EBP107_Assessment Brief 3_Journal Evaluation Page 1 of 7 A SSESSMENT 3 BRIEF Subject Code and Title EBP107 Evidence-Based Practice Assessment Assessment 3: Journal Article Evaluation: Using a critical appraisal tool Individual/Group Individual Length 1,500 words (+/- 10%) Learning Outcomes This assessment addresses the Subject Learning Outcomes outlined at the bottom of this document. Submission By 11:55pm AEST/AEDT Sunday of Module 5.2 (week 10) Weighting 45% Total Marks 100 marks Context: This assessment enables students to demonstrate their ability to evaluate and appraise evidence in healthcare research, an essential component of evidence-based practice and the exercise of clinical judgement in the delivery of quality healthcare. Students will use a critical appraisal tool and other supporting references to appraise and interpret the sections and methodological quality of a research article including how well the evidence may be applied in evidence-based practice. Instructions: Students are required to conduct an evaluation of one journal article in an essay format. The article may be the selected one used in Assessment 2 Article Summary task. Alternatively, you may choose to select an article of your choice from the range of research articles supplied for the previous Assessment 2 assignment. EBP107_Assessment Brief 3_Journal Evaluation Page 2 of 7 This task requires using one of the critical appraisal tools supplied from a link below. Choose an appraisal tool that fits the chosen article to evaluation. CASP. (n.d.). CASP Checklists. https://casp-uk.net/casp-tools-checklists/ Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine (CEBM). (2014). Critical Appraisal Tools. https://www.cebm.net/2014/06/critical-appraisal/ Equator Network.(n.d.). Reporting guidelines for main study types. http://www.equator- network.org/ Joanna Briggs Institute (n.d). Critical appraisal tools. https://jbi.global/critical-appraisal-tools Essay Format: The article evaluation must be presented in an essay format, with an introduction, body and conclusion. Introduction: The introduction must introduce the article, including proper referencing of the article, and a discussion about why you chose that article to evaluate. Body: In the body of your essay you must: 1. Use the critical appraisal tool you have chosen to evaluate all the sections of the research study, including the title, abstract and declarations. 2. Throughout the body of your essay you are to refer to the chosen critical appraisal tool and use additional references to support your evaluation. Subheadings may be used. 3.. Provide a referenced definition of Evidence Based Practice (EBP), and a recommendation as to how well the findings from this study may be incorporated into EBP. Give reasons and offer evidence to support your evaluation. Conclusion: A brief discussion of the overall quality of the study with reference to the strengths and weaknesses as outlined in the body of the essay. Referencing: It is essential that you use appropriate APA style for citing and referencing research. Please see more information on referencing here: https://library.torrens.edu.au/academicskills/apa/tool Word count: Please include the word count – excluding the reference list at the end of the assessment. Please adhere to the word count, if you exceed 1,500 words (+10%), the excess may not be graded. Appendix: Include a copy of the completed critical appraisal tool as an appendix. EBP107_Assessment Brief 3_Journal Evaluation Page 3 of 7 Submission Instructions: Submit via the Assessment 3: Journal Article Evaluation link in the main navigation menu in EBP107 Evidence-Based Practice. The Learning Facilitator will provide feedback via the Grade Centre in the LMS portal. Feedback can be viewed in My Grades. EBP107_Assessment Brief 3_Journal Evaluation Page 4 of 7 Learning Rubric: Assessment 3 Journal Article Evaluation: using a critical appraisal tool Assessment Attributes Fail (Unacceptable) 0- 49% Pass (Functional) 50- 64% Credit (Proficient) 65- 74% Distinction (Advanced) 75 -84% High Distinction (Exceptional) 85-100% Knowledge and understanding Review and introduction provided for a chosen article. Percentage for this criterion: 20% The chosen article being reviewed has not been clearly identified, information is disjointed or irrelevant comments are present. The article being reviewed has been identified, however, appropriate referencing is not included and introduction provided is limited. The article being reviewed is identified, referenced and clear introduction is provided. The article being reviewed is identified, referenced and a succinct introduction is provided. The article being reviewed is identified, referenced and thorough and succinct introduction is provided. Application of new knowledge. Evaluation of journal article and adherence to the critical appraisal tool. Percentage for this criterion: 30% Lack of