DNP 805 Week 4 Assignment EHR Database and Data Management

Introduction

Prostate cancer is the most frequent sickness among males, according to medical studies on cancer therapy (Hernandez-Boussard, Blayney & Brooks, 2020). Recently diagnosed males face a plethora of treatment options, each with varying risks of obtaining patient-centered results such as urinary and erectile problems. Currently, care providers and patients find it challenging to compare the trade-offs among patient-centered outcomes across diverse treatments since experimental evidence on these trade-offs is lacking (Hernandez-Boussard, Blayney & Brooks, 2020). Experts believe this is because patient-centered outcomes are not regularly recorded in computer-readable formats. In order for healthcare facilities to improve cancer care and data quality, evidence recorded in computable forms should be made available to physicians and patients via a Web-based platform (Hernandez-Boussard, Blayney & Brooks, 2020). This article proposes three key revolutionary measures for the administration of cancer patient data.

The first proposed solution advocates for the establishment of an EHR prostate cancer database, which will allow clinical data to be weighed alongside diagnostic information (Hernandez-Boussard, Blayney & Brooks, 2020). The second method creates new ontologies of quality metrics that are accessible and consistent across EHR applications. The third suggested strategy is to create a strong data information mining workflow that is based on modern methodologies and uses ontology-based dictionaries to parse free text (Hernandez-Boussard, Blayney & Brooks, 2020). By combining these three novel approaches, physicians and patients will be able to effectively use current EHRs to understand the trade-offs between patient-centered outcomes across various treatments.

Using EHR to measure and improve prostate cancer therapy is critical because it allows healthcare facilities to share critical information (Hernandez-Boussard, Blayney & Brooks, 2020).

It is simple to establish the building blocks required to recognize quality metric information in EHRs using the EHR. The creation of an EHR database, mapping of quality measurements to medical vocabularies, and development of electronic quality metric phenotypes are all critical. The EHR initiative develops a web-based application that incorporates empirical information and clinical characteristics to assess patient tailored risk prediction, assisting care providers and patients in making treatment decisions (Hernandez-Boussard, Blayney & Brooks, 2020). Given the importance they place on each patient-centered result, these alternatives deliver the best-anticipated quality of care. Using EHR will help to close a critical gap in evidence for prostate cancer therapy and research by providing care professionals and patients with useful evidence to compare the trade-offs between patient-centered outcomes across various treatments.

Details

As a DNP-prepared nurse, you may be called upon to assist in the design of a for your organization. This assignment requires you to integrate a clinical problem with data technologies to better understand the components as well as how those components can lead to better clinical outcomes.

General Guidelines:

Use the following information to ensure successful completion of the assignment:

This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.
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 requires that at least two additional scholarly research sources related to this topic, and at least one in-text citation from each source be included.
You are required to submit this assignment to Turnitin. Refer to the directions in the Student Success Center.

Directions:

For this assignment, write a 1,000-1,250 word paper in which you:

Select a clinically-based patient problem in which using a management approach provides clear benefit potential.
Identify the data needed to manage this patient problem using information from the electronic health record (EHR).
Include a brief description of the patient problem which incorporates information needed to manage the specific problem.
Identifies whether the EHR-supplied data is structured or unstructured with an explanation as to why.
Provide a complete description of the structured and unstructured data from the EHR that are needed to organize a hypothetical database.
Provide a complete description of data relationships that apply to the hypothetical database.

DNP 805 Week 4 Assignment EHR Database and Data Management

Assessment Description

As a DNP-prepared nurse, you may be called upon to assist in the design of a clinical database for your organization. This assignment requires you to integrate a clinical problem with data technologies to better understand the components as well as how those components can lead to better clinical outcomes.

General Guidelines:

Use the following information to ensure successful completion of the assignment:

This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.
Doctoral learners are required to use APA style for their writing assignments. The APA Style Guide is located in the Student Success Center.
Use primary sources published within the last 5 years. Provide citations and references for all sources used.
Refer to the examples in the topic resources for health care database examples.
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.
Learners will submit this assignment using the assignment dropbox in the learning management system. In addition, learners must upload this deliverable to the Learner Dissertation Page (LDP) in the DNP PI Workspace for later use.

