Assigment .Apa seven . All instructions attached.
butterflyl
EpidemiologyPaperProjectFinalFallF2023.docxEPIDEMIOLOGY DISEASE PAPER (Worth 20% of Course Grade) 2
Your topics have been assigned to you in Week 2 Module . Please make sure that you are using the assigned disease. Again, this is available in the folder marked Epidemiological Disease Paper (if you do not see your topic than please reach out to your instructor). The rubric has changed from last semester so please make sure to follow the current grading rubric using the assigned topic.
Purpose
This paper should clearly and comprehensively describe the assigned infectious disease (the infectious disease was assigned to each student in Week 1)
The purpose of this assignment is to:
· Provide learners with the opportunity to integrate knowledge and skills learned throughout this course regarding infectious disease epidemiology
· Directly apply principles and knowledge learned in the course to problem solving of population health problems in their own geographic areas regarding epidemiological principles.
Assignment Outcomes
This assignment enables the student to meet the following course outcomes:
1. Define key terms in epidemiology, community health, and population-based research.
2. Compare study designs used for obtaining population health information from surveillance, observation, community, and control trial-based research.
3. Identify appropriate outcome measures and study designs applicable to epidemiological subfields such as infectious disease, chronic disease, environmental exposures, reproductive health, and genetics.
4. Apply commonly used measures of health risk.
5. Examine current ethical/legal issues in epidemiology.
6. Identify important sources of epidemiological data.
7. Evaluate a infectious disease in terms of magnitude, person, time, and place.
Requirements
· Page length: 6-10 pages, excluding title/cover page
· APA format 7th edition
· Include at least one table to present information somewhere in the paper.
· Must include excellent supporting scholarly resources (at least 5 of these need to be no older than 5 years)
Epidemiology Paper: Descriptive Epidemiology of a Selected Assigned Infectious Disease
Outline of the Assignment (make sure the paper includes the following and following the Grading Rubric)
1. Introduction with a clear presentation of the problem as well as significance and a scholarly overview of the paper.
2. Describing an infectious disease to explore in detail by using a descriptive epidemiological approach. Background of the disease including definition, description, signs and symptoms, and current incidence and/or prevalence statistics current local (county, if available), state, national and international data/statistics pertaining to the disease. (Include a table of incidence or prevalence rates by your geographic county, state, national and international statistics.)
3. A review of current surveillance methods and mandated reporting methods that accurately in a detailed manner describes how reporting in the state of FL, nationally and internationally is done and to which authorities. From the perspective of the APN describe how potential reporting would be done This should include providers and potentially exposed individuals.
4. Identifying various sources of data for the epidemiological description of an infectious disease
5. Mortality, morbidity, risk data and other important data/statistics to inform the impact of the infectious disease on the population. Describe these numbers from a local (if available), state of FL, national (US), and internationally. Compare the data about the assigned infectious disease to illustrate how the infectious disease data in local (county if available) and/or state of (FL) compares with national and international level data. What is the impact of the infectious disease on the population in FL and/or local (county-if available) when compared with national and international level data and how does FL compare? What determines this significance, why is there such a difference; provide a rationale with strong supporting evidence to support response.
6. Identifying host characteristics (age, gender, marital status, race etc.) and environmental attributes: geographic areas, income, housing, occupation, and education (essentially the main social determinants of health (SDH) as they relate to an infectious disease as a health condition.
7. Conduct descriptive and analytical epidemiological analysis of the disease including the characteristics of the general population most impacted by the disease which includes the economic and social burden of the disease (if not provided above).
8. Prove a detailed description of how each of the social determinants of health (SDH) specifically impact the population/person who lives in the state of FL. This analysis must include all the SDH and provide a detailed integration of factors that correlate with a person/population in the state of FL. This should be detailed and presented similar to the example provided in ‘John’s Story’ in Week 1 PPT (in the last few slides). Additionally excellent supporting data and evidence must be provided that supports this analysis
9. Identifying temporal variation: (secular, cyclic, seasonal, and epidemic) as they relate to an infectious disease or health condition.
10. Summarizing current hypotheses that have been proposed to explain the observed distribution of the infectious disease or health condition
11. Review how the disease is diagnosed, current national standards for screening or
a. prevention, and pick one screening test and review its sensitivity, specificity, positive
b. predictive value, cost and any current national guidelines for conducting which patients to conduct this test on.
