Johns Hopkins Evidence-Based Practice Model and Guidelines
Johns Hopkins Evidence-Based Practice Model and Guidelines
Write a Summarizing and synthesizing research paper in which you do the following:
Using a scholarly voice, summarize each of the three articles you selected.
Using a scholarly voice, synthesize the three articles you selected.
Include a copy of your completed Appendix H.
Note: You will submit your completed Appendix H along with your 2–3-page paper. Save copies of your completed Appendix H in Word format.
Mullen, A., et al. (2022). Safewards: An integrative review of the literature within inpatient and forensic mental health units. International Journal of Mental Health Nursing, 31(5), 1090–1108. doi: 10.1111/inm.13001
Saunders, K. R. K., et al. (2023). A scoping review of trauma-informed approaches in acute, crisis, emergency, and residential mental health care. BMC Psychiatry, 23(1), 567. doi: 10.1186/s12888-023-05016-z
Pedersen, M.L., et al. (2024). A systematic review of interventions to reduce mechanical restraint in adult mental health inpatient settings. International Journal of Mental Health Nursing, 33(3), 505–522. doi: 10.1111/inm.13267
ORDER A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE
Johns Hopkins Evidence-Based Practice Model and Guidelines
Appendix H
Summary, Synthesis, & Best-Evidence Recommendation Tool
Purpose: This tool guides the EBP team through the process of synthesizing the pertinent findings from the Best Evidence or Individual Evidence Summary (Appendix G1 or G2) to create an overall picture of the body of the evidence related to the EBP question. The team analyzes the data in each category of support for decision-making, as well as any additional organizational approaches that bring further insights.
Section I: Findings from the Individual Evidence Summary
Support for Decision-Making Synthesized Findings with Article Number(s) (This is not a simple restating of information from each individual evidence summary—see instructions)
Strong
Number of sources = Enter #
Enter text
Moderate
Number of sources = Enter #
Enter text
Limited
Number of sources =Enter #
Enter text
Further Synthesis Based on Additional Organization and Analysis (OPTIONAL)
Enter text
Johns Hopkins Evidence-Based Practice Model and Guidelines
Instructions for the Summary, Synthesis, & Best-Evidence Recommendation Tool
Section II: Best-Evidence Recommendations
The recommendations below are based on: ☒Pre-appraised evidence identified in a best evidence search Record each recommendation in the corresponding evidence category in the table below based on the confidence/certainty listed in the clinical practice guidelines, evidence summary, or literature review with a systematic approach ☒Evidence appraised by the EBP team from a targeted search to supplement the pre-appraised evidence (single studies with a formal study design) Record any additional or altered recommendations to the pre-appraised evidence in the corresponding evidence category in table below. See instructions for more details. ☒Evidence appraised by the EBP team from an exhaustive search (single studies, anecdotal evidence, and pre-appraised evidence that does not fully address the EBP question) Record each recommendation in the table below based on the team’s analysis and synthesis of information in Section I Characteristics of the Recommendation(s) Best-Evidence Recommendation(s)
High certainty recommendations (Robust, well-documented, consistent & persuasive, based mostly on evidence that provides strong support for decision-making)
Enter text
Reasonable certainty recommendations (Good, mostly compelling, consistent evidence, based mostly on evidence that provides moderate to strong support for decision-making)
Enter text
Characteristics of the Recommendation(s) Recommendation(s) Lacking Adequate Evidence
Reasonable to low certainty recommendations (Good but conflicting evidence. Inconsistent results, based mostly on evidence that provides moderate support for decision making)
Enter text
Low certainty recommendations (Little to no evidence. Information is minimal, inconsistent and/or based mostly on evidence that provides limited support for decision-making)
Johns Hopkins Evidence-Based Practice Model and Guidelines
Section I: Findings from the Individual Evidence Summary Only complete Section I if the team completed an exhaustive evidence search and the Individual Evidence Summary Tool (Appendix G2). Support for Decision-Making Synthesized Findings With Article Number(s) (This is not a simple restating of information from each individual evidence summary—see instructions)
Strong
Number of sources = _____
This table captures key findings that answer the EBP question from an exhaustive evidence search. As a team, review the evidence that provides strong support for decision-making in the Individual Evidence Summary Tool (Appendix G2). Look for salient themes, patterns, important takeaways, consistencies, and inconsistencies.
