Part 1: Literature Search Plan
Part 1: Literature Search Plan
Based on the scenario provided and collaboration with AI, students are expected to develop a clinical PICOT question and the relevant search plan.
Instructions:
Select ONE of the scenarios provided
Use AI (such as ChatGPT) to develop a starting research question
Define or redevelop your research question using the PICOT format
Briefly describe your search plan, including o Databases: select at least 2 databases required o Search strategy: including limiters (e.g., date range, language etc.) o Search terms: o Inclusion and exclusion criteria
Write a 150-word paragraph to share your experience of using AI in developing a research question, including advantages, disadvantages, perceptions, challenges and suggestions.
Use the Literature Search Plan template provided on the NUR237 LMS homepage, under the Assessment section, to write Assignment 1 Part 1.
No word limit.
No references required.
Read the marking rubric carefully.
Part 2: Full Literature Search 1500 words +/- 10%
In Part 2, you are expected to provide a detailed background about your topic selected and a comprehensive database search based on your search plan developed in Part 1,
Instructions: including the points below:
Topic title reflecting on your PICOT question
Introduction using available literature to introduce your topic
Purpose statement of the research question with rationales for developing your PICOT question
PICOT question relevant and answerable
Search strategy, including
Databases searched: at least 2 databases required
Search strategy used, including limiters (e.g., date range, language etc.) o Search terms used o Inclusion and exclusion criteria
Search process for each database presented in a search results table, including Databases
Search terms
Number retrieved
Number included o Summary of search results
Selection of final article: Select two original studies of the final sources of evidence for appraisal and explain why you chose each source to answer your PICOT question: e.g., how is it relevant to the PICOT question? you might refer to keywords, sample size, subject/participant/ age/ gender, quantitative/ qualitative methods, country, etc.
References: o APA 7th style referencing, including headings, tables and figures.
At least 10 references are required, including at least five peer-reviewed references.
Read the marking rubric carefully.
Must submit A1 Part 2 with Assessment 2 as a whole document
HOW IT IS ASSESSED (summary)
You will be assessed on these key criteria:
Identifying and creating a nursing-focused research question;
Locating the relevant nursing and midwifery research literature; and
Search strategy
Communication of evidence
Assignment presentation
This is a modified version of the Discipline of Nursing Student Written Assignment Guide (2017) provided on the Nursing Community Site to accommodate textbox submission. The following presentation guidelines must be adhered to:
Use Arial, Times New Roman, Calibri or Verdana font in size 11&12.
Single spacing throughout the whole document.
Pages to be numbered consecutively commencing at the introduction of the written assignment. Number to be placed in the top right-hand corner. Running headings are not required.
No additional decorative lines, prints or pictures are required.
Submit as a WORD file
Headings are to follow the APA heading styles.
Margins 2.54-cm (1-in.) on all sizes.
Figures, diagrams, graphs, images, tables are to be clearly labelled and referenced as per APA 7th edition guidelines:
https://www.apastyle.org/
The standard format for presentation is as follows and an electronic assignment cover sheet and assignment templates have been provided in the LMS.
Assignment Coversheet
Body of the Assignment (including APA style headings see above)
0.5 in. paragraph indentation required for the first line of every paragraph
In-Text and End-Text References:
Marking Criteria for Assessment One_Part 1
Literature Search Plan (10%)
Quality and Criterion Exceptional Mark: 5 Excellent
Mark: 4 Good
(Mark: 3) Adequate (Mark: 2.5) Unsatisfactory (Mark: 0-2)
Marks
AI use Pass / Fail
PICO(T) question ULO2, ULO3 Demonstrates an excellent understanding of the PICO(T) format evidenced by an excellently structured, relevant and answerable, clinical question.
Demonstrates a good understanding of the PICO(T) format evidenced by a satisfactory and relevant clinical question that could be answered and researched with some refinement.
Demonstrates a satisfactory understanding of the PICO(T) format evidenced by an average question that is not directly relevant but could be answered and researched with moderate refinement.
Demonstrates a beginning understanding of the PICO(T) format evidenced by a minimally acceptable question that is not relevant and/or clinical that could be answered and researched with major refinement. Demonstrates a poor understanding of the PICO(T) format evidenced by a poorly structured, question that is not relevant and/or not clinical and would not be answerable or researchable. 15
Purpose statement ULO2, ULO3 Clearly and succinctly states the purpose of the PICOT question.
