how community-based interventions, equal access to evidence-based practices, and resources to fund health services can improve access to psychiatric care in the underserved and Racial-Ethnic Minority Groups.”

Words: 928
Pages: 4
Subject: Premium Writing

Cite all the Biblography in JAMA style

Week 12-13 Creating posters
All Sections
No unread replies.11 reply.
Dear all,
These next two weeks you will be working on your poster. The poster is due on 7/31. Please submit your poster via Canvas.
Here is some tips to help you create your poster:
– The poster should reflect a summary of your manuscript. Bullet points are preferred.
– I recommend adding some illustrations, either in the form of a graphical abstract (https://www.elsevier.com/authors/tools-and-resources/graphical-abstract (Links to an external site.)) or tables. This is a review paper that has a great summary graphical abstract: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00325481.2020.1783937 (Links to an external site.)
– If you are thinking of submitting this poster to a conference I’d recommend that you check the conference’s requisites/guidelines. They might require that you use a specific poster template.
– If your poster is part of an institution/company you work for, they might also have templates.
– If you don’t need to use a specific template, then you can use any poster template you’d like. The RMU has poster templates too. You can find them here: https://ctle.rm.edu/ (Links to an external site.) (scroll to the bottom of the page).
I added examples of past posters in the files section.
Let me know if you have any questions.

By the end of Week 14, please submit your poster via Canvas.
The following rubric details how your assignment will be scored.
Outstanding
Exceeds Expectations
Meets Expectations
Unsatisfactory
Articulation of Problem, Gap, Purpose, or Focus
(25%)
25-30%
Question, hypothesis, or position is articulated and defended in the context of the problem or purpose; and/or
A central purpose, focus, or essence of the work or performance is highly evident
20-24.9%
Question, hypothesis, or position is stated clearly and context of the problem or purpose is apparent; and/or
A central purpose, focus, or essence of the work or performance is evident
10-19.9%
Question, hypothesis, or position is stated clearly; and/or
A purpose or focus of the work can be determined
0 – 9.9%
Question, hypothesis, position, purpose, or focus is not visible or stated clearly
Scholarly Context
(25%)
25-30%
Comprehensively places problem/question in appropriate scholarly context (scholarly literature, theory, model, or genre)
20-24.9%
Sufficiently places problem/question in appropriate scholarly context (scholarly literature, theory, model, or genre)
10-19.9%
Partially places problem/question in scholarly context; some critical elements are missing, incorrectly developed, or unfocused
0 – 9.9%
Scholarly context for the problem/question may be apparent but is not sufficiently demonstrated
Application of Scholarly Method/
Technique to Project Design
(10%)
7.5-10%
Method/technique is appropriate for question or purpose
Data/sources/evidence are expertly presented
All elements of method/technique are fully developed and articulated
Evidence supports a mature, complex, and/or nuanced analysis of the problem
5-7.5%
Method/technique is appropriate for question or purpose
Data/sources/evidence are adequately presented
Critical elements of method/technique are adequately developed; subtle elements are unclear or missing
Evidence supports an adequately complex analysis of the problem
2.5-4.9%
Method/technique loosely supports the question or purpose
Data/sources/evidence are partially presented
Critical elements of method/technique are partially developed
Evidence supports a limited analysis of the problem
0-2.4%
Method/technique is not appropriate for question or purpose
Data/sources/evidence are minimally or not presented
Critical elements of method/technique are minimally developed
Evidence supports very limited analysis of the problem
Analysis or Interpretation
(20%)
15-20%
Interpretation is explicitly linked to theoretical framework or scholarly model
10-14.9%
Interpretation is adequately linked to theoretical framework or scholarly model
5-9.9%
Interpretation is partially linked to theoretical framework or scholarly model
0-4.9%
Interpretation is minimally linked to theoretical framework or scholarly model
Implications/
Impact
(10%)
7.5-10%
Implications, consequences, and/or questions raised by the project are thoroughly explored
Limitations are fully articulated
5-7.5%
Implications, consequences, and/or questions are adequately explored
Limitations are adequately articulated
2.5-4.9%
Implications, consequences, and/or questions are partially explored
Limitations are partially articulated
0-2.4%
Implications, consequences, and/or questions are minimally supported or unarticulated
Limitations are minimally or not articulated
Quality of Delivery
(10%)
7.5-10%
Presentation or performance is of superior quality
Delivery is submitted by the deadline and is free of technical errors
Excellent grammar, spelling, and JAMA style with appropriate paragraphs, sentences, and headings throughout the assignment
5-7.5%
Presentation or performance is of high quality
Delivery is submitted later but within 48 hours of the deadline and/or has few technical errors
Few errors in grammar, spelling, and JAMA style with appropriate paragraphs, sentences, and headings throughout the assignment
2.5-4.9%
Presentation or performance is of acceptable quality
Delivery is submitted late but within 48-96 hours of the deadline and/or has some technical errors
Pattern errors in grammar, spelling, and JAMA style with appropriate paragraphs, sentences, and headings throughout the assignment
0-2.4%
Presentation or performance is of low quality
Delivery is submitted later than 96 hours and/or has frequent technical errors
Excessive grammar, spelling, and/or JAMA style errors throughout the assignment
PreviousNext