Category: Medicine

Find an article that talks about an issue with otorhinolaryngology. Then discuss

Find an article that talks about an issue with otorhinolaryngology. Then discuss what you learned from the article in own words. and have the link copied on the paper.

-Compare and contrast the two different major classes of ion channels.
-Explain

-Compare and contrast the two different major classes of ion channels.
-Explain the difference between full agonists, partial agonists, antagonists, inverse agonists.
Responses need to address all components of the question, demonstrate critical thinking and analysis and include peer-reviewed journal evidence to support the student’s position.
Please be sure to validate your opinions and ideas with in-text citations and corresponding references in APA format.

This should be a recommendation letter from a Gynecology department professor. M

This should be a recommendation letter from a Gynecology department professor. My wife had attended shihezi university in China. She completed he (MBBS), Bachelor of Medicine, Bachelor of Surgery there. She learned Mandarin as part of her study, as she traveled from Bangladesh to study for MBBS in China. She is applying for Medical School in America.

Due Sunday by 10:59pm Points 100 Submitting a text entry box or a file upload

Due Sunday by 10:59pm Points 100 Submitting a text entry box or a file upload Attempts 0 Allowed Attempts 2
Back to Week at a Glance
DIGITAL CLINICAL EXPERIENCE: FOCUSED EXAM: COUGH
In this DCE Assignment, you will conduct a focused exam related to cough in your DCE using the simulation tool, Shadow Health. You will determine what history should be collected from the patient, what physical exams and diagnostic tests should be conducted, and formulate a differential diagnosis with several possible conditions.
RESOURCES
Be sure to review the Learning Resources before completing this activity.
Click the weekly resources link to access the resources.
WEEKLY RESOURCES
TO PREPARE
Review this week’s Learning Resources and consider the insights they provide related to ears, nose, and throat.
Review the Shadow Health Resources provided in this week’s Learning Resources specifically the tutorial to guide you through the documentation and interpretation within the Shadow Health platform. Review the examples also provided.
Review the DCE (Shadow Health) Documentation Template for Focused Exam: Cough found in this week’s Learning Resources and use this template to complete your Documentation Notes for this DCE Assignment.
Access and login to Shadow Health using the link in the left-hand navigation of the Blackboard classroom.
Review the Week 5 Focused Exam: Cough Rubric provided in the Assignment submission area for details on completing the Assignment in Shadow Health.
Consider what physical exams and diagnostic tests would be appropriate to gather more information about the patient’s condition. How would the results be used to make a diagnosis?
FOCUSED EXAM: COUGH ASSIGNMENT:
Complete the following in Shadow Health:
Respiratory Concept Lab (Required)
Episodic/Focused Note for Focused Exam: Cough
HEENT (Recommended but not required)
Note: Each Shadow Health Assessment may be attempted and reopened as many times as necessary prior to the due date to achieve a total of 80% or better (this includes your DCE and your Documentation Notes), but you must take all attempts by the Week 5 Day 7 deadline.
SUBMISSION INFORMATION
Complete your Focused Exam: Cough DCE Assignment in Shadow Health via the Shadow Health link in Canvas.
Once you complete your assignment in Shadow Health, you will need to download your lab pass and upload it to the corresponding assignment in Canvas for your faculty review.
(Note: Please save your lab pass as “LastName_FirstName_AssignmentName”.) You can find instructions for downloading your lab pass here: https://link.shadowhealth.com/download-lