Category: Nursing Assignment Help

Medication Prescription: Pharmacokinetic and Pharmacodynamic Processes.

4 different sources
Examine Case Study: A Middle-Aged Caucasian Man With Anxiety. You will be asked to make
three decisions concerning the medication to prescribe to this client. Be sure to consider factors
that might impact the client’s pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic processes.
At each decision point stop to complete the following:
Decision #1
Which decision did you select?

Why did you select this decision? Support your response with evidence and references to the Learning Resources.
What were you hoping to achieve by making this decision? Support your response with evidence
and references to the Learning Resources.
Explain any difference between what you expected to achieve with Decision #1 and the results of
the decision. Why were they different?
Decision #2
Why did you select this decision? Support your response with evidence and references to the
Learning Resources.
What were you hoping to achieve by making this decision? Support your response with evidence
and references to the Learning Resources.
Explain any difference between what you expected to achieve with Decision #2 and the results of
the decision. Why were they different?
Decision #3
Why did you select this decision? Support your response with evidence and references to the
Learning Resources.
What were you hoping to achieve by making this decision? Support your response with evidence
and references to the Learning Resources.
Explain any difference between what you expected to achieve with Decision #3 and the results of
the decision. Why were they different?
Also include how ethical considerations might impact your treatment plan and communication
with clients.

Note: Support your rationale with a minimum of three academic resources. While you may use
the course text to support your rationale, it will not count toward the resource requirement.

Instructions 

Analyze your assigned case and write your case study analysis.
The Sittig and Singh article introduces a new sociotechnical with eight dimensions for studying
HIT in complex adaptive healthcare systems.
If you read the article carefully, you may have noticed that in Table 1, Sittig and Singh apply their
new 8-dimension sociotechnical model to analyze the same cases from Unit 1. Table 1 includes
some sociotechnical factors that would need to be addressed. You may note that the sociotechnical approach reveals more factors that need to be addressed compared to the factors
that were raised in the Unit 1 case studies that used an MIS approach.
For the case study analysis, use Sittig and Singh’s 8-dimension sociotechnical model to analyze
the case study assigned to you. The cases this week also described failures and used an MIS
approach. Use Sittig and Singh’s 8-dimension sociotechnical model to analyze your assigned
case to identify the sociotechnical factors that should be addressed and discuss how the
sociotechnical dimensions interact with each other to give you insights about the problems,
solutions, or approaches in the case that may not be discussed by the authors.
Your analysis should demonstrate critical thinking and scholarly investigation, should be informed
by peer-reviewed literature, and referenced appropriately.
Each of you has been assigned a case, which you will find in the Readings folder. Your case
number is posted next to your name in the “Find your case assignment” chart.
1. Case #1 is Hoot, N. R., & Sanders, D. L. (2005). Case 8. Implementation of OpChart in West
Medical Building. In L. Einbinder & N. M. Lorenzi (Eds.), Transforming Health Care Through
Information: Case Studies (3rd ed., Health Informatics, pp. 81-91). New York: Springer
Science+Business Media.
Case Study Analysis Requirements
• You must follow APA style rules for your case study analysis, including for heading, citations,
and references.
Required Assignment Format
The following sections should be the Level 1 headings for your case study analysis. You may,
and probably should, have Level 2 headings to organize your arguments within each section of the paper.
• Introduction – This is where you describe the background and situation/problem presented in
the case. Introduce, in your own words, the problem and situation presented in the case study.
• Results/Analysis – This is where you narrate the findings of your analysis and describe how you
made your decision about what to analyze. Write up your analysis of the case, using section
headers and supportive references as appropriate. In this case study analysis, this could include
characteristics of each of the eight dimensions of Sittig and Singh’s new sociotechnical model.
(E.g. a description of the users, some of their characteristics that impact the project, and how you
decided those characteristics were important.)
• Discussion – Discuss the interpretation of your results and analysis. For this case study
analysis, you might discuss how the characteristics of the dimensions did or did not match to
create success or failure.
• Conclusion – Summarize your findings in this section.
Tips for Conducting an Analysis
What is the situation?
Usually reading the first and last sections of the case is sufficient to identify the situation.
Decisions and evaluations tend to be stated at the beginning.
What is the problem?
• Who or what is the subject of the problem (e.g., a manager)? What is the problem? What’s the significance of the problem to the subject? Who is responsible for the problem and what might
s/he need to know to do something about it? Make sure you know the problem that needs to be
diagnosed. Consider whether the characteristics of the problem suggest causes.
1. Subject of the problem
2. The problem
3. significance of the problem to the subject
4. Who is responsible for the problem?
5. What can responsible party do about the problem
Make your decision about what to analyze
• Review the 8 dimensions of Sittig and Singh outlined in Table 1:
1. Hardware and software computing infrastructure refers to equipment and software used to
power, support, and operate clinical applications and devices.
2. Clinical content refers to textual or numeric data and images that constitute the ‘language’ of
clinical applications.
3. The human computer interface includes all aspects of the computer that users can see, touch
or hear as they interact with it.
4. People refers to everyone who interacts in some way with the system, from developer to end
user, including potential patient-users.
5. Workflow and communication are the processes or steps involved in ensuring that patient care
tasks are carried out effectively.
6. Internal organizational features are, e.g., policies, procedures and culture.
7. External rules and regulations may facilitate or constrain many aspects of the preceding dimensions.
8. Measurement and monitoring refers to the process of measuring and evaluating both intended
and unintended consequences of HIT implementation and use.
• Identify which of the 8 dimensions of the Sittig and Singh model seem most appropriate to the
situation/problem as presented in the case.
1.
• Thinking about the 8 dimensions, for which dimensions do you find the most evidence in the
case. Those are the dimensions you should investigate further for your case analysis.
1.
• If the case has a lot of quantitative evidence, to which of the 8 dimensions is the evidence most
relevant? If you can’t see an immediate connection, propose one that seems reasonable to
explain the situation. Work up as much relevant, high-value quantitative evidence as you can.
1.
• If there are conflicts between individuals or groups in the case, think about why that is. Build
your analysis from the point of view of each of the parties to the conflict.
1.
• If one or more active participants in the event is/are in a difficult position in relation to the
situation, consider why that is in your analysis.
1.
Defend your decision about what you analyzed
• Among the dimensions you have selected so far that you felt were in greatest evidence in the
case, which dimension(s) do you feel is (are) most likely the major cause(s) of the problems.

