Literature Review: The Use of Clinical Systems to Improve Outcomes and Efficiencies New technology—and the application of existing technology—only appears in healthcare settings after careful and significant research.

Literature Review: The Use of Clinical Systems to Improve Outcomes and Efficiencies

New technology—and the application of existing technology—only appears in healthcare settings after careful and significant research. The stakes are high, and new clinical systems need to offer evidence of positive impact on outcomes or efficiencies.

Nurse informaticists and healthcare leaders formulate clinical system strategies. As these strategies are often based on technology trends, informaticists and others have then benefited from consulting existing research to inform their thinking.

In this Assignment, you will review existing research focused on the application of clinical systems. After reviewing, you will summarize your findings.

Resources

Be sure to review the Learning Resources before completing this activity.
Click the weekly resources link to access the resources.

WEEKLY RESOURCES

To Prepare:

Review the Resources and reflect on the impact of clinical systems on outcomes and efficiencies within the context of nursing practice and healthcare delivery.
Conduct a search for recent (within the last 5 years) research focused on the application of clinical systems. The research should provide evidence to support the use of one type of clinical system to improve outcomes and/or efficiencies, such as “the use of personal health records or portals to support patients newly diagnosed with diabetes.”
Identify and select 4 peer-reviewed research articles from your research.
For information about annotated bibliographies, visit https://academicguides.waldenu.edu/writingcenter/assignments/annotatedbibliographiesLinks to an external site.

The Assignment: (4-5 pages not including the title and reference page)

In a 4- to 5-page paper, synthesize the peer-reviewed research you reviewed. Format your Assignment as an Annotated Bibliography. Be sure to address the following:

Identify the 4 peer-reviewed research articles you reviewed, citing each in APA format.
Include an introduction explaining the purpose of the paper.
Summarize each study, explaining the improvement to outcomes, efficiencies, and lessons learned from the application of the clinical system each peer-reviewed article described. Be specific and provide examples.
In your conclusion, synthesize the findings from the 4 peer-reviewed research articles.
Use APA format and include a title page.
Use the Turnitin Drafts to check your match percentage before submitting your work.

By Day 7 of Week 8

Submit your completed Assignment.

submission information

Before submitting your final assignment, you can check your draft for authenticity. To check your draft, access the Turnitin Drafts from the Start Here area.

To submit your completed assignment, save your Assignment as WK8Assgn_LastName_Firstinitial
Then, click on Start Assignment near the top of the page.
Next, click on Upload File and select Submit Assignment for review.

File Upload
Text Entry

Top of Form

Upload a file, or choose a file you’ve already uploaded.
Drag a file here, or Choose a file to upload


<=”” div=”” style=”text-size-adjust: auto; margin: 10px 0px;”> I agree to the tool’s End-User License Agreement This assignment submission is my own, original work *

Bottom of Form

Rubric

NURS_5051_Module04_Week08_Assignment_Rubric

NURS_5051_Module04_Week08_Assignment_Rubric
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeIn a 4- to 5-page paper, synthesize the peer-reviewed research you reviewed. Format your Assignment as an Annotated Bibliography. Be sure to address the following:· Properly identify 4 peer-reviewed research articles you reviewed.	20 to >17.0 ptsExcellentThe response identifies 4 peer-reviewed research articles for the Assignment. 17 to >15.0 ptsGoodThe response identifies 3 peer-reviewed research articles and one peer-reviewed article for the Assignment. 15 to >13.0 ptsFairThe response identifies 4 or less peer-reviewed articles 13 to >0 ptsPoorThe response identifies less than 4 peer-reviewed articles or peer-reviewed articles are missing	20 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome· Summarize each study, explaining the improvement to outcomes, efficiencies, and lessons learned from the application of the clinical system each peer-reviewed article described. Be specific and provide examples.	40 to >35.0 ptsExcellentThe response accurately and thoroughly summarizes in detail each study reviewed, explaining in detail the improvement to outcomes, efficiencies, and lessons learned from the application of the clinical system each peer-reviewed article described….Specific, accurate, and detailed examples are provided which fully support the response. 35 to >31.0 ptsGoodThe response summarizes each study reviewed, explaining the improvement to outcomes, efficiencies, and lessons learned from the application of the clinical system each peer-reviewed article described….Accurate examples are provided which support the response provided. 31 to >27.0 ptsFairThe response is missing one or two of the required elements or summaries are superficially addressed. 27 to >0 ptsPoorThe response is missing three or more required elements or the summaries are superficially addressed.	40 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome· Synthesize the findings from the 4 peer-reviewed research articles in a cohesive conclusion.	25 to >22.0 ptsExcellentResponse includes a synthesis of the findings in an exceptionally well-written conclusion. 22 to >19.0 ptsGoodResponse includes a synthesis of the findings in a well-written conclusion. 19 to >17.0 ptsFairThe response is missing a synthesis of the findings or the conclusion is superficial. 17 to >0 ptsPoorThe response is missing a synthesis of the findings and the conclusion is not accurate or is missing.	25 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten Expression and Formatting – Paragraph Development and Organization:Paragraphs make clear points that support well developed ideas, flow logically, and demonstrate continuity of ideas. Sentences are carefully focused–neither long and rambling nor short and lacking substance.	5 to >4.0 ptsExcellentParagraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity. 4 to >3.0 ptsGoodParagraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 80% of the time. 3 to >2.0 ptsFairParagraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 60%- 79% of the time. 2 to >0 ptsPoorParagraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity < 60% of the time.	5 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten Expression and Formatting – English writing standards:Correct grammar, mechanics, and proper punctuation	5 to >4.0 ptsExcellentUses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors. 4 to >3.0 ptsGoodContains a few (1-2) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. 3 to >2.0 ptsFairContains several (3-4) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. 2 to >0 ptsPoorContains many (≥ 5) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the reader’s understanding.	5 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten Expression and Formatting – APA:The paper follows correct APA format for title page, headings, font, spacing, margins, indentations, page numbers, parenthetical/in-text citations, and reference list.	5 to >4.0 ptsExcellentUses correct APA format with no errors. 4 to >3.0 ptsGoodContains a few (1-2) APA format errors. 3 to >2.0 ptsFairContains several (3-4) APA format errors. 2 to >0 ptsPoorContains many (≥ 5) APA format errors.	5 pts

