Decision Tree For Neurological And Musculoskeletal Disorders

Decision Tree For Neurological And Musculoskeletal Disorders

Decision Tree For Neurological And Musculoskeletal Disorders

To Prepare

Review the interactive media piece assigned by your Instructor.

Reflect on the patient’s symptoms and aspects of the disorder presented in the interactive media piece.

Consider how you might assess and treat patients presenting with the symptoms of the patient case study you were assigned.You will be asked to make three decisions concerning the diagnosis and treatment for this patient. Reflect on potential co-morbid physical as well as patient factors that might impact the patient’s diagnosis and treatment.

Write a 1- to 2-page summary paper that addresses the following:

Briefly summarize the patient case study you were assigned, including each of the three decisions you took for the patient presented.

ORDER COMPREHESIVE SOLUTION PAPERS ON Decision Tree For Neurological And Musculoskeletal Disorders

Based on the decisions you recommended for the patient case study, explain whether you believe the decisions provided were supported by the evidence-based literature.

Be specific and provide examples.

Be sure to support your response with evidence and references from outside resources.

What were you hoping to achieve with the decisions you recommended for the patient case study you were assigned?

Support your response with evidence and references from outside resources.

Explain any difference between what you expected to achieve with each of the decisions and the results of the decision in the exercise.

Describe whether they were different.

Be specific and provide examples.

Rubric Detail

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

Content

Name: NURS_6521_Week8_Assignment_Rubric

Decision Tree For Neurological And Musculoskeletal Disorders

Show Descriptions Show Feedback

Briefly summarize the patient case study you were assigned, including each of the three decisions you took for the patient presented. Be specific.–

Levels of Achievement:

Excellent 18 (18%) – 20 (20%)

The response accurately and thoroughly summarizes in detail the patient case study assigned, including specific and complete details on each of the three decisions made for the patient presented.

Good 16 (16%) – 17 (17%)

The response accurately summarizes the patient case study assigned, including details on each of the three decisions made for the patient presented.

Fair 14 (14%) – 15 (15%)

The response inaccurately or vaguely summarizes the patient case study assigned, including details on each of the three decisions made for the patient presented.

Poor 0 (0%) – 13 (13%)

The response inaccurately and vaguely summarizes the patient case study assigned, including details on each of the three decisions made for the patient presented, or is missing.

Feedback:

Based on the decisions you recommended for the patient case study, explain whether you believe the decisions provided were supported by the evidence-based literature. Be specific and provide examples. Be sure to support your response with evidence and references from outside resources.–

Levels of Achievement:

Excellent 23 (23%) – 25 (25%)

The response accurately and thoroughly explains in detail how the decisions recommended for the patient case study are supported by the evidence-based literature. The response includes specific and relevant outside reference examples that fully support the explanation provided.

Good 20 (20%) – 22 (22%)

The response accurately explains how the decisions recommended for the patient case study are supported by the evidence-based literature. The response includes relevant outside reference examples that lend support for the explanation provided that are accurate.

Fair 18 (18%) – 19 (19%)

The response inaccurately or vaguely explains how the decisions recommended for the patient case study are supported by the evidence-based literature. The response includes inaccurate or vague outside reference examples that may or may not lend support for the explanation provided or are misaligned to the explanation provided.

Poor 0 (0%) – 17 (17%)

The response inaccurately and vaguely explains how the decisions recommended for the patient case study are supported by the evidence-based literature, or is missing. The response includes inaccurate and vague outside reference examples that do not lend support for the explanation provided, or is missing.

Feedback:

What were you hoping to achieve with the decisions you recommended for the patient case study you were assigned? Support your response with evidence and references from outside resources.–

Levels of Achievement:

Excellent 18 (18%) – 20 (20%)

The response accurately and thorough explains in detail what they were hoping to achieve with the decisions recommend for the patient case study assigned. The response includes specific and relevant outside reference examples that fully support the explanation provided.

Good 16 (16%) – 17 (17%)

The response accurately explains what they were hoping to achieve with the decisions recommended for the patient case study assigned. The response includes relevant outside reference examples that lend support for the explanation provided that are accurate.

Fair 14 (14%) – 15 (15%)

The response inaccurately or vaguely explains what they were hoping to achieve with the decisions recommended for the patient case study assigned. The response includes inaccurate or vague outside reference examples that may or may not lend support for the explanation provided or are misaligned to the explanation provided.

Poor 0 (0%) – 13 (13%)

The response inaccurately and vaguely explains what they were hoping to achieve with the decisions recommended for the patient case study assigned, or is missing. The response includes inaccurate and vague outside reference examples that do not lend support for the explanation provided, or is missing.

Feedback:

Explain any difference between what you expected to achieve with each of the decisions and the results of the decisions in the exercise. Describe whether they were different. Be specific and provide examples.–

Levels of Achievement:

Excellent 18 (18%) – 20 (20%)

The response accurately and clearly explains in detail any differences between what they expected to achieve with each of the decisions and the results of the decisions in the exercise. The response provides specific, accurate, and relevant examples that fully support whether there were differences between the decisions made and the decisions available in the exercise.

Good 16 (16%) – 17 (17%)

The response accurately explains any differences between what they expected to achieve with each of the decisions and the results of the decisions in the exercise. The response provides accurate examples that support whether there were differences between the decisions made and the decisions available in the exercise.

Fair 14 (14%) – 15 (15%)

The response inaccurately or vaguely explains any differences between what they expected to achieve with each of the decisions and the results of the decisions in the exercise. The response provides inaccurate or vague examples that may or may not support whether there were differences between the decisions made and the decisions available in the exercise.

Poor 0 (0%) – 13 (13%)

vaguely explains in detail any differences between what they expected to achieve with each of the decisions and the results of the decisions in the exercise, or is missing. The response provides inaccurate and vague examples that do not support whether there were differences between the decisions made and the decisions available in the exercise, or is missing.

Feedback:

Written 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.–

Levels of Achievement:

Excellent 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)

Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity.

Good 4 (4%) – 4 (4%)

Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 80% of the time.

Fair 3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%)

Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 60%–79% of the time.

Poor 0 (0%) – 3 (3%)

Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity less than 60% of the time.

Feedback:

ORDER COMPREHESIVE SOLUTION PAPERS ON Decision Tree For Neurological And Musculoskeletal Disorders

Written Expression and Formatting – English writing standards: Correct grammar, mechanics, and proper punctuation–

Levels of Achievement:

Excellent 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)

Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors

Good 4 (4%) – 4 (4%)

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

Fair 3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%)

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

Poor 0 (0%) – 3 (3%)

Contains many (≥ 5) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the reader’s understanding

Feedback:

Written Expression and Formatting – The paper follows correct APA format for title page, headings, font, spacing, margins, indentations, page numbers, running head, parenthetical/in-text citations, and reference list.–

Levels of Achievement:

Excellent 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)

Uses correct APA format with no errors

Good 4 (4%) – 4 (4%)

Contains a few (1–2) APA format errors

Fair 3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%)

Contains several (3–4) APA format errors

Poor 0 (0%) – 3 (3%)

Contains many (≥ 5) APA format errors

Feedback:

Decision Tree For Neurological And Musculoskeletal Disorders