| Course | IBC 793 Applied Project |
|---|---|
| Module | Module 5 |
| Paper type | Evidence table |
| Length | About 305 words, 4 pages |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Arizona State University |
| Program | Doctor of Behavioral Health |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for IBC 793 Module 5
What the Evidence Says: A Table Technique Review for Closing the Loop
Student Name
Doctor of Behavioral Health, Arizona State University
IBC 793: Applied Project
Instructor Name
Month Day, Year
What the Evidence Says: A Table Technique Review for Closing the Loop
Purpose
The table technique organizes studies side by side so that patterns and gaps become visible (Melnyk & Fineout-Overholt, 2023). The question guiding this table is whether same-day warm handoffs with registry-based care coordination are likely to increase follow-up and improve outcomes for adolescents with positive depression screens.
Evidence Table
| Source | Design and sample | Key findings | Level | Relevance to the project |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Screening guideline (US Preventive Services Task Force, 2022) | Recommendation based on a systematic review | Screen adolescents 12 to 18 for major depressive disorder | Guideline | Supports routine screening as the project's starting point |
| Richardson et al. (2010) | Validation study, adolescents in primary care | PHQ-9 of 11 or more: 89.5% sensitivity, 77.5% specificity | Diagnostic accuracy | Sets the population threshold |
| Richardson et al. (2014) | Randomized trial, 101 adolescents | Collaborative care raised 12-month remission to 50.4% vs 20.7% | Level II | Shows treatment in primary care works once adolescents engage |
| Wright et al. (2016) | Cost-effectiveness analysis of the 2014 trial | About $18,239 per quality-adjusted life year gained | Economic | Supports value to clinic leaders and payers |
| Archer et al. (2012) | Cochrane review, 79 trials, mostly adults | Collaborative care improved depression in the short and longer term | Level I | Supports the care-coordination model |
| Horevitz et al. (2015) | Mixed methods, 431 referrals | Attendance after warm handoffs was lower for English-speaking Latinos | Level IV | Warns that handoffs need attention to language and relationship |
Synthesis
The evidence is strongest for screening and for collaborative care once adolescents engage, and the economic analysis suggests the approach offers reasonable value. Evidence specific to warm handoffs is weaker and mixed, and most collaborative care trials enrolled adults. The project will therefore pair warm handoffs with registry outreach, measure follow-up as its primary outcome and report results by language so that any differences are detected early.
References
Archer, J., Bower, P., Gilbody, S., Lovell, K., Richards, D., Gask, L., Dickens, C., & Coventry, P. (2012). Collaborative care for depression and anxiety problems. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2012(10), CD006525. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD006525.pub2
Horevitz, E., Organista, K. C., & Areán, P. A. (2015). Depression treatment uptake in integrated primary care: How a "warm handoff" and other factors affect decision making by Latinos. Psychiatric Services, 66(8), 824-830. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ps.201400085
Melnyk, B. M., & Fineout-Overholt, E. (2023). Evidence-based practice in nursing and healthcare: A guide to best practice (5th ed.). Wolters Kluwer.
Richardson, L. P., Ludman, E., McCauley, E., Lindenbaum, J., Larison, C., Zhou, C., Clarke, G., Brent, D., & Katon, W. (2014). Collaborative care for adolescents with depression in primary care: A randomized clinical trial. JAMA, 312(8), 809-816. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2014.9259
Richardson, L. P., McCauley, E., Grossman, D. C., McCarty, C. A., Richards, J., Russo, J. E., Rockhill, C., & Katon, W. (2010). Evaluation of the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 item for detecting major depression among adolescents. Pediatrics, 126(6), 1117-1123. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2010-0852
US Preventive Services Task Force. (2022). Screening for depression and suicide risk in children and adolescents: US Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. JAMA, 328(15), 1534-1542. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2022.16946
Wright, D. R., Haaland, W. L., Ludman, E., McCauley, E., Lindenbaum, J., & Richardson, L. P. (2016). The costs and cost-effectiveness of collaborative care for adolescents with depression in primary care settings: A randomized clinical trial. JAMA Pediatrics, 170(11), 1048-1054. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamapediatrics.2016.1721
Reading the IBC 793 Module 5 assignment instructions
Module 5 brings the 10-point Table Technique, an evidence table for your intervention. Organize the evidence for your project's intervention in a table that lets a reader compare sources at a glance: each row should capture a source's design and sample, what it found, where it sits in the evidence hierarchy and what it means for your project. Include guidelines, trials, reviews and studies that challenge your approach as well as those that support it. End with a short judgment of how strong and how relevant the sources are overall. The table becomes the foundation for the Evidenced Based Intervention Paper due in Module 7. Five to eight well-chosen sources are usually enough for a focused applied project. Rate each source with the evidence hierarchy your program uses, and keep the column headings identical from row to row so comparisons are easy.
How this IBC 793 Module 5 example is built
The sample states the question the table answers, then presents six sources in a five-column table ordered from guideline to trial to review to a study with a cautionary finding. Each row reports specific figures rather than general claims. The level column distinguishes guidelines, randomized trials, reviews and observational work. A short synthesis summarizes strengths and gaps and explains how the gaps change the project's design. A margin note explains why a contrary study belongs in the table. The format is compact enough to drop into the final proposal. Rows are ordered so the reader moves from guidance to trials to cautionary evidence.
Reading the IBC 793 Module 5 grading rubric
Faculty grading the table look for relevant, credible sources, accurate summaries of design and findings, an appropriate level-of-evidence rating and a clear statement of relevance for each row. Tables lose points when they include only sources that support the intervention, when findings are paraphrased vaguely, when levels are missing or wrong or when no synthesis follows. Too many weak sources can also dilute the table. A short, honest synthesis that names the gaps in the evidence usually earns more credit than a list of supportive studies. Accurate figures copied from each source's results, rather than from secondary summaries, protect the table's credibility. Tables that are easy to scan, with short entries, earn credit for clarity.
IBC 793 Module 5 help with common mistakes
Decide the question your table must answer before you search. Choose five to eight sources of different types. Record exact figures from each study's abstract or results. Rate each source's level using your course's evidence hierarchy. Write one line on how each applies to your project. Include at least one study that complicates your plan. Finish with a short synthesis. If rating evidence levels feels confusing, the desk can review your table with you. Keep columns consistent across rows. Keep a citation manager entry for every row so the references are ready for the proposal folder. Recheck each figure against the original abstract.
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 IBC 793 and Doctor of Behavioral Health sample papers
- IBC 793 Module 2: SBAR Assignment: Closing the Loop on Positive Adolescent Depression Screens
- IBC 793 Module 3: PICOT Assignment: Building the Applied Project's Clinical Question
- IBC 793 Module 4: PICOT Population Paper: Adolescents With Positive Depression Screens in a Pediatric Clinic
- IBC 793 Module 6: Intervention Steps and Timeline: Planning Six Months of Implementation
- IBC 793 Module 7: Evidenced Based Intervention Paper: Warm Handoffs With Registry-Based Follow-Up
- IBC 793 Module 8: PICOT Current Status and Root Cause Analysis Paper: Why Follow-Up Fails
- IBC 793 Module 9: PICOT Identified Outcomes Paper: Outcome, Process and Balancing Measures
- IBC 793 Module 10: Measurement Tool Paper: The PHQ-9 for Adolescents and the Project Registry
- IBC 793 Module 11: Proposed Budget: The Costs of Closing the Loop
- IBC 603 Module 6: Population Health Management Planning Paper: Depression in Adults With Diabetes
IBC 793 Module 5 questions, answered
Where can I find a free IBC 793 Module 5 sample paper?
This page shows the full six-source evidence table and synthesis.
What is the table technique in IBC 793?
An evidence table that compares sources by design, findings, level and relevance.
Should an evidence table include studies that disagree?
Yes; including them shows the evidence was weighed rather than selected to confirm a plan.
Is collaborative care for adolescent depression cost-effective?
One analysis estimated about $18,239 per quality-adjusted life year gained.
What comes after the IBC 793 table technique?
The Evidenced Based Intervention Paper in Module 7.