childhood obesity.
When you reach the last part (IMPLICATIONS FOR MY WORK or HEALTH EDUCATOR) you can write that part through the lens of a Elementary school teacher. I am a teacher, so it would be best if you can write through the teacher lens, and if not you can write it through the lens of a health educator like the sample critique does. PLEASE follow the critique format, and language that was used in the sample. It should be a reference for you as you complete the paper. My topic is childhood obesity (not adolescence) but childhood. The article must be about childhood obesity and must use the framework of the Health Belief Model or the Theory of Reasoned Action. That is a very important part of this assignment. Please reach out to me with any questions comments or concerns. If you have an article that you are unsure of the theoretical framework, please find an article that is clear about the Health Belief Model or the Theory of Reasoned Action.
2. Read one published articles on CHILDHOOD OBESITY that reports the results of a data-based research study evaluating the application of 1) an individual level theory (HEALTH BELIEF MODEL OR THE THEORY OF REASONED ACTION), aimed at changing health behavior or a determinant of health status and published between 2011 and 2016. Write a critical analysis of three double-spaced pages in length.

You may select readings from among articles that have been published in any of the following journals.

Addictive Behaviors
American Journal of Applied Biobehavioral Research
American Journal of Epidemiology
American Journal of Health Promotion American
Journal of Public Health
American Psychologist
Annals of Behavioral Medicine
Annals of Internal Medicine
Arthritis Care and Research
Health Education and Behavior
Health Education Research
Health Promotion and Practice
Health Psychology
Health Services Research
Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology
Journal of Drug Education
Journal of Health and Social Behavior
Journal of Health Education
Journal of Nutrition Education
Journal of School Health
Journal of the American Medical Association
Mind Body Medicine
New England Journal of Medicine
Preventive Medicine
Psychological Bulletin
Psychology, Health and Medicine
Psychosomatic Medicine
Social Science and Medicine

RUBRIC FOR CRITIQUES

Please provide complete bibliographic information at the top of the first page of your summary in
theAmerican Psychological Association, 6th Edition format.

The review should then follow and include
1. A summary of the study purpose,
2. Its theoretical perspective and an explanation of this theory in your own words and how it was applied in the study,
3. A brief summary of the study methods, data analysis and results,
4. Conclusions of the study,
5. Problems with study,
6. Implications of study, and please conclude with-
7. A summary statement of what you have learned from reading the article, and whether you feel theory was useful in guiding the research and was appropriately applied or not and why.
8. Thoughts on strengthening the study.

Childhood Obesity

Order Description

see attachment

Developing an Evaluation Plan and Disseminating Evidence
Instructions:
1ST PROJECT: Using 800-1,000 words, discuss methods to evaluate the effectiveness of your proposed solution and variables to be assessed when evaluating project outcomes.

Example: If you are proposing a new staffing matrix that is intended to reduce nurse turnover, improve nursing staff satisfaction, and positively impact overall delivery of care, you may decide the following methods and variables are necessary to evaluate the effectiveness of your proposed solution:
Methods:
Survey of staff attitudes and contributors to job satisfaction and dissatisfaction before and after initiating change.
Obtain turnover rates before and after initiating change.
Compare patient discharge surveys before change and after initiation of change.
Variables:
Staff attitudes and perceptions.
Patient attitudes and perceptions.
Rate of nursing staff turnover.
I’m gone prepare a brochure
2nd PROJECT: Using 250-500 words, summarize your strategy for disseminating the results of the project to key stakeholders and to the greater nursing community.

This is for both projects

Developing an  Evaluation Plan
•    Described methods used to evaluate effectiveness of proposed solution.        SURVEY
DURING THE INVESTIGATION WE MADE SOME QUESTION TO THE PARENTS …

•    Described variables to be assessed when evaluating project outcomes.

•    Developed tools necessary to educate project participants.
•    Developed assessment tool(s) necessary to evaluate project outcomes.

Disseminating Evidence    •    Discussed strategy for disseminating results of project to key stakeholders.

•    Discussed strategy for disseminating significance of project outcomes to greater nursing community.

