Blog

Cybercrime

Cybercrime

Write an essay and your answer should be written using your own words. Do not ‘copy and paste’ from your textbook or an Internet source. Simply copying from the book word-for-word does not show me that you understand the concepts.   Ensure you cite your work and add reference(s) at the end of your journal.

 

topic: 

What are the major differences between public and private investigations?

Posted in Uncategorized

Patient’s Spiritual Needs: Case Analysis

Patient’s Spiritual Needs: Case Analysis

Assessment Description:

In addition to the topic resources, use the chart completed and questions answered in topic 3 about “Case Study: Healing and Autonomy” as the basis for the responses in this assignment.

Answer the following questions about a patient’s spiritual needs in light of the Christian worldview.

  1. In 200-250 words, respond to the following: Should the physician allow Mike to continue making decisions that seem to him to be irrational and harmful to James, or would that mean a =disrespect of a patient’s autonomy? Explain your rationale.
  2. In 400-500 words, respond to the following: How ought the Christian think about sickness and health? How should a Christian think about medical intervention? What should Mike as a Christian do? How should he reason about trusting God and treating James in relation to what is truly honoring the principles of beneficence and nonmaleficence in James’s care?
  3. In 200-250 words, respond to the following: How would a spiritual needs assessment help the physician assist Mike in determining the appropriate interventions for James and for his family or others involved in his care?

– Remember to support your responses with the topic resources.

– While APA style is not required for the body of this assignment, solid academic writing is expected (ex. an introduction that includes the aim/purpose of paper and a closing summary to wrap up key points mentioned)

– Documentation of sources should be presented using APA formatting guidelines.

– This assignment uses a rubric. 

Posted in Uncategorized

DB 9

DB 9

Given the difficulties in copying the best practices of others, and the presence of path dependency, why should we study comparative corporate governance?

Posted in Uncategorized

Cybercrime

Cybercrime

How is the “reasonable expectation of privacy” test applied to computers? What are your thoughts on the Carey-Winick approach? Is it beneficial or bad news? In your opinion, what is the best strategy for reviewing privileged information on computers and why? Give at least one example:

Posted in Uncategorized

Assignment 2

Assignment 2

Select a company. Go to their webpage and review their corporate social responsibility/sustainability/corporate citizenship report (this may be a pdf

document or digitally presented on the website). Following your review, describe the information disclosed? How did they measure their performance?

Was the report effective? What are your overall impressions of the report?

Try not to use the following companies: Wal-Mart, Apple, General Electric, or Southwest  Airlines. 

Posted in Uncategorized

Cybercrime

Cybercrime

Write a 1300-word Research paper, DOUBLE SPACED, 12-FONT TIMES NEW ROMAN paper with references and sources cited. The paper must discuss each step of the sections in detail. This project will be a minimum of five (5) pages for the entire paper, not five (5) pages for each step. Your cover sheet, abstract, and your source citing/references are NOT included in the five-page minimum. Your grade will depend upon the presentation of your analysis and research, the quality of the work presented – whether you give a detailed presentation or a vague overview, whether you addressed all parts of the question asked, and how you support your argument/discussion – as well as the citing of a variety of sources/use of references and whether you met the mandatory minimum page requirement. Please make sure to use AT LEAST 5 sources for your research. Please make sure you include your title and the page number in the header of each page.

 

Please note that APA Format requires an abstract a Cover/Title page along with a Reference page. 

 

TOPIC

The History of Cyber Crimes

Research the beginnings of Cyber Crimes and how they have changed the way crimes are committed and investigated. Then focus on a major cybercrime that has happened and how the criminal was caught.

Posted in Uncategorized

COMPREHENSIVE PSYCHIATRIC EVALUATION NOTE AND PATIENT CASE PRESENTATION

COMPREHENSIVE PSYCHIATRIC EVALUATION NOTE AND PATIENT CASE PRESENTATION

  •  
    • Subjective: What details did the patient provide regarding their chief complaint and symptomology to derive your differential diagnosis? What was the duration and severity of their symptoms? How are their symptoms impacting their functioning in life?
    • Objective: What observations did you make during the psychiatric assessment?
    • Assessment: Discuss the patient’s mental status examination results. What were your differential diagnoses? Provide a minimum of three possible diagnoses in order of highest to lowest priority and explain why you chose them. What was your primary diagnosis and why? Describe how your primary diagnosis aligns with DSM-5-TR diagnostic criteria and is supported by the patient’s symptoms.
    • Plan: Describe your treatment modality and your plan for psychotherapy. Explain the principles of psychotherapy that underline your chosen treatment plan to support your rationale for the chosen psychotherapy framework. What were your follow-up plan and parameters? What referrals would you make or recommend as a result of this psychotherapy session?
    • Reflection notes: What would you do differently in a similar patient evaluation? Reflect on one social determinant of health according to the HealthyPeople 2030 (you will need to research) as applied to this case in the realm of psychiatry and mental health. As a future advanced provider, what are one health promotion activity and one patient education consideration for this patient for improving health disparities and inequities in the realm of psychiatry and mental health? Demonstrate your critical thinking.