1.
• Provide a detailed explanation of why you made this selection to the exclusion of others.
Defend your choice. What stands out in the case to make you feel as you do.
1.

Health Care Delivery Models and Nursing Practice

Examine changes introduced to reform or restructure the U.S. health care delivery system. In a
1,000 word paper, discuss action taken for reform and restructuring and the role of the nurse
within this changing environment.
Include the following:
Outline a current or emerging health care law or federal regulation introduced to reform or
restructure some aspect of the health care delivery system. Describe the effect of this on nursing
practice and the nurse’s role and responsibility.
Discuss how quality measures and pay for performance affect patient outcomes. Explain how
these affect nursing practice and describe the expectations and responsibilities of the nursing
role in these situations.
Discuss professional nursing leadership and management roles that have arisen and how they
are important in responding to emerging trends and in the promotion of patient safety and quality
care in diverse health care settings.
Research emerging trends. Predict two ways in which the practice of nursing and nursing roles
will grow or transform within the next five years to respond to upcoming trends or predicted
issues in health care.

Global Healthcare Disasters -COVID-19

COVID-19 Emergency Preparedness

COVID-19 Pandemic. Is the world handing it well?

Components of the Final Paper
Students must address all content areas, found below, in their paper. If the specific content
area(s) are not relevant to your disaster situation, please address this, within the body of your
paper that the content areas were not applicable.
If your specific situation is not applicable, when you type that section of the paper, please
indicate that the specific area was not applicable to your situation. You must address each of the
content areas, as outlined below, whether applicable or not. You will lose points if all of the areas
are not mentioned in your paper. A specific content area may not be relevant to you, however, if
you do not indicate that the content area is not applicable, I won’t know if the content area is not
applicable, or if you simply forgot to address the content area.

