Attachment below
3
Complete a discussion post following the instructions and rubric. Resources are also below for you to use.
Rubric:
|
RESPONSIVENESS TO DISCUSSION QUESTION (20 possible points): Discussion posts minimum requirements: The original posting must be completed by Day 3 at 11:59pm ET. Two response postings to two different peer original posts, on two different days, are required by Day 6 at 11:59pm ET. Faculty member inquiries require responses, which are not included in the peer posts. Your Discussion Board postings should be written in Standard Academic English and follow APA 7 style for format and grammar as closely as possible given the constraints of the online platform. Be sure to support the postings with specific citations from this week’s learning resources as well as resources available through the Walden University library and other credible online resources (guidelines, expert opinions etc.) |
20 to >19.0 ptsExcellent• Discussion postings and responses are responsive to and exceed the requirements of the Discussion instructions. • The student responds to the question/s being asked or the prompt/s provided. Goes beyond what is required in some meaningful way (e.g., the post contributes a new dimension, unearths something unanticipated) • Demonstrates that the student has read, viewed, and considered a variety of learning resources, as well as resources available through the Walden University library and other credible online resources (guidelines, expert opinions etc.) • Detailed response to faculty. 19 to >15.0 ptsGood• Discussion postings and responses are responsive to and meet the requirements of the Discussion instructions. • The student responds to the question/s being asked or the prompt/s provided. • Demonstrates that the student has read, viewed, and considered a variety of learning resources, as well as resources available through the Walden University library and other credible online resources (guidelines, expert opinions etc.) • Appropriate reply to faculty. 15 to >12.0 ptsFair• Discussion postings and responses are somewhat responsive to the requirements of the Discussion instructions. • The student may not clearly address the objectives of the discussion or the question/s or prompt/s. • Minimally demonstrates that the student has read, viewed, and considered a variety of learning resources, as well as resources available through the Walden University library and other credible online resources (guidelines, expert opinions etc.) • Brief response to faculty with minimal effort. 12 to >0 ptsPoor• Discussion postings and responses are unresponsive to the requirements of the Discussion instructions. • Does not clearly address the objectives of the discussion or the question/s or prompt/s. • Does not demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered a variety of learning resources, as well as resources available through the Walden University library and other credible online resources (guidelines, expert opinions etc.) • Fails to respond to faculty inquiries. |
20 pts |
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeCONTENT REFLECTION and MASTERY: Initial Post (30 possible points) |
30 to >29.0 ptsExcellentInitial Discussion posting: • Post demonstrates mastery and thoughtful/accurate application of content and/or strategies presented in the course. • Posts are substantive and reflective, with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings and current credible evidence. • Initial post is supported by 3 or more relevant examples and research/evidence from a variety of scholarly sources including course and outside readings. 29 to >23.0 ptsGoodInitial Discussion posting: • Posts demonstrate some mastery and application of content, applicable skills, or strategies presented in the course. • Posts are substantive and reflective, with analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings and current credible evidence. • Initial post is supported by 3 or more relevant examples and research/evidence from a variety of scholarly sources including course and outside readings. 23 to >18.0 ptsFairInitial Discussion posting: • Post may lack in depth, reflection, analysis, or synthesis but rely more on anecdotal than scholarly evidence. • Posts demonstrate minimal understanding of concepts and issues presented in the course, and, although generally accurate, display some omissions and/or errors. • There is a lack of support from relevant scholarly research/evidence. 18 to >0 ptsPoorInitial Discussion posting: • Post lacks in substance, reflection, analysis, or synthesis. • Posts do not generalize, extend thinking or evaluate concepts and issues within the topic or context of the discussion. • Relevant examples and scholarly resources are not provided. |
30 pts |
Instructions:
What is the incidence of blood clots from COVID-19 in females over the age of 35?
