PUB-540 Principles of Epidemiology Course Assignments & Discussions Study Guide
PUB-540 Principles of Epidemiology Course Description
This course introduces epidemiological principles and methods to study, quantify, and assess the distribution and determinants of disease among populations. Learners examine the influence of biological and social factors on population health, including epigenetics, infectious disease, and foodborne illnesses. Learners evaluate epidemiologic study designs and apply measures of association as methods for determining relationships. Prerequisite: PUB-520 or PHN-600.
Grand Canyon University PUB-540 Benchmark – Epidemiologic Profile Assignment
Description
An epidemiologic profile is a summary of a significant public health issue, or issues, in your community, county, state, or country. An epidemiological profile helps to coordinate activities and policies from various agencies and organizations to improve health.
Review the available data, reports, and documents for your locale. Assess how the methods of epidemiology (study designs, data collection, measures of association, etc.) are used to determine who needs what services, where the services are needed, and how those services should be delivered. Define your community as your city, metropolitan area, or county and write a 2,000-2,250 word epidemiological profile (word limit excludes references and title page). The profile can be a general profile that provides a landscape picture of several significant chronic and infectious diseases in your defined community, or it can be a specific profile that targets one health issue, such as diabetes, asthma, STDs, flu, heart disease, obesity, alcohol abuse, or other drug use. Include the following:
Executive Summary
- Describe the purpose of the epidemiologic profile and the health issue(s) it addresses. Discuss its importance to the community and how it will be utilized.
- Summarize the key findings from your review of available data, reports, and documents for the community.
Introduction
- Describe the defined community and population using demographic and socio-economic information and data.
- Briefly describe the history and cultural background of the community.
- Explain any unique contextual information that pertains to the public health of the defined community.
- Describe any key public health projects, grants, or existing epidemiology-related working groups or committees in the community/county.
Description of Available Data
Identify at least two different data sources relevant to your profile. Discuss data from these sources and their relation to the issue or community.
Discuss the methods used in the data collection process (data source and organization providing the data; how often the data are collected; data limitations including response rates, missing data, selection of participants, etc.). Potential data sources and databases might include the following depending on what is available for your community or county:
- Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) data
- Youth risk behavioral survey
- Surveillance, epidemiology, and end results (SEER) program data
- CDC Wonder (multiple data sources)
- County health rankings data (multiple data sources)
- Alcohol-related disease impact data
- Demographic health survey data (international)
- Global school-based student health survey (international)
- Local evaluation reports from the department/ministry of health or other nonprofit organizations
Interpretation of Results Regarding Key Health Issue
- Size and magnitude of the measures
- Trends and comparisons
- Economic costs
Discussion of Problems and Strategies
- Discuss disparities, limitations, and gaps in the information available regarding the health issue(s).
- Describe potential public health strategies to address these gaps.
- Use graphs and tables where appropriate.
Conclusion
You are required to cite to at least five sources to complete this assignment. Sources should be published within the last 5 years and appropriate for the assignment criteria and public health content.
General Requirements
You are required to cite at least FOUR sources to complete this assignment. Sources must be published within the last 5 years and appropriate for the discussion question criteria and public health content.
You are required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite. Refer to the LopesWrite Technical Support articles for assistance.
For top-quality coursework writing help and assignment writing services, trust Reliable Papers. Our expert team delivers 100% original human-written work tailored to your needs. Contact us via phone, WhatsApp, or live chat for assistance today!
Benchmark Information
This benchmark assignment assesses the following programmatic competency:
MPH
2.1 Apply epidemiological methods to the breadth of settings and situations in public health practice.
MSN Public Health Nursing
6.2 Apply epidemiological methods to the breadth of settings and situations in public health practice.
Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide. An abstract is not required.
While APA style is required, solid academic writing is expected as well, and documentation of sources should be presented using APA formatting guidelines.
This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.
PLEASE make sure APA citation and permalink for articles are complete and correct.
PLEASE add the links/sites below to the reference list if you use any of these readings and make sure everything is in proper APA format.
https://apastyle.apa.org/learn/quick-guide-on-refe…
Read Chapters 17, 19, and 20 in Gordis Epidemiology.
URL:
https://www.gcumedia.com/digital-resources/elsevier/2019/gordis-epidemiology_6e.php
Read “Health Inequalities Among British Civil Servants: The Whitehall II Study,” by Marmot and Smith, from The Lancet (1991).
URL:
Read “The Role of Epidemiology in Disaster Response Policy Development,” by Thorpe et al., from Science Direct (2015).
URL:
Read “Prescription Drug Abuse: From Epidemiology to Public Policy,” by McHugh, Nielsen, and Weiss, from Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment (2015).
URL:
Read “The Role Epidemiology in Evidence-Based Policy Making: A Case Study of Tobacco Use in Youth,” by Aldrich et al., from Annals of Epidemiology (2015).
URL:
Read “Epidemiology, Policy, and Racial/Ethnic Minority Health Disparities,” by Carter-Pokras et al., from Annals of Epidemiology (2012).
URL:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3724931/
Read “Epidemiology and Public Policies,” by Barata, from Revista Brasileira de Epidemiologia (2013).
URL:
http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?pid=S1415-790X2013000100003&script=sci_arttext&tlng=en
Read “Ethical Issues in Epidemiologic Research and Public Health Practice,” by Coughlin, from Emerging Themes Epidemiology (2006).
URL:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1594564/
Explore the “Viral Hepatitis Epidemiologic Profiles” map, located on the Association of State and Territorial Health Officials (ASTHO) website, to assist with topic assignment.
URL:
https://www.astho.org/Viral-Hepatitis-Epi-Profiles/Map/
Use the “BRFSS Web Enabled Analysis Tool,” located on the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) website, to complete the topic assignment.
URL:
Review the “Belmont Report,” by the National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research (1979), located on the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services – Office for Human Research Protections website.
URL:
https://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/regulations-and-policy/belmont-report/index.html
Explore the resources on “Health Data Tools and Statistics,” located on the PHPartners website.
URL:
https://phpartners.org/health_stats.html
Explore “Surveillance, Epidemiology and the End Results Program,” from the National Cancer Institute.
URL:
Explore the STEPwise Approach to Surveillance (STEPS) page of the World Health Organization (WHO) website.
URL:
http://www.who.int/chp/steps/en/
MUST 2000-2250 WORDS have at least 6 citations with the page numbers and 6 references in APA format. (The List of References should not be older than 2018 and should not be included in the word count.)
Be sure to support your postings and responses with specific references to the Learning Resources.
It is important that you cover all the topics identified in the assignment. Covering the topic does not mean mentioning the topic BUT presenting an explanation from the context of ethics and the readings for this class
To get maximum points you need to follow the requirements listed for this assignments 1) look at the word/page limits 2) review and follow APA rules 3) create subheadings to identify the key sections you are presenting and 4) Free from typographical and sentence construction errors.
REMEMBER IN APA FORMAT JOURNAL TITLES AND VOLUME NUMBERS ARE ITALICIZED.
You can also read another study guide on nursing assignments for students from another post on PUB-550 Application and Interpretation of Public Health Data Course Assignments & Discussions.
PUB-540 Benchmark – Epidemiologic Profile Assignment Rubric
| Course Code | Class Code | Assignment Title | Total Points | ||||||
| PUB-540 | PUB-540-O500 | Benchmark – Epidemiologic Profile Assignment | 200.0 | ||||||
| Criteria | Percentage | Unsatisfactory (0.00%) | Less than Satisfactory (74.00%) | Satisfactory (79.00%) | Good (87.00%) | Excellent (100.00%) | Comments | Points Earned | |
| Content | 70.0% | ||||||||
| Executive Summary | 10.0% | The purpose of the epidemiological profile is not stated. A summary of key findings is not presented. | The purpose of the epidemiological profile and a summary of key findings are presented. The purpose, importance, or use of the epidemiological profile is unclear. The key findings are misrepresented or require more detail to establish support for the proposed profile. | The purpose, importance, and use of the epidemiological profile are generally described. The key findings are summarized. Overall, more information is required to fully present the epidemiological profile. There are some inaccuracies. | The purpose, importance, and use of the epidemiological profile are described. The key findings are discussed. Overall, the key findings offer adequate support for the epidemiological profile. Some detail is required for clarity. The epidemiological profile is relevant for the proposed community or population. | The purpose, importance, and use of the epidemiological profile are described in detail. The key findings are discussed and offer strong support for the epidemiological profile. The epidemiological profile is highly relevant for the proposed community or population. Compelling rationale is provided and is supported by factual findings. | |||
| Introduction | 10.0% | A description of the public health community, its issues, and current services is not provided in the epidemiological profile. | An incomplete summary of the public health community, its issues, and current services is presented. One or more element of the assigned elements is omitted. Information presented is inaccurate or not relevant to the population or community. | A general description of the public health community, its issues, and current services is presented. Information presented contains some minor inaccuracies or is not fully relevant to the population or community. More information or evidence is needed to fully represent the population or community. | A description of the public health community, its issues, and current services is presented. Information presented is relevant to the population or community. Some detail is needed for clarity. The population or community is adequately represented. | A detailed description of the public health community, its issues, and current services is well presented. Information is thoroughly presented that provides insight into the population or community. Strong support is offered to factually support claims. | |||
| Description of Available Data (C2.1)(C6.2) | 10.0% | No data sources are utilized. | Less than two data sources are utilized. The data sources are not entirely relevant to the population, community, or issue. The methods used in data collection are not discussed, or the discussion is incomplete. There are minor inaccuracies. | At least two data sources relevant to the population and community are utilized. It is unclear how the data from these sources directly supports the epidemiological profile or the particular issue facing the population or community. More detail is needed to establish a clear correlation. The methods used in data collection are summarized. | At least two data sources relevant to the population and community are utilized. Support for the epidemiological profile or the particular issue facing the population or community is adequately established. The methods used in data collection are described. Minor detail is needed for clarity. | At least two data sources relevant to the population and community are utilized. Direct support for the epidemiological profile or the particular issue facing the population or community is clearly established. The methods used in data collection are clearly described. The description demonstrates a good ability to utilize data sources and apply the information to practice. | |||
| Interpretation of Results of Key Health Issue | 10.0% | Interpretation of results of key health issues is not presented. The interpretation is not consistent with the assignment guidelines. | An incomplete interpretation of key health issues is presented. The interpretation omits one of the elements outlined in the assignment guidelines. The interpretation omits significant implications of the findings; or, it is unclear how the interpreted findings correlate with the proposed issue facing the population or community. There are some inaccuracies. | A general interpretation of key health issues is presented as outlined in the assignment guidelines. The interpretation does not fully elaborate on the findings. A correlation between the proposed issue facing the population or community is generally established. More detail or information is required. | An interpretation of key health issues is presented as outlined in the assignment guidelines. The interpretation elaborates on the findings. A correlation between the proposed issue facing the population or community is established. Some detail or information is needed for clarity. | A factual interpretation of key health issues is presented as outlined in the assignment guidelines. The interpretation provides an in-depth explanation of the findings. A strong correlation between the proposed issue facing the population or community is established. An aptitude for interpreting data is demonstrated. | |||
| Discussion (disparities, limitations, or gaps; potential public health strategies) | 15.0% | A discussion of problems and strategies is omitted. | An incomplete discussion of problems and strategies is presented; one category has been omitted, or both categories lack sufficient information or support. The discussion contains inaccuracies. | A general discussion of problems and strategies is presented. The discussion of problems provides superficial assessment; not all of the key disparities, limitations, and gaps in information related to the health issue are presented. Potential strategies to address the problems are summarized. More information and detail is required. | A discussion of problems and strategies is presented. The discussion of problems provides an assessment of the most significant disparities, limitations, and gaps in information related to the health issue. Potential strategies to address the problems are described. Some minor detail is required for clarity. | A comprehensive discussion of problems and strategies is logically presented. The discussion of problems provides an in-depth assessment of the major and minor disparities, limitations, and gaps in information related to the health issue. Realistic strategies are proposed in detail to address the problems. The discussion is well-supported. | |||
| Display of Visual Data | 5.0% | Tables and graphs are not utilized. | Tables and graphs were utilized inappropriately. Tables and graphs report information inconsistent with findings presented in the discussion. | Tables and graphs are minimally utilized. Tables and graphs contain some errors, or have some inconsistencies with the findings presented in the discussion. | Tables and graphs are utilized. The tables and graphs reflect the findings presented in the discussion. | Tables and graphs are strategically utilized. The tables and graphs clearly reflect the information presented in the discussion. | |||
| Conclusion | 5.0% | A conclusion is not presented. | An incomplete conclusion is presented. | The conclusion provides a concise summary of the elements presented in the epidemiological profile. | The conclusion summarizes the elements presented in the epidemiological profile. The importance of the thesis is reiterated. | The conclusion summarizes elements of the epidemiological profile, synthesizing key points and ideas. The conclusion stresses the importance of the thesis presented in the epidemiological profile. The conclusion is compelling and encourages the reader to reflect on the proposed profile. | |||
| Required Sources | 5.0% | Sources are not included. | Number of required sources is only partially met. | Number of required sources is met, but sources are outdated or inappropriate. | Number of required sources is met. Sources are current, but not all sources are appropriate for the assignment criteria and public health content. | Number of required resources is met. Sources are current, and appropriate for the assignment criteria and public health content. | |||
| Organization and Effectiveness | 20.0% | ||||||||
| Thesis Development and Purpose | 7.0% | 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. | |||
| Argument Logic and Construction | 8.0% | 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. | |||
| Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use) | 5.0% | Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is 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. | |||
| Format | 10.0% | ||||||||
| Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment) | 5.0% | 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. | |||
| Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style) | 5.0% | Sources are not documented. | Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors. | Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present. | Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct. | Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error. | |||
| Total Weightage | 100% |
Grand Canyon University PUB-540 Historical Review of Epidemiology Assignment
Description
Key individuals and historical events have helped shape the field of epidemiology. Research the following individuals and their roles in shaping contemporary epidemiology:
John Graunt
James Lind
Edward Jenner
Ignaz Semmelweis
John Snow
Choose three of the individuals from your research. In a 1,000-1,250 word paper, describe the epidemiological advancements that were influenced by these individuals. Include the following:
- Describe the disease and the event. Using descriptive epidemiology, discuss how common the disease was at the time, who was infected, when it occurred (time of year or season), and the mode of transmission. If the individual is not associated with a specific disease, discuss a significant disease happening during that period.
