Using Evidence-Based Resources to Support Practice
This assessment addresses the following Module Learning Outcomes:
1. Demonstrate the ability to systematically search the evidence base
2. Critically appraise research using an appropriate critical appraisal framework
3. Explore an aspect of clinical practice using the evidence base
4. Discuss implementation of research into practice
Assessment Task
For successful completion of this module you are required to complete a 3000 word (+10%) critical exploration of the contemporary research on a subject matter of your choice relevant to paramedic practice in the UK. Please write in the third person throughout
You will:
1. Demonstrate the ability to systematically search the evidence base
2. Critically appraise research using an appropriate critical appraisal framework
3. Explore an aspect of clinical practice using the evidence base
4. Discuss implementation of research into practice
Extensive use of the evidence base is required to support your writing and discussion. Referencing should be in line with the Harvard convention utilised at BCU, and a standard submission feedback sheet and marking matrix (from Moodle) should be included along with an accurate word count.
NB. Please note that for the purposes of this paper, in-text references will contribute to the word count, however the title/contents pages, headings & subheadings, reference list and any appendix inclusions do not.
Appendices are additional information which you may consider to be too long or complex to include within your main body e.g. tables, diagrams, leaflets, letters, charts etc. Appendices should not be used to replace vital content, but rather to illustrate your writing. If appendices are used then they should each be referred to within your text and, they should not be included if they have not been discussed within your main body.
Appendices should appear after the reference list, with one appendix per page, fully referenced and labelled appropriately e.g. Appendix 1, Appendix 2. You MUST include a readable COPY (not a link to your paper) of your research paper within the appendix.
When creating your assignment plan and draft, consider using the below structure to support its development:
Introduction11
• What am I doing – talk about doing a lit critique and why they are useful
• Why am I doing it – links to HCPC, CPD and EBP
• How am I doing it – which framework you are using and why they are useful also can mention the paper you are using at this point too
Search Process
• Where did I look - CINAHL, MEDLINE, etc, with supporting evidence
• How did I search? What tools did I use within the database?
• What did I find?
• How did I decide which paper(s) to review? (inclusion/exclusion criteria) with supporting evidence
• This section should detail your search so that others could follow it and find your paper. You must justify your search, or say what you could have done (if your search was not ideal)
• You must identify the paper you are using at this point
Your search should be comprehensive enough that someone else can find the paper you did in the same way
The search should also be fully justified and supported with references
Main Body
• Use a recognised critiquing framework (e.g. Bellini & Rumrill, or Holland & Rees)
• Divide your main body using the subheadings in the framework you are using
• This section discussed the research process your papers authors have used – it does not discuss the subject matter of the paper
Implications for clinical practice
• Is the paper good enough from a research perspective to use – this is the whole point in undertaking the critique – so you should comment on this
• Can you use a single piece of research to inform your practice? Why not? Support with references
• What do other pieces of research say about this topic? Do they support your papers conclusions?
• Overall should practice be changed based upon your research in this topic
o Your conclusion should be one of the following be:
Yes practice should be changed by doing……
No practice should not be changed because….
More research is required before practice can be changed
Timely advice and support for this assignment should be sought from the Module Leader and the Personal Development Department.
Submission Details
Submission via turnitin on Moodle. Please only upload ONE .doc or .docx file (no other format)
Formative Opportunities
Should you wish to send a formative draft of your work, it is of note that this must be sent at least 2 weeks prior to your submission date. You can ask for comment on 10% of your essay. You can either send just that 10%, or identify within an essay which section you would like comment on. Please send your draft in a word document attached to an email.
Font: Arial Size 12pt Spacing 1.5 line
USING EVIDENCE BASE TO SUPPORT PRACTICE
Student’s Name
Course
Date
Using Evidence Base To Support Practice
Introduction
This research work entails a critique of a medical journal on the use of adrenaline among adult cardiac arrest patients in their out of hospital recovery process. A literature critique entails undertaking a comparison, analysis, interpretation, and or assessment of works of literature. It essentially involves providing an opinion on a literary material and supporting it with evidence in relation to the theme, style, setting, or context. The purpose and importance of conducting a literary criticism is to broaden one’s understanding of an author’s work by summarizing, interpreting, and exploring the value of the information presented. In clinical practice, literary criticism is important as it helps medical researchers explore the criticisms relevant to a specific medical practice and adopt the most effective approach. In this criticism, understanding the effectiveness of using adrenaline to assist in the recovery of adult cardiac arrest patients will help determine the effectiveness and possible risks involved in utilizing this method.
There has been an extensive debate regarding the use of adrenaline in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest and in-hospital resuscitation. However, this evidence is inconclusive. Consequently, a literary criticism of this debate will provide further insights on the level of effectiveness of the intervention. This critique will utilize Holland and Rees framework for critiquing quantitative research articles to evaluate the research by Gavin D Perkins and colleagues published in an article entitled “Adrenaline to improve survival in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: The paramdeic2 RCT.” According to Holland and Rees, a research article critique based on evidence-based practice should incorporate several sections including the focus of the study, its background, aim, methodology or approach, tool of data collection, method of data analysis and presentation, sample, ethical considerations, main findings, conclusion and recommendations, overall strengths and limitations, and application to practice. An effective research article should cover all these sections for it to qualify for use in research-based practice.
The Search Process
The search process began through formulation of a PICO question about the topic. The question used was “Do cardiac arrest patients who use adrenaline out of hospital show better response? UK paramedic.” The search process was conducted using both the Google and Summon search engines. While the Google search engine gave 3,450,000 results, the Summon search, including the advanced search option, did not yield any findings. Among the top results from the Google search included an article on the use of adrenaline for out of hospital cardiac arrest from the BMJ journal. However, this article did not provide more relevant information of my interest. Other top researches failed to meet either one or more of my research interests. Ultimately, I settled on the article by Gavin D. Perkins and colleagues, which was not only up to date, but also provided significant insights in terms of my research interests. For examp...
👀 Other Visitors are Viewing These Harvard Article Critique Samples:
- Research on the Use of Starch-Based Biodegradable Plastics3 pages/≈825 words | 1 Source | Harvard | Biological & Biomedical Sciences | Article Critique |