| Course | HCD 400 Evidence Odyssey Decoding Peer-Reviewed Research for Future Practice |
|---|---|
| Module | Module 2 |
| Paper type | Database search essay |
| Length | About 539 words, 4 pages |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Arizona State University |
| Program | BS in Health Care Administration and Policy |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for HCD 400 Module 2
Three Doors Into the Literature: Searching PubMed, CINAHL and Google Scholar for Evidence on Community Health Workers and Hospital Use
Student Name
BS in Health Care Administration and Policy, Arizona State University
HCD 400: Evidence Odyssey: Decoding Peer-Reviewed Research for Future Practice
Instructor Name
Month Day, Year
Three Doors Into the Literature: Searching PubMed, CINAHL and Google Scholar for Evidence on Community Health Workers and Hospital Use
Introduction
Administrators who want to fund a program need evidence they can trust, and finding it starts with knowing where to look. My question for this course is practical: do community health workers, local residents trained to guide patients through medical care and social needs, reduce hospital use? This essay describes how I searched three platforms, what each did well and poorly and how I judged the three sources I selected.
The Search Question and Terms
I broke the question into two concepts: community health workers and hospital use. Synonyms for the first included lay health worker, patient navigator and promotora; for the second, hospitalization, readmission, emergency department visits and health care utilization. I combined synonyms within a concept with OR and joined the two concepts with AND, limited results to English and the past ten years and asked for peer-reviewed articles.
PubMed
PubMed's controlled vocabulary helped most. Its Medical Subject Heading for community health workers gathered articles that used different wording, and the "systematic review" filter narrowed results quickly. The interface felt technical at first, and abstracts sometimes used jargon, but the "similar articles" link led me to studies I had missed.
CINAHL
CINAHL, a database focused on nursing and allied health, used its own subject headings and returned more program evaluations and nursing journals. Its limiters for research articles and peer review were easy to apply. Some results were descriptive program reports rather than studies, so screening took longer.
Google Scholar
Google Scholar returned the most results and ranked highly cited studies first, which made the landmark trial easy to find. It offered no subject headings or reliable filters for study design, and it mixed in theses, conference abstracts and reports, so judging peer review required checking each journal.
Three Sources Evaluated
Patients at three primary care practices in Philadelphia were randomized to test a standardized program in which community health workers supported adults from high-poverty neighborhoods living with at least two long-term conditions (Kangovi et al., 2018). Usability: clearly structured, with a structured abstract and outcomes defined in advance. Relevance: high, since hospital days and repeat admissions were measured directly.
A systematic review of U.S. studies examined the effect of community health workers on health care use and found that results varied by design, with randomized trials less often showing reductions than weaker designs (Jack et al., 2017). Usability: long, but the summary tables let me compare studies quickly. Relevance: high, because it answers my question across many programs.
A second systematic review gathered randomized trials of community-based health workers serving vulnerable groups living with chronic illness (Kim et al., 2016). Usability: dense, with many outcome types across 61 trials. Relevance: moderate, since most programs it covers address prevention and disease management rather than hospital use, though it adds context.
Conclusion
No single database was best. PubMed was most precise, CINAHL best for nursing and allied health program studies and Google Scholar fastest for finding influential papers. Using all three, and checking each result for peer review and design, gave me a small set of sources I can rely on for the rest of the course.
References
Jack, H. E., Arabadjis, S. D., Sun, L., Sullivan, E. E., & Phillips, R. S. (2017). Impact of community health workers on use of healthcare services in the United States: A systematic review. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 32(3), 325-344. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-016-3922-9
Kangovi, S., Mitra, N., Norton, L., Harte, R., Zhao, X., Carter, T., Grande, D., & Long, J. A. (2018). Effect of community health worker support on clinical outcomes of low-income patients across primary care facilities: A randomized clinical trial. JAMA Internal Medicine, 178(12), 1635-1643. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamainternmed.2018.4630
Kim, K., Choi, J. S., Choi, E., Nieman, C. L., Joo, J. H., Lin, F. R., Gitlin, L. N., & Han, H. R. (2016). Effects of community-based health worker interventions to improve chronic disease management and care among vulnerable populations: A systematic review. American Journal of Public Health, 106(4), e3-e28. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2015.302987
What the HCD 400 Module 2 instructions ask for
HCD 400's Module 2 Assignment, worth 40 points, is the first of four graded essays and focuses on finding literature. The syllabus describes it as a written essay that develops proficiency in navigating scholarly databases and platforms to access relevant peer-reviewed literature in the health field and that critically evaluates the usability and relevance of the sources found. The course also sets a strict rule on quotation: essays with more than five percent quoted material receive a zero and are not reconsidered, so paraphrase and cite instead. Module 2 follows weekly reading assessments in Module 1, and the essays in Modules 3, 5 and 7 will ask you to appraise sources more deeply, so choose a question you are willing to carry through the course.