Directions:

For this assignment, write a 1,000-1,250 word paper in which you:

Select a clinically based patient problem in which using a database management approach provides clear benefit potential.
Consider how a hypothetical database could be created to assist with this clinically based patient problem. Identify and describe the data needed to manage this patient problem using information from the electronic health record (EHR).
Include a brief description of the patient problem that incorporates information needed to manage the specific problem. Describe what information is required for the patient to manage the condition and how the database and health care provider can be incorporated into the approach for better health outcomes.
Describe each entity (data or attribute) that will be pulled from the EHR as either structured or unstructured and provide an operational definition for each. Structured data is more easily searchable and specifically defined. For example, structured data can be placed in a drop-down menu like hair color: brown, black, grey, salt and pepper, blonde, platinum, etc. Unstructured data is data that would be included in a nurse’s notes. An operational definition is how a researcher or informatics specialist decides to measure a variable. For example, when the nurses enter height into the EHR, do they enter height as measured in inches or centimeters or in feet and inches?
Provide a complete description of data entities (the objects for which you seek information, e.g., patients) and their relationships to the attributes collected for each entity (data collected for each entity, e.g., gender, birthdate, first name, last name) that apply to the hypothetical database. You can use a concept map similar to the “Database Concept Map” resource, to help you describe the relationships between each entity and its attributes.

DNP 805 Week 4 Assignment EHR Database and Data Management

Attachments

Portfolio Practice Hours:

It may be possible to earn portfolio practice hours for this case report. Enter the following after the references section of your paper:

Practice Hours Completion Statement DNP-805

I, (INSERT NAME), verify that I have completed (NUMBER OF) clock hours in association with the goals and objectives for this assignment. I have also tracked said practice hours in the Typhon Student Tracking System for verification purposes and will be sure that all approvals are in place from my faculty and practice mentor.

Also Check Out:

Rubric Criteria

Total100 points

Criterion	1. Unsatisfactory	2. Less Than Satisfactory	3. Satisfactory	4. Good	5. Excellent
Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use) Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)	0 points Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is used.	4 points Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) or word choice are present. Sentence structure is correct but not varied.	4.4 points Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct and varied sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are employed.	4.6 points Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. The writer uses a variety of effective sentence structures and figures of speech.	5 points Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.
Patient Problem Description Incorporates Information Needed to Manage the Problem Patient Problem Description Incorporates Information Needed to Manage the Problem	0 points Patient problem description that incorporates information needed to manage the problem is not present.	12 points Patient problem description that incorporates information needed to manage the problem is marginal or incomplete.	13.2 points Patient problem description that incorporates information needed to manage the problem is present but at a perfunctory level.	13.8 points Patient problem description that incorporates information needed to manage the problem is present in full. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources.	15 points Patient problem description that incorporates information needed to manage the problem is present in full. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Discussion is insightful and forward-thinking. Information presented is from current scholarly sources.
Documentation of Sources Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style)	0 points Sources are not documented.	4 points Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.	4.4 points Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present.	4.6 points Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct.	5 points Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error.
Thesis Development and Purpose Thesis Development and Purpose	0 points Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.	5.6 points Thesis is insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not clear.	6.16 points Thesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose.	6.44 points Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper. Thesis is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose.	7 points Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.
Identification of EHR-Supplied Data as Structured or Unstructured With Explanation Identification of EHR-Supplied Data as Structured or Unstructured With Explanation	0 points Identification of EHR-supplied data as structured or unstructured with an explanation is not present.	8 points Identification of EHR-supplied data as structured or unstructured is present with or without an explanation but is marginal or incomplete.	8.8 points Identification of EHR-supplied data as structured or unstructured is present with an explanation but is rendered at a perfunctory level.	9.2 points Identification of EHR-supplied data as structured or unstructured is present with a thorough explanation. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources.	10 points Identification of EHR-supplied data as structured or unstructured is present with a thorough explanation. Discussion is insightful and forward-thinking. Information presented is from current scholarly sources.
Argument Logic and Construction Argument Logic and Construction	0 points Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources.	6.4 points Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility.	7.04 points 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.	7.36 points Argument shows logical progressions. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative.	8 points Clear and convincing argument that presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative.
Paper Format (Use of appropriate style for the major and assignment) Paper Format (Use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)	0 points Template is not used appropriately or documentation format is rarely followed correctly.	4 points Template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken; lack of control with formatting is apparent.	4.4 points Template is used, and formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present.	4.6 points Template is fully used; There are virtually no errors in formatting style.	5 points All format elements are correct.
Data Relationships That Apply to the Hypothetical Database Data Relationships That Apply to the Hypothetical Database	0 points Data relationships that apply to the hypothetical database are not described.	12 points Data relationships that apply to the hypothetical database are described, but description is marginal or incomplete.	13.2 points Data relationships that apply to the hypothetical database are described, but description is rendered at a perfunctory level.	13.8 points Data relationships that apply to the hypothetical database are not described in full. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources.	15 points Data relationships that apply to the hypothetical database are not described in full. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Discussion is insightful and forward-thinking. Information presented is from current scholarly sources.
Structured and Unstructured Data From the EHR That Are Needed to Organize a Hypothetical Database Structured and Unstructured Data From the EHR That Are Needed to Organize a Hypothetical Database	0 points Structured and unstructured data from the EHR needed to organize a hypothetical database are not described.	8 points Structured and unstructured data from the EHR needed to organize a hypothetical database are described, but description is marginal or incomplete.	8.8 points Structured and unstructured data from the EHR needed to organize a hypothetical database are described, but description is rendered at a perfunctory level.	9.2 points Structured and unstructured data from the EHR needed to organize a hypothetical database are described in full. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources.	10 points Structured and unstructured data from the EHR needed to organize a hypothetical database are described in full. A discussion of the rationale behind the design development is convincing and defines specific elements. Discussion is insightful and forward-thinking. Information presented is from current scholarly sources.
Identification of Data Needed to Manage the Patient Problem Using Information From the Electronic He Identification of Data Needed to Manage the Patient Problem Using Information From the Electronic Health Record (EHR)	0 points Identification of data needed to manage the patient problem using information from the electronic health record (EHR) is not present.	8 points Identification of data needed to manage the patient problem using information from the electronic health record (EHR) is marginal or incomplete.	8.8 points Identification of data needed to manage the patient problem using information from the electronic health record (EHR) is present but at a perfunctory level.	9.2 points Identification of data needed to manage the patient problem using information from the electronic health record (EHR) is present in full. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources.	10 points Identification of data needed to manage the patient problem using information from the electronic health record (EHR) is present in full. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Discussion is insightful and forward-thinking. Information presented is from current scholarly sources.
Selection of Clinically-Based Patient Problem Selection of Clinically-Based Patient Problem	0 points Patient problem selection does not provide clear benefit potential by using a database management approach.	8 points Patient problem selection indicates some benefit potential by using a database management approach, but the connection is marginal or incomplete.	8.8 points Patient problem selection indicates clear benefit potential by using a database management approach, but the connection is perfunctory.	9.2 points Patient problem selection indicates clear benefit potential by using a database management approach. Discussion is convincing. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources.	10 points Patient problem selection indicates clear benefit potential by using a database management approach. Discussion is insightful and forward-thinking. Information presented is from current scholarly sources.

