EBP Article Summary
EBP Article Summary – Grading Rubric
The purpose of this assignment is to enhance your ability to analyze the reliability and validity of various musculoskeletal evaluation techniques and to familiarize you with the language and format of research. You will find and select a research article from a peer-reviewed journal published in the last 5 years. The article should emphasize the effectiveness of at least one physical evaluation strategy for orthopedic examination of the lower extremity.
APA Format: 12 pt font, Times New Roman. Double-spaced.USE 1 INCH MARGINS. Reference example: (more on www.apastyle.org): Place reference at the top of the page.
Wegener, D. T., Smith, J. O. & Petty, R. E. (2014). Mood management across affective states: The hedonic contingency hypothesis. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 66(3), 1034-1048. DOI: 39847298911
ORDER A CUSTOM-WRITTEN PAPER NOW
General expectations:
- The entire abstract should not exceed three pages, nor should it be less than 1.5 pages.
- Cite the article at the top of the page. If you use the textbook, cite that as well.
- Proper grammar is critical and will be graded as well as the content of the text. The majority of the article should be written in third person, avoiding personal pronouns. 1st person is acceptable in the reflection portion of the paper.
- Avoid quotations. Use your own words.
- Introduction should introduce the topic of the article, providing a brief summary of the pathology / treatment considered. Introduction should also restate the hypothesis of the article and identify the study type.
- Provide a summary of the methodology. This would include things like description of the population, assignment of testing groups, and procedures for testing or treatments.
- Provide a summary of the results. This would include significant findings, reliability / validity measures, etc.
- Provide a summary of the discussion. This would include how the authors think the information will be utilized and reported limitations.
- Provide your impression. In this section ONLY, 1st person language is acceptable. What did you think about the article? Did the findings surprise you in any way? What future research could be pursued to augment this research? How will you apply your findings to clinical care? Tell me what you learned from the article.
RUBRIC
| STRUCTURE AND FORMAT
30% |
6 | 5-4 | 3-2 | 1-0 |
| Development | Content fully demonstrates a clear, logical, and coherent topic development with appropriate paragraph organization. | Content mostly demonstrates a clear, logical, and coherent topic development with appropriate paragraph organization. | Content somewhat demonstrates a clear, logical, and coherent topic development. Paragraphs are somewhat organized. | Content does not demonstrates a clear, logical, and coherent topic development. Paragraphs lack organization. |
| Grammar | Paper evidences competence in standard academic English. No grammatical, spelling or punctuation errors. | Almost no grammatical, spelling or punctuation errors | A few grammatical spelling or punctuation errors. | Many grammatical, spelling, or punctuation errors. |
| Style Guide | Follows all aspects of assigned style-guide. APA unless otherwise stated. | Almost no citation or style errors | A few citation or style errors. | Shows lack of understanding of APA style. |
| Audience | Writer demonstrates awareness of audience and maintains scholarly tone in active voice throughout. | Writer considers awareness of audience and generally maintains scholarly tone in active voice. | Writer illustrates an inconsistent awareness of the audience and fails to maintain scholarly tone. | Writer lacks awareness of audience’s knowledge level and writes in a casual or passive voice. |
| Sources / citations | Appropriate level of sources are used and referenced to support content.
Avoids plagiarism. |
Supporting resources are mostly high-quality sources and referenced appropriately.
Avoids plagiarism. |
Supporting resources are mostly low-quality sources or not appropriately referenced.
Avoids plagiarism. |
Poor selection of resources or failure to document supporting evidence.
Avoids plagiarism.* |
| CONTENT
70% |
18-16 | 15-11 | 10-6 | 5-0 |
| Introduction / Purpose | Article introduces the topic well and clearly describes research hypothesis / purpose. Type of research is correctly identified. | Article introduces the topic and describes research hypothesis / purpose. Type of research is identified. | Article introduces the topic, describes research hypothesis / purpose, and identifies type of research. Gaps in understanding are present. | Fails to introduce the topic, identify the research type, or discuss the research hypothesis. |
| Methodology | Research methodology is clearly described with description of population, testing techniques, and measurement strategies. | Research methodology is mostly described with description of population, testing techniques, and measurement strategies. | Methodology is described with some gaps in understanding. | Significant gaps in methodology discussion. |
| Results / Findings / discussion | Research results / findings are well described with primary study findings as they relate to the hypothesis, evidence of statistical reliability / validity measures, and authors’ application strategies. | Research results / findings are mostly described with primary study findings as they relate to the hypothesis, evidence of statistical reliability / validity measures, and authors’ application strategies. | Results / findings are described with some gaps in understanding. | Significant gaps in results / findings discussion |
| Reflection | Reflection thoroughly discusses implications for clinical application with consideration of study limitations, and identifies potential needs for future research. | Reflection discusses clinical application with consideration of study limitations. | Reflection vaguely identifies clinical application implications. | Personal reflection is lacking clarity or shows little effort. |
Evidence of plagiarism warrants an overall score of zero and referral to the program director for violation of university academic integrity policies. EBP Article Summary.