Discuss how the individuals influenced or advanced epidemiological methods and the process they used to describe and control disease. Discuss how their contributions helped to inform the definition of epidemiology. Consider whether they used qualitative, quantitative, or both types of data collection methods, and the approach they used to test their hypotheses.
Discuss how similar epidemiological methods have been used to understand one current public health issue (not one for each individual). Discuss the key research studies used to understand the risk factors associated with the problem or disease. Two potential examples include lung cancer (Doll and Hill, 1950) or cardiovascular disease and the Framingham Heart Study (Drawber, Meadors, & Moore, 1950; Kannel, 2000).
- While APA style is not required for the body of this assignment, solid academic writing is expected, and documentation of sources should be presented using APA formatting guidelines, which can be found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center.
This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.
You are required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite. Refer to the LopesWrite Technical Support articles for assistance.
PLEASE make sure APA citation and permalink for articles are complete and correct.
- PLEASE add the links/sites below to the reference list if you use any of these readings and make sure everything is in proper APA format.
https://apastyle.apa.org/learn/quick-guide-on-refe…
Read Chapters 1, 2, and 6 in Gordis Epidemiology.
- URL:
https://www.gcumedia.com/digital-resources/elsevier/2019/gordis-epidemiology_6e.php
Read “Smoking and Carcinoma of the Lung,” by Doll and Hill, from British Medical Journal (1950).
- URL:
https://www-ncbi-nlm-nih-gov.lopes.idm.oclc.org/pmc/articles/PMC2038856/pdf/brmedj03566-0003.pdf
Read “The Training of Epidemiologists and Diversity in Epidemiology: Findings from the 2006 Congress of Epidemiology Survey,” by Carter-Pokras et al., from Annals of Epidemiology (2009).
URL:
http://www.sciencedirect.com.lopes.idm.oclc.org/science/article/pii/S104727970900060X
Watch “Epidemiology the Backbone of Public Health,” by Greg Martin (2017), located on the YouTube website.
- URL:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S5XRh47T420
Read “The Framingham Study: ITS 50-Year Legacy and Future Promise,” by Kannel, from Journal of Atherosclerosis and Thrombosis (2000).
- URL:
https://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/jat1994/6/2/6_2_60/_pdf
Read “Epidemiological Background and Design: The Framingham Study,” located on the Framingham Heart Study website.
- URL:
https://www.framinghamheartstudy.org/fhs-about/history/epidemiological-background/
Read “Epidemiological Approaches to Heart Disease: The Framingham Study,” by Dawber, Meadors, and Moore, from American Journal of Public Health (1951).
URL:
View “Global Disease Detectives,” by the Center for Global Health (2013), located on the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) website.
URL:
https://www.cdc.gov/cdctv/dataandstatistics/disease-detectives.html
Read “Section 2: Historical Evolution of Epidemiology,” from Lesson 1 of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) self-study course, Principles of Epidemiology in Public Health Practice (2012), located on the CDC website.
URL:
https://www.cdc.gov/csels/dsepd/ss1978/lesson1/section2.html
Explore the CDC Current Outbreak List page of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) website.
URL:
https://www.cdc.gov/outbreaks/index.html
Explore the Epidemic Intelligence Service page of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) website.
URL:
https://www.cdc.gov/eis/index.html
Explore the Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR), located on the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) website.
URL:
https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/index.html
PUB-540 Historical Review of Epidemiology Rubric
| Course Code | Class Code | Assignment Title | Total Points | ||||||
| PUB-540 | PUB-540-O500 | Historical Review of Epidemiology | 100.0 | ||||||
| Criteria | Percentage | Unsatisfactory (0.00%) | Less than Satisfactory (74.00%) | Satisfactory (79.00%) | Good (87.00%) | Excellent (100.00%) | Comments | Points Earned | |
| Criteria | 100.0% | ||||||||
| Key Individuals and Historical Events | 20.0% | Three individuals shaping the field of epidemiology have not been presented. The individuals chosen do not meet the assignment criteria. | An incomplete summary of three individuals is presented. The individuals chosen meet the assignment criteria, but the roles of the individuals or events are inaccurately represented. | Three key individuals shaping the field of epidemiology are presented. The roles of the individuals and events are presented, but there are minor inaccuracies. | A narrative describing the key individuals shaping the field of epidemiology is presented. The roles of the individuals and events are accurate. More detail is required to fully represent the individuals or events. | A well-organized narrative describing the key individuals shaping the field of epidemiology is presented. The roles of the individuals and events are accurately and discussed in detailed. | |||
| Disease and Event | 15.0% | The disease and event are not described for the three individuals. | The disease and event are generally presented for all three individuals. The descriptions contain inaccuracies regarding the timeframe, who was infected and when, and the mode of transmission. Descriptive epidemiology is not used, or is used out of context. | The disease and event are generally summarized for all three individuals. The descriptions are accurate, but require significantly more detail regarding the timeframe, who was infected and when, and the mode of transmission. Some descriptive epidemiology is used. | The disease and event are accurately described for all three individuals. Some detail regarding the timeframe, who was infected and when, and the mode of transmission is needed to provide clarity. Descriptive epidemiology is generally used. | The disease and event are described accurately and clearly for all three individuals. Strong detail regarding the timeframe, who was infected and when, and the mode of transmission is presented. The description demonstrates a strong understanding of descriptive epidemiology. | |||
| How Individuals/Events Influenced or Advanced Methods of the Time | 20.0% | A discussion of how events or the three individuals influenced or advanced epidemiological methods of the time is not presented. | A summary of how events or the three individuals influenced or advanced epidemiological methods of the time is presented. The summary contains inaccuracies. Significant detail or evidence is needed to support discussion. | A general discussion of how events or the three individuals influenced or advanced epidemiological methods of the time is presented. The discussion requires some detail or evidence to fully support discussion. | A discussion of how events or the three individuals influenced or advanced epidemiological methods of the time is presented. Evidence is used to support discussion. Some detail is needed for clarity. | A detailed discussion of how events or the three individuals influenced or advanced epidemiological methods of the time is presented. Strong evidence is used to support discussion. The discussion demonstrates an understanding of the epidemiological advancements. | |||
| How Advancements Influenced Understanding of Current Public Health Efforts | 15.0% | A discussion on the epidemiological advancements of methods leading to the understanding of current public health issues is not presented. | A summary on the epidemiological advancements leading to the understanding of current public health issues is presented. The summary contains inaccuracies. No logical correlation between epidemiological historical advancements and the understanding of current public health issues is established. | A discussion on the epidemiological advancements leading to the understanding of current public health issues is generally presented. A general correlation between epidemiological historical advancements and the understanding of current public health issues is established. There are some inaccuracies; more evidence is needed to support discussion. | A discussion on the epidemiological advancements leading to the understanding of current public health issues is accurately presented. A correlation between epidemiological historical advancements and the understanding of current public health issues is established. The discussion requires some detail for clarity. | A discussion on the epidemiological advancements leading to the understanding of current public health issues is accurately presented. A correlation between epidemiological historical advancements and the understanding of current public health issues is established. | |||
| Thesis Development and Purpose | 7.0% | 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. | |||
| Argument Logic and Construction | 8.0% | 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. | |||
| Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use) | 5.0% | Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is 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. | |||
| Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment) | 5.0% | 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. | |||
| Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style) | 5.0% | Sources are not documented. | Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors. | Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present. | Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct. | Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error. | |||
| Total Weightage | 100% |
PUB-540 Oswego Outbreak Case Study Assignment
Topic 2: Disease Surveillance and Measurement
Objectives:
- Evaluate the effectiveness of disease surveillance in public health.
- Apply measurement tools to assess the impact of disease, its burden, and associated risk factors.
- Discuss the importance of validity and reliability.
- Evaluate the steps for investigating the occurrence of disease.
| Oswego Outbreak Case Study Description |
Read the “Oswego Outbreak Investigation,” located in the Topic Materials.
