dsm 5 case conceptualization – www.savvyessaywriters.net
The assignment deals with a hypothetical that requires knowledge of the DSM-5 diagnoses along with possible incosistencies and supporting reasoning.
Savvy Essay Writers
Assignment Week1 – Savvy Essay Writers | savvyessaywriters.net
In a formal paper of 1,000-1,250 words you will discuss the work of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Committee Initiative on the Future of Nursing and the Institute of Medicine research that led to the IOM report, “Future of Nursing: Leading Change, Advancing Health.” Identify the importance of the IOM “Future of Nursing” report related to nursing practice, nursing education and nursing workforce development. What is the role of state-based action coalitions and how do they advance goals of the Future of Nursing: Campaign for Action?
Explore the Campaign for Action webpage (you may need to research your state’s website independently if it is not active on this site): http://campaignforaction.org/states
Review your state’s progress report by locating your state and clicking on one of the six progress icons for: education, leadership, practice, interpersonal collaboration, diversity, and data. You can also download a full progress report for your state by clicking on the box located at the bottom of the webpage.
In a paper of 1,000-1,250 words:
Summarize two initiatives spearheaded by your state’s action coalition. In what ways do these initiatives advance the nursing profession? What barriers to advancement currently exist in your state? How can nursing advocates in your state overcome these barriers?
A minimum of three scholarly references are required for this assignment.
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.
RUBRICS
1
Unsatisfactory
0.00%
2
Less than Satisfactory
75.00%
3
Satisfactory
79.00%
4
Good
89.00%
5
Excellent
100.00%
80.0 %Content
5.0 %Provided an original summary of the key messages of the IOM report, Future of Nursing: Leading Change, Advancing Health. Any specific references should be cited.
Did not attempt to provide a summary of the key messages of the IOM report, Future of Nursing: Leading Change, Advancing Health, or failed to cite specific references to the IOM report.
Provided a skeletal summary of the key messages of the IOM report, Future of Nursing: Leading Change, Advancing Health. Some of the specific references to the IOM report were cited or were done incorrectly.
Demonstrates a moderate knowledge of the subject. Recognizes the basic ideas. Misinterprets evidence on the committee’s initiative.
Demonstrates good knowledge of the subject. Correctly describes the committee’s initiative. Justifies some of the impacts on the Future of Nursing.
Provided an original summary of the key messages of the IOM report, Future of Nursing: Leading Change, Advancing Health. References specific to the IOM report were properly cited.
15.0 %Identify the role of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Initiative and the American Association of Retired Persons on the Future of Nursing Campaign for Action and the State Based Action Coalitions
Does not demonstrate knowledge of role. Fails to identify the impact of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Initiative on the Future of Nursing.
Demonstrates minimal knowledge of subject. Does not adequately visualize or justify the work of the Committee of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Initiative on the Future of Nursing.
Demonstrates a moderate knowledge of the subject. Recognizes the basic ideas. Misinterprets evidence on the committee’s initiative.
Demonstrates good knowledge of the subject. Correctly describes the committee’s initiative. Justifies some of the impacts on the Future of Nursing.
Demonstrates a full and deep knowledge of subject. Develops and explains an informed position on the committee’s initiative, integrates and justifies the impact on the Future of Nursing
15.0 %Identify the importance of the IOM FON report related to the nursing workforce
Does not demonstrate knowledge of the concept or its role. Fails to identify the importance of the IOM FON report related to the nursing workforce.
Demonstrates minimal knowledge of the subject. Does not adequately visualize or justify the importance of the IOM FON report related to the nursing workforce.
Demonstrates a moderate knowledge of the subject. Recognizes the basic ideas. Misinterprets evidence on the importance of the IOM FON report related to the nursing workforce.
Demonstrates good knowledge of the subject. Correctly describes importance of the IOM FON report related to the nursing workforce.
Demonstrates a full and deep knowledge of the subject. Develops and explains the importance of the IOM FON report, integrates and justifies the importance of the IOM FON report related to the nursing workforce.
15.0 %Discuss the intent of the Future of Nursing Campaign for Action
Does not demonstrate knowledge of the concept or its role. Fails to identify the intent of the Future of Nursing Campaign for Action.
Demonstrates minimal knowledge of the subject. Does not adequately visualize or identify the intent of the Future of Nursing Campaign for Action.
Demonstrates a moderate knowledge of the subject. Recognizes the basic ideas. Misinterprets evidence on the intent of the Future of Nursing Campaign for Action.
Demonstrates good knowledge of the subject. Correctly describes the intent of the Future of Nursing Campaign for Action.
