Benchmark – Part B: Literature Review Assignments | Get Homework Help

In Part A, you described the population and quality initiative related to your PICOT (Population/Problem, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome, and Time to achieve the outcome) statement. In this assignment, you will formalize your PICOT and research process.

Use the GCU Library to perform a search for peer-reviewed research articles. Find five peer-reviewed primary source translational research articles.

In a paper of 1,250-1,500 words, synthesize the research into a literature review. The literature review should provide an overview for the reader that illustrates the research related to your particular PICOT. Include the following:

Introduction: Describe the clinical issue or problem you are addressing.
Methods: Describe the criteria you used in choosing your articles
Synthesize the Literature: Part A: Discuss the main components of each article (subjects, methods, key findings) and provide rationale for how this supports your PICOT; Part B: Compare and contrast the articles: Discuss limitations, controversies, and similarities/differences of the studies.
Areas of Further Study: Analyze the evidence presented in your articles to identify what is known, unknown, and requires further study.
You are required to cite five to 10 sources to complete this assignment. Sources must be published within the last 5 years and appropriate for the assignment criteria and nursing content.

Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center. An abstract is not required.

ntroduction
5.0
An introduction is not included.
An introduction is present, but it lacks detail or is incomplete.
An introduction is present.
An introduction is clearly provided and well developed.
A comprehensive introduction is thoroughly developed with supporting details.
Methods
15.0
A discussion of methods, including criteria used to select the articles, is not included.
A discussion of methods, including criteria used to select the articles, is present, but it lacks detail or is incomplete.
A discussion of methods, including criteria used to select the articles, is present.
A discussion of methods, including criteria used to select the articles, is clearly provided and well developed.
A comprehensive discussion of methods, including criteria used to select the articles, is thoroughly developed with supporting details.
Literature Synthesis, Part A
15.0
A discussion of the main components of each article, including subjects, methods, key findings, and rationale for how the article supports the PICOT statement, is not included.
A discussion of the main components of each article, including subjects, methods, key findings, and rationale for how the article supports the PICOT statement, is present, but it lacks detail or is incomplete.
A discussion of the main components of each article, including subjects, methods, key findings, and rationale for how the article supports the PICOT statement, is present.
A discussion of the main components of each article, including subjects, methods, key findings, and rationale for how the article supports the PICOT statement, is clearly provided and well developed.
A comprehensive discussion of the main components of each article, including subjects, methods, key findings, and rationale for how the article supports the PICOT statement, is thoroughly developed with supporting details.
Literature Synthesis, Part B
15.0
A discussion of the limitations, controversies, similarities, and differences of the studies is not included.
A discussion of the limitations, controversies, similarities, and differences of the studies is present, but it lacks detail or is incomplete.
A discussion of the limitations, controversies, similarities, and differences of the studies is present.
A discussion of the limitations, controversies, similarities, and differences of the studies is clearly provided and well developed.
A comprehensive discussion of the limitations, controversies, similarities, and differences of the studies is thoroughly developed with supporting details.
Areas of Further Study
15.0
An analysis of evidence in the articles to identify what is known, unknown, and needed for further study is not included.
An analysis of evidence in the articles to identify what is known, unknown, and needed for further study is present, but it lacks detail or is incomplete.
An analysis of evidence in the articles to identify what is known, unknown, and needed for further study is present.
An analysis of evidence in the articles to identify what is known, unknown, and needed for further study is clearly provided and well developed.
A comprehensive analysis of evidence in the articles to identify what is known, unknown, and needed for further study is thoroughly developed with supporting details.
Required Sources
5.0
Sources are not included.
Number of required sources is only partially met.
Number of required sources is met, but sources are outdated or inappropriate.
Number of required sources is met. Sources are current, but not all sources are appropriate for the assignment criteria and nursing content.
Number of required resources is met. Sources are current, and appropriate for the assignment criteria and nursing content.
Organization and Effectiveness
20.0

Thesis Development and Purpose
7.0
Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.
Thesis is insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not clear.
Thesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose.
Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper. Thesis is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose.
Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.
Argument Logic and Construction
8.0
Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources.
Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility.
Argument is orderly, but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis.
Argument shows logical progressions. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative.
Clear and convincing argument that presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative.
Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)
5.0
Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is used.
Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) or word choice are present. Sentence structure is correct but not varied.
Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct and varied sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are employed.
Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. The writer uses a variety of effective sentence structures and figures of speech.
Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.
Format
10.0

Paper Format (Use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)
5.0
Template is not used appropriately or documentation format is rarely followed correctly.
Template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken; lack of control with formatting is apparent.
Template is used, and formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present.
Template is fully used; There are virtually no errors in formatting style.
All format elements are correct.
Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style)
5.0
Sources are not documented.
Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present.
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct.
Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error.
Total Percentage 100