Part 1
Complete the following:
Using the line listing in the Excel “Oswego Line Listing Workbook,” calculate the attack rate ratios for each food item using the table in the Excel “Oswego Attack Rate Table.” Create a separate 2×2 table for the food item you think is responsible for the outbreak and interpret the attack rate ratio for this food item. Refer to the “Creating a 2×2 Contingency Table” resource for guidance.
Using the line listing in Excel “Oswego Line Listing Workbook,” construct an epidemic curve by the time of onset of illness. What does this curve tell you regarding the average incubation period, source, and transmission?
Using the incubation range and clinical symptoms, identify potential infectious agents that could be responsible for the outbreak (refer to the Topic Material, “Compendium of Acute Foodborne and Waterborne Diseases”). Discuss your rationale.
Part 2
In a 500-750 word paper, evaluate the situation and present your findings. Including the following:
- Does this case meet the definition of an “outbreak?” Why or why not?
- Identify the steps required to investigate an outbreak. How did these steps help in investigating the Oswego event? Include the relevant information needed for each step to be successful.
- Discuss the possible routes of transmission for the expected agent.
Based on this information, what control measures would you recommend? State whether they are primary, secondary, or tertiary prevention strategies.
While APA style is not required for the body of this assignment, solid academic writing is expected, and documentation of sources should be presented using APA formatting guidelines, which can be found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center.
This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.
- PLEASE make sure APA citation and permalink for articles are complete and correct.
- PLEASE add the links/sites below to the reference list if you use any of these readings and make sure everything is in proper APA format.
- https://apastyle.apa.org/learn/quick-guide-on-refe…
- Read Chapters 3-5 and 18 in Gordis Epidemiology.
URL:
https://www.gcumedia.com/digital-resources/elsevier/2019/gordis-epidemiology_6e.php
Use the “Compendium of Acute Foodborne and Waterborne Diseases,” located on the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) website, to assist in completing the Oswego Outbreak Case History assignment.
URL:
https://www.cdc.gov/eis/casestudies/xoswego.401.303.compendium.pdf
View “How to Create an Epidemic Curve,” by Martin (2016), located on the YouTube website.
URL:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dn84ezAzV4k
View “Know How to Interpret an Epidemic Curve?” by Martin (2017), located on the YouTube website.
URL:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SM4PN7Yg1s
Read “Two by Two Tables,” by Sullivan, Dean, and Pezzullo, from OpenEpi: Open Source Epidemiologic Statistics for Public Health (2013), located on the OpenEpi website.
URL:
http://www.openepi.com/TwobyTwo/TwobyTwo.htm
Read “Goodness of Measurement: Reliability and Validity,” by Bajpai and Bajpai, from International Journal of Medical Science and Public Health (2014).
URL:
https://www.ejmanager.com/mnstemps/67/67-1380953319.pdf
Read “CDC 24-7 Fact of the Week,” located on the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) website.
URL:
General Requirements
Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center. An abstract is not required.
This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.
You are required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite. Refer to the LopesWrite Technical Support articles for assistance.
| Topic 2 DQ 1 |
Disease surveillance is a necessary public health role. Passive surveillance relies on individuals and local authorities “pushing” information to national agencies who then compile, analyze, and disseminate the information. Unfortunately, significant gaps occur in reporting.
Review your textbook, and the CDC’s National Notifiable Disease Surveillance System (NNDSS). Discuss the strengths of the current surveillance systems, the gaps you identified, and why these gaps occur. Discuss the global challenges of coordinating surveillance between multiple countries and provide an example highlighting the challenges. What could other governments and agencies, such as the World Health Organization and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, do to strengthen global disease surveillance systems?
| Topic 2 DQ 2 |
Explain the importance of validity and reliability in diagnostic testing or research. Describe how validity relates to sensitivity and specificity in diagnostic testing. Identify a health screen specific to a diagnostic test that is currently being debated regarding its use, recommended ages, or frequency, and discuss how validity and reliability play into this debate. What other factors should you consider when you assess the recommendations for a diagnostic test or screen?
PUB-540 Oswego Outbreak Case Study Assignment Rubric
| Course Code | Class Code | Assignment Title | Total Points | ||||||
| PUB-540 | PUB-540-O500 | Oswego Outbreak Case Study | 120.0 | ||||||
| Criteria | Percentage | Unsatisfactory (0.00%) | Less than Satisfactory (74.00%) | Satisfactory (79.00%) | Good (87.00%) | Excellent (100.00%) | Comments | Points Earned | |
| Criteria | 100.0% | ||||||||
| Calculation of Attack Rate Ratios for Food Items | 10.0% | Calculation of attack rate ratios for food items is not performed; or, the calculation is not performed or presented according to assignment guidelines. | N/A | Calculation of attack rate ratios for food items is performed accurately and according to assignment guidelines. However, the data used are inaccurate, yielding an inaccurate attack rate ratio, or the wrong formula is utilized to calculate the ratio. | N/A | Calculation of attack rate ratios for food items is presented according to assignment guidelines and the results are accurate. | |||
| Construction of Epidemic Curve by Time of Onset of Illness | 10.0% | Epidemic curve by time of onset of illness is not constructed; or, it is not presented according to assignment guidelines. | N/A | Epidemic curve by time of onset of illness is presented according to assignment guidelines. However, the data used, or the manner in which the curve is displayed is inaccurate. | N/A | Epidemic curve by time of onset of illness is constructed and accurate. | |||
| Identify Incubation Range Identification of Infectious Agent | 10.0% | Identification of an agent is not discussed. | Identification of an agent is present but does not include any rationale. | Identification of an agent is present including some rationale, but the agent or discussion is incorrect. | Identification of more than one possible agents is present, and rationale is appropriate. Use of the epidemic curve and incubation range are evident. Discussion is sufficient and appropriate based on the agents identified. | Identification of several agents is present and supported by strong rationale. Use of the epidemic curve and incubation range are evident. Discussion is comprehensive and correctly explains the rationale for selecting the appropriate agent. | |||
| Evaluation of Situation (Analysis of outbreak, steps to investigate outbreak | 15.0% | Analysis of the case history as an outbreak and the steps to investigating an outbreak is not presented; or, the analysis and presentation are incomplete. | Analysis of the case history as an outbreak and the steps to investigating an outbreak is summarized. The summary contains significant inaccuracies. | Analysis of case history as an outbreak and the steps to investigating an outbreak is discussed. The discussion presents a general evaluation the situation. There are minor inaccuracies. More evidence is needed for support. | Analysis of the case history as an outbreak and the steps to investigating an outbreak is discussed. The discussion presents an evaluation of the situation. Some evidence or detail is needed for clarity. | Analysis of the case history as an outbreak and the steps to investigating the outbreak is thoroughly discussed. The discussion presents a detailed evaluation of the situation. Sufficient evidence and detail are provided to support the evaluation of the situation. | |||
| Possible Routes of Transmission | 10.0% | Possible routes of transmission of the expected agent are not presented. | Possible routes of transmission of the expected agent are summarized. The summary contains inaccuracies or is incomplete. | Possible routes of transmission of the expected agent are generally presented. There are minor inaccuracies. More evidence is needed for support. | Possible routes of transmission of the expected agent are presented. Some evidence or detail is needed for clarity. | Possible routes of transmission of the expected agent are clearly presented. Sufficient evidence and detail is provided to support claims. | |||
| Recommendations (Control measures recommended; primary, secondary or tertiary prevention strategies) | 15.0% | Control measures and prevention strategies are not recommended. | An incomplete recommendation for control measures and prevention strategies is presented. | A general recommendation for control measures and prevention strategies is presented. The recommendation contains inaccuracies or requires more detail and evidence to support claims. | A recommendation for control measures and prevention strategies is presented. The recommendation requires some detail for clarity. Evidence provided adequately supports claims. | A detailed recommendation for control measures and prevention strategies is presented. The recommendation provides strong evidence that supports claims. The recommendations demonstrate insight into addressing critical thinking. | |||
| Thesis Development and Purpose | 7.0% | 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. | |||
| Argument Logic and Construction | 8.0% | 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. | |||
| Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use) | 5.0% | Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is 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. | |||
| Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment) | 5.0% | 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. | |||
| Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style) | 5.0% | Sources are not documented. | Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors. | Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present. | Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct. | Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error. | |||
| Total Weightage | 100% |
PUB-540 Oswego Outbreak Case Study Assignment: Creating a 2×2 Contingency Table
Creating a 2×2 contingency table is very useful in calculating a variety of public health measurements, including sensitivity and specificity, negative and positive predictive value, risk ratios, attack rate ratios, and odds ratios.
A 2×2 table is actually a 3×3 table when you include the rows and columns for the totals. If you are setting up a table to measure the sensitivity and specificity of a test or its negative and positive predictive values, you should put the test results on the y-axis (rows) and the actual presence of disease on the x-axis (columns).
| Disease | No Disease | Total | |
| Test (+) | (a) | (b) | a + b |
| Test (-) | (c) | (d) | c + d |
| Total | a + c | b + d | a + b + c + d |
The highlighted section is where you will enter the data for each corresponding cell. You can set up the table switching the rows and columns but you will generally see them set up in this format with test results on the y-axis and disease on the x-axis.
Setting up a table to measure the association of a risk factor or exposure is similar, with the outcome or disease on the x-axis and the presence of the risk factor or exposure on the y-axis.