If your topic is not an actual disaster situation, for the content areas that need to be researched,
you may indicate how the specific areas of content could or would be impacted by the specific
topic of research, if the content area is not from a real disaster situation. (For example, the type
of disaster and consequences to the community, you would indicate the type of disaster you are
writing about and then potential areas of impact to the community, if not an actual disaster.)
Content areas
Introduction of topic
Why this topic is of special interest to you
How this topic would impact the community either locally, nationally or internationally
Literature review
Review at least 3 journal articles, you can use the journal article review assignment as a guide
for reviewing the article. How does it apply to your topic, why is this article relevant to your paper.
You should have quotes in the other sections of the paper.
Address all of these topics in your plan (whether applicable, or not)
Type of disaster and consequences to local, national, or international community
How the public health department became involved in the disaster
The role that federal agencies (Homeland Security, Health & Human Services, etc.) played in the
disaster situation AND then address 2 of the following:
The system of communication employed in the disaster situation.
The actual, or potential, psychosocial impacts of disaster to the individual, responders, or the
community.
The actual, or potential, environmental health issues that resulted, or may result, from the disaster. How were the environmental health issues managed?
How people with disabilities, or others with access and functional needs, were managed.
The actual, or potential ethical considerations produced in the disaster situation.
An evaluation of how the disaster was managed, from your point of view.
Conclusion (this should tie everything together, could also mention future research that could be
done etc._)
Reference page

Epidemiology Paper

Resources To use:

Friis, R. H., & Sellers, T. A. (2014). Epidemiology for public health practice (5th ed.). Sudbury, MA: Jones & Bartlett.

Chapter 10, “Data Interpretation Issues”

Chapter 15, “Social, Behavioral, and Psychosocial Epidemiology”

Appendix A – Guide to the Critical Appraisal of an Epidemiologic/Public Health Research Article

In Chapter 10, the authors describe issues related to data interpretation and address the main types of research errors that need to be considered when conducting epidemiologic research, as well as when analyzing published results. It also presents techniques for reducing bias. Chapter 15 features psychosocial, behavioral, and social epidemiology. Appendix A includes criteria to consider when reading an empirical journal article.

Elliott, A. M., Smith, B. H., Penny, K., Smith, W. C., & Chambers, W. A. (1999). The epidemiology of chronic pain in the community. The Lancet, 354(9186), 1248–1252.

This article describes an early epidemiologic study on chronic pain. Carefully review this article noting the structure of the research design, assessment and data collection, and analysis strategies. You will refer to this article for Discussion 2.

Oppenheimer, G. M. (2010). Framingham Heart Study: The first 20 years. Progress in Cardiovascular Diseases, 53(1), 55–61.

The Framingham Heart Study is a landmark epidemiologic study that began in the 1940s. The author of this article reviews the history of the Framingham Heart Study and its contribution to population health. As you read this article, consider any sources of bias or potential conflict of interest. You will refer to this article for Discussion 2.

Phillips, C. V., & Goodman, K. J. (2004). The missed lessons of Sir Austin Bradford Hill. Epidemiologic Perspectives & Innovations, 1(3). Retrieved from http://www.biomedcentral.com/1742-5573/1/3

In 1965, Austin Bradford Hill worked on a paper that has become a standard in public health and epidemiologic study about how to make decisions based on epidemiologic evidence. Hill put forth strategies for inferring causation and stressed the need for considering costs and benefits when planning health-promoting interventions. Review this article, which examines how Hill’s strategies are often misused or misinterpreted.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2011). CDC health disparities and inequalities report—United States, 2011. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, Supplement, (60), 1–114. Retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/pdf/other/su6001.pdf. [Read pages 11–32]

 

This report consolidates national data on disparities in mortality, morbidity, behavioral risk factors, health care access, preventive health services, and social determinants of critical health problems in the United States by using selected indicators. The required section of reading introduces the social determinants of health and environmental hazards.

