DNP 825 Part I Assignment: Population Health Issues GCU

DNP 825 Part I Assignment: Population Health Issues GCU

GCU Part I Assignment: Population Health Issues/DNP 825

Assessment Description
This assignment will be completed in two parts. The purpose of this two-part assignment is to identify an at-risk population, evaluate the disparities contributing to their health issue, and propose an intervention to improve health for that community.

ORDER A CUSTOMIZED, PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE

Good News For Our New customers . We can write this assignment for you and pay after Delivery. Our Top -rated medical writers will comprehensively review instructions , synthesis external evidence sources(Scholarly) and customize a quality assignment for you. We will also attach a copy of plagiarism report alongside and AI report. Feel free to chat Us

General Requirements

A minimum of three scholarly or peer-reviewed research articles are required. Sources must be published within the last 5 years and appropriate for the assignment criteria and nursing content.
Doctoral learners are required to use APA style for their writing assignments. The APA Style Guide is located in the Student Success Center.
This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.
You are required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite. A link to the LopesWrite technical support articles is located in Class Resources if you need assistance.
Directions

The purpose of this assignment is to evaluate an at-risk population affected by a population-based health condition. You will use the topic you select here to complete Part II of this assignment.

Write a 750-1,000-word paper and include the following.

Refer to the topic Resource “Data and Statistics” for examples of population-based health conditions. Select a population-based health condition and a high-risk group affected by the population-based condition. An example of this would be looking at the prevalence rates of diseases (population-based health condition) in vaccinated children versus groups where parents may withhold vaccinations because of feared side effects (high-risk group).
Describe the high-risk group and population-based health condition you selected. Explain why this group is considered high-risk.
Compare the prevalence rate of the selected population-based health condition for this high-risk group between two similar areas (county to county, state to state, country to country). Refer to the topic Resources for assistance with your comparison.
Evaluate the social determinants that lead to disparities and health outcomes for your selected at-risk population and explain why they differ between your selected population and a population of comparison from a similar area.
Discuss what evidence-based interventions have been introduced to try and improve the health outcomes for this high-risk population and whether they have been effective.
Discuss current electronic or online consumer health information available for the population on the health issue (e.g., the topic Resource, “Find and Compare Nursing Homes, Hospitals and Other Providers Near You”).

ORDER A CUSTOMIZED, PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE

Rubric Criteria

At-Risk Population and Population Health Condition
19.5 points
Criteria Description
Description of the high-risk group and population-based health condition selected; explain why the group is considered high-risk.

5. Target
19.5 points
The high-risk group and population-based health condition are clearly described. A well-supported explanation for why the group is considered high-risk is presented.

4. Acceptable
17.94 points
The high-risk group and population-based health condition are described. An adequate explanation for why the group is considered high-risk is presented. Some detail is needed for clarity or accuracy.

3. Approaching
17.16 points
The high-risk group and population-based health condition are generally described. A summary of why the group is considered high-risk is presented. Some information or support is needed. There are minor inaccuracies.

2. Insufficient
15.6 points
The description of the high-risk group and population-based health condition is incomplete.

1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
The description of the high-risk group and population-based health condition is omitted.

Prevalence Rates Comparison
19.5 points
Criteria Description
Comparison of the prevalence rate of a selected population-based health condition between two similar areas.

5. Target
19.5 points
Comparison of the prevalence rate of a selected population-based health condition between two similar areas is thoroughly described.

4. Acceptable
17.94 points
Comparison of the prevalence rate of a selected population-based health condition between two similar areas is adequately described. Some detail is needed for clarity or accuracy.

3. Approaching
17.16 points
A general comparison of the prevalence rate of a selected population-based health condition between two similar areas is presented. Some information or support is needed. There are minor inaccuracies.

2. Insufficient
15.6 points
The comparison of the prevalence rate of a selected population-based health condition between two similar areas is incomplete.

1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
The comparison of the prevalence rate of a selected population-based health condition between two similar areas is omitted. The comparison does not meet the criteria as outlined in the assignment.

Evaluation of Social Determinants
19.5 points
Criteria Description
Evaluation of social determinants leading to disparities and health outcomes; explanation for difference between your selected population and the population of comparison.

5. Target
19.5 points
A thorough explanation for why social determinates leading to disparities and health outcomes differ between the selected population and a population of comparison from a similar area is presented. The narrative is insightful and demonstrates a strong understanding of social determinates and the impact they have on disparity and health.

4. Acceptable
17.94 points
An adequate explanation for why social determinates leading to disparities and health outcomes differ between the selected population and a population of comparison from a similar area is presented. Some detail is needed for clarity or accuracy.

3. Approaching
17.16 points
A summary of why social determinates leading to disparities and health outcomes differ between the selected population and a population of comparison from a similar area is presented. Some information or support is needed. There are minor inaccuracies.

2. Insufficient
15.6 points
The explanation for why social determinates leading to disparities and health outcomes differ between the selected population and a population of comparison from a similar area is incomplete.

1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
An explanation for why social determinates leading to disparities and health outcomes differ between the selected population and a population of comparison from a similar area is omitted.

Evidence-Based Intervention
13 points
Criteria Description
Discussion of evidence-based interventions previously introduced to try and improve the health outcomes for selected population and effectiveness.

5. Target
13 points
A well-supported discussion of evidence-based interventions previously introduced to try and improve the health outcomes for selected population, and whether they were effective, is clearly presented.

4. Acceptable
11.96 points
An adequate discussion of evidence-based interventions previously introduced to try and improve the health outcomes for selected population, and whether they were effective, is presented. Some detail is needed for clarity or accuracy.

