Evaluation of Epidemiological Problem

  Evaluation of Epidemiological Problem  

Guidelines & Grading Rubric

Purpose

The purpose of this assignment is to

• Provide learners with the opportunity to integrate knowledge and skills learned throughout this course
• Directly apply principles and knowledge learned in the course to problem solving of population health problems in their own geographic areas.

Course Outcomes

This assignment enables the student to meet the following course outcomes:

1.    Define key terms in epidemiology, community health, and population-based research.

2.    Compare study designs used for obtaining population health information from surveillance, observation, community, and control trial based research.

3.    Identify appropriate outcome measures and study designs applicable to epidemiological subfields such as infectious disease, chronic disease, environmental exposures, reproductive health, and genetics.

4.    Apply commonly used measures of health risk.

5.    Examine current ethical/legal issues in epidemiology.

6.    Identify important sources of epidemiological data.

7.    Evaluate a public health problem in terms of magnitude, person, time, and place.

Due Date

Submit to Dropbox by 11:59 p.m. MT Sunday of Week 6

Total Points Possible: 200

i sent 1 for my friend to we are in same class so make sure no similarity

Requirements

This paper should clearly and comprehensively identify the disease or population health problem chosen. The problem must be an issue in Maryland  geographic area and a concern for the population you will serve upon graduation with your degree:(Maryland)

. The paper should be organized into the following sections:

1.    Introduction with a clear presentation of the problem as well as significance and a scholarly overview of the paper.

2.    Background of the disease including definition, description, signs and symptoms, and current incidence and/or prevalence statistics current state, local, and national statistics pertaining to the disease. (Include a table of incidence or prevalence rates by your geographic county, state, and national statistics.)

3.    A review of current surveillance methods and any mandated reporting or methods for reporting the disease for providers.

4.    Conduct descriptive epidemiology analysis of the disease including who is more frequently affected and characteristics of the population that might help in creating a prevention plan. Include costs (both financial and social) associated with the disease or problem.

5.    Review how the disease is diagnosed, current national standards for screening or prevention, and pick one screening test and review its sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, cost and any current national guidelines for conducting which patients to conduct this test on.

6.    Provide a brief plan of how you will address this epidemiological disease in your practice once you are finished with school.  Provide three actions you will take along with how you will measure outcomes of your actions.

7.    Conclude in a clear manner with a brief overview of key points of the entire disease,

Preparing the Paper

·         Page length: 7-10 pages, excluding title/cover page

·         APA format 6^th edition

·         Include references when necessary. 

·         Include at least one table to present information somewhere in the paper.

Directions and Grading Criteria

Category

Points

Possible

Points Earned

Comments

Scholarly Introduction (clear presentation of problem)

20

Background and significance of the disease (includes incidence or prevalence statistics)

30

Current surveillance methods

30

Descriptive epidemiological analysis (includes characteristics of the at-risk population and/or those affected by the disease and costs of the disease)

30

Screening and diagnosis (includes review of current guidelines for screening and diagnosis of the disease. In-depth review of statistics one screening or diagnostic test provided)

30

Plan of action (includes at least three evidenced based actions, supported by literature, that the student will take in their own practice and how outcomes will be measured)

30

Conclusion

20

Mechanics of writing, APA

10

Total

 200

Total Points earned = 

A quality paper will meet or exceed all of the criteria requirements.

Grading Rubric

Assignment Criteria

Exceptional

Outstanding or highest level of performance

Exceeds

Very good or high level of performance

Meets

Competent or satisfactory level of performance

Needs Improvement

Poor or failing level of performance

Developing

Unsatisfactory level of performance

Identification of the problem/concern

20 Points

18 Points

16 Points

8 Points

0 Points

Comprehensively identifies the problem/concern

Adequately identifies the problem/concern

Identification of problem/concern is limited

Identification of problem/concern is unclear.

Identification of problem/concern is absent

Background and significance of the disease (includes incidence or prevalence statistics)

30 Points

26 Points

24 Points

11 Points

0 Points

Background is complete, presents risks, disease impact and includes a review of incidence and prevalence of the disease within the student’s local area, state, and nationally. Evidence supports background.

Background is complete, presents risk, disease impact and at least one set of incidence and prevalence statistics are presented and supported by evidence.

Background missing one or more key points and at least one set of incidence and prevalence statistics are presented. Lack of evidence or limited presentation of the background.

