NSG 6630 Week 3 DQ 1 evidence-based research barriers
Describe a major challenge for nurses who have not been exposed to evidence-based research, analyse the evidence on nurse staffing patterns and whether more staff always means safer care, and describe two strategies for engaging administrators who see research as time away from patient care.
Editorial process
Last reviewed · August 14, 2026
Three questions, and the middle one has a real answer
The first question is about a nurse who has never worked with research, and the central challenge is not lack of access. It is appraisal. A nurse without that training can find studies and still not be able to tell a well-powered trial from a small uncontrolled one, or judge whether a finding from a different population transfers to their patients. That produces two opposite failures: dismissing evidence as academic, or accepting whichever abstract was read most recently. Around that sit time, database access, unfamiliar statistical language and a unit culture in which practice is justified by custom. Name appraisal as the core, then add the surrounding barriers, and the answer has a spine rather than a list. It is also the barrier a course like this one exists to remove, which is worth saying plainly rather than treating the challenge as somebody else's problem to solve.
The staffing question is the substantive one. The prompt asks whether more staff always means safer or more effective care, and the defensible answer is no, though the relationship is real. Higher registered nurse hours per patient day and better skill mix are associated with lower mortality, fewer failures to rescue and fewer complications, and the association is consistent enough to inform policy. But the studies are mostly observational, better-staffed units differ from worse-staffed ones in other ways, the benefit is not linear, and adding staff without addressing experience, skill mix, workflow and stability of the team buys less than the raw ratio predicts. Then the third question asks for two strategies to engage administrators, and both should speak their language: connect the evidence to a measure the organisation already reports, and start with a small time-boxed project on one unit whose result is measurable within a quarter rather than a proposal for a research programme.
Likely learning objectives
Inferred from the brief — check these against your own rubric.
- 01Identify critical appraisal as the core barrier to using research in practice.
- 02Interpret observational staffing evidence without overstating causation.
- 03Explain why the staffing-outcome relationship is not linear.
- 04Translate research proposals into measures administrators already track.
- 05Design a small, time-boxed project as an engagement strategy.
Read the full question
Review every instruction before using the planning guidance that follows.
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 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. NSG 6630 Week 3 DQ 1 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.
Turn the brief into deliverables
- 01A major challenge for nurses not exposed to evidence-based research.
- 02An analysis of nurse staffing evidence, including its limits.
- 03A direct answer to whether more staff always means safer care.
- 04Two strategies for engaging administrators, each with a rationale.
- 05Citations for the staffing evidence used.
The challenge, the staffing evidence, the two strategies
The barrier that matters most
Argue that appraisal, not access, is the central challenge.
Surrounding barriers
Cover time, access, statistical language and unit culture.
What the staffing evidence shows
Set out the association between staffing and outcomes.
Why more is not automatically better
Explain non-linearity, skill mix, experience and team stability.
Two strategies for administrators
Tie evidence to reported measures and propose a small pilot.
Staffing outcome research and how to read it
Recommended databases
- AHRQ Patient Safety Network
- StatPearls via NCBI Bookshelf
- Cochrane Library
- PubMed
- Your organisation's quality dashboard
Search sequence
- 1.Read a summary of nurse staffing and patient outcome research.
- 2.Note the study designs used, since almost none are randomised.
- 3.Find what your organisation already reports, so a proposal can attach to it.
- 4.Look up failure to rescue as an outcome measure.
- 5.Draft the two strategies in the language of cost and reported measures.
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
Nursing and Patient Safety
AHRQ Patient Safety Network · 2024
Summarises the staffing and outcome evidence together with its design limits.
- 02
Nursing Shortage
StatPearls, NCBI Bookshelf · 2023
Context on skill mix, experience and vacancy that complicate a simple ratio argument.
- 03
Nursing Professional Development Evidence-Based Practice
StatPearls, NCBI Bookshelf · 2024
Sets out appraisal as a distinct competence from finding evidence.
- 04
About Cochrane Reviews
Cochrane Library · 2024
Model for how strength of evidence is expressed, useful when qualifying the staffing claim.
Review before submission
Common mistakes
- Naming lack of time as the whole barrier, which misses appraisal.
- Answering the staffing question with an unqualified yes.
- Treating observational association as demonstrated causation.
- Offering strategies that ask administrators to fund research on principle.
- Proposing a project with no measurable outcome inside a reporting period.
- Ignoring skill mix and experience, which change what a ratio buys.
Submission checklist
- Appraisal appears as a named barrier, not only access or time.
- The staffing answer is qualified and the qualification is explained.
- Study design limits are acknowledged.
- Both strategies are addressed to administrator priorities.
- At least one strategy is small enough to start immediately.
- Sources are cited in APA format.
Use this guide to plan and review your own work. Follow your institution's rules and read our academic-integrity policy.
Written by
Aaron Bishop
MA, Education
assignment interpretation and research-methods coaching across disciplines
Aaron leads the EssayCrackers editorial desk. He works on how assignment briefs are read — what a rubric is actually asking for, and where students most often answer a different question than the one set.
Reviewed by
Dr. Nathan Cole
PhD, Rhetoric & Composition
Argumentation and thesis development
Nathan teaches first-year composition and directs a university writing center. He reviews EssayCrackers guides for argumentative soundness and citation accuracy.