NR599 Week 3 EHRs Benefits and Drawbacks
Order ID 53563633773 Type Essay Writer Level Masters Style APA Sources/References 4 Perfect Number of Pages to Order 5-10 Pages Description/Paper Instructions
Purpose
The ideas and beliefs underpinning the discussions guide students through engaging dialogues as they achieve the desired learning outcomes/competencies associated with their course in a manner that empowers them to organize, integrate, apply and critically appraise their knowledge to their selected field of practice. The ebb and flow of a discussion is based upon the composition of student and faculty interaction in the quest for relevant scholarship.
Activity Learning Outcomes
Through this discussion, the student will demonstrate the ability to:
- Contribute level-appropriate knowledge and experience to the topic in a discussion environment that models professional and social interaction (CO4)
- Actively engage in the written ideas of others by carefully reading, researching, reflecting, and responding to the contributions of their peers and course faculty (CO5)
Due Date:
Students must post a minimum of two times in each graded discussion. The two posts in each individual discussion must be on separate days. Posting twice on two different days meets the minimum requirement however for full credit, the student must post at least three substantive posts on three different days. The student must provide an initial post to each graded discussion topic posted by the course instructor, by Wednesday, 11:59 p.m. MT of Week 3. Subsequent posts, including essential responses to peers, must occur no later than the Sunday, 11:59 p.m. MT at the end of Week 3. Students are expected to submit assignments by the time they are due. Threaded discussions are not considered assignments and are not part of the late assignment policy.
A 10% late penalty will be imposed for discussions posted after the deadline on Wednesday regardless of the number of days late. NOTHING will be accepted after 11:59pm MT on Sunday (i.e. student will receive an automatic 0).
Total Points Possible: 150 Points
Requirements:
Post a written response in the discussion forum to EACH threaded discussion topic:
- As discussed in the lesson and assigned reading for this week, EHRs provide both benefits and drawbacks. Create a “Pros” versus “Cons” table and include at least 3 items for each list. Next to each item, provide a brief rationale as to why you selected to include it on the respective list.
- Refer to the Stage 3 objectives for Meaningful Use located in this week’s lesson under the heading Meaningful Use and the HITECH Act. Select two objectives to research further. In your own words, provide a brief discussion as to how the objective may impact your role as an APN in clinical practice.
Adhere to the following guidelines regarding quality for the threaded discussions in Canvas:
- Application of Course Knowledge: Demonstrate the ability to analyze, synthesize, and/or apply principles and concepts learned in the course lesson and outside readings.
- Scholarliness and Scholarly Sources: Demonstrates achievement of scholarly inquiry for professional and academic decisions using valid, relevant, and reliable outside scholarly source to contribute to the discussion thread.
- Writing Mechanics: Grammar, spelling, syntax, and punctuation are accurate. In-text and reference citations should be formatted using correct APA guidelines.
- Direct Quotes: Good writing calls for the limited use of direct quotes. Direct quotes in discussions are to be limited to one short quotation (not to exceed 15 words). The quote must add substantively to the discussion. Points will be deducted under the grammar, syntax, APA category.
For each threaded discussion per week, the student will select no less than TWO scholarly sources to support the initial discussion post.
Scholarly Sources: Only scholarly sources are acceptable for citation and reference in this course. These include peer-reviewed publications, government reports, or sources written by a professional or scholar in the field. The textbooks and lessons are NOT considered to be outside scholarly sources. For the threaded discussions and reflection posts, reputable internet sources such as websites by government agencies (URL ends in .gov) and respected organizations (often ends in .org) can be counted as scholarly sources. The best outside scholarly source to use is a peer-reviewed nursing journal. You are encouraged to use the Chamberlain library and search one of the available databases for a peer-reviewed journal article. The following sources should not be used: Wikipedia, Wikis, or blogs. These websites are not considered scholarly as anyone can add to these. Please be aware that .com websites can vary in scholarship and quality. For example, the American Heart Association is a .com site with scholarship and quality. It is the responsibility of the student to determine the scholarship and quality of any .com site. Ask your instructor before using any site if you are unsure. Points will be deducted from the rubric if the site does not demonstrate scholarship or quality. Current outside scholarly sources must be published with the last 5 years. Instructor permission must be obtained BEFORE the assignment is due if using a source that is older than 5 years.