Clearly states the purpose of the PICOT question. Satisfactorily states the purpose of the PICOT question. Basically states the purpose of the PICOT question. The purpose of the PICOT question is unclear or unstated. 5
Search strategy plan
ULO2, ULO3
Evidence of the use of exceptional search techniques that can be applied consistently across all the databases and other resources.
Exceptional selection of keywords clearly related to the PICO(T) question. Evidence of the use of comprehensive research techniques that can be mostly applied across all the databases. A comprehensive selection of keywords mostly related to the PICO(T) question.
Evidence of the use of satisfactory research techniques that can be sometimes applied across all the databases.
A satisfactory selection of keywords often related to the PICO(T) clinical question. Evidence of the use of beginner research techniques that can be infrequently applied across all the databases.
A beginner selection of keywords less often related to the PICO(T) clinical question. Evidence of the use of poor research techniques that can be infrequently or not applied across all the databases.
A poor selection of keywords poorly related to the PICO(T) clinical question. 5
Reflection
ULO2, ULO3
ULO4 An exemplary reflection of experience, thoughts, actions, and feelings of AI use in developing a research question An comprehensive reflection of experience, thoughts, actions, and feelings of AI use in developing a research question A satisfactory reflection of experience, thoughts, actions, and feelings of AI use in developing a research question A basic reflection of experience, thoughts, actions, and feelings of AI use in developing a research question No or little reflection of experience, thoughts, actions, and feelings of AI use in developing a research question 5
Tutor comments:
Total mark: /30
Marking Criteria for Assessment One_Part 2
Full Literature Search (20%)
Quality and Criterion Exceptional Mark: 5 Excellent
Mark: 4 Good
(Mark: 3) Adequate (Mark: 2.5) Unsatisfactory (Mark: 0-2)
Marks
Introduction
ULO2, ULO3, ULO4,
ULO6 Clearly and succinctly state the selected topic and background.
Demonstrate an excellent ability to identify the rationale for developing a focused, relevant answerable clinical question.
Clearly state the selected topic and background.
Demonstrate a good ability to identify the rationale for developing a focused, answerable clinical question.
Satisfactorily state the selected topic and background.
Demonstrates a satisfactory ability to identify the rationale for developing a focused, answerable clinical question.
The selected topic and background are basically stated. Demonstrates a weak ability to identify the rationale for developing a focused, answerable clinical question.
The selected topic and background are unclear or unstated.
Demonstrates little or no ability to identify the rationale for developing a focused, answerable clinical question.
10
PICO(T) question
ULO2, ULO3 An excellently structured, concise, relevant and answerable clinical questions with a clear and succinct purpose statement. A clear and relevant clinical question that could be answered and researched with a clear purpose statement.
A relevant clinical question that could be answered and researched with moderate refinement with a satisfactory purpose statement A minimally acceptable question that could be answered and researched with major refinement, with a basic purpose statement. a poorly structured, question that is not relevant and/or not clinical and would not be answerable or researchable, with a unclear or unstated purpose statement. 5
Method (Search strategy)
ULO2, ULO3, ULO6
Evidence of the use of exceptional search techniques that were applied consistently across all the databases and other resources.
Exceptional selection of keywords and subject headings
that clearly relate to the PICO(T) question. Evidence of the use of comprehensive research techniques that were mostly applied across all the databases.
A comprehensive selection of keywords and subject headings that mostly relate to the PICO(T) question. Evidence of the use of satisfactory research techniques that were sometimes applied across all the databases.
A satisfactory selection of keywords and subject headings that often relate to the PICO(T) clinical question. Evidence of the use of beginner research techniques that were infrequently applied across all the databases.
A beginner selection of keywords and subject headings that less often relate to the PICO(T) clinical question. Evidence of the use of poor research techniques that were infrequently or not applied across all the databases.
A poor selection of keywords and subject headings that poorly relate to the PICO(T) clinical question. 5
Selection of the final two articles for appraisal
ULO2, ULO3, ULO4
Exceptional discussion on how the final two articles were selected from the larger number sourced.
