Guaranteed Success
First Class Honours
Evidence-Based Promotion Project
Evidence-Based Promotion Project
Purpose
Evidence-Based Promotion Project: The purpose of this project is to complete the interventional health promotion program. Part 1 of the assignment was the identification of a high-risk population and possible adverse health outcomes. In this assignment, the student will develop evidence-based interventions to address the adverse health outcomes associated with the high-risk factors. An integral part of intervention development is the creation of measurable outcomes to evaluate the program. The consequences of this process in light of the DNP role will be discussed.
Course Outcomes
This assignment provides documentation of students’ ability to meet the following course outcomes:
- Distinguish the roles and relationships between epidemiology and biostatistics in the prevention of disease and the improvement of health. (PO 1)
- Assimilate principles of epidemiology with scientific data necessary for epidemiologic intervention and draw appropriate inferences from epidemiologic data. (PO 1)
Evidence-Based Promotion Project
- Synthesize ethical and legal principles regarding the collection, maintenance, utilization and dissemination of epidemiologic data. (PO 1)
- Utilize appropriate public health terminology and definitions of epidemiology necessary for intra-/interprofessional collaboration in advanced nursing practice. (PO 8)
- Analyze the role of the advanced practice nurse to overcoming access barriers by providing culturally-relevant and high-quality healthcare for vulnerable and high-risk populations. (PO 1)
- Differentiate biopsychosociopolitical and economic/environmental conditions impacting epidemiologic perspectives that inform scientific, ethical, economic, and political discussion of public health issues. (PO 1)
- Articulate the driving and restraining forces of public health screening programs. (PO 1)
- Examine selected strategies for increasing intra-/interprofessional collaboration in interventional health education programs across healthcare settings. (PO 8)
- Formulate an interventional public health program in response to an identified epidemiologic problem. (PO 1)
- Integrate intra-/interprofessional collaboration in the design, implementation, and outcomes evaluation elements of a selected interventional public health program for improving health. (PO 8)
Points
The assignment is worth a total of 225 points.
Requirements
- The Evidenced-Based Promotion Project, Part 2 is worth 225 points and will be graded on quality of self-assessment, use of citations, use of Standard English grammar, sentence structure, and overall organization based on the required components as summarized in the directions and grading criteria and rubric.
- Create your assignment using Microsoft Word (a part of Microsoft Office), which is the required format for all Chamberlain College of Nursing documents. You can tell that the document is saved as an MS Word document because the file name will end in .docx.
- Follow the directions and grading criteria closely. Any questions about your assignment may be posted in the weekly Q & A Forum.
- The length of the reflection is to be no more than five pages, excluding title page and reference pages.
- APA format is required with both a title page and a reference page. Use the required components of the review as Level 1 headings (upper and lower case, centered, boldface)
Note: Introduction—Write an introduction but do not use “Introduction” as a heading in accordance with the rules put forth in the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (2010, p. 63).
Evidence-Based Promotion Project
Directions and Grading Criteria
| Category | Points | % | Description |
| Introduction | 20 | 9% | Introduction to the development of interventions and outcomes measurement for evaluation in population health. |
| Identify evidence-based interventions for identified high-risk population | 60 | 27% | Identify evidence-based interventions for the identified high-risk population. Discuss the rationale for interventions. |
| Identification of measurement outcomes for identified interventions. | 65 | 29% | Identify outcome measurements to utilize in the evaluation phase of the project. |
| Utilization of epidemiology principles and terminology | 30 | 13% | Utilize the proper epidemiological terminology in the description of interventions and outcomes. |
| Implications of the project for practice area | 20 | 9% | What have you learned from developing this interventional program? What implications does it have for your practice area? |
| Clarity of writing | 20 | 9% | Use of Standard English grammar and sentence structure. No spelling errors or typographical errors. Organized around the required components using appropriate headers. |
| APA format | 10 | 4% | All information taken from another source, even if summarized, must be appropriately cited in the manuscript and listed in the references using APA (6th ed.) format:
|
| Total: | 225 | 100% | A quality assignment will meet or exceed all of the above requirements. |
Grading Rubric
| Assignment Criteria | Meets Criteria | Partially Meets Criteria | Does Not Meet Criteria |
| Introduction(20 points) | Clearly introduces the theory of population-based interventions and outcomes. Well articulated and integrated.15-20 points | Basic understanding and/or limited understanding of population-based interventions and outcomes. Articulated and integrated in an average manner.9-14 points | Little understanding of population-based interventions and/or outcomes. Poorly articulated and integrated.0-8 points |
| Identification of evidence-based empirical interventions for the previously selected high-risk population (60 points) | Accurate, precise, and complete identification of all evidence-based interventions for the identified high-risk population. All aspects of the interventions are considered.50-60 points | Incomplete identification of evidence-based interventions for the identified high-risk population. Only partial aspects of the interventions are considered.35-49 points | Little or inaccurate identification of evidence-based interventions for the identified high-risk population. Minimal aspects of the interventions are considered.0-34 points |
| Development of measurable outcomes for proposed interventions for evaluation purposes(65 points) | Measurable outcome criteria are developed and appropriate for evaluation purposes.55-65 points | Measureable outcome criteria are only partially developed or appropriate for evaluation purposes.39-54 points | Measurable outcome criteria not developed or appropriate for evaluation purposes.0-38 points |
| Utilization of Epidemiological principle and terminology(30 points) | Complete, accurate, and demonstrable use of appropriate epidemiological principles and terminology to describe the interventions appropriate for the identified high-risk population25-30 points | Basic understanding and/or limited use of epidemiological principles and terminology to describe the interventions appropriate for the identified high-risk population15-24 points | Little understanding and/or use of pertinent epidemiological principles and terminology to describe the interventions appropriate for the identified high-risk population0-14 points |
| Implications of the project for the APN’s clinical practice (20 points) | Identifies and articulates the applicable DNP Essentials (AACN, 2006) pertinent to the development and implementation of the project. Is able to give a coherent rationale on the implications for clinical practice.15-20 points | Partially identifies and articulates the applicable DNP Essentials (AACN, 2006) pertinent to the development and implementation of the project. Is able to give partial rationale for the implications for clinical practice9-14 points | Unable to identify and articulate the applicable DNP Essentials (AACN, 2006) pertinent to the development and implementation of the project. Is unable to give rationale on the implications for clinical practice0-8 points |
| Clarity of writing(20 points) | Excellent use of Standard English showing original thought. No spelling or grammatical errors. Well organized with proper flow of meaning.15-20 points | Some evidence of own expression and competent use of language. No more than three spelling or grammatical errors. Well-organized thoughts and concepts.9-14 points | Language needs development. Four or more spelling and/or grammatical errors. Poorly organized thoughts and concepts.0-8 points |
| APA format(10 points) | APA format correct with no more than one or two minor errors.8-10 points | Three to five errors in APA format and/or one or two citations are missing.5-7 points | APA formatting contains multiple errors and/or several citations are missing.0-4 points |
| Total Points Possible = 225 points | |||
