. BMC Public Health, 18(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-018-5569-4
Kose, S., & Gulay, Y. (2020). The Effect of a Nutrition Education Program on Nutrition Behavior and Body Mass Index of Secondary School Students . International Journal of Caring Sciences , 13(1), 1–10.
Sanders, L. M., Perrin, E. M., Yin, H. S., Delamater, A. M., Flower, K. B., Bian, A., Schildcrout, J. S., & Rothman, R. L. (2021). A Health-Literacy Intervention for Early Childhood Obesity Prevention: A Cluster-Randomized Controlled Trial. Pediatrics, 147(5), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2020-049866
Stark, L. J., Filigno, S. S., Kichler, J. C., Bolling, C., Ratcliff, M. B., Robson, S. M., Simon, S. L., McCullough, M. B., Clifford, L. M., Stough, C. O., Zion, C., & Mara, C. A. (2019). Maintenance Following a Randomized Trial of a Clinic and Home-based Behavioral Intervention of Obesity in Preschoolers. The Journal of Pediatrics, 213, 128–135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpeds.2019.05.004
Rubric:
15 pts
Exceptional: Introduction clearly conveys the necessity of the research; writing is in a scholarly, informative (rather than persuasive) style; writer has included, to support their claims, evidence-based facts from peer-reviewed resources and elaborated on what they read. The PIO statement is included in the introduction. Two or more paragraphs are typically needed for conveying the necessity of research and the PIO information in this project.
13.5 pts
Above Average: This category may be chosen if the introduction is mostly well written, with evidence-based facts from peer-reviewed resources, but: the necessity of the research is not clearly conveyed AND/OR the writing has taken on a persuasive rather than informative style AND/OR there are problems with the PIO statement.
12 pts
Average: This category may be chosen if: the introduction describes the topic but does not convey the importance of the research AND/OR no evidence-based information is cited AND/OR the writer does not include the PIO statement.
10.5 pts
Needs Improvement: The writer has included a perfunctory explanation of the topic (a few sentences or less) and has not included much of what is required in the exceptional column for this criterion.
0 pts
No Marks
15 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome
Search Methods and References This criterion measures the student’s ability to find and utilize outside resources and refereces which are reliable, evidence-based, and peer-reviewed.
10 pts
Exceptional: Student has included five or more studies, ranked level VII or higher, from peer-reviewed nursing literature, published within the last 10 years. Student explains their methods in retrieval (which databases used, key words, how they chose which studies to include). Generally one to two paragraphs are necessary to convey this information thoroughly.
9 pts
Above Average: This category may be selected if everything from the exceptional column is present except: student has chosen only 4 appropriate sources as described (for example, 4 studies meet the criterion of being level VII or higher, from peer-reviewed nursing literature, and published within the last 10 years, but one study is over 10 years old).
7 pts
Average: This category may be selected if: student has chosen only 3 appropriate sources as described AND/OR student neglects to discuss some of the requirements in the retrieval methods.
5 pts
Needs Improvement: This category may be selected if: student has chosen 2 or fewer appropriate sources as described AND/OR student neglects to discuss most of the requirements in the retrieval methods.
0 pts
No Marks
10 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome
Organization of Thought This criterion measures the student’s ability to organize collected data into understandable themes or categories, and present it in a meaningful way which promotes understanding of their inquiry results.
10 pts
Exceptional: Student is exceptionally organized in their presentation of their collected data. They have formed clear themes or categories out of the data they found and presented it, with level 1 APA-style headers, in such a way that seems to provide an answer to the PICOT.
9 pts
Above Average: As in the “exceptional” category, except perhaps student did not create more than two distinct categories or themes, or perhaps headers are not used in the most effective manner.
7 pts
Average: As in the “exceptional” category, except perhaps headers are unclear or irrelevant to the content, or the themes/categories do not make sense in answering the PICOT.
5 pts
Needs Improvement: Data is unorganized; AND/OR no headers are utilized. It is difficult to follow the student’s train of thought or see how the data relates in order to answer the PICOT.
0 pts
No Marks
10 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome
Responsible Reporting This criterion measures the student’s ability to identify gaps, contradictions, and inconsistencies in clinical research. Mastery of this criterion indicates ethical treatment of research data and safe care.
20 pts
Exceptional: Student discusses gaps, contradictions, and inconsistencies in clinical research and provides a robust discussion of the implications. This is its own section in the paper and has a level one APA-style heading. Four or more studies are discussed in this section and properly cited.
18 pts
Above Average: Most of the items in the exceptional category are present.
14 pts
Average: Some of the items in the exceptional category are present.
10 pts
Needs Improvement: Most of the items in the exceptional category are not present.
