Gaining Practice with Systematic Review
“A systematic review is a process of comprehensively locating and synthesizing the research on a particular question using organized, transparent, and replicable procedures (Littell, et al., 2008, as cited in Hall & Roussell, 2017, p. 19). A good first step in researching evidence-based approaches is to conduct a search of the available scholarly literature.
Using the real-world problem you formulated with your peers and instructor in this week’s first Discussion Question explore the Library to identify five articles closely aligned with your uniquely formulated problem. Present a synopsis of your findings in the form of a 700-1750 word written paper. Be sure to include the following elements in your paper:
Establish a search protocol by developing a question, or set of questions, in alignment with the real-world problem to guide your research.
Discuss the process you used to search the internet and library, by identifying which search engines and databases you used and any keywords and combinations of key words that you used in your searches (explain your search processes in a way that would allow someone else to replicate them).
Next, discuss your systematic review process by explaining your rationale for deciding which articles to include and which to exclude.
Base your article selections on those studies which are the most methodologically sound and offer a detailed explanation of how each of the articles you selected aligns with your real-world problem.
Synthesize your findings by highlighting research-based, evidence-based, emerging or promising practices that align with your search protocol and real-world problem.
Keep in mind that your Final Paper will likely include between 8-12 sources, however, for this week’s assignment, you will only be required to identify five articles total.
This assignment is worth 10 points of the total course grade.
Real world problem from week 1
Real World Problem There are many issues that can be be addressed by applying evidence based practice. In this case however, the problem that will be addressed will be a problem that is faced in therapy. Mrs. Jones is a therapist in Maryland Hospital and she helps patients to recover from traumatizing problems that they are facing or have faced. Recently, she has been noticing that the patients that she is treating are not recovering in the best way and some of the patients have specifically approached her and have communicated to her about the approach that she is using when it comes to the therapy sessions. Mrs. Jones therefore has decided to improve her methods and approach when it comes to the sessions with the hopes that the patients will feel better. In therefore identifying the best way to come up with a solution to this problem, the best thing or approach to take in order to ensure that the problem is solved is to first ensure that as the best approach that will help in getting the evidence needed and this will specifically help in the process of ensuring that as a therapist the best solution is gotten by simply looking out for evidences that are suitable in looking for the best approach that will help patients improve. References Flood, K. L., Booth, K., Vickers, J., Simmons, E., James, D. H., Biswal, S., … & Bowman, E. H. (2018). Acute care for elders (ACE) team model of care: a clinical overview. Geriatrics, 3(3), 50. https://www.mdpi.com/324378 Robinson, A., Shore, B. M., & Enersen, D. L. (2021). Best practices in gifted education: An evidence-based guide. Routledge. https://academic.oup.com/humrep/article-ab
Resources
Required Text
Hall, H., Roussell, L.A. (2017). Evidence-based practice: An integrative approach to research, administration, and practice. 2nd Ed. Burlington, MA: Jones & Bartlett Learning.
Chapter 6
Required References
Armitage, A. and Keeble-Allen, D. (2008). Undertaking a Structured Literature Review or Structuring a Literature Review: Tales from the Field. The Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods 6(2) pp. 103 – 114, Retrieved from www.ejbrm.com
Undertaking a Structured Literature Review or Structuring a Literature Review: Tales from the Field
Center for Evidence-Based Management. (n.d.) Critical appraisal. Retrieved from https://www.cebma.org/resources-and-tools/what-is-critical-appraisal/
Center for Evidence-Based Management. (n.d.) Critically appraised topic (CAT) manager app. Retrieved from https://www.cebma.org/resources-and-tools/cat-manager-app/
Cochrane. (2016, January 27). What are systematic reviews? [Video File]. Retrieved from
What are systematic reviews? (Links to an external site.)
What are systematic reviews?
How to read a scholarly article (Links to an external site.)
Will, R. (2016, September 6). Critical appraisal: A checklist featured on Students 4 Best Evidence [Blog post]. Retrieved from https://www.students4bestevidence.net/critical-appraisal-checklist/ (Links to an external site.)
Recommended References
Griffith University. (2013, March 17). Step 2. Systematically searching for papers [Video File]. Retrieved from
Step 2. Systematically searching for papers (Links to an external site.)
