Northern Arizona University
College of Health and Human Services
School of Nursing
SYLLABUS
Course Title: NUR 390: Nursing Research & Evidence Based Practice
Semester: Fall 2010
Credits: Three (3) credit hours
Instructor: Vicki Black-Bishop, Ph(c), RN
*Nursing Building, #110
* use course email, please
*Office: (928)523-8774 OR 1(800)426-8315 X8774 – Please do
not leave messages on this phone
*Cell Phone: 404-451-5504 – this is the best phone to use
*Home Phone: 928-266-7913
*Office Hours: Wednesdays 8:00 -11: 00 am; other times by
appointment
Please do not call or text me before 6 am or after 10pm
Course Prerequisites: STA 270, or equivalent statistics course.
Course Description: Focuses on research process as it relates to health
and nursing practice. Emphasizes developing abilities to interpret research
reports and apply research evidence to nursing practice.
Course approach and delivery: This online course uses a VISTA
platform for the delivery of assignments, asynchronous online discussions,
and exploration of selected issues using internet sources. Text and electronic
readings, weekly quizzes, and written assignments are also included as
approaches to learning in this course.
1
STUDENT LEARNING OUTCOMES:
Upon completion of this course, the successful student will be prepared to:
Accountability
1. Utilize research by incorporating research evidence into nursing practice.
2. Explain the need for an evidence-base in nursing practice.
Caring
3. Discuss the concept of “vulnerable population: and its implication for
conducting research.
Communication
4. Utilize electronic databases and resources to efficiently and effectively
locate desired research-based evidence.
Competency
5. Critically appraise best evidence to answer selected clinical questions.
Critical Thinking
6. Examine clinical questions in relation to levels of evidence.
Culture
7. Consider client values/viewpoint in the application of clinical evidence for
decision-making.
Leadership/Management
8. Promote integration of research findings in clinical settings.
COURSE CONTENT
Module I: Overview & Foundations of Nursing Research
Lesson
Lesson
Lesson
Lesson
Lesson
Lesson
1
2
3
4
5
6
(Week
(Week
(Week
(Week
(Week
(Week
1):
2):
3):
4):
5):
6):
Introduction and overview
Evidence-based practice: what? why? what now?
Reading research reports
Asking clinical questions
Finding answers--searching for evidence
Ethics and the research process
Module II: Now what do I do with this?
Lesson 1 (Week 7): Theoretical frameworks
Lesson 2 (Week 8): The naturalist paradigm & qualitative approaches
Lesson 3 (Week 9): The positivist paradigm & quantitative approaches
Lesson 4 (Week 10): Sampling issues and data collection in quantitative &
qualitative research
Lesson 5 (Week 11): Bias, reliability & validity in data analysis
2
Module III: Taking the next step....
COURSE READINGS: Lesson 1 (Week 12): Summarizing evidence &
Clinical Practice Guidelines
Lesson 2 (Week 13): Critical appraisal: Evidence Summaries & Clinical
Practice Guidelines
Lesson 3 (Week 14): Applying evidence & disseminating research
Required textbooks:
Polit, P.F., & Beck, C.T.. (2010). Essentials of nursing research: Methods,
appraisal, & utilization (7th ed.). Philadelphia: Lippincott. PLEASE DO
NOT USE AN EARLIER EDITION OF THIS BOOK
American Psychological Association. (2010). Publication of Manual of the
American Psychological Association, (6th ed.). Washington, DC:
Author. PLEASE DO NOT USE THE 5TH EDITION OF THIS BOOK
Supplemental Readings/Electronic Course Reserves
(available within course shell):
Week 1:
Polit, P.F., & Beck, C.T. (2010). Introducing research and its use in nursing
practice. In Essentials of nursing research: Methods, appraisal, &
utilization (6th ed.), [pp 3-32]. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott. *this
chapter of the text is also available electronically for the first week’s
lesson if you are waiting for your text to arrive*
Gordon, S., & Nelson, S. (2005). An end to angels: Moving away from the
"virtue script" toward a knowledge-based identity for nurses. American
Journal of Nursing, 105(5), 62-69.
Week 2:
Institute of Medicine (2001). Crossing the quality chasm: Shaping the future
for health. Washington, DC: Author. (Download:
http://www.iom.edu/file.asp?id=27184)
Week 3: Article for Abstract Translation Assignment:
Aiken, L. H., Clarke, S. P., Cheung, R. B., Sloane, D. M., & Silber, J. H.
(2003,September 24). Educational levels of hospital nurses and
surgical patient mortality, Journal of the American Medical Association
(JAMA), 290, 1617-1623.