0 pts
No Marks
20 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome
Responsible Citation This criterion measures the ability of the student to source relevant research and give credit to the authors of the ideas they are reviewing.
20 pts
Exceptional: Student provides robust citations for the source information in their paper (one does not ever have to guess where the information came from). No “claims” are made without evidentiary support. In a 5-7 page review of nursing literature, one might expect to include anywhere from 30-100 in-text citations. In a well-written paragraph, there might be anywhere from one to four. However, be careful that you are taking the opportunity to elaborate on and further explain your cited information in your own words in order to break up cited material.
18 pts
Above Average: Student provides adequate citations for the source information in their paper. “Good” category may be chosen if occasionally inferences must be made as to which sentences go with which research study.
14 pts
Average: Student gives appropriate credit to the sources of information throughout the paper, but the citations are incorrectly handled. “Adequate” may also be chosen if the student often makes claims but fails to provide evidentiary support.
10 pts
Needs Improvement
0 pts
No Marks
20 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome
Conclusions and Application This criterion measures the ability of the student to draw conclusions from their collected data, as well as their ability to synthesize the next step of the research process and develop a plan for the future.
15 pts
Exceptional: Student provides a robust conclusion section in which they draw conclusions from the data, summarize the current state of the research, state how they intend to apply the data they discovered in their own practice, and discuss plans for future research.
14 pts
Above Average: As in the exceptional category, except some of the information specified may be missing.
11 pts
Average: Student has written a conclusion but does not address much of the information requested in the “exceptional” category.
8 pts
Needs Improvement: Conclusion is difficult to find, or is confusing, or is off-topic.
0 pts
No Marks
15 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome
Scholarly Writing This criterion measures the scholarly writing abilities of the student, especially in regards to APA writing style, formatting (when possible), grammar, punctuation, spelling, syntax, and diction.
10 pts
Exceptional: Paper is exceptionally well-written. Tone is scholarly. Mistakes in grammar, spelling, punctuation, syntax, diction, and other areas of written communication are not obvious. APA GUIDELINES: APA 6th edition writing rules are followed. A title page is included and correctly formatted. A reference list is included on the last page and formatted correctly.
8 pts
Above Average: This category may be used if: Paper is mostly well-written; AND/OR tone is mostly scholarly AND/OR mistakes in grammar, spelling, punctuation, syntax, diction, and other areas of written communication are infrequent; AND/OR there are few errors from an APA standpoint.
6 pts
Average: This category may be used if: Tone sometimes strays from scholarly AND/OR there are some mistakes in grammar, spelling, punctuation, syntax, diction, and other areas of written communication; AND/OR there are some errors from an APA standpoint.
4 pts
Needs Improvement: This category may be used if: Tone often strays from scholarly AND/OR there are many mistakes in grammar, spelling, punctuation, syntax, diction, and other areas of written communication; AND/OR there are many errors from an APA standpoint.
2 pts
Poor: The student has made no obvious effort to proofread paper AND/OR APA styling is not included in regards to a reference list and/or in-text citations.
0 pts
No Marks
10 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome
Decision Making
Integrates decision making and critical thinking with respect for ethical issues surrounding research and the protection of human rights.
threshold: 3.0 pts
5 pts
Exceeds Expectations
3 pts
Meets Expectations
0 pts
Does Not Meet Expectations
—
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome
Therapeutic Intervention
Critique evidenced-based therapeutic interventions through the evaluation of research articles’ design, sampling, data collection, data analysis and interpretation of results.
threshold: 3.0 pts
5 pts
Exceeds Expectations
3 pts
Meets Expectations
0 pts
Does Not Meet Expectations
—
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome
Life Span Development
Analyze the principles of life-span development in the review of evidence-based research. improvement.
threshold: 3.0 pts
5 pts
Exceeds Expectations
3 pts
Meets Expectations
0 pts
Does Not Meet Expectations
—
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome
RN-BSN Competency
Implement evidence based therapeutic interventions
threshold: 3.0 pts
5 pts
Exceeds Expectations
3 pts
Meets Expectations
0 pts
Does Not Meet Expectations
—
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome
RN-BSN Competency
Use methods of discovery to inform practice and improve nursing care
threshold: 3.0 pts
5 pts
Exceeds Expectations
3 pts
Meets Expectations
0 pts
Does Not Meet Expectations
—
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome
QSEN – Evidence-based Practice
Integrate best current evidence with clinical expertise and patient/family preferences and values for delivery of optimal health care.
threshold: 3.0 pts
5 pts
Exceeds Expectations
3 pts
Meets Expectations
0 pts
Does Not Meet Expectations
—
Total Points: 100
Last Completed Projects
| topic title | academic level | Writer | delivered |
|---|