DISCUSSION CONTENT Category Points % Description Application of Course Knowledge
50 33% The quality for this category is determined by the ability to analyze, synthesize, and/or apply principles and concepts learned in the course lessons and outside readings and relate them to real-life professional situations. Scholarliness and Scholarly Resources
40 27% This category is evaluated on the quality of the student’s ability to: Support writing with appropriate, scholarly sources; provide relevant evidence of scholarly inquiry clearly stating how the evidence informed or changed professional or academic decisions; evaluate literature resources to develop a comprehensive analysis or synthesis; use sources published within the last 5 years; match reference list and in-text citations match, and minimize or appropriately format direct quotations.
Interactive Dialogue 40 27% The quality for this category is determined by substantive written responses to a peer and faculty member’s questions in the threaded discussion. Substantive posts add importance, depth, and meaningfulness to the discussion. Students must respond to least one peer in the threaded discussion. If no question asked directly from faculty, student must respond to questions posed to the entire class. Post must include at least one scholarly source.
Total CONTENT Points= 130 DISCUSSION FORMAT Category Points % Description Grammar, Spelling, Syntax, Mechanics and APA Format 20 13% Reflection post has minimal grammar, spelling, syntax, punctuation and APA* errors. Direct quotes (if used) is limited to 1 short statement** which adds substantively to the post. * APA style references and in text citations are required; however, there are no deductions for errors in indentation or spacing of references. All elements of the reference otherwise must be included.
**Direct quote should not to exceed 15 words & must add substantively to the discussion
Total FORMAT Points= 20 DISCUSSION TOTAL= 150 Points
**To see view the grading criteria/rubric, please click on the 3 dots in the box at the end of the solid gray bar above the discussion board title and then Show Rubric.
Required Readings:
McGonigle, D. & Mastrian, K. (2018). Nursing informatics and the foundation of knowledge (4th ed.). Burlington, MA: Jones and Bartlett.
- Chapter 7 Nursing Informatics as a Specialty
- Chapter 15 Informatics Tools to Promote Patient Safety and Quality Outcomes
McBride, S., & Tietze, M. (2018). Nursing Informatics for the Advanced Practice Nurse (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Springer Publishing https://doi.org/10.1891/9780826140555
- Chapter 2 Advanced Practice Roles in Interprofessional Teams
- Chapter 24 Developing Competencies in Nursing for an Electronic Age of Healthcare
Articles
American Association of Colleges of Nursing (AACN) (2017). AACN essentials. http://www.aacnnursing.org/Education-Resources/AACN-Essentials
Bickford, C. J. (2017). The Professional Association’s Perspective on Nursing Informatics and Competencies in the US. Studies in Health Technology & Informatics, 232, 62. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28106583/
Hussey, P., Adams, E., & Shaffer, F. A. (2015). Nursing informatics and leadership, an essential competency for a global priority: eHealth. Nurse Leader, 13, 52-57 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mnl.2015.07.002
National Organization of Nurse Practitioner Faculties (NONPF) (2017). Nurse practitioner core competencies content. https://cdn.ymaws.com/www.nonpf.org/resource/resmgr/competencies/2017_NPCoreComps_with_Curric.pdf
O’Connor, S., Hubner, U., Shaw, T., Blake, R., & Ball, M. (2017). Time for TIGER to ROAR! Technology Informatics Guiding Education Reform. Nurse Education Today, 78-81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2017.07.014
McGonigle, D. & Mastrian, K. (2018). Nursing informatics and the foundation of knowledge (4th ed.). Burlington, MA: Jones and Bartlett.