Step 2. Systematically searching for papers
OvidWoltersKluwer. (2015, October 6). Beyond the search: Maximizing the quality of systematic reviews [Video File]. Retrieved from
What is a Systematic Review (Links to an external site.)
What is a Systematic Review
Grading rubric
Description:
Total Possible Score: 10.00
Explains the Process Used to Search, Including the Search Protocol, the Search Engines and Keywords Used
Total: 2.00
Distinguished – Clearly explains in detail the process used to search, including the search protocol, the search engines and keywords used.
Proficient – Clearly explains the process used to search, including the search protocol, the search engines and keywords used.
Basic – Explains the process used to search, including the search protocol, the search engines and keywords used.
Below Expectations – Partially explains the process used to search, including the search protocol, the search engines and keywords used.
Non-Performance – Does not explains the process used to search.
Establishes the Systematic Review Process Explaining the Rationale for Inclusion and Real-World Alignment
Total: 2.00
Distinguished – Fully establishes the systematic review process explaining in detail the rationale for inclusion and real-world alignment.
Proficient – Clearly establishes the systematic review process explaining the rationale for inclusion and real-world alignment.
Basic – Establishes the systematic review process explaining the rationale for inclusion and real-world alignment.
Below Expectations – Partially establishes the systematic review process explaining the rationale for inclusion and real-world alignment.
Non-Performance – Does not establish the systematic review process.
Synthesizes Findings by Highlighting Research-Based, Evidence-Based, Emerging or Promising Practices that Align with the Search Protocol and Real-World Problem
Total: 2.00
Distinguished – Fully synthesizes findings by highlighting research-based, evidence-based, emerging or promising practices that clearly align with the search protocol and real-world problem.
Proficient – Synthesizes findings by highlighting research-based, evidence-based, emerging or promising practices that clearly align with the search protocol and real-world problem.
Basic – Synthesizes findings by highlighting research-based, evidence-based, emerging or promising practices that align with the search protocol and real-world problem.
Below Expectations – Incompletely synthesizes findings by highlighting research-based, evidence-based, emerging or promising practices that may align with the search protocol and real-world problem.
Non-Performance – Does not synthesize findings by highlighting research-based, evidence-based, emerging or promising practices.
Written Communication: Control of Syntax and Mechanics
Total: 1.00
Distinguished – Displays meticulous comprehension and organization of syntax and mechanics, such as spelling and grammar. Written work contains no errors and is very easy to understand.
Proficient – Displays comprehension and organization of syntax and mechanics, such as spelling and grammar. Written work contains only a few minor errors and is mostly easy to understand.
Basic – Displays basic comprehension of syntax and mechanics, such as spelling and grammar. Written work contains a few errors which may slightly distract the reader.
Below Expectations – Fails to display basic comprehension of syntax or mechanics, such as spelling and grammar. Written work contains major errors which distract the reader.
Non-Performance – The assignment is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the instructions.
Written Communication: APA Formatting
Total: 1.00
Distinguished – Accurately uses APA formatting consistently throughout the paper, title page, and reference page.
Proficient – Exhibits APA formatting throughout the paper. However, layout contains a few minor errors.
Basic – Exhibits limited knowledge of APA formatting throughout the paper. However, layout does not meet all APA requirements.
Below Expectations – Fails to exhibit basic knowledge of APA formatting. There are frequent errors, making the layout difficult to distinguish as APA.
Non-Performance – The assignment is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the instructions.
Written Communication: Resource Requirement
Total: 2.00
Distinguished – Uses more than the required number of scholarly sources, providing compelling evidence to support ideas. All sources on the reference page are used and cited correctly within the body of the assignment.
Proficient – Uses the required number of scholarly sources to support ideas. All sources on the reference page are used and cited correctly within the body of the assignment.
Basic – Uses less than the required number of sources to support ideas. Some sources may not be scholarly. Most sources on the reference page are used within the body of the assignment. Citations may not be formatted correctly.
Below Expectations – Uses an inadequate number of sources that provide little or no support for ideas. Sources used may not be scholarly. Most sources on the reference page are not used within the body of the assignment. Citations are not formatted correctly.
Non-Performance – The assignment is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the instructions.
The post Gaining Practice with Systematic Review “A systematic review is a process of appeared first on PapersSpot.
