HCI 600 Grand Canyon University Data Collection Report

Description

Currently, the hospital in which you work has implemented a new clinical practice that will reduce the amount of radiation to a child’s brain. The child enters the emergency room with a head injury and a Glasgow Coma Score of 14 or more, and the child is not vomiting. It has been asked that the physician not order a CT scan. To ensure that all physicians are in compliance with the practice, a report will need to be generated for the chief marketing officers at each facility. To generate the report, you are asked to create a data collection plan. Include the following criteria into your plan:
Consider health informatics regulations and standards regarding the collection of personal data. Identify what data elements would be needed to pull the report from the electronic health record.
Discuss theories that could be utilized when collecting data.

Discuss the essential questions that you would ask in order to ensure that you are collecting the correct data. (Do they want the report to be on ongoing? Do they want just a single report?)
Explain how the data collected will improve or influence the situation.
Discuss how to protect the patient’s identity when doing reporting.

 

2 attachmentsSlide 1 of 2attachment_1attachment_1attachment_2attachment_2

Unformatted Attachment Preview

Course Code
HIM-615
Class Code
HIM-615-O500
Criteria
Content
Percentage
70.0%
Comparison of State HIEs
10.0%
Coordination of Care
20.0%
Public Health Initiatives
20.0%
Evidence-Based Research
20.0%
Organization and Effectiveness
20.0%
Thesis Development and Purpose
7.0%
Argument Logic and Construction
8.0%
Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling,
punctuation, grammar, language use)
5.0%
Format
10.0%
Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the
major and assignment)
5.0%
Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes,
references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to
assignment and style)
5.0%
Total Weightage
100%
Assignment Title
Health Information Exchange Analysis
Unsatisfactory (0.00%)
A comparison of three state HIEs is not included.
A description of HIE and its ability to share data and improve
the coordination of care is not included.
A description of HIE and its ability to share data and improve
the public health initiatives is not included.
A description of HIE and its ability to share data and improve
evidence-based research is not included.
Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing
claim.
Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The
conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is
incoherent and uses noncredible sources.
Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede
communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or
sentence construction is used.
Template is not used appropriately or documentation format
is rarely followed correctly.
Sources are not documented.
Total Points
135.0
Less than Satisfactory (74.00%)
A comparison of three state HIEs is incomplete or incorrect.
A description of HIE and its ability to share data and improve
the coordination of care is incomplete or incorrect.
A description of HIE and its ability to share data and improve
the public health initiatives is incomplete or incorrect.
A description of HIE and its ability to share data and improve
evidence-based research is incomplete or incorrect.
Thesis is insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not
clear.
Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks
consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some
sources have questionable credibility.
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.
Appropriate template is used, but some elements are missing
or mistaken. A lack of control with formatting is apparent.
Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as
appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous
formatting errors.
Satisfactory (79.00%)
A comparison of three state HIEs is included but lack details.
A description of HIE and its ability to share data and improve
the coordination of care is included but lack details.
A description of HIE and its ability to share data and improve
the public health initiatives is included but lack details.
A description of HIE and its ability to share data and improve
evidence-based research is included but lack details.
Thesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose.
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.
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.
Appropriate template is used. Formatting is correct, although
some minor errors may be present.
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and
style, although some formatting errors may be present.
Good (87.00%)
A comparison of three state HIEs is complete and includes
supporting detail.
A description of HIE and its ability to share data and improve
the coordination of care is complete and includes supporting
detail.
A description of HIE and its ability to share data and improve
the public health initiatives is complete and includes
supporting detail.
A description of HIE and its ability to share data and improve
evidence-based research is complete and includes supporting
detail.
Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper.
Thesis is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and
appropriate to the purpose.
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.
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.
Appropriate template is fully used. There are virtually no
errors in formatting style.
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and
style, and format is mostly correct.
Excellent (100.00%)
A comparison of three state HIEs is extremely thorough and
includes substantial detail.
A description of HIE and its ability to share data and improve
the coordination of care is extremely thorough and includes
substantial detail.
A description of HIE and its ability to share data and improve
the public health initiatives is extremely thorough and
includes substantial detail.
A description of HIE and its ability to share data and improve
evidence-based research is extremely thorough and includes
substantial detail.
Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the
paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper
clear.
Clear and convincing argument that presents a persuasive
claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are
authoritative.
Comments
Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic
English.
All format elements are correct.
Sources are completely and correctly documented, as
appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of
error.
Points Earned
Course Code
HCI-600
Class Code
HCI-600-O500
Criteria
Content
Percentage
70.0%
Data Elements
20.0%
Data Collection Theories
10.0%
Essential Questions
20.0%
Influence of Data Collected
10.0%
Patient Identify Protection
10.0%
Organization and Effectiveness
20.0%
Thesis Development and Purpose
7.0%
Argument Logic and Construction
8.0%
Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling,
punctuation, grammar, language use)
5.0%
Format
10.0%
Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the
major and assignment)
5.0%
Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes,
references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to
assignment and style)
5.0%
Total Weightage
100%
Assignment Title
Data Collection Plan
1: Unsatisfactory (0.00%)
A description of data elements needed to pull the identified
report from the EHR is not included.
A discussion of theories utilized to collect data is not
included.
A discussion of essential questions that would be asked in
order to ensure the collection of correct data is not included.
An explanation of how the data collected will improve or
influence is not included.
A discussion of how the identity of the patient will be
protected is not included.
Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing
claim.
Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The
conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is
incoherent and uses noncredible sources.
Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede
communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or
sentence construction is used.
Template is not used appropriately or documentation format
is rarely followed correctly.
Sources are not documented.
Total Points
125.0
2: Less Than Satisfactory (74.00%)
A description of data elements needed to pull the identified
report from the EHR is incomplete or incorrect.
A discussion of theories utilized to collect data is incomplete
or incorrect.
A discussion of essential questions that would be asked in
order to ensure the collection of correct data is incomplete or
incorrect.
An explanation of how the data collected will improve or
influence is incomplete or incorrect.
A discussion of how the identity of the patient will be
protected is incomplete or incorrect.
Thesis is insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not
clear.
Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks
consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some
sources have questionable credibility.
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.
Appropriate template is used, but some elements are missing
or mistaken. A lack of control with formatting is apparent.
Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as
appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous
formatting errors.
3: Satisfactory (79.00%)
A description of data elements needed to pull the identified
report from the EHR is included but lacks supporting details.
A discussion of theories utilized to collect data is included but
lacks supporting details.
A discussion of essential questions that would be asked in
order to ensure the collection of correct data is included but
lacks supporting details.
An explanation of how the data collected will improve or
influence is included but lacks supporting details.
A discussion of how the identity of the patient will be
protected is included but lacks supporting details.
Thesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose.
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.
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.
Appropriate template is used. Formatting is correct, although
some minor errors may be present.
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and
style, although some formatting errors may be present.
4: Good (87.00%)
A description of data elements needed to pull the identified
report from the EHR is complete and includes supporting
details.
A discussion of theories utilized to collect data is complete
and includes supporting details.
A discussion of essential questions that would be asked in
order to ensure the collection of correct data is complete and
includes supporting details.
An explanation of how the data collected will improve or
influence is complete and includes supporting details.
A discussion of how the identity of the patient will be
protected is complete and includes supporting details.
Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper.
Thesis is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and
appropriate to the purpose.
Argument shows logical progressions. Techniques of
argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of
claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are
authoritative.
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.
Appropriate template is fully used. There are virtually no
errors in formatting style.
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and
style, and format is mostly correct.
5: Excellent (100.00%)
A description of data elements needed to pull the identified
report from the EHR is extremely thorough and includes
substantial supporting details.
A discussion of theories utilized to collect data is extremely
thorough and includes substantial supporting details.
A discussion of essential questions that would be asked in
order to ensure the collection of correct data is extremely
thorough and includes substantial supporting details.
An explanation of how the data collected will improve or
influence is extremely thorough and includes substantial
supporting details.
A discussion of how the identity of the patient will be
protected is extremely thorough and includes substantial
supporting details.
Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the
paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper
clear.
Comments
Clear and convincing argument that presents a persuasive
claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are
authoritative.
Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic
English.
All format elements are correct.
Sources are completely and correctly documented, as
appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of
error.
Points Earned

Purchase answer to see full
attachment

Explanation & Answer:
7 paragraphs

User generated content is uploaded by users for the purposes of learning and should be used following Studypool’s honor code & terms of service.

Reviews, comments, and love from our customers and community:

Article Writing

Keep doing what you do, I am really impressed by the work done.

Alexender

Researcher

PowerPoint Presentation

I am speechless…WoW! Thank you so much!

Stacy V.

Part-time student

Dissertation & Thesis

This was a very well-written paper. Great work fast.

M.H.H. Tony

Student

Annotated Bibliography

I love working with this company. You always go above and beyond and exceed my expectations every time.

Francisca N.

Student

Book Report / Review

I received my order wayyyyyyy sooner than I expected. Couldn’t ask for more.

Mary J.

Student

Essay (Any Type)

On time, perfect paper

Prof. Kate (Ph.D)

Student

Case Study

Awesome! Great papers, and early!

Kaylin Green

Student

Proofreading & Editing

Thank you Dr. Rebecca for editing my essays! She completed my task literally in 3 hours. For sure will work with her again, she is great and follows all instructions

Rebecca L.

Researcher

Critical Thinking / Review

Extremely thorough summary, understanding and examples found for social science readings, with edits made as needed and on time. Transparent

Arnold W.

Customer

Coursework

Perfect!

Joshua W.

Student

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes:

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>