CT scans versus MRIs in diagnosing TB caverns in patients with tuberculosis.

Posted on | by Linus

Module 6: Clinical Work

Instructions
Prepare a data extraction of 5 peer reviewed journals. As a DNP, you need to be able to evaluate peer reviewed journals and appropriately appraise the articles to evaluate if the information can be used to answer the clinical question.
Clinical Question:
In patients diagnosed with Tuberculosis (P) is a CT scan (I) compared to MRI (C) more accurate diagnosing (O)TB caverns during patient assessment T?
P = Patient Population – TB Patients
I = Intervention or issue – CT scan
C = Comparison Intervention or Status – Comparison of a CT vs MRI
O = Outcome – Diagnosing accuracy (TB Caverns)
T: Time – Patient assessment
Based on the question above please complete the following:
1.Find 5 peer reviewed journals articles
2.Read the articles (take notes, look for key points)
3.Fill out the form for each article – John Hopkins Article Appraisal Form (Microsoft Word file)
4.Return the forms for evaluation and grading
Use an Essay Format
You must present your writing double-spaced, in a Times New Roman, Arial or Courier New font, with a font size of 12.
Pay attention to grammar rules (spelling and syntax).
Your work must be original and must not contain material copied from books or the internet.
When citing the work of other authors, include citations and references using APA style to respect their intellectual property and avoid plagiarism.
Remember that your writing must have a header or a cover page that includes the name of the institution, the program, the course code, the title of the activity, your name and student number, and the assignment’s due date.

Contribute a minimum of 5 pages. It should include at least 3 academic sources, formatted and cited in APA.
Be sure to review the academic expectations for your submission.
Submission Instructions:
Submit your assignment by 11:59 PM Eastern on Sunday.
Review the rubric to determine how your assignment will be graded.
Your assignment will be run through Turnitin to check for plagiarism.
 Official Rubric for Case Study Rubric
– Official Rubric for Case Study Rubric
Criteria Ratings Pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeCritical Thinking and Logical Reasoning
Development of Ideas 40 to >36.0 pts
Excellent
The case study provided all basic and complex details are considered, and the situation, problem, or diagnosis is identified. Next, the thought process to present alternatives, solutions, or the required information is linked to the analysis. Finally, the student presents excellent evidence, arguments, or examples to support the alternatives, solutions, or the required information. 36 to >32.0 pts
Good
The case study provided the most basic and complex details are considered, and the situation, problem, or diagnosis is identified. Next, the thought process to present alternatives, solutions, or the required information is linked to the analysis. Finally, the student presents good evidence, arguments, or examples to support the alternatives, solutions, or the required information. 32 to >28.0 pts
Fair
The case study provided some basic and complex details, identifying the situation, problem, or diagnosis. Next, the thought process to present alternatives, solutions, or the required information is linked to the analysis. Finally, the student presents limited evidence, arguments, or examples to support the alternatives, solutions, or the required information. 28 to >24.0 pts
Poor
The case study provided only minimal details and lacked a clear identification of the situation, problem, or diagnosis. The thought process to present alternatives, solutions, or the required information is not linked to the analysis. Finally, the student presents weak or no evidence, arguments, or examples to support the alternatives, solutions, or the required information. 24 to >0 pts
Unacceptable
The assignment did not reflect the requested outcomes, was off-topic, and/or the assignment was not submitted.
40 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeContent
Mastery 25 to >23.0 pts
Excellent
The response shows exemplary mastery of the theoretical concepts applicable to the situation, recognizing all basic and complex factors. Furthermore, based on the case study presented, the response exceeds the requested information. 23 to >20.0 pts
Good
The response shows good mastery of the theoretical concepts applicable to the situation, recognizing the most basic and complex factors. Based on the situation presented, the response complies with the information requested. 20 to >18.0 pts
Fair
The response shows fair mastery of the theoretical concepts applicable to the situation, recognizing the basic factors. However, based on the situation presented, the response minimally complies with the information requested. 18 to >15.0 pts
Poor
The response does not show mastery of the professional theoretical concepts applicable to the situation. Analysis misses many factors and details. The response does not comply with the information requested. 15 to >0 pts
Unacceptable
The assignment did not reflect the requested outcomes, was off-topic, and/or the assignment was not submitted.
25 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeInformation Literacy
Quality of Resources 15 to >14.0 pts
Excellent
Supporting information is pertinent to the topic, up to date (depending on what is acceptable in the field), from credible and trusted sources, and the number of sources meets the requested amount. 14 to >12.0 pts
Good
Supporting information is pertinent to the topic, however, 1 source is not a credible and trusted source; they may or may not be the most recent (depending on what is acceptable in the field). Additionally, the number of sources meets the requested amount. 12 to >11.0 pts
Fair
Supporting information is pertinent to the topic, however, 2 or more sources are not credible and trusted sources; they may or may not be the most recent (depending on what is acceptable in the field). Additionally, the number of sources meets the requested amount. 11 to >9.0 pts
Poor
The following criteria would apply, supporting information is not pertinent to the topic, none of the sources are from credible or trusted sources, or the number of sources requested was not met. 9 to >0 pts
Unacceptable
Resources did not reflect the requested outcomes, were off-topic, and/or the assignment was not submitted.
15 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWriting
Mechanics, Grammar, and APA 10 to >9.0 pts
Excellent
Excellence in grammar, spelling, and sentence structure. Sentences are not too long and are complete sentences. 9 to >8.0 pts
Good
Minimal (1 – 3) typos, spelling, grammatical, punctuation, or translation errors. 8 to >7.0 pts
Fair
Multiple (4 -7) typos, spelling, grammatical, punctuation, or translation errors. 7 to >6.0 pts
Poor
Severe (8 – 10) typos, spelling, grammatical, punctuation, or translation errors. 6 to >0 pts
Unacceptable
Unacceptable (11 or more) typos, spelling, grammatical, punctuation, or translation errors.
10 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeFormat
Organization and Presentation of Information 10 to >9.0 pts
Excellent
The document has a high level of professional appearance. Material is formatted exceptionally well, presented in a highly organized fashion, and aligned with assignment requirements. Includes sections and subtitles as required. 9 to >8.0 pts
Good
The document has a good, professional appearance. Overall, the material is formatted and presented in an organized fashion, aligned with assignment requirements. Includes sections and subtitles as required. 8 to >7.0 pts
Fair
The presentation of information does not appear professional or approaching proficiency. For example, the assignment missed required sections, subtitles, or other elements. 7 to >6.0 pts
Poor
The presentation of information lacks a clear demonstration of a professional appearance. The assignment is missing several required sections, subtitles, or other elements. 6 to >0 pts
Unacceptable
The assignment did not reflect the requested outcomes, was off-topic, and/or the assignment was not submitted.
10 pts

