NURS 6051CASE STUDY ANALYSIS MODULE 7
CASE STUDY ANALYSIS
An understanding of the factors surrounding women’s and men’s health, infections, and hematologic disorders can be critically important to disease diagnosis and treatment in these areas. This importance is magnified by the fact that some diseases and disorders manifest differently based on the sex of the patient.
Effective disease analysis often requires an understanding that goes beyond the human systems involved. The impact of patient characteristics, as well as racial and ethnic variables, can also have an important impact..
An understanding of the symptoms of alterations in systems based on these characteristics is a critical step in diagnosis and treatment of many diseases. For APRNs, this understanding can also help educate patients and guide them through their treatment plans.
In this Assignment, you examine a case study and analyze the symptoms presented. You identify the elements that may be factors in the diagnosis, and you explain the implications to patient health.
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:
By Day 1 of this week, you will be assigned to a specific case study scenario for this Case Study Assignment. Please see the “Announcements” section of the classroom for your assignment from your Instructor.
The Assignment (1- to 2-page case study analysis)
In your Case Study Analysis related to the scenario provided, explain the following:
The factors that affect fertility (STDs).
Why inflammatory markers rise in STD/PID.
Why prostatitis and infection happens. Also explain the causes of systemic reaction.
Why a patient would need a splenectomy after a diagnosis of ITP.
Anemia and the different kinds of anemia (i.e., micro and macrocytic).
BY DAY 7 OF WEEK 10
Submit your Case Study Analysis Assignment by Day 7 of Week 10.
Reminder: The College of Nursing requires that all papers submitted include a title page, introduction, summary, and references. The sample paper provided at the Walden Writing Center provides an example of those required elements (available at https://academicguides.waldenu.edu/writingcenter/templates Links to an external site.). All papers submitted must use this formatting.
SUBMISSION INFORMATION
Before submitting your final assignment, you can check your draft for authenticity. To check your draft, access the Turnitin Drafts from the Start Here area.
To submit your completed assignment, save your Assignment as MD7Assgn1_LastName_Firstinitial
Then, click on Start Assignment near the top of the page.
Next, click on Upload File and select Submit Assignment for review.
Rubric
NURS_6501_Module7_Case Study_Assignment_Rubric
NURS_6501_Module7_Case Study_Assignment_RubricCriteriaRatingsPtsThis criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeDevelop a 1- to 2-page case study analysis, examining the patient symptoms presented in the case study. Be sure to address the following as it relates to the case you were assigned (omit section that does not pertain to your case, faculty will give full points for that section):Explain the factors that affect fertility (STDs)25 to >22.0 pts Excellent The response accurately and thoroughly describes the patient symptoms. … The response includes accurate, clear, and detailed explanations of the processes related to women’s and men’s health, infections, and hematologic disorders and is supported by evidence and/or research, as appropriate, to support the explanation. 22 to >19.0 pts Good The response describes the patient symptoms. … The response includes accurate, explanations of the processes related to women’s and men’s health, infections, and hematologic disorders and is supported by evidence and/or research, as appropriate, to support the explanation. 19 to >17.0 pts Fair The response describes the patient symptoms in a manner that is vague or inaccurate. … The response includes explanations of the processes related to women’s and men’s health, infections, and hematologic disorders, with explanations that are vague or based on inappropriate evidence/research. 17 to >0 pts Poor The response describes the patient symptoms in a manner that is vague and inaccurate, or the description is missing. … The response does not include explanations of the processes related to women’s and men’s health, infections, and hematologic disorders, or the explanations are vague or based on inappropriate evidence/research.25 ptsThis criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeExplain why inflammatory markers rise in STD/PID20 to >17.0 pts Excellent The response includes an accurate, complete, detailed, and specific analysis of the concepts and principles of pathophysiology across the life span and is supported by evidence and/or research, as appropriate, to support the explanation. 17 to >15.0 pts Good The response includes an accurate explanation of how the highlighted processes interact to affect the patient and is supported by evidence and/or research, as appropriate, to support the explanation. 15 to >13.0 pts Fair The response includes a vague or inaccurate explanation of how the highlighted processes interact to affect the patient, with explanations that are based on inappropriate evidence/research. 