Final Report:

Instructions and template

HRE1000 Evidence and Research

How to use this document

This document contains the instructions for the Final Report and a brief template document
that sets out the parts you need to compile in order to produce the report – think of it as a
checklist to work through so as to ensure that you have what you need.

Purpose of the Final Report

Making this Final Report is what this whole unit is about! The unit – and this central task – is
designed to:

 Support your growing understanding of evidence-based practice as it applies to your

field of practice – you best show your understand of something by explaining it to
others!
 Support your development of EBP-related skills – by building this report, you will
have – asked questions, acquired academic resources that help you to answer those
questions, and applied that new knowledge through preparation of the report;
 Support your development of additional professional skills – especially those related
to collaborative work and the translation of complex ideas into clear and accessible
language;
 Make sure that you leave this unit with a) something of which you are proud, and b)
something that is useful to you in the future. Keep a copy of your final report – it can
help you when you turn to research and evidence units in years 2, 3 and 4, and
perhaps even when you are a practicing professional in your field!

New content for the Final Report

Much of your Final Report has already been drafted – it must include edited versions of your
work submitted as Parts A and B of the Report. In addition, however, you must include
several ‘new’ components – things we will work on in Sessions 9 and 10. These include:
1. A conclusion – one that tells the story of where EBP is heading.
2. A ‘guide to finding evidence resources’ page – this will show your reader how and
where to search for evidence resources.
3. A ‘translating evidence for practice’ page – this will show your reader how real
evidence resources can be used in the context of practice.

General expectations for the Final Report

1
The final report must provide “A guide to evidence-based practice for a brand new student
(in your discipline)”.

 Your Final Report can be as long as you want – it should not be shorter than about 8
pages, because you already have two 3-5 page sections and a reference list on a
separate page. However, you want the report to be accessible, so don’t make it
longer than an undergraduate student would ever want to read!
 Your Final Report must be coherent – by this I mean, that it should read and look like
one report, even though that report will have been written by multiple people and
will incorporate multiple sections. This means that you need to edit the writing and
the format so that sections of your report make sense as parts of a whole. It also will
mean that you need to add small bits of new content (such as a short introduction or
conclusion, or new links between sections) that help to tie the whole thing together.
 Your Final Report must be presented beautifully and it should be personalised – you
have produced most of the content that you need for this report. Now you have the
opportunity to add value to this report by designing it so that it is appealing and
adding the content (images, infographics, examples, instructions, resources,
analogies) that makes this meaningful to YOU.
 Your Report must be fully referenced, with in-text citations showing where you are
referring to readings, and a full list of the references that you use. (Follow APA 7 th
formatting for referencing).

Final Report – Assessment criteria

Quality of editing and coherence (as evidenced by your effective use of 20%
feedback to improve content from Parts A and B of the Report and to link
those sections into a coherent whole)
Quality of the ‘guide to finding new evidence’ appendix (as evidenced 20%
through the precision and clarity of your description of which
databases/search engines to use and how to best use them to find evidence)
Quality of the ‘translating evidence’ appendix (as evidenced through the 20%
accuracy of your introduction of each of your group’s resources and the
accessibility of your description of the evidence contained in each)
Presentation 1: Language (evidenced through clarity and precision) and 20%
referencing (as evidenced by the accuracy of in-text citations and
references)
Presentation 2: Design (as evidenced through the quality of formatting, use 20%
of colour and imagery) and creativity (evidenced through the inclusion of
creative additional content that illustrates the meaning of the content)

2
A Student’s Guide to Evidence-Based
Practice – Template for Final Report
General points:
 This is a checklist more than a template – rather than using this content to start a
new shared document, you should keep a copy on hand and work through to make
sure you have included all of the relevant content in your Final Report!

Section 1: An introduction to evidence-based practice

Subsection 1.1: What is evidence-based practice?

Subsection 1.2: Why is evidence-based practice important?
Subsection 1.3: The four components of evidence-based practice
Subsection 1.4: Illustrating the use of evidence in practice

Section 2: An introduction to evidence in EBP

Subsection 2.1: Closing the evidence-practice gap

Subsection 2.2: The origins of evidence: primary evidence resources
Subsection 2.3: Getting evidence into practice: secondary evidence resources

Conclusion: The future of EBP

Reference list

Appendices

Appendix 1. A guide to finding evidence resources

Appendix 2. Translating evidence for practice

3
Conclusion: The future of EBP

Evidence-based practice is highly advocated among health organisations. Statistics highlight

the “growing use of EBP among practitioners over the past few years.” (Connor, 2023)
Previously we discussed how to be evidenced based practitioner by using that correctly, we
learnt how important that is. EBP will be even further used in future due to many reasons.
One these reasons is the trend towards professionalism, which highlights further developing
autonomy in a practitioner’s decision-making scope, as well as developing responsibility and
accountability for the decisions they make. Another reason is the accelerating speed of
research generation, which means the best available evidence is evolving continuously,
therefore, it’s practitioner’s responsibility to always keep updating, in order to access the
best available evidence.