BY DAY 7

Submit your Video and Comprehensive Psychiatric Evaluation Note Assignment. You must submit two files for the evaluation note, including a Word document and completed assignment document signed by your Preceptor.

SUBMISSION INFORMATION

Before submitting your final assignment, you can check your draft for authenticity. To check your draft, access the Turnitin Drafts from the Start Here area. 

  1. To submit your completed assignment, save your Assignment as WK7Assgn2+last name+first initial.
  2. Then, click on Start Assignment near the top of the page.
  3. Next, click on Upload File and select Submit Assignment for review.

Rubric

PRAC_6645_Week7_Assignment2_Rubric

 

Criteria Ratings Pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomePhoto ID display and professional attire

5 to >0.0 pts

Excellent

Photo ID is displayed. The student is dressed professionally.

 

0 pts

Fair

 

0 pts

Good

 

0 pts

Poor

Photo ID is not displayed. Student must remedy this before grade is posted. The student is not dressed professionally.

 

5 pts
 
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeTime

5 to >3.0 pts

Excellent

The video does not exceed the 8-minute time limit.

 

3 to >0.0 pts

Good

The video exceeds the 8-minute time limit. (Note: Information presented after 8 minutes will not be evaluated for grade inclusion.)

 

0 pts

Fair

 

0 pts

Poor

 

5 pts
 
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeDiscuss Subjective data:• Chief complaint• History of present illness (HPI)• Medications• Psychotherapy or previous psychiatric diagnosis• Pertinent histories and/or ROS

10 to >8.0 pts

Excellent

The video accurately and concisely presents the patient’s subjective complaint, history of present illness, medications, psychotherapy or previous psychiatric diagnosis, and pertinent histories and/or review of systems that would inform a differential diagnosis.

 

8 to >7.0 pts

Good

The video accurately presents the patient’s subjective complaint, history of present illness, medications, psychotherapy or previous psychiatric diagnosis, and pertinent histories and/or review of systems that would inform a differential diagnosis.

 

7 to >6.0 pts

Fair

The video presents the patient’s subjective complaint, history of present illness, medications, psychotherapy or previous psychiatric diagnosis, and pertinent histories and/or review of systems that would inform a differential diagnosis, but is somewhat vague or contains minor inaccuracies.

 

6 to >0 pts

Poor

The video presents an incomplete, inaccurate, or unnecessarily detailed/verbose description of the patient’s subjective complaint, history of present illness, medications, psychotherapy or previous psychiatric diagnosis, and pertinent histories and/or review of systems that would inform a differential diagnosis. Or subjective documentation is missing.

 

10 pts
 
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeDiscuss Objective data:• Physical exam documentation of systems pertinent to the chief complaint, HPI, and history• Diagnostic results, including any labs, imaging, or other assessments needed to develop the differential diagnoses

10 to >8.0 pts

Excellent

The video accurately and concisely documents the patient’s physical exam for pertinent systems. Pertinent diagnostic tests and their results are documented, as applicable.

 

8 to >7.0 pts

Good

The response accurately documents the patient’s physical exam for pertinent systems. Diagnostic tests and their results are documented, as applicable.

 

7 to >6.0 pts

Fair

Documentation of the patient’s physical exam is somewhat vague or contains minor inaccuracies. Diagnostic tests and their results are documented but contain inaccuracies.

 

6 to >0 pts

Poor

The response provides incomplete, inaccurate, or unnecessarily detailed/verbose documentation of the patient’s physical exam. Systems may have been unnecessarily reviewed, or objective documentation is missing.

 

10 pts
 
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeDiscuss results of Assessment:• Results of the mental status examination• Provide a minimum of three possible diagnoses in order of highest to lowest priority and explain why you chose them. What was your primary diagnosis and why? Describe how your primary diagnosis aligns with DSM-5 diagnostic criteria and is supported by the patient’s symptoms.

20 to >17.0 pts

Excellent

The video accurately documents the results of the mental status exam…. Video presents at least three differentials in order of priority for a differential diagnosis of the patient, and a rationale for their selection. Response justifies the primary diagnosis and how it aligns with DSM-5 criteria.

