DNP 805 Week 7 Assignment Case Report Health Care Informatics GCU
DNP 805 Week 7 Assignment Case Report Health Care Informatics GCU
DNP 805 Week 7 Assignment Case Report Health Care Informatics GCU
DNP 805 Week 7 Assignment Case Report Health Care Informatics GCU
Assessment Description
In this assignment, learners are required to write a case report addressing the personal knowledge and skills gained in the current course and potentially solving an identified practice problem.
General Guidelines:
Use the following information to ensure successful completion of the assignment:
- This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.
- Doctoral learners are required to use APA style for their writing assignments. The APA Style Guide is located in the Student Success Center.
- Use primary sources published within the last 5 years. Provide citations and references for all sources used.
- Your case report should be no more than 10 double-spaced pages, including references.
- You are required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite. A link to the LopesWrite technical support articles is located in Class Resources if you need assistance.
- Learners will submit this assignment using the assignment dropbox in the learning management system. In addition, learners must upload this deliverable to the Learner Dissertation Page (LDP) in the DNP PI Workspace for later use.
Directions:
Choose a specific focus of patient practice (e.g., acute care hospital, clinic, primary care, long-term care, home health). Select a

particular disease process (congestive heart failure, fall, diabetes, etc.). Identify and fully describe a technology element that could be involved in providing care to a patient with your selected disease process and the patient practice. Define how this technology will integrate treatment, monitoring or communication from the identified care setting to the home and then to ongoing care through the clinic.
Your case report must include the following:
- Introduction with a problem statement and your disease process described from the focus of patient practice.
- Synthesized literature review.
- Description of the case/situation/conditions. Use a real life patient situation or condition to describe your case, including the problems the patient encounters and the barriers to care.
- Describe at least one technology that may be used as a solution to the patient situation or condition described in your case.
- Describe how the technology can be used specifically in the case you have proposed.
- Summary of the case integrating proposed solutions(s).
- Keep in mind and integrate a Christian worldview when summarizing proposed solutions.
- Conclusion.
Case Report: Health Care Informatics – Rubric
Collapse All Case Report: Health Care Informatics – RubricCollapse All
Identification and Description of Applicable Care-Based Technologies
16.5 points
Criteria Description
Identification and Description of Applicable Care-Based Technologies
5. Excellent
16.5 points
Identification and description of applicable care-based technologies are clearly presented and in full. Discussion is insightful and forward-thinking. Information presented is from current scholarly sources.
4. Good
15.18 points
Identification and description of applicable care-based technologies are clearly presented and in full. Discussion is convincing. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources.
3. Satisfactory
14.52 points
Identification and description of applicable care-based technologies are present but done at a perfunctory level.
2. Less Than Satisfactory
13.2 points
Identification and description of applicable care-based technologies are present but incomplete.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Identification and description of applicable care-based technologies are not present.
Check Out Also: MAT 2051 Unit 4 Discussion DQ2 Practice Problem Set Review
Discussion of the Integration of Technologies and Treatment/Monitoring in Applicable Care Settings
16.5 points
Criteria Description
Discussion of the Integration of Technologies and Treatment/Monitoring in Applicable Care Settings
5. Excellent
16.5 points
Discussion of integration of technologies and treatment/monitoring in applicable care settings is clearly present. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Discussion is insightful and forward-thinking. Information presented is from current scholarly sources.
4. Good
15.18 points
Discussion of integration of technologies and treatment/monitoring in applicable care settings is clearly present. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources.
3. Satisfactory
14.52 points
Discussion of integration of technologies and treatment/monitoring in applicable care settings is present but done at a perfunctory level.
2. Less Than Satisfactory
13.2 points
Discussion of integration of technologies and treatment/monitoring in applicable care settings is present but incomplete.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Discussion of integration of technologies and treatment/monitoring in applicable care settings is not present.
Introduction and Problem Statement
5.5 points
Criteria Description
Introduction and Problem Statement
5. Excellent
5.5 points
An introduction with problem statement is clearly present. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Discussion is insightful and forward-thinking. Information presented is from current scholarly sources.
4. Good
5.06 points
An introduction with problem statement is present, clear, and thorough. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources.
3. Satisfactory
4.84 points
An introduction with problem statement is present but rendered at a perfunctory level.
2. Less Than Satisfactory
4.4 points
An introduction with problem statement is present but incomplete.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
An introduction with problem statement is not present.
Brief Literature Review
5.5 points
Criteria Description
Brief Literature Review
5. Excellent
5.5 points
A brief literature review is clearly present in full. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Discussion is insightful and forward-thinking. Information presented is from current scholarly sources.
4. Good
5.06 points
A brief literature review is clearly present in full. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources.
3. Satisfactory
4.84 points
A brief literature review is present but rendered at a perfunctory level.
2. Less Than Satisfactory
4.4 points
A brief literature review is present but incomplete.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
A brief literature review is not present.
