NUR 318 Module 5 PICOT and Research Evidence Alignment Example

Reviewed by Ingrid Vasterling, MSN, RN Arizona State University Updated October 2026

This NUR 318 Module 5 sample is the PICOT and research evidence alignment worksheet, the assignment in which two studies saved from the search are held up against each element of the question. At ASU NUR 318, a Nursing Research and Evidence Translation course in the RN to BSN sequence, the worksheet must hold at least one trial with random assignment or one quasi-experiment, uploaded along with both article PDFs. The question in this sample asks if outpatient surgery patients who turn queasy before discharge do better with an inhaled agent than with usual antiemetic rescue. One study is a four-arm randomized trial at a single surgical center; the other is a quasi-experimental comparison of controlled breathing with and without alcohol inhalation. Each is matched on population, intervention, comparison, outcome and time, with a note on where alignment is partial.

CourseNUR 318 Nursing Research and Evidence Translation
ModuleModule 5
Paper typePICOT research evidence alignment worksheet
LengthAbout 897 words, 6 pages
FormatAPA 7 student paper
SchoolArizona State University
ProgramRN to BSN
UpdatedOctober 2026

Free sample paper for NUR 318 Module 5

1

Do the Studies Answer the Question? Aligning a Randomized Trial and a Quasi-Experimental Study With a PICOT on Inhaled Agents for Nausea After Ambulatory Surgery

Student Name

Edson College of Nursing and Health Innovation, Arizona State University

NUR 318: Nursing Research and Evidence Translation

Instructor Name

Month Day, Year

What this page is doingPosing the worksheet's job as a question signals that alignment is a test the studies can partly fail, which is the honest finding here and the one graders reward.
2

Do the Studies Answer the Question? Aligning a Randomized Trial and a Quasi-Experimental Study With a PICOT on Inhaled Agents for Nausea After Ambulatory Surgery

The PICOT Question

For nauseated adults in the second stage of recovery following outpatient surgery (P), is an inhaled agent, either an alcohol prep pad or an essential oil mixture (I), more effective than usual care with antiemetics given when the patient asks (C) at reducing how sick they feel and how many rescue doses they need (O) during the first half hour (T)?

The question was revised after the search. The comparison had first read "rescue medication alone," but no study withholds antiemetics from a patient who asks for one, so the realistic comparison is usual care with medication on request. The intervention was widened from isopropyl alcohol alone to include essential oil blends, because the strongest ambulatory trial tested both.

What this page is doingShowing the revised PICOT and the reason for each change tells the grader the worksheet is doing its job: the evidence is shaping the question, not the other way around.
3

Study One: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Hunt et al. (2013) enrolled adults at one ambulatory surgical center who reported nausea in the PACU. Of 1,151 patients screened, 303 reported nausea and were enrolled, and 301 were analyzed. Each was randomly given one gauze pad soaked in one of four agents: ginger oil on its own, a four-oil mix that combined ginger with spearmint, peppermint and cardamom, isopropyl alcohol, or saline as the placebo. Patients inhaled deeply three times, and nausea was rated again five minutes later on a four-point verbal scale. Antiemetics were given as ordered or when patients asked.

The findings speak directly to the question. Nausea fell significantly more with the blend and with ginger than with saline, and patients in those groups requested fewer antiemetics, but isopropyl alcohol did not differ from saline. That result complicates the intervention in my PICOT, since alcohol prep pads were the option I expected to recommend.

PICOT elementMy questionHunt et al. (2013)Alignment
PopulationAdults with nausea in recovery after ambulatory surgeryAdults with nausea in the PACU at an ambulatory surgical centerStrong
InterventionInhaled isopropyl alcohol or essential oil blendInhaled ginger, oil blend or isopropyl alcohol from gauzeStrong
ComparisonMedication on requestSaline placebo, with medication also availablePartial
OutcomeNausea severity and rescue dosesChange in 0 to 3 nausea score; antiemetics requestedStrong
TimeWithin 30 minutesFive minutes after inhalation, then through recoveryPartial
What this page is doingThe table makes alignment visible element by element, and the rating column is honest about partial fits. The paragraph after it reports the result that cuts against the student's preferred intervention, which shows appraisal rather than advocacy.
4

Study Two: A Quasi-Experimental Study

Cronin et al. (2015) studied women having elective outpatient laparoscopic procedures. The design was described as prospective, randomized and two-group, but the authors labeled it quasi-experimental, likely because of the convenience sample. Women who developed nausea were assigned either to controlled breathing alone or to controlled breathing while inhaling isopropyl alcohol, and they rated nausea before and at two and five minutes after the intervention. Complete data on 82 patients, 41 per group, were analyzed.

Nausea severity dropped significantly over time in both groups, with no difference between them and no difference in rescue medication requests. The authors concluded that slow, deep breathing could be offered first because it costs nothing and has no side effects.

PICOT elementMy questionCronin et al. (2015)Alignment
PopulationAdults with nausea after ambulatory surgeryWomen with nausea after outpatient laparoscopyPartial (women only)
InterventionInhaled isopropyl alcoholIsopropyl alcohol plus controlled breathingStrong
ComparisonMedication on requestControlled breathing aloneWeak for my comparison
OutcomeNausea severity and rescue dosesNausea severity; requests for rescue medicationStrong
TimeWithin 30 minutesTwo and five minutesPartial
What this page is doingNaming why the authors called a randomized study quasi-experimental shows the student read the methods section. The weak comparison rating is the key judgment, and it is stated in plain words.
5

What the Two Studies Say Together

Read side by side, the studies point in a direction I did not expect when I wrote the first PICOT. Neither found that isopropyl alcohol beat its comparison. Hunt et al. (2013) found it did no better than saline, and Cronin et al. (2015) found that adding it to controlled breathing changed nothing measurable. The effective element in both may be the slow breathing that goes with inhaling from a pad, which an earlier small trial also suggested when saline, alcohol and peppermint worked equally well (Anderson & Gross, 2004). Only the essential oil blend and ginger outperformed placebo, and only in one trial.

