Discussion postEvidence-based practice

Based on the PICOT you developed for NUR-550, summarize the change initiative you will be proposing.

This post is not a PICOT formatting exercise. It asks you to argue that the problem behind your PICOT is one an existing evidence base can actually move — inside your setting, within your timeframe, and within what your role lets you authorise.

Editorial process

Last reviewed · July 21, 2026

Written by

Ryan Harper

MSc, Health Sciences

evidence-based practice implementation and care-transition safety

Reviewed by

Dr. Laura Bennett

DNP, RN, CNE

Evidence-based practice and clinical education

On this page

Interpret the task
Assignment instructions
Deliverables
Proposed outline
Research plan
Reference shortlist
Final review

What NUR 590 Topic 1 DQ 1 is actually asking

The word doing the work here is 'amenable'. You are not being asked to restate the PICOT you wrote in NUR-550, and you are not being asked whether your problem matters — you are being asked to justify that it is the kind of problem a research-based intervention can shift. Many genuine clinical problems are not: chronic understaffing, capital funding, prescriber behaviour outside your authority, or outcomes that take years to move. A post that describes an important problem without arguing its amenability has answered a question that wasn't asked.

Two distinctions decide whether the post lands. First, your PICOT is the question; your change initiative is what people will actually do differently on the unit. They are not the same sentence, and summarising the initiative means naming the practice change, not re-reading the five letters back. Second, 'research-based intervention' means an intervention that already carries an evidence base you will implement — not that you are conducting a study. Writing as though you will generate new knowledge misplaces the project and, in a real setting, changes whether it needs IRB review at all.

The middle question hides three separate alignments — population of focus, setting, and role — and most posts answer only the first. 'Role' is the one that is routinely skipped and the easiest to get visibly wrong: an intervention that depends on authority you do not hold is not amenable in your hands, whatever the literature says about it.

Likely learning objectives

Distinguish a PICOT question from the change initiative it implies, and state the initiative as a practice change rather than as a restatement of the question.
Argue amenability: show that an existing evidence base supports an intervention capable of moving the chosen outcome, rather than asserting that the problem is important.
Likely assessed on whether all three alignments — population of focus, setting, and role — are addressed distinctly, since the prompt names them separately.
Separate implementing evidence from generating it, which is the distinction that determines whether a project is quality improvement or research.
Tends to be rewarded when the outcome and timeframe are chosen so the change could actually be measured within the project window, not merely named.

Assignment instructions

Read the full question

Review every instruction before using the planning guidance that follows.

NUR 590 Topic 1 DQ 1 Based on the PICOT you developed for NUR-550, summarize the change initiative you will be proposing. Description: Based on the PICOT you developed for NUR-550, summarize the change initiative you will be proposing. How does this support the population of focus, your setting, and role? Justify how the problem you selected to investigate is amenable to a research-based intervention using the PICOT format. NUR 590 Topic 1 DQ 1