Criterion

1. Unsatisfactory

2. Less Than Satisfactory

3. Satisfactory

4. Good

5. Excellent

Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)

0 points

Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is used.

4 points

Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) or word choice are present. Sentence structure is correct but not varied.

4.4 points

Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct and varied sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are employed.

4.6 points

Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. The writer uses a variety of effective sentence structures and figures of speech.

5 points

Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.

Patient Problem Description Incorporates Information Needed to Manage the Problem

0 points

Patient problem description that incorporates information needed to manage the problem is not present.

12 points

Patient problem description that incorporates information needed to manage the problem is marginal or incomplete.

13.2 points

Patient problem description that incorporates information needed to manage the problem is present but at a perfunctory level.

13.8 points

Patient problem description that incorporates information needed to manage the problem is present in full. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources.

15 points

Patient problem description that incorporates information needed to manage the problem is present in full. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Discussion is insightful and forward-thinking. Information presented is from current scholarly sources.

Documentation of Sources

Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style)

0 points

Sources are not documented.

4 points

Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.

4.4 points

Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present.

4.6 points

Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct.

5 points

Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error.

Thesis Development and Purpose

0 points

Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.

5.6 points

Thesis is insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not clear.

6.16 points

Thesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose.

6.44 points

Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper. Thesis is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose.

7 points

Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.

Identification of EHR-Supplied Data as Structured or Unstructured With Explanation

0 points

Identification of EHR-supplied data as structured or unstructured with an explanation is not present.

8 points

Identification of EHR-supplied data as structured or unstructured is present with or without an explanation but is marginal or incomplete.

8.8 points

Identification of EHR-supplied data as structured or unstructured is present with an explanation but is rendered at a perfunctory level.

9.2 points

Identification of EHR-supplied data as structured or unstructured is present with a thorough explanation. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources.