12. Listing gaps in knowledge about the distribution of an infectious disease or health condition.
13. Develop a prevention plan as an advanced practice nurse (APN) who runs a local clinic in the state of the best way to ensure that the most impacted population is adequately screened for the disease (what measures/tools should be implemented to ensure these individuals are screened for); what educational initiatives should be provided that would target and impact the identified population at risk (this needs to be well supported by literature and sources); describe prevention measures at the primary, secondary and tertiary prevention levels that can be the focus of the APN’s plan to target the disease (must be realistic, specific to the infectious disease, and detailed with supporting evidence and literature).
14. Develop a prevention plan that describes at least 2 specific overarching goals to achieve the intended intervention to address the infectious disease per the APN’s practice, 2 expected short term outcomes, the specific interventions to achieve the outcomes with rationales and measures that would determine the effectiveness of the intended goals, outcomes.
15. Examining areas for further epidemiological research related to an infectious disease or health condition. This must be realistic and well supported with the literature.
16. Conclude with a summary that outlines the key points outlined in the paper that is clear and succinct.
Grading Rubric
|
Criteria |
Proficient/Exemplary |
Competent |
Beginner |
|
Introduction (9 pts) |
9 pts Clear introduction of the infectious disease as a health problem with a clear direction and purpose for the paper |
6 pts Mostly clear introduction that largely presents the infectious disease as a health problem and a clear direction and purpose for the paper |
3 pts Presents a vague introduction that only limitedly presents the infectious disease as a health problem and fails to provide a clear and direct direction for the paper |
|
Descriptive epidemiological approach is utilized to describe the infectious disease as a health problem. Background & significance data is included. County, state, national, and international incidence/prevalence data presented (make sure to include a table here to present the data) (45 pts) |
45 pts Excellent description of the infectious disease as a health problem is introduced using descriptive epidemiology. This includes a comprehensive definition, signs and symptoms, current incidence and prevalence statistics at the local, state, national, and international level data. Presents a comprehensive and clear table or similar organized format of the required data as described in the assignment outline. |
30 pts Good description of the infectious disease as a health problem is introduced using descriptive epidemiology. Most but not comprehensive definition, signs and symptoms, current incidence and prevalence statistics at the local, state, national and international level data. Presents a largely but not comprehensive and/or slightly unclear table in a somewhat organized format of the required data as described in the assignment outline. |
15 pts Poor or failure to provide a description of the infectious disease as a health problem is introduced using and/or not using descriptive epidemiology. Limited, missing and/or no definition, signs and symptoms, current incidence and prevalence statistics at the local, state, national and international level data. Fails to present a comprehensive table and/or vague table in an unorganized format of the required data as described in the assignment outline. |
|
Surveillance methods and mandated reporting (30 pts) |
30 pts Accurate and comprehensive description of current and relevant surveillance methods and mandated reporting and methods for reporting the disease to correct authorities is provided and well described and supported with evidence and literature. |
20 pts Mostly accurate and comprehensive current and relevant surveillance methods and mandated reporting and methods for reporting the disease to correct authorities is provided and somewhat described but not fully supported with evidence and literature. |
10 pts Limited, vague, or missing current and relevant surveillance methods and mandated reporting and methods for reporting the disease to correct authorities is provided and limited and not fully supported with evidence and literature. |
|
Sources of epidemiological data about the disease (21 pts) |
21 pts A comprehensive variety of data sources are identified that provide an accurate and relevant description of the infectious disease as a health disorder. |
14 pts An adequate variety of data sources are identified that provide a good and somewhat accurate description of the health disorder/infectious disease |
7 pts A limited variety of data sources are identified that provide a poor and inadequate description of the health disorder/infectious disease
|
|
Comparative summary of mortality, morbidity, risk and other data/statistics (45 pts) |
45 pts Comprehensive and detailed description of the morbidity, mortality, risk and other disease data that compares the count (if available) and/or state data with other counties/states, national and international date providing a detailed comparison that identifies the impact of the disease on the local population that is well supported with evidence and literature. |
30 pts Somewhat comprehensive but not fully detailed description of the morbidity, mortality, risk and other disease data that compares the count (if available) and/or state data with other counties/states, national and international date providing a mostly but not fully detailed comparison that identifies the impact of the disease on the local population which is somewhat but not fully supported with evidence and literature. |
