Discussion
Purpose
The purpose of graded collaborative discussions is to engage faculty and students in an interactive dialogue to assist the student in organizing, integrating, applying, and critically appraising knowledge. Meaningful dialogue among faculty and students fosters the development of a learning community as ideas, perspectives, and knowledge are shared. This discussion will allow students to improve their knowledge and understanding of a body system identified as an area of opportunity on the CEA pre predictor exam.
Course Outcomes
This discussion enables the student to meet the following course outcomes:
- CO 1: Interpret subjective and objective data to develop appropriate diagnoses and evidence based management plans for patients and families with complex or multiple diagnoses across the lifespan. (PO 5)
- CO 2: Utilize healthcare delivery system resources in a fiscally responsible manner in the diagnosis and treatment of patients and families across the lifespan. (PO 5)
- CO 4: Develop management plans based on current scientific evidence and national guidelines. (PO 5)
- CO 6: Prioritize treatment based on relevant clinical presentation. (PO 5)
Due Date
Initial posts are due to the discussion board by Tuesday at 11:59 p.m. MT. Follow-up peer questions and responses to faculty questions are due by Sunday at 11:59 p.m. MT. A 10% late penalty will be imposed for discussions posted after the deadline Tuesday at 11:59 p.m. MT, regardless of the number of days late. NOTHING will be accepted after 11:59 p.m. MT on Sunday (i.e., the student will receive an automatic 0).
Total Points Possible
This discussion is worth a total of 85 points.
**To view the grading criteria/rubric, please click on the three (3) dots in the upper in the box at the end of the solid gray bar, above the discussion board title, and then Show Rubric.
Preparing the Assignment
Follow these guidelines when completing each component of the assignment. Contact your course faculty if you have questions.
Include the Following Sections:
- Application of Course Knowledge
- Reflect on your Exam experience to identify the knowledge area in which you struggled the most.
- Create an original case study based on a common chief complaint seen in clients in primary care settings in the body system related to the lowest-scoring knowledge area. Select a chief complaint not already covered in this term’s i-Human case studies.
- Case study requirements:
- Include the chief complaint, demographics, previous medical history (PMHx), previous surgical history (PSHx), allergies, lifestyle, history of present illness (HPI).
- Analyze associated risk factors/demographics that contribute to the chief complaint and differential diagnoses
- List three common differential diagnoses for the chief complaint, including pathophysiology and rationale, from the topic area identified on the CEA exam.
- Discuss how the three differential diagnoses differ from each other in occurrence, pathophysiology, and presentation. Your discussion should compare and contrast these diagnoses rather than listing them.
- Describe relevant testing required to diagnose/evaluate the severity of the three differential diagnoses.
- Present applicable national guidelines related to diagnosis and diagnostic testing for the differential diagnoses.
- Integration of Evidence: Integrate relevant scholarly sources as defined by program expectationsLinks to an external site.:
- Cite a scholarly source in the initial post.
- Cite a scholarly source in one faculty response post.
- Cite a scholarly source in one peer post.
- Accurately analyze, synthesize, and/or apply principles from evidence with no more than one short quote (15 words or less) for the week.
- Include a minimum of two different scholarly sources per week. Cite all references and provide references for all citations.
- Engagement in Meaningful Dialogue: Engage peers and faculty by asking questions, and offering new insights, applications, perspectives, information, or implications for practice.
- Peer Response: Respond to at least one peer. Substantive posts contribute new, novel perspectives to the discussion using original dialogue (not quotes from sources).
- Faculty Response: Respond to all questions posed directly to the student.
- Communicate using respectful, collegial language and terminology appropriate to advanced nursing practice.
- Professionalism in Communication: Communicate with minimal errors in English grammar, spelling, syntax, and punctuation.
- Reference Citation: Use current APA format to format citations and references and is free of errors.
- Tuesday Participation Requirement: Provide a substantive response to the graded discussion question(s) or topic(s), posted by the course faculty (not a response to a peer), by Tuesday, 11:59 p.m. MT of each week.
- Total Participation Requirement: Provide at least three substantive posts (one to the initial question or topic, one to a student peer, and one to a faculty question) on two different days during the week.
**To see view the grading criteria/rubric, please click on the 3 dots in the box at the end of the solid gray bar above the discussion forum title and then Show Rubric.