World Health Organization. (2011). Social determinants of health. Retrieved from http://www.who.int/social_determinants/en/

According to the World Health Organization, “The social determinants of health are mostly responsible for health inequities—the unfair and avoidable differences in health status seen within and between countries.” This article presents an introduction to social determinants of health.

World Health Organization. (2011). Social determinants of health: Key concepts. Retrieved from http://www.who.int/social_determinants/thecommission/finalreport/key_concepts/en/index.html

This article outlines key concepts related to the social determinants of health.

Healthy People 2020. (2011). Social determinants of health. Retrieved from http://healthypeople.gov/2020/topicsobjectives2020/overview.aspx?topicid=39

This website presents an overview of the social determinants of health and addresses how the information relates to Healthy People 2020.

UCL Institute of Health Equity. (2018). ‘Fair society healthy lives’ (The Marmot Review). Retrieved from http://www.instituteofhealthequity.org/resources-reports/fair-society-healthy-lives-the-marmot-review

Discussion 1: Psychosocial Factors in Health

 

Although the United States spends more money per capita on health care delivery, statistics indicate it is not a particularly healthy country. Over 50% of all preventable deaths in the United States are a result of unhealthy lifestyle behaviors (AACN, 2006). As epidemiologists explore essential questions such as how stressful life events and behavioral choices may influence an individual’s health, society wrestles with the distinction of what is actually within the control of an individual, and therefore relates to a personal responsibility for promoting well being, versus how larger-scale efforts can modulate psychosocial risk factors that result in population health problems.

In this Discussion, you will consider the connection between psychosocial risk factors and health outcomes. As you review the research literature, consider how you have come across this issue in your professional practice. As a nurse leader, what opportunities do you have to apply the information presented this week to promote improvements in population health status?

 

To prepare:

Review the Learning Resources, focusing on the influence of psychosocial factors on health and disease.

Locate at least two examples from the research literature of how these factors influence health. If necessary, conduct additional research using the Walden Library and credible websites.

Examine strategies currently being employed to address these factors, including health promotion and disease prevention efforts.

Ask yourself: How are these strategies designed to improve population health status?

By Day 3

Post a cohesive scholarly response that addresses the following:

Provide a brief summary of each example, including the influence of psychosocial factors on health and disease as discussed in the research literature. Cite your sources.

What strategies are currently being used to address these factors? Support your response with examples from the literature.

Knowing that there are psychosocial factors that influence acute and chronic diseases, what is the role of the nurse in probing for that information or in larger initiatives?

3 References is Good!!

Rubric Detail

Select Grid View or List View to change the rubric’s layout.

Content

 

Excellent

Discussion post minimum requirements:

*The original posting must be completed by Wednesday, Day 3, at 10:59pm MST. Two response postings to two different peer original posts, on two different days, are required by Saturday, Day 6, at 11:59pm MST. Faculty member inquiries require responses, which are not included in the minimum number of posts. Your Discussion Board postings should be written in standard edited English and follow APA style for format and grammar as closely as possible given the constraints of the online platform. Be sure to support the postings with specific citations from this week’s Learning Resources as well as resources available through the Walden University online databases. Refer to the Essential Guide to APA Style for Walden Students to ensure your in-text citations and reference list are correct.

Points Range:

8 (26.67%) – 8 (26.67%)

Discussion postings and responses exceed the requirements of the Discussion instructions. They: Respond to the question being asked or the prompt provided; – Go beyond what is required in some meaningful way (e.g., the post contributes a new dimension, unearths something unanticipated); -Are substantive, reflective, with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings and current credible evidence. – Demonstrate significant ability to generalize and extend thinking and evaluate theories or concepts within the topic or context of the discussion. -Demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered the Learning -Resources as well as additional resources and has read, viewed, or considered a sampling of colleagues’ postings; -Exceed the minimum requirements for discussion posts*.

Points Range:

8 (26.67%) – 8 (26.67%)

Discussion postings and responses: -demonstrate in-depth understanding and application of concepts and issues presented in the course (e.g., insightful interpretations including analysis, synthesis and/or evaluation of topic; – are well supported by pertinent research/evidence from a variety of and multiple peer- reviewed books and journals, where appropriate; -Demonstrate significant mastery and thoughtful/accurate application of content, applicable skills or strategies presented in the course.

Points Range:

8 (26.67%) – 8 (26.67%)

Discussion postings and responses significantly contribute to the quality of the discussion/interaction and thinking and learning by: -providing Rich and relevant examples; discerning and thought-provoking ideas; and stimulating thoughts and probes; – -demonstrating original thinking, new perspectives, and extensive synthesis of ideas supported by the literature.

6 (20%) – 6 (20%)

Discussion postings and responses exceed doctoral -level writing expectations. They: · Use grammar and syntax that is clear, concise, and appropriate to doctoral level writing; · Make few if any errors in spelling, grammar, and syntax; · Use original language and refrain from directly quoting original source materials; -provide correct APA · Are positive, courteous, and respectful when offering suggestions, constructive feedback, or opposing viewpoints.

 

Total Points: 30

Name: NURS_8310_ Week6 part 1_Discussion_Rubric

2. Provide an introduction about the ethical topic. The introduction should be interesting and
capture the reader’s attention.
a. Provide a brief description of the scholarly article, this may be the same as in assignment 1
b. Discuss the purpose of your paper and the implications it has on your future healthcare
profession
c. Continue with the ethical issue that you’re identified in Assignment 1 which is directly related to
your selected ethical topic
d. Summarize in your own words
3. Explore Practical Alternative
a. Don’t limit to the obvious, consider five or more alternative
b. Are the alternative solutions opposing each other?

c. Identify the positive and negative consequences of each alternative
d. Are there guidelines or code of ethics to support an alternative?
4. Complete the Action
a. Clearly describe the problem
b. Provide a list of alternative that were considered
c. Provide a clear rationale for the proposed ethical decision
5. Evaluate the Process and the Outcome
a. What were the most challenging aspects in the decision-making process
b. What is the final outcome?
c. What new problems did the solution create?
6. Summary
a. Summarize the important points related to the ethical topic
b. What did you learn through this process?
c. End with a concluding statement
7. Citations and References must be included to support the information within each section of
the paper. Refer to APA manual https://www.apastyle.org/
8. The reference page must be included and begins as a new page. All references should be
cited in the paper.

Week 6: Epidemiological Applications, Part 2 and Data Interpretation

Can a person’s experience with racial discrimination impact aging and his or her physical health? The answer may be yes, according to a preliminary epidemiologic research study sponsored by the National Institute on Aging (NIA) and the National Institute of Health (Szanton et al., 2011; NIH, 2011). The NIA looks at factors such as race and socioeconomic status in relation to health disparities and outcomes. The Szanton et al. study identified a sample population of African Americans living in the Baltimore area who reported experiencing racial discrimination in their lifetime. This sample population showed higher levels of red blood cell oxidative stress, a potential risk factor in cardiovascular and other age-related diseases. Although this study presents only preliminary findings, it is interesting to consider the role that stress and other psychosocial factors play in the overall health of individuals and populations.

This week, you will examine psychosocial factors that influence health and disease. By understanding the role of these factors in health, along with environmental and genetic factors, you will have additional tools to improve health outcomes for individuals and populations.

Finally, in order to develop evidence-based interventions, DNP-prepared nurses need to be able to critically appraise the research literature, including the conclusions drawn from the data analysis. To practice this skill, you will appraise two articles and consider potential sources of confounding and bias.

Learning Objectives

Students will:

• Evaluate the influence of psychosocial factors in health and disease
• Critically appraise epidemiologic literature
• Analyze the potential influence of confounding variables in a research study
• Analyze potential sources of bias in epidemiologic research

Learning Resources

Note: To access this week’s required library resources, please click on the link to the Course Readings List, found in the Course Materials section of your Syllabus.

Required Readings

Friis, R. H., & Sellers, T. A. (2014). Epidemiology for public health practice (5th ed.). Sudbury, MA: Jones & Bartlett.