TOTAL POINTS
Example of other person project TO BETTER GUDE FOR THE WRITTER:

Evaluation
Outcomes of nursing care must be shown to relate to the specific care aspects of the process change (Frisch & Kelley, 2002). The general purpose of an evaluation is to measure the impact of the process change and to determine if compliance with all aspects of the process has been met. A 6-month pilot will be completed to test the efficacy and feasibility of a process change related to the early recognition and effective management of AW. The AW Protocol Quality Management/Performance Improvement Data Collection Tool (Appendix H) will be used when doing a retrospective audit of charts for all patients admitted with a principal, primary, or secondary diagnosis of AW during the 6-month trial period. Questions to be answered during that audit will include:
?    Were the assessment tools (CAGE and CIWA-Ar) appropriately and successfully completed?
?    Was the treatment protocol appropriately initiated?
?    Was documentation adequately and appropriately completed based on the protocol and policy?
?    Was additional supportive care in the form of restraints and/or sitters required?
Data collection for this evaluation process will be limited to a retrospective chart audit that may be labor intensive. However, the actual number of patients diagnosed with AW at Casa Grande Regional Medical Center (90 patients in 2008) may impact the time/work necessitated by this audit. Patient identification for the intent of the audit will be based on information obtained from Health Information Management (HIM), related to and restricted by admission diagnosis type as defined earlier.
Data for this pilot time frame will be collected by the author and prepared for oral presentation to identified groups. Handouts recalling the general outline of the process change/protocol and the results of the chart audit, in graph format, will be made available to all groups. The initial presentation will be made to the senior administrative group and will allow them to review and determine how the data may impact patient care and safety, as well as possible financial impact. The Medical Executive Board will receive the information to review for the appropriate use of the CAGE and CIWA-Ar tools in successfully and accurately identifying patients at risk and in need of treatment. As well, this group will examine the appropriateness of the protocol orders, specifically pharmacotherapy. They would further review data for the accuracy and efficacy of the documentation flowsheet as it relates to assessment and intervention. The nursing department directors will review the data and address the efficiency and efficacy of the assessment tools (CAGE and CIWA-Ar) and the treatment protocol as it relates to nursing assessment and documentation and for any impact on nursing care delivery as it relates the use of restraints and/or sitters. The Patient Care Coordinators and nursing staff groups will review the data and discuss any impact related to the assessment tools, the treatment protocol, and the documentation flowsheet, and they will discuss the use of restraints and/or sitters as it impacts their care delivery. All recommendations will be forwarded to a committee, yet to be formed, at the completion of the pilot.
Following the initial data review by the indicated groups, a quality management/performance improvement team composed of four to six nursing department staff and a medical advisor will be formed. Data will be collected monthly using the same process previously outlined; data will be collated and reported quarterly to all groups. Team meetings will be held monthly to address any newly identified limitations to the protocol and/or the evaluation process, discussing any necessary process changes related to the protocol, and to discuss continued validity of the data collection tool. These activities will help to establish and validate an evidence-based and standardized process for the early identification of AW and any required interventions. In addition, collected data may provide the basis for additional changes including expansion of electronic documentation for AW, development of nursing care plans specific to AW, and development of AW clinical pathways.
Dissemination
The ultimate impact of a process change rests in the effectiveness of the dissemination strategy and presentation (RUSH, 2001). To promote and expedite the proposed protocol/process change, the intent is to complete the dissemination plan in a 2-month time frame. This would allow for sufficient time to schedule presentations with all groups comprising the audience. The intended audience for the introduction of the protocol/process change at CGRMC is the senior administration team, the medical staff, the nursing department directors, the PCCs, and the professional nursing staff. The variation in audience needs, which is based on position within the CGRMC organization, can be met on all levels by the information provided. The goal of the dissemination plan is for all members of the audience, as previously noted, to have access to information related to the significance and impact of AW, and to the design and implementation of the AW protocol/process change. By way of an objective, that same group will acknowledge an understanding of the significance of the development and implementation of the AW protocol/process change. Content of the presentation will include research data related to the significance and impact of AW on the patient and the health care delivery system, and an outline of the proposed protocol/process change. Secondary to time constraints, all groups will be addressed through oral presentations. Handouts which include data related to the significance/impact of AW and copies of the policy, the assessment tools, the treatment protocol, the documentation flowsheet, and the process evaluation tool will be made available to all members of the audience.  A review of all handout information will be included in the presentation.
Ultimately the intent of the presentation is for the audience to improve practice. All members of the identified audience have the skills and awareness levels to effectively promote and implement the protocol/process change. Continued monitoring following implementation will help to keep the group engaged as they become aware of the successes and failures, and what needs to be done to achieve success with the new protocol/process change.
Evaluation of the proposed process change would be based on retrospective chart audits using a specifically developed paper data collection tool.  Elements to be examined would include compliance in the use of the Cage and CIWA-Ar screening/assessment tools, compliance in initiating and following the physician order set/protocol, review of the need/use of restraints and/or sitters, and review of the level of care required by the patient. Results of those audits would be reviewed, collated, and made available to Senior Administration, the Medical Executive Board, the Nursing Directors, and the staff on a quarterly basis. Recommendations related to the process and any suggested or needed change would be considered at the end of the 6-month trial period.

