Literature Review: The Use of Clinical Systems to Improve Outcomes and Efficiencies

PLEASE FOLLOW THE INSTRUCTIONS AS INDICATED BELOW:

1). ZERO (0) PLAGIARISM

2). ATLEAST 5 REFERENCES, NO MORE THAN 5 YEARS

3). PLEASE SEE THE FOLLOWING ATTACHED RUBRIC DETAILS. 

Thank you.   

New technology—and the application of existing technology—only appears in healthcare settings after careful and significant research. The stakes are high, and new clinical systems need to offer evidence of positive impact on outcomes or efficiencies.

Nurse informaticists and healthcare leaders formulate clinical system strategies. As these strategies are often based on technology trends, informaticists and others have then benefited from consulting existing research to inform their thinking.

In this Assignment, you will review existing research focused on the application of clinical systems. After reviewing, you will summarize your findings.

To Prepare:

• Review the Resources and reflect on the impact of clinical systems on outcomes and efficiencies within the context of nursing practice and healthcare delivery.
• Conduct a search for recent (within the last 5 years) research focused on the application of clinical systems. The research should provide evidence to support the use of one type of clinical system      to improve outcomes and/or efficiencies, such as “the use of personal health records or portals to support patients newly diagnosed with diabetes.”
• Identify and select 4 peer-reviewed research articles from your research.

The Assignment: (4-5 pages)

In a 4- to 5-page paper, synthesize the peer-reviewed research you reviewed. Format your Assignment as an Annotated Bibliography. Be sure to address the following:

• Identify the 4 peer-reviewed research articles you reviewed, citing each in APA format.
• Summarize each study, explaining the improvement to outcomes, efficiencies, and lessons learned from the application of the clinical system each peer-reviewed article described. Be specific and provide examples.
• In your conclusion, synthesize the findings from the 4 peer-reviewed research articles.

Rubric Detail

Select Grid View or List View to change the rubric’s layout.

Content

Name:

 

NURS_5051_Module04_Week08_Assignment_Rubric

• Grid View
• List View

 

In a 4- to 5-page paper, synthesize the peer-reviewed research you reviewed. Format your Assignment as an Annotated Bibliography. Be sure to address the following:

·   Properly identify 4 peer-reviewed research articles you reviewed.
·   Summarize each study, explaining the improvement to outcomes, efficiencies, and lessons learned from the application of the clinical system each peer-reviewed article described. Be specific and provide examples.
In your conclusion, synthesize the findings from the 4 peer-reviewed research articles.

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.

Written Expression and Formatting – English writing standards:
Correct grammar, mechanics, and proper punctuation

Written Expression and Formatting – The paper follows correct APA format for title page, headings, font, spacing, margins, indentations, page numbers, running head, parenthetical/in-text citations, and reference list.

Excellent	Good	Fair	Poor
Points: Points Range: 77 (77%) – 85 (85%) The responses accurately and clearly identify 4 peer-reviewed research articles for the Assignment. The responses accurately and thoroughly summarize in detail each study reviewed, explaining in detail the improvement to outcomes, efficiencies, and lessons learned from the application of the clinical system each peer-reviewed article described. Specific, accurate, and detailed examples are provided which fully support the responses. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 68 (68%) – 76 (76%) The responses identify 4 peer-reviewed research articles for the Assignment. The responses summarize each study reviewed, explaining the improvement to outcomes, efficiencies, and lessons learned from the application of the clinical system each peer-reviewed article described. Accurate examples are provided which support the responses provided. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 60 (60%) – 67 (67%) The responses vaguely or inaccurately identify 4 or less peer-reviewed articles for the Assignment. The responses summarize each study reviewed, explaining the improvement to outcomes, efficiencies, and lessons learned from the application of the clinical system each peer-reviewed article described that is vague or inaccurate. Examples provided to support the responses are vague or inaccurate. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 0 (0%) – 59 (59%) The responses vaguely and inaccurately identify less than 4 peer-reviewed articles for the Assignment, or are missing. The responses vaguely and inaccurately summarize each study reviewed, explaining the improvement to outcomes, efficiencies, and lessons learned from the application of the clinical system each peer-reviewed article described, or are missing. Examples provided to support the responses are vague and inaccurate, or are missing. Feedback:
Points: Points Range: 5 (5%) – 5 (5%) Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 4 (4%) – 4 (4%) Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 80% of the time. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%) Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 60%- 79% of the time. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 0 (0%) – 3 (3%) Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity < 60% of the time. Feedback:
Points: Points Range: 5 (5%) – 5 (5%) Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 4 (4%) – 4 (4%) Contains a few (1-2) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%) Contains several (3-4) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 0 (0%) – 3 (3%) Contains many (≥ 5) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the reader’s understanding. Feedback:
Points: Points Range: 5 (5%) – 5 (5%) Uses correct APA format with no errors. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 4 (4%) – 4 (4%) Contains a few (1-2) APA format errors. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%) Contains several (3-4) APA format errors. Feedback:	Points: Points Range: 0 (0%) – 3 (3%) Contains many (≥ 5) APA format errors. Feedback:

Show Descriptions

Show Feedback

In a 4- to 5-page paper, synthesize the peer-reviewed research you reviewed. Format your Assignment as an Annotated Bibliography. Be sure to address the following:

·   Properly identify 4 peer-reviewed research articles you reviewed.
·   Summarize each study, explaining the improvement to outcomes, efficiencies, and lessons learned from the application of the clinical system each peer-reviewed article described. Be specific and provide examples.
In your conclusion, synthesize the findings from the 4 peer-reviewed research articles.–

Levels of Achievement:

Excellent
77 (77%) – 85 (85%)

The responses accurately and clearly identify 4 peer-reviewed research articles for the Assignment.

The responses accurately and thoroughly summarize in detail each study reviewed, explaining in detail the improvement to outcomes, efficiencies, and lessons learned from the application of the clinical system each peer-reviewed article described.

Specific, accurate, and detailed examples are provided which fully support the responses.

Good
68 (68%) – 76 (76%)

The responses identify 4 peer-reviewed research articles for the Assignment.

The responses summarize each study reviewed, explaining the improvement to outcomes, efficiencies, and lessons learned from the application of the clinical system each peer-reviewed article described.

Accurate examples are provided which support the responses provided.

Fair
60 (60%) – 67 (67%)

The responses vaguely or inaccurately identify 4 or less peer-reviewed articles for the Assignment.

The responses summarize each study reviewed, explaining the improvement to outcomes, efficiencies, and lessons learned from the application of the clinical system each peer-reviewed article described that is vague or inaccurate.

Examples provided to support the responses are vague or inaccurate.

Poor
0 (0%) – 59 (59%)

The responses vaguely and inaccurately identify less than 4 peer-reviewed articles for the Assignment, or are missing.

The responses vaguely and inaccurately summarize each study reviewed, explaining the improvement to outcomes, efficiencies, and lessons learned from the application of the clinical system each peer-reviewed article described, or are missing.

Examples provided to support the responses are vague and inaccurate, or are missing.

Feedback:

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.–

Levels of Achievement:

Excellent
5 (5%) – 5 (5%)

Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity.

Good
4 (4%) – 4 (4%)

Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 80% of the time.

Fair
3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%)

Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 60%- 79% of the time.

Poor
0 (0%) – 3 (3%)

Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity < 60% of the time. Feedback:

Written Expression and Formatting – English writing standards:
Correct grammar, mechanics, and proper punctuation–

Levels of Achievement:

Excellent
5 (5%) – 5 (5%)

Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors.

Good
4 (4%) – 4 (4%)

Contains a few (1-2) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors.

Fair
3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%)

Contains several (3-4) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors.

Poor
0 (0%) – 3 (3%)

Contains many (≥ 5) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the reader’s understanding.

Feedback:

Written Expression and Formatting – The paper follows correct APA format for title page, headings, font, spacing, margins, indentations, page numbers, running head, parenthetical/in-text citations, and reference list.–

Levels of Achievement:

Excellent
5 (5%) – 5 (5%)

Uses correct APA format with no errors.

Good
4 (4%) – 4 (4%)

Contains a few (1-2) APA format errors.

Fair
3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%)

Contains several (3-4) APA format errors.

Poor
0 (0%) – 3 (3%)

Contains many (≥ 5) APA format errors.

Feedback:

Total Points: 100

Name: NURS_5051_Module04_Week08_Assignment_Rubric