• Chapter 10, “Data Interpretation Issues”
• Chapter 15, “Social, Behavioral, and Psychosocial Epidemiology”
• Appendix A – Guide to the Critical Appraisal of an Epidemiologic/Public Health Research Article

In Chapter 10, the authors describe issues related to data interpretation and address the main types of research errors that need to be considered when conducting epidemiologic research, as well as when analyzing published results. It also presents techniques for reducing bias. Chapter 15 features psychosocial, behavioral, and social epidemiology. Appendix A includes criteria to consider when reading an empirical journal article.

Elliott, A. M., Smith, B. H., Penny, K., Smith, W. C., & Chambers, W. A. (1999). The epidemiology of chronic pain in the community. The Lancet, 354(9186), 1248–1252.

 

This article describes an early epidemiologic study on chronic pain. Carefully review this article noting the structure of the research design, assessment and data collection, and analysis strategies. You will refer to this article for Discussion 2.

Oppenheimer, G. M. (2010). Framingham Heart Study: The first 20 years. Progress in Cardiovascular Diseases, 53(1), 55–61.

 

The Framingham Heart Study is a landmark epidemiologic study that began in the 1940s. The author of this article reviews the history of the Framingham Heart Study and its contribution to population health. As you read this article, consider any sources of bias or potential conflict of interest. You will refer to this article for Discussion 2.

Phillips, C. V., & Goodman, K. J. (2004). The missed lessons of Sir Austin Bradford Hill. Epidemiologic Perspectives & Innovations, 1(3). Retrieved from http://www.biomedcentral.com/1742-5573/1/3

In 1965, Austin Bradford Hill worked on a paper that has become a standard in public health and epidemiologic study about how to make decisions based on epidemiologic evidence. Hill put forth strategies for inferring causation and stressed the need for considering costs and benefits when planning health-promoting interventions. Review this article, which examines how Hill’s strategies are often misused or misinterpreted.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2011). CDC health disparities and inequalities report—United States, 2011. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, Supplement, (60), 1–114. Retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/pdf/other/su6001.pdf. [Read pages 11–32]

This report consolidates national data on disparities in mortality, morbidity, behavioral risk factors, health care access, preventive health services, and social determinants of critical health problems in the United States by using selected indicators. The required section of reading introduces the social determinants of health and environmental hazards.

World Health Organization. (2011). Social determinants of health. Retrieved from http://www.who.int/social_determinants/en/

According to the World Health Organization, “The social determinants of health are mostly responsible for health inequities—the unfair and avoidable differences in health status seen within and between countries.” This article presents an introduction to social determinants of health.

World Health Organization. (2011). Social determinants of health: Key concepts. Retrieved from http://www.who.int/social_determinants/thecommission/finalreport/key_concepts/en/index.html

This article outlines key concepts related to the social determinants of health.

Healthy People 2020. (2011). Social determinants of health. Retrieved from http://healthypeople.gov/2020/topicsobjectives2020/overview.aspx?topicid=39

This website presents an overview of the social determinants of health and addresses how the information relates to Healthy People 2020.

UCL Institute of Health Equity. (2018). ‘Fair society healthy lives’ (The Marmot Review). Retrieved from http://www.instituteofhealthequity.org/resources-reports/fair-society-healthy-lives-the-marmot-review

 

Optional Resources

Genaidy, A. M., Lemasters, G. K., Lockey, J., Succop, P., Deddens, J., Sobeih, & Dunning, K. (2007). An epidemiological appraisal instrumental – a tool for evaluation of epidemiological studies. Ergonomics, 50(6), 920–960.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2011). Social determinants of health. Retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov/socialdeterminants/

 

Discussion 1: Psychosocial Factors in Health

Although the United States spends more money per capita on health care delivery, statistics indicate it is not a particularly healthy country. Over 50% of all preventable deaths in the United States are a result of unhealthy lifestyle behaviors (AACN, 2006). As epidemiologists explore essential questions such as how stressful life events and behavioral choices may influence an individual’s health, society wrestles with the distinction of what is actually within the control of an individual, and therefore relates to a personal responsibility for promoting well being, versus how larger-scale efforts can modulate psychosocial risk factors that result in population health problems.

