NursingDiscussion postEvidence-based practice

Developing a PICO question from an evaluation plan

In at least 550 words with numbered level one headings, summarise the evaluation goal, viewpoint and model from your Evaluation Plan Focus assignment, then post a PICO question derived from it, explaining why you developed it and why it matters.

Aug 13, 2026

Editorial process

Last reviewed · August 13, 2026

Written by

Aaron Bishop

MA, Education

assignment interpretation and research-methods coaching across disciplines

Reviewed by

Dr. Nathan Cole

PhD, Rhetoric & Composition

Argumentation and thesis development

On this page

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

Deriving the question from last week's plan

The structural instruction is unusually explicit and it is worth following exactly: at least 550 words, APA format, a minimum of three references from the list supplied, and two numbered level one headings matching the two numbered tasks. Marks are routinely lost on that formatting alone. The substantive point is that this discussion is the second half of something you have already written. Section one summarises three specific things from your Evaluation Plan Focus assignment — the evaluation goal, the viewpoint and the model — and those three are named because they constrain what a good PICO question can be. The viewpoint in particular decides whose question this is: an evaluation conducted from the clinician's viewpoint asks something different from one conducted from the patient's or the administrator's, even about the same system, and a summary that omits it leaves the reader unable to judge whether the question that follows is the right one.

Then build the question properly. The four elements are population, intervention, comparison and outcome, and each has to be specific enough to search on. Population means the actual group your evaluation covers, not patients generally. Intervention in an informatics evaluation is usually the system or the change you are evaluating. Comparison is the element most often left vague — current practice is acceptable only if you say what current practice is. Outcome must be measurable, which is where an informatics PICO tends to weaken, because satisfaction and usability need defined instruments to count as outcomes at all. The prompt then asks for the who cares factor, which is not decoration: say who would act differently depending on the answer. A question nobody would change a decision over is a well-formed question that is not worth asking, and identifying that decision-maker is what the final part of the reflection is testing.

Likely learning objectives

Inferred from the brief — check these against your own rubric.

01
Summarise an evaluation plan's goal, viewpoint and model concisely.
02
Explain how the chosen viewpoint constrains the questions worth asking.
03
Construct a PICO question with four specific and searchable elements.
04
Define a measurable outcome for an informatics evaluation.
05
Identify the decision-maker whose actions the answer would change.

Assignment instructionsQuoted verbatim

Read the full question

Review every instruction before using the planning guidance that follows.

Determining the topic of an evaluation is one of the most important steps of the evaluation process. In the process of selecting a topic for evaluation, researchers should reflect on what information needs to be gathered and how it will be used. A PICO question can provide the foundation for this process. The PICO question requires researchers to determine the population to be studied, select the intervention that occurred or will occur (such as a new system), have a baseline with which to compare the evaluation, and finally, have a standard to measure the outcome of the project. Using a PICO question as a guideline helps ensure the evaluation is focused and effective. In this Discussion, you generate a PICO question that corresponds to the Evaluation Plan Focus you developed last week. To prepare: Develop a PICO question based on the Evaluation Plan Focus Assignment completed last week. Reflect on why it is important that this question be answered. Identify the “who cares?” factor. By Day tomorrow 12/28/2016, write a minimum of 550 words essay in APA format with a minimum of 3 reference from the list provided below. Include the level one headings as numbered below: 1) Post a summary of key points (evaluation goal, viewpoint, and model) from your Evaluation Plan Focus Assignment. 2) Post your PICO question. Explain why you developed this question, and why it is important to be considered. Required Readings Friedman, C. P., & Wyatt, J. C. (2010). Evaluation methods in biomedical informatics (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Springer Science+Business Media, Inc. Chapter 3, “Determining What to Study” (pp. 48–84) This chapter focuses on how to identify the relevant questions to cover in an evaluation and how to ensure that the scope of the question is appropriate. It includes a description of different types of evaluations, including what they specifically focus on and the general type of questions they address. Gschwandtner, T., Kaiser, K., & Miksch, S. (2011). Information requisition is the core of guideline-based medical care: Which information is needed for whom? Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, 17(4), 713–721. Retrieved from the Walden Library databases. This article describes the construction of a comprehensive information source to be used in the development of computerized clinical practice guideline (CPG). The authors emphasize how the information source is designed to meet the informational requirements of anyone developing a CPG for any user group. Lin, J. W., Chang, C. H., Lin, M. W., Ebell, M. H., & Chiang, J. H. (2011). Automating the process of critical appraisal and assessing the strength of evidence with information extraction technology. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, 17(4), 832–838. Retrieved from the Walden Library databases. The authors of this article explain a study that sought to create and evaluate a system to automatically determine a medical article’s evidence level. The authors describe the accuracy of the system and speculate on the causes of errors. Developing PICO Questions Assignment Swennen, M. H. J., vander Heijden, G. J. M. G., Blijham, G. H., & Kalkman, C. J. (2011). Career stage and work setting create different barriers for evidence-based medicine. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, 17(4), 775–785. Retrieved from the Walden Library databases. This article describes a study that examines how a doctor’s career stage and work setting are related to their perceptions of barriers to practicing evidence-based medicine (EBM). The authors also provide a framework for classifying the identified barriers. Required Media Laureate Education (Producer). (n.d.e). PICO question. Retrieved from CDN database. (NURS 6431) This animation describes the basics of formulating a PICO question. The animation provides an example scenario of effectively generating a PICO question. Optional Resources Alliance for Health Reform. (2013). Health Information Technology. Retrieved from http://www.allhealth.org/issues.asp?wi=4 American Health Information Management Association. Retrieved from http://www.ahima.org/ Healthcare Information and Management Systems. (2013). Retrieved from http://www.himss.org/ Kaiser.edu. (n.d.). Health information technology. Retrieved from http://kff.org/health-reform/issue-brief/building-an-information-technology-foundation-for-health/ National Center for Biotechnology Information. (n.d.). Health services/technology assessment texts (HSTAT). Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK16710/

