Less than 20% plaigarism and need a plaigarism check at the end. This is part 2 of the literarture review. I will attach part 1 for review in order to continue in part 2. I also attached an xcel sheet with 60 of the articles needed to complete the paper. Out of ther 60 articles 20 were uses in the part 1 which I have atetched, for this part 2 I need to use a defferent 20 articles from the xcel sheet attached. The articles chosen must be from 2019 or newer. Topic: Educating Emergency room nurses on how to properly use aseptic technique when inserting urinary foley catheters vs theoritical textbook education. Review the following 20 articles from the approved list. Synthesize the information for each article, including the authors, the title, the type of research, the methodology used, the tool used, the results, and the practice recommendation. Submit the literature review via Canvas for your mentor to provide feedback. Add the literature review to your Practice Change Project. Submission Instructions: It should include at least 20 academic sources, formatted and cited in APA. Rubric – Official Assignment Rubric – Official Assignment Rubric Criteria Ratings Pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeProfessionalism Concept Application 20 to >18.0 pts Excellent The student meets 90% to 100% of the required content criteria by mastering both rudimentary and complex elements and, in addition, applying high-level facts, theories, definitions, and other contextual aspects. Lastly, all the delivered information is compliant with the assignment instructions. 18 to >16.0 pts Good The student meets 80% to 89% of the required content criteria by recognizing the fundamental, rudimentary, and complex elements and applying proficient facts, theories, definitions, and other contextual aspects. Lastly, all the delivered information is compliant with the assignment instructions. 16 to >14.0 pts Fair The student meets 70% to 79% of the required content criteria by recognizing rudimentary and complex elements and demonstrating facts, theories, definitions, and other contextual aspects. All of the delivered information is compliant with the assignment instructions. 14 to >12.0 pts Poor The student meets less than 70% of the required content criteria with a low-level approach of rudimentary and complex elements and a lack of application facts, theories, definitions, and other contextual aspects. However, all the delivered information is compliant with the assignment instructions. 12 to >0 pts Unacceptable The assignment did not reflect the requested outcomes, was off-topic, and/or the assignment was not submitted. 20 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeGrammar Written Communication 20 to >18.0 pts Excellent Excellence in grammar, spelling, and sentence structure. Sentences are not too long and are complete sentences. 18 to >16.0 pts Good Minimal (1 – 3) typos, spelling, grammatical, punctuation, or translation errors 16 to >14.0 pts Fair Multiple (4 -7) typos, spelling, grammatical, punctuation, or translation errors. 14 to >12.0 pts Poor Severe (8 – 10) typos, spelling, grammatical, punctuation, or translation errors. 12 to >0 pts Unacceptable Unacceptable (11 or more) typos, spelling, grammatical, punctuation, or translation errors. 20 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeCommunication Specific Formatting 20 to >18.0 pts Excellent The assignment meets 90 % – 100% of the required formatting elements in the assignment description. Additionally, the presented information is complete in all the required components and exceeds expectations. 18 to >16.0 pts Good The assignment meets 80% to 89% of the required formatting elements in the assignment description. Additionally, the presented information meets all the necessary components and formatting requirements. 16 to >14.0 pts Fair The assignment meets 70% to 79% of the required formatting elements in the assignment description. However, the presented information is missing some key details, but overall does not disrupt the required format. 14 to >12.0 pts Poor The assignment meets at most 69% of the required formatting elements in the description. The presented information is missing some key details that disrupt the needed formatting. 12 to >0 pts Unacceptable The assignment did not reflect the requested outcomes, was off-topic, and/or the assignment was not submitted. 20 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeCritical and Logical Thinking Thought analysis process 20 to >18.0 pts Excellent The assignment meets 90% to 100% of rudimentary and complex details, situations, problems, and diagnosis awareness that are accurate and correctly documented. In addition, the analysis offers a clear and concise analysis along with an impeccable and precise, well-thought process. 18 to >16.0 pts Good The assignment meets 80% to 89% of rudimentary and complex details, situations, problems, and diagnosis awareness which are accurate and correctly documented. The analysis is well communicated, and the fundamental thought process presented in the written piece clearly aligns with the assignment expectations. 16 to >14.0 pts Fair The assignment satisfies 70% to 79% of rudimentary and complex details, situations, problems, or diagnosis awareness but may overlook some essential parameters. The analysis and thought process presented in the written piece is evident; however, still developing. 14 to >12.0 pts Poor The assignment meets at most 69% of rudimentary details, situations, problems, or diagnosis awareness, but there was a severe overlook of some essential parameters. In addition, the analysis and thought process presented in the written piece is not evident and not founded on previous discussions or information. 12 to >0 pts Unacceptable The assignment did not reflect the requested outcomes, was off-topic, and/or the assignment was not submitted. 20 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAcademic Literacy Quality of Sources and APA Citations 20 to >18.0 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. Additionally, all sources are recognized or cited properly. 18 to >16.0 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. The essay offers correct formatting on the setup, and title page, with minimal formatting or punctuation errors within the in-text citations or references. 16 to >14.0 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. The essay offers correct formatting, setup, and title page but has significant errors within in-text citations and references. 14 to >12.0 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. The essay offers severe incorrect APA formatting, setup or missing title page, and/or problematic in-text citations and references. 12 to >0 pts Unacceptable The assignment did not reflect the requested outcomes, was off-topic, and/or the assignment was not submitted. 20 pts Total Points: 100
Last Completed Projects
| topic title | academic level | Writer | delivered |
|---|