10 points

Identification of EHR-supplied data as structured or unstructured is present with a thorough explanation. Discussion is insightful and forward-thinking. Information presented is from current scholarly sources.

Argument Logic and Construction

0 points

Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources.

6.4 points

Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility.

7.04 points

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.

7.36 points

Argument shows logical progressions. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative.

8 points

Clear and convincing argument that presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative.

Paper Format (Use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)

0 points

Template is not used appropriately or documentation format is rarely followed correctly.

4 points

Template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken; lack of control with formatting is apparent.

4.4 points

Template is used, and formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present.

4.6 points

Template is fully used; There are virtually no errors in formatting style.

5 points

All format elements are correct.

Data Relationships That Apply to the Hypothetical Database

0 points

Data relationships that apply to the hypothetical database are not described.

12 points

Data relationships that apply to the hypothetical database are described, but description is marginal or incomplete.

13.2 points

Data relationships that apply to the hypothetical database are described, but description is rendered at a perfunctory level.

13.8 points

Data relationships that apply to the hypothetical database are not described in full. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources.

15 points

Data relationships that apply to the hypothetical database are not described in full. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Discussion is insightful and forward-thinking. Information presented is from current scholarly sources.

Structured and Unstructured Data From the EHR That Are Needed to Organize a Hypothetical Database

0 points

Structured and unstructured data from the EHR needed to organize a hypothetical database are not described.

8 points

Structured and unstructured data from the EHR needed to organize a hypothetical database are described, but description is marginal or incomplete.

8.8 points

Structured and unstructured data from the EHR needed to organize a hypothetical database are described, but description is rendered at a perfunctory level.

9.2 points

Structured and unstructured data from the EHR needed to organize a hypothetical database are described in full. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources.

10 points

Structured and unstructured data from the EHR needed to organize a hypothetical database are described in full. A discussion of the rationale behind the design development is convincing and defines specific elements. Discussion is insightful and forward-thinking. Information presented is from current scholarly sources.

Identification of Data Needed to Manage the Patient Problem Using Information From the Electronic He

Identification of Data Needed to Manage the Patient Problem Using Information From the Electronic Health Record (EHR)

0 points

Identification of data needed to manage the patient problem using information from the electronic health record (EHR) is not present.

8 points

Identification of data needed to manage the patient problem using information from the electronic health record (EHR) is marginal or incomplete.

8.8 points

Identification of data needed to manage the patient problem using information from the electronic health record (EHR) is present but at a perfunctory level.

9.2 points

Identification of data needed to manage the patient problem using information from the electronic health record (EHR) is present in full. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources.

10 points

Identification of data needed to manage the patient problem using information from the electronic health record (EHR) is present in full. Discussion is convincing and defines specific elements. Discussion is insightful and forward-thinking. Information presented is from current scholarly sources.

Selection of Clinically-Based Patient Problem

0 points

Patient problem selection does not provide clear benefit potential by using a database management approach.

8 points

Patient problem selection indicates some benefit potential by using a database management approach, but the connection is marginal or incomplete.

8.8 points

Patient problem selection indicates clear benefit potential by using a database management approach, but the connection is perfunctory.

9.2 points

Patient problem selection indicates clear benefit potential by using a database management approach. Discussion is convincing. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources.

10 points

Patient problem selection indicates clear benefit potential by using a database management approach. Discussion is insightful and forward-thinking. Information presented is from current scholarly sources.