Course-wide instructions that accompany this question

ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE CLASS Discussion Questions (DQ) Initial responses to the DQ should address all components of the questions asked, include a minimum of one scholarly source, and be at least 250 words. Successful responses are substantive (i.e., add something new to the discussion, engage others in the discussion, well-developed idea) and include at least one scholarly source. One or two sentence responses, simple statements of agreement or “good post,” and responses that are off-topic will not count as substantive. Substantive responses should be at least 150 words. I encourage you to incorporate the readings from the week (as applicable) into your responses. Weekly Participation Your initial responses to the mandatory DQ do not count toward participation and are graded separately. In addition to the DQ responses, you must post at least one reply to peers (or me) on three separate days, for a total of three replies. Participation posts do not require a scholarly source/citation (unless you cite someone else’s work). Part of your weekly participation includes viewing the weekly announcement and attesting to watching it in the comments. These announcements are made to ensure you understand everything that is due during the week. APA Format and Writing Quality Read Also:NURS 6053 Discussion – Week 1 Review of Current Healthcare Issues Familiarize yourself with APA format and practice using it correctly. It is used for most writing assignments for your degree. Visit the Writing Center in the Student Success Center, under the Resources tab in LoudCloud for APA paper templates, citation examples, tips, etc. Points will be deducted for poor use of APA format or absence of APA format (if required). Cite all sources of information! When in doubt, cite the source. Paraphrasing also requires a citation. I highly recommend using the APA Publication Manual, 6th edition. Use of Direct Quotes I discourage overutilization of direct quotes in DQs and assignments at the Masters’ level and deduct points accordingly. As Masters’ level students, it is important that you be able to critically analyze and interpret information from journal articles and other resources. Simply restating someone else’s words does not demonstrate an understanding of the content or critical analysis of the content. It is best to paraphrase content and cite your source. LopesWrite Policy For assignments that need to be submitted to LopesWrite, please be sure you have received your report and Similarity Index (SI) percentage BEFORE you do a “final submit” to me. Once you have received your report, please review it. This report will show you grammatical, punctuation, and spelling errors that can easily be fixed. Take the extra few minutes to review instead of getting counted off for these mistakes. Review your similarities. Did you forget to cite something? Did you not paraphrase well enough? Is your paper made up of someone else’s thoughts more than your own? Visit the Writing Center in the Student Success Center, under the Resources tab in LoudCloud for tips on improving your paper and SI score. Late Policy The university’s policy on late assignments is 10% penalty PER DAY LATE. This also applies to late DQ replies. Please communicate with me if you anticipate having to submit an assignment late. I am happy to be flexible, with advance notice. We may be able to work out an extension based on extenuating circumstances. If you do not communicate with me before submitting an assignment late, the GCU late policy will be in effect. I do not accept assignments that are two or more weeks late unless we have worked out an extension. As per policy, no assignments are accepted after the last day of class. Any assignment submitted after midnight on the last day of class will not be accepted for grading. Communication Communication is so very important. There are multiple ways to communicate with me: Questions to Instructor Forum: This is a great place to ask course content or assignment questions. If you have a question, there is a good chance one of your peers does as well. This is a public forum for the class. Individual Forum: This is a private forum to ask me questions or send me messages. This will be checked at least once every 24 hours. Grading Rubric Guidelines Performance Category 10 9 8 4 0 Scholarliness Demonstrates achievement of scholarly inquiry for professional and academic decisions. Provides relevant evidence of scholarly inquiry clearly stating how the evidence informed or changed professional or academic decisions Evaluates literature resources to develop a comprehensive analysis or synthesis. Uses valid, relevant, and reliable outside sources to contribute to the threaded discussion Provides relevant evidence of scholarly inquiry but does not clearly state how the evidence informed or changed professional or academic decisions. Evaluates information from source(s) to develop a coherent analysis or synthesis. Uses some valid, relevant, reliable outside sources to contribute to the threaded discussion. Discusses using scholarly inquiry but does not state how scholarly inquiry informed or changed professional or academic decisions. Information is taken from source(s) with some interpretation/evaluation, but not enough to develop a coherent analysis or synthesis. Little valid, relevant, or reliable outside sources are used to contribute to the threaded discussion. Demonstrates little or no understanding of the topic. Discusses using scholarly inquiry but does not state how scholarly inquiry informed or changed professional or academic decisions. Information is taken from source(s) without any interpretation/evaluation. The posting uses information that is not valid, relevant, or reliable No evidence of the use of scholarly inquiry to inform or change professional or academic decisions. Information is not