- Premium Academic Help From Professionals
- +1 810 395 5448
- support@essayshredder.com
Assignment: Evidence-Based Capstone Project, Part 6: Disseminating Results
Assignment: Evidence-Based Capstone Project, Part 6: Disseminating Results
The dissemination of EBP results serves multiple important roles. Sharing results makes the case for your decisions. It also adds to the body of knowledge, which creates opportunities for future practitioners. By presenting results, you also become an advocate for EBP, creating a culture within your organization or beyond that informs, educates, and promotes the effective use of EBP.
To Prepare:
- Review the final PowerPoint presentation you submitted in Module 5, and make any necessary changes based on the feedback you have received and on lessons you have learned throughout the course.
- Consider the best method of disseminating the results of your presentation to an audience.
To Complete:
Create a 5-minute, 5- to 6-slide narrated PowerPoint presentation of your Evidence-Based Project.
- Be sure to incorporate any feedback or changes from your presentation submission in Module 5.
- Explain how you would disseminate the results of your project to an audience. Provide a rationale for why you selected this dissemination strategy.
By Day 5 of Week 11
Submit Part 6, your revised PowerPoint presentation of your Evidence-Based Project.
Submission
Name: NURS_6052_Module06_Week11_Assignment_Rubric
| Excellent | Good | Fair | Poor | |
| Part 6: Disseminating Results
Create a 5-minute, 5- to 6-slide narrated PowerPoint presentation of your Evidence-Based Project:
· Be sure to incorporate any feedback or changes from your presentation submission in Module 5. · Explain how you would disseminate the results of your project to an audience. Provide a rationale for why you selected this dissemination strategy. |
Points Range:81 (81.00%) – 90 (90.00%)
The narrated presentation accurately and completely summarizes the evidence-based project. The narrated presentation is professional in nature and thoroughly addresses all components of the evidence-based project. The narrated presentation accurately and clearly explains in detail how to disseminate the results of the project to an audience, citing specific and relevant examples. The narrated presentation accurately and clearly provides a justification that details the selection of this dissemination strategy that is fully supported by specific and relevant examples. The narrated presentation provides a complete, detailed, and specific synthesis of two outside resources related to the dissemination strategy explained. The narrated presentation fully integrates at least two outside resources and two or three course-specific resources that fully support the presentation. |
Points Range:72 (72.00%) – 80 (80.00%)
The narrated presentation adequately summarizes the evidence-based project. The narrated presentation is professional in nature and adequately addresses the components of the evidence-based project. The narrated presentation accurately explains how to disseminate the results of the project to an audience; some specific examples may be provided. The narrated presentation accurately provides a justification for the selection of this dissemination strategy and may be supported by specific examples. The narrated presentation provides an accurate synthesis of at least one outside resource related to the dissemination strategy explained. The narrated presentation integrates at least one outside resource and two or three course-specific resources that may support the presentation. |
Points Range:63 (63.00%) – 71 (71.00%)
The narrated presentation vaguely, inaccurately, or incompletely summarizes the evidence-based project. The narrated presentation may be professional in nature and somewhat addresses the components of the evidence-based project. The narrated presentation inaccurately or vaguely explains how to disseminate the results of the project to an audience; inaccurate or vague examples may be provided. The narrated presentation inaccurately or vaguely provides a justification for the selection of this dissemination strategy and may be supported by inaccurate or vague examples. The narrated presentation provides a vague or inaccurate synthesis of outside resources reviewed related to the dissemination strategy explained. The response minimally integrates resources that may support the presentation. |
Points Range:0 (0.00%) – 62 (62.00%)
The narrated presentation vaguely and inaccurately summarizes the evidence-based project or is missing. The narrated presentation is not professional in nature and inaccurately and incompletely addresses the components of the evidence-based project or is missing. The narrated presentation vaguely and inaccurately explains how to disseminate the results of the project to an audience, no examples are provided, or it is missing. The narrated presentation vaguely and inaccurately provides a justification for the selection of this dissemination strategy, no examples are provided, or it is missing. The narrated presentation provides a vague and inaccurate synthesis of outside resources reviewed related to the dissemination strategy explained or is missing. The presentation fails to integrate any resources to support the presentation. |
| 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. | Points Range:5 (5.00%) – 5 (5.00%)
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity. A clear and comprehensive purpose statement, introduction, and conclusion is provided which delineates all required criteria. |
Points Range:4 (4.00%) – 4 (4.00%)
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. |
Points Range:3.5 (3.50%) – 3.5 (3.50%)
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. |
Points Range:0 (0.00%) – 3 (3.00%)
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity less than 60% of the time. No purpose statement, introduction, or conclusion was provided. |
| Written Expression and Formatting—English Writing Standards: Correct grammar, mechanics, and proper punctuation. | Points Range:5 (5.00%) – 5 (5.00%)
Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors. |
Points Range:4 (4.00%) – 4 (4.00%)
Contains a few (one or two) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. |
Points Range:3.5 (3.50%) – 3.5 (3.50%)
Contains several (three or four) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. |
Points Range:0 (0.00%) – 3 (3.00%)
Contains many (five or more) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the reader’s understanding. |
Learning Objectives
Students will:
- Evaluate dissemination strategies
- Recommend strategies to overcome barriers to dissemination of evidence-based practice changes
- Synthesize concepts of evidence-based practice
- Justify dissemination strategies
Photo Credit: sturti/E+/Getty images
Learning Resources
Required Readings
Melnyk, B. M., & Fineout-Overholt, E. (2018). Evidence-based practice in nursing & healthcare: A guide to best practice (4th ed.). Philadelphia, PA: Wolters Kluwer.
- Chapter 10, “The Role of Outcomes on Evidence-based Quality Improvement and enhancing and Evaluating Practice Changes” (pp. 293–312)
- Chapter 12, “Leadership Strategies for Creating and Sustaining Evidence-based Practice Organizations” (pp. 328–343)
- Chapter 14, “Models to Guide Implementation and Sustainability of Evidence-based Practice” (pp. 378–427)
Newhouse, R. P., Dearholt, S., Poe, S., Pugh, L. C., & White, K. M. (2007). Organizational change strategies for evidence-based practice. Journal of Nursing Administration, 37(12), 552–557. doi:0.1097/01.NNA.0000302384.91366.8f
Note: You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.
Melnyk, B. M. (2012). Achieving a high-reliability organization through implementation of the ARCC model for systemwide sustainability of evidence-based practice. Nursing Administration Quarterly, 36(2), 127–135. doi:10.1097/NAQ.0b013e318249fb6a
Note: You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.
Melnyk, B. M., Fineout-Overholt, E., Gallagher-Ford, L., & Stillwell, S. B. (2011). Evidence-based practice, step by step: Sustaining evidence-based practice through organizational policies and an innovative model. American Journal of Nursing, 111(9), 57–60. doi:10.1097/01.NAJ.0000405063.97774.0e
Note: You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.
Melnyk, B. M., Fineout-Overholt, E., Giggleman, M., & Choy, K. (2017). A test of the ARCC© model improves implementation of evidence-based practice, healthcare culture, and patient outcomes. Worldviews on Evidence-Based Nursing, 14(1), 5–9. doi:10.1111/wvn.12188
Note: You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.
Melnyk, B. M., Fineout-Overholt, E., Gallagher-Ford, L., & Stillwell, S. B. (2011). Evidence-based practice, step by step: Sustaining evidence-based practice through organizational policies and an innovative model. American Journal of Nursing, 111(9), 57–60. doi:10.1097/01.NAJ.0000405063.97774.0e
Note: You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.