Demonstrates a full and deep knowledge of the subject. Develops and explains the intent of the Future of Nursing Campaign for Action, integrates and justifies the intent of the Future of Nursing Campaign for Action.
15.0 %Identify the rationale of state-based action coalitions
Does not demonstrate knowledge of the concept or its role. Fails to identify the rationale of state-based action coalitions.
Demonstrates minimal knowledge of the subject. Does not adequately identify the rationale of state-based action coalitions.
Demonstrates a moderate knowledge of the subject. Recognizes the basic ideas. Misinterprets evidence on the rationale of state-based action coalitions.
Demonstrates good knowledge of the subject. Correctly identifies the rationale of state-based action coalitions.
Demonstrates a full and deep knowledge of the subject. Develops and explains and identifies the rationale of state-based action coalitions and justifies a rationale for state-based action coalitions.
15.0 %Discuss one state-based action coalition and two initiatives
Does not demonstrate knowledge of the concept or its role. Fails to identify one state-based action coalition and two initiatives.
Demonstrates minimal knowledge of the subject. Does not adequately identify one state-based action coalition and two initiatives.
Demonstrates a moderate knowledge of the subject. Recognizes the basic ideas. Identifies but misinterprets one state-based action coalition and two initiatives.
Demonstrates good knowledge of the subject. Correctly identifies one state-based action coalition and two initiatives.
Demonstrates a full and deep knowledge of the subject. Develops and explains the one state-based action coalition and two initiatives, integrates and justifies one state-based action coalition and two initiatives.
15.0 %Organization and Effectiveness
5.0 %Thesis Development and Purpose
Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.
Thesis and/or main claim are insufficiently developed and/or vague; purpose is not clear.
Thesis and/or main claim are apparent and appropriate to purpose.
Thesis and/or main claim are clear and forecast the development of the paper. Is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to purpose.
Thesis and/or main claim are comprehensive; contained within the thesis is the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.
15.0 %Organization and Effectiveness
5.0 %Paragraph Development and Transitions
Paragraphs and transitions consistently lack unity and coherence. No apparent connections between paragraphs are established. Transitions are inappropriate to purpose and scope. Organization is disjointed.
Some paragraphs and transitions may lack logical progression of ideas, unity, coherence, and/or cohesiveness.Some degree of organization is evident.
Paragraphs are generally competent, but ideas may show some inconsistency in organization and/or in their relationships to each other.
A logical progression of ideas between paragraphs is apparent. Paragraphs exhibit a unity, coherence, and cohesiveness. Topic sentences and concluding remarks are appropriate to purpose.
There is a sophisticated construction of paragraphs and transitions. Ideas progress and relate to each other. Paragraph and transition construction guide the reader. Paragraph structure is seamless.
15.0 %Organization and Effectiveness
5.0 %Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)
Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice and/or sentence construction are used.
Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register), sentence structure, and/or word choice are present.
Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are used.
Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. A variety of sentence structures and effective figures of…
arbohydrates and Physical Activity – Savvy Essay Writers | savvyessaywriters.net
DUE TODAY BY 10PM san diego, ca time
Carbohydrates and Physical Activity
Scenario/Summary
The Week 2 Lab will challenge you, as it has to do with sweeteners and obesity. Current research has shown that there may be a relationship between the consumption of sweeteners and the rise in obesity, so this will be an opportunity to examine the facts and develop an opinion.
Please select one of the following sweeteners.
Sugar (sucrose)
Fructose
High fructose corn syrup
Stevia
Equal
Splenda
Ace K
Answer the following questions about the sweetener that you have selected. Your paper should be approximately two pages long, double-spaced, with proper citations and a References section at the end.
Select a sweetener.
Explore the history of the sweetener (when it was developed, its composition).
Discuss safety and the sweetener that you have selected.
Examine the relationship between the sweetener that you have selected and obesity.
Write a critical appraisal that demonstrates comprehension of two quantitative research studies. Use the “Research Critique Guidelines – Part II” document to organize your essay. Successful completion of this assignment requires that you provide a rationale, include examples, and reference content from the study in your responses.
Use the practice problem and two quantitative, peer‐reviewed research articles you identified in the Topic 1 assignment to complete this assignment.
In a 1,000–1,250 word essay, summarize two quantitative studies, explain the ways in which the findings might be used in nursing practice, and address ethical considerations associated with the conduct of the study.
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.
