Placeholder

DNP 820 Week 7 Case Report Translational Research GCU

$22.00

Quantity:

Description

DNP 820 Week 7 Case Report Translational Research GCU

DNP 820 Week 7 Case Report Translational Research and Evidence Based Practice

Details:

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 Requirements:

Use the following information to ensure successful completion of the assignment:

  • Use at least two additional scholarly research sources published within the last 5 years. Provide citations and references for all sources used.
  • Doctoral learners are required to use APA style for their writing assignments. The APA Style Guide is located in the Student Success Center.
  • This assignment uses a rubric. Please Review the rubric prior to the beginning to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.
  • You are required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite. Please refer to the directions in the Student Success Center.

Directions:

For a specific focus of patient practice (e.g., acute care hospital, clinic, primary care, long-term care, home health), select a particular disease process. Chose a topic of concern such as providing elements of care for a specific disease process or an administrative problem. This topic must be in need of progression or process improvement. Once identified, summarize the literature supporting proposed change. Identify an action plan to introduce change and potential barriers to implementing change. Finally, describe how you would propose evaluating the change.

Your case report must include the following:

  1. Introduction with a problem statement.
  2. Brief synthesized review.
  3. Description of the case/situation/conditions.
  4. Proposed solutions describing the validity and reliability of the research you have read.
  5. Conclusion.

Portfolio Practice Hours:

Practice immersion assignments are based on your current course objectives, and are intended to be application-based learning using your real-world practice setting. These assignments earn practice immersion hours, and are indicated in the assignment by a Portfolio Practice Hours statement which reminds you, the learner, to enter in a corresponding case log in Typhon. Actual clock hours are entered, but the average hours associated with each practice immersion assignment is 10.

You are required to complete your assignment using real-world application. Real-world application requires the use of evidence-based data, contemporary theories, and concepts presented in the course. The culmination of your assignment must present a viable application in a current practice setting. For more information on parameters for practice immersion hours, please refer to DNP resources in the DC Network.

To earn portfolio practice hours, enter the following after the references section of your paper:

Practice Hours Completion Statement DNP-820

I, (INSERT NAME), verify that I have completed (NUMBER OF) clock hours in association with the goals and objectives for this assignment. I have also tracked said practice hours in the Typhon Student Tracking System for verification purposes and will be sure that all approvals are in place from my faculty and practice mentor.

Case Report – Translational Research and Evidence-Based Practice  

  1
Unsatisfactory
0.00%
2
Less Than Satisfactory
74.00%
3
Satisfactory
79.00%
4
Good
87.00%
5
Excellent
100.00%
70.0 %Content  
15.0 %Identification of Topic of Concern  Identification and description of topic of concern are not present. Identification and description of topic of concern are present but incomplete. Identification and description of topic of concern are present but done at a perfunctory level. Identification and description of topic of concern are clearly presented and in full. Discussion is convincing. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources. Identification and description of topic of concern are clearly presented and in full. Discussion is insightful and forward-thinking. Information presented is from current scholarly sources.
15.0 %Discussion of the progressions or process of improvement Discussion of the progressions or process of improvement is not present. Discussion of the progressions or process of improvement is present but incomplete. Discussion of the progressions or process of improvement is present but done at a perfunctory level. Discussion of the progressions or process of improvement is clearly present. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources. Discussion of the progressions or process of improvement is clearly present. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Discussion is insightful and forward-thinking. Information presented is from current scholarly sources.
5.0 %Introduction and Problem Statement An introduction with problem statement is not present. An introduction with problem statement is present but incomplete. An introduction with problem statement is present but rendered at a perfunctory level. 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. 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.
5.0 %Brief Literature Review A brief literature review is not present. A brief literature review is present but incomplete. A brief literature review is present but rendered at a perfunctory level. A brief literature review is clearly present in full. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources. 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.
5.0 %Description of the Case, Situation, or Conditions A description of the case, situation, or conditions is not present. A description of the case, situation, or conditions is present but incomplete. A description of the case, situation, or conditions is present but rendered at a perfunctory level. A description of the case, situation, or conditions is convincing and defines specific elements. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources. 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.
5.0 %Detailed Explanation of the Synthesized Literature Findings A detailed explanation of the synthesized literature findings is not present. A detailed explanation of the synthesized literature findings is present but incomplete. A detailed explanation of the synthesized literature findings is present but rendered at a perfunctory level. A detailed explanation of the synthesized literature findings is convincing and defines specific elements. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources. 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.
5.0 %Case Summary A case summary is not present. A case summary is present but incomplete. A case summary is present but rendered at a perfunctory level. A case summary is convincing and defines specific elements. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources. 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.
10.0 %Proposed Solutions to Remedy Identified Technology Gaps, Inefficiencies, or Other Issues Proposed solutions are not presented. Proposed solutions are presented but are incomplete. Proposed solutions are presented but are rendered at a perfunctory level. Proposed solutions are clearly presented and thorough. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources. Proposed solutions are clearly presented and thorough. Discussion is insightful, forward-thinking, and detailed. Information presented is from current scholarly sources.
5.0 %Conclusion A conclusion is not presented. A conclusion is presented but is incomplete. A conclusion is presented but is rendered at a perfunctory level. A conclusion is clearly presented and thorough. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources. A conclusion is clearly presented and thorough. Discussion is insightful, forward-thinking, and detailed. Information presented is from current scholarly sources.
20.0 %Organization and Effectiveness  
7.0 %Thesis Development and Purpose Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim. Thesis is insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not clear. Thesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose. Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper. Thesis is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose. Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.
8.0 %Argument Logic and Construction Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources. Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility. 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. Argument shows logical progressions. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative. Clear and convincing argument that presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative.
5.0 %Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use) Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice and/or sentence construction are used. 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. Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct and varied sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are employed. Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. The writer uses a variety of effective sentence structures and figures of speech. Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.
10.0 %Format  
5.0 %Paper Format (Use of appropriate style for the major and assignment) Template is not used appropriately or documentation format is rarely followed correctly. Appropriate template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken. A lack of control with formatting is apparent. Appropriate template is used. Formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present. Appropriate template is fully used. There are virtually no errors in formatting style. All format elements are correct.
5.0 %Research Citations (In-text citations for paraphrasing and direct quotes, and reference page listing and formatting, as appropriate to assignment and style) No reference page is included. No citations are used. Reference page is present. Citations are inconsistently used. Reference page is included and lists sources used in the paper. Sources are appropriately documented, although some errors may be present. Reference page is present and fully inclusive of all cited sources. Documentation is appropriate and citation style is usually correct. In-text citations and a reference page are complete and correct. The documentation of cited sources is free of error.
100 %Total Weightage

 

Tutorialsexperts helps in providing the best essay writing service. If you need 100% original papers for DNP 820 Week 7 Case Report Translational Research GCU, then contact us through call or live chat.

DNP 820 Week 7 Case Report Translational Research GCU

Perfect DNP 820 Week 7 Case Report Translational Research GCU

DNP 820 Week 7 Case Report Translational Research GCU

 

There are no reviews yet.

Add your review