Source: CDC MMWR, https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/index.htmlLinks to an external site.
Introduction to Assignment:
You were asked to sign up for a free subscription to Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR) at the beginning of the term. If you have not done this, please click on this link: http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/mmwrsubscribe.htmlLinks to an external site.. Please review several MMWRs to glean an understanding of what it entails. For this assignment, you will be required to create your own MMWR on a topic and population group you are interested in knowing more about. Although the rubric will remain the same, you will have two options to choose from:
• A 10-15 minute video MMWR, or
• A traditional written MMWR manuscript
Assignment Development Tips:
General Instructions:
Both options require you to upload a copy of your reference list. Your references may include research articles, peer-reviewed journal articles, databases, government websites, health websites, course resources, and other appropriate epidemiological sources as needed. There may be an MMRW available on your topic. However, your MMRW allows you to create materials specifically for your chosen populations. Please note: There may be differences in how certain populations receive and understand information.
Assignment Requirements:
The following submission types are accepted: 1) text entry, 2) file upload, 3) website URL and 4) media uploads
Students utilizing MAC products have reported issues with using Kaltura. If you have difficulty uploading your video via Kaltura, consider uploading it to YouTube first. Here is a tip sheet: How to Upload a YouTube Video to KalturaLinks to an external site.
Former Student Exemplar:
DNP 801 Student Exemplar – MMWR Assignment.pdf
Actions
Rubric
MMRW Assignment
MMRW Assignment
Criteria Ratings Pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSummary
• What is known about the topic currently?
• What is a novel addition to the current topic based on your population?
• What is the implication to public health? 15 to >13.0 pts
Expert
The criteria are addressed (verbal or written) at an Expert level. It addresses all required elements. The summary is complete, accurate, and discussed or written concisely. 13 to >10.0 pts
Well Done
The criteria are addressed (verbal or written) at the Well Done level, but one to two key summary elements are either missing or incomplete. 10 to >6.0 pts
Good
The criteria are addressed (verbal or written) at a Good level. However, many key elements are missing, or the information shared lacks depth. 6 to >0 pts
Poor
The criteria are addressed (verbal or written) at a Good level. However, many key elements are missing, or the information shared lacks depth.
15 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeBackground
• Provide a succinct literature review of the topic pertaining to your chosen population.
• Discuss any surveillance and monitoring strategies. If there are none, please indicate and propose some of your own.
• How is the concern identified/diagnosed? Is there any cultural differentiation in the diagnosis? 15 to >13.0 pts
Expert
The criteria are addressed (verbal or written) at an Expert level. It addresses all required elements. The ROL sufficiently provides a background to the significance of the health concern. 13 to >10.0 pts
Well Done
The criteria are addressed (verbal or written) at the Well Done level. It discusses the required criteria, but there may be organizational issues with the ROL and/or other background criteria. 10 to >6.0 pts
Good
The criteria are addressed (verbal or written) at a Good level. One or more of the criteria is missing and/or underdeveloped. The ROL or sources used are insufficient. 6 to >0 pts
Poor
The criteria are addressed (verbal or written) at a Poor level. Most of the criteria are missing. The sources may be of poor quality, and the ROL is not supportive of the population and health concerns.
15 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeDiscussion
• Provide an interpretation of your review of literature findings
• Discuss the short-term and long-term impact of the health concern on the chosen population
• What has been the public health response from the chosen population? If there has been none, identify why. 15 to >13.0 pts
Expert
The criteria are addressed (verbal or written) at an Expert level. It discusses all required elements. The discussion infers the connection between the ROL and the impact on the chosen population. The health response is concisely and accurately discussed. 13 to >10.0 pts
Well Done
The criteria are addressed (verbal or written) at the Well Done level. It discusses the required criteria, but there may be mild structural issues tieing the ROL with the impact on the chosen population. 10 to >6.0 pts
Good
The criteria are addressed (verbal or written) at a Good level. One or more of the criteria is missing and/or underdeveloped. There is a weak connection between the chosen population’s impact and the literature. 6 to >0 pts
Poor
The criteria are addressed (verbal or written) at the Poor level. Most of the criteria are missing or underdeveloped. There is no connection between the chosen population and literature. There is limited to no dialogue on the health response.
15 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeStrategies
• Share the primary, secondary, and tertiary prevention strategies individualized to your population.
• List strategies the chosen population can implement to lessen health concerns (health promotion). 15 to >13.0 pts
Expert
The criteria are addressed (verbal or written) at an Expert level. Several health prevention and promotion strategies are listed and are best practices. 13 to >10.0 pts
Well Done
The criteria are addressed (verbal or written) at the Well Done level. A limited number of prevention and health promotion strategies are listed to meet the health and cultural needs of the chosen population. The strategies may or may not be best practices. 10 to >6.0 pts
Good
The criteria are addressed (verbal or written) at a Good level. The prevention and health promotion strategies are either underdeveloped or do not consider the cultural needs of the chosen population 6 to >0 pts
Poor
The criteria are addressed (verbal or written) at a Good level. The prevention and health promotion strategies are either underdeveloped or do not consider the cultural needs of the chosen population
15 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeDNP-Prepared Nurse Role
• Discuss the role of the DNP-prepared nurse in decreasing the prevalence and incidence of the disease/health concern presented by MMRW, including the resources available and the resources needed.
