Selecting Inclusion/Exclusion Criteria

Selecting Inclusion/Exclusion Criteria. PICO QUESTION WEEK 1 Among males under 25, does cannabis use compared to speeding have a greater impact on the number of motor vehicle fatalities?

After finishing the week 3 discuss the following:

• Identify databases that were searched to gather the evidence based research for the PICO question discussed in Week 1
• Describe the inclusion/exclusion criteria used to fine tune the evidence based research for the PICO question discussed in Week 1

Inclusion/Exclusion Criteria

Submission Instructions:

• Your initial post should be at least 900 words, formatted and cited in the current APA style.
• Provide support for your work from five academic sources less than 5 years old. Visit purdue.owl.edu for specific examples on how to create in-text citations and cite references using the current APA format. APA7th Edition guidelines for formatting references were not adhered to. When using a textbook, page numbers must be used. Review the formatting for journal articles. Please contact BrainFuse for assistance or visit purdue.owl.edu to prevent loss of points on future assignments.
• Students will use this PICO question when creating the abstract and academic poster.
• Students may not duplicate the PICO question of another student at St. Thomas University.
• Your initial post is worth 8 points.

• Grading Rubric

• ---

  Your assignment will be graded according to the grading rubric.

  Discussion Rubric
  Criteria	Ratings	Points
  Identification of Main Issues, Problems, and Concepts	Distinguished – 4 points Post is substantively accurate. Identifies and demonstrates a sophisticated understanding of the issues, problems, and concepts surrounding the assignment. Provides exceptional and thought-provoking analysis that directly addresses details and/or examples of the main topic.	Excellent – 3 points Post is mostly related to the topic. Demonstrates understanding of most of the issues, problems, and concepts surrounding the assignment. It provides some supporting details and/or examples. Analyses not as clear as they could be.	Fair – 1-2 points Demonstrates limited understanding of most of the issues, problems, and concepts surrounding the assignment. No details and/or examples are given.	Poor – 0 points Post is off-topic, incorrect and/or irrelevant to the issues, problems, and concepts surrounding the assignment. Analyses are not well organized or clear.	4 points
  APA Formatting Guidelines	Distinguished – 2 points The reference page contains at least the required current scholarly academic reference and text reference. Follows APA guidelines of components: double space, 12 pt. font, abstract, level headings, hanging indent, and in-text citations.	Excellent – 1 point The reference page contains one current scholarly academic resource and text reference. Follows most APA guidelines of components: double space, 12 pt. font, abstract, level headings, hanging indent, and in-text citations.	Fair – 0.5 points The reference page contains one current or outdated scholarly academic resource. Many errors of APA guidelines: double space, 12 pt. font, abstract, level headings, hanging indent, and in-text citations.	Poor – 0 points The reference page contains no current scholarly academic resources, only internet web pages, or no reference page. Lack of APA guidelines for references provided or in-text citations.	2 points
  Writing Mechanics	Distinguished – 2 points Rules of grammar, usage, and punctuation are followed; spelling is correct.	Excellent – 1 point Few grammatical errors, but sentences could be clearer and more precise.	Fair – 0.5 points The paper contains a few grammatical, punctuation, and spelling errors.	Poor – 0 points The paper contains numerous grammatical, punctuation, and spelling errors.	2 points
  Response to Posts of Peers	Distinguished – 2 points Constructively responded to two other posts and either extended, expanded, or provided a rebuttal to each.	Fair – 1 point Constructively responded to one other post and either extended, expanded, or provided a rebuttal.	Poor – 0 points Provided no response to a peer’s post.	2 points