For this Case Study Assignment, you will once again choose 1 of 4 case study scenarios and review the case study scenario to obtain information related to a gynecologic exam and determine differential diagnoses, diagnostics, and develop treatment and management plan

For this Case Study Assignment, you will once again choose 1 of 4 case study scenarios and review the case study scenario to obtain information related to a gynecologic exam and determine differential diagnoses, diagnostics, and develop treatment and management plan

For this Case Study Assignment, you will once again choose 1 of 4 case study scenarios and review the case study scenario to obtain information related to a gynecologic exam and determine differential diagnoses, diagnostics, and develop treatment and management plan

Case studies provide the opportunity to simulate realistic scenarios involving patients presenting with various health problems or symptoms. Such case studies enable nurse learners to apply concepts, lessons, and critical thinking to interviewing, screening, and diagnostic approaches, as well as to the development of treatment plans.

For this Case Study Assignment, you will once again choose 1 of 4 case study scenarios and review the case study scenario to obtain information related to a gynecologic exam and determine differential diagnoses, diagnostics, and develop treatment and management plans.

RESOURCES

Be sure to review the Learning Resources before completing this activity.

Click the weekly resources link to access the resources.

WEEKLY RESOURCES

ORDER A CUSTOMIZED, PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE

Good News For Our New customers . We can write this assignment for you and pay after Delivery. Our Top -rated medical writers will comprehensively review instructions , synthesis external evidence sources(Scholarly) and customize a quality assignment for you. We will also attach a copy of plagiarism report alongside and AI report. Feel free to chat Us

To prepare:

By Day 1 of this week, you will choose 1 of 4 case study scenarios.

Review the Learning Resources for this week and specifically review the clinical guideline resources specific to your chosen case study.

Use the Case Study Assignment Template found in the Learning Resources to support your assignment.

BY DAY 5 OF WEEK 4

Submit your case study assignment by Day 5 of Week 4.

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 Wk4Assgn_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

NRNP_6552_Week4_Case_Study_Assignment_Rubric

NRNP_6552_Week4_Case_Study_Assignment_Rubric

Criteria Ratings Pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAnalyzes subjective and objective data and outlines applicable diagnostic tests related to case studies.

30 to >26.7 pts

Excellent

The response provides clear, complete, and comprehensive descriptions of subjective and objective case data, appropriately outlining all diagnostic tests, clinical procedures and pharmacological interventions.

26.7 to >23.7 pts

Good

The response provides clear, complete partial descriptions of the components of the subjective and objective case data, appropriately outlining most of the diagnostic tests, clinical procedures and pharmacological interventions.

23.7 to >20.7 pts

Fair

The response provides some components of the subjective and objective case data, but they are incomplete, vague or inaccurate, outlining some of the diagnostic tests, clinical procedures and pharmacological interventions.

20.7 to >0 pts

Poor

The response provides unclear or incomplete components of subjective and objective case data. The diagnostic tests, clinical procedures and pharmacological interventions are missing, incorrect, or inappropriately applied.
30 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeIdentifies differential diagnoses related to case studies.

30 to >26.76 pts

Excellent

The response contains at least 3 differential diagnoses relevant and applicable to the case.

26.76 to >23.7 pts

Good

The response contains at least 2 differential diagnoses relevant and applicable to the case.

23.7 to >20.7 pts

Fair

The response contains at least 1 differential diagnosis relevant and applicable to the case.

20.7 to >0 pts

Poor

The response contains few or no differential diagnoses and/or diagnoses are not relevant and applicable to the case.
30 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeFormulates a treatment plan related to case studies based on scientific rationale, evidence- based standards of care, and practice guidelines. Integrates ethical, psychological, physical, financial issues and Social Determinants of Health in plan.
30 to >26.76 pts

Excellent

Formulates a thorough treatment plan including explanations of appropriate diagnostic tests and treatment options. Fully incorporates syntheses representative of knowledge gained from the resources for the module and current credible sources, with no less than 75% of the treatment plan having exceptional depth and breadth. Supported by at least 3 current peer- reviewed, references or professional practice guidelines.

26.76 to >23.7 pts

Good

Formulates a partially complete treatment plan including partial explanations of appropriate diagnostic tests and treatment options. Somewhat incorporates syntheses representative of knowledge gained from the resources for the module and current credible sources with no less than 50% of the treatment plan having exceptional depth and breadth. Supported by at least 3 current peer- reviewed, references or professional practice guidelines.

23.7 to >20.7 pts

Fair

Formulates a minimally complete treatment plan including incomplete or vague explanations of appropriate diagnostic tests and treatment options. Lacking in synthesis of knowledge gained from the resources for the module and current credible sources. Supported by at least 2 current peer- reviewed, references or professional practice guidelines.

20.7 to >0 pts

Poor

Formulates a treatment plan that contains incomplete explanations of appropriate diagnostic tests and treatment options and/ or explanations are missing. Lacks synthesis gained from the resources for the module and current credible sources. Supported by 1 or no current peer- reviewed, references or professional practice guidelines.
30 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten Expression and Formatting – English writing standards:

Correct grammar, mechanics, and proper punctuation

5 to >4.45 pts

Excellent

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

4.45 to >3.95 pts

Good

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

3.95 to >3.45 pts

Fair

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

3.45 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 >4.45 pts

Excellent

Uses correct APA format with no errors.

4.45 to >3.95 pts

Good

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

3.95 to >3.45 pts

Fair

Contains several (3 or 4) APA format errors.

3.45 to >0 pts

Poor

Contains many (≥ 5) APA format errors.

5 pts

Total Points: 100

PreviousNext