PICOT

 

Feedback:

 

·

 

Clinical area of interest is good

–

 

burnout

 

·

 

PICOT

–

 

okay; however, poor pt. outcomes

—

 

are you thinking “pt satisfaction”

or what?

 

 

I would have aimed for something that would have looked more at

nurses and perhaps retention, nurse satisfaction, etc.

 

 

Or, compared strategies

for healthcare provide

rs r/t burnout prevention or reduction.

 

 

Feedback:

 

·

 

APA

–

 

citations

 

–

 

see et al. rule and apply in citations with more than 2 authors.

 

·

 

Be sure to utilize at least two filtered databases when conducting search for

systematic reviews.

 

Databases such as Joanna Briggs and Cochrane. Articles

selected and not representative of Systematic Review, they are primary research

articles.

A systematic review is seconda

ry research

—

 

uses research that was

conducted previously (primary research). Systematic Reviews are extremely

detailed and look at throughout many databases to collect all the primary

research studies done on the topic.

 

·

 

Level of Evi

dence in Peer

–

Reviewed Articles

–

 

be sure to share for each of the

peer

–

reviewed articles the level of evidence based on a particular source

–

 

explain

–

 

did this represent the Hierarchy of Evidence

, or John

Hopkins Level of

Evidence shared? Remember, Level 1 are considered the highest level and

representative of Systematic Reviews

—

 

in primary studies, such as the articles

you located, those are lower on the hierarchy of evidence pyramid.

 

·

 

List all reference

 

together on the last Reference page

–

 

include all. In

presentation include a thorough and detailed explanation of the strengths of

using systematic reviews for clinical research. From the articles you located,

what strengths did you note from the systemat

ic review

—

 

did it shed some light

into discovery of the PICOT answer? What other strengths from systematic

reviews did you learn about from various course resources?

 

 

Feedback:

 

A

lways have a clear purpose statement and conclusion

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Feedback:

 Clinical area of interest is good – burnout

 PICOT – okay; however, poor pt. outcomes — are you thinking “pt satisfaction”

or what? I would have aimed for something that would have looked more at

nurses and perhaps retention, nurse satisfaction, etc. Or, compared strategies

for healthcare providers r/t burnout prevention or reduction.

 

Feedback:

 APA – citations – see et al. rule and apply in citations with more than 2 authors.

 Be sure to utilize at least two filtered databases when conducting search for

systematic reviews. Databases such as Joanna Briggs and Cochrane. Articles

selected and not representative of Systematic Review, they are primary research

articles. A systematic review is secondary research — uses research that was

conducted previously (primary research). Systematic Reviews are extremely

detailed and look at throughout many databases to collect all the primary

research studies done on the topic.

 Level of Evidence in Peer-Reviewed Articles – be sure to share for each of the

peer-reviewed articles the level of evidence based on a particular source –

explain – did this represent the Hierarchy of Evidence, or John Hopkins Level of

Evidence shared? Remember, Level 1 are considered the highest level and

representative of Systematic Reviews — in primary studies, such as the articles

you located, those are lower on the hierarchy of evidence pyramid.

 List all reference together on the last Reference page – include all. In

presentation include a thorough and detailed explanation of the strengths of

using systematic reviews for clinical research. From the articles you located,

what strengths did you note from the systematic review — did it shed some light

into discovery of the PICOT answer? What other strengths from systematic

reviews did you learn about from various course resources?

 

Feedback:

Always have a clear purpose statement and conclusion