Week 4:
Nolan, R., Fineout-Overholt, E., & Stephenson, P. (2005). Asking compelling
3
clinical questions. In B. M Melnyk & E. Fineout-Overholt, Evidencebased practice in nursing & healthcare: A guide to best practice [pp.
25-37]. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.
Week 6:
John, J. E. (2007). The child’s right to participate in research: Myth or
misconception? British Journal of Nursing 16(3), 157-160.
Article for Ethical Critique Assignment:
Sarna, L., Bialous, S. A., Wewers, M. E., Froelicher, E. S., & Danao, L.
(2005). Nurses, smoking, and the workplace. Research in Nursing and
Health, 28, 79-90.
Week 7:
Smith, M. (2004). Review of research related to Watson’s Theory of Caring.
Nursing Science Quarterly, 17(1), 17-25.
Tourville, C. & Ingalls, K. (2003). The living tree of nursing theories. Nursing
Outlook, 38(3), 21-36.
Week 10: Use these articles for the Paradigm Comparison
Assignment:
Albrecht, S. A., Caruthers, D., Patrick, T., Reynolds, M., Salamie, D.,
Higgins, L.W., Braxter, B., Kim, Y., & Mlynarchek, S. (2006). A
randomized control trial of a smoking cessation intervention for
pregnant adolescents. Nursing Research, 55,(6) 402-410.
Falkin, G.P., Fryer, C. S., & Mahadeo, M. (2007). Smoking cessation and
stress among teenagers. Qualitative Health Research, 17(6), 812-823.
Week 12:
Ezzo, J. (2007). What can be learned from the Cochrane systematic reviews
of massage that can guide future research? The Journal of Alternative
and Complementary Medicine, 13 (2), 291-295 4
McQueen, K., & Dennis, C.-L. (2007). Development of a
postpartum depression best practice guideline: A review of the
systematic process. Journal of Nursing Care Quality, 22(3), 199-204.
Week 13:
Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ). (2002). Systems to
rate the strength of scientific evidence (AHRQ publication no. 02E016).
Broughton, R. & Rathbone, B. (2004). What makes a good clinical guideline?
4
Evidence-based Medicine, 1(11). Retrieved Januray 30, 2006:
http://www.evidence-based
medicine.co.uk/ebmfiles/WhatmakesClinGuide.pdf
Slutsky, J. (2005). Using evidence-based practice guidelines: Tools for
improving practice. In B. Melnyk & E. Fineout-Overholt, Evidencebased practice in nursing & healthcare: A guide to best practice, [pp.
221-236]. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.
Small, L., Anderson, D., Melnyk, B. M. (2007). Prevention and early
treatment of overweight and obesity in young children: A critical
review and appraisal of the evidence. Pediatric Nursing, 33(2), 149161, 127.
Week 14:
Pipe, T. B. (2007). Optimizing nursing care by integrating theory-driven
evidence-based practice. Journal of Nursing Care Quality, 22(3), 234238.
Rauen, C. A., Chulay, M., Briedges, E., Vollman, K. M., Arbour, R. (2008).
Seven evidence-based practice habits: Putting some sacred cows out
to pasture. Critical Care Nurse, 28(2), 98-124.
GRADING AND EVALUATION:
Your grade in this course will be earned from numerous sources
of work:
Assignments
Quizzes (1st 12 weeks)
Weekly Discussions
Moderator of Discussion
Course Agreement
Annotated Bibliography
Ethical Critique
Paradigm Comparison
Final Paper
Electronic Presentation
Total
5
Points
175
75
10
5
20
20
25
100
20
450
Using the NAU School of Nursing grading scale, grades will be
calculated as follows:
418-450 points = A
417-378 points = B
377-337 points = C
336 points and below = F; must repeat and cannot progress in
nursing courses
It is important to note that an Incomplete in this course will
prevent you from progressing in the nursing sequence (until it is
resolved).
6
Assignment due dates:
Assignments, discussion postings and quizzes, are due no later than
8:00 a.m. MST on the Monday dates described in the Calendar.
However, assignments may be turned in early. Assignments turned in
after the due date and time will have a point reduction of 5% of the
total possible points for the assignment for each day that the
assignment is late if prior arrangements are not made with
instructor.
Quizzes: In this course the weekly quizzes are open-book quizzes, but NOT
collaborative quizzes. Please put forth your own best effort, using text or
other print and online resources. However, collaboration with another person
will be considered a breach of academic integrity. See Course Policies
All quizzes will be available from the beginning of the course, but will close
at the end of the lesson on Mondays when online discussions are closed—
8:00 a.m. MST. You may take a quiz up to three times within the
timeframe that it is open; your highest grade will be recorded. Missed
quizzes cannot be made up unless arrangements are made with the
instructor prior to the closing of the quiz.
