NURS 6003 Discussion: Using the Walden Library Essay

NURS 6003 Discussion: Using the Walden Library Essay

Where can you find evidence to inform your thoughts and scholarly writing? As nursing students, one of the essential skills you need to develop is the ability to locate and analyze evidence to support your ideas and arguments. The Library is an invaluable resource that can help you find credible and relevant sources to inform your scholarly writing. In this article, we will discuss how you can use it to locate evidence to inform your thoughts and scholarly writing.

Throughout your degree program, you will use the research literature to explore ideas, guide your thinking, and gain new insights. As you search the research literature, it is important to use academic resources that are peer-reviewed and from scholarly journals. You may already have some favorite online resources and databases that you use or have found useful in the past.

For this Discussion, you explore the databases available. The first step to locate evidence is to identify the relevant resources. You can start by selecting the appropriate databases to search for your topic. The most relevant databases include CINAHL, MEDLINE, and PubMed. These databases are specifically designed to index and provide access to nursing and healthcare literature.

When searching for resources, use appropriate keywords and phrases related to your topic. For example, if you are researching the impact of exercise on mental health, you could use keywords such as “exercise,” “mental health,” “anxiety,” and “depression.” It’s also helpful to use Boolean operators such as “AND” and “OR” to refine your search and retrieve more targeted results.

Also Read:

Academic Success And Professional Development Plan Part 1

NURS 6003 Discussion: Using the Walden Library Image by Vidal Balielo Jr.

Read Also: NURS 6003 Discussion: Examining Nursing Specialties

To prepare:

Review the information presented in the Resources, search the databases, and evaluate online resources.

Begin searching for a peer-reviewed article that pertains to your area and is of particular interest to you.

Identify the database that you used to search for a peer-reviewed article of your interest.

Reflect on your experience with searching the database. Did you note any difficulties when searching for an article? What steps/strategies did you find helpful for locating a peer-reviewed article? Would this database be useful to your colleagues? Would you recommend this database?

Once you have selected your peer-reviewed article, evaluate its strengths and weaknesses in terms of scholarly writing, bias, opinion, quality of evidence, and appropriateness to its target audience.

BY DAY 3

Post a brief summary of your peer-reviewed article, the database you located your article in, your database searching experience, keywords utilized in the search, and an analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of the article.

Support your Discussion assignment with specific resources used in its preparation using APA style formatting. You are asked to provide a reference for all resources, including those in the Learning Resources for this course.

This week, you explore the Walden Library and consider the differences between peer-reviewed research evidence and non-peer-reviewed evidence. In addition, you continue your examination of effective scholarly writing as you analyze writing in terms of its purpose, audience, bias, and quality of evidence.

Using the Walden Library Example

Decision-making in healthcare necessitates the use of evidence to inform thoughts and scholarly writing. I understand the role and relish the impact of an evidence-based approach to care on patients’ health outcomes and the healthcare system as a whole. As a registered nurse (RN), I am frequently confronted with multiple scenarios daily that require me to explore ideas, stimulate my thinking, and seek insights from people or scholarly articles.

The latter has proven to be extremely useful in my practice, and learning how to locate scholarly articles was most likely the source of my seamless practice. In keeping with the use of the Walden library, the following discussion provides an example of a database I frequently use, the difficulties I encounter, and whether or not I recommend the same databases to colleagues.

Peer-Reviewed Article Selected

As an RN, I perform the duties outlined by the American Nurses Association. In addition, as a psychiatric mental health nursing practice enthusiast and aspiring psychiatric mental health nurse practitioner (PMHNP), I care for adult patients with a variety of mental health care needs. I work as an RN at Wellpath South Florida Evaluation and Treatment Center while also pursuing my MSN PMHNP program. In keeping with the clinical setting and my interests, I chose an article about caring for elderly patients who require mental health care. Flint et al. (2020) investigate the impact of Covid19 on the care of elderly patients.