We are constantly receiving and sharing information globally through social media. These
diverse and dynamic amount of information and data are referred to world of content. this
is similar to evidence jungle that we have previously discussed. However, it’s important to
distinguish those two and keep in mind the importance of evidence jungle or world of EBP.
Because as practitioners, we need to find the best evidence and translate it into our
practice, therefore, it’s the matter of life.

In the first part of the report, we discussed the evidence-based practice gap. We must work
collaboratively in order to close it. EBP gap can be minimised by improving education for
students in their early stages of their study, improving professional development for
practitioners, production of resources and tools that make evidence more accessible to
practitioners.

References:
Connor, L. (2023). Evidence‐Based practice improves patient outcomes and
healthcare system return on investment: Findings from a scoping
review. Worldviews on Evidence-Based Nursing, 20(1), 6–15.
https://doi.org/10.1111/wvn.12621

4
‌part B

2.1

In the first few parts, we explained how important evidence-based practice is. When it’s
done correctly, it enhances practitioners’ confidence, professionalism and ethical
responsibility in their practice and therefore leading to improved patient’s health outcomes.
It’s importance to know the about the evidence-practice gap and have knowledge about
actions in our practice that can minimise it. The evidence-practice gap refers to the variation
between what research evidence suggests is effective or best practice and what is actually
practiced in healthcare settings. It highlights the challenge of translating research findings
into everyday practical applications. When there is an evidence-practice gap, patients may
not receive the most effective treatments, leading them to prolonged suffering. This gap can
worsen the existing health disparities. “Adverse pregnancy outcomes are more common
among Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander populations than non-Indigenous populations in
Australia” (Gibson-Helm, et al, 2018). Practitioners who do not embrace EBP might face
challenges in establishing credibility, therefore undermining their professional creditability.
Evidence-practice gap raises ethical concerns regarding the responsibility of practitioners to
provide the best and most effective interventions.

Now that we know what the evidence-practice gap as well as its consequences, let’s explore
it’s causes. Evidence practice gap exists because of insufficient training in evidence-based
practice principles and skills, this lack of knowledge can “hinder practitioner’s ability to
critically appraise and apply evidence in their practice.” (Dean-Baar et al, 2004) another
cause is some practitioners don’t have access to the latest research findings due to the
practice settings they work at. Additionally, “Complexity of evidence is another contributing
factor to evidence practice gap”. (Hoffmann et al, 2023) this complexity can be explained in
several ways. i)Sometimes, evidence found by practitioners conflict, as every research has
its own recommendation and result, making the practitioner unsure about which practices
to perform. ii)as we know, every research study has its own characteristics and population.
Applying findings from studies conducted on one population to another may not always be
effective. This is referred to “Heterogeneity of Populations” (Xie, Y. 2013). iii) the dynamic
evolution of evidence is another factor contributing to evidence’s complexity. new research
findings are constantly evolving, challenging practitioners to keep up with the latest
evidence. This dynamic overwhelming production and complexity of research evidence is
known as the “jungle of evidence”. (French, et al. 2008)

Working collaboratively to translate evidence into practice plays a significant role in closing
the evidence-practice gap. Partnership develops through collaboration. This partnership
ensures that evidence-based practices are implemented and evaluated with input from
diverse perspectives. Therefore, an exchange of knowledge, expertise and new research
findings occurs between practitioners.
Partnership could be further developed between practitioners and researchers, as well as to
the patients and their families. Practitioners can ensure research studies are relevant to the

5
real-world settings by collaborating with researcher to their study design. They can also
ensure that their interventions are culturally safe and appropriate and consider their
patient’s preferences by collaborating with their patients and their families.

While fostering collaboration is effective to close the evidence practice gap, it's also
important to improve the educational programs related to EBP for students in their early
stage of their study and facilitate the access to the latest evidence resources for
practitioners in order to successfully close the evidence practice gap.

2.2

As we have learned, research studies provide the foundation for EBP by offering the
empirical evidence needed to inform practitioners' decision-making and interventions.
Research studies vary in terms of their design, methodology, and purpose.
Understanding the variation in types of research studies is essential for us to critically
evaluate research findings, select appropriate study designs and methodologies, and
thus apply the best available evidence in our practice.

