Searching and Appraising Literature

Searching and Appraising Literature

Description of the Organizational Type and Gap

The selected organizational type is healthcare organizations, specifically focusing on sepsis management. Sepsis is one of the most critical conditions that affect hospital patients, and its early identification and treatment can be difficult. The gap in practice identified in this case is poor compliance with sepsis protocols where some organizations do not adhere to protocols and recommended procedures are not followed appropriately (Draeger et al., 2025). The prevalence of sepsis has escalated, and early identification and treatment have been proven to lower its mortality rate notably; however, organizational practices to this effect vary with proven best practices. The search examined the literature on ways to enhance the sepsis process and reduce the disparities in its treatment methods for healthcare institutions. It also sought to identify ways to optimize the identification of early sepsis and ideal care intervention to give a better prognosis to patients.

Process of Searching for the Evidence

To make my research as all-encompassing as possible, I identified several databases that would prove useful in the search for available sepsis resources based on their relevance and scope. Firstly, PubMed is one of the most renowned databases in the field of medicine, and it grants access to articles, scientific journals, and clinical trials. I chose PubMed because it allowed me to get information on clinical research on diseases like sepsis, regardless of their type, such as experimental research, cohort studies, and randomized clinical trials, which are critical in answering the research question.

I also chose CINAHL, which is good for nursing and healthcare-related articles due to its primary focus. CINAHL was used to search for articles on the role of nursing interventions, patient experiences, and care processes pertinent to sepsis. Also, the Cochrane Library was employed due to its systematic reviews and clinical evidence databases and guidelines. Cochrane was selected because it contains good-quality articles and provides the best evidence for clinical practice.

To search, I chose specific words to increase the likelihood of finding relevant information to clinical practice and the health care systems. The literature research identified the terms: “sepsis management,” “early sepsis detection,” “sepsis care protocols,” “healthcare organization sepsis,” and “sepsis treatment guidelines.” These keywords were selected because they target features of sepsis care that concern both clinical and organizational levels. I used specific words such as ‘sepsis care protocols’ to increase specificity by only capturing articles that explore set interventions and guidelines. Using clinical terms and phrases associated with healthcare organizations, the search focused on the research that can be used to enhance sepsis progression through enhanced protocols and early approaches in hospitals.

Process of Appraising the Evidence

I synthesized and initially searched for literature on sepsis care and intervention in health organizations to critically evaluate the evidence. While searching for the evidence, I could identify 10 reliable articles related to the topic, including clinical trials and systematic reviews. From the articles, I studied their titles, abstracts, and methods to confirm that the articles fit the identified gap in practice, which was the ineffective implementation of sepsis protocols. The articles were reviewed to determine their methodological quality regarding the type of study, sample, and the analysis process involved. I focused on peer-reviewed articles and ensured the chosen research methods were qualitative, cohort research, or randomized controlled trials.

I shortlisted the three most recent and relevant studies based on the criteria for evaluating the articles. First, I narrowed the articles’ publication dates to the last five years, meaning the evidence depicted recent innovations and strategies taken in managing sepsis. Second, I checked how each article was related to the formulated research question, looking at the articles that address early detection of sepsis, management of sepsis, and effective and inexpensive interventions in the ultimate healthcare facilities. I also took into account the fact that all articles were peer-reviewed, which ensured their credibility. Lastly, the quality of the studies was assessed to incorporate only high-quality and methodologically sound research employing huge samples, statistical analysis of results, and other conditions that would make the results generalizable.

The first selected is by Krepiakevich et al. (2021), which explores the economic impact of pediatric sepsis treatment, focusing on the costs incurred directly by patients and lost productivity. The second article is by Xu et al. (2023)—it presents a study on a prediction model for the development of ARDS in patients with sepsis, which can help in early interventions, enhance the prognosis, and decrease expenditures. The last article is authored by Gauer et al. (2020) and is a clinical practice guideline for sepsis diagnosis and management that helps establish standardized protocols for managing sepsis care. The articles were chosen because they informed the participants of time-effective ways of increasing the detection of sepsis, the management of sepsis, and the financial effects of sepsis care in a healthcare setting.

References

Krepiakevich, A., Khowaja, A. R., Kabajaasi, O., Nemetchek, B., Ansermino, J. M., Kissoon, N., Mugisha, N. K., Tayebwa, M., Kabakyenga, J., & Wiens, M. O. (2021). Out of pocket costs and time/productivity losses for pediatric sepsis in Uganda: A mixed-methods study. BMC Health Services Research, 21(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-021-07272-9

Draeger, L., Fleischmann-Struzek, C., Bleidorn, J., Kannengiesser, L., Schmidt, K., Apfelbacher, C., & Matthaeus-Kraemer, C. (2025). Healthcare professionals’ perspectives on sepsis care pathways—Qualitative pilot expert interviews. Journal of Clinical Medicine, 14(2), 619. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm14020619

Gauer, R., Forbes, D., & Boyer, N. (2020). Sepsis: Diagnosis and management. American Family Physician, 101(7), 409–418. https://www.aafp.org/pubs/afp/issues/2020/0401/p409.html

Xu, C., Zheng, L., Jiang, Y., & Jin, L. (2023). A prediction model for predicting the risk of acute respiratory distress syndrome in sepsis patients: A retrospective cohort study. BMC Pulmonary Medicine, 23(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12890-023-02365-z

ORDER A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE

We’ll write everything from scratch

Searching and Appraising Literature

When conducting a literature review, what are the steps you should you take to successfully search the evidence? Once you have generated your results, how do you properly appraise the evidence, grade them, and select the ones you want to use?
When conducting a literature review, the goal is to produce a set of results that match your search criteria. The results you get will vary dramatically depending on the search engine(s) you utilize and which key words you choose to enter. Selecting the right database(s) is one skill; selecting the best key words is another. In this Assignment, you will hone your skills in both of these important aspects of the search process.