- Chapter 1 Nursing Science and the Foundation of Knowledge
- Chapter 2 Introduction to Information, Information Science, and Information Systems
- Chapter 3 Computer Science and the Foundation of Knowledge Model
- Chapter 4 Introduction to Cognitive Science and Cognitive Informatics
- Chapter 6 History and Evolution of Nursing Informatics
RUBRIC
QUALITY OF RESPONSE NO RESPONSE POOR / UNSATISFACTORY SATISFACTORY GOOD EXCELLENT Content (worth a maximum of 50% of the total points) Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. 20 points out of 50: The essay illustrates poor understanding of the relevant material by failing to address or incorrectly addressing the relevant content; failing to identify or inaccurately explaining/defining key concepts/ideas; ignoring or incorrectly explaining key points/claims and the reasoning behind them; and/or incorrectly or inappropriately using terminology; and elements of the response are lacking. 30 points out of 50: The essay illustrates a rudimentary understanding of the relevant material by mentioning but not full explaining the relevant content; identifying some of the key concepts/ideas though failing to fully or accurately explain many of them; using terminology, though sometimes inaccurately or inappropriately; and/or incorporating some key claims/points but failing to explain the reasoning behind them or doing so inaccurately. Elements of the required response may also be lacking. 40 points out of 50: The essay illustrates solid understanding of the relevant material by correctly addressing most of the relevant content; identifying and explaining most of the key concepts/ideas; using correct terminology; explaining the reasoning behind most of the key points/claims; and/or where necessary or useful, substantiating some points with accurate examples. The answer is complete. 50 points: The essay illustrates exemplary understanding of the relevant material by thoroughly and correctly addressing the relevant content; identifying and explaining all of the key concepts/ideas; using correct terminology explaining the reasoning behind key points/claims and substantiating, as necessary/useful, points with several accurate and illuminating examples. No aspects of the required answer are missing. Use of Sources (worth a maximum of 20% of the total points). Zero points: Student failed to include citations and/or references. Or the student failed to submit a final paper. 5 out 20 points: Sources are seldom cited to support statements and/or format of citations are not recognizable as APA 6th Edition format. There are major errors in the formation of the references and citations. And/or there is a major reliance on highly questionable. The Student fails to provide an adequate synthesis of research collected for the paper. 10 out 20 points: References to scholarly sources are occasionally given; many statements seem unsubstantiated. Frequent errors in APA 6th Edition format, leaving the reader confused about the source of the information. There are significant errors of the formation in the references and citations. And/or there is a significant use of highly questionable sources. 15 out 20 points: Credible Scholarly sources are used effectively support claims and are, for the most part, clear and fairly represented. APA 6th Edition is used with only a few minor errors. There are minor errors in reference and/or citations. And/or there is some use of questionable sources. 20 points: Credible scholarly sources are used to give compelling evidence to support claims and are clearly and fairly represented. APA 6th Edition format is used accurately and consistently. The student uses above the maximum required references in the development of the assignment. Grammar (worth maximum of 20% of total points) Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. 5 points out of 20: The paper does not communicate ideas/points clearly due to inappropriate use of terminology and vague language; thoughts and sentences are disjointed or incomprehensible; organization lacking; and/or numerous grammatical, spelling/punctuation errors 10 points out 20: The paper is often unclear and difficult to follow due to some inappropriate terminology and/or vague language; ideas may be fragmented, wandering and/or repetitive; poor organization; and/or some grammatical, spelling, punctuation errors 15 points out of 20: The paper is mostly clear as a result of appropriate use of terminology and minimal vagueness; no tangents and no repetition; fairly good organization; almost perfect grammar, spelling, punctuation, and word usage. 20 points: The paper is clear, concise, and a pleasure to read as a result of appropriate and precise use of terminology; total coherence of thoughts and presentation and logical organization; and the essay is error free. Structure of the Paper (worth 10% of total points) Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. 3 points out of 10: Student needs to develop better formatting skills. The paper omits significant structural elements required for and APA 6th edition paper. Formatting of the paper has major flaws. The paper does not conform to APA 6th edition requirements whatsoever. 5 points out of 10: Appearance of final paper demonstrates the student’s limited ability to format the paper. There are significant errors in formatting and/or the total omission of major components of an APA 6th edition paper. They can include the omission of the cover page, abstract, and page numbers. Additionally the page has major formatting issues with spacing or paragraph formation. Font size might not conform to size requirements. The student also significantly writes too large or too short of and paper 7 points out of 10: Research paper presents an above-average use of formatting skills. The paper has slight errors within the paper. This can include small errors or omissions with the cover page, abstract, page number, and headers. There could be also slight formatting issues with the document spacing or the font Additionally the paper might slightly exceed or undershoot the specific number of required written pages for the assignment. 10 points: Student provides a high-caliber, formatted paper. This includes an APA 6th edition cover page, abstract, page number, headers and is double spaced in 12’ Times Roman Font. Additionally, the paper conforms to the specific number of required written pages and neither goes over or under the specified length of the paper. GET THIS PROJECT NOW BY CLICKING ON THIS LINK TO PLACE THE ORDER
CLICK ON THE LINK HERE: https://www.perfectacademic.com/orders/ordernow
Do You Have Any Other Essay/Assignment/Class Project/Homework Related to this? Click Here Now [CLICK ME] and Have It Done by Our PhD Qualified Writers!!