Week 5: Clinical Decision Support Systems

Week 5: Clinical Decision Support Systems

Purpose
The ideas and beliefs underpinning the discussions guide students through engaging dialogues as they achieve the desired learning outcomes/competencies associated with their course in a manner that empowers them to organize, integrate, apply and critically appraise their knowledge to their selected field of practice. The ebb and flow of a discussion is based upon the composition of student and faculty interaction in the quest for relevant scholarship.

Activity Learning Outcomes

Through this discussion, the student will demonstrate the ability to:

Contribute level-appropriate knowledge and experience to the topic in a discussion environment that models professional and social interaction (CO4)
Actively engage in the written ideas of others by carefully reading, researching, reflecting, and responding to the contributions of their peers and course faculty (CO5)

Due Date:

Students must post a minimum of two times in each graded discussion. The two posts in each individual discussion must be on separate days. Posting twice on two different days meets the minimum requirement however for full credit, the student must post at least three substantive posts on three different days. The student must provide an initial post to each graded discussion topic posted by the course instructor, by Wednesday, 11:59 p.m. MT of Week 5. Subsequent posts, including essential responses to peers, must occur no later than the Sunday, 11:59 p.m. MT at the end of Week 5. Students are expected to submit assignments by the time they are due. Threaded discussions are not considered assignments and are not part of the late assignment policy.

A 10% late penalty will be imposed for discussions posted after the deadline on Wednesday regardless of the number of days late. NOTHING will be accepted after 11:59pm MT on Sunday (i.e. student will receive an automatic 0).

Total Points Possible: 150 Points

Requirements:
Post a written response in the discussion forum to EACH threaded discussion topic:

This week we learned about the potential benefits and drawbacks to clinical decision support systems (CDSSs). Create a “Pros” versus “Cons” table with a column for “Pro” and a separate column for “Con”. Include at least 3 items for each column. Next to each item, provide a brief rationale as to why you included it on the respective list.
The primary goal of a CDSS is to leverage data and the scientific evidence to help guide appropriate decision making. CDSSs directly assist the clinician in making decisions about specific patients. For this discussion thread post, you are to assume your future role as an APN and create a clinical patient and scenario to illustrate an exemplary depiction of how a CDSS might influence your decision. This post is an opportunity for you to be innovative, so have fun!
Adhere to the following guidelines regarding quality for the threaded discussions in Canvas:

Application of Course Knowledge: Demonstrate the ability to analyze, synthesize, and/or apply principles and concepts learned in the course lesson and outside readings.
Scholarliness and Scholarly Sources: Demonstrates achievement of scholarly inquiry for professional and academic decisions using valid, relevant, and reliable outside scholarly source to contribute to the discussion thread.
Writing Mechanics: Grammar, spelling, syntax, and punctuation are accurate. In-text and reference citations should be formatted using correct APA guidelines.
Direct Quotes: Good writing calls for the limited use of direct quotes. Direct quotes in discussions are to be limited to one short quotation (not to exceed 15 words). The quote must add substantively to the discussion. Points will be deducted under the grammar, syntax, APA category.
For each threaded discussion per week, the student will select no less than TWO scholarly sources to support the initial discussion post.

Scholarly Sources: Only scholarly sources are acceptable for citation and reference in this course. These include peer-reviewed publications, government reports, or sources written by a professional or scholar in the field. The textbooks and lessons are NOT considered to be outside scholarly sources. For the threaded discussions and reflection posts, reputable internet sources such as websites by government agencies (URL ends in .gov) and respected organizations (often ends in .org) can be counted as scholarly sources. The best outside scholarly source to use is a peer-reviewed nursing journal. You are encouraged to use the Chamberlain library and search one of the available databases for a peer-reviewed journal article. The following sources should not be used: Wikipedia, Wikis, or blogs. These websites are not considered scholarly as anyone can add to these. Please be aware that .com websites can vary in scholarship and quality. For example, the American Heart Association is a .com site with scholarship and quality. It is the responsibility of the student to determine the scholarship and quality of any .com site. Ask your instructor before using any site if you are unsure. Points will be deducted from the rubric if the site does not demonstrate scholarship or quality. Current outside scholarly sources must be published with the last 5 years. Instructor permission must be obtained BEFORE the assignment is due if using a source that is older than 5 years.

DISCUSSION CONTENT

Category

Points

%

Description

Application of Course Knowledge

50

33%

The quality for this category is determined by the ability to analyze, synthesize, and/or apply principles and concepts learned in the course lessons and outside readings and relate them to real-life professional situations.

Scholarliness and Scholarly Resources

40

27%

This category is evaluated on the quality of the student’s ability to: Support writing with appropriate, scholarly sources; provide relevant evidence of scholarly inquiry clearly stating how the evidence informed or changed professional or academic decisions; evaluate literature resources to develop a comprehensive analysis or synthesis; use sources published within the last 5 years; match reference list and in-text citations match, and minimize or appropriately format direct quotations.

Interactive Dialogue

40

27%

The quality for this category is determined by substantive written responses to a peer and faculty member’s questions in the threaded discussion. Substantive posts add importance, depth, and meaningfulness to the discussion. Students must respond to least one peer in the threaded discussion. If no question asked directly from faculty, student must respond to questions posed to the entire class. Post must include at least one scholarly source.

Total CONTENT Points= 130

DISCUSSION FORMAT

Category

Points

%

Description

Grammar, Spelling, Syntax, Mechanics and APA Format

20

13%

Reflection post has minimal grammar, spelling, syntax, punctuation and APA* errors. Direct quotes (if used) is limited to 1 short statement** which adds substantively to the post.

* APA style references and in text citations are required; however, there are no deductions for errors in indentation or spacing of references. All elements of the reference otherwise must be included.

**Direct quote should not to exceed 15 words & must add substantively to the discussion

Total FORMAT Points= 20

DISCUSSION TOTAL=150 Points

**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 board title and then Show Rubric.

Search entries or author
Search entries or author
Filter replies by unread
ReplyReply to Week 5: Clinical Decision Support Systems
Replies are only visible to those who have posted at least one reply.

(Visited 14 times, 1 visits today)