Name: Assignment Rubric

	Excellent	Good	Fair	Poor
Summarize your interpretation of the frequency data provided in the output for respondent’s age, highest school grade completed, and family income from prior month.	32 (32%) – 35 (35%) The response accurately and clearly explains, in detail, a summary of the frequency distributions for the variables presented. The response accurately and clearly explains, in detail, the number of times the value occurs in the data. The response accurately and clearly explains, in detail, the appearance of the data, the range of data values, and an explanation of extreme values in describing intervals that sufficiently provides an analysis that fully supports the categorization of each variable value. The response includes relevant, specific, and appropriate examples that fully support the explanations provided for each of the areas described.	28 (28%) – 31 (31%) The response accurately summarizes the frequency distributions for the variables presented. The response accurately explains the number of times the value occurs in the data. The response accurately explains the appearance of the data, the range of data values, and explains extreme values in describing intervals that provides an analysis which supports the categorization of each variable value. The response includes relevant, specific, and accurate examples that support the explanations provided for each of the areas described.	25 (25%) – 27 (27%) The response inaccurately or vaguely summarizes the frequency distributions for the variables presented. The response inaccurately or vaguely explains the number of times the value occurs in the data. The response inaccurately or vaguely explains the appearance of the data, the range of data values, and inaccurately or vaguely explains extreme values. An analysis that may support the categorization of each variable value is inaccurate or vague. The response includes inaccurate and irrelevant examples that may support the explanations provided for each of the areas described.	0 (0%) – 24 (24%) The response inaccurately and vaguely summarizes the frequency distributions for the variables presented, or it is missing. The response inaccurately and vaguely explains the number of times the value occurs in the data, or it is missing. The response inaccurately and vaguely explains the appearance of the data, the range of data values, and an explanation of extreme values, or it is missing. An analysis that does not support the categorization of each variable values is provided, or it is missing. The response includes inaccurate and vague examples that do not support the explanations provided for each of the areas described, or it is missing.
Summarize your interpretation of the descriptive statistics provided in the output for respondent’s age, highest school grade completed, race and ethnicity, currently employed, and family income from prior month.	45 (45%) – 50 (50%) The response accurately and clearly summarizes in detail the interpretation of the descriptive statistics provided. The response accurately and clearly evaluates in detail each of the variables presented, including an accurate and complete description of the sample size, the mean, the median, standard deviation, and the size and spread of the data.	40 (40%) – 44 (44%) The response accurately summarizes the interpretation of the descriptive statistics provided. The response accurately explains evaluates each of the variables presented, including an accurate description of the sample size, the mean, the median, standard deviation, and the size and spread of the data.	35 (35%) – 39 (39%) The response inaccurately or vaguely summarizes the interpretation of the descriptive statistics provided. The response inaccurately or vaguely evaluates each of the variables presented, including an inaccurate or vague description of the sample size, the mean, the median, the standard deviation, and the size and spread of the data.	0 (0%) – 34 (34%) The response inaccurately and vaguely summarizes the interpretation of the descriptive statistics provided, or it is missing. The response inaccurately and vaguely evaluates each of the variables presented, including an inaccurate and vague description of the sample size, the mean, the median, the standard deviation, and the size and spread of the data, or it is missing.
Written Expression and Formatting – Paragraph Development and Organization: Paragraphs make clear points that support well-developed ideas, flow logically, and demonstrate continuity of ideas. Sentences are carefully focused—neither long and rambling nor short and lacking substance. A clear and comprehensive purpose statement and introduction is provided which delineates all required criteria.	5 (5%) – 5 (5%) Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity. A clear and comprehensive purpose statement, introduction, and conclusion is provided which delineates all required criteria.	4 (4%) – 4 (4%) Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 80% of the time. Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment is stated, yet is brief and not descriptive.	3 (3%) – 3 (3%) Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 60%–79% of the time. Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment is vague or off topic.	0 (0%) – 2 (2%) Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity < 60% of the time. No purpose statement, introduction, or conclusion was provided.
Written Expression and Formatting – English writing standards: Correct grammar, mechanics, and proper punctuation	5 (5%) – 5 (5%) Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors.	4 (4%) – 4 (4%) Contains a few (1 or 2) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors.	3 (3%) – 3 (3%) Contains several (3 or 4) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors.	0 (0%) – 2 (2%) Contains many (≥ 5) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the reader’s understanding.
Written Expression and Formatting – The paper follows correct APA format for title page, headings, font, spacing, margins, indentations, page numbers, parenthetical/in-text citations, and reference list.	5 (5%) – 5 (5%) Uses correct APA format with no errors.	4 (4%) – 4 (4%) Contains a few (1 or 2) APA format errors.	3 (3%) – 3 (3%) Contains several (3 or 4) APA format errors.	0 (0%) – 2 (2%) Contains many (≥ 5) APA format errors.
Total Points: 100

Excellent

Good

Fair

Poor

Summarize your interpretation of the frequency data provided in the output for respondent’s age, highest school grade completed, and family income from prior month.

32 (32%) – 35 (35%)

The response accurately and clearly explains, in detail, a summary of the frequency distributions for the variables presented.

The response accurately and clearly explains, in detail, the number of times the value occurs in the data.

The response accurately and clearly explains, in detail, the appearance of the data, the range of data values, and an explanation of extreme values in describing intervals that sufficiently provides an analysis that fully supports the categorization of each variable value.

The response includes relevant, specific, and appropriate examples that fully support the explanations provided for each of the areas described.

