Congratulations—You and your team have completed a project!
Now what? Disseminate your work of course so that others can learn. A poster is a great way to do this. Dissemination is a key step in research & evidence-based practice.
But how should you present the information on your poster? To quote a well-known
politician: “What difference does it make” how you
present your project in a poster. Quite a bit, it turns out! Some posters are definitely better than others.
For your poster you want to realize that you are dealing with a VISUAL medium, not text. This means that you need:
- A CLEAR FOCUS on the key ideas & results
- CONTENT THAT FLOWS. You want to make sure the reader is guided through the poster–maybe by numbering steps or adding arrows.
- Enough “WHITE SPACE” that the readers eye has time to “rest” and that draws attention to your focus. (e.g., think “Got Milk?” in bold white letters on a black background. White space =any color blank space.)
- USE VISUAL – Employ short phrases, bullet points, active voice, and graphics that take advantage of the visual medium. Some people say 50% should be graphics.

For example, let’s look at 3 different ways that you could present your pretend research study on RN attitudes to electronic health records (EHR). The NOVICE POSTER-MAKER may put the following on their poster:
“RN attitudes toward the new electronic health record were examined in a pretest, and class was taught on how to use the electronic health record. After the class a posttest of their attitudes was conducted.”
The above example has several problems! It is in passive voice. It has too many extra words. It is plain text and not the visual. It doesn’t give results. Is someone going to stand there and read your poster like an article? Nope. You need to make it different!
To make a difference, TRY THIS SOLUTION to present the same information as bullet point phrases:

- Key variable: RN attitudes toward electronic health record (EHR)
- Pretest of RN attitudes to EHR
- Class on improved use
- Posttest of RN attitudes toward EHR showed improvement (p<.05)

OR PERHAPS TO MAKE AN EVEN BETTER DIFFERENCE—KEEP IT REALLY VISUAL, WITH FLOW AND FOCUS (using graphics when possible instead of words)
So….“What difference does it make?” You decide!
For more information: Check out http://www.evergreen.edu/scicomp/docs/workshops/Poster_Tips2.pdf or do a quick search for other poster making tips. There is LOTS of good info out there.
Critical Thinking:
Critique this poster or another using the “60 second poster evaluation” at http://dept-wp.nmsu.edu/nmsuhhmi/files/2013/06/60-Second-Poster-Evaluation.pdf
Google–not to mention yahoo, bing & other web search engines–are mere popularity contests of literature. Google Scholar is a step up, but it is still a search engine. It can miss important articles entirely.
For more info: Look for that



Use 


Critical thinking: What is something in nursing that has been “bugging” you. Missed care–e.g., inability to get all the tasks done on time? Or discharge med teaching? Or the

numbers. Another problem will occur if the reliability and validity of the self-report questionnaire is not established. (Reliability is consistency in measurement and validity is the accuracy of measuring what it purports to measure.) Additionally, self-reports typically provide only a)ordinal level data, such as on a 1-to-5 scale, b) nominal data, such as on a yes/no scale, or c) qualitative descriptions in words without categories or numbers. (Ordinal data=scores are in order with some numbers higher than others, and nominal data = categories. Statistical calculations are limited for both and not possible for qualitative data unless the researcher counts themes or words that recur.)
An example of a self-report measure that we regard as a gold standard for clinical and research data = 0-10 pain scale score. An example of a self-report measure that might be useful but less preferred is a self-assessment of knowledge (e.g., How strong on a 1-5 scale is your knowledge of arterial blood gas interpretation?) The use of it for knowledge can be okay as long as everyone understands that it is perceived level of knowledge.
at
“What’s important is not where an organization begins its patient safety journey, but instead the degree to which it exhibits a relentless commitment to improvement.” – TJC, 2016, p.68

perimental drug X will have better cardiac function than will heart failure patients who receive standard drug Y.” You can see that the researcher is manipulating the drug (independent variable) that patients will receive. And patient cardiac outcomes are expected to vary—in fact cardiac function is expected to be better—for patients who receive the experimental drug X.
1st – Identify the population in the hypothesis—the population does not vary (& so, it is not a variable). 2nd – Identify the independent variable–This will be the one that is the cause & it will vary. 3rd – Identify the dependent variable–This will be the one that is the outcome & its variation depends on changes/variation in the independent variable.






On the experimental unit RNs stated the script to patients exactly as written and on room whiteboards posted the script, last pain med & pain scores. Posters of the script were also posted on the unit. In contrast, on the control unit RN communication and use of whiteboard were dependent on individual preferences. Researchers measured effectiveness of the script by collecting HCAHPS scores 2 times before RNs began using the script (a baseline pretest) and then 5 times during and after RNs began using it (a posttest) on both units.
Critical thinking? What would prevent you from adopting or adapting this script in your own personal practice tomorrow? What are the barriers and facilitators to getting other RNs on your unit to adopt this script, including using whiteboards? Are there any risks to using the script? What are the risks to NOT using the script?