NURS 6050 Evidence Base in Design Walden Discussion

Want create site? With Free visual composer you can do it easy.

NURS 6050 Evidence Base in Design Walden Discussion

NURS 6050 Evidence Base in Design Walden Discussion

When politics and medical science intersect, there can be much debate. Sometimes anecdotes or
hearsay are misused as evidence to support a particular point. Despite these and other challenges,
however, evidence-based approaches are increasingly used to inform health policy decision-
making regarding causes of disease, intervention strategies, and issues impacting society. One
example is the introduction of childhood vaccinations and the use of evidence-based arguments
surrounding their safety.
In this Discussion, you will identify a recently proposed health policy and share your analysis of
the evidence in support of this policy.
To Prepare:
 Review the Congress website provided in the Resources and identify one recent (within
the past 5 years) proposed health policy.
 Review the health policy you identified and reflect on the background and development
of this health policy.
By Day 3 of Week 7
Post a description of the health policy you selected and a brief background for the problem or
issue being addressed. Explain whether you believe there is an evidence base to support the
proposed policy and explain why. Be specific and provide examples.
By Day 6 of Week 7
Respond to at least two of your colleagues* on two different days by either supporting or
respectfully challenging their explanation on whether there is an evidence base to support the
proposed health policy they described.
*Note: Throughout this program, your fellow students are referred to as colleagues.
Submission and Grading Information
Grading Criteria
To access your rubric:
Week 7 Discussion Rubric
Post by Day 3 and Respond by Day 6 of Week 7
To participate in this Discussion:
Week 7 Discussion

Module 4: Healthcare Program Design and Implementation
(Weeks 7-8)
Laureate Education (Producer). (2018). Design and Implementation [Video file]. Baltimore, MD:
Author.
Accessible player
Learning Objectives
Students will:
 Analyze health policies
 Analyze opportunities for RNs and APRNs to participate in policy-making
 Analyze strategies for overcoming challenges for participating in policy-making
 Recommend strategies to improve the advocacy and communication of policy-making
opportunities
 Analyze healthcare programs
 Analyze the role of the nurse in healthcare program design
 Analyze the role of the nurse as advocates for target populations of healthcare programs
 Analyze the role of the nurse in healthcare program implementation
 Analyze healthcare teams necessary for implementing healthcare programs
Due By
Assignment
Week 7, Days 1–2
Read/Watch/Listen to the Learning Resources.
Compose your initial Discussion 1 post.
Week 7, Day 3
Post your initial Discussion 1 post.
Begin to compose your Assignment.
Week 7, Days 4-5
Review peer Discussion 1 posts.
Compose your peer Discussion 1 responses.
Continue to compose your Assignment.
Week 7, Day 6
Post at least two peer Discussion 1 responses on two different days (and not the same day as the
initial post).
Week 7, Day 7
Wrap up Discussion 1.
Week 8, Days 1–2
Compose your initial Discussion 2 post.
Continue to compose your Assignment.
Week 8, Day 3
Post your initial Discussion 2 post.

Continue to compose your Assignment.
Week 8, Days 4-5
Review peer Discussion 2 post.Compose your peer Discussion 2 post.
Continue to compose your Assignment.
Week 8, Day 6
Post at least two peer Discussion 2 responses on two different days (and not the same day as the
initial post).

Click here to ORDER an A++ paper from our Verified MASTERS and DOCTORATE WRITERS:NURS 6050 Evidence Base in Design Walden Discussion

Week 8, Day 7
Wrap up Discussion 2.
Deadline to submit your Assignment.
Learning Resources
Required Readings
Milstead, J. A., & Short, N. M. (2019). Health policy and politics: A nurse’s guide (6th ed.).
Burlington, MA: Jones & Bartlett Learning.

 Chapter 5, “Public Policy Design” (pp. 87–95 only)
 Chapter 8, “The Impact of EHRs, Big Data, and Evidence-Informed Practice” (pp.
137–146)
 Chapter 9, “Interprofessional Practice” (pp. 152–160 only)
 Chapter 10, “Overview: The Economics and Finance of Health Care” (pp.
183–191 only)

American Nurses Association (ANA). (n.d.). Advocacy. Retrieved September 20, 2018, from
https://www.nursingworld.org/practice-policy/advocacy/
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). (n.d.). Step by step: Evaluating violence and
injury prevention policies: Brief 4: Evaluating policy implementation. Retrieved from
https://www.cdc.gov/injury/pdfs/policy/Brief%204-a.pdf
Congress.gov. (n.d.). Retrieved September 20, 2018, from https://www.congress.gov/
Klein, K. J., & Sorra, J. S. (1996). The challenge of innovation implementation. Academy of
Management Review, 21(4), 1055–1080. doi:10.5465/AMR.1996.9704071863
Sacristán, J., & Dilla, T. D. (2015). No big data without small data: Learning health care systems
begin and end with the individual patient. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, 21(6),
1014–1017.
Tummers, L., & Bekkers, V. (2014). Policy implementation, street level bureaucracy, and the
importance of discretion. Public Management Review, 16(4), 527–547.

Required Media
Laureate Education (Producer). (2018). Getting your Program Designed and Implemented
[Video file]. Baltimore, MD: Author.
Accessible player
Laureate Education (Producer). (2018). Health policy and politics [Video file]. Baltimore, MD:
Author.
Rubric Detail
Select Grid View or List View to change the rubric's layout.
Name: NURS_6050_Module04_Week07_Discussion_Rubric
Grid View
List View
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.
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.
Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed.
Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources.
Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.
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.
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.
Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed.
Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources.
Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.
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_6050_Module04_Week07_Discussion_Rubric

Did you find apk for android? You can find new Free Android Games and apps.