In step with the case, total file a total smartly being ancient previous (subjective info most efficient) and a centered bodily examination (fair info most efficient).  Attain NOT provide:  A prognosis  A differential prognosis checklist

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomePart I: Complete Smartly being Historical previous (Subjective Recordsdata Exclusively)… Demonstrates devoted and total documentation of patient total smartly being ancient previous (subjective info most efficient).

25 to >22.35 ptsExcellentPresents devoted and total documentation of patient total smartly being ancient previous (subjective info most efficient).

22.35 to >19.85 ptsGoodPresents a largely devoted and total patient total smartly being ancient previous (subjective info most efficient); would possibly perchance presumably also possess some minor errors.

19.85 to >0 ptsPoorDoesn’t provide documentation of patient smartly being ancient previous (subjective info most efficient); documentation is incorrect and/or incomplete.

25 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomePart II: Centered Physical Examination (Diagram Recordsdata Exclusively)… Demonstrates devoted and total documentation of patient centered bodily examination (fair info most efficient).

25 to >22.35 ptsExcellentPresents devoted and total documentation of patient centered bodily examination (fair info most efficient).

22.35 to >19.85 ptsGoodPresents a total, largely devoted documentation of patient centered bodily examination (fair info most efficient); would possibly perchance presumably also possess some minor errors.

19.85 to >0 ptsPoorDoesn’t provide documentation of patient centered bodily examination (fair info most efficient); info equipped is incorrect and/or incomplete.

25 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomePart III: Reflection Piece 1: Subjective vs. Diagram Distinction…Name two examples the keep it would possibly perchance presumably well also were exciting to separate subjective from fair info; Expose how you ensured that patient-reported indicators remained in the ancient previous fragment; Expose how you ensured that nearly all efficient observable or measurable findings were incorporated in the bodily examination fragment.

15 to >13.41 ptsExcellentPresents two fully developed examples of eventualities that posed a challenge conserving aside subjective and fair info… Fully explains how they ensured that patient-reported indicators remained in the ancient previous fragment… Fully explains how they ensured that nearly all efficient observable or measurable findings were incorporated in the bodily examination fragment.

13.41 to >11.91 ptsGoodPresents two adequately developed examples of eventualities that posed a challenge conserving aside subjective and fair info… Adequately explains how they ensured that patient-reported indicators remained in the ancient previous fragment… Adequately explains how they ensured that nearly all efficient observable or measurable findings were incorporated in the bodily examination fragment.

11.91 to >0 ptsPoorDoesn’t provide examples of eventualities that posed a challenge conserving aside subjective and fair info; explanations are unclear or incomplete.

15 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomePart III: Reflection Piece 2: Further Evaluate Questions… Name 2–3 further questions you would possibly perchance presumably well presumably search info from to toughen your subjective overview…. For every search info from: Voice the search info from; Briefly existing why it is serious; Picture how the response would possibly perchance presumably also manual your centered bodily examination

10 to >8.94 ptsExcellentIdentifies 2–3 further questions they would perchance search info from to toughen their subjective overview… Presents a actually developed explanation of why the search info from is vital… Presents a actually developed description of how the response would possibly perchance presumably also manual their centered examination.

8.94 to >7.94 ptsGoodIdentifies 2–3 further questions they would perchance search info from to toughen their subjective overview… Presents an adequately developed explanation of why the search info from is serious… Presents an adequately developed description of how the response would possibly perchance presumably also manual their centered examination.

7.94 to >0 ptsPoorDoesn’t determine 2–3 further questions they would perchance search info from to toughen their subjective overview; the questions equipped are unclear, incorrect, or incomplete.

10 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomePart III: Reflection… Piece 3: Skilled Mutter… Name one home of your overview expertise that you just would favor to toughen (e.g., documenting vesicular lesions, describing rash morphology, lymph node overview). Briefly existing how you intend to toughen that skill.

10 to >8.94 ptsExcellentIdentifies one home of their overview expertise they would perchance favor to toughen… Presents a fully developed explanations of how they thought to toughen that skill.

8.94 to >7.94 ptsGoodIdentifies one home of their overview expertise they would perchance favor to toughen… Presents an adequately developed explanations of how they thought to toughen that skill.

7.94 to >0 ptsPoorDoesn’t determine one home of overview expertise they would perchance favor to toughen; explanation is unclear, incorrect, or incomplete.

10 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeUses at least 3 scholarly sources which would possibly perchance presumably well be not as a lot as 5 years gentle.

5 to >4.46 ptsExcellentUses 3 explore-reviewed scholarly sources printed inner the closing 5 years.

4.46 to >3.96 ptsGoodUses 2 explore-reviewed scholarly sources printed inner the closing 5 years.

3.96 to >3.46 ptsFairUses 1 explore-reviewed scholarly source printed inner the closing 5 years.

3.46 to >0 ptsPoorDoesn’t expend explore-reviewed scholarly sources or sources used are older than 5 years.

5 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSource Attribution and APA Formatting

5 to >4.46 ptsExcellentAll sources are cited in APA format with none errors.

4.46 to >3.96 ptsGoodAll sources are cited in APA format with some minor errors.

3.96 to >3.46 ptsFairAll sources are cited with frequent APA formatting errors.

3.46 to >0 ptsPoorMissing source citations and/or minimal adherence to APA formatting guidelines.

5 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeGrammar, Mechanics, and Punctuation

5 to >4.46 ptsExcellentRavishing grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors.

4.46 to >3.96 ptsGoodRavishing grammar, spelling, and punctuation with few errors.

3.96 to >3.46 ptsFairRavishing grammar, spelling, and punctuation with frequent errors.

3.46 to >0 ptsPoorFrequent errors in grammar, spelling, and punctuation that intrude with comprehension.

5 pts