A finished NU 760 Unit 2 search strategy documented well enough that another person could repeat it and retrieve the same studies from the same databases. Searches like "nu 760 unit 2 assignment example", "nu760 unit 2 sample" and "nu 760 unit 2 example" land here.
What a finished NU 760 Unit 2 search strategy looks like
The finished strategy reads as a record of what was done. Databases are named individually rather than as library resources, and each carries the terms actually entered, the controlled vocabulary where it applies, the Boolean structure that combined them and the filters imposed. Numbers appear at every stage: records retrieved, duplicates removed, titles screened, full texts examined, studies retained. Exclusions carry reasons rather than being reported as a count. Where a search returned very little, the example says so instead of quietly widening the question until results appeared. Gray literature and guidelines are searched separately and reported apart from primary studies, since they are different kinds of source and mixing them inflates the apparent evidence base.
How a NU 760 Unit 2 example is structured
The strategy is written so that its yield can be checked. It opens by restating the question in the terms the search will use, which is where a vague problem statement first shows itself. A databases section names each source and says why it was chosen for this question. The search section then reports each database separately, with terms, vocabulary, operators, limits and dates, in enough detail to be typed again. A yield section gives counts at every stage and the reasons behind each exclusion, in a flow diagram where the assignment allows one. A section on gray literature covers guidelines, agency reports and anything found outside the databases. The closing describes the retained set without appraising it, since appraisal belongs to the next unit.
Databases named individually
Each source is listed with the reason it suits this question, rather than a general reference to searching the library.
Terms exactly as entered
Controlled vocabulary, keywords, operators and filters are reproduced so somebody could type the same string and check the yield.
Counts at every stage
Retrieved, deduplicated, screened, examined and retained all carry figures, which is what makes the search auditable.
Exclusions with reasons
Studies dropped carry why, since a count alone is indistinguishable from keeping whichever sources agreed with the writer.
Gray literature kept apart
Guidelines and agency reports are searched and reported separately, because folding them in makes a thin evidence base look full.
Where marks go in NU 760 Unit 2
The heaviest loss is a search described rather than documented, where terms are mentioned but the structure that combined them is missing and nobody could repeat the work. Second is missing counts, which leaves the yield impossible to check and the screening impossible to audit. Third is exclusion without stated reasons, which looks like selection whether or not it was. Fourth is a single database, usually the one the writer finds easiest, presented as a complete search. A thin yield reported honestly scores better than a rich one produced by loosening the question, and readers at this level notice when a question drifts to fit the results. A question that drifts to fit its results is visible to anybody who reads both.
Get a NU 760 Unit 2 example written to your instructions
Send the Unit 2 instructions and the rubric from your NU 760 classroom, plus your problem statement and any searching you have already done. We write a custom example that documents the databases, terms, operators and yield at a level somebody could reproduce, and return it in 24 to 48 hours. The first custom sample is free.
NU 760 Unit 2 questions, answered
How much detail does a search strategy need?
Enough for somebody else to obtain your results. That means the database, the exact terms, whether you used subject headings, how the terms were combined, what filters you applied and over what date range. If a reader would have to guess at any of those, the strategy has been described rather than documented, and reproducibility is the criterion being graded.
What if my search returns almost nothing?
Report it and proceed. A thin yield tells you something real about the evidence base, and faculty read it as a finding rather than a failure. What costs marks is broadening the question until results appear, because the question you then answer is no longer the one your problem statement posed, and the mismatch shows up in later units.
Do guidelines and agency reports count?
Include them and keep them in their own section. A clinical guideline is a synthesis somebody else performed under their own assumptions, so it carries different weight from a primary study and belongs in a separate part of your yield. Combining the two makes the evidence base look larger and stronger than it is, which appraisal in the next unit will expose.