These are two discussion questions
Your DQ1 and DQ2 posts must be at least 150 words and have at least one reference cited for each question. In-text citation, please
Tutor MUST have a good command of the English language
Sources need to be journal/scholarly articles.
Use only articles that are published between 2015-2018 (except for your theory articles which will be older as you must cite primary sources).
No textbook or direct quotes
Details:
In this assignment, learners are required to write a case report addressing the personal knowledge and skills gained in this course and potentially solving an identified practice problem.
General Guidelines:
Use the following information to ensure successful completion of the assignment:
· This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.
· Doctoral learners are required to use APA style for their writing assignments. The APA Style Guide is located in the Student Success Center.
· This assignment requires that at least two additional scholarly research sources related to this topic, and at least one in-text citation from each source be included.
· You are required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite. Please refer to the directions in the Student Success Center.
Directions:
Construct a 2,500-3,000 word (approximately 10-12 pages) case report that includes a problem or situation consistent with a DNP area of practice.
1. Review the IOM and Kaiser Commission Report on the uninsured to develop the case report.
2. Apply public health concepts to describe understanding of the problem or situation of focus.
3. Apply one or more public health concepts to the recommended intervention or solution being proposed.
4. Develop the case report across the entire scenario from the identification of the clinical or health care problem through the proposal for an intervention, implementation, and evaluation using an appropriate research instrument.
5. Describe the evaluation of the selected research instrument in the case report.
6. Lastly, explain in full the tenets, rationale for selection (empirical evidence), and clear application using the language of public health concepts within the case report.
Case Report Requirements:
In addition, your case report must include the following:
1. Introduction with a problem statement.
2. Brief literature review.
3. Description of the case/situation/conditions explained from a theoretical perspective.
4. Discussion that includes a detailed explanation of the synthesized literature findings.
5. Summary of the case.
6. Proposed solutions to remedy gaps, inefficiencies, or other issues from a theoretical approach.
7. Identification of a research instrument to evaluate the proposed solution along with a description of how the instrument could be evaluated.
8. Conclusion.
Apply Rubrics
Case Report: Application of Public Health Concepts for the Uninsured
| 1 Unsatisfactory 0.00% | 2 Less than Satisfactory 74.00% | 3 Satisfactory 79.00% | 4 Good 87.00% | 5 Excellent 100.00% | ||
| 70.0 %Content | ||||||
| 5.0 %Introduction and Problem Statement | An introduction with problem statement is not present. | An introduction with problem statement is present but incomplete. | An introduction with problem statement is present but rendered at a perfunctory level. | An introduction with problem statement is present, clear, and thorough. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources. | An introduction with problem statement is clearly present. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Discussion is insightful and forward-thinking. Information presented is from current scholarly sources. | |
| 5.0 %Brief Literature Review | A brief literature review is not present. | A brief literature review is present but incomplete. | A brief literature review is present but rendered at a perfunctory level. | A brief literature review is clearly present in full. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources. | A brief literature review is clearly present in full. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Discussion is insightful and forward-thinking. Information presented is from current scholarly sources. | |
| 10.0 %Description of the Case, Situation, or Conditions Explained from a Theoretical Perspective | A description of the case, situation, or conditions from a theoretical perspective is not present. | A description of the case, situation, or conditions from a theoretical perspective is present but incomplete. | A description of the case, situation, or conditions from a theoretical perspective is present but rendered at a perfunctory level. | A description of the case, situation, or conditions from a theoretical perspective is convincing and defines specific elements. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources. | A description of the case, situation, or conditions from a theoretical perspective is clearly present. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Discussion is insightful and forward-thinking. Information presented is from current scholarly sources. | |
| 10.0 %Discussion Includes a Detailed Explanation of the Synthesized Literature Findings | A detailed explanation of the synthesized literature findings is not present. | A detailed explanation of the synthesized literature findings is present but incomplete. | A detailed explanation of the synthesized literature findings is present but incomplete. | A detailed explanation of the synthesized literature findings is convincing and defines specific elements. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources. | A detailed explanation of the synthesized literature findings is clearly present. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Discussion is insightful and forward-thinking. Information presented is from current scholarly sources. | |