Original research studies, also reffered as 'primary research' are prodeuced by researchers
to generate new knowledge by answering to a research question. “These studies aim to test
specific hypotheses by collecting and analysing data in order to answer the research
question.” (Yoder et al, 2014)

The steps of a primary research study typically include formulating a research question,
conducting a review of the relevant literature, deciding on the method for addressing the
research question, collecting data using the chosen method, analysing the data, and finally
interpreting the data in terms of the answer to the research question.

Primary research studies are conducted by researchers, scholars, scientists, and

professionals. These individuals hold advanced academic degrees, e.g master’s,
doctoral degrees, or Ph.Ds. and have the expertise to conduct, implement, and analyse
data to generate new knowledge and answer that specific research question. Primary
research studies are conducted within academic institutions (universities), research
organizations (such as laboratories), or healthcare settings. “Researchers work
collaboratively in interdisciplinary teams” (Yoder et al, 2014) to design their study,
plan and collect data and eventually produce their findings through publication or
other scholarly forums.

Add figure 1 types of studies

Research studies are qualified based on their impact.” ( Straus et al, 2019) Prior to acquiring
evidence from a research study, it's essential to verify that the study has received ethical
approval and exhibits originality. Ethical approval guarantees that research studies utilized
in evidence-based practice (EBP) adhere to ethical standards and respect the wellbeing and
rights of research participants. It offers assurance regarding the reliability and

6
trustworthiness of the evidence derived from research. Originality in research refers to
how unique and innovative a study's contributions are to the existing body of
knowledge in a particular field. This uniqueness is crucial when reviewing research to
ensure that the findings are not only relevant but also genuinely advance our
understanding, providing fresh insights that are vital for informing evidence-based
practices.

When it comes to using the best available evidence for decision-making, the quality of
the research is a key factor. It determines how strong and reliable the evidence is.
There's a system known as an evidence hierarchy that helps evaluate research quality.
This framework looks at how well a study is designed and how rigorously it's
conducted to ensure the conclusions drawn are sound and dependable. “The hierarchy
typically ranks different types of research studies according to their level of validity,
reliability, risks and biases.” (Maddox. S, 2023) Evidence hierarchy provides guidance to
practitioners and researchers in determining the best available evidence. As the type of
research study descends to the base of the pyramid, the likelihood of study bias increases.
Conversely, as the research study ascends to the top of the pyramid, it represents a more
powerful study design, and the likelihood of bias decreases. However, there are many
different evidence hierarchies used in various fields within evidence-based practice. These
hierarchies may differ in terms of the types of research studies included, the ranking criteria
used, and the specific levels of categories within the hierarchy. The diversity of evidence
hierarchy is due to diverse research contexts, evolution of evidence-based practice, and
different stakeholder needs.

Figure 2 evidence hirachy pyramid

There are various types of research studies, including experimental studies, observational
studies, quantitative research studies, and qualitative studies. Each study type has its own
strengths and weaknesses. The choice of study design depends on the research question,
and the nature of the phenomenon being investigated. Researchers can also use a
combination of these study types to triangulate findings and provide a more comprehensive
understanding of the research topic.

Figure 3 primary research

Figure 4 alogorithms for designs

Experimental studies are designed to pinpoint cause-and-effect relationships between

variables by actively manipulating certain factors and observing their impact on
outcomes. On the other hand, observational studies focus on watching and describing
phenomena just as they occur naturally, without any interference or alteration by the
researcher.. These studies investigate associations between variables and may yield
hypotheses for further exploration. Quantitative research studies are geared towards
systematically gathering and analysing numerical data to address research inquiries and
uncover connections between variables. These studies aim to quantify phenomena,

7
enabling researchers to draw objective and statistically supported conclusions. Conversely,
qualitative studies delve deeply into complex phenomena and experiences, concentrating
on grasping meanings and perspectives. Such studies prioritize subjective interpretations
and have the potential to generate theories or frameworks rooted in the data.

Quantitative and qualitative research studies share some common elements in their
structure, such as an introduction and conclusion; however, they differ significantly due to
their distinct methodologies and approaches to data collection and analysis.

Quantitative research methodology involves the collection of numerical data through

statistical analysis, while qualitative studies involve the collection of non-numerical data
through observation or content analysis.

The process of analysis in quantitative research utilizes statistical techniques to identify

relationships among variables, whereas analysis in qualitative studies employs techniques
such as content analysis or grounded theory to identify patterns within the data.
Quantitative studies typically represent their findings using tables, charts, and graphs to
illustrate statistical significance, whereas qualitative research studies often represent their
findings through narrative descriptions or excerpts from the data to highlight key insights.
The following two images provide an initial comparison of how quantitative and qualitative
research studies appear.

Figure 5 example of quanititavie research study

Figure 6 an example of qualitative

Below is a comparison table of original research study types.