15 pts Vague, unclear and/or missing description of the morbidity, mortality, risk and other disease data that compares the count (if available) and/or state data with other counties/states, national and international date providing a vague, limited or missing detailed comparison that fails or limitedly identifies the impact of the disease on the local population which is limitedly or not fully supported with evidence and/or literature. |
|
Host characteristics and environmental, geographic, income, housing, occupation (essentially primary SDOH) that relate to this infection’s disease (45 pts)
|
45 pts Comprehensive and thorough integration of the main social determinants of health that impact the infectious disease as a health condition including those outlined in the above section. |
30 pts Good integration and mostly but not fully comprehensive integration of the main social determinants of health that impact the infectious disease as a health condition including those outlined in the above section. |
15 pts Limited, poor or missing integration of the main social determinants of health that impact the infectious disease as a health condition including those outlined in the section above. |
|
Epidemiological analysis of the most affected population which includes the general population impacted by the disease which includes the financial and social burden of the disease. (30 pts) |
30 pts Comprehensive descriptive and analytical epidemiological analysis of the infectious disease which fully integrates characteristics of the most impacted population which includes detailed information about the economic and social burden of the disease which is well supported by the literature. |
20 pts Adequate descriptive and analytical epidemiological analysis of the infectious disease which integrates some characteristics of the most impacted population which includes somewhat detailed information about the economic and social burden of the disease which is not fully supported by the literature |
10 pts Limited, vague and/or missing descriptive and analytical epidemiological analysis of the infectious disease which may or may not integrate some characteristics of the most impacted population which includes a vague, limited or missing information about the economic and social burden of the disease which is not supported by the literature. |
|
Detailed description of how all the social determinants of health (SDH) correlate with supporting data linking these with the population and/or individuals in the state of FL that is similar to the “John’s Story’ that is well supported with the literature. (45 pts) |
45 pts Detailed description of how the SDH inform the impact of the disease on the population and/or individual in the state of FL that is similar to the ‘John’s Story’ which is well supported by the evidence and literature. |
30 pts Somewhat detailed description of how the SDH inform the impact of disease on the population and/or individual in the state of FL that is somewhat similar to ‘John’s Story’ which is somewhat but not fully supported by the evidence and literature. |
15 pts Limited, vague and/or missing description of how the SDOH inform the impact of the disease on the population and/or individual in the state of FL that is somewhat similar to ‘John’s Story’ which is limitedly or missing support by the evidence and literature. |
|
Temporal variation identified (30 pts) |
30 pts Clear and evident identification of a temporal variation (secular, cyclic, seasonal or epidemic) that relates to the infectious disease/health condition |
20 pts Good and mostly clear identification of a temporal variation (secular, cyclic, seasonal or epidemic) that relates to the infectious disease/health condition |
10 pts Limited and vague identification of a temporal variation (secular, cyclic, seasonal or epidemic) that relates to the infectious disease/health condition |
|
Current hypothesis reflecting existing literature (21 pts) |
21 pts Identifies and accurately describes the current and existing hypothesis that reflects existing literature as the rationale for the observed variations or distribution of the infectious disease/health condition |
14 pts Adequate and mostly accurate description of current and existing hypothesis that reflects existing literature as the rationale for the observed variations or distribution of the infectious disease/health condition |
7 pts Limited and vague description of current and existing hypothesis that reflects existing literature as the rationale for the observed variations or distribution of the infectious disease/health condition |
|
Reviews how disease is diagnosed, tested with specific information about screening, prevention, and screening test (30 pts) |
30 pts Comprehensively reviews how the disease is diagnosed, current national standards for screening and prevention are identified. At least one screening test is identified with a thorough analysis and review of the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, cost and current national guidelines for populations or patients who should be tested. |
20 pts Adequately reviews how the disease is diagnosed, current national standards for screening and prevention are identified. At least one screening test is identified with a good analysis and review of the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, cost and current national guidelines for populations or patients who should be tested. |
10 pts Limitedly reviews how the disease is diagnosed, current national standards for screening and prevention are poorly identified. A screening test may or may not be identified; with somewhat inaccurate and incomplete data regarding the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, cost and current national guidelines for populations or patients who should be tested. |
