HUM 102 MODULE THREE SHORT ANSWER ASSIGNMENT GUIDELINES AND RUBRIC

[ORDER] NURS_8310 WEEK 10 ASSIGNMENT: APPLYING EPIDEMIOLOGY TO PROGRAM DESIGN FOR CHRONIC DISEASE

$ 150.67

APPLYING EPIDEMIOLOGY TO PROGRAM DESIGN FOR CHRONIC DISEASE

As you know, promoting positive social change is a part of the Walden mission. To be an effective agent for social change, nurses must be able to logically and critically analyze population health issues using epidemiologic concepts, and then translate this knowledge into evidence-based practice to improve healthcare outcomes. This exercise will afford you such an experience at the population level. This is an exciting time to be working in the field of population health with all the new, dynamic, and innovative technologies and strategies to help patients and populations become more knowledgeable about their health.

Order Now
Category:
Order This Paper

APPLYING EPIDEMIOLOGY TO PROGRAM DESIGN FOR CHRONIC DISEASE

Roughly 28.5 million Americans were still uninsured as of 2017, and 133 million Americans […] suffer from at least one chronic condition.
—Nash et al. (2021, p. 5)

As you know, promoting positive social change is a part of the Walden mission. To be an effective agent for social change, nurses must be able to logically and critically analyze population health issues using epidemiologic concepts, and then translate this knowledge into evidence-based practice to improve healthcare outcomes. This exercise will afford you such an experience at the population level. This is an exciting time to be working in the field of population health with all the new, dynamic, and innovative technologies and strategies to help patients and populations become more knowledgeable about their health.

This week’s Learning Resources present numerous health problems that result in a need for ongoing care. Your Assignment is to select a chronic disease of professional importance to you, and then design an intervention program to improve the health of populations affected by it.

Reference:

Nash, D. B., Skoufalos, A., Fabius, R. J., & Oglesby, W. H. (2021). Population health: Creating a culture of wellness (3rd ed). Jones & Bartlett Learning.

RESOURCES

Be sure to review the Learning Resources before completing this activity.
Click the weekly resources link to access the resources.

WEEKLY RESOURCES

LEARNING RESOURCES

Required Readings

  • Curley, A. L. C. (Ed.). (2020). Population-based nursing: Concepts and competencies for advanced practice(3rd ed.). Springer.
    • Chapter 7, “Concepts in Program Design and Development”
  • Center for Community Health and Development. (n.d.). Toolkits. In Community tool box.Links to an external site.University of Kansas. https://ctb.ku.edu/en/toolkits
    Note:     The toolkits page provides guidance on designing and developing programs to improve population outcomes.
  • Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2021). National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion (NCCDPHP): Links to an external site.https://www.cdc.gov/chronicdisease/index.htm
  • Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2018). Writing SMART objectivesLinks to an external site.. Evaluation Briefs.
    https://www.cdc.gov/healthyyouth/evaluation/pdf/brief3b.pdf
  • The Community GuideLinks to an external site.. (n.d.). https://www.thecommunityguide.org/index.html
  • Minnesota Department of Health. (n.d.). Smart objectivesLinks to an external site.. https://www.health.state.mn.us/communities/practice/resources/phqitoolbox/objectives.html

TO PREPARE:

  • Review the Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion (NCCDPHP) website from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).
  • Select one of the identified chronic diseases of national significance that impacts a population of interest to you.
  • Consider a health outcome you would like to improve in this population related to the selected chronic disease.
  • Develop a program proposal to improve this health outcome for this population using the assignment guidelines below. Select one of the program models in Curley, Chapter 7, to guide your planning.
  • Review the SMART objective resources for a review of how to write objectives for your program.
  • Use the Walden APA paper template, including appropriate APA 7 headings, to develop this Assignment.
THE ASSIGNMENT

In a 7- to 10-page proposal (not including title page and references), address the following:

  • Briefly identify your selected chronic health issue and population.
  • Describe the geographic region and important characteristics of this population.
  • Describe the patterns of the disease in your selected population using the epidemiologic characteristics of person, place, and time.
  • Identify one health outcome you would like to improve for the population.
  • Briefly summarize current evidence that supports the importance of improving this health outcome.
  • Briefly describe the evidence-based program you are developing, and why this approach will best fit the needs of your population.
  • Explain what data you would need to collect, and how you would obtain and analyze it. You may choose to collect primary data or use secondary data. Justify your choice.
  • Using the “SMART” method, write short- and long-term objectives for the program.
  • Identify the stakeholders who should be involved in program planning.
  • Identify which program planning model (see Curley, Chapter 7) you selected for your program. Justify your selection of model. Based on the model, explain how you would plan, implement, and evaluate the program.
  • Explain any relevant cultural or ethical considerations related to your program design.
  • Explain how you would fund the program.
  • Describe strategies that would be appropriate for marketing the program.