Background missing more than one key point and at least one set of incidence and prevalence statistics are presented, or there is no supported evidence. Unclear conclusions or presentation.

Background and significance of the disease is not provided.

Current surveillance methods

30 Points

26 Points

24 Points

11 Points

0 Points

Current local, state, and national disease surveillance methods are reviewed, currently gathered types of statistics, and information on whether the disease is mandated for reporting, supported by evidence

More than one local, state, and national disease surveillance methods are reviewed, currently gathered types of statistics, and information on whether the disease is mandated for reporting, supported by evidence

One of either local, state, and national disease surveillance methods are reviewed, currently gathered types of statistics, and information on whether the disease is mandated for reporting, supported by evidence

One of either local, state, and national disease surveillance methods are reviewed, currently gathered types of statistics, or only information on whether the disease is mandated for reporting, or evidence is lacking to support this area. Unclear conclusions or presentation.

Local, state, and national disease surveillance methods were not discussed.

Descriptive epidemiological analysis (includes characteristics of the at-risk population and/or those affected by the disease and costs of the disease)

30 Points

26 Points

24 Points

11 Points

0 Points

Comprehensive review and analysis of descriptive epidemiological points of the identified disease and population most at risk, supported by scholarly evidence.

Adequate review with some analysis of descriptive epidemiological points of the identified disease and population most at risk supported by scholarly evidence.

Limited review and analysis of key descriptive epidemiological points of the identified disease and   at-risk population.

Minimal analysis of key descriptive epidemiological points of the identified disease and at-risk population.

No analysis of key descriptive epidemiological points of the identified disease and at-risk population is provided.

Screening and diagnosis (includes review of current guidelines for screening and diagnosis of the disease. In-depth review of statistics one screening or diagnostic test provided)

30 Points

26 Points

24 Points

11 Points

0 Points

Comprehensive review of current guidelines for screening, diagnosis, and statistics related to validity, predictive value, and reliability of screening tests is presented.

Adequate review of guidelines for screening, diagnosis, and statistics related to validity, predictive value, and reliability of screening tests is presented.

Limited review of guidelines for screening, diagnosis, and statistics related to validity, predictive value, and reliability of screening tests.

Minimal or unclear review of guidelines for screening, diagnosis, and statistics related to validity, predictive value, and reliability of screening tests.

Review of guidelines for screening, diagnosis, and statistics related to validity, predictive value, and reliability of screening tests not provided.

Plan of action (includes at least three evidenced based actions, supported by literature, that the student will take in their own practice and how outcomes will be measured)

30 Points

26 Points

24 Points

11 Points

0 Points

A comprehensive plan of action specific to the student’s interests, the problem, and the geographic area is presented with 3 evidenced based actions that will be taken to address the impact, outcomes, or prevalence of the disease.

An adequate, but not fully comprehensive, plan of action specific to the student’s interests, the problem, and the geographic area is presented with 3 evidenced based actions that will be taken to address the impact, outcomes, or prevalence of the disease.

A limited plan of action specific to the student’s interests, the problem, and the geographic area is, outcomes, or prevalence of the disease. Three actions are presented with limited or little evidence.

Actions are minimal or unclear, or lack specificity to geographic area, are not supported directly by evidence or are not direct actions the student can take in practice.

Plan of action not provided.

Conclusion

20 Points

18 Points

16 Points

8 Points

0 Points

The conclusion thoroughly, clearly, succinctly, and logically presents major points of the paper with clear direction for action.

The conclusion adequately and logically presents major points of the paper with clear direction for action, but lacks one major point or is not succinct.

The conclusion is a limited review of key points of the paper, is not succinct, or lacks one or more major points of the paper or clear direction for action.

Conclusion is unclear or significantly limited in overview of the paper.

Conclusion not provided.

Grammar, Spelling, APA

10 Points

9 Points

8 Points

4 Points

0 Points

APA format, grammar, spelling, and/or punctuation are accurate, or with zero to one errors.

Two to four errors in APA format, grammar, spelling, and syntax noted.

Five to seven errors in APA format, grammar, spelling, and syntax noted.

Eight to nine errors in APA format, grammar, spelling, and syntax noted.

Post contains greater than ten errors in APA format, grammar, spelling, and/or punctuation or repeatedly makes the same errors after faculty feedback.

Total Points Possible =          200 points