This document provides guidance and criteria for a PowerPoint presentation on evidence-based clinical inquiry and systematic reviews. Students are instructed to identify a clinical issue of interest, develop a PICO(T) question, search four databases to find four relevant peer-reviewed articles, cite the articles, describe the level of evidence and strengths of systematic reviews. Criteria are provided to evaluate the presentation on a scale of 0-100%, assessing inclusion of required elements, clarity, examples, synthesis of resources, writing standards, and formatting.

1. · Grid View
· List View
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor
Part 3: Advanced Levels of Clinical Inquiry and Systematic
Reviews
Create a 6- to 7-slide PowerPoint presentation in which you do
the following:
· Identify and briefly describe your chosen clinical issue of
interest.
· Describe how you developed a PICO(T) question focused on
your chosen clinical issue of interest.
· Identify the four research databases that you used to conduct
your search for the peer-reviewed articles you selected.
· Provide APA citations of the four peer-reviewed articles you
selected.
· Describe the levels of evidence in each of the four peer-
reviewed articles you selected, including an explanation of the
strengths of using systematic reviews for clinical research. Be
specific and provide examples.
81 (81%) - 90 (90%)

2. The presentation clearly and accurately identifies and describes
in detail the chosen clinical issue of interest.
The presentation clearly and accurately describes in detail the
developed PICO(T) question.
The presentation clearly and accurately identifies four or more
research databases used to conduct a search for the peer-
reviewed articles selected.
The presentation clearly and accurately provides full APA
citations for at least four peer-reviewed articles selected,
including a thorough and detailed explanation of the strengths
of using systematic reviews for clinical research.
The presentation includes specific and relevant examples that
fully support the research.
The presentation provides a complete, detailed, and accurate
synthesis of two outside resources related to the peer-reviewed
articles selected, and fully integrates at least two outside
resources and two or three course-specific resources that fully
support the presentation.
72 (72%) - 80 (80%)
The presentation accurately identifies and describes the chosen
clinical issue of interest.
The presentation accurately describes the developed PICO(T)
question focused on the chosen clinical issue of interest.
The presentation accurately identifies at least four research
databases used to conduct a search for the peer-reviewed
articles selected.
The presentation accurately provides APA citations for at least
four peer-reviewed articles selected, including an adequate

3. explanation of the strengths of using systematic reviews for
clinical research.
The presentation includes relevant examples that support the
research presented.
The presentation provides an accurate synthesis of at least one
outside resource related to the peer-reviewed articles selected.
The response integrates at least one outside resource and two or
three course-specific resources that may support the
presentation.
63 (63%) - 71 (71%)
The presentation inaccurately or vaguely identifies and
describes the chosen clinical issue of interest.
The presentation inaccurately or vaguely describes the
developed PICO(T) question focused on the chosen clinical
issue of interest.
The presentation inaccurately or vaguely identifies at least four
research databases used to conduct a search for the peer-
reviewed articles selected.
The presentation inaccurately or vaguely provides APA
citations for at least four peer-reviewed articles selected,
including an inaccurate or vague explanation of the strengths of
using systematic reviews for clinical research.
The presentation includes inaccurate or vague examples to
support the research presented.
The presentation provides a vague or inaccurate synthesis or
outside resources related to the peer-reviewed articles selected.
The response minimally integrates resources that may support
the presentation.
0 (0%) - 62 (62%)

4. The presentation inaccurately and vaguely identifies and
describes the chosen clinical issue of interest or is missing.
The presentation inaccurately and vaguely describes the
developed PICO(T) question, or is missing.
The presentation inaccurately and vaguely identifies less than
four research databases used to conduct a search for the peer-
reviewed articles selected or is missing.
The presentation inaccurately and vaguely provides APA
citations for at least four peer-reviewed articles selected,
including an inaccurate and vague explanation of the strengths
of using systematic reviews for clinical research, or is missing.
The presentation includes inaccurate and vague examples to
support the research presented or is missing.
The presentation provides a vague and inaccurate synthesis of
no outside resources related to the articles selected and fails to
integrate any resources to support the presentation or is
missing.
Written Expression and Formatting—Paragraph Development
and Organization:
Paragraphs make clear points that support well-developed ideas,
flow logically, and demonstrate continuity of ideas. Sentences
are carefully focused—neither long and rambling nor short and
lacking substance. A clear and comprehensive purpose
statement and introduction is provided, which delineates all
required criteria.
5 (5%) - 5 (5%)
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow,
continuity, and clarity.
A clear and comprehensive purpose statement, introduction, and
conclusion are provided, which delineates all required criteria.

5. 4 (4%) - 4 (4%)
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow,
continuity, and clarity 80% of the time.
Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment is
stated yet is brief and not descriptive.
3.5 (3.5%) - 3.5 (3.5%)
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow,
continuity, and clarity 60–79% of the time.
Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment is
vague or off topic.
0 (0%) - 3 (3%)
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow,
continuity, and clarity < 60% of the time.
No purpose statement, introduction, or conclusion are provided.
Written Expression and Formatting—English Writing
Standards:
Correct grammar, mechanics, and proper punctuation.
5 (5%) - 5 (5%)
Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors.
4 (4%) - 4 (4%)
Contains a few (one or two) grammar, spelling, and punctuation
errors.
3.5 (3.5%) - 3.5 (3.5%)
Contains several (three or four) grammar, spelling, and
punctuation errors.
0 (0%) - 3 (3%)
Contains many (five or more) grammar, spelling, and
punctuation errors that interfere with the reader’s
understanding.
Total Points: 100
Name: NURS_6052_Module03_Week05_Assignment_Rubric