28 (28%) – 31 (31%)

The response accurately summarizes the frequency distributions for the variables presented.

The response accurately explains the number of times the value occurs in the data.

The response accurately explains the appearance of the data, the range of data values, and explains extreme values in describing intervals that provides an analysis which supports the categorization of each variable value.

The response includes relevant, specific, and accurate examples that support the explanations provided for each of the areas described.

25 (25%) – 27 (27%)

The response inaccurately or vaguely summarizes the frequency distributions for the variables presented.

The response inaccurately or vaguely explains the number of times the value occurs in the data.

The response inaccurately or vaguely explains the appearance of the data, the range of data values, and inaccurately or vaguely explains extreme values.

An analysis that may support the categorization of each variable value is inaccurate or vague.

The response includes inaccurate and irrelevant examples that may support the explanations provided for each of the areas described.

0 (0%) – 24 (24%)

The response inaccurately and vaguely summarizes the frequency distributions for the variables presented, or it is missing.

The response inaccurately and vaguely explains the number of times the value occurs in the data, or it is missing.

The response inaccurately and vaguely explains the appearance of the data, the range of data values, and an explanation of extreme values, or it is missing.

An analysis that does not support the categorization of each variable values is provided, or it is missing.

The response includes inaccurate and vague examples that do not support the explanations provided for each of the areas described, or it is missing.

Summarize your interpretation of the descriptive statistics provided in the output for respondent’s age, highest school grade completed, race and ethnicity, currently employed, and family income from prior month.

45 (45%) – 50 (50%)

The response accurately and clearly summarizes in detail the interpretation of the descriptive statistics provided.

The response accurately and clearly evaluates in detail each of the variables presented, including an accurate and complete description of the sample size, the mean, the median, standard deviation, and the size and spread of the data.

40 (40%) – 44 (44%)

The response accurately summarizes the interpretation of the descriptive statistics provided.

The response accurately explains evaluates each of the variables presented, including an accurate description of the sample size, the mean, the median, standard deviation, and the size and spread of the data.

35 (35%) – 39 (39%)

The response inaccurately or vaguely summarizes the interpretation of the descriptive statistics provided.

The response inaccurately or vaguely evaluates each of the variables presented, including an inaccurate or vague description of the sample size, the mean, the median, the standard deviation, and the size and spread of the data.

0 (0%) – 34 (34%)

The response inaccurately and vaguely summarizes the interpretation of the descriptive statistics provided, or it is missing.

The response inaccurately and vaguely evaluates each of the variables presented, including an inaccurate and vague description of the sample size, the mean, the median, the standard deviation, and the size and spread of the data, or it is missing.

Written Expression and Formatting – Paragraph Development and Organization:
Paragraphs make clear points that support well-developed ideas, flow logically, and demonstrate continuity of ideas. Sentences are carefully focused—neither long and rambling nor short and lacking substance. A clear and comprehensive purpose statement and introduction is provided which delineates all required criteria.

5 (5%) – 5 (5%)

Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity.

A clear and comprehensive purpose statement, introduction, and conclusion is provided which delineates all required criteria.

4 (4%) – 4 (4%)

Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 80% of the time.

Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment is stated, yet is brief and not descriptive.

3 (3%) – 3 (3%)

Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 60%–79% of the time.

Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment is vague or off topic.

0 (0%) – 2 (2%)

Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity < 60% of the time.

No purpose statement, introduction, or conclusion was provided.

Written Expression and Formatting – English writing standards:
Correct grammar, mechanics, and proper punctuation

5 (5%) – 5 (5%)

Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors.

4 (4%) – 4 (4%)

Contains a few (1 or 2) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors.

3 (3%) – 3 (3%)

Contains several (3 or 4) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors.

0 (0%) – 2 (2%)

Contains many (≥ 5) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the reader’s understanding.

Written Expression and Formatting – The paper follows correct APA format for title page, headings, font, spacing, margins, indentations, page numbers, parenthetical/in-text citations, and reference list.

5 (5%) – 5 (5%)

Uses correct APA format with no errors.

4 (4%) – 4 (4%)

Contains a few (1 or 2) APA format errors.

3 (3%) – 3 (3%)

Contains several (3 or 4) APA format errors.

0 (0%) – 2 (2%)

Contains many (≥ 5) APA format errors.

Total Points: 100

Name: Assignment Rubric

DNP 805 Week 4 Assignment EHR Database and Data Management

Rubric Criteria

Calculate the price of your order

Essay Writing Service