The two studies also differ in ways that limit how far they can be combined. Hunt et al. (2013) measured nausea once, five minutes after three deep breaths, while Cronin et al. (2015) measured at two and five minutes, and neither followed patients to discharge. Hunt et al. (2013) enrolled men and women of all ages; Cronin et al. (2015) enrolled only women having laparoscopy, a group known to be at higher risk. Neither study recorded how long patients stayed in recovery, which is the operational outcome my unit cares about most. These gaps do not make the studies useless, but they mean my project will need its own measures of time to relief and time to discharge.

Revised Direction for the Project

The worksheet leads to two changes. First, the intervention should be controlled breathing as a first step for every nauseated patient, with an essential oil blend offered as an adjunct, rather than alcohol pads on their own. Second, the comparison should remain usual care, because no study tested breathing against medication on request, and that gap will be named in the presentation. The evaluation table in the next module will add the systematic reviews and test whether these two studies are typical of the wider evidence.

References

Anderson, L. A., & Gross, J. B. (2004). Aromatherapy with peppermint, isopropyl alcohol, or placebo is equally effective in relieving postoperative nausea. Journal of PeriAnesthesia Nursing, 19(1), 29-35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jopan.2003.11.001

Cronin, S. N., Odom-Forren, J., Roberts, H., Thomas, M., Williams, S., & Wright, M. I. (2015). Effects of controlled breathing, with or without aromatherapy, in the treatment of postoperative nausea. Journal of PeriAnesthesia Nursing, 30(5), 389-397. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jopan.2015.03.010

Hunt, R., Dienemann, J., Norton, H. J., Hartley, W., Hudgens, A., Stern, T., & Divine, G. (2013). Aromatherapy as treatment for postoperative nausea: A randomized trial. Anesthesia & Analgesia, 117(3), 597-604. https://doi.org/10.1213/ANE.0b013e31824a0b1c

Reading the NUR 318 Module 5 assignment instructions

In the course syllabus this appears as the PICO(T) Research Evidence Alignment assignment, a 5-point worksheet that must include a randomized controlled trial, a quasi-experimental study, or both, aligned with your PICO topic. You upload it with the PDFs of the two studies you saved during the search strategy assignment. The worksheet asks you to restate your PICOT and show, for each study, how its population, intervention, comparison, outcome and time frame correspond to yours. Some versions add a short summary of each study's design and main findings. The rubric in Canvas will tell you whether a table is required, and whether the two studies must be of different designs.

How the NUR 318 Module 5 example is put together

The example restates the revised PICOT and explains the two changes the search forced. Each study then gets a short description of its design, sample, intervention and measure, followed by a five-row table that rates alignment for every PICOT element as strong, partial or weak. Results come after each table in plain numbers. A synthesis paragraph explains that neither study showed isopropyl alcohol beating its comparison and that controlled breathing may account for much of the effect. A final section turns that finding into a new project direction and names the gap the presentation will need to admit. Both PDFs are listed in the reference entries with their DOIs so the grader can open them.

Where the marks sit in the NUR 318 Module 5 rubric

Rubrics for this worksheet focus on accuracy and fit. Points go to correctly identifying each study's design, to a complete element-by-element comparison with the PICOT, and to judgments about alignment that the study details support. Instructors also check that the studies are the required designs and that the PDFs are attached. Clear writing and APA citations for both studies make up the rest. A worksheet that labels every element "aligned" without evidence, or that misnames a quasi-experimental study as a randomized trial, tends to lose most of the analysis points. Instructors also notice when a student explains how the findings change the PICOT, since that shows the EBP process at work.

NUR 318 Module 5 help from the desk

The easiest mistake is choosing studies that share a keyword with your PICOT but study a different population, such as children or patients receiving chemotherapy. Another is rating alignment as perfect when the comparison or time frame differs; partial alignment is normal and graders expect you to say so. Students also copy the abstract into the table instead of extracting the specific population and outcome. If a study's findings contradict your planned intervention, report it and adjust, because that is the point of the exercise. For a worksheet built around the two studies you saved, send the PDFs and your PICOT to the desk. Finally, keep the worksheet focused: the alignment judgment matters more than a long summary of each study's background.

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.

Request this one custom, free All NUR 318 module samples

More NUR 318 and RN to BSN sample papers

NUR 318 Module 5 questions, answered

Where can I find a free NUR 318 Module 5 sample paper?

The complete alignment worksheet is on this page: a revised PICOT, two studies described and matched in element-by-element tables, a synthesis and the new project direction, with references.

Can both studies in the NUR 318 alignment worksheet be randomized trials?

The syllabus asks for an RCT and/or a quasi-experimental study, so two RCTs are usually acceptable. Check your Canvas rubric, since some instructors want one of each design.

How do I tell a quasi-experimental study from an RCT for NUR 318?

An RCT assigns participants to groups at random and controls the comparison. A quasi-experimental study lacks true randomization or a full control group. Read the methods section and use the authors' own design label as a starting point.

What if my NUR 318 studies do not support my intervention?

Report what they found and revise your PICOT or intervention. Showing that evidence changed your plan is a strength in this course, and later assignments let you add reviews that may clarify the picture.

Do I attach the PDFs to the NUR 318 alignment worksheet?

Yes. The syllabus asks for the PDFs of the two studies with the worksheet, so upload them in the same Canvas submission unless your instructor says otherwise.