Hi, i need the table i uploaded to be filledHealth Promotion Program, Part B2: Evidence-based Literature SearchYou will be expected to search for the highest level of evidence for your health promotio

Hi, i need the table i uploaded to be filledHealth Promotion Program, Part B2: Evidence-based Literature SearchYou will be expected to search for the highest level of evidence for your health promotion project. Please listen to the lecture on searching the evidence, use the services of the research librarian, and pull from the knowledge gained in NUR 39000 Nursing Research to complete this assignment. The Purdue Owl website is a great resource for you when citing your references in APA style.  Self- Assessment of Learning Styles.pdf          .JBI-Levels-of-Evidence(1).pdfLibrary Resources: The reference librarian for the School of Nursing has created a very helpful website of library resources for this course. Click on the link below to accept this website:NUR 39400 Library Resource Guide https://mycourses.purdue.edu/bbcswebdav/pid-12421733-dt-content-rid-93949047_1/courses/pnw_45033.201920/JBI-Levels-of-Evidence%281%29.pdfNew JBI Levels of EvidenceDeveloped by the Joanna Briggs Institute Levels of Evidence and Grades of Recommendation Working Party October 2013PLEASE NOTE: These levels are intended to be used alongside the supporting document outlining their use. Using Levels of Evidence does not preclude the need for careful reading, critical appraisal and clinical reasoning when applying evidence.LEVELS OF EVIDENCE FOR EFFECTIVENESSLevel 1 – Experimental DesignsLevel 1.a – Systematic review of Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs)Level 1.b – Systematic review of RCTs and other study designsLevel 1.c – RCTLevel 1.d – Pseudo-RCTsLevel 2 – Quasi-experimental DesignsLevel 2.a – Systematic review of quasi-experimental studiesLevel 2.b – Systematic review of quasi-experimental and other lower study designsLevel 2.c – Quasi-experimental prospectively controlled studyLevel 2.d – Pre-test – post-test or historic/retrospective control group studyLevel 3 – Observational – Analytic DesignsLevel 3.a – Systematic review of comparable cohort studiesLevel 3.b – Systematic review of comparable cohort and other lower study designsLevel 3.c – Cohort study with control groupLevel 3.d – Case – controlled studyLevel 3.e – Observational study without a control groupPage | 2Level 4 – Observational –Descriptive StudiesLevel 4.a – Systematic review of descriptive studiesLevel 4.b – Cross-sectional studyLevel 4.c – Case seriesLevel 4.d – Case studyLevel 5 – Expert Opinion and Bench ResearchLevel 5.a – Systematic review of expert opinionLevel 5.b – Expert consensusLevel 5.c – Bench research/ single expert opinionPage | 3LEVELS OF EVIDENCE FOR DIAGNOSISLevel 1 – Studies of Test Accuracy among consecutive patientsLevel 1.a – Systematic review of studies of test accuracy among consecutive patientsLevel 1.b – Study of test accuracy among consecutive patientsLevel 2 – Studies of Test Accuracy among non-consecutive patientsLevel 2.a – Systematic review of studies of test accuracy among non-consecutive patientsLevel 2.b – Study of test accuracy among non-consecutive patientsLevel 3 – Diagnostic Case control studiesLevel 3.a – Systematic review of diagnostic case control studiesLevel 3.b – Diagnostic case-control studyLevel 4 – Diagnostic yield studiesLevel 4.a – Systematic review of diagnostic yield studiesLevel 4.b – Individual diagnostic yield studyLevel 5 – Expert Opinion and Bench ResearchLevel 5.a – Systematic review of expert opinionLevel 5.b – Expert consensusLevel 5.c – Bench research/ single expert opinionPage | 4LEVELS OF EVIDENCE FOR PROGNOSISLevel 1 – Inception Cohort StudiesLevel 1.a – Systematic review of inception cohort studiesLevel 1.b – Inception cohort studyLevel 2 – Studies of All or noneLevel 2.a – Systematic review of all or none studiesLevel 2.b – All or none studiesLevel 3 – Cohort studiesLevel 3.a – Systematic review of cohort studies (or control arm of RCT)Level 3.b – Cohort study (or control arm of RCT)Level 4 – Case series/Case Controlled/ Historically Controlled studiesLevel 4.a – Systematic review of Case series/Case Controlled/ Historically Controlled studiesLevel 4.b – Individual Case series/Case Controlled/ Historically Controlled studyLevel 5 – Expert Opinion and Bench ResearchLevel 5.a – Systematic review of expert opinionLevel 5.b – Expert consensusLevel 5.c – Bench research/ single expert opinionPage | 5LEVELS OF EVIDENCE FOR ECONOMIC EVALUATIONSLevels1. Decision model with assumptions and variables informed by systematic review and tailored to fit the decision making context.2. Systematic review of economic evaluations conducted in a setting similar to the decision makers.3. Synthesis/review of economic evaluations undertaken in a setting similar to that in which the decision is to be made and which are of high quality (comprehensive and credible measurement of costs and health outcomes, sufficient time period covered, discounting, and sensitivity testing).4. Economic evaluation of high quality (comprehensive and credible measurement of costs and health outcomes, sufficient time period covered, discounting and sensitivity testing) and conducted in setting similar to the decision making context.5. Synthesis / review of economic evaluations of moderate and/or poor quality (insufficient coverage of costs and health effects, no discounting, no sensitivity testing, time period covered insufficient).6. Single economic evaluation of moderate or poor quality (see directly above level 5 description of studies). 7. Expert opinion on incremental cost effectives of intervention and comparator.Page | 6LEVELS OF EVIDENCE FOR MEANINGFULNESS1. Qualitative or mixed-methods systematic review2. Qualitative or mixed-methods synthesis3. Single qualitative study4. Systematic review of expert opinion5. Expert opinion