Very detailed description provided on the key factors that were identified to make the appropriate article selection. Comprehensive discussion on how the final two articles were selected from the larger number sourced. Detailed description provided on the key factors that were identified to make the appropriate article selection. Satisfactory discussion on how the final two articles were selected from the larger number sourced.
Satisfactory description provided on the key factors that were identified to make the appropriate article selection. Beginner level discussion on how the final two articles were selected from the larger number sourced.
Minimum level description provided on the key factors that were identified to make the appropriate article selection. Poor discussion on how the final two articles were selected from the larger number sourced.
Limited or no description provided on the key factors that were identified to make the appropriate article selection. 5
Presentation/references ULO4 Exemplary adherence to the presentation requirements. Exemplary adherence to the APA style requirements. Exemplary grammar, spelling and syntax. Comprehensive adherence
to the presentation requirements.
Comprehensive adherence
to the APA style requirements.
Comprehensive grammar, spelling and syntax. Satisfactory adherence to the presentation requirements. Satisfactory adherence to the APA style requirements. Satisfactory grammar, spelling and syntax. Basic adherence to the presentation requirements. Basic adherence to the APA style requirements. Basic grammar, spelling and syntax. Unsatisfactory adherence to the presentation requirements. Unsatisfactory adherence to the APA style requirements. Unsatisfactory grammar, spelling and syntax. 5
Tutor comments:
Total mark: /30
Marking Criteria for Assessment Two
Article Review & Discussion Marking Criteria (20%)
Quality and Criteria Exceptional
Excellent
Good
Adequate
Unsatisfactory
Marks
Critical appraisal
ULO1, ULO2, ULO4,
ULO5, ULO6
Select correct appraisal tool/s. Excellently detailed descriptions of each article in an accurate, clear, concise and consistent manner, highlighting all key points.
Evidence of a deep understanding of each article shows in the detailed & thoughtful analysis of each one. (Mark: 9-10 Select correct appraisal tool/s. Adequately detailed descriptions of each article in an accurate, clear, and consistent manner, highlighting most key points. Evidence of an understanding of each article shows in a detailed analysis, however, there is a lack of interrogation of the reports.
(Mark: 8
Select correct appraisal tool/s. Satisfactorily detailed descriptions of each article in an accurate and consistent manner, highlighting most key points. Evidence of an understanding of each article shows in some analysis, however, most comments are descriptive rather than evaluative. (Mark: 6 Select correct appraisal tool/s. Basically detailed descriptions of each article in a less accurate and consistent manner, highlighting some key points.
Evidence of understanding is limited to accurate but descriptive summaries. Evidence of analysis (Mark: 5) Select incorrect appraisal tool/s.
Limited or no descriptions of each article in an inaccurate and inconsistent manner, without highlighting all key points.
Very limited evidence of understanding and/or very limited evaluative comment included. Mark: 0-4 10
Discussion
ULO1, ULO4, ULO7
Clearly and concisely explains the applicability to the PICOT question.
Responses given to the questions are adequate, appropriate, clear, comprehensive and concise. Mark: 5 Clearly explains the applicability to the PICOT question but could be more concise. Responses given to the questions are adequate, appropriate, comprehensive but could be more succinct. (Mark: 4) Explains the applicability to the PICOT question, but explanation somewhat confused or unconvincing and is not succinct and to the point.
Responses given to the questions are appropriate and adequate but could be more comprehensive, clear and/or succinct. (Mark: 3) Does not demonstrate the applicability to the PICOT question. Unconvincing arguments used. Either too brief or too wordy.
Responses given to the questions are adequate but could be more appropriate, comprehensive and succinctly.
(Mark: 2.5)
No applicability to the PICOT question demonstrated.
Unconvincing arguments used.
Either too brief or too wordy. Responses given to the questions provided are inadequate and/or inappropriate. (Mark: 0-2) 5
Written communication and Source selection
ULO1, ULO4, ULO6
The writing is clear, concise, and free of typographical errors. It conforms to the guidelines for the assignment in all respects. The summaries are clear & succinctly convey the key information.
Sources chosen are highly relevant to the topic and are credible, scholarly material.
Exemplary grammar, spelling and syntax.
Exemplary adherence to the presentation requirements. Mark: 5 The writing is clear & concise with minimal typographical errors. It conforms to the guidelines in most respects with good use of transitional words, no repetition but may not always use full sentences or other weaknesses. Summaries are written clearly & concisely & key aspects accurately conveyed.