The elderly population is growing as a result of (1) improved medical care for the elderly, which increases life expectancy, and (2) improved medical care for children and youth, which lowers mortality among that age group (WHO, 2021). Why is this population group important in my line of work? Older adults are at a higher risk of severe infection and death in the Covid19 era due to the likelihood of multiple comorbidities and waning immunity, as well as, to some extent, a lack of adequate social support (loneliness) and low financial support. It is my responsibility as an RN and PMHNP enthusiast to understand the population and design appropriate interventions to assist patients with mental health care needs.

NURS 6003 Discussion: Using the Walden Library Essay

Database Used and Difficulties Encountered

I used the PubMed search engine to find the article. PubMed is a reputable medical and nursing database that contains over 34 million biomedical literature citations and abstracts (Frandsen et al., 2019). When I entered the keywords ‘ impact of Covid19 on mental healthcare’ into the PubMed search box, several articles appeared. In addition, I customized the year so that only articles published within the last five years (since 2018) appeared. The challenge I encountered was that there were several articles to choose from, and deciding on one, in particular, was difficult.

Is the Database useful to my Colleagues and would I recommend it?

PubMed is a free resource for searching biomedical and life sciences literature. The primary goal of the literature search is to obtain information that can be used to improve global healthcare practice as well as personal practice (Tucker et al., 2021). Since medical and nursing practice relies heavily on evidence, the database is extremely beneficial to my colleagues. Furthermore, because healthcare professionals are obligated to improve patient health outcomes, I recommend the database to my colleagues to obtain credible information that will inform practice.

References

Flint, A. J., Bingham, K. S., & Iaboni, A. (2020). Effect of COVID-19 on the mental health care of older people in Canada. International Psychogeriatrics, 32(10), 1113–1116. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1041610220000708

Frandsen, T. F., Eriksen, M. B., Hammer, D. M. G., & Christensen, J. B. (2019). PubMed coverage varied across specialties and over time: a large-scale study of included studies in Cochrane reviews. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 112, 59–66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2019.04.015

Tucker, S., McNett, M., Mazurek Melnyk, B., Hanrahan, K., Hunter, S. C., Kim, B., Cullen, L., & Kitson, A. (2021). Implementation science: Application of evidence-based practice models to improve healthcare quality. Worldviews on Evidence-Based Nursing, 18(2), 76–84. https://doi.org/10.1111/wvn.12495

World Health Organization. (2021). Ageing and health. Who.int. https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/ageing-and-health

Sample Week 4 Discussion BY AB

RE: Discussion – Week 4

I decided to research covid survivors’ long-term symptoms. In doing this, I did a google search of Peer review Post Covid 19 long-term symptoms. There were multiple articles that were presented for this area. I selected an article from the National Library of Medicine (NIH). This website is well known for factual information. I choose this specific area since I am a family nurse practitioner that rounds in the hospital and 2 nursing homes. I see a lot of post-covid symptoms in the covid survivors. I am going to be using the “Long-Term Sequelae of COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of One-Year Follow-Up Studies on Post-COVID Symptoms” article for my peer-reviewed article during this assignment.

NIH’s database is a good place for any medical student to use in research. In reading about the NIH Peer Review process, applicants have to go through and pass two review boards to be granted money to start the applied research. The review board strives in promoting a fair and unbiased process. This is to ensure the highest quality of research in biomedical science. I believe this is a good site for articles due to the core values used in each selection of the researchers. The core values are “(1) expert assessment, (2) transparency, (3) impartiality, (4) fairness, (5) confidentiality, (6) security, (7) integrity, and (8) efficiency.” (NIH Peer Review: Grants and Cooperative Agreements 2019)

Reference

Han Q, Zheng B, Daines L, Sheikh A. Long-Term Sequelae of COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of One-Year Follow-Up Studies on Post-COVID Symptoms. Pathogens. 2022 Feb 19;11(2):269. doi:10.3390/pathogens11020269. PMID: 35215212; PMCID: PMC8875269.                          

