Category: Uncategorized

Posted onUncategorized

i-Human Case Study: Evaluation and Management of Growth and Development Issues NRNP_6541_Week2_Assignment_Rubric NRNP_6541_Week2_Assignment_Rubric Criteria Ratings Pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeHistory: Complete an appropriate health history (Scores are automatically calculated in iHuman platform). Evidence of Academic Integrity Issues will result in a grade of 0. 10 pts Proficient Achieve a score of 85-100% Need a high-quality paper urgently? We can deliver within hours. PLACE AN ORDER 5 pts Competent Achieve a score of 65-84% 1 pts Novice Achieve a score of less than 65% 10 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomePhysical Exam: Complete an appropriate physical exam (Scores are automatically calculated in iHuman platform). Evidence of Academic Integrity Issues will result in a grade of 0. 10 pts Proficient Achieve a score of 85-100% 5 pts Competent Achieve a score of 65-84% 1 pts Novice Achieve a score of less than 65% 10 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeProblem Statement: Clearly written problem statement including all aspects including subjective/objective data. 5 to >3.0 pts Proficient Clearly written problem statement including all pertinent information related to chief complaint. 3 to >1.0 pts Competent Well written problem statement but missing 1-2 key components. 1 to >0 pts Novice Poorly written problem statement. Incomplete ideas and sentences. Lacks basic information. 5 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeHPI: Complete HPI including all 8 aspects and pertinent information related to chief complaint. 10 to >6.0 pts Proficient Clearly written HPI statement including all 8 aspects and pertinent information related to chief complaint. Includes pertinent positives and negatives. 6 to >2.0 pts Competent Well written HPI statement but missing 1-2 key components from the history. Missing pertinent positives and negatives. 2 to >0 pts Novice Poorly written HPI statement. Incomplete ideas and sentences. Lacks basic history taking skills. Missing pertinent positives and negatives. 10 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeDiagnosis, Differentials, and Coding: What were the key clinical presentations in this patient that led you to choose these differentials; then how did you rule them out to reach your primary diagnosis? 10 to >6.0 pts Proficient Primary diagnosis identified. Appropriate and clearly written differential diagnoses. Minimum of three differentials with appropriate rationale included. Appropriate codes included. 6 to >2.0 pts Competent Correct primary diagnosis identified. Well written differential diagnoses. May be missing 1-2 critical components. Priority list may be out of order. At least 2 differentials are included and rationale is generally appropriate. Most codes correct but some errors. 2 to >0 pts Novice Primary diagnosis is wrong. Differential diagnosis list too brief and inconclusive. May be missing 3 or more critical components. 0 to 2 differentials are included and rationale is lacking or not appropriate. Codes are incorrect. 10 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeMedications: Ordered (including over the counter) are appropriate, evidenced based, written as a complete prescription, and includes appropriate patient education. 10 to >6.0 pts Proficient Medications prescribed are appropriate, evidenced based, and full prescription is included and dosing correct. Full patient education information is included. 6 to >2.0 pts Competent Medications prescribed are appropriate, may not be evidenced based, and missing 1 or 2 elements of the prescription. Dosing is correct. Some patient education information is missing. 2 to >0 pts Novice Medications prescribed are inappropriate, are not evidenced based, and missing more than 3 elements of the prescription. Dosing is incorrect. Patient education information is inaccurate or missing important elements. 10 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeManagement Plan: Nonpharmacological treatment, Social Determinants of Health (SDOH) is addressed and evidenced based screening tool is used. 20 to >14.0 pts Proficient Clearly written plan covering all critical components for patient’s final diagnosis. SDOH and Health promotion/anticipatory guidance is addressed. 14 to >8.0 pts Competent Well written plan but may be missing 1-2 key issues critical to patient’s diagnosis. Some aspects of SDOH are addressed. Some aspects of Health Promotion/anticipatory guidance are addressed. 8 to >0 pts Novice Poorly written plan. May be missing 3 or more key issues that are critical to patient’s diagnosis. There are missing aspects of SDOH and Health Promotion anticipatory guidance 20 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomePatient Education 10 to >6.0 pts Proficient Comprehensive patient education is included related to current health visit and recommended health screenings. 6 to >2.0 pts Competent Patient education is present but missing 1 or 2 key pieces of information. Missing some recommendation for health screenings. 2 to >0 pts Novice Patient education is missing many aspects related to current visit. Recommended health screenings are missing. 10 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeFollow Up Instructions 10 to >6.0 pts Proficient Follow up instructions are complete and include time to next visit and specific symptoms to prompt a return visit sooner. 6 to >2.0 pts Competent Follow up instructions are generally complete but missing 1 or 2 aspects. Symptoms that would prompt a return visit sooner are included but some are missing. 2 to >0 pts Novice Follow up instructions are missing important timing aspects. Symptoms prompting return visit sooner are incomplete or missing. 10 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeScholarly References and Clinical Practice Guidelines: The assignment includes a minimum of 3 scholarly references that are not older than 5 years. Clinical practice guidelines are included if applicable. 5 pts Excellent Contains parenthetical/in-text citations and at least 3 evidenced based references less than 5 years old are listed. Clinical practice guidelines are cited if applicable. 3 pts Good Contains parenthetical/in-text citations and at least 2 evidenced based references less than 5 years old are listed. Clinical practice guidelines are cited if applicable. 1 pts Poor Contains no parenthetical/in-text citations and 0 evidenced based references listed. Clinical practice guidelines are not cited if applicable. 5 pts Total Points: 100 Struggling with this assignment?

by

i-Human Case Study: Evaluation and Management of Growth and Development Issues NRNP_6541_Week2_Assignment_Rubric NRNP_6541_Week2_Assignment_Rubric Criteria Ratings Pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeHistory: Complete…

Read More