13 to >0 pts Poor The response includes a vague or inaccurate explanation of how the highlighted processes interact to affect the patient, with explanations that are based on inappropriate or missing evidence/research.20 ptsThis criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeExplain why prostatitis and infection happen. Also explain the causes of systemic reaction.20 to >17.0 pts Excellent The response includes an accurate, complete, detailed, and specific explanation of how the highlighted processes interact to affect the patient and is supported by evidence and/or research, as appropriate, to support the explanation. 17 to >15.0 pts Good The response includes an accurate explanation of how the highlighted processes interact to affect the patient and is supported by evidence and/or research, as appropriate, to support the explanation. 15 to >13.0 pts Fair The response includes a vague or inaccurate explanation of how the highlighted processes interact to affect the patient, with explanations that are based on inappropriate evidence/research. 13 to >0 pts Poor The response includes a vague or inaccurate explanation of how the highlighted processes interact to affect the patient, with explanations that are based on inappropriate or missing evidence/research.20 ptsThis criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeExplain why a patient would need a splenectomy after a diagnosis of ITP.10 to >4.0 pts Excellent The response includes an accurate, complete, detailed, and specific explanation of racial/ethnic variables that may impact physiological functioning and is supported by evidence and/or research, as appropriate, to support the explanation. 4 to >3.0 pts Good The response includes an accurate explanation of racial/ethnic variables that may impact physiological functioning and is supported by evidence and/or research, as appropriate, to support the explanation. 3 to >2.0 pts Fair The response includes a vague or inaccurate explanation of racial/ethnic variables that may impact physiological functioning, and/or explanations are based on inappropriate evidence/research. 2 to >0 pts Poor The response includes a vague or inaccurate explanation of racial/ethnic variables that may impact physiological functioning, or the explanations are based on inappropriate or no evidence/research.10 ptsThis criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeExplain anemia and the different kinds of anemia (i.e., micro and macrocytic).10 to >4.0 pts Excellent The response includes an accurate, complete, detailed, and specific explanation of racial/ethnic variables that may impact physiological functioning and is supported by evidence and/or research, as appropriate, to support the explanation. 4 to >3.0 pts Good The response includes an accurate explanation of racial/ethnic variables that may impact physiological functioning and is supported by evidence and/or research, as appropriate, to support the explanation. 3 to >2.0 pts Fair The response includes a vague or inaccurate explanation of racial/ethnic variables that may impact physiological functioning, and/or explanations are based on inappropriate evidence/research. 2 to >0 pts Poor The response includes a vague or inaccurate explanation of racial/ethnic variables that may impact physiological functioning, or the explanations are based on inappropriate or no evidence/research.10 ptsThis criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten Expression and Formatting – Paragraph Development and Organization: Paragraphs make clear points that support well-developed ideas, flow logically, and demonstrate continuity of ideas. Sentences are carefully focused—neither long and rambling nor short and lacking substance. A clear and comprehensive purpose statement and introduction are provided that delineate all required criteria.5 to >4.0 pts Excellent Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity. … A clear and comprehensive purpose statement, introduction, and conclusion are provided that delineate all required criteria. 4 to >3.0 pts Good Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 80% of the time. … The purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment are stated, yet are brief and not descriptive. 3 to >2.0 pts Fair Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 60%-79% of the time….The purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment are vague or off topic. 2 to >0 pts Poor Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity < 60% of the time. … No purpose statement, introduction, or conclusion were provided.5 ptsThis criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten Expression and Formatting – English Writing Standards: Correct grammar, mechanics, and proper punctuation5 to >4.0 pts Excellent Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors. 4 to >3.0 pts Good Contains a few (1 or 2) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. 3 to >2.0 pts Fair Contains several (3 or 4) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. 2 to >0 pts Poor Contains many (≥ 5) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the reader’s understanding.5 ptsThis 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, running heads, parenthetical/in-text citations, and reference list.5 to >4.0 pts Excellent Uses correct APA format with no errors. 4 to >3.0 pts Good Contains a few (1 or 2) APA format errors. 3 to >2.0 pts Fair Contains several (3 or 4) APA format errors. 2 to >0 pts Poor Contains many (≥ 5) APA format errors.5 ptsTotal Points: 100
PreviousNext