National Library of Medicine. (2019). NIH Peer Review: Grants and Cooperative Agreements. NIH Peer Review – National Institutes of Health. Retrieved September 12, 2022, from    https://grants.nih.gov/grants/PeerReview22713webv2.pdf

NURS 6003 Discussion: Using the Walden Library Image by Zakir Rushanly

Related posts:

NURS 6003 Week 1 Discussion: Networking Opportunities

NURS 6003 Discussion: Strategies for Academic Portfolios

NURS 6003 Week 2 Assignment: Academic Success and Professional Development Plan Part 2: Strategies to Promote Academic Integrity and Professional Ethics

Learning Objectives

STUDENTS WILL:

Evaluate research databases

Analyze a peer-reviewed article in terms of its purpose, audience, presence of bias, and quality of evidence

Also Read: NURS 6003 Week 2 Assignment: Academic Success and Professional Development Plan Part 2: Strategies to Promote Academic Integrity and Professional Ethics

REQUIRED READINGS

Please review the Academic Integrity area located on the Course Information page, particularly the SafeAssign Tutorial.

Cornell University Library. (2010). Distinguishing scholarly journals from other periodicals. Retrieved from http://guides.library.cornell.edu/scholarlyjournal…

This online article from the Cornell University Library distinguishes scholarly journals from other periodic literature and provides the general criteria that define an academic journal.

Eaton, S. E. (2010). Reading strategies: Differences between summarizing and synthesizing. Retrieved from http://drsaraheaton.wordpress.com/2010/09/29/readi…

The author proposes that critical reading must include using critical thinking to create “new” information and insights from this information.

Walden University. (2012g). Walden University: Scholarly writing. Retrieved from http://writingcenter.waldenu.edu/312.htm

Another excellent resource provided by the Walden Writing Center, this website defines scholarly writing and explains the characteristics of scholarly writing.

Walden University. (2012h). Walden University webinar archives. Retrieved from http://writingcenter.waldenu.edu/26.htm

Review the following archived webinar:

Writing at the Graduate study Level

The Writing Center archives its webinars so you can review them at a time that is convenient for you. This Webinar was created to help you improve your writing skills as a graduate and to assist you in the development of your scholarly voice.

Walden University Library Links and Resources

The Walden Library webinars provide relevant information on accessing and evaluating scholarly sources. The information on retrieving evidence-based sources is especially pertinent to MSN students.

Introduction to the Walden University Library

Searching and Retrieving graduate study Materials in the Research Databases

Identifying and Evaluating the nursing practice Online Resources

The Walden University Library and Your Total Information Network

Document: Introduction to Scholarly Writing: Finding a Scholarly Voice (PDF)

What does it mean to write with a scholarly voice? This document reinforces the information presented in the media program and provides information about how to find your scholarly voice.

Document: Introduction to Scholarly Writing: Purpose, Audience, and Evidence (PDF)

Purpose, audience, and evidence are three important topics a scholar-practitioner needs to keep in mind when writing. This document will help to reinforce the information presented in the video program and enrich your understanding of scholarly writing.

Document: Introduction to Scholarly Writing: Tips for Success (PDF)

This document, which accompanies the media program of the same title, provides resources for improving your scholarly writing and critical-thinking skills.

Document: Stages in Critical Reading of Research Articles (Word document)

This chart describes the purpose of, and questions for, six stages of critically reading research articles. Focus on the many activities and questions that make up the critical reading process. Begin to consider the journal articles and books you read in terms of these criteria.

Document: Basics Checklist: Citations, and Reference List (PDF)

Related:

NURS 6003 Assignment Transition to Graduate Study

NURS 6003 Assignment: Academic Success and Professional Development Plan Part 1: Developing an Academic and Professional Network

NURS 6003 Walden University Nursing at Walden University Paper

Nurs 6003 Walden Wk 11 Psychiatric Mental Health Nurse Academic Success

NURS 6003 Discussion: Using the Walden Library Image by RODNAE Productions

Rubric Detail

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

Name: NURS_6003_Module03_Week04_Discussion_Rubric

  Excellent Good Fair Poor
Main Posting 45 (45%) – 50 (50%)Answers all parts of the discussion question(s) expectations with reflective critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources.