Description of the Case, Situation, or Conditions
5.5 points
Criteria Description
Description of the Case, Situation, or Conditions
5. Excellent
5.5 points
A description of the case, situation, or conditions is clearly present. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Discussion is insightful and forward-thinking. Information presented is from current scholarly sources.
4. Good
5.06 points
A description of the case, situation, or conditions is convincing and defines specific elements. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources.
3. Satisfactory
4.84 points
A description of the case, situation, or conditions is present but rendered at a perfunctory level.
2. Less Than Satisfactory
4.4 points
A description of the case, situation, or conditions is present but incomplete.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
A description of the case, situation, or conditions is not present.
Detailed Explanation of the Synthesized Literature Findings
5.5 points
Criteria Description
Detailed Explanation of the Synthesized Literature Findings
5. Excellent
5.5 points
A detailed explanation of the synthesized literature findings is clearly present. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Discussion is insightful and forward-thinking. Information presented is from current scholarly sources.
4. Good
5.06 points
A detailed explanation of the synthesized literature findings is convincing and defines specific elements. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources.
3. Satisfactory
4.84 points
A detailed explanation of the synthesized literature findings is present but rendered at a perfunctory level.
2. Less Than Satisfactory
4.4 points
A detailed explanation of the synthesized literature findings is present but incomplete.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
A detailed explanation of the synthesized literature findings is not present.
Case Summary
5.5 points
Criteria Description
Case Summary
5. Excellent
5.5 points
A case summary is clearly present. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Discussion is insightful and forward-thinking. Information presented is from current scholarly sources.
4. Good
5.06 points
A case summary is convincing and defines specific elements. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources.
3. Satisfactory
4.84 points
A case summary is present but rendered at a perfunctory level.
2. Less Than Satisfactory
4.4 points
A case summary is present but incomplete.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
A case summary is not present.
Proposed Solutions to Remedy Identified Technology Gaps, Inefficiencies, or Other Issues
11 points
Criteria Description
Proposed Solutions to Remedy Identified Technology Gaps, Inefficiencies, or Other Issues
5. Excellent
11 points
Proposed solutions are clearly presented and thorough. Discussion is insightful, forward-thinking, and detailed. Information presented is from current scholarly sources.
4. Good
10.12 points
Proposed solutions are clearly presented and thorough. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources.
3. Satisfactory
9.68 points
Proposed solutions are presented but are rendered at a perfunctory level.
2. Less Than Satisfactory
8.8 points
Proposed solutions are presented but are incomplete.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Proposed solutions are not presented.
Conclusion
5.5 points
Criteria Description
Conclusion
5. Excellent
5.5 points
A conclusion is clearly presented and thorough. Discussion is insightful, forward-thinking, and detailed. Information presented is from current scholarly sources.
4. Good
5.06 points
A conclusion is clearly presented and thorough. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources.
3. Satisfactory
4.84 points
A conclusion is presented but is rendered at a perfunctory level.
2. Less Than Satisfactory
4.4 points
A conclusion is presented but is incomplete.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
A conclusion is not presented.
Thesis Development and Purpose
7.7 points
Criteria Description
Thesis Development and Purpose
5. Excellent
7.7 points
Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.
4. Good
7.08 points
Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper. Thesis is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose.
3. Satisfactory
6.78 points
Thesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose.
2. Less Than Satisfactory
6.16 points
Thesis is insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not clear.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.
Argument Logic and Construction
8.8 points
Criteria Description
Argument Logic and Construction
5. Excellent
8.8 points
Clear and convincing argument that presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative.
4. Good
8.1 points
Argument shows logical progressions. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative.
3. Satisfactory
7.74 points
Argument is orderly, but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis.
2. Less Than Satisfactory
7.04 points
Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources.
Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)
5.5 points
Criteria Description
Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)
5. Excellent
5.5 points
Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.
4. Good
5.06 points
Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. A variety of sentence structures and effective figures of speech are used.
3. Satisfactory
4.84 points
Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct and varied sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are employed.
2. Less Than Satisfactory
4.4 points
Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) or word choice are present. Sentence structure is correct but not varied.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice and/or sentence construction are used.
Paper Format (Use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)
5.5 points
Criteria Description
Paper Format (Use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)
5. Excellent
5.5 points
All format elements are correct.
4. Good
5.06 points
Appropriate template is fully used. There are virtually no errors in formatting style.
3. Satisfactory
4.84 points
Appropriate template is used. Formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present.
2. Less Than Satisfactory
4.4 points
Appropriate template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken. A lack of control with formatting is apparent.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Template is not used appropriately or documentation format is rarely followed correctly.
Documentation of Sources
5.5 points
Criteria Description
Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style
5. Excellent
5.5 points
Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error.
4. Good
5.06 points
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct.
3. Satisfactory
4.84 points
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present.
2. Less Than Satisfactory
4.4 points
Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Sources are not documented.
Total 110 points