Searching and Appraising Literature

Keep in mind, the results of your search will vary in terms of quality, as well as appropriateness, and significance to your research goals. For this reason, searching is only the first step of the process. The second step is to appraise the results you identified, and based on your evaluations, select the literature that you will select.
To prepare:
• Review the Learning Resources for this week which focus on how to successfully search and appraise search results.
• Review the course textbook Appendices E, F, and G, located in the Learning Resources for this week, which you will be required to complete and submit as part of this Assignment.
• Select one organizational type and one gap in practice or practice change on which to focus for this Assignment.
Note: You may select a new organizational type and gap in practice or practice change or, if you choose, you may reuse one on which you focused for a previous Assignment, Discussion, or Blog in this course.

Also Note: These may or may not be the same organizational type and gap in practice or practice change as those you will focus on for your Practicum and DNP Project.

• Consider all of the factors you should take into account when searching the evidence, then, using the Walden Library databases, conduct a search related to the organizational type and gap in practice or practice change you selected.
• Consider all of the factors you should take into account when apprising evidence, then, using the course text Appendices E, F, and G, appraise the results of your search.
• Based on your appraisals, identify the three recent (within the last five years), peer-reviewed articles that you think are most relevant to your research goals.

Note: For this Assignment, you must complete Appendix G based on having completed either Appendix E or F for each of the three articles you selected, as appropriate. You will submit a total of five documents (four completed Appendices along with your 2–3-page paper).
Be sure to review the grading rubric for this Assignment so you fully understand what is expected of you. To access the rubric, scroll down to the bottom of the Assignment page.
The Assignment: (2–3 pages)
Write a paper in which you do the following:
• Describe the organizational type and gap in practice or practice change you selected and explain the goals of the search you conducted.
• Describe your process of searching the evidence. Be specific and provide examples. Include the following:
o Which database(s) did you select? Why did you choose them?
o Which key words did you select? Why did you choose them?
• Describe your process of appraising the evidence you identified. Be specific and provide examples. Include the following:
o How many articles did you find?
o Based on what criteria did you decide on the three recent (within the last five years), peer-reviewed articles that you selected?
• Include copies of your completed Appendix G, along with the Appendices E and/or F that you completed as appropriate for each of the articles you selected.
o Note: For this Assignment, you must complete Appendix G based on having completed either Appendix E or F for each of the three articles you selected, as appropriate. You will submit a total of five documents (four completed Appendices along with your 2–3-page paper).

References for assignment 1
• Dang, D., Dearholt, S. L., Bissett, K., Ascenzi, J., & Whalen, M. (2021). Johns Hopkins evidence-based practice for nurses and healthcare professionals: Model and guidelines (4th ed.). Sigma Theta Tau International.
o Chapter 5, “Searching for Evidence” (pp. 99–120)
o Chapter 6, “Evidence Appraisal: Research” (pp. 129–162)
o Chapter 7, “Evidence Appraisal: Nonresearch” (pp. 163–188)
o Appendix D, “Hierarchy of Evidence Guide” (pp. 295–296)
o Appendix E, “Research Evidence Appraisal Tool” (pp. 297–306)Download Appendix E, “Research Evidence Appraisal Tool” (pp. 297–306)
o Appendix F, “Nonresearch Evidence Appraisal Tool” (pp. 307–314)Download Appendix F, “Nonresearch Evidence Appraisal Tool” (pp. 307–314)
o Appendix G, “Individual Evidence Summary Tool” (pp. 315–316)Download Appendix G, “Individual Evidence Summary Tool” (pp. 315–316)
o Appendix H, “Synthesis and Recommendations Tool” (pp. 319–323)Download Appendix H, “Synthesis and Recommendations Tool” (pp. 319–323)
Note: Be prepared to complete and submit Appendices E, F, and G for Assignment 1 and Appendix H for Assignment 2 this week.

(Continuation) Summarizing and synthesizing research Assignment 2
As you saw in Assignment 1, when conducting a literature review, you first search the evidence, and next you appraise it. Then, you are ready to summarize the evidence that you uncovered, and finally, you can synthesize it.
This Assignment is a continuation of Assignment 1, in which you used the Walden Library to conduct a literature review and appraised your results to select the highest quality and most appropriate and significant evidence. Now, for Assignment 2, you will take the recent (within the last 5 years), peer-reviewed articles you selected and write brief summaries of each of them. You will then write a synthesis of all the articles.
To prepare:
• Review the Learning Resources for this week, which focus on how to summarize and synthesize literature search results.
• Review Appendix H in the course textbook located in the Learning Resources for this week, which you will be required to complete and submit as part of this Assignment.
• Refer to your Assignment 1 submission and prepare to write a summary of each of the three articles you selected.
• Refer to your Assignment 1 submission and prepare to write a synthesis of the three articles you selected.
Note: For this Assignment, you must complete Appendix H. You will submit your completed Appendix H along with your 2- to 3-page paper.
Note: Be sure to review the grading rubric for this Assignment so you fully understand what is expected of you. To access the rubric, scroll down to the bottom of the Assignment page.
The Assignment: (2–3 pages)
Write a 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- to 3-page paper. Save copies of your completed Appendix H in Microsoft Word format. You will submit a total of two documents.