application of new knowledge is evident. No reference to the critical appraisal tool. Demonstrated application of new knowledge in evaluating a chosen journal article. Lacks reference to the critical appraisal tool. Well-developed application of new knowledge and evaluation of chosen article with reference to the critical appraisal tool. Thoroughly developed evaluation of chosen article with clear reference to the critical appraisal tool. Highly sophisticated and creative evaluation of chosen article with thorough application of the critical appraisal tool. Excellent description and critique of each section. EBP107_Assessment Brief 3_Journal Evaluation Page 5 of 7 Reasoning and presentation of argument and/or position. Limited understanding of key concepts required to support discussion. Resembles a recall or summary of key ideas. Often conflates/confuses assertion of personal opinion with information Supports personal opinion and information substantiated by evidence from the research/course materials. Discriminates between assertion of personal opinion and information substantiated by robust evidence from the research/course Clearly discriminates between assertion of personal opinion and Information that is substantiated by robust evidence from the Key concepts of discussion presented. Discriminates between personal opinion and substantiated information. Percentage for this criterion: 25% Confuses logic and emotion. Information taken from reliable sources but without comments to support. substantiated by evidence from the research/course materials. Demonstrates a capacity to explain and apply relevant concepts, with a good description of the overall quality of research. Clear definition of Evidence Based Practice provided. materials and extended reading. Well demonstrated capacity to explain and apply relevant concepts, with a very good description and critique of the overall quality of research. Relevant and thorough definition of Evidence Based Practice. research/course materials and extended reading. Information is taken from sources with a high level of interpretation/evaluatio n to develop a comprehensive analysis or synthesis. An excellent description of overall quality of research, including succinct and thorough definition of Evidence Based Practice provided. EBP107_Assessment Brief 3_Journal Evaluation Page 6 of 7 Structure and writing style. Clarity of expression, planning and flow of work 15% No evidence of planning. Inappropriate writing style. Needs work on structure, flow and order. Report missing structure of introduction, body and conclusion. Adequate academic writing style. Basic structure, some areas may lack flow or order. Some aspects of report structure missing, lacking complete introduction, body and conclusion. Good academic writing style. Logical sequence with clear structure. Report structure includes flow of introduction, body and conclusion. Well-developed academic writing style. Clear expression with logical sequencing, flow and structure. Report structure includes clear presentation of introduction, body and conclusion. Highly developed academic writing style. Clear and concise. Structure and sequencing effectively supports discussion, drawing concepts together. Report structure includes succinct presentation of introduction, body and conclusion. Correct citation of key resources and evidence Demonstrates inconsistent use of good quality, credible and relevant resources to support and develop ideas. Demonstrates use of credible and relevant resources to support and develop ideas, but these are not always explicit or well developed. Demonstrates use of credible resources to support and develop ideas. Demonstrates use of good quality, credible and relevant resources to support and develop arguments and position statements. Demonstrates use of high-quality, credible and relevant resources to support and develop arguments and position statements. 10% Shows evidence of wide scope within the organisation for sourcing evidence. Show evidence of wide scope within and without the organisation for sourcing evidence. The following Subject Learning Outcomes are addressed in this assessment SLO a) Describe the different forms of knowledge acquisition and the sources of evidence in health. EBP107_Assessment Brief 3_Journal Evaluation Page 7 of 7 SLO b) Explain
the rationale and purpose of scientific research, evaluation and the
evidence-based approach and ethical considerations in the context of healthcare. SLO c) Describe and interpret the hierarchy of evidence. SLO
d) Retrieve and evaluate health information from databases, internet
and library sources in order to inform and improve healthcare practice.
SLO e) Identify and appraise the quality of the key components of an evidence- based, health science research article SLO
f) Describe quantitative, qualitative and mixed research
methodologies, research processes, data management and analysis.
