Literature Evaluation Table             In nursing practice, accurate identification and application of   research is essential to achieving successful outcomes. Being able to   articulate the information and successfully summarize relevant   peer-reviewed articles in a scholarly fashion helps to support the   student's ability and confidence to further develop and synthesize the   progressively more complex assignments that constitute the components   of the course change proposal capstone project. For this assignment, the student will provide a synopsis of eight   peer-reviewed articles from nursing journals using an evaluation table   that determines the level and strength of evidence for each of the   eight articles. The articles should be current within the last 5 years   and closely relate to the PICOT statement developed earlier in this   course. The articles may include quantitative research, descriptive   analyses, longitudinal studies, or meta-analysis articles. A   systematic review may be used to provide background information for   the purpose or problem identified in the proposed capstone project.   Use the "Literature Evaluation Table" resource to complete   this assignment. While APA style is not required for the body of this assignment,   solid academic writing is expected, and in-text citations and   references should be presented using APA documentation guidelines,   which can be found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student   Success Center. This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to   beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for   successful completion. You are not required to submit this assignment to Turnitin. NRS-490-RS-LiteratureEvaluationTable.docx Apply Rubrics Literature Evaluation Table                                    1                          Unsatisfactory          0-71%                         0.00%                                                     2                          Less Than Satisfactory          72-75%                         75.00%                                                     3                          Satisfactory          76-79%                         79.00%                                                     4                          Good          80-89%                         89.00%                                                     5                          Excellent          90-100%                         100.00%                             100.0 %Article Selection 5.0 % Author, Journal (Peer-Reviewed), and Permalink or Working Link to Access Article                                                   Author, journal (peer-reviewed), and  permalink or working link to access article section is not included.                                                  Author, journal (peer-reviewed), and .

1. Literature Evaluation Table
In nursing practice, accurate identification and application of
research is essential to achieving successful outcomes. Being
able to articulate the information and successfully summarize
relevant peer-reviewed articles in a scholarly fashion helps to
support the student's ability and confidence to further develop
and synthesize the progressively more complex assignments
that constitute the components of the course change proposal
capstone project.
For this assignment, the student will provide a synopsis of eight
peer-reviewed articles from nursing journals using an
evaluation table that determines the level and strength of
evidence for each of the eight articles. The articles should be
current within the last 5 years and closely relate to the PICOT
statement developed earlier in this course. The articles may
include quantitative research, descriptive analyses,
longitudinal studies, or meta-analysis articles. A systematic
review may be used to provide background information for the
purpose or problem identified in the proposed capstone project.
Use the "Literature Evaluation Table" resource to complete
this assignment.
While APA style is not required for the body of this assignment,
solid academic writing is expected, and in-text citations and
references should be presented using APA documentation
guidelines, which can be found in the APA Style Guide,
located in the Student Success Center.
This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to
beginning the assignment to become familiar with the
expectations for successful completion.

2. You are not required to submit this assignment to Turnitin.
NRS-490-RS-LiteratureEvaluationTable.docx
Apply Rubrics
Literature Evaluation Table
1
Unsatisfactory 0-71%
0.00%
2
Less Than Satisfactory
72-75%
75.00%
3
Satisfactory 76-79%
79.00%
4
Good 80-89%
89.00%
5

3. Excellent 90-100%
100.00%
100.0 %Article Selection
5.0 %
Author, Journal (Peer-Reviewed), and Permalink or Working
Link to Access Article
Author, journal (peer-reviewed), and permalink
or working link to access article section is not included.
Author, journal (peer-reviewed), and permalink
or working link to access article section is present, but it lacks
detail or is incomplete.
Author, journal (peer-reviewed),
and permalink or working link to access article section is
present.
Author, journal (peer-reviewed), and permalink
or working link to access article section is clearly provided and
well developed.
Author, journal (peer-reviewed), and
permalink or working link to access article section is
comprehensive and thoroughly developed with supporting
details.
5.0 %
Article Title and Year Published
Article title and year published section is not
included.
Article title and year published section is
present, but it lacks detail or is incomplete.
Article