valid, relevant, or reliable Performance Category 10 9 8 4 0 Application of Course Knowledge – Demonstrate the ability to analyze, synthesize, and/or apply principles and concepts learned in the course lesson and outside readings and relate them to real-life professional situations Posts make direct reference to concepts discussed in the lesson or drawn from relevant outside sources; Applies concepts to personal experience in the professional setting and or relevant application to real life. Posts make direct reference to concepts discussed in the lesson or drawn from relevant outside sources. Applies concepts to personal experience in their professional setting and or relevant application to real life Interactions with classmates are relevant to the discussion topic but do not make direct reference to lesson content Posts are generally on topic but do not build knowledge by incorporating concepts and principles from the lesson. Does not attempt to apply lesson concepts to personal experience in their professional setting and or relevant application to real life Does not demonstrate a solid understanding of the principles and concepts presented in the lesson Posts do not adequately address the question posed either by the discussion prompt or the instructor’s launch post. Posts are superficial and do not reflect an understanding of the lesson content Does not attempt to apply lesson concepts to personal experience in their professional setting and or relevant application to real life Posts are not related to the topics provided by the discussion prompt or by the instructor; attempts by the instructor to redirect the student are ignored No discussion of lesson concepts to personal experience in the professional setting and or relevant application to real life Performance Category 5 4 3 2 0 Interactive Dialogue Replies to each graded thread topic posted by the course instructor, by Wednesday, 11:59 p.m. MT, of each week, and posts a minimum of two times in each graded thread, on separate days. (5 points possible per graded thread) Exceeds minimum post requirements Replies to each graded thread topic posted by the course instructor, by Wednesday, 11:59 p.m. MT, of each week, and posts three or more times in each graded thread, over three separate days. Replies to a post posed by faculty and to a peer Summarizes what was learned from the lesson, readings, and other student posts for the week. Replies to each graded thread topic posted by the course instructor, by Wednesday, 11:59 p.m. MT, of each week, and posts a minimum of two times in each graded thread, on separate days Replies to a question posed by a peer Summarizes what was learned from the lesson, readings, and other student posts for the week. Meets expectations of 2 posts on 2 different days. The main post is not made by the Wednesday deadline Does not reply to a question posed by a peer or faculty Has only one post for the week Discussion posts contain few, if any, new ideas or applications; often are a rehashing or summary of other students’ comments Does not post to the thread No connections are made to the topic Minus 1 Point Minus 2 Point Minus 3 Point Minus 4 Point Minus 5 Point Grammar, Syntax, APA Note: if there are only a few errors in these criteria, please note this for the student in as an area for improvement. If the student does not make the needed corrections in upcoming weeks, then points should be deducted. Points deducted for improper grammar, syntax and APA style of writing. The source of information is the APA Manual 6th Edition 2-3 errors in APA format. Written responses have 2-3 grammatical, spelling, and punctuation errors. Writing style is generally clear, focused, and facilitates communication. 4-5 errors in APA format. Writing responses have 4-5 grammatical, spelling and punctuation errors. Writing style is somewhat focused. 6-7 errors in APA format. Writing responses have 6-7 grammatical, spelling and punctuation errors. Writing style is slightly focused making discussion difficult to understand. 8-10 errors in APA format. Writing responses have 8-10 grammatical, spelling and punctuation errors. Writing style is not focused, making discussion difficult to understand. Post contains greater than 10 errors in APA format. Written responses have more than 10 grammatical, spelling and punctuation errors. Writing style does not facilitate communication. The student continues to make repeated mistakes in any of the above areas after written correction by the instructor 0 points lost -5 points lost Total Participation Requirements per discussion thread The student answers the threaded discussion question or topic on one day and posts a second response on another day. The student does not meet the minimum requirement of two postings on two different days Early Participation Requirement per discussion thread The student must provide a substantive answer to the graded discussion question(s) or topic(s), posted by the course instructor (not a response to a peer), by Wednesday, 11:59 p.m. MT of each week. The student does not meet the requirement of a substantive response to the stated question or topic by Wednesday at 11:59 pm MT. });

Turn the brief into deliverables

01A summary of the change initiative you will propose, based on the PICOT developed in NUR-550.
02An explicit answer to how the initiative supports your population of focus, your setting, and your role — three separate points.
03A justification that the problem is amenable to a research-based intervention, expressed using the PICOT format.
04At least 250 words for the initial post (course instructions).
05A minimum of one scholarly source (course instructions).

Structuring the PICOT change-initiative post

State the PICOT in its current, corrected form

Reproduce the NUR-550 PICOT with each element identified, and flag any element you have since tightened. This is orientation for the reader, not the body of the post — keep it to a few lines.