After discussing the strong evidence and coming to a consensus as a team, record succinct statements in this box that synthesize the information, enhance the team’s knowledge, and generate new insight, perspective, and understanding to answer the EBP question.
Avoid repeating content and/or copying and pasting directly from the Individual Evidence Summary Tool. Record the article number(s) used to generate each synthesis statement to make the source of findings easy to identify.
Moderate
Number of sources = _____
Repeat the process above for evidence that provides moderate support for decision-making.
Limited
Number of sources = _____
Repeat the process above for evidence that provides limited support for decision-making.
Further Synthesis Based on Additional Organization and Analysis (OPTIONAL)
This is an optional section to reflect any additional insights the team has from further organization and analysis of the data. It may include patterns, themes, subgroups, or additional sorting. To determine if this step is necessary, the team should ask themselves, “How can the evidence be organized to explore subtleties or details in order to produce a more comprehensive understanding of the big picture?” See Chapter 9 for more information.
Section II: Best-Evidence Recommendations
Johns Hopkins Evidence-Based Practice Model and Guidelines
The recommendations below are based on: Select boxes below that reflect the type(s) of evidence used to generate the best-evidence recommendations.
Pre-appraised evidence identified in a best evidence search Record each recommendation in the corresponding evidence category in the table below based on the confidence/certainty listed in the clinical practice guidelines, evidence summary, or literature review with a systematic approach Using the certainty or confidence schema used by the authors of the pre-appraised evidence, put each recommendation into the corresponding box.
Evidence appraised by the EBP team from a targeted search to supplement the pre-appraised evidence (single studies with a formal study design) Record any additional or altered recommendations to the pre-appraised evidence in the corresponding evidence category in table below. See instructions for more details. Record any changes to the recommendations from the pre-appraised evidence in the corresponding box. When determining if a recommendation should be updated consider the following: o Does the new evidence provide results that are based on robust methods that the team considers compelling? o How does the certainty of any new or altered recommendations compare to the certainty of the recommendation from the pre-appraised evidence?
Evidence appraised by the EBP team from an exhaustive search (single studies, anecdotal evidence, and pre-appraised evidence that does not fully address the EBP question) Record each recommendation in the table below based on the team’s analysis and synthesis of information in Section I Review the information from Section I. Consider the quantity and quality of information for each recommendation. Based on the descriptions below, record the best-evidence recommendation in the box that corresponds to the characteristics of the evidence used to support it. Recommendations should be succinct statements that distill the synthesized evidence into an answer to the EBP question. The team bases these recommendations on the evidence and does not yet consider their specific setting. Translating the recommendations into action steps within the team’s organization occurs in the next step (Translation and Implementation Tools, Appendices I and J).
Characteristics of the Recommendation(s) Best-Evidence Recommendation(s)
High certainty recommendations (Robust, well-documented, consistent & persuasive, based mostly on evidence that provides strong support for decision-making)
Record recommendations the team feels confident in endorsing here. Keep in mind, these can be recommendations FOR or AGAINST an intervention. Sentences can start with phrases such as:
“The evidence endorses…”
“The evidence recommends…”
Or end with
“…is recommended”
“…is indicated”
“…is beneficial”
“…is useful”
Reasonable certainty recommendations (Good, mostly compelling, consistent evidence, based mostly on evidence that provides moderate to strong support for decision-making)
Record recommendations the team is fairly confident in endorsing here. Sentences can start with phrases such as:
“the evidence suggests…”
Or end with
“…is reasonable”
“…can be useful”
“…can be effective”
“…can be beneficial”
Johns Hopkins Evidence-Based Practice Model and Guidelines
Characteristics of the Recommendation(s) Recommendation(s) Lacking Adequate Evidence
Reasonable to low certainty recommendations (Good but conflicting evidence. Inconsistent results, based mostly on evidence that provides moderate support for decision making)
Record recommendations the team the team has little confidence in endorsing here. Sentences can start with phrases such as:
“Evidence is mixed regarding…”
“Evidence is conflicting regarding…”
“There is little evidence to support…”
Or end with:
“… may or may not be useful”
Low certainty recommendations (Little to no evidence. Information is minimal, inconsistent and/or based mostly on evidence that provides limited support for decision-making)
Record recommendations that team has no confidence in endorses here. Sentences can start with:
“There is no evidence to support…”
“Evidence is very limited on…”
“Recommendations cannot be made on…”
Or end with:
“….is not supported by evidence”
