Addressing Challenges With Interoperability NURS 514 Assignment
Addressing Challenges With Interoperability NURS 514 Assignment
Addressing Challenges With Interoperability Nursing Assignment
Details:
The purpose of this assignment on Addressing Challenges With Interoperability is to investigate solutions to challenges with interoperability in health care delivery environments. To complete the assignment, you will select a problem with interoperability you have witnessed in your current or past work environment, evaluate options for addressing the problem, and recommend a solution based on evidence.
Write a 750-1,000 word paper that addresses the following:
- Describe the problem with the lack of interoperability witnessed in the healthcare care delivery environment. Include details about the scope of the problem, including who and what was impacted and how.
- Provide an analysis of the workflow and structure related to the problem to identify its root cause.
- Recommend a potential solution to the problem and provide evidence from the literature demonstrating its successful implementation in other cases to support your recommendation.
Integrate 3-5 scholarly sources into your recommendation.
Prepare this Addressing Challenges With Interoperability assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center. An abstract is not required.
This assignment ON Addressing Challenges With Interoperability uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.
You are required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite
LOOKING FOR NURSING ESSAY HELP? GET A NURSING CUSTOM ESSAY
Addressing Challenges With Interoperability
| 1 Unsatisfactory 0.00% |
2 Less than Satisfactory 80.00% |
3 Satisfactory 88.00% |
4 Good 92.00% |
5 Excellent 100.00% |
||
| 70.0 %Content | ||||||
| 20.0 %Issue Related to Lack of Interoperability | A description of the problem with the lack of interoperability in health care delivery is not included. | A description of the problem with the lack of interoperability in health care delivery is incomplete or incorrect | A description of the problem with the lack of interoperability in health care delivery is included, but lacks supporting detail | A description of the problem with the lack of interoperability in health care delivery is completed and includes supporting detail. | A description of the problem with the lack of interoperability in health care delivery is extremely thorough and includes substantial details. | |
| 25.0 %Analysis of Workflow and Structure | An analysis of the workflow and structure related to the problem and its root cause is not included. | An analysis of the workflow and structure related to the problem and its root cause is incomplete or incorrect. | An analysis of the workflow and structure related to the problem and its root cause is included, but lacks supporting detail. | An analysis of the workflow and structure related to the problem and its root cause is completed and includes supporting detail. | An analysis of the workflow and structure related to the problem and its root cause is extremely thorough and includes substantial details. | |
| 25.0 %Solution Recommendation | A recommendation for potentially solving the problem including evidence from literature is not included | A recommendation for potentially solving the problem including evidence from literature is incomplete or incorrect. | A recommendation for potentially solving the problem including evidence from literature is included, but lacks supporting detail. | A recommendation for potentially solving the problem including evidence from literature is completed and includes supporting detail. | A recommendation for potentially solving the problem including evidence from literature is extremely thorough and includes substantial details. | |
| 20.0 %Organization and Effectiveness | ||||||
| 7.0 %Thesis Development and Purpose | Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim. | Thesis is insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not clear. | Thesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose. | Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper. Thesis is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose. | Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear. | |
| 20.0 %Organization and Effectiveness | ||||||
| 8.0 %Argument Logic and Construction | Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources. | Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility. | 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. | Argument shows logical progressions. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative. | Clear and convincing argument that presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative. | |
| 20.0 %Organization and Effectiveness | ||||||
| 5.0 %Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use) | Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is used. | 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. | 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. | 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. | Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English. | |
| 10.0 %Format | ||||||
| 5.0 %Paper Format (Use of appropriate style for the major and assignment) | Template is not used appropriately or documentation format is rarely followed correctly. | Template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken; lack of control with formatting is apparent. | Template is used, and formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present. | Template is fully used; There are virtually no errors in formatting style. | Template is fully used; There are virtually no errors in formatting style. | |
| 5.0 %Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style) | Sources are not documented. | Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors. | Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present | Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct. | Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error. | |