 

17 to >15.0 pts

Good

The video adequately documents the results of the mental status exam…. Video presents three differentials for the patient and a rationale for their selection. Response adequately justifies the primary diagnosis and how it aligns with DSM-5 criteria.

 

15 to >13.0 pts

Fair

The video presents the results of the mental status exam, with some vagueness or inaccuracy…. Video presents three differentials for the patient and a rationale for their selection. Response somewhat vaguely justifies the primary diagnosis and how it aligns with DSM-5 criteria.

 

13 to >0 pts

Poor

The response provides an incomplete, inaccurate, or unnecessarily detailed/verbose description of the results of the mental status exam and explanation of the differential diagnoses. Or assessment documentation is missing.

 

20 pts
 
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeDiscuss treatment Plan:• A treatment plan for the patient that addresses psychotherapy and rationales including a plan for follow-up parameters and referrals

20 to >17.0 pts

Excellent

The video clearly and concisely outlines an evidence-based treatment plan for the patient that addresses treatment modality, psychotherapy choice with framework principles, and rationale. … Discussion includes a clear and concise follow-up plan and parameters…. The discussion includes a clear and concise referral plan.

 

17 to >15.0 pts

Good

The video clearly outlines an appropriate treatment plan without evidence-based discussion for the patient that addresses treatment modality, psychotherapy choice with framework principles, and rationale. … Discussion includes a clear follow-up plan and parameters…. The discussion includes a clear referral plan.

 

15 to >13.0 pts

Fair

The response somewhat vaguely or inaccurately outlines a treatment plan for the patient and provides a rationale for the treatment approaches recommended…. The discussion is somewhat vague or inaccurate regarding the follow-up plan and parameters…. The discussion is somewhat vague or inaccurate regarding a referral plan.

 

13 to >0 pts

Poor

The response does not address the treatment plan or the treatment plan is not appropriate for the assessment and the diagnosis or is missing elements of the treatment plan. … There is no discussion for follow-up and parameters. … There is no discussion of a referral plan.

 

20 pts
 
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeReflections on this case.

5 to >4.0 pts

Excellent

Reflections are thorough, thoughtful, and demonstrate critical thinking. … Reflections contain all 3 elements from the assignment directions including a discussion demonstrating critical thinking of the case related to the HealthyPeople 2030 social health determinates. Clearly and concisely relates discussion to the psychiatric and mental health field.

 

4 to >3.5 pts

Good

Reflections demonstrate critical thinking. … Reflections demonstrate critical thinking. … Reflections contain 2 of the elements from the assignment directions with one being a basic discussion of the case related to the HealthyPeople 2030 social health determinates. Clearly relates discussion to the psychiatric and mental health field.

 

3.5 to >3.0 pts

Fair

Reflections are somewhat general or do not demonstrate critical thinking. … Reflections contain 1 of the required elements from the assignment directions which is the HealthyPeople 2030 social health determinates. … Somewhat vaguely or inaccurately relates discussion to the psychiatric and mental health field.

 

3 to >0 pts

Poor

Reflections are incomplete, inaccurate, or missing. … There are no Reflections elements from the assignment directions (no HeathlyPeople 2030 social health determinates, no health promotion, and no education activity). … Missing discussion relating to the psychiatric and mental health field or relates discussion to another specialty realm including medical co-morbidity illnesses.

 

5 pts
 
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeComprehensive Psychiatric Evaluation documentation

20 to >17.0 pts

Excellent

The response clearly, accurately, and thoroughly follows the Comprehensive Psychiatric Evaluation format to document the selected patient case. Preceptor signature and date pdf/image is uploaded on the completed assignment (not an electronic signature).

 

17 to >15.0 pts

Good

The response accurately follows the Comprehensive Psychiatric Evaluation format to document the selected patient case. Preceptor signature and date pdf/image is uploaded on the completed assignment but is an electronic signature.

 

15 to >13.0 pts

Fair

The response follows the Comprehensive Psychiatric Evaluation format to document the selected patient case, with some vagueness and inaccuracy Preceptor signature and date pdf/image is uploaded on the completed assignment but is an electronic signature.

 

13 to >0 pts

Poor

The response incompletely and inaccurately follows the Comprehensive Psychiatric Evaluation format to document the selected patient case. No preceptor signature.

 

20 pts
 
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomePresentation style

5 to >4.0 pts

Excellent

Presentation style is exceptionally clear, professional, and focused.

 

4 to >3.5 pts

Good

Presentation style is clear, professional, and focused.

 

3.5 to >2.0 pts

Fair

Presentation style is mostly clear, professional, and focused.

 

2 to >0 pts

Poor

Presentation style is unclear, unprofessional, and/or unfocused.

 

5
Posted in Uncategorized