4. title and year published section is present.
Article
title and year published section is clearly provided and well
developed.
Article title and year published section is
comprehensive and thoroughly developed with supporting
details.
10.0 %
Research Questions (Qualitative) or Hypothesis (Quantitative),
and Purposes or Aim of Study
Research questions (qualitative) or hypothesis
(quantitative), and purposes or aim of study section is not
included.
Research questions (qualitative) or
hypothesis (quantitative), and purposes or aim of study section
is present, but it lacks detail or is incomplete.
Research questions (qualitative) or hypothesis
(quantitative), and purposes or aim of study section is present.
Research questions (qualitative) or hypothesis
(quantitative), and purposes or aim of study section is clearly
provided and well developed.
Research questions
(qualitative) or hypothesis (quantitative), and purposes or aim
of study section is comprehensive and thoroughly developed
with supporting details.
5.0 %
Design (Type of Quantitative, or Type of Qualitative)
Design (type of quantitative, or type of
qualitative) section is not included.
Design

5. (type of quantitative, or type of qualitative) section is present,
but it lacks detail or is incomplete.
Design
(type of quantitative, or type of qualitative) section is present.
Design (type of quantitative, or type of
qualitative) section is clearly provided and well developed.
Design (type of quantitative, or type of
qualitative) section is comprehensive and thoroughly developed
with supporting details.
5.0 %
Setting or Sample
Setting or sample section is not included.
Setting or sample section is present, but it lacks
detail or is incomplete.
Setting or sample section is
present.
Setting or sample section is clearly provided and
well developed.
Setting or sample section is
comprehensive and thoroughly developed with supporting
details.
5.0 %
Methods: Intervention or Instruments
Methods: Intervention or instruments section is
not included.
Methods: Intervention or instruments
section is present, but it lacks detail or is incomplete.
Methods: Intervention or instruments section is

6. present.
Methods: Intervention or instruments section is
clearly provided and well developed.
Methods: Intervention or instruments section is
comprehensive and thoroughly developed with supporting
details.
10.0 %
Analysis
Analysis section is not included.
Analysis section is present, but it lacks detail or
is incomplete.
Analysis section is present.
Analysis section is clearly provided and well
developed.
Analysis section is comprehensive and
thoroughly developed with supporting details.
10.0 %
Key Findings
Key findings section is not included.
Key findings section is present, but it lacks
detail or is incomplete.
Key findings section is present.
Key findings section is clearly provided and
well developed.
Key findings section is
comprehensive and thoroughly developed with supporting
details.

7. 10.0 %
Recommendations
Recommendations section is not included.
Recommendations section is present, but it lacks
detail or is incomplete.
Recommendations section is
present.
Recommendations section is clearly provided
and well developed.
Recommendations section is
comprehensive and thoroughly developed with supporting
details.
10.0 %
Explanation of How the Article Supports EBP or Capstone
Explanation of how the article supports EBP or
capstone section is not included.
Explanation of how
the article supports EBP or capstone section is present, but it
lacks detail or is incomplete.
Explanation of how the
article supports EBP or capstone section is present.
Explanation of how the article supports EBP or
capstone section is clearly provided and well developed.
Explanation of how the article supports EBP or
capstone section is comprehensive and thoroughly developed
with supporting details.
10.0 %
Presentation

8. The piece is not neat or organized, and it does
not include all required elements.
The work is not neat
and includes minor flaws or omissions of required elements.
The overall appearance is general, and major
elements are missing.
The overall appearance is
generally neat, with a few minor flaws or missing elements.
The work is well presented and includes all
required elements. The overall appearance is neat and
professional.
10.0 %
Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation,
grammar, and language use)
Surface errors are pervasive enough that they
impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice
or sentence construction is employed.
Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors
distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice
(register) or word choice are present. Sentence structure is
correct but not varied.
Some mechanical errors or typos
are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader.
Correct and varied sentence structure and audience-appropriate
language are employed.
Prose is largely free of
mechanical errors, although a few may be present. The writer
uses a variety of effective sentence structures and figures of
speech.
The writer is clearly in command of standard,

9. written, academic English.
5.0 %
Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references,
bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style)
Sources are not documented.
Documentation of sources is inconsistent or
incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with
numerous formatting errors.
Sources are documented, as
appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting
errors may be present.
Sources are documented, as
appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly
correct.
Sources are completely and correctly
documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format
is free of error.
100 %
Total Weightage