Childhood Obesity

Order Description

see attachment

Developing an Evaluation Plan and Disseminating Evidence
Instructions:
1ST PROJECT: Using 800-1,000 words, discuss methods to evaluate the effectiveness of your proposed solution and variables to be assessed when evaluating project outcomes.

Example: If you are proposing a new staffing matrix that is intended to reduce nurse turnover, improve nursing staff satisfaction, and positively impact overall delivery of care, you may decide the following methods and variables are necessary to evaluate the effectiveness of your proposed solution:
Methods:
Survey of staff attitudes and contributors to job satisfaction and dissatisfaction before and after initiating change.
Obtain turnover rates before and after initiating change.
Compare patient discharge surveys before change and after initiation of change.
Variables:
Staff attitudes and perceptions.
Patient attitudes and perceptions.
Rate of nursing staff turnover.
I’m gone prepare a brochure
2nd PROJECT: Using 250-500 words, summarize your strategy for disseminating the results of the project to key stakeholders and to the greater nursing community.

This is for both projects

Developing an  Evaluation Plan
•    Described methods used to evaluate effectiveness of proposed solution.        SURVEY
DURING THE INVESTIGATION WE MADE SOME QUESTION TO THE PARENTS …

•    Described variables to be assessed when evaluating project outcomes.

•    Developed tools necessary to educate project participants.
•    Developed assessment tool(s) necessary to evaluate project outcomes.

Disseminating Evidence    •    Discussed strategy for disseminating results of project to key stakeholders.

•    Discussed strategy for disseminating significance of project outcomes to greater nursing community.

TOTAL POINTS
Example of other person project TO BETTER GUDE FOR THE WRITTER:

Evaluation
Outcomes of nursing care must be shown to relate to the specific care aspects of the process change (Frisch & Kelley, 2002). The general purpose of an evaluation is to measure the impact of the process change and to determine if compliance with all aspects of the process has been met. A 6-month pilot will be completed to test the efficacy and feasibility of a process change related to the early recognition and effective management of AW. The AW Protocol Quality Management/Performance Improvement Data Collection Tool (Appendix H) will be used when doing a retrospective audit of charts for all patients admitted with a principal, primary, or secondary diagnosis of AW during the 6-month trial period. Questions to be answered during that audit will include:
?    Were the assessment tools (CAGE and CIWA-Ar) appropriately and successfully completed?
?    Was the treatment protocol appropriately initiated?
?    Was documentation adequately and appropriately completed based on the protocol and policy?
?    Was additional supportive care in the form of restraints and/or sitters required?
Data collection for this evaluation process will be limited to a retrospective chart audit that may be labor intensive. However, the actual number of patients diagnosed with AW at Casa Grande Regional Medical Center (90 patients in 2008) may impact the time/work necessitated by this audit. Patient identification for the intent of the audit will be based on information obtained from Health Information Management (HIM), related to and restricted by admission diagnosis type as defined earlier.
Data for this pilot time frame will be collected by the author and prepared for oral presentation to identified groups. Handouts recalling the general outline of the process change/protocol and the results of the chart audit, in graph format, will be made available to all groups. The initial presentation will be made to the senior administrative group and will allow them to review and determine how the data may impact patient care and safety, as well as possible financial impact. The Medical Executive Board will receive the information to review for the appropriate use of the CAGE and CIWA-Ar tools in successfully and accurately identifying patients at risk and in need of treatment. As well, this group will examine the appropriateness of the protocol orders, specifically pharmacotherapy. They would further review data for the accuracy and efficacy of the documentation flowsheet as it relates to assessment and intervention. The nursing department directors will review the data and address the efficiency and efficacy of the assessment tools (CAGE and CIWA-Ar) and the treatment protocol as it relates to nursing assessment and documentation and for any impact on nursing care delivery as it relates the use of restraints and/or sitters. The Patient Care Coordinators and nursing staff groups will review the data and discuss any impact related to the assessment tools, the treatment protocol, and the documentation flowsheet, and they will discuss the use of restraints and/or sitters as it impacts their care delivery. All recommendations will be forwarded to a committee, yet to be formed, at the completion of the pilot.
Following the initial data review by the indicated groups, a quality management/performance improvement team composed of four to six nursing department staff and a medical advisor will be formed. Data will be collected monthly using the same process previously outlined; data will be collated and reported quarterly to all groups. Team meetings will be held monthly to address any newly identified limitations to the protocol and/or the evaluation process, discussing any necessary process changes related to the protocol, and to discuss continued validity of the data collection tool. These activities will help to establish and validate an evidence-based and standardized process for the early identification of AW and any required interventions. In addition, collected data may provide the basis for additional changes including expansion of electronic documentation for AW, development of nursing care plans specific to AW, and development of AW clinical pathways.
Dissemination
The ultimate impact of a process change rests in the effectiveness of the dissemination strategy and presentation (RUSH, 2001). To promote and expedite the proposed protocol/process change, the intent is to complete the dissemination plan in a 2-month time frame. This would allow for sufficient time to schedule presentations with all groups comprising the audience. The intended audience for the introduction of the protocol/process change at CGRMC is the senior administration team, the medical staff, the nursing department directors, the PCCs, and the professional nursing staff. The variation in audience needs, which is based on position within the CGRMC organization, can be met on all levels by the information provided. The goal of the dissemination plan is for all members of the audience, as previously noted, to have access to information related to the significance and impact of AW, and to the design and implementation of the AW protocol/process change. By way of an objective, that same group will acknowledge an understanding of the significance of the development and implementation of the AW protocol/process change. Content of the presentation will include research data related to the significance and impact of AW on the patient and the health care delivery system, and an outline of the proposed protocol/process change. Secondary to time constraints, all groups will be addressed through oral presentations. Handouts which include data related to the significance/impact of AW and copies of the policy, the assessment tools, the treatment protocol, the documentation flowsheet, and the process evaluation tool will be made available to all members of the audience.  A review of all handout information will be included in the presentation.
Ultimately the intent of the presentation is for the audience to improve practice. All members of the identified audience have the skills and awareness levels to effectively promote and implement the protocol/process change. Continued monitoring following implementation will help to keep the group engaged as they become aware of the successes and failures, and what needs to be done to achieve success with the new protocol/process change.
Evaluation of the proposed process change would be based on retrospective chart audits using a specifically developed paper data collection tool.  Elements to be examined would include compliance in the use of the Cage and CIWA-Ar screening/assessment tools, compliance in initiating and following the physician order set/protocol, review of the need/use of restraints and/or sitters, and review of the level of care required by the patient. Results of those audits would be reviewed, collated, and made available to Senior Administration, the Medical Executive Board, the Nursing Directors, and the staff on a quarterly basis. Recommendations related to the process and any suggested or needed change would be considered at the end of the 6-month trial period.