Supported by at least three current, credible sources.

Written clearly and concisely with no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.

40 (40%) – 44 (44%)Responds to the discussion question(s) and is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.

At least 75% of post has exceptional depth and breadth.

Supported by at least three credible sources.

Written clearly and concisely with one or no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.

35 (35%) – 39 (39%)Responds to some of the discussion question(s).

One or two criteria are not addressed or are superficially addressed.

Is somewhat lacking reflection and critical analysis and synthesis.

Somewhat represents knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.

Post is cited with two credible sources.

Written somewhat concisely; may contain more than two spelling or grammatical errors.

Contains some APA formatting errors.

0 (0%) – 34 (34%)Does not respond to the discussion question(s) adequately.

Lacks depth or superficially addresses criteria.

Lacks reflection and critical analysis and synthesis.

Does not represent knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.

Contains only one or no credible sources.

Not written clearly or concisely.

Contains more than two spelling or grammatical errors.

Does not adhere to current APA manual writing rules and style.

Main Post: Timeliness 10 (10%) – 10 (10%)Posts main post by day 3. 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)Does not post by day 3.
First Response 17 (17%) – 18 (18%)Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings.

Responds fully to questions posed by faculty.

Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources.

Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.

Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.

Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed.

Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.

15 (15%) – 16 (16%)Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings.

Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.

Responses to faculty questions are answered, if posed.

Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources.

Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.

13 (13%) – 14 (14%)Response is on topic and may have some depth.

Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication.

Responses to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed.

Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and a few or no credible sources are cited.

0 (0%) – 12 (12%)Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.

Responses posted in the discussion lack effective professional communication.

Responses to faculty questions are missing.

No credible sources are cited.

Second Response 16 (16%) – 17 (17%)Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings.

Responds fully to questions posed by faculty.

Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources.

Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.

Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.

Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed.

Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.

14 (14%) – 15 (15%)Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings.

Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.

Responses to faculty questions are answered, if posed.

Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources.

Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.

12 (12%) – 13 (13%)Response is on topic and may have some depth.

Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication.

Responses to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed.

Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and a few or no credible sources are cited.

0 (0%) – 11 (11%)Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.

Responses posted in the discussion lack effective professional communication.

Responses to faculty questions are missing.

No credible sources are cited.

Participation 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)Meets requirements for participation by posting on three different days. 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)Does not meet requirements for participation by posting on 3 different days.
Total Points: 100

Name: NURS_6003_Module03_Week04_Discussion_Rubric

Quiz: Walden’s Student Readiness Orientation

You probably have a lot of questions (and perhaps some hesitation) about the journey you are undertaking. How do I navigate the online classroom? How can I have access to a library in this environment? The Readiness Orientation (SRO) minicourse available on your MyWalden page provides answers to such questions and helps ensure you understand how to navigate the online classroom and utilize the many resources available to you.

The Readiness Check will help you determine your preparedness to navigate the online classroom.

The questions presented on the Quiz are derived from the readiness check presented in the SRO.

Click on the Week 1 Quiz link after you have read the directions carefully.

The readiness check includes 15 questions in various formats including true/false and multiple choice. If you score 12 or below, please retake the exam. You may retake the exam as many times as you would like in order to achieve your desired score. Your highest score will be recorded. To retake the Quiz, click on “Take Test Again” (this does not appear as a hyperlink but works as a hyperlink when you click on the area).

To view the questions you answered correctly and incorrectly, click on your score in the “My Grades” area.

To Prepare:

Review Walden’s SRO found on your MyWalden page.

By Day 7

Complete the quiz.

Submit both Section 1 and Section 2 of Part 3.

Remember to include an introduction paragraph that contains a clear and comprehensive purpose statement that delineates all required criteria, and end the assignment Part with a conclusion paragraph.