Case study and the template are attached!
Case studies provide the opportunity to simulate realistic scenarios involving patients presenting with various health problems or symptoms. Such case studies enable nurse learners to apply concepts, lessons, and critical thinking to interviewing, screening, and diagnostic approaches, as well as to the development of treatment plans.
For this Case Study Assignment, you will chose from four case studies to identify common health implications for women. You will then explore the chosen case study to determine the diagnosis, diagnostic tests, and treatment options for the patient.
RESOURCES
Be sure to review the Learning Resources before completing this activity. Click the weekly resources link to access the resources.
WEEKLY RESOURCES
To prepare:
- Review the 4 case studies in this week’s Learning Resources. Select one of the cases to prepare your written assignment.
- Review the Learning Resources for this week.
Assignment Instructions:
- Use the Case Study Template from the Learning Resources to complete the assignment. Your submission must include a brief case write-up, followed by the fully completed template, which must be integrated into the document rather than submitted separately.
- Include a title page, a case summary in your own words, the completed template, and a reference page formatted in APA style.
- Ensure your submission meets all criteria outlined in the template and rubric for completeness and accuracy.
NRNP_6552_Week8_Case_Study_Assignment_Rubric
NRNP_6552_Week8_Case_Study_Assignment_Rubric
| Criteria | Ratings | Pts |
|---|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAnalyzes subjective and objective data and outlines applicable diagnostic tests related to case studies. | | 30 to >26.7 pts Excellent The response provides clear, complete, and comprehensive descriptions of subjective and objective case data, appropriately outlining all diagnostic tests, clinical procedures and pharmacological interventions. | 26.7 to >23.7 pts Good The response provides clear, complete partial descriptions of the components of the subjective and objective case data, appropriately outlining most of the diagnostic tests, clinical procedures and pharmacological interventions. | 23.7 to >20.7 pts Fair The response provides some components of the subjective and objective case data, but they are incomplete, vague or inaccurate, outlining some of the diagnostic tests, clinical procedures and pharmacological interventions. | 20.7 to >0 pts Poor The response provides unclear or incomplete components of subjective and objective case data. The diagnostic tests, clinical procedures and pharmacological interventions are missing, incorrect, or inappropriately applied. |
| 30 pts
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeIdentifies differential diagnoses related to case studies. | | 30 to >26.76 pts Excellent The response contains at least 3 differential diagnoses relevant and applicable to the case. | 26.76 to >23.7 pts Good The response contains at least 2 differential diagnoses relevant and applicable to the case. | 23.7 to >20.7 pts Fair The response contains at least 1 differential diagnosis relevant and applicable to the case. | 20.7 to >0 pts Poor The response contains few or no differential diagnoses and/or diagnoses are not relevant and applicable to the case. |
| 30 pts
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeFormulates a treatment plan related to case studies based on scientific rationale, evidence- based standards of care, and practice guidelines. Integrates ethical, psychological, physical, financial issues and Social Determinants of Health in plan. | | 30 to >26.76 pts Excellent Formulates a thorough treatment plan including explanations of appropriate diagnostic tests and treatment options. Fully incorporates syntheses representative of knowledge gained from the resources for the module and current credible sources, with no less than 75% of the treatment plan having exceptional depth and breadth. Supported by at least 3 current peer- reviewed, references or professional practice guidelines. | 26.76 to >23.7 pts Good Formulates a partially complete treatment plan including partial explanations of appropriate diagnostic tests and treatment options. Somewhat incorporates syntheses representative of knowledge gained from the resources for the module and current credible sources with no less than 50% of the treatment plan having exceptional depth and breadth. Supported by at least 3 current peer- reviewed, references or professional practice guidelines. | 23.7 to >20.7 pts Fair Formulates a minimally complete treatment plan including incomplete or vague explanations of appropriate diagnostic tests and treatment options. Lacking in synthesis of knowledge gained from the resources for the module and current credible sources. Supported by at least 2 current peer- reviewed, references or professional practice guidelines. | 20.7 to >0 pts Poor Formulates a treatment plan that contains incomplete explanations of appropriate diagnostic tests and treatment options and/ or explanations are missing. Lacks synthesis gained from the resources for the module and current credible sources. Supported by 1 or no current peer- reviewed, references or professional practice guidelines. |
| 30 pts
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten Expression and Formatting - English writing standards:Correct grammar, mechanics, and proper punctuation | | 5 to >4.45 pts Excellent Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors. | 4.45 to >3.95 pts Good Contains a few (1 or 2) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. | 3.95 to >3.45 pts Fair Contains several (3 or 4) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. | 3.45 to >0 pts Poor Contains many (≥ 5) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the reader’s understanding. |
| 5 pts
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten Expression and Formatting - The paper follows correct APA format for title page, headings, font, spacing, margins, indentations, page numbers, parenthetical/in-text citations, and reference list. | | 5 to >4.45 pts Excellent Uses correct APA format with no errors. | 4.45 to >3.95 pts Good Contains a few (1 or 2) APA format errors. | 3.95 to >3.45 pts Fair Contains several (3 or 4) APA format errors. | 3.45 to >0 pts Poor Contains many (≥ 5) APA format errors. |
| 5 pts
|
Total Points: 100 |