This assessment item will assess:
Learning Outcome 4:Apply knowledge of the
pathophysiology of disorders of the nervous, immune and musculoskeletal
systems to solve clinical problems.
Learning Outcome 3: Apply knowledge of
microbiology to selected infectious diseases
Relate the clinical manifestations and diagnostic findings of health
deviations to the underlying pathophysiology of disease states.
• An interpretation of ALL the patient risk
factors (from the case-study scenario) and a demonstration of
how these risk factors link and relate to the diagnosed
disease/disorders’ aetiology, using evidence-based literature.
• A step-by-step pathophysiological sequence between
the diagnosed disease/disorders’ aetiology and ALL the patient’s
clinical manifestations (from the case-study scenario), using
evidence-based literature.
• Explain how ALL the patient’s risk factors (from
the case-study scenario) are linked to the
diagnosed disease’s/disorder’s pathophysiological process/s.
diagnosed disease/disorder.
Please note the marker will cease marking your submitted work once
they have reached 750
words.
(between 2011 – 2021 (inclusive).
• Use the referencing style.
2804NRS Human Pathophysiology and Pharmacology
1
A2 Written Assignment: Concept map assignment
|
|
ACCOMPLISHED
High quality performance or
standard of learning achievement. |
|
|
TOTAL MARK |
Criterion One
An interpretation of the
three patient’s risk factors (from the case-study
scenario) and a
demonstration of how
these risk factors link and relate to the diagnosed
disease/disorder’s
aetiology in the concept map.
|
|
|
Satisfactory standard as evidenced by an adequate
interpretation of some of the patient risk factors.
Some links between the risk factors
|
|
/6 |
| Mark allocation |
6-5.5 |
5-4 |
3.5-2.5 |
<2 |
patient’s clinical
manifestations (from the
case-study scenario) in the concept map.
|
Exceptionally high standard as
evidenced by a logical step by step pathophysiological
sequence
between the diagnosed
|
patient’s clinical manifestations evident in the concept map.
|
Satisfactory standard as evidenced by an
inconsistent step by step
pathophysiological sequence
between the diagnosed
disease/disorder’s aetiology and the
|
|
/6 |
| Mark allocation |
6-5.5 |
5 -4 |
3.5-2.5 |
<2 |
disease’s/disorder’s
pathophysiological
sequence in the concept map.
|
Exceptionally high standard as
evidenced by an accurate
interpretation of the five patient’s clinical manifestations.
Clear links between the five clinical
manifestations and the
disease’s/disorder’s
pathophysiological sequence in the concept map.
|
|
|
Unsatisfactory standard as
evidenced by an inaccurate or absent interpretation of
the
patient’s clinical manifestations. Links between the clinical
manifestations and the
|
/10 |
| Mark allocation |
10 – 9 |
8.5 – 6.5 |
6 – 4.5 |
4 – 1 |
|
|
High quality standard as evidenced by an accurate
identificationof the appropriate pharmacological
approach and treatment modalities for the patient diagnosis, with
most links evident in the concept
map.
|
Satisfactory standard as evidenced by an accurate
identificationof the appropriate pharmacological
approach and treatment modalities for the patient diagnosis, with
some links evident in the concept
map.
|
|
/9 |
| Mark allocation |
9 – 7.5 |
7 –5.5 |
5 – 3.5 |
3 – 1 |
|
|
High quality standard as evidenced by an accurate
identificationof the appropriate diagnostic investigations for the
patient diagnosis, with most links
evident in the concept map.
|
Satisfactory standard as evidenced by an accurate
identificationof the diagnostic investigations for the
patient diagnosis, with some links
evident in the concept map.
|
|
/9 |
| Mark allocation |
9 – 7.5 |
7 – 5.5 |
5 – 3.5 |
3 – 1 |
|
Exceptionally high standard as evidenced by an
accurate
explanation of how the three
patient’s risk factors are linked to
the diagnosed disease’s/disorder’s pathophysiological process/s.
|
|
|
|
/9 |
| Mark allocation |
9 – 7.5 |
7 – 5.5 |
5 – 3.5 |
3 – 1 |
Criterion Seven Explain how
the
disease’s/disorder’s
pathophysiology manifests to produce the five patient’s clinical
manifestations
(from the case-study
scenario).
|
|
|
Satisfactory standard as evidenced by a brief, but
sufficient explanation of how the disease’s/disorder’s
pathophysiology manifests to
produce some of the patient’s clinical
manifestations.
|
Unsatisfactory standard as evidenced by an
inadequate explanation of how the
|
/15 |
| Mark allocation |
15 – 12 |
11.5 – 7.5 |
7 – 5.5 |
5 – 1 |
|
|
|
Satisfactory standard as evidenced by a brief, but
sufficient justification of how some of the
pharmacological approach and treatment modalities in terms of their
relevance and
appropriateness for the diagnosed disease/disorder.
|
Unsatisfactory standard as
evidenced by an inadequate justification of the
pharmacological approach and treatment modalities in terms of their
relevance and
appropriateness for the
diagnosed disease/disorder.
|
/9 |
| Mark allocation |
9 – 7.5 |
7 – 5.5 |
5 – 3.5 |
3 – 1 |
|
|
|
|
Unsatisfactory standard as
evidenced by an inadequate justification of the
diagnostic investigations in terms of their relevance and
appropriateness for the diagnosed
disease/disorder.
|
/9 |
| Mark allocation |
9 – 7.5 |
7 – 5.5 |
5 – 3.5 |
3 – 1 |
|
|
|
|
Does not comply with academic writing
standards;
Poor sentence and paragraph structure,
and poor logical flow demonstratesan
inability to
communicate ideas effectively.
|
/6 |
| Mark allocation |
6 – 5.5 |
5 – 4 |
3.5 – 2.5 |
<2 |
Criterion Eleven
Use of the literature.
|
|
|
|
|
/8 |
|
8 – 6.5 |
6 – 4.5 |
4 – 2.5 |
2 – 1 |
|
Criterion Twelve Referencing.
|
Exceptionally high standard as
evidenced by exemplary use of APA 7 format in-text and
reference list with no errors.
|
|
|
|
/4 |
| Mark allocation |
4 |
3 |
2 |
0.5 – 1 |
|
TOTAL |
/100 |