No of Criteria: 11 Achievement Levels: 5CriteriaAchievement LevelsDescriptionPercentage1: Unsatisfactory0.00 %2: Less Than Satisfactory75.00 %3: Satisfactory83.00 %4: Good94.00 %5: Excellent100.00 %Content75.0 Quantitative Studies5.0Only one article is presented. Neither of the articles presented use quantitative research.Two articles are presented. Of the articles presented, only one article is based on quantitative research.N/AN/ATwo articles are presented. Both articles are based on quantitative research.Background of Study10.0Background of study, including problem, significance to nursing, purpose, objective, and research questions, is incomplete.Background of study, including problem, significance to nursing, purpose, objective, and research questions, is included but lacks relevant details and explanation.Background of study, including problem, significance to nursing, purpose, objective, and research questions, is partially complete and includes some relevant details and explanation.Background of study, including problem, significance to nursing, purpose, objective, and research questions, is complete and includes relevant details and explanation.Background of study, including problem, significance to nursing, purpose, objective, and research questions, is thorough with substantial relevant details and extensive explanation.Article Support of Nursing Practice15.0Discussion on how articles support the PICOT question is incomplete.A summary of how articles support the PICOT question is presented. It is unclear how the articles can be used to answer the proposed PICOT question. Significant information and detail is required.A general discussion on how articles support the PICOT question is presented. The articles demonstrate general support in answering the proposed PICOT question. It is unclear how the interventions and comparison groups in the articles compare to those identified in the PICOT question. Some rational or information is needed.A discussion on how articles support the PICOT question is presented. The articles demonstrate support in answering the proposed PICOT question. The interventions and comparison groups in the articles compare to those identified in the PICOT question. Minor detail or rational is needed for clarity or support.A clear discussion on how articles support the PICOT question is presented. The articles demonstrate strong support in answering the proposed PICOT question. The interventions and comparison groups in the articles strongly compare to those identified in the PICOT question.Method of Study15.0Discussion on the method of study for each article is omitted. The comparison of study methods is omitted or incomplete.A partial summary of the method of study for each article is presented. The comparison of study methods is incomplete. A benefit and a limitation of each method are omitted or incomplete. There are significant inaccuracies.A general discussion on the method of study for each article is presented. The comparison of study methods is summarized. A benefit and a limitation of each method are summarized. There some inaccuracies or partial omissions. More information is needed.A discussion on the method of study for each article is presented. The comparison of study methods is generally described. A benefit and a limitation of each method are presented. There minor are inaccuracies. Some detail is required for accuracy or clarity.A thorough discussion on the method of study for each article is presented. The comparison of study methods is described in detail. A benefit and a limitation of each method are presented. The discussion demonstrates a solid understanding of research methods.Results of Study15.0Discussion of study results, including findings and implications for nursing practice, is incomplete.A summary of the study results includes findings and implications for nursing practice but lacks relevant details and explanation. There are some omissions or inaccuracies.Discussion of study results, including findings and implications for nursing practice, is generally presented. Overall, the discussion includes some relevant details and explanation.Discussion of study results, including findings and implications for nursing practice, is complete and includes relevant details and explanation.Discussion of study results, including findings and implications for nursing practice, is thorough with substantial relevant details and extensive explanation.Anticipated Outcomes and Outcomes Comparison15.0Anticipated outcomes for the PICOT are omitted or are unrealistic. Comparison of research article outcomes to anticipated outcomes is incomplete.Anticipated outcomes for the PICOT are partially summarized. Comparison of research article outcomes to anticipated outcomes contains omissions of key information. It is unclear how the anticipated outcomes of the PICOT and those of the current research mentioned compare.Anticipated outcomes for the PICOT are summarized. Comparison of research article outcomes to anticipated outcomes is generally presented. More information is needed to fully establish how the anticipated outcomes of the PICOT and those of the current research mentioned compare.Anticipated outcomes for the PICOT are discussed. A comparison of research article outcomes to anticipated outcomes of the PICOT is presented. An explanation of how the anticipated outcomes of the PICOT and those of the current research mentioned compare is presented. Some detail is needed for clarity.Anticipated outcomes for the PICOT are thoroughly discussed. A detailed comparison of research article outcomes to the anticipated outcomes of the PICOT is presented. An explanation of how the anticipated outcomes of the PICOT and those of the current research mentioned compare is presented in detail.Organization and Effectiveness15.0 Thesis Development and Purpose5.0Paper 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 Construction5.0Statement 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.Argument is clear and convincing and presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative.Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)5.0Surface 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), sentence structure, or word choice are present.Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are used.Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. A variety of sentence structures and effective figures of speech are used.Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.Format10.0 Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)5.0Template is not used appropriately or documentation format is rarely followed correctly.Template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken; lack of control with formatting is apparent.Template is used, and formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present.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)5.0Sources 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…