Struggling with where to start this assignment? Follow this guide to tackle your assignment easily!

Step 1: Understanding the Assignment

Before you begin writing, ensure you fully comprehend the instructions. Your task is to conduct a data extraction of five peer-reviewed journal articles that evaluate the accuracy of CT scans versus MRIs in diagnosing TB caverns in patients with tuberculosis. You will then appraise these articles using the John Hopkins Article Appraisal Form and write a structured essay.

Step 2: Research and Selecting Articles

  1. Find five peer-reviewed journal articles that focus on CT vs. MRI for diagnosing TB caverns.
  2. Use reliable databases such as PubMed, CINAHL, or Google Scholar.
  3. Evaluate article credibility by ensuring they are published in reputable journals within the last five years.
  4. Take notes on key findings, methodology, sample size, results, and conclusions.
  5. Save citation details in APA format for proper referencing.

Step 3: Completing the John Hopkins Article Appraisal Form

  1. Read each article carefully and analyze its methodology, reliability, and conclusions.
  2. Fill out the John Hopkins Article Appraisal Form for each article, ensuring completeness and accuracy.
  3. Summarize key findings and determine if the study provides evidence to support your clinical question.

Step 4: Structuring Your Essay

Your paper should be at least five pages long and follow APA formatting guidelines. Use the following structure:

1. Cover Page

  • Name of the institution
  • Program and course code
  • Assignment title
  • Your name and student number
  • Due date

2. Introduction

  • Briefly introduce the clinical question.
  • Explain the importance of evaluating CT scans vs. MRIs for TB cavern diagnosis.
  • Outline what the paper will discuss.

3. Literature Review

  • Summarize key findings from the five selected articles.
  • Compare and contrast methodologies, results, and conclusions.
  • Highlight trends or discrepancies among the studies.

4. Critical Appraisal

  • Use the insights from the John Hopkins Article Appraisal Forms.
  • Discuss the strengths and weaknesses of each study.
  • Explain how these studies contribute to answering the clinical question.

5. Conclusion

  • Summarize key points.
  • State whether CT or MRI is more accurate based on the evidence.
  • Discuss potential clinical implications.

6. References

  • List all sources in APA format.

Step 5: Formatting and Final Review

  • Double-space your text and use Times New Roman, Arial, or Courier New (size 12).
  • Ensure proper grammar and sentence structure.
  • Check for plagiarism using Turnitin before submission.
  • Use in-text citations where necessary to support claims.
  • Proofread carefully for errors in grammar, APA format, and content accuracy.

Step 6: Submission

  • Upload your final document by 11:59 PM Eastern on Sunday.
  • Review the grading rubric to ensure you meet all criteria.
  • Ensure your submission includes the completed John Hopkins Appraisal Forms.

Following these steps will help you efficiently complete your assignment while meeting academic expectations. Good luck!

Posted in Uncategorized

Place this order or similar order and get an amazing discount. USE Discount code “GET20” for 20% discount