How this HCD 400 Module 2 example is built
Built as a short reflective essay, the sample states a practical question and breaks it into two concepts with synonyms and Boolean logic. One paragraph per platform, PubMed, CINAHL and Google Scholar, reports what the platform made easy and what it made hard, which is the usability judgment the prompt asks for. Three sources, a randomized trial and two systematic reviews, are then evaluated for usability and relevance with a sentence of reasoning each. The conclusion compares the platforms and explains why using more than one mattered. The essay paraphrases rather than quotes, in keeping with the five percent rule. Notice that each platform paragraph names a concrete feature, such as subject headings or a design filter, instead of a general impression, because specific observations are what make a usability judgment credible to a grader.
Reading the HCD 400 Module 2 grading rubric
Faculty grade this essay on the Canvas rubric for 40 points. Search essays are typically credited for a clear, answerable question, sensible search terms with synonyms and Boolean operators, comparison of at least two or three platforms with specific observations, sources that are genuinely peer-reviewed and relevant, reasoned evaluations of usability and relevance and clear writing with APA citations. Essays lose credit for vague descriptions such as "the database was helpful," for including non-peer-reviewed sources without noting it, for relevance judgments without reasons and for quotations above the five percent limit, which the syllabus treats as grounds for a zero.
HCD 400 Module 2 help from the desk
The most common weakness is describing the search in general terms. Name the platforms, the terms, the filters and what changed when you adjusted them. Choose sources you can actually read in full through the ASU Library, since later essays will ask you to appraise them. Separate usability (how easy the source is to read and use) from relevance (how well it answers your question). Paraphrase rather than quote; the five percent rule is strict. Keep your question narrow enough to evaluate sources against it. The desk can review your search terms if you share your question.
Write yours, or have the desk draft it
This paper is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official Arizona State University document. Read it for the moves, then write your own to the instructions in your classroom. If you want one built to your exact prompt and rubric, the first custom sample is free and arrives in 24 to 48 hours.
More HCD 400 and BS in Health Care Administration and Policy sample papers
- HCD 400 Module 3: Module 3 Assignment: Evaluating Methodological Rigor and Credibility
- HCD 400 Module 5: Module 5 Assignment: Implicit Biases, Assumptions and Limitations
- HCD 400 Module 7: Module 7 Assignment: Critical Review
- HCD 420 Module 3: Writing Workshop 3: Laws That Enhance and Limit Outbreak Investigation
- HCD 303 Module 2: Comparative Health System Analysis: Germany and the United States
- HCD 330 Module 2: Payment Model Assignment
- HCD 332 Module 1: Health Policy Analysis Problem Statement
HCD 400 Module 2 questions, answered
Where can I find a free HCD 400 Module 2 sample paper?
This page holds a full HCD 400 Module 2 sample: an essay comparing PubMed, CINAHL and Google Scholar searches and evaluating three sources on community health workers.
What does the HCD 400 Module 2 assignment ask?
To navigate scholarly databases for peer-reviewed health literature and critically evaluate the usability and relevance of the sources found.
What is the quotation rule in HCD 400?
Essays with more than five percent quoted material receive a zero and are not reconsidered, so paraphrase and cite instead.
Which database is best for health research?
Each has strengths: PubMed for precise searches with subject headings, CINAHL for nursing and allied health and Google Scholar for finding highly cited work quickly.
How much is the HCD 400 Module 2 assignment worth?
It is worth 40 points; the Module 3 essay is worth 50 and the Module 5 and 7 essays 60 each.