|
Gaps in knowledge about distributions are identified (30 pts) |
30 pts Clearly and concisely identifies gaps in knowledge about the distribution of the infectious disease |
20 pts Adequate and mostly accurate gaps in knowledge about the distribution of the infectious disease |
10 pts Limited and poorly identified gap in knowledge about the distribution of the infectious disease |
|
Develop a prevention plan as an APN in the state which addresses how to adequately screen for the infectious disease, what educational initiatives that target the at-risk population, and specific prevention strategies at all the primary, secondary, & tertiary levels of prevention. (45 pts) |
45 pts Comprehensive and developed prevention plan that focuses on how the APN would screen, educate the at-risk population about the infectious disease. Detailed and comprehensive examples of primary, secondary, and tertiary prevention activities that reflect real-world initiatives of ways the APN would address the infectious disease for the at-risk population in a clinic in FL that is well supported with best evidence and the literature. |
30 pts Somewhat comprehensive but not fully developed prevention plan that focuses on how the APN would screen, educate the at-risk population about the infectious disease. Somewhat detailed but not comprehensive examples of primary, secondary, and tertiary prevention activities that reflect real-world initiatives of ways the APN would address the infectious disease for the at-risk population in a clinic in FL that is somewhat but not fully supported with best evidence and the literature. |
15 pts Limited, vague and/or missing prevention plan that focuses on how the APN would screen, educate the at-risk population about the infectious disease. Incomplete or missing examples of primary, secondary, and tertiary prevention activities that reflect real-world initiatives of ways the APN would address the infectious disease for the at-risk population in a clinic in FL that is not well supported with best evidence and the literature. |
|
Develops a prevention plan to address the infectious disease by the APN that includes 2 specific long-term goals, 2 short term outcomes with specific interventions with rationales outlining. Well supported by the literature. (45 pts) |
45 pts Comprehensive and detailed prevention plan that addresses the infectious disease by the APN which includes 2 specific long-term goals, and 2 short term outcomes with specific interventions with rationales that are realistic and well supported with the literature. |
30 pts Somewhat comprehensive but not detailed prevention plan that addresses the infectious disease by the APN which includes 2 specific long-term goals, and 2 short term outcomes with somewhat specific interventions with rationales that are somewhat realistic and not well supported with the literature. |
15 pts Vague, limited or missing prevention plan that minimally or fails to address the infectious disease by the APN which may or may not include 2 specific long-term goals, and/or 2 short term outcomes with vague and/or unclear interventions with or without rationales that are not realistic and unsupported by the literature |
|
Identifies areas for further epidemiological research related to the infectious disease/health problem. Clear and concise summary of key points in the conclusion (21 pts) |
21 pts Comprehensively identifies areas for further epidemiological research grounded in evidence r/t the infectious disease/health condition. Clear and concise summary of the key points provided in the conclusion |
14 pts Adequately identifies areas of further epidemiological research grounded in evidence r/t the infectious disease/health condition. Mostly clear and somewhat concise summary of the key points provided in the conclusion |
7 pts Limitedly identifies areas of further epidemiological research which may or may not be grounded in evidence r/t the infectious disease/health condition. Vague and unclear or no summary of key points provided in the conclusion. |
|
Conclusion (summary of the key points of the student paper that is succinct and clear) ( 9 pts) |
9 pts Clear and succinct summary of the key points made in the student’s paper |
6 pts Somewhat clear but not succinct summary of the key points that are somewhat general and specific to the student paper. |
3 pts Vague, unclear and/or missing summary of the key points made that are general rather than specific to the student paper. |
|
APA formatting 7 th edition (21 pts) |
21 pts Paper is formatted according to APA 7th ed. formatting including spacing, referencing in-text and reference page with less than 2 errors. |
14 pts Paper is formatted according to APA 7th edition formatting including spacing, referencing in-text and reference page with more than 2 errors and less than 6 errors. |
7 pts Paper does not follow correct APA 7thedition formatting in regard to spacing, referencing, in-text and reference page with greater than 6 errors. |
|
Spelling, grammar and formatting and supporting literature (9 pts) |
9 pts Less than 2-3 errors in spelling and grammar throughout paper as well as formatting. The paper has the required 4-5 scholarly resources. |
6 pts Greater than 3 to 6 errors in spelling, grammar and formatting throughout paper. Paper has at least 3-4 scholarly resources are included within the past 5 years. |
3 pts Greater than 6 errors in grammar, spelling and formatting throughout paper. Paper has less than the required 4 scholarly resources that are or are not within the 5 years. |
|
Total: 531 pts |
|
|
|
|
Student score |
|
|
|