In this Discussion, you will consider the connection between psychosocial risk factors and health outcomes. As you review the research literature, consider how you have come across this issue in your professional practice. As a nurse leader, what opportunities do you have to apply the information presented this week to promote improvements in population health status?

To prepare:

• Review the Learning Resources, focusing on the influence of psychosocial factors on health and disease.
• Locate at least two examples from the research literature of how these factors influence health. If necessary, conduct additional research using the Walden Library and credible websites.
• Examine strategies currently being employed to address these factors, including health promotion and disease prevention efforts.
• Ask yourself: How are these strategies designed to improve population health status?

By Day 3

Post a cohesive scholarly response that addresses the following:

• Provide a brief summary of each example, including the influence of psychosocial factors on health and disease as discussed in the research literature. Cite your sources.
• What strategies are currently being used to address these factors? Support your response with examples from the literature.
• Knowing that there are psychosocial factors that influence acute and chronic diseases, what is the role of the nurse in probing for that information or in larger initiatives?

Read a selection of your colleagues’ responses.

By Day 5

Respond to at least one of your colleagues in one or more of the following ways:

• Ask a probing question, substantiated with additional background information, evidence, or research.
• Share an insight from having read your colleagues’ postings, synthesizing the information to provide new perspectives.
• Offer and support an alternative perspective using readings from the classroom or from your own research in the Walden Library.
• Validate an idea with your own experience and additional research.
• Make a suggestion based on additional evidence drawn from readings or after synthesizing multiple postings.
• Expand on your colleagues’ postings by providing additional insights or contrasting perspectives based on readings and evidence.

Submission and Grading Information

Grading Criteria

To access your rubric:

Week 6 Discussion 1 Rubric

 

 

Post by Day 3 and Respond by Day 5

To participate in this Discussion:

Week 6 Discussion 1

 

 

Discussion 2: Appraising the Literature

For the DNP-prepared nurse, it is important to hone skills related to reviewing and evaluating research literature to implement evidence-based practices. As you examine epidemiological research, in particular, it is essential to ask, “What are the strengths and weakness of the research method(s)? Are the data analysis and interpretation sound? Is there any evidence of bias?” This Discussion provides you and your colleagues valuable practice in critically analyzing research literature.

To prepare:

• With this week’s Learning Resources in mind, reflect on the importance of analyzing epidemiological research studies.
• Critically appraise the Oppenheimer (2010) and Elliott, Smith, Penny, Smith and Chambers (1999) articles presented in the Learning Resources using Appendix A in Epidemiology for Public Health Practice as a guide.
• Determine the strengths and weaknesses of the research methods and data analysis of each study.
• Ask yourself, “Is any bias evident in either study? What did the researchers do to control for potential bias?”
• Finally, consider the importance of data interpretation in epidemiologic literature and the issues that may arise if potential confounding factors are not considered.

By Day 5

Post a cohesive scholarly response that addresses the following:

• Appraise the Oppenheimer (2010) and Elliott et al. (1999) articles, summarizing the strengths and weaknesses of each study.
• Analyze potential sources of bias in each study, and suggest strategies for minimizing bias.
• Suggest possible confounding variables that may have influenced the results of each study.

Read a selection of your colleagues’ responses.

By Day 7

Respond to at least one of your colleagues in one or more of the following ways:

• Ask a probing question, substantiated with additional background information, evidence, or research.
• Share an insight from having read your colleagues’ postings, synthesizing the information to provide new perspectives.
• Offer and support an alternative perspective using readings from the classroom or from your own research in the Walden Library.
• Validate an idea with your own experience and additional research.
• Make a suggestion based on additional evidence drawn from readings or after synthesizing multiple postings.
• Expand on your colleagues’ postings by providing additional insights or contrasting perspectives based on readings and evidence.

Submission and Grading Information

Grading Criteria

To access your rubric:

Week 6 Discussion 2 Rubric

 

 

Post by Day 5 and Respond by Day 7

To participate in this Discussion:

Week 6 Discussion 2