2.3

Secondary evidence resources are tools that gather, synthesize, or summarize the
findings from primary research, rather than presenting new data. These resources
reanalyze and interpret existing information to offer a wider perspective on a topic or
issue. Systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and evidence-based guidelines are examples
of secondary evidence resources. They are important in evidence-based practice
because they integrate the results from many original studies, providing a clearer
picture of the effectiveness of different interventions.

A systematic review can be likened to a movie review but for research studies. It
critically assesses the work of other researchers using a structured approach. This
involves a detailed search and evaluation process, identifying and synthesizing only
the most reliable studies. By doing so, a systematic review lays the groundwork for
evidence-based practice, starting from framing a question, collecting relevant data,
and rigorously analyzing it to offer a well-rounded synthesis of the best available
evidence on a particular subject.

8
Systematic reviews are typically conducted by researchers within a specific field who
prioritize reviewing existing research over initiating new projects. It's crucial to note that
they are not produced by practitioners. These reviews can be published in various outlets,
including academic journals, where they may be featured alongside research studies.
Systematic reviews originated from Scottish epidemiologist Archie Cochrane's advocacy in
the 1970s, addressing a gap in the UK medical system's knowledge gathering process.
Cochrane emphasized the challenge of accessing valuable evidence dispersed across various
research studies. His advocacy led to the establishment of the Cochrane Library, a pivotal
development in healthcare research, centralizing the production of systematic reviews to
synthesize evidence from multiple sources.

The Cochrane Library is a non-profit organization dedicated to facilitating the creation and
preservation of exceptionally high-quality systematic reviews. Providing assistance
throughout the development process, including online resources guiding the production of
systematic reviews, it maintains a portal/library housing these rigorous reviews. This effort
aligns with its overarching mission to ensure that high-quality evidence is readily accessible
to everyone. Accessible via the internet, almost all systematic reviews housed within the
Cochrane Library can be easily downloaded, furthering its commitment to dissemination
and accessibility.

Cohrane libarary at first glance figure

Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) on the other hand serve as directives for medical
practitioners, offering practical advice on diagnostic procedures, interventions, and other
clinical practices rather than merely summarizing evidence conclusions. Focused on
addressing clinical questions, CPGs aim to swiftly provide actionable guidance that can be
readily implemented in a clinical setting with real patients. These guidelines are considered
high-quality secondary evidence resources as they effectively synthesize original research
studies, facilitating the translation of evidence into practice. CPGs are meticulously
constructed and transparently presented, ensuring both usability and rigor in their
development.

CPGs are produced through a meticulous process, which, according to organizations like the
National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC), mirrors that of creating a
systematic review. This involves rigorously and systematically acquiring and evaluating
existing research pertinent to a clinical query, supplemented with additional steps. The
National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) states that Clinical Practice
Guidelines (CPGs) are developed by using teams of specialists from diverse
disciplines, adhering strictly to evidence-based practices. these guidelines are
produced after the a comprehensive evaluation of all relevant data and are designed
for clear decision making processes. This meticulous approach ensures that the
guidelines are both trustworthy and practical for clinical applications.. Expert judgment,
along with input from consumers and relevant stakeholders, informs the guideline
development process. Furthermore, robust mechanisms are in place to address conflicts of
interest, and the GRADE approach, recognized internationally, is employed to assess the
certainty of evidence and strength of recommendations.

9
Evidence-based practitioners should aim to access the most reliable evidence resources.
What qualifies as the best available evidence resource may vary, depending on the specific
needs and availability at the time. Additionally, the availability of evidence can change over
time. One way to observe this is by tracking the evolution of evidence hierarchies. Initially,
these hierarchies categorized various types of original or primary research studies based on
their accuracy and susceptibility to bias. However, a notable addition to these hierarchies is
the inclusion of systematic reviews and meta-analyses as a top category.

Figure 7 the most recent evidence hierarcy in blue

A good and relevant secondary evidence resource is considered superior to an original

research study. The reasons for this are that secondary evidence resources systemically
gather, appraise, and synthesize findings from multiple original or primary research studies
on a specific topic. This provides a more comprehensive overview of the available evidence
than any single study could offer. Additionally, by critically evaluating and synthesizing
evidence from multiple studies, bias is minimized, thereby providing a more balanced and
objective summary of the literature. Furthermore, as we have previously discussed,
secondary evidence resources aggregate data from diverse populations, settings, and study
designs, increasing the generalizability of findings beyond the scope of individual studies. It
is important to highlight the link between these factors and informed decision-making.
Secondary evidence resources distil complex research findings into actionable
recommendations, providing practitioners with evidence-based guidance for decision-
making and practice.

Below is a comparison table for systematic reviews and clinical practice guidelines. It
highlights the strengths and weaknesses of each of these secondary evidence resources and
provides examples for each.

Table

References for part B

10