fbpx

Managing the Poor Practice

Managing the Poor Practice

Assessment; (c)
3: Managing the poor practice
Assessment type;
Critical review
Word limit/length: 3000 words plus 500 extras (including citations, references, and any tables/figures)Overview
You will further expand on assignment one to critically analyse how the poor practice in health, social, and community care settings can be resolved using reliable and recent evidence.

Learning Outcomes
This assignment task is aligned with the following unit learning outcomes:
• Demonstrate an in-depth understanding of the main research philosophical perspectives and methodologies including their assumptions and practical applications
• Provide an evidence-based practice framework to resolve poor practice in health, social, and community services

Assignment structure
1. Describing a poor practice and its consequences (Approx. 300 words) – Describe the poor practice, its definition, and consequences. This section can be an extension of assignment one – No rephrasing is required.

2. The critical argument of evidence-based practice for resolving poor practice (Approx. 2000)
• critically analyse how the poor practice in health, social, and community care can be managed, considering three dimensions of evidence-based practice

a) patient’s values,
b) professional expertise, and
c) evidence-based research.

Please provide a minimum of one database used to find evidence of poor practice.

3. Recommendations for different involved partners as applicable (e.g., consumers, providers/professionals/practitioners, policymakers, community and government bodies), and researchers (e.g., translation of the results into practice, further future studies, change of policies and practices, training requirements) – (Approx. 400)

4. References – include three references (APA 7th). We recommend that you include at least one of these three types of research publication: a) an original quantitative research article (primary evidence) b) an original qualitative research article (primary evidence) c) a systematic review (secondary evidence, which can be any types of reviews, from scoping review to meta-analysis). Then you can use these diverse approaches to discuss evidence-based ways that the poor practice can be resolved. If this is not applicable, it is OK to choose the 3 papers from the same design. Also, please choose credible, peer-reviewed, and recent sources (last 5 yrs, if not applicable, please consider the last 10 yrs).

Notes to consider in preparation for assignment 3:
• Frame a research question based on PICO/PIO, based on the design chosen. Quantitative design  P (population or problem); I (intervention); C (comparison – this may not be applicable); O (an outcome which can be related to health, social, and community care outcomes)

• Consider a searching strategy (e.g., keywords, and linking them via Booleans) to find the most reliable sources of evidence for resolving the poor practice. The W2 unit content might be helpful for you in terms of strategy and analysing evidence. We recommend that you use a searching strategy (right keywords, and linking them via Booleans) to find the right evidence discussing the poor practice.

• Please provide the name of a (minimum of one) database used for the papers chosen, including 1-2 sentences of justification.

• Choose a practice that you can provide at least three peer-reviewed papers, as it will be the basis for your next assignments.

• If applicable, choose various types of evidence-based research including original quantitative and qualitative studies, & secondary systematic reviews.

• Please make sure to choose the 3 references carefully as they can be used for the final assignment as well – choose the most credible and recent (preferably the last 5 years, and if not applicable, the last 10 years will be acceptable). We recommend that you choose a combination of three research types: a) an original quantitative research article (primary evidence) b) an original qualitative research article (primary evidence) c) a systematic review (secondary evidence) to look at the issue from different perspectives. If you are not able to include all these 3 research variations, it is all ok, you can focus on only one or two research designs.

• Students can be flexible in the ways they write their assignment/structure headings, sub-headings, etc. For example, they can divide the EBP into 3 key sections/headings or provide intervention/strategies for improving the poor practice and then discuss the 3 dimensions under each strategy. So, they can be quite flexible, in structuring their work, as far as they cover justification around the 3 dimensions of the EBP.

• The main focus of the discussion can be on evidence-based literature, as the current unit is about appraising evidence. However, they still require to discuss patients’ values and expertise.

• Discussion on patients’ values for some specific topics may be indirect. For example, if a topic is about leadership changes or staff retention/burnout, etc.
Students do not require to provide a citation for the section’s professional expertise, as it can be their reflection. However, if they can find support/citations based on the literature, it can be idea

error: Content is protected !!