Sources chosen are relevant to the topic and are current, credible, scholarly material. Comprehensive grammar, spelling and syntax.
Comprehensive adherence to the presentation requirements. Mark: 4 The writing is competent and clear but with some typographical errors. It may not conform to the guidelines in minor ways such as using multiple paragraphs. Most key features of each summary are conveyed clearly.
Sources a selection of scholarly articles but some of the sources but could be more directly relevant to the topic and/or more current.
Satisfactory grammar, spelling and syntax.
Satisfactory adherence to the presentation requirements
Mark: 3 The writing adequately communicates some of the features of each summary with some typographical errors. It loosely conforms to the guidelines, but maybe too wordy, lack effective use of transition words, uses bullet points, multiple paragraphs for example.
Sources chosen are not directly relevant to the topic or current and are not both credible, scholarly materials. Basic grammar, spelling and syntax.
Basic adherence to the presentation requirements. Mark: 2.5 The writing is poor and unclear with frequent errors of grammar and spelling. Does not conform to the writing guidelines. Sources chosen are not relevant to the topic nor are they credible and/or scholarly. Unsatisfactory grammar, spelling and syntax.
Unsatisfactory adherence to the presentation requirements. Mark: 0-2 5
Tutor comments:
Total mark:
/20
Scenario 2: Mrs Kelly Lee
Mrs Kelly Lee
Age: 70 years old
Diagnosis: Metastatic Liver Cancer
Occupation: Previous primary school teacherOne year ago, Kelly was diagnosed with liver cancer and recently noticed lumps under her ribcage. She was admitted to the medical ward for biopsies. Kelly understood she had liver cancer but following her treatment, believed her health to be generally good. After the biopsy procedure, the surgeon visited Kelly and Mark on the ward and gave them the biopsy results which revealed that the lumps were cancerous and cancer has metastasized. Her life expectancy is about 3-6 months. The surgeon has referred Kelly to the palliative care team. Mark was devastated but did not want his mum to know the bad news to keep hope alive for her. Kelly has said she would like to stay at home for any further treatment that might be requiredUnfortunately, her disease has begun to progress more rapidly and just two months following diagnosis of the metastases, she is bedbound. Due to the complexity of her 24/7 care needs, her pain, and other distressing symptoms, she was transferred to a long-term care unit at Mary Aged Care yesterday.
Kelly has a long history of diabetes mellitus type 2, which was well managed with medications, diet, and exercise. But recently the blood sugar has raised. She has been prescribed multiple medications to treat her pain, diabetes, and symptom management.
Kelly migrated to Australia from China in 2009 and does not speak English. Her husband died two years ago, and she now lives with her son Mark and his wife, Sue, and two sons, Jack 7 years old, and Simon, 5 years old. Mark teaches maths at the local high school and Sue works as a part-time Customer service officer. There are no other relatives in Australia. Due to the current COVID situation, Sue lost her job three months ago. Mark has recently changed his work hours so that he can care for his mother and acts as a translator.
Assessment 1 Part 1: Literature Search Plan_TemplateTick the scenario selected:
FORMCHECKBOX Scenario 1: Anne Purple
FORMCHECKBOX Scenario 2: Mrs Kelly Lee
FORMCHECKBOX Scenario 3: Marilyn Hughes
FORMCHECKBOX Scenario 4; Rachel Wards
FORMCHECKBOX Scenario 5: Ms Jade Purple
Task Content Results Marks
1 Use AI to generate your initial draft research question Name the AI tool you used below:
Which question/s did you ask AI?
What was the research question that AI generated?
Pass
2
Identify where each PICOT component exists in the AI-generated questionand then based on this analysis define or redevelop the PICOT components for your final research question PICOT component Where is each PICOT component in the AI generated question? What is your final research question PICOT component? 10
P I C O T Now write your PICOT question in a full sentence 5
3 Write down the purpose statement in 1-2 sentence/s(5%) 5
4 Briefly describe your search plan Databases 5
Search strategy Limiters Search terms Inclusion/Exclusion criteria 5 Reflection Reflect on your experience of using AI in developing a research question, including advantages, disadvantages, perceptions, challenges and suggestions. (150 words)
5