Rubric

NURS_8310 Week 10 Assignment Rubric

NURS_8310 Week 10 Assignment Rubric
Criteria Ratings Pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeIn a 7- to 10-page proposal (not including title page and references), address the following: Briefly identify your selected chronic health issue and population.
20 to >17.0 pts

Excellent

The response accurately and concisely identifies the selected chronic health issue and population.

 17 to >15.0 pts

Good

The response accurately identifies the selected chronic health issue and population.

 15 to >12.0 pts

Fair

The response somewhat inaccurately or vaguely identifies the selected chronic health issue and population.

 12 to >0 pts

Poor

The response inaccurately and vaguely identifies the selected chronic health issue and population, or it is missing.
20 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeDescribe the geographic region and important characteristics of this population.
20 to >17.0 pts

Excellent

The response accurately and concisely describes the geographic region and important characteristics of the population.

 17 to >15.0 pts

Good

The response accurately describes the geographic region and important characteristics of the population.

 15 to >12.0 pts

Fair

The response somewhat inaccurately or vaguely describes the geographic region and important characteristics of the population.

 12 to >0 pts

Poor

The response inaccurately and vaguely describes the geographic region and important characteristics of the population, or it is missing.
20 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeDescribe the patterns of the disease in your selected population using the epidemiologic characteristics of person, place, and time.
25 to >22.0 pts

Excellent

An accurate and detailed description of the patterns of the disease in the selected population using the epidemiologic characteristics of person, place, and time is provided.

 22 to >19.0 pts

Good

An accurate description of the patterns of the disease in the selected population using the epidemiologic characteristics of person, place, and time is provided.

 19 to >17.0 pts

Fair

A somewhat inaccurate or vague description of the patterns of the disease in the selected population using the epidemiologic characteristics of person, place, and time is provided.

 17 to >0 pts

Poor

An inaccurate and vague, or incomplete description of the patterns of the disease in the selected population using the epidemiologic characteristics of person, place, and time is provided, or it is missing.
25 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeIdentify one health outcome you would like to improve for the population.
20 to >17.0 pts

Excellent

The response accurately and concisely identifies one health outcome for improvement in the population.

 17 to >15.0 pts

Good

The response accurately identifies one health outcome for improvement in the population.

 15 to >12.0 pts

Fair

The response somewhat inaccurately or vaguely identifies one health outcome for improvement in the population.

 12 to >0 pts

Poor

The response inaccurately and vaguely identifies one health outcome for improvement in the population, or it is missing.
20 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeBriefly summarize current evidence that supports the importance of improving this health outcome.
25 to >22.0 pts

Excellent

A clear, concise, and well-organized summary of current evidence that supports the importance of improving the health outcome is provided.

 22 to >19.0 pts

Good

An accurate summary of current evidence that supports the importance of improving the health outcome is provided.

 19 to >17.0 pts

Fair

A somewhat inaccurate or vague summary of current evidence that supports the importance of improving the health outcome is provided.

 17 to >0 pts

Poor

An inaccurate and vague, or incomplete summary of current evidence that supports the importance of improving the health outcome is provided, or it is missing.
25 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeBriefly describe the evidence-based program you are developing, and why this approach will best fit the needs of your population.
20 to >17.0 pts

Excellent

The response accurately and concisely the evidence-based program you are developing, and why this approach will best fit the needs of your

Note: Full answer to this question is available after purchase.
population.
 17 to >15.0 pts

Good

The response accurately describes the evidence-based program you are developing, and why this approach will best fit the needs of your population.

 15 to >12.0 pts

Fair

The response somewhat inaccurately or vaguely describes the evidence-based program you are developing, and why this approach will best fit the needs of your population.

 12 to >0 pts

Poor

The response inaccurately and vaguely describes the evidence-based program you are developing, and why this approach will best fit the needs of your population.
20 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeExplain what data you would need to collect, and how you would obtain and analyze it. You may choose to collect primary data or use secondary data. Justify your choice.
25 to >22.0 pts

Excellent

An accurate and detailed explanation of needed data for the program and how it would be obtained and analyzed is provided. A strong justification for choices is provided.

 22 to >19.0 pts

Good

An accurate explanation of needed data for the program and how it would be obtained and analyzed is provided. Appropriate justification for choices is provided.

 19 to >17.0 pts

Fair

A somewhat inaccurate or vague explanation of needed data for the program and how it would be obtained and analyzed is provided. Justification for choices is provided but may be somewhat vague or inaccurate.

 17 to >0 pts

Poor

An inaccurate and vague, or incomplete explanation of needed data for the program and how it would be obtained and analyzed is provided, or it is missing. Justification for choices is inadequate or missing.
25 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeUsing the “SMART” method, write short-term and long-term objectives for the program.
25 to >22.0 pts

Excellent

Clear and measurable short-term and long-term SMART goals for the program are provided.

 22 to >19.0 pts

Good

Measurable short-term and long-term SMART goals for the program are provided.

 19 to >17.0 pts

Fair

Short-term and long-term goals for the program are provided but may be somewhat vague or not meet all SMART criteria.