Turn the brief into deliverables

01
A summary of the evaluation goal, viewpoint and model from the prior assignment.
02
A PICO question derived from that plan.
03
An explanation of why the question was developed as it was.
04
An account of why the question is important to answer.
05
A minimum 550-word APA post with numbered level one headings and three references.

Summary, then the question, then the who-cares

Evaluation goal

What the prior assignment set out to evaluate and why.

Viewpoint and model

Whose perspective the evaluation takes and which evaluation model frames it.

The PICO question

Population, intervention, comparison and outcome, each specified.

Why this question

How the question follows from the goal, viewpoint and model above.

Who cares

The decision-maker whose action would change depending on the answer.

Evaluation methods in biomedical informatics

Recommended databases

Friedman and Wyatt, Evaluation Methods in Biomedical Informatics
PubMed
CINAHL
StatPearls via NCBI Bookshelf
Course required readings list

Search sequence

1.
Re-read your Evaluation Plan Focus assignment and extract goal, viewpoint and model.
2.
Read the assigned chapter on determining what to study.
3.
Read a reference description of PICO and its four elements.
4.
Draft the question, then test whether each element could be searched on.
5.
Identify who would act on the answer before finalising the question.

Reference shortlist

These are authoritative starting points, not a ready-made bibliography. A qualified reviewer must confirm that each source fits the assignment and supports the claim beside which it is cited.

Nothing here is cleared for citation until you have read it.

01
Evidence-Based Medicine
StatPearls, NCBI Bookshelf · 2024
Where a well-formed clinical question sits in the evidence-based practice sequence.
02
Health Information Technology
StatPearls, NCBI Bookshelf · 2024
The informatics interventions an evaluation plan of this kind is usually about.
03
Epidemiology Of Study Design
StatPearls, NCBI Bookshelf · 2024
Which designs answer which question shapes, which is what makes an outcome measurable.
04
Health IT Playbook
HealthIT.gov, Office of the National Coordinator · 2024
Practical framing of who the stakeholders in a health IT evaluation are, for the who-cares section.

Review before submission

Common mistakes

Writing a PICO unconnected to the evaluation plan being summarised.
Leaving the comparison element as current practice without defining it.
Choosing an outcome with no defined measurement instrument.
Summarising the plan but omitting one of the three named elements.
Ignoring the numbered level one heading requirement.
Treating the who cares factor as a rhetorical flourish rather than naming a decision-maker.

Submission checklist

Both numbered level one headings are present.
Goal, viewpoint and model are all summarised.
The PICO question contains all four elements explicitly.
The comparison is defined rather than assumed.
The outcome is measurable with a named instrument or metric.
The post exceeds 550 words with at least three references in APA format.

Use this guide to plan and review your own work. Follow your institution's rules and read our academic-integrity policy.