The above question is an example of a research question. A research question consists of three parts and guides the methods and approaches in which you will study the question to find answers. The research question includes the question, the topic, and the population or variables. In the example provided above, the question examines the prevalence of blood clots from severe COVID-19 in a selected population. From this question, the variables can be assessed, considerations can be analyzed, and populations can be sampled in order to guide the research.
For this Discussion, you will analyze a selected work to identify and analyze the variables, comparisons, and sample sizes. You will explore the potential levels of measurement for your variables and the rationale for the labels, as well as consider the advantages and challenges that you might experience in the statistical analysis.
Reference: Gray, J. R., & Grove, S. K. (2020). Burns and Grove’s the practice of nursing research: Appraisal, synthesis, and generation of evidence (9th ed.). Elsevier.
To prepare:
· View the required media.
· It is recommended you complete the quiz prior to constructing your initial response.
Post a response including the following:
· Choose a research study, QI article, or EBP DNP project and interpret at least one continuous demographic variable and one categorical variable.
· Differentiate between comparisons made using descriptive statistics (e.g., the mean and standard deviation) and comparisons based on inferential statistics (e.g., a
t test).
· Compare and contrast the sample sizes used in the research study, the QI project, and the DNP project in terms of type 1 and type 2 errors.
· Explain the SIR rate, how it is developed, and how organizations use it.
· Using the same articles, pick one and differentiate between one descriptive and one inferential statistic used in any one of the three studies/projects.
Resources to use for post:
· Beydoun, A. S., Koss, K., Nielsen, T., Holcomb, A. J., Pichardo, P., Purdy, N., Zebolsky, A. L., Heaton, C. M., McMullen, C. P., Yesensky, J. A., Moore, M. G., Goyal, N., Kohan, J., Sajisevi, M., Tan, K., Petrisor, D., Wax, M. K., Kejner, A. E., Hassan, Z., … Zenga, J. (2022).
Perioperative topical antisepsis and surgical site infection in patients undergoing upper aerodigestive tract reconstruction
Links to an external site.
. JAMA Otolaryngology-Head & Neck Surgery, 148(6), 547–554.
· Sood, N., Lee, R. E., To, J. K., Cervellione, K. L., Smilios, M. D., Chun, H., & Ngai, I. M. (2022).
Decreased incidence of cesarean surgical site infection rate with hospital‐wide perioperative bundle
Links to an external site.
. Birth: Issues in Perinatal Care, 49(1), 141–146.
· Sauer, K. (2023).
Testing for the treatment of urinary tract infections in symptomatic adult patients residing in long-term care facility: An evidence-based quality improvement projectLinks to an external site.
(Publication No. 30569808) [Doctoral dissertation, Phoenix University]. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.
· Bullen, P. (n.d.).
How to choose a sample size (for the statistically challenged)
Links to an external site.
. tools4dev.
· Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2025, April).
NHSN’s guide to the 2022 baseline standardized infection ratiosLinks to an external site.
.
· “Overview of the Standard Infection Ratio (SIR)” (pp. 3–14)
· Bissett, K., Ascenzi, J., & Whalen, M. (2025).
Johns Hopkins evidence-based practice for nurses and healthcare professionals: Model and guidelines(5th ed.). Sigma Theta Tau International Honor Society of Nursing.
· Chapter 8, “Evidence Phase: Appraising the Evidence” (pp. 118–129)
· Chapter 9, “Evidence Phase: Summary, Synthesis and Best-Evidence Recommendations” (pp. 132–144)
· Salkind, N., & Frey, B. (2025).
Statistics for people who (think they) hate statistics (8th ed.). SAGE Publications.
· Chapter 1, “Descriptive Statistics and Averages” (pp. 8–15)
· Chapter 2, “What Do Your Data Look Like? Summarizing and Picturing Distributions” (pp. 25–50)
· Chapter 6, “Hypotheticals and You: Making Guesses” (pp. 117–130)
· Chapter 5, “The Normal Curve: It’s Shaped Like a Bell and It’s Everywhere!” (pp. 97–116)
Niedz, B. (2024). Descriptive statistics [Video]. Walden University Canvas.