 17 to >0 pts

Poor

Short-term and long-term goals for the program are vague or do not meet SMART criteria or are missing.
25 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeIdentify the stakeholders that should be involved in program planning.
20 to >17.0 pts

Excellent

The response accurately and concisely identifies the stakeholders that should be involved in program planning.

 17 to >15.0 pts

Good

The response accurately identifies the stakeholders that should be involved in program planning.

 15 to >12.0 pts

Fair

The response somewhat inaccurately or vaguely identifies the stakeholders that should be involved in program planning.

 12 to >0 pts

Poor

The response inaccurately and vaguely identifies the stakeholders that should be involved in program planning or is missing.
20 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeIdentify which program planning model you selected for your program. Justify your selection of model. Based on the model, explain how you would plan, implement, and evaluate the program.
40 to >35.0 pts

Excellent

The response clearly and concisely identifies the program planning model and provides a strong justification for its selection…. An accurate and detailed explanation of program planning, implementation, and evaluation, based on the selected model, is provided. Response reflects strong understanding and application of program planning concepts and strategies.

 35 to >31.0 pts

Good

The response clearly identifies the program planning model and provides an appropriate justification for its selection…. An accurate and appropriate explanation of program planning, implementation, and evaluation, based on the selected model, is provided.

 31 to >27.0 pts

Fair

The response somewhat inaccurately or vaguely identifies a program planning model and justifies the choice…. A somewhat vague or inaccurate explanation of program planning, implementation, and evaluation, based on the selected model, is provided.

 27 to >0 pts

Poor

The response inaccurately or vaguely identifies a program planning model, or it is missing. Justification for selection is weak or missing…. A vague or inaccurate explanation of program planning, implementation, and evaluation is provided, or it is missing.
40 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeExplain any relevant cultural or ethical considerations related to your program design.
25 to >22.0 pts

Excellent

An accurate and detailed explanation of relevant cultural or ethical considerations related to the program design is provided.

 22 to >19.0 pts

Good

An accurate explanation of relevant cultural or ethical considerations related to the program design is provided.

 19 to >17.0 pts

Fair

A somewhat inaccurate or vague explanation of relevant cultural or ethical considerations related to the program design is provided.

 17 to >0 pts

Poor

An inaccurate and vague, or incomplete explanation of relevant cultural or ethical considerations related to the program design is provided, or it is missing.
25 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeExplain how you would fund the program.
10 to >8.0 pts

Excellent

An accurate and detailed explanation of how the program would be funded is provided.

 8 to >7.0 pts

Good

An accurate explanation of how the program would be funded is provided.

 7 to >6.0 pts

Fair

A somewhat inaccurate or vague explanation of how the program would be funded is provided.

 6 to >0 pts

Poor

An inaccurate and vague, or incomplete explanation of how the program would be funded is provided, or it is missing.
10 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeDescribe strategies that would be appropriate for marketing the program.
10 to >8.0 pts

Excellent

An accurate and detailed description of strategies that would be appropriate for marketing the program is provided.

 8 to >7.0 pts

Good

An accurate description of strategies that would be appropriate for marketing the program is provided.

 7 to >6.0 pts

Fair

A somewhat inaccurate or vague description of strategies that would be appropriate for marketing the program is provided.

 6 to >0 pts

Poor

An inaccurate and vague, or incomplete description of strategies that would be appropriate for marketing the program is provided, or it is missing.
10 pts
This 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 is provided which delineates 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 is provided which delineates all required criteria.

 4 to >3.5 pts

Good

Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 80% of the time…. Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment is stated, yet is brief and not descriptive.

 3.5 to >3.0 pts

Fair

Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 60%–79% of the time…. Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment is vague or off topic.

 3 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 was provided.
5 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten Expression and Formatting—English writing standards: Correct grammar, mechanics, and proper punctuation
5 to >4.0 pts

Excellent

Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors.

 4 to >3.5 pts

Good

Contains a few (1 or 2) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors.

 3.5 to >3.0 pts

Fair

Contains several (3 or 4) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors.

 3 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 >4.0 pts

Excellent

Uses correct APA format with no errors.

 4 to >3.5 pts

Good

Contains a few (1 or 2) APA format errors.

 3.5 to >3.0 pts

Fair

Contains several (3 or 4) APA format errors.

 3 to >0 pts

Poor

Contains many (≥ 5) APA format errors.
5 pts
Total Points: 300

RELATED: Thomas Deliver, a 36-year-old male patient, enters your office for his initial appointment.  According to the intake paperwork, Mr. Deliver is a computer programmer who is complaining of problems with concentration, completing tasks, and being terrible at listening during company meetings and even at home.

Order This Paper

Reviews

There are no reviews yet.

Be the first to review “[ORDER] NURS_8310 WEEK 10 ASSIGNMENT: APPLYING EPIDEMIOLOGY TO PROGRAM DESIGN FOR CHRONIC DISEASE”

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Related products

error: Content is protected !!