3. Approaching
11.44 points
A general discussion of evidence-based interventions previously introduced to try and improve the health outcomes for selected population, and whether they were effective, is presented. Some information or support is needed. There are minor inaccuracies.

2. Insufficient
10.4 points
A discussion of evidence-based interventions previously introduced to try and improve the health outcomes for the selected population is incomplete.

1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
A discussion of evidence-based interventions previously introduced to try and improve the health outcomes for the selected population is omitted.

Current Consumer Health Information
13 points
Criteria Description
Discussion of the current electronic or online consumer health information available for the population on the health issue.

5. Target
13 points
An informative discussion on the current electronic or online consumer health information available for the population on the health issue is presented.

4. Acceptable
11.96 points
An adequate discussion on the current electronic or online consumer health information available for the population on the health issue is presented. Some detail is needed for clarity or accuracy.

3. Approaching
11.44 points
A general discussion on the current electronic or online consumer health information available for the population on the health issue is presented. Some information or support is needed. There are minor inaccuracies.

2. Insufficient
10.4 points
A discussion on the current electronic or online consumer health information available for the population on the health issue is incomplete. It is unclear how the consumer health information relates to the selected population or health issue.

1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
A discussion on the current electronic or online consumer health information available for the population on the health issue is omitted.

Research Articles
6.5 points
Criteria Description
Research Articles

5. Target
6.5 points
Research articles are supportive of the rationale presented. Sources are distinctive and address all of the issues stated in the assignment criteria.

4. Acceptable
5.98 points
Research is timely and relevant and addresses all of the issues stated in the assignment criteria.

3. Approaching
5.72 points
Research articles are adequate. Sources are standard in relevance, quality of outside sources, or timeliness.

2. Insufficient
5.2 points
Few research articles are used to support the assignment. Limited research is apparent.

1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
No research articles are used to support the assignment.

Thesis, Position, or Purpose
6.5 points
Criteria Description
Communicates reason for writing and demonstrates awareness of audience

5. Target
6.5 points
The thesis, position, or purpose is persuasively developed throughout and skillfully directed to a specific audience.

4. Acceptable
5.98 points
The thesis, position, or purpose is clearly communicated throughout and clearly directed to a specific audience.

3. Approaching
5.72 points
The thesis, position, or purpose is adequately developed. An awareness of the appropriate audience is demonstrated.

2. Insufficient
5.2 points
The thesis, position, or purpose is discernable in most aspects but is occasionally weak or unclear. There is limited awareness of the appropriate audience.

1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
The thesis, position, or purpose is not discernible. No awareness of the appropriate audience is evident.

Development, Structure, and Conclusion
6.5 points
Criteria Description
Advances position or purpose throughout writing; conclusion aligns to and evolves from development.

5. Target
6.5 points
The thesis, position, or purpose is coherently and cohesively advanced throughout. The progression of ideas is coherent and unified. A convincing and unambiguous conclusion aligns to the development of the purpose.

4. Acceptable
5.98 points
The thesis, position, or purpose is logically advanced throughout. The progression of ideas is coherent and unified. A clear and plausible conclusion aligns to the development of the purpose.

3. Approaching
5.72 points
The thesis, position, or purpose is advanced in most aspects. Ideas clearly build on each other. Conclusion aligns to the development of the purpose.

2. Insufficient
5.2 points
Limited advancement of thesis, position, or purpose is discernable. There are inconsistencies in organization or the relationship of ideas. Conclusion is simplistic and not fully aligned to the development of the purpose.

1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
No advancement of the thesis, position, or purpose is evident. Connections between paragraphs are missing or inappropriate. No conclusion is offered.

Evidence
6.5 points
Criteria Description
Selects and integrates evidence to support and advance position/purpose; considers other perspectives.

5. Target
6.5 points
Comprehensive and compelling evidence is included. Multiple other perspectives are integrated effectively.

4. Acceptable
5.98 points
Specific and appropriate evidence is included. Other perspectives are integrated.

3. Approaching
5.72 points
Relevant evidence that includes other perspectives is used.

2. Insufficient
5.2 points
Evidence is used but is insufficient or of limited relevance. Simplistic explanation or integration of other perspectives is present.

1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Evidence to support the thesis, position, or purpose is absent. The writing relies entirely on the perspective of the writer.

Mechanics of Writing
10.4 points
Criteria Description
Includes spelling, capitalization, punctuation, grammar, language use, sentence structure, etc.

5. Target
10.4 points
No mechanical errors are present. Skilled control of language choice and sentence structure are used throughout.

4. Acceptable
9.57 points
Few mechanical errors are present. Suitable language choice and sentence structure are used.

3. Approaching
9.15 points
Occasional mechanical errors are present. Language choice is generally appropriate. Varied sentence structure is attempted.

2. Insufficient
8.32 points
Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors are present. Inconsistencies in language choice or sentence structure are recurrent.

1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Errors in grammar or syntax are pervasive and impede meaning. Incorrect language choice or sentence structure errors are found throughout.

Format/Documentation
9.1 points
Criteria Description
Uses appropriate style, such as APA, MLA, etc., for college, subject, and level; documents sources using citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc.

5. Target
9.1 points
No errors in formatting or documentation are present. Selectivity in the use of direct quotations and synthesis of sources is demonstrated.

4. Acceptable
8.37 points
Appropriate format and documentation are used with only minor errors.

3. Approaching
8.01 points
Appropriate format and documentation are used, although there are some obvious errors.

2. Insufficient
7.28 points
Appropriate format is attempted, but some elements are missing. Frequent errors in documentation of sources are evident.

1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Appropriate format is not used. No documentation of sources is provided.

Total
130 points