6. Assignment: Evidence-Based Project, Part 3: Advanced Levels
of Clinical Inquiry and Systematic Reviews
Your quest to purchase a new car begins with an identification
of the factors important to you. As you conduct a search of cars
that rate high on those factors, you collect evidence and try to
understand the extent of that evidence. A report that suggests a
certain make and model of automobile has high mileage is
encouraging. But who produced that report? How valid is it?
How was the data collected, and what was the sample size?
In this Assignment, you will delve deeper into clinical inquiry
by closely examining your PICO(T) question. You also begin to
analyze the evidence you have collected.
To Prepare:
· Review the Resources and identify a clinical issue of interest
that can form the basis of a clinical inquiry.
· Develop a PICO(T) question to address the clinical issue of
interest for the Assignment.
· Use the key words from the PICO(T) question you developed
and search at least four different databases in the Walden
Library to identify at least four relevant peer-reviewed articles
at the systematic-reviews level related to your research
question.
· Reflect on the process of creating a PICO(T) question and
searching for peer-reviewed research.
The Assignment (Evidence-Based Project)
Part 3: Advanced Levels of Clinical Inquiry and Systematic
Reviews
Create a 6- to 7-slide PowerPoint presentation in which you do
the following:
· Identify and briefly describe your chosen clinical issue of
interest.
· Describe how you developed a PICO(T) question focused on
your chosen clinical issue of interest.
· Identify the four research databases that you used to conduct
your search for the peer-reviewed articles you selected.

7. · Provide APA citations of the four peer-reviewed articles you
selected.
· Describe the levels of evidence in each of the four peer-
reviewed articles you selected, including an explanation of the
strengths of using systematic reviews for clinical research. Be
specific and provide examples.
RESOURCES
https://catalog.loc.gov/vwebv/ui/en_US/htdocs/help/searchBool
ean.html
Davies, K. S. (2011). Formulating the evidence based practice
question: A review of the frameworks for LIS professionals.
Evidence Based Library and Information Practice, 6(2), 75–80.
https://doi.org/10.18438/B8WS5N.
Stillwell, S. B., Fineout-Overholt, E., Melnyk, B. M., &
Williamson, K. M. (2010a). Evidence-based practice, step by
step: Asking the clinical question: A key step in evidence-based
practice. American Journal of Nursing, 110(3), 58–61.
doi:10.1097/01.NAJ.0000368959.11129.79.
Melnyk, B. M., Fineout-Overholt, E., Stillwell, S. B., &
Williamson, K. M. (2009). Evidence-based practice: Step by
step: Igniting a spirit of inquiry. American Journal of Nursing,
109(11), 49–52. doi:10.1097/01.NAJ.0000363354.53883.58.
Retrieved from
https://journals.lww.com/ajnonline/fulltext/2009/11000/Evidenc
e_Based_Practice__Step_by_Step__Igniting_a.28.aspx
Stillwell, S. B., Fineout-Overholt, E., Melnyk, B. M., &
Williamson, K. M. (2010b). Evidence-based practice, step by
step: Searching for the evidence. American Journal of Nursing,
110(5), 41–47. doi:10.1097/01.NAJ.0000372071.24134.7e.
Retrieved from
https://journals.lww.com/ajnonline/Fulltext/2010/05000/Evidenc
e_Based_Practice,_Step_by_Step__Searching.24.aspx

8. DISCUSSION POST WITH MY ORIGINAL PICOT QUESTION
.
A PICOt question will yield the most relevant and best evidence
from a search of existing literature (Melnyk & Fineout-
Overholt, 2019, p. 17). PICOt stand for the following;
P- Population, Problem, or patient
I- Intervention/Exposure
C- Comparative Intervention/Exposure
O- Outcome
t- Time
PICOt approach will provide an initial basis for mutual
understanding, communication, and direction to help answer
clinical study questions(Riva, Malik, Burnie, Endicott, & Busse,
2012).
When formulating my PICOt question, I first wrote down my
general question Does music therapy help with outbursts on the
Senior Behavioral Health Unit. Then by using the PICOt
formula, I was able to rewrite my question to:
In Geriatric patients over 50 years old with Dementia and
behavioral outbursts (P) does music therapy (I) reduce
behavioral outbursts (O) compared to no music therapy (C) in
two weeks (t)?
For my question, I decided to use PsycArticles and PsycINFO
since my questions are psych related. My results were the
following:
PsycINFO
Behavioral Outbursts & Music Therapy – 0 results
Dementia & Music Therapy- 281 results
Dementia & Music Therapy & 2 weeks- 9 results
Geriatric & Music Therapy- 153 results
Geriatric & Music Therapy & Behavioral outbursts- 0 results
Geriatric & Dementia & Music Therapy- 67 results
Geriatric & Dementia & Outbursts- 0 results

9. PsycARTICLES
Behavioral Outbursts & Music Therapy- 0 results
Dementia & Music Therapy- 4 results
Dementia & Music Therapy & 2 weeks- 0 results
Geriatric & Music Therapy- 3 results
Geriatric & Music Therapy & Behavioral outbursts- 0 results
Geriatric & Dementia & Music Therapy- 3 results
Geriatric & Dementia & Outbursts- 0 results
The number of results decreased after I added more words and
interchanged words. I had better results with PsycINFO than I
did with PsycARTICLES. To increase the rigor and
effectiveness, one needs to consider all areas of the PICOt
question. One can also relook at their PICOt question to make
sure it is correctly worded, does it need to be reworded, and are
you missing a part of the question. Once you relook at your
question a new search can be completed. This is something I
will be utilizing throughout my nursing career now.