Online Discussion dates: Online discussions are designed to take place
over one week. It is expected that initial contributions to the
discussion will occur earlier in the described time frame (Monday
through Friday), and additional entries, responding to two
classmates' postings, is expected prior to the closing of the
discussion topic (responses are accepted through the weekend until
the Discussion closes on Monday morning). Please make sure that you
are posting to the correct Discussion; misplaced discussion postings may not
be counted. Discussion postings will be graded according to the stated
Rubric. Contributions to online discussions after the described time frame
will not be accepted, and grade credit will not be awarded.
Evaluative Rubric for Web CT Discussion Assignments
Up to five points may be earned each week for participation in the course
Discussion. Two portions are involved in the grading of the Discussion
Assignments:
Individual student postings that include an analysis of the question(s) being
discussed. A score of 0-5 will be awarded to the initial posting using the
rubric standards below. This initial posting is expected in the MondayFriday timeframe of the weekly lesson.
Up to one additional point will be awarded to each of two (maximum)
responses to other student postings that are substantive and contribute to
thoughtful and collegial dialogue. Responses may be posted through the
7
weekend period of the lesson, up until the Monday morning closing of the
lesson.
When considering the initial discussion posting, the following criteria will be
used:
Score of 5: OUTSTANDING
Student will address the questions directly and thoroughly. The position
taken will be supported with specific evidence and examples with the line of
reasoning clearly articulated. The reader will clearly know the student’s
judgment and the reasons for it, with no need to seek further information. In
addition, the reader will recognize the student’s insight into the issues as
well as the analysis and interpretation. References (cited in APA format) will
strengthen the position(s) taken.
In addition, the student will read 100% of the posts
Score of 4: ACCEPTABLE
Student will address the questions, though its focus may wander in portions.
Elements of the student’s position may not be completely developed or may
receive erratic support (i.e., some points supported well, while others
supported weakly). The quality of writing interferes with understanding. The
reader will recognize basic understanding of the issues represented, though
with a need for some clarification or elaboration. References may not be
included, or cited incorrectly.
In addition, the student will read 75% of the posts
Score of 1: WEAK
Student may fail to address the question adequately. Ideas are put together
without careful design, so that the overall effect is confusion on the part of
the reader. Little support is provided for the arguments or comparison made,
and inaccuracies may be present. Mechanical errors may be substantial, and
there errors may attribute to misunderstandings. The reader will have
serious questions about the writer’s understanding. Frequent misspellings
and/or grammatical errors contribute to difficulties for the reader.
In addition, the student will read 50% of the posts
Score of 0: FAIL
Student fails to address the question adequately. Ideas are irrelevant to
question and confuse to the reader. No rationale is proved to support the
arguments. The quality of writing is poor; mechanical errors are substantial
which results in misunderstandings. The reader will have serious difficulty
following writer’s understanding. In addition, the student reads less than
50% of the posts.
8
There is also a Discussion Facilitator assignment, described below:
Discussion Facilitator
During certain weeks of the semester, a discussion facilitator will be assigned for
the weekly discussions. The facilitator will be responsible for answering the
discussion question as usual, but, in addition, she/he will do the following:
1. Read the posts every day of the assigned week and pose thought-provoking
questions to stimulate substantive discussion.
2. The facilitator will provide helpful and gentle feedback to each group member
– such as, Please discuss this further; this particular sentence is not clear; don’t
forget to cite the in-text references, etc. The facilitator’s job is to help keep the
discussion going in a meaningful way. She/he might also gently point out that
some replies are not substantive enough in nature. The facilitator is not to
criticize but to gently keep the discussion going.
2. At the end of the weekly postings (between Sunday evening and Monday
morning at 8 am), the facilitator will summarize the group’s discussion.
Summarization should include the key points that were made and should include
references.
3. Discussions week 3-11 will be assigned facilitators. I will post the assignments
during the first ten days of class.
4. This assignment is worth 10 points.
IMPORTANT NOTE:
Wikipedia is not considered an acceptable, valid, reliable resource for use in
any School of Nursing coursework, especially NUR 390. Any
assignment/discussion that cites this source will automatically be graded
with a zero (0). One purpose of this course is to help students identify,
appraise, and utilize valid and reliable professional resources. Wikipedia does
not meet this criterion.
NAU STUDENT POLICIES:
http://www2.nau.edu/academicadmin/UCCPolicy/plcystmt.html
9