Standards And Healthcare Applications And Operations

After completing this week's readings from the textbook Healthcare informatics: An interdisciplinary approach part 2, select one set of standards from both Chapter 17 and Chapter 18. In a paper of 750-1,000 words, identify the sets of standards chosen and explain what the standards govern or the broad category in which they fit (for example, patient identifiers, accreditation, etc.). Evaluate how the two sets of standards impact health care systems and informatics applications, and assess these standards in relation to functional health care operations.
To help you frame your arguments, consider implementation of electronic health records (EHR), regulations guiding the coding requirements, ethical reporting, or other broad topics related to application and operations. Discussion of these specific areas in your paper is not required, but it may assist in contextualizing your points.
Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center. An abstract is not required.
This assignment 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 Turnitin. Please refer to the directions in the Student Success Center
Standards and Health Care Applications and Operations
 
1
Unsatisfactory
0.00%
2
Less Than Satisfactory
74.00%
3
Satisfactory
79.00%
4
Good
87.00%
5
Excellent
100.00%
70.0 %
Content
 
10.0 %
Identification of the Standards Chosen, Including What They Govern or the Broad Category in Which They Fit
An identification of the two sets of standards selected and what they govern is not included.
An identification of the two sets of standards selected and what they govern is present, but it lacks detail or is incomplete.
An identification of the two sets of standards selected and what they govern is present.
An identification of the two sets of standards selected and what they govern is clearly provided and well developed.
A comprehensive identification of the two sets of standards selected and what they govern is thoroughly developed with supporting details.
30.0 %
Evaluation of How the Two Sets of Standards Impact Health Care Systems and Informatics Applications
An evaluation of how the two sets of standards impact health care systems and informatics applications is not included.
An evaluation of how the two sets of standards impact health care systems and informatics applications is present, but it lacks detail or is incomplete.
An evaluation of how the two sets of standards impact health care systems and informatics applications is present.
An evaluation of how the two sets of standards impact health care systems and informatics applications is clearly provided and well developed.
A comprehensive evaluation of how the two sets of standards impact health care systems and informatics applications is thoroughly developed with supporting details.
30.0 %
Assessment of the Two Sets of Standards in Relation to Functional Health Care Operations
An assessment of how the two sets of standards relate to functional health care operations is not included.
An assessment of how the two sets of standards relate to functional health care operations is present, but it lacks detail or is incomplete.
An assessment of how the two sets of standards relate to functional health care operations is present.
An assessment of how the two sets of standards relate to functional health care operations is clearly provided and well developed.
A comprehensive assessment of how the two sets of standards relate to functional health care operations is thoroughly developed with supporting 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.
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.
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.
Appropriate template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken. A lack of control with formatting is apparent.
Appropriate template is used. Formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present.
Appropriate template is fully used. There are virtually no errors in formatting style.
All format elements are correct.
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.
100 %
Total Weightage