| 10.0 %Case Summary | A case summary is not present. | A case summary is present but incomplete. | A case summary is present but rendered at a perfunctory level. | A case summary is convincing and defines specific elements. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources. | A case summary is clearly present. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Discussion is insightful and forward-thinking. Information presented is from current scholarly sources. | |
| 10.0 %Proposed Solutions to Remedy Identified Gaps, Inefficiencies, or Other Issues from a Theoretical Approach | Proposed solutions from a theoretical approach are not presented. | Proposed solutions from a theoretical approach are presented but are incomplete. | Proposed solutions from a theoretical approach are presented but are rendered at a perfunctory level. | Proposed solutions from a theoretical approach are clearly presented and thorough. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources. | Proposed solutions from a theoretical approach are clearly presented and thorough. Discussion is insightful, forward-thinking, and detailed. Information presented is from current scholarly sources. | |
| 10.0 %Identification of a Research Instrument to Evaluate the Proposed Solution along with a Description of how the Instrument could be Evaluated | Identification of a research instrument to evaluate the proposed solution along with a description of how the instrument could be evaluated is not present. | Identification of a research instrument to evaluate the proposed solution along with a description of how the instrument could be evaluated is presented but is incomplete. | Identification of a research instrument to evaluate the proposed solution along with a description of how the instrument could be evaluated is presented but is rendered at a perfunctory level. | Identification of a research instrument to evaluate the proposed solution along with a description of how the instrument could be evaluated is clearly presented and thorough. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources. | Identification of a research instrument to evaluate the proposed solution along with a description of how the instrument could be evaluated is clearly presented and thorough. Discussion is insightful, forward-thinking, and detailed. Information presented is from current scholarly sources. | |
| 10.0 %Conclusion | A conclusion is not presented. | A conclusion is presented but is incomplete. | A conclusion is presented but is rendered at a perfunctory level. | A conclusion is clearly presented and thorough. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources. | A conclusion is clearly presented and thorough. Discussion is insightful, forward-thinking, and detailed. Information presented is from current scholarly sources. | |
| 20.0 %Organization and Effectiveness | ||||||
| 7.0 %Thesis Development and Purpose | Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim. | Thesis and/or main claim are insufficiently developed and/or vague; purpose is not clear. | Thesis and/or main claim are apparent and appropriate to purpose. | Thesis and/or main claim are clear and forecast the development of the paper. It is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose. | Thesis and/or main claim are comprehensive. The essence of the paper is contained within the thesis. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear. | |
| 8.0 %Argument Logic and Construction | Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources. | Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility. | Argument is orderly, but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis. | Argument shows logical progressions. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative. | Clear and convincing argument that presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative. | |
| 5.0 %Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use) | Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice and/or sentence construction are used. | Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register), sentence structure, and/or word choice are present. | Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are used. | Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. A variety of sentence structures and effective figures of speech are used. | Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English. | |
| 10.0 %Format | ||||||
| 5.0 %Paper Format (Use of appropriate style for the major and assignment) | Template is not used appropriately or documentation format is rarely followed correctly. | Appropriate template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken. A lack of control with formatting is apparent. | Appropriate template is used. Formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present. | Appropriate template is fully used. There are virtually no errors in formatting style. | All format elements are correct. | |
| 5.0 %Research Citations (In-text citations for paraphrasing and direct quotes, and reference page listing and formatting, as appropriate to assignment and style) | No reference page is included. No citations are used. | Reference page is present. Citations are inconsistently used. | Reference page is included and lists sources used in the paper. Sources are appropriately documented, although some errors may be present. | Reference page is present and fully inclusive of all cited sources. Documentation is appropriate and citation style is usually correct. | In-text citations and a reference page are complete and correct. The documentation of cited sources is free of error. |