• What ethical considerations must a DNP-prepared nurse acknowledge associated with the health concern? With the chosen population? 15 to >13.0 pts
Expert
The criteria are addressed (verbal or written) at the Expert level. It expertly discusses the criteria listed for DNP-Prepared Nurse. All required elements are presented, and an informed opinion is established with appropriate literature. 13 to >10.0 pts
Well Done
The criteria are addressed (verbal or written) at the Well Done level. The criteria listed for the DNP-Prepared nurse are addressed but not thoroughly. Supportive literature is present. 10 to >6.0 pts
Good
The criteria are addressed (verbal or written) at a Good level. One of the criteria is missing or lack of depth to the information provided. Supporting literature is missing or not contextually supportive. 6 to >0 pts
Poor
The criteria are addressed (verbal or written) at the Poor level. There may be a discussion, but it may lack depth. One or more of the criteria is missing. There is no supporting literature or ineffectively used sources.
15 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeOrganization 10 to >8.0 pts
Expert
An excellent organization style with clear focus and transition between paragraphs; logical order to presentation of information; paragraphs are well-organized; easy to understand and make sense. 8 to >5.0 pts
Well Done
A good organizational style with the logical transition between paragraphs; overall or paragraph organization could be slightly improved. 5 to >2.0 pts
Good
An adequate organizational style, although the flow is somewhat choppy and may occasionally wander. Paper is rather confusing due to the organization of paper or paragraphs. 2 to >0 pts
Poor
Incoherent structure: logic is unclear; paragraph transition is weak; difficult to understand; must re-read parts to figure out what is being said.
10 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeOral Delivery or Writing Mechanics 10 to >8.0 pts
Expert
Skillful use of language. Varied and accurate vocabulary. Well-developed sentence structure with minimal errors in punctuation, spelling, or grammar; Appropriate margins and font. Correct application of research style format and use of active professional voice. Very well-written paper. 8 to >5.0 pts
Well Done
Appropriate use of language with a few errors in grammar, sentence structure, punctuation, APA; fairly accurate interpretation of assignment guidelines, with a few minor errors; readability of paper only slightly affected by mistakes. 5 to >2.0 pts
Good
Some problems with sentence structure, grammar, punctuation, APA, and/or spelling. It may have several run-on sentences or comma splices. Some errors in citation style. The format does not fully comply with assignment guidelines; somewhat difficult to read due to mistakes. 2 to >0 pts
Poor
Many difficulties in sentence structure, grammar, citation style, punctuation, spelling, APA, and/or misused words; proper format not used consistently; many errors in citation style very difficult to understand. Not written at the graduate level.
10 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeReferences 5 to >4.0 pts
Expert
Uses sources effectively and documents sources accurately with minimal errors. Limited use of direct quotes (no more than 2 or 3). Meets reference requirements for the assignment. The reference list is in the correct format. 4 to >3.0 pts
Good
Appropriate sources and documentation; may have minimal errors with too few or too many in-text citations; missing no more than one reference as required for the assignment. 3 to >2.0 pts
Good
Some quotes are not integrated smoothly into the text. Several errors with in-text citations or reference list. Omitted in-text citations infrequently. Missing two required references. Overuse of direct quotes. 2 to >0 pts
Poor
Quotes are not well integrated into the narrative or are significantly overused. Paraphrasing is too close to the original work. (Minimal errors only; more significant errors will be considered plagiarism)
5 pts
Total Points: 100
PreviousNext
• What is known about the topic currently?
• What is a novel addition to the current topic based on your population?
• What is the implication to public health?
• Provide a succinct literature review of the topic pertaining to your chosen population.
• Discuss any surveillance and monitoring strategies. If there are none, please indicate and propose some of your own.
• How is the concern identified/diagnosed? Is there any cultural differentiation in the diagnosis?
• Provide an interpretation of your review of literature findings
• Discuss the short-term and long-term impact of the health concern on the chosen population
• What has been the public health response from the chosen population? If there has been none, identify why.
• Share the primary, secondary, and tertiary prevention strategies individualized to your population.
• List strategies the chosen population can implement to lessen health concerns (health promotion).
• Discuss the role of the DNP-prepared nurse in decreasing the prevalence and incidence of the disease/health concern presented by MMRW, including the resources available and the resources needed.
• What ethical considerations must a DNP-prepared nurse acknowledge associated with the health concern? With the chosen population?