NURS_5051_Module04_Week08_Assignment_Rubric

Criteria

Ratings

Pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeIn a 4- to 5-page paper, synthesize
the peer-reviewed research you reviewed. Format your Assignment as an
Annotated Bibliography. Be sure to address the following:· Properly identify
4 peer-reviewed research articles you reviewed.

20 to >17.0 ptsExcellentThe response identifies 4
peer-reviewed research articles for the Assignment.

17 to >15.0 ptsGoodThe response identifies 3
peer-reviewed research articles and one peer-reviewed article for the
Assignment.

15 to >13.0 ptsFairThe response identifies 4 or less peer-reviewed
articles

13 to >0 ptsPoorThe response identifies less than 4
peer-reviewed articles or peer-reviewed articles are missing

20 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome· Summarize each study, explaining
the improvement to outcomes, efficiencies, and lessons learned from the
application of the clinical system each peer-reviewed article described. Be
specific and provide examples.

40 to >35.0 ptsExcellentThe response accurately and
thoroughly summarizes in detail each study reviewed, explaining in detail the
improvement to outcomes, efficiencies, and lessons learned from the
application of the clinical system each peer-reviewed article
described….Specific, accurate, and detailed examples are provided which
fully support the response.

35 to >31.0 ptsGoodThe response summarizes each study
reviewed, explaining the improvement to outcomes, efficiencies, and lessons
learned from the application of the clinical system each peer-reviewed
article described….Accurate examples are provided which support the
response provided.

31 to >27.0 ptsFairThe response is missing one or two
of the required elements or summaries are superficially addressed.

27 to >0 ptsPoorThe response is missing three or
more required elements or the summaries are superficially addressed.

40 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome· Synthesize the findings from the 4
peer-reviewed research articles in a cohesive conclusion.

25 to >22.0 ptsExcellentResponse includes a synthesis of the
findings in an exceptionally well-written conclusion.

22 to >19.0 ptsGoodResponse includes a synthesis of the
findings in a well-written conclusion.

19 to >17.0 ptsFairThe response is missing a synthesis
of the findings or the conclusion is superficial.

17 to >0 ptsPoorThe response is missing a synthesis
of the findings and the conclusion is not accurate or is missing.

25 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten Expression and Formatting –
Paragraph Development and Organization:Paragraphs make clear points that
support well developed ideas, flow logically, and demonstrate continuity of
ideas. Sentences are carefully focused–neither long and rambling nor short and
lacking substance.

5 to >4.0 ptsExcellentParagraphs and sentences follow
writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity.

4 to >3.0 ptsGoodParagraphs and sentences follow
writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 80% of the time.

3 to >2.0 ptsFairParagraphs and sentences follow
writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 60%- 79% of the time.

2 to >0 ptsPoorParagraphs and sentences follow
writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity < 60% of the time.

5 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten Expression and Formatting –
English writing standards:Correct grammar, mechanics, and proper punctuation

5 to >4.0 ptsExcellentUses correct grammar, spelling, and
punctuation with no errors.

4 to >3.0 ptsGoodContains a few (1-2) grammar,
spelling, and punctuation errors.

3 to >2.0 ptsFairContains several (3-4) grammar,
spelling, and punctuation errors.

2 to >0 ptsPoorContains many (≥ 5) grammar,
spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the reader’s
understanding.

5 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten Expression and Formatting –
APA:The paper follows correct APA format for title page, headings, font,
spacing, margins, indentations, page numbers, parenthetical/in-text
citations, and reference list.

5 to >4.0 ptsExcellentUses correct APA format with no
errors.

4 to >3.0 ptsGoodContains a few (1-2) APA format
errors.

3 to >2.0 ptsFairContains several (3-4) APA format
errors.

2 to >0 ptsPoorContains many (≥ 5) APA format
errors.

5 pts

Total Points: 100