| Disease | No Disease | Total | |
| Exposure (+) | (a) | (b) | a + b |
| Exposure (-) | (c) | (d) | c + d |
| Total | a + c | b + d | a + b + c + d |
Note: You can set up the table differently but you will need to be cognizant of which numbers you are putting in your numerator and denominator for the measure you are calculating. For example:
| Exposure (+) | Exposure (-) | Total | |
| No Disease | (b) | (d) | b + d |
| Disease | (a) | (c) | a + c |
| Total | a + b | b + c | a + b + c + d |
| Number of persons who ate specified food | Number of persons who did not eat specified food | Attack Rate Ratio | |||||||
| Ill | Not Ill | Total | Percent Ill (Attack Rate) | Ill | Not Ill | Total | Percent Ill (Attack Rate) | ||
| Baked ham | |||||||||
| Spinach | |||||||||
| Mashed potatoes | |||||||||
| cabbage | |||||||||
| Jello | |||||||||
| Rolls | |||||||||
| Brown bread | |||||||||
| Milk | |||||||||
| Coffee | |||||||||
| Water | |||||||||
| Cakes | |||||||||
| Van ice cream | |||||||||
| Cho ice cream | |||||||||
| Fruit salad | |||||||||
| ID | AGE | SEX | Time of Meal | Ill | Date of Onset | Time of Onset | Baked ham | Spinach | Mashed potatoes | Cabbage | Jello | Rolls | Brown bread | Milk | Coffee | Water | Cakes | Van ice cream | Cho ice cream | Fruit salad | |
| 1 | 11 | M | unk | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | Y | N | |||
| 2 | 52 | F | 20:00 | Y | 19-Apr | 0:30 | Y | Y | Y | N | N | Y | N | N | Y | N | N | Y | N | N | |
| 3 | 65 | M | 18:30 | Y | 19-Apr | 0:30 | Y | Y | Y | Y | N | N | N | N | Y | N | N | Y | Y | N | |
| 4 | 59 | F | 18:30 | Y | 19-Apr | 0:30 | Y | Y | N | N | N | N | N | N | Y | N | Y | Y | Y | N | |
| 5 | 13 | F | unk | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | Y | N | |||
| 6 | 63 | F | 19:30 | Y | 18-Apr | 22:30 | Y | Y | N | Y | Y | N | N | N | N | Y | N | Y | N | N | |
| 7 | 70 | M | 19:30 | Y | 18-Apr | 22:30 | Y | Y | Y | N | Y | Y | Y | N | Y | Y | N | Y | N | N | |
| 8 | 40 | F | 19:30 | Y | 19-Apr | 2:00 | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | Y | Y | N | |
| 9 | 15 | F | 22:00 | Y | 19-Apr | 1:00 | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | Y | N | Y | N | |
| 10 | 33 | F | 19:00 | Y | 18-Apr | 23:00 | Y | Y | Y | N | N | Y | Y | N | N | Y | N | Y | Y | N | |
| 11 | 65 | M | unk | N | Y | Y | Y | N | Y | Y | N | N | N | N | N | Y | N | N | |||
| 12 | 38 | F | unk | N | Y | Y | Y | N | N | Y | N | N | Y | N | N | Y | Y | Y | |||
| 13 | 62 | F | unk | N | Y | Y | N | Y | Y | Y | Y | N | N | Y | N | N | N | N | |||
| 14 | 10 | M | 19:30 | Y | 19-Apr | 2:00 | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | Y | Y | N | |
| 15 | 25 | M | unk | N | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | N | N | |||
| 16 | 32 | F | unk | Y | 19-Apr | 10:30 | Y | Y | N | N | N | Y | N | N | Y | N | Y | Y | Y | N | |
| 17 | 62 | F | unk | Y | 19-Apr | 0:30 | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | Y | N | N | |
| 18 | 36 | M | unk | Y | 18-Apr | 22:15 | Y | Y | N | Y | N | Y | Y | N | N | N | N | Y | N | N | |
| 19 | 11 | M | unk | N | Y | Y | ? | Y | N | Y | N | N | N | Y | N | N | Y | N | |||
| 20 | 33 | F | unk | Y | 18-Apr | 22:00 | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | N | N | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | N | |
| 21 | 13 | F | 22:00 | Y | 19-Apr | 1:00 | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | Y | Y | N | N | |
| 22 | 7 | M | unk | Y | 18-Apr | 23:00 | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | N | N | Y | Y | Y | Y | N | |
| 23 | 64 | M | unk | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | Y | N | N | |||
| 24 | 3 | M | unk | Y | 18-Apr | 21:45 | N | Y | Y | N | N | Y | N | N | N | Y | Y | Y | N | N | |
| 25 | 65 | F | unk | N | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | N | Y | N | Y | N | Y | Y | Y | N | |||
| 26 | 59 | F | unk | Y | 18-Apr | 21:45 | N | Y | Y | Y | N | Y | Y | N | N | Y | Y | Y | N | N | |
| 27 | 15 | F | 22:00 | Y | 19-Apr | 1:00 | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | Y | Y | Y | N | |
| 28 | 62 | M | unk | N | Y | Y | N | Y | N | Y | Y | N | Y | Y | Y | N | Y | N | |||
| 29 | 37 | F | unk | Y | 18-Apr | 23:00 | Y | Y | Y | N | Y | Y | Y | N | Y | N | Y | Y | N | N | |
| 30 | 17 | M | 22:00 | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | Y | Y | Y | N | |||
| 31 | 35 | M | unk | Y | 18-Apr | 21:00 | Y | Y | Y | N | Y | Y | Y | N | Y | N | Y | Y | N | Y | |
| 32 | 15 | M | 22:00 | Y | 19-Apr | 1:00 | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | Y | Y | N | N | |
| 33 | 50 | F | 22:00 | Y | 19-Apr | 1:00 | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | Y | N | N | |
| 34 | 40 | M | unk | N | Y | Y | N | N | N | Y | Y | N | Y | Y | Y | N | Y | Y | |||
| 35 | 35 | F | unk | N | Y | Y | Y | N | N | Y | Y | N | Y | Y | N | N | Y | N | |||
| 36 | 35 | F | unk | Y | 18-Apr | 21:15 | Y | Y | Y | Y | N | Y | Y | N | Y | N | N | Y | N | N | |
| 37 | 36 | M | unk | N | Y | N | Y | Y | N | Y | Y | N | Y | N | N | N | Y | N | |||
| 38 | 57 | F | unk | Y | 18-Apr | 23:30 | Y | Y | N | Y | Y | Y | Y | N | Y | N | Y | Y | Y | N | |
| 39 | 16 | F | 22:00 | Y | 19-Apr | 1:00 | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | Y | N | Y | N | |
| 40 | 68 | M | unk | Y | 18-Apr | 21:30 | Y | N | Y | Y | N | N | Y | N | Y | N | N | Y | N | N | |
| 41 | 54 | F | unk | N | Y | Y | Y | N | N | Y | N | N | Y | N | Y | N | Y | N | |||
| 42 | 77 | M | unk | Y | 19-Apr | 2:30 | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | Y | N | Y | |
| 43 | 72 | F | unk | Y | 19-Apr | 2:00 | Y | Y | N | Y | Y | N | Y | N | Y | N | Y | Y | Y | N | |
| 44 | 58 | M | unk | Y | 18-Apr | 9:30 | Y | Y | Y | N | N | N | Y | Y | Y | N | N | Y | ? | Y | |
| 45 | 20 | M | 22:00 | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | Y | Y | Y | N | |||
| 46 | 17 | M | unk | N | Y | Y | Y | N | N | Y | N | N | N | Y | N | Y | Y | N | |||
| 47 | 62 | F | unk | Y | 19-Apr | 0:30 | Y | Y | N | N | N | Y | N | N | N | Y | N | Y | N | N | |
| 48 | 20 | F | 19:00 | Y | 19-Apr | 1:00 | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | Y | N | N | |
| 49 | 52 | F | unk | Y | 18-Apr | 22:30 | Y | Y | Y | Y | N | Y | N | N | Y | N | N | Y | Y | N | |
| 50 | 9 | F | unk | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | Y | N | Y | N | |||
| 51 | 50 | M | unk | N | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | N | Y | N | |||
| 52 | 8 | M | 11:00 | Y | 18-Apr | 15:00 | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | Y | Y | N | |
| 53 | 35 | F | unk | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | Y | Y | N | |||
| 54 | 48 | F | unk | Y | 19-Apr | 0:00 | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | N | Y | Y | Y | N | |
| 55 | 25 | M | unk | Y | 18-Apr | 23:00 | Y | N | Y | N | N | Y | Y | N | N | Y | Y | Y | Y | N | |
| 56 | 11 | F | unk | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | Y | N | |||
| 57 | 74 | M | unk | Y | 18-Apr | 22:30 | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | N | Y | N | Y | Y | N | N | |
| 58 | 12 | F | 22:00 | Y | 19-Apr | 1:00 | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | Y | Y | Y | N | |
| 59 | 44 | F | 19:30 | Y | 19-Apr | 2:30 | Y | Y | Y | N | N | Y | N | N | N | Y | Y | N | Y | N | |
| 60 | 53 | F | 19:30 | Y | 18-Apr | 23:30 | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | N | Y | N | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | N | |
| 61 | 37 | M | unk | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | Y | N | |||
| 62 | 24 | F | unk | N | Y | Y | Y | N | N | Y | N | N | Y | N | N | N | N | N | |||
| 63 | 69 | F | unk | N | N | Y | Y | N | Y | N | Y | N | N | Y | Y | N | Y | N | |||
| 64 | 7 | M | unk | N | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | N | N | N | Y | Y | N | Y | N | |||
| 65 | 17 | F | 22:00 | Y | 19-Apr | 1:00 | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | Y | Y | Y | N | |
| 66 | 8 | F | unk | Y | 19-Apr | 0:30 | Y | N | Y | Y | Y | N | N | N | N | N | Y | Y | Y | N | |
| 67 | 11 | F | 19:30 | N | Y | Y | Y | Y | N | Y | N | N | Y | Y | N | N | Y | N | |||
| 68 | 17 | M | 19:30 | N | Y | Y | Y | Y | N | Y | N | N | Y | N | Y | Y | N | N | |||
| 69 | 36 | F | unk | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | Y | N | |||
| 70 | 21 | F | unk | Y | 19-Apr | 0:30 | Y | N | N | Y | Y | N | N | N | N | N | N | Y | Y | N | |
| 71 | 60 | M | 19:30 | Y | 19-Apr | 1:00 | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | Y | Y | N | N | |
| 72 | 18 | F | 19:30 | Y | 19-Apr | 0:00 | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | N | N | N | N | Y | Y | Y | Y | N | |
| 73 | 14 | F | 22:00 | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | Y | Y | N | N | |||
| 74 | 52 | M | unk | Y | 19-Apr | 2:15 | Y | N | Y | N | Y | Y | Y | N | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | N | |
| 75 | 45 | F | unk | Y | 18-Apr | 23:00 | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | N | Y | N | Y | Y | N | Y |
PUB-540 Measuring Morbidity: Prevalence and Incidence Assignment
Topic 3: Causal Inference, Confounding, and Bias
Objectives:
- Determine sources of bias within a study design.
- Describe confounding relationships.
- Evaluate the types of causal relationships associated with causation.
- Assess measures of morbidity.
| Measuring Morbidity: Prevalence and Incidence Assignment Description |
Morbidity is a term used to describe the unhealthy state of an individual (e.g., individual with diabetes) or within a population (e.g., the incidence of seasonal flu). Whereas mortality is the rate of death in population. Both terms are applied in epidemiology at the individual level and across a population. In public health, surveillance plays an essential role. Surveillance is carried out for many reasons, such as monitoring changes in disease frequency or monitoring changes in the levels of risk factors. Much of the information that is obtained about mortality and morbidity comes from surveillance.
For this assignment, examine prevalence and incidence to measure morbidity for a disease.
Read the scenario below and complete the assignment as instructed.
SCENARIO
In Community X (population 20,000), an epidemiologist conducted a prevalence survey in January of 2012 and reported an HIV prevalence of 2.2%. Over the next 12 months, the department of health reported an additional 50 new HIV cases between February 2012 and January 2013. The total population stayed constant at 20,000.
PART 1
- How many people had HIV in January 2012? Present or describe the formula you used to arrive at your answer.
- Calculate the incidence rate assuming no HIV-related deaths over the 12-month period. Present or describe the formula you used to arrive at your answer. Be sure to clearly indicate the numerator and denominator used in your calculation and include an appropriate label for the rate.
In a summary, interpret the results and discuss the relationship between incidence and prevalence. Discuss whether or not the epidemiologist should be concerned about these new HIV infections, assuming a previous incidence rate of 0.5 per 1,000 person-years prior to this updated risk assessment.
PART 2
A rapid test used for diagnosing HIV has a sensitivity of 99.1% and a specificity of 90%. Based on the population prevalence of 2.2% in 2012, create a 2×2 table showing the number of true positives, false positives, false negatives, and true negatives. Calculate the positive predicative value and negative predictive value for this test. Refer to the “Creating a 2×2 Contingency Table” resource for guidance.
Discuss whether or not the epidemiologist should recommend this test as part of a universal HIV screening program. Provide rationale for your recommendation applying the positive and negative predictive values. Present or describe the formula you used to arrive at your answer.
Read Chapters 14 and 15 in Gordis Epidemiology.
Read “Multicausality: Confounding,” by Schoenbach (2004), located on the Epidemilog.net website.
URL:
http://www.epidemiolog.net/evolving/Multicausality-Confounding.pdf
Read “Weak Associations in Epidemiology: Importance, Detection, and Interpretation,” by Doll, from Journal of Epidemiology (1996).
URL:
https://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/jea1991/6/4sup/6_4sup_11/_pdf
Read “Causal Inference Based on Counterfactuals,” by Hofler (2005), located on the BioMed Central website.
URL:
https://bmcmedresmethodol.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1471-2288-5-28
View “The Relationship Between Incidence and Prevalence,” by Patwari (2013), located on the YouTube website.
URL:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1jzZe3ORdd8
Use the “Creating a 2×2 Contingency Table” resource to assist with the completion of the Measuring Morbidity: Prevalence and Incidence assignment, as needed.
View “Sensitivity and Specificity – Explained in 3 Minutes,” by Martin (2014), located on the YouTube website.
URL:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FnJ3L-63Cf8
General Requirements
APA style is not required, but solid academic writing is expected.
This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.
You are not required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite.
| Topic 3 DQ 1 |
Differentiate between bias and confounding. Discuss the criteria necessary to establish a factor as a confounder and provide an example applying these criteria. What is one way to adjust for a confounding relationship in the study design or the analysis?
| Topic 3 DQ 2 |
Explain the two major types of bias. Identify a peer-reviewed epidemiology article that discusses potential issues with bias as a limitation and discuss what could have been done to minimize the bias (exclude articles that combine multiple studies such as meta-analysis and systemic review articles). What are the implications of making inferences based on data with bias? Include a link to the article in your reference.
PUB-540 Multicausality: Confounding Assignment
Topic 4: Study Designs I
Objectives:
- Compare and contrast randomized trials and cohort studies.
- Differentiate between experimental and observational categories of study designs.
| Multicausality: Confounding Assignment Description |
These estimates include the influence of other extraneous variables, such as confounders. Confounding is often considered a type of bias, but it is a real relationship that requires an adjustment in the study design or analysis. Understanding how to identify confounding is important as most associations have multiple causal factors. Recognizing if a study adjusted for the appropriate confounding variables is important to determine the validity of the association. To assist your proficiency with the concept of confounding, and how it ultimately affects public health, this practice assignment has been provided.
Complete Problems 1 to 4 from the “Multicausality: Confounding – Assignment” by Schoenbach, located in your Topic Materials. Check your answers against the solutions presented in the “Multicausality: Confounding – Assignment Solutions” Topic Material.
You are required to cite at least FOUR sources to complete this assignment. Sources must be published within the last 5 years and appropriate for the discussion question criteria and public health content.
Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide. An abstract is not required.
While APA style is not required for the body of this assignment, solid academic writing is expected, and documentation of sources should be presented using APA formatting guidelines, which can be found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center.
You are not required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite.
PLEASE make sure APA citation and permalink for articles are complete and correct.
PLEASE add the links/sites below to the reference list if you use any of these readings and make sure everything is in proper APA format.
https://apastyle.apa.org/learn/quick-guide-on-refe…
Read Chapters 7-9 in Gordis Epidemiology.
URL:
https://www.gcumedia.com/digital-resources/elsevier/2019/gordis-epidemiology_6e.php
View “Randomized Control Trials and Confounding,” by Martin (2013), located on the YouTube website.
URL:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ybuE39BpQ8
Read “2020 LHI Topics,” located on the Healthy People 2020 website.
URL:
https://www.healthypeople.gov/2020/leading-health-indicators/2020-LHI-Topics
Complete the “Multicausality: Confounding – Assignment,” by Schoenbach (2001), located on the Epidemilog.netwebsite.
URL:
http://www.epidemiolog.net/evolving/ConfoundingAssgt.pdf
Refer to the “Multicausality: Confounding – Assignment Solutions,” by Schoenbach (2001), located on the Epidemilog.netwebsite, to check your answers to the assignment.
URL:
http://www.epidemiolog.net/evolving/ConfoundingSolns.pdf
Read “Understanding Controlled Trials: Why Are Randomized Controlled Trials Important?” by Sibbald and Roland, from British Medical Journal (1998).
URL:
MUST have at least 4 citations with the page numbers and 4 references in APA format.(The List of References should not be older than 2016 and should not be included in the word count.)
Be sure to support your postings and responses with specific references to the Learning Resources.
It is important that you cover all the topics identified in the assignment. Covering the topic does not mean mentioning the topic BUT presenting an explanation from the context of ethics and the readings for this class
To get maximum points you need to follow the requirements listed for this assignments 1) look at the word/page limits 2) review and follow APA rules 3) create subheadings to identify the key sections you are presenting and 4) Free from typographical and sentence construction errors.
REMEMBER IN APA FORMAT JOURNAL TITLES AND VOLUME NUMBERS ARE ITALICIZED.
| Topic 4 DQ 2 |
Describe the characteristics and design of a cohort study. Based on a disease or health condition identified from the “2020 LHI Topics” on the Healthy People 2020 website, or an article from the GCU library, discuss a real example of a cohort study (include the link to the article in your post to the forum). Include the participants, exposures or treatment groups, timeframe, and outcomes that were measured. Why is a cohort study described as an “observational” study rather than an “experimental” study design?
| Topic 5 DQ 1 |
Describe the common characteristics and design of a case-control study. Discuss the three important features when it comes to selecting cases and controls, and identify a situation when one of these might be violated. Discuss the limitations of using questionnaires for determining exposure status and provide examples of alternative strategies for collecting this information in a case-control study. PUB 540 Principles of epidemiology.
| Topic 5 DQ 2 |
Discuss the strengths and weaknesses of cross-sectional studies and examples of how they can be “descriptive” or “analytic” study designs. Discuss an example of a disease where survival could influence the association between a possible exposure and the disease when measured with a cross-sectional study. Do not discuss examples used in the textbook.
PUB-540 Calculating Odds Ratio Assignment
Topic 6: Measures of Association and Application
Objectives:
- Differentiate between association and causal relationships.
- Determine the relative risk and odds ratio as measures of association.
- Evaluate the utility of the population attributable risk.
- Evaluate the types of causal relationships and associated guidelines for establishing causality.
| Calculating Odds Ratio |
Data can be qualitative or quantitative. Qualitative data is helpful to generate a hypothesis and gather information if little is known about an expected association. Focus groups, key informant interviews, and case studies are types of qualitative data collection methods used to identify common themes from which to build a hypothesis. Quantitative data collection and analysis is used to test a hypothesis and make comparisons to determine the direction and strength of a potential association. The Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) is cross-sectional panel survey used to collect quantitative data on adult behaviors and risk factors. It is one of the largest U.S. health data collection efforts. The data can be used to analyze associations on a state or country level. Follow the steps to obtain a 2×2 contingency table (also known as a “cross tabulation”) crossing binge drinking with depression PUB 540 Principles of epidemiology.
Calculating Odds Ratio
Odds ratio is a measure of association used in epidemiological studies to assess the relationship between disease and exposure. In this exercise, you will calculate and interpret odds ratio using real-world examples.
Odds Ratio
In case control studies the odds ratio (OR) is the measure of the association between the frequency of an exposure and the frequency of an outcome. The OR is an indirect measure of risk in case control studies because incidence rates cannot be calculated.
The formula for odds ratio is: (A/C) ÷ (B/D) or (AD)/(BC).
Remember, data from an output source may not be ordered according to the table. Ensure that the output data corresponds to the table, or you will calculate incorrectly when you apply the formula.
| Disease Status | |||
| Exposure Status | Yes | No | Total |
| Yes | A | B | A + B |
| No | C | D | C + D |
| Total | A+C | B+D | A+B+C+D |
For this assignment:
- Retrieve the “BRFSS Web-Enabled Analysis Tool” resource provided in the study materials.
- Select “Cross Tabulation.”
- Select “2015” for the year.
- Select “Arizona” for the state.
- Select “Alcohol Consumption: Binge drinkers (males having five or more drinks on one occasion, females having four or more drinks on one occasion)” for Step 2 Select Row.
- Select “Chronic Health Conditions: Ever diagnosed with a depressive disorder, including depression, major depression, dysthymia, or minor depression” for Step 3 Select Column.
- Skip Steps 4 and 5.
- Select “Sample Size” for Step 6 Select Statistics and run the report for the cross tabulation.
Part 1
Using the data from the cross-tabulation results, calculate the odds ratio for depression among those exposed to binge drinking. Refer to the formula provided above.
| Exposure Status | Yes | No | Total |
| Yes | |||
| No | |||
| Total |
- Present or describe the formula you used to arrive at your answer. Show all calculations.
- Interpret the odds ratio. In your interpretation, describe the association between the variables and indicate whether there is a positive, negative, or no association.
Part 2
Use the study material, “BRFSS Web-Enabled Analysis Tool,” located on the CDC website, and run a report for two variables of interest to you.
| Exposure Status | Yes | No | Total |
| Yes | |||
| No | |||
| Total |
- Present or describe the formula you used to arrive at your answer.
- Interpret the odds ratio. In your interpretation describe the association between the variables and indicate whether there is a positive, negative, or no association.
- Discuss the public health importance of the association.
Odds Ratio Interpretation
| 1.0
or (≈ 1.0) |
Means that the odds of exposure among cases is the same the odds of exposure among controls |
The exposure is not associated with the disease |
| > 1.0 | Means that the odds of exposure among cases is greater than the odds of exposure among controls and positively associated with the outcome |
The exposure may be a risk factor for the disease. |
| < 1.0 | Means that the odds of exposure among cases is lower than the odds of exposure among controls and negatively associated with the outcome |
The exposure may be protective against the disease. |
General Requirements
APA style is not required, but solid academic writing is expected.
This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.
You are required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite. Refer to the LopesWrite Technical Support articles for assistance.
PUB-540 Calculating Odds Ratio Assignment Rubric
| Course Code | Class Code | Assignment Title | Total Points | ||||||
| PUB-540 | PUB-540-O500 | Calculating Odds Ratio | 100.0 | ||||||
| Criteria | Percentage | 1: Unsatisfactory (0.00%) | 2. Less Than Satisfactory (74.00%) | 3. Satisfactory (79.00%) | 4. Good (87.00%) | 5. Excellent (100.00%) | Comments | Points Earned | |
| Criteria | 100.0% | ||||||||
| Part 1: Table | 10.0% | The table is not completed. | N/A | The table is complete but incorrect values are placed in the cells. | N/A | The is complete and accurate. | |||
| Part 1: Odds Ratio Calculation | 15.0% | Odds ratio is not calculated or presented. | Odds ratio is calculated but is not correct or is incomplete. | Odds ratio is calculated and mostly correct but shows a slight misunderstanding. | N/A | Odds ratio is correct. Calculations are provided and correct. | |||
| Part 1: Odds Ratio Interpretation | 15.0% | Odds ratio interpretation is not presented. | Odds ratio interpretation and association among variables are presented but are not correct. | Odds ratio interpretation is presented, but slight misunderstanding is apparent. The association between the variables is summarized but shows a slight misunderstanding. | Odds ratio interpretation is presented and accurate. The association between the variables is adequate. | Odds ratio interpretation is thoroughly presented and accurate. The association between the variables is accurate. An in-depth understanding of the odds ratio is apparent. | |||
| Part 2: Table | 10.0% | The table is not completed. | N/A | The table is complete but incorrect values are placed in the cells. | N/A | The is complete and accurate. | |||
| Part 2: Odds Ratio Calculation | 15.0% | Odds ratio is not calculated or presented. | Odds ratio is calculated but is not correct or is incomplete. | Odds ratio is calculated and mostly correct but shows a slight misunderstanding. | N/A | Odds ratio is correct. Calculations are provided and correct. | |||
| Part 2: Odds Ratio Interpretation | 15.0% | Odds ratio interpretation is not presented. | Odds ratio interpretation and association among variables are presented but are not correct. | Odds ratio interpretation is presented, but slight misunderstanding is apparent. The association between the variables is summarized but shows a slight misunderstanding. | Odds ratio interpretation is presented and accurate. The association between the variables is adequate. | Odds ratio interpretation is thoroughly presented and accurate. The association between the variables is accurate. An in-depth understanding of the odds ratio is apparent. | |||
| Importance of Association to Public Health | 15.0% | The public health importance of the association is not discussed. | The public health importance of the association only partially discussed. | The public health importance of the association is summarized. Some support is needed. | The public health importance of the association is discussed. Minor detail is needed for accuracy or clarity. | The public health importance of the association is discussed and well supported. | |||
| Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, and language use) | 3.0% | Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is employed. | 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. | The writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English. | |||
| Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style) | 2.0% | Sources are not documented. | Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors. | Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present. | Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct. | Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error. | |||
| Total Weightage | 100% |
| Topic 6 DQ 1 |
Differentiate between association and causation using the causal guidelines. Discuss which of the guidelines you think is the most difficult to establish. Discuss the four types of causal relationships and use an example not listed in the textbook to describe each relationship. PUB 540 Principles of epidemiology.
| Topic 6 DQ 2 |
Explain the difference between relative risk, attributable risk, and population attributable risk. Provide an example (not from the textbook) of how each type of risk is used in epidemiology. How would you propose using population attributable risk to advocate for a health policy or intervention relative to your health interest?
PUB 540-Benchmark – Epidemiologic Profile Assignment
Topic 7: Applying Epidemiology to Policy
Objectives:
- Apply epidemiological methods to the breadth of settings and situations in public health practice.
- Discuss the means by which social inequities, and racism undermine health and create challenges to achieving health equity at organizational, community and societal levels.
| Benchmark – Epidemiologic Profile Assignment Description |
IMPORTANT NOTE REGARDING WORD LIMIT REQUIREMENTS:
Please note that each and every assignment has its own word limit.
An epidemiologic profile is a summary of a significant public health issue, or issues, in your community, county, state, or country. An epidemiological profile helps to coordinate activities and policies from various agencies and organizations to improve health.
Review the available data, reports, and documents for your locale. Assess how the methods of epidemiology (study designs, data collection, measures of association, etc.) are used to determine who needs what services, where the services are needed, and how those services should be delivered. Define your community as your city, metropolitan area, or county and write a 2,000-2,250 word epidemiological profile (word limit excludes references and title page).The profile can be a general profile that provides a landscape picture of several significant chronic and infectious diseases in your defined community, or it can be a specific profile that targets one health issue, such as diabetes, asthma, STDs, flu, heart disease, obesity, alcohol abuse, or other drug use. Include the following:
Executive Summary
- Describe the purpose of the epidemiologic profile and the health issue(s) it addresses. Discuss its importance to the community and how it will be utilized.
- Summarize the key findings from your review of available data, reports, and documents for the community.
Introduction
- Describe the defined community and population using demographic and socio-economic information and data.
- Briefly describe the history and cultural background of the community.
- Explain any unique contextual information that pertains to the public health of the defined community.
- Describe any key public health projects, grants, or existing epidemiology-related working groups or committees in the community/county.
Description of Available Data
Identify at least two different data sources relevant to your profile. Discuss data from these sources and their relation to the issue or community.
Discuss the methods used in the data collection process (data source and organization providing the data; how often the data are collected; data limitations including response rates, missing data, selection of participants, etc.). Potential data sources and databases might include the following depending on what is available for your community or county:
- Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) data
- Youth risk behavioral survey
- Surveillance, epidemiology, and end results (SEER) program data
- CDC Wonder (multiple data sources)
- County health rankings data (multiple data sources)
- Alcohol-related disease impact data
- Demographic health survey data (international)
- Global school-based student health survey (international)
- Local evaluation reports from the department/ministry of health or other nonprofit organizations
Interpretation of Results Regarding Key Health Issue
- Size and magnitude of the measures
- Trends and comparisons
- Economic costs
Discussion of Problems and Strategies
- Discuss disparities, limitations, and gaps in the information available regarding the health issue(s).
- Describe potential public health strategies to address these gaps.
- Use graphs and tables where appropriate.
Conclusion
You are required to cite to at least five sources to complete this assignment. Sources should be published within the last 5 years and appropriate for the assignment criteria and public health content.
General Requirements
You are required to cite at least FOUR sources to complete this assignment. Sources must be published within the last 5 years and appropriate for the discussion question criteria and public health content.
You are required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite. Refer to the LopesWrite Technical Support articles for assistance.
Benchmark Information
This benchmark assignment assesses the following programmatic competency:
MPH
2.1 Apply epidemiological methods to the breadth of settings and situations in public health practice.
MSN Public Health Nursing
6.2 Apply epidemiological methods to the breadth of settings and situations in public health practice.
Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide. An abstract is not required.
While APA style is required, solid academic writing is expected as well, and documentation of sources should be presented using APA formatting guidelines.
This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.
PLEASE make sure APA citation and permalink for articles are complete and correct.
PLEASE add the links/sites below to the reference list if you use any of these readings and make sure everything is in proper APA format.
https://apastyle.apa.org/learn/quick-guide-on-refe…
Read Chapters 17, 19, and 20 in Gordis Epidemiology.
URL:
https://www.gcumedia.com/digital-resources/elsevier/2019/gordis-epidemiology_6e.php
Read “Health Inequalities Among British Civil Servants: The Whitehall II Study,” by Marmot and Smith, from The Lancet (1991).
URL:
Read “The Role of Epidemiology in Disaster Response Policy Development,” by Thorpe et al., from Science Direct (2015).
URL:
Read “Prescription Drug Abuse: From Epidemiology to Public Policy,” by McHugh, Nielsen, and Weiss, from Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment (2015).
URL:
Read “The Role Epidemiology in Evidence-Based Policy Making: A Case Study of Tobacco Use in Youth,” by Aldrich et al., from Annals of Epidemiology (2015).
URL:
Read “Epidemiology, Policy, and Racial/Ethnic Minority Health Disparities,” by Carter-Pokras et al., from Annals of Epidemiology (2012).
URL:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3724931/
Read “Epidemiology and Public Policies,” by Barata, from Revista Brasileira de Epidemiologia (2013).
URL:
http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?pid=S1415-790X2013000100003&script=sci_arttext&tlng=en
Read “Ethical Issues in Epidemiologic Research and Public Health Practice,” by Coughlin, from Emerging Themes Epidemiology (2006).
URL:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1594564/
Explore the “Viral Hepatitis Epidemiologic Profiles” map, located on the Association of State and Territorial Health Officials (ASTHO) website, to assist with topic assignment.
URL:
https://www.astho.org/Viral-Hepatitis-Epi-Profiles/Map/
Use the “BRFSS Web Enabled Analysis Tool,” located on the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) website, to complete the topic assignment.
URL:
Review the “Belmont Report,” by the National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research (1979), located on the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services – Office for Human Research Protections website.
URL:
https://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/regulations-and-policy/belmont-report/index.html
Explore the resources on “Health Data Tools and Statistics,” located on the PHPartners website.
URL:
https://phpartners.org/health_stats.html
Explore “Surveillance, Epidemiology and the End Results Program,” from the National Cancer Institute.
URL:
Explore the STEPwise Approach to Surveillance (STEPS) page of the World Health Organization (WHO) website.
URL:
http://www.who.int/chp/steps/en/
MUST 2000-2250 WORDS, have at least 6 citations with the page numbers and 6 references in APA format.(The List of References should not be older than 2016 and should not be included in the word count.)
Be sure to support your postings and responses with specific references to the Learning Resources.
It is important that you cover all the topics identified in the assignment. Covering the topic does not mean mentioning the topic BUT presenting an explanation from the context of ethics and the readings for this class
To get maximum points you need to follow the requirements listed for this assignments 1) look at the word/page limits 2) review and follow APA rules 3) create subheadings to identify the key sections you are presenting and 4) Free from typographical and sentence construction errors.
REMEMBER IN APA FORMAT JOURNAL TITLES AND VOLUME NUMBERS ARE ITALICIZED.
PUB-540 Benchmark – Epidemiologic Profile Assignment Rubric
| Course Code | Class Code | Assignment Title | Total Points | ||||||
| PUB-540 | PUB-540-O500 | Benchmark – Epidemiologic Profile Assignment | 200.0 | ||||||
| Criteria | Percentage | Unsatisfactory (0.00%) | Less than Satisfactory (74.00%) | Satisfactory (79.00%) | Good (87.00%) | Excellent (100.00%) | Comments | Points Earned | |
| Content | 70.0% | ||||||||
| Executive Summary | 10.0% | The purpose of the epidemiological profile is not stated. A summary of key findings is not presented. | The purpose of the epidemiological profile and a summary of key findings are presented. The purpose, importance, or use of the epidemiological profile is unclear. The key findings are misrepresented or require more detail to establish support for the proposed profile. | The purpose, importance, and use of the epidemiological profile are generally described. The key findings are summarized. Overall, more information is required to fully present the epidemiological profile. There are some inaccuracies. | The purpose, importance, and use of the epidemiological profile are described. The key findings are discussed. Overall, the key findings offer adequate support for the epidemiological profile. Some detail is required for clarity. The epidemiological profile is relevant for the proposed community or population. | The purpose, importance, and use of the epidemiological profile are described in detail. The key findings are discussed and offer strong support for the epidemiological profile. The epidemiological profile is highly relevant for the proposed community or population. Compelling rationale is provided and is supported by factual findings. | |||
| Introduction | 10.0% | A description of the public health community, its issues, and current services is not provided in the epidemiological profile. | An incomplete summary of the public health community, its issues, and current services is presented. One or more element of the assigned elements is omitted. Information presented is inaccurate or not relevant to the population or community. | A general description of the public health community, its issues, and current services is presented. Information presented contains some minor inaccuracies or is not fully relevant to the population or community. More information or evidence is needed to fully represent the population or community. | A description of the public health community, its issues, and current services is presented. Information presented is relevant to the population or community. Some detail is needed for clarity. The population or community is adequately represented. | A detailed description of the public health community, its issues, and current services is well presented. Information is thoroughly presented that provides insight into the population or community. Strong support is offered to factually support claims. | |||
| Description of Available Data (C2.1)(C6.2) | 10.0% | No data sources are utilized. | Less than two data sources are utilized. The data sources are not entirely relevant to the population, community, or issue. The methods used in data collection are not discussed, or the discussion is incomplete. There are minor inaccuracies. | At least two data sources relevant to the population and community are utilized. It is unclear how the data from these sources directly supports the epidemiological profile or the particular issue facing the population or community. More detail is needed to establish a clear correlation. The methods used in data collection are summarized. | At least two data sources relevant to the population and community are utilized. Support for the epidemiological profile or the particular issue facing the population or community is adequately established. The methods used in data collection are described. Minor detail is needed for clarity. | At least two data sources relevant to the population and community are utilized. Direct support for the epidemiological profile or the particular issue facing the population or community is clearly established. The methods used in data collection are clearly described. The description demonstrates a good ability to utilize data sources and apply the information to practice. | |||
| Interpretation of Results of Key Health Issue | 10.0% | Interpretation of results of key health issues is not presented. The interpretation is not consistent with the assignment guidelines. | An incomplete interpretation of key health issues is presented. The interpretation omits one of the elements outlined in the assignment guidelines. The interpretation omits significant implications of the findings; or, it is unclear how the interpreted findings correlate with the proposed issue facing the population or community. There are some inaccuracies. | A general interpretation of key health issues is presented as outlined in the assignment guidelines. The interpretation does not fully elaborate on the findings. A correlation between the proposed issue facing the population or community is generally established. More detail or information is required. | An interpretation of key health issues is presented as outlined in the assignment guidelines. The interpretation elaborates on the findings. A correlation between the proposed issue facing the population or community is established. Some detail or information is needed for clarity. | A factual interpretation of key health issues is presented as outlined in the assignment guidelines. The interpretation provides an in-depth explanation of the findings. A strong correlation between the proposed issue facing the population or community is established. An aptitude for interpreting data is demonstrated. | |||
| Discussion (disparities, limitations, or gaps; potential public health strategies) | 15.0% | A discussion of problems and strategies is omitted. | An incomplete discussion of problems and strategies is presented; one category has been omitted, or both categories lack sufficient information or support. The discussion contains inaccuracies. | A general discussion of problems and strategies is presented. The discussion of problems provides superficial assessment; not all of the key disparities, limitations, and gaps in information related to the health issue are presented. Potential strategies to address the problems are summarized. More information and detail is required. | A discussion of problems and strategies is presented. The discussion of problems provides an assessment of the most significant disparities, limitations, and gaps in information related to the health issue. Potential strategies to address the problems are described. Some minor detail is required for clarity. | A comprehensive discussion of problems and strategies is logically presented. The discussion of problems provides an in-depth assessment of the major and minor disparities, limitations, and gaps in information related to the health issue. Realistic strategies are proposed in detail to address the problems. The discussion is well-supported. | |||
| Display of Visual Data | 5.0% | Tables and graphs are not utilized. | Tables and graphs were utilized inappropriately. Tables and graphs report information inconsistent with findings presented in the discussion. | Tables and graphs are minimally utilized. Tables and graphs contain some errors, or have some inconsistencies with the findings presented in the discussion. | Tables and graphs are utilized. The tables and graphs reflect the findings presented in the discussion. | Tables and graphs are strategically utilized. The tables and graphs clearly reflect the information presented in the discussion. | |||
| Conclusion | 5.0% | A conclusion is not presented. | An incomplete conclusion is presented. | The conclusion provides a concise summary of the elements presented in the epidemiological profile. | The conclusion summarizes the elements presented in the epidemiological profile. The importance of the thesis is reiterated. | The conclusion summarizes elements of the epidemiological profile, synthesizing key points and ideas. The conclusion stresses the importance of the thesis presented in the epidemiological profile. The conclusion is compelling and encourages the reader to reflect on the proposed profile. | |||
| Required Sources | 5.0% | Sources are not included. | Number of required sources is only partially met. | Number of required sources is met, but sources are outdated or inappropriate. | Number of required sources is met. Sources are current, but not all sources are appropriate for the assignment criteria and public health content. | Number of required resources is met. Sources are current, and appropriate for the assignment criteria and public health content. | |||
| Organization and Effectiveness | 20.0% | ||||||||
| Thesis Development and Purpose | 7.0% | 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. | |||
| Argument Logic and Construction | 8.0% | 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. | |||
| Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use) | 5.0% | Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is 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. | |||
| Format | 10.0% | ||||||||
| Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment) | 5.0% | 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. | |||
| Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style) | 5.0% | Sources are not documented. | Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors. | Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present. | Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct. | Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error. | |||
| Total Weightage | 100% |
| Topic 7 DQ 1 |
Epidemiological methods are used in a variety of public health areas (including infectious disease, chronic disease, and social health) and settings (including the community, schools, and the workplace). Epidemiological methods are used to assess, describe, analyze, and make comparisons of populations to inform evidence-based practices, policies, and interventions. Propose a study based on the methods you have learned thus far designed to investigate an association within one of the public health areas listed (infectious disease, chronic disease, or social health) and the methods you would apply. Discuss and define the risk factor or exposure that is being assessed, the method of comparison that is used, and the setting or situation (community, school, workplace, etc.) your study would look to address. Consider the concepts of causal inference, measures of association, and study design. PUB 540 Principles of epidemiology.
| Topic 7 DQ 2 |
Race is often used as a descriptor of disease burden and helps us to determine where health disparities exist in order to address them, which is important. It is helpful to differentiate between race as a descriptor and race as a risk factor. Think about institutional racism and its influence on health. Consider the factors related to race and ethnicity that might be influencing disease status more than the genetics of race when answering this discussion question.
Consider the following statement: “Race is not a risk factor and should not be used in public health data collection.” Discuss the ethical and public health implications of this statement. When might collecting data on race perpetuate institutional racism leading to health disparities and when is it necessary to improve public health? Provide support and examples for your answer. Consider ethical issues related to respect for persons, beneficence, and justice as described in “The Belmont Report.”
Topic 8: Environment and Genetics
Objectives:
- Discuss how genetic and environmental factors interact in causing disease.
- Explain the biological and genetic factors that affects a population’s health.
| Topic 8 DQ 1 |
One method to investigate gene-environment interactions is to study monozygotic twins. Identify an example of a twin study not listed in the textbook used to examine the gene-environment interaction of a specific disease or condition. Briefly summarize the gene-environment interaction investigated, the methods, and the results. What are other possible methods for studying gene-environment interactions as they relate to improving population health?
| Topic 8 DQ 2 |
Using the CDC Wonder website, set the query criteria for pancreatic cancer for the United States as illustrated below. Compare the rates by race for Wisconsin and Colorado. Discuss possible biological, genetic, and environmental reasons for differences. What are potential social determinants that contribute to the disparity presented between the two states? PUB 540 Principles of epidemiology.
Use this query upon entering the CDC Wonder website:
Select “Cancer Statistics” under the Wonder Systems tab
Select “Cancer Incidence 1999 – 2013” and click “Data Request”
Organize table layout:
- Group results by 1. States and 2. Race (leave the rest of the group options as “None”)
- Measures – click “Count” (default) and “Age Adjusted Rates”
Select location – select “States” and “The United States”
Select year and demographics
- Year – 2014
- Sex – All genders
- Age groups – All ages
- Ethnicity – All ethnicities
- Race – All races
Select cancers of interest – select “Pancreas”
Other options – keep default settings PUB 540 Principles of epidemiology
PUB-540 Benchmark – Epidemiological Surveillance Data Dissemination and Recommendations for Action Assignment
Description
| Benchmark – Epidemiological Surveillance Data Dissemination and Recommendations for Action |
Epidemiological surveillance data can be used to guide public health interventions, support funding, develop policy, and educate the community and specific populations in order to decrease burden. The purpose of this assignment it to analyze, interpret, and disseminate Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR) surveillance data to both technical and nontechnical audiences, and provide recommendations for public health action for a selected disease or heath issue using audience-appropriate language and information.
Select a MMWR health issue published within the past 5-10 years to disseminate data to a technical and nontechnical audience. Select a technical audience, such as public health practitioners, clinicians and other health care providers, policymakers and other decision makers, and a nontechnical community group or target population. Provide the reason for the dissemination from the following, be specific, and provide details tailored to your data and health issue:
- Educate about recent findings or accomplishments.
- Elicit immediate action.
- Solicit support or participation.
- Justify program/prevention activities.
- Prepare for an upcoming intervention or program.
- Provide rationale to develop new policy or support current policy.
For the technical audience, create a PowerPoint presentation (10-13 slides) to disseminate surveillance data from the MMWR report for a selected purpose using the slide headings outlined below. Include speaker notes for each slide. For your final slide, develop an educational “fact sheet” about the issue that is appropriate for a nontechnical community group or target population.
Add two additional slides for the Title and References slides.
Refer to Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR), “Introduction to Public Health Surveillance,” and “Data Dissemination” to assist you in completing this assignment.
PowerPoint Headings
- Title Page: Include your health issue topic which identifies a specific technical and nontechnical audience and group member names.
- Audience Appropriate Data Dissemination (1-2 slides): Explain the importance audience appropriate messages for data dissemination. Identify your health issue, technical and nontechnical audiences, and the reason for the dissemination
- Data Collection (1-2 slides): Identify and describe a MMWR for a health issue and the data collection timeframe and methods.
- Data Analysis (1-2 slides): Summarize the data and document the magnitude of the health issue using descriptive statistics (person, place, time), rates, include tables, graphs, maps, or charts.
- Data Interpretation (1-2 slides): Summarize the report results and provide the implications for public health practice.
- Recommendations for Action (1-2 slides): Provide recommendations or support for policy, policy development, funding for screening or implementation of an intervention or program to address the health issue. Include the factors (e.g., unique behaviors, exposures, or environmental factors) that contribute to the health issue that will be addressed.
- Fact Sheet: Data Dissemination to a Nontechnical Audience (1 slide): On the last slide of your presentation, create an audience appropriate fact sheet that explains and brings awareness to the health issue and the steps in addressing/mitigating the health issue for a community group or population. Include both text and photos, images, or illustrations to make it eye catching and compelling.
- Conclusion (1 slide)
- References page
You are required to cite to a minimum of three sources to complete this assignment. Sources must be published within the last 5 years and appropriate for the assignment criteria and public health content.
This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.
While APA style is not required for the body of this assignment, solid academic writing is expected, and documentation of sources should be presented using APA formatting guidelines, which can be found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center.
You are required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite. Refer to the LopesWrite Technical Support articles for assistance.
PUB-540 Benchmark – Epidemiological Surveillance Data Dissemination and Recommendations for Action Assignment
| Course Code | Class Code | Assignment Title | Total Points | ||||||
| PUB-540 | PUB-540-O500 | Benchmark – Epidemiological Surveillance Data Dissemination and Recommendations for Action | 140.0 | ||||||
| Criteria | Percentage | 1: Unsatisfactory (0.00%) | 2. Less Than Satisfactory (74.00%) | 3. Satisfactory (79.00%) | 4. Good (87.00%) | 5. Excellent (100.00%) | Comments | Points Earned | |
| Criteria | 100.0% | ||||||||
| Title Page | 5.0% | Title page is omitted. | Title page is presented but contains numerous errors. The title does not reflect the health issue topic. | Title page contains some formatting errors. Overall, title is appropriate for the health issue topic. | NA | Title page is formatted correctly. The title clearly reflects the health issue topic. | |||
| Audience Appropriate Data Dissemination | 10.0% | The importance of audience appropriate data dissemination is omitted. | The importance of audience appropriate data dissemination is only partially discussed. | The importance of audience appropriate messages for data dissemination is summarized. The health issue, technical and nontechnical audiences, and the reason for the dissemination are generally discussed. There are some inaccuracies or minor omissions. Some support is needed. | The importance of audience appropriate messages for data dissemination is discussed. The health issue, technical and nontechnical audiences, and the reason for the dissemination are described. Some detail or information is needed for accuracy or clarity. | The importance of audience appropriate messages for data dissemination is detailed. The health issue, technical and nontechnical audiences, and the reason for the dissemination are clearly described. | |||
| Data Collection | 10.0% | The data collection timeframe and methods are omitted. | A MMWR for a health issue and the data collection timeframe and methods are incomplete. | A MMWR for a health issue is identified and summarized. The data collection timeframe and methods are summarized. There are some inaccuracies or minor omissions. Some support is needed. | A MMWR for a health issue is identified and described. The data collection timeframe and methods are discussed. Some detail or information is needed for accuracy or clarity. | A MMWR for a health issue is identified and clearly described. The data collection timeframe and methods are detailed. | |||
| Data Analysis (C2.1a, 6.2a) | 10.0% | The data analysis is omitted. | The data analysis is incomplete. | The data analysis is summarized and generally documented. The documentation contains some inaccuracies or minor omissions. Some support is needed. | The data analysis is discussed. Documentation of the analysis includes descriptive statistics, rates, tables graphs, maps, or charts to describe the magnitude of the health issue. Some detail or information is needed for accuracy or clarity. The analysis demonstrates a general understanding of the application of epidemiologic methods used in public heath practice. | The data analysis is thoroughly discussed. Documentation of the analysis demonstrates strong support for the analysis and includes descriptive statistics, rates, tables graphs, maps, or charts to describe the magnitude of the health issue. The analysis demonstrates insight into application of epidemiologic methods used in public heath practice. | |||
| Data Interpretation (C2.1b, 6.2b) | 10.0% | The report results and implications for the public health practice are omitted. | The report results and implications for the public health practice are incomplete. | The report results and implications for the public health practice are summarized. The interpretation contains some inaccuracies or minor omissions. Some support is needed. | The report results are presented. The implications for the public health practice are discussed. The interpretation demonstrates a general understanding of the application of epidemiologic methods used in public heath practice. | The report results are clearly presented. The implications for the public health practice are detailed. The interpretation of the data demonstrates insight into the application of epidemiologic methods used in public heath practice. | |||
| Recommendations for Action (C2.1c, 6.2c) | 10.0% | Recommendations or support for policy, policy development, funding for screening, or implementation of an intervention or program to address the health issue are omitted. | Recommendations or support for policy, policy development, funding for screening, or implementation of an intervention or program to address the health issue are only partially presented. | Recommendations or support for policy, policy development, funding for screening, or implementation of an intervention or program to address the health issue are summarized. There are some inaccuracies or minor omissions. Some support is needed. | Recommendations or support for policy, policy development, funding for screening, or implementation of an intervention or program to address the health issue are presented. Factors such as unique behaviors, exposures, or environmental factors that contribute to the health issue that will be addressed are discussed. The narrative demonstrates general insight into the application of epidemiologic methods used in public heath practice. | Effective recommendations or strong support for policy, policy development, funding for screening, or implementation of an intervention or program to address the health issue are presented. Factors such as unique behaviors, exposures, or environmental factors that contribute to the health issue that will be addressed are discussed. The narrative demonstrates insight into application of epidemiologic methods used in public heath practice. | |||
| Fact Sheet | 5.0% | The fact sheet is omitted. | The fact sheet is incomplete. | The fact sheet summarizes awareness for health issue and outlines steps for addressing the issue for a community group or population. At least one item is included in an attempt to make it eye-catching or compelling. There are some inaccuracies or minor omissions. | The fact sheet offers an explanation for the health issue and helps bring awareness to the issue. Steps for addressing the issue for a community group or population are provided. Text and photos, images, or illustrations are included that generally make it eye-catching and more compelling. The fact sheet is appropriate for a nontechnical audience. | The fact sheet offers a well-supported explanation for the health issue and helps bring awareness to the issue. Clear steps for addressing the issue for a community group or population are provided. Text and photos, images, or illustrations are added that make it more eye-catching and compelling. The fact sheet is accurate, well developed, and appropriate for a nontechnical audience. | |||
| Conclusion | 5.0% | The conclusion is omitted. | The conclusion is incomplete. | The conclusion summarizes the presentation. Some aspects are vague. | The conclusion concisely restates the main points of the presentation and provides a call for action or restates potential recommendations. | The conclusion is well developed, concisely restates the main points of the presentation, and provides a call for action or restates potential recommendations. | |||
| Presentation of Content | 10.0% | The content lacks a clear point of view and logical sequence of information. Includes little persuasive information. Sequencing of ideas is unclear. | The content is vague in conveying a point of view and does not create a strong sense of purpose. Includes some persuasive information. | The presentation slides are generally competent, but ideas may show some inconsistency in organization or in their relationships to each other. | The content is written with a logical progression of ideas and supporting information exhibiting a unity, coherence, and cohesiveness. Includes persuasive information from reliable sources. | The content is written clearly and concisely. Ideas universally progress and relate to each other. The project includes motivating questions and advanced organizers. The project gives the audience a clear sense of the main idea. | |||
| Layout | 5.0% | The layout is cluttered, confusing, and does not use spacing, headings, and subheadings to enhance the readability. The text is extremely difficult to read with long blocks of text, small point size for fonts, and inappropriate contrasting colors. Poor use of headings, subheadings, indentations, or bold formatting is evident. | The layout shows some structure, but appears cluttered and busy or distracting with large gaps of white space or a distracting background. Overall readability is difficult due to lengthy paragraphs, too many different fonts, dark or busy background, overuse of bold, or lack of appropriate indentations of text. | The layout uses horizontal and vertical white space appropriately. Sometimes the fonts are easy to read, but in a few places the use of fonts, italics, bold, long paragraphs, color, or busy background detracts and does not enhance readability. | The layout background and text complement each other and enable the content to be easily read. The fonts are easy to read and point size varies appropriately for headings and text. | The layout is visually pleasing and contributes to the overall message with appropriate use of headings, subheadings, and white space. Text is appropriate in length for the target audience and to the point. The background and colors enhance the readability of the text. | |||
| Language Use and Audience Awareness (includes sentence construction, word choice, etc.) | 10.0% | Inappropriate word choice and lack of variety in language use are evident. Writer appears to be unaware of audience. Use of primer prose indicates writer either does not apply figures of speech or uses them inappropriately. | Some distracting inconsistencies in language choice (register) or word choice are present. The writer exhibits some lack of control in using figures of speech appropriately. | Language is appropriate to the targeted audience for the most part. | The writer is clearly aware of audience, uses a variety of appropriate vocabulary for the targeted audience, and uses figures of speech to communicate clearly. | The writer uses a variety of sentence constructions, figures of speech, and word choice in distinctive and creative ways that are appropriate to purpose, discipline, and scope. | |||
| Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use) | 5.0% | Slide errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. | Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. | Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader. | Slides are largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. | Slides are largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. | |||
| Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style) | 5.0% | Sources are not documented. | Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors. | Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present. | Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct. | Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error. | |||
| Total Weightage | 100% |
Make Your Nursing Academic Journey Truly Fulfilling with Our Expert Nursing Assignment Writing Help!
Feeling overwhelmed by the demands of your nursing essays and assignments? Don’t let stress derail your academic success. ReliablePapers.com is your partner in navigating the challenges of nursing studies. Our reliable nursing paper writing services are tailored to lighten your assignment load and ensure your journey in nursing education is not just manageable, but truly fulfilling.
Expertise That Sets Us Apart
At ReliablePapers.com, we understand the unique struggles faced by nursing students. That’s why we’ve assembled a team of seasoned nursing writers who are not only experts in their field but also passionate about helping students succeed. Our writers bring years of academic writing experience and a deep understanding of nursing topics, ensuring that your papers are meticulously crafted to meet the highest standards.
Why Choose ReliablePapers.com for Your Nursing Essays?
- Experienced Nursing Writers: Our team comprises experienced nursing professionals who are dedicated to delivering top-quality nursing papers tailored to your requirements.
- Direct Communication: You’ll have direct communication with your assigned writer, allowing for seamless collaboration and transparency throughout the writing process.
- Affordable Prices: We understand the financial constraints of students, which is why we offer competitive prices starting at just $10 per page.
- Guaranteed Originality: Plagiarism is a strict no-no at ReliablePapers.com. We guarantee 100% original, custom-made papers that reflect your unique voice and understanding.
- Timely Support: With our fast turnaround times and dedicated support team, you can rest assured that your papers will be delivered on time, every time.
- Hassle-Free Ordering: Ordering a custom nursing paper from ReliablePapers.com is quick and easy. Simply provide your details, and our experts will take care of the rest.
Why Struggle When Help Is Just a Click Away?
Don’t let nursing assignments overwhelm you. With ReliablePapers.com’s nursing writing help services, you can reclaim your time, achieve top grades, and stay ahead of the curve. Order your custom nursing paper today and unlock your full potential with ReliablePapers.com!
Don’t Let Stress Define Your Nursing Academic Journey
Place your order with ReliablePapers.com today and experience the difference firsthand. Whether you need to buy nursing research papers, get cheap nursing papers, or get professional nursing coursework help, we’ve got you covered. Trust us with your nursing assignments, and let us help you succeed in your nursing studies.
Hire an Expert Paper Writer on Any Subject, Any Topic, Any Deadline! Submit your paper instructions by placing your order here to get started!
HCI-670 User Interface Design for Informatics Course Description
HCI-660 Health Data Analytics Course Description
HCI-655 Electronic Health Records Course Description
HIM-615 Health Care Information Systems and Technology Course Description
HQS-620 Project Management in Health Care Course Description
HQS-610 Foundations of Quality Improvement and Patient Safety Course Description
HLT-362V Applied Statistics for Health Care Professionals Course Description
HLT-302 Spirituality and Christian Values in Health Care and Wellness Course Description
NRS-490 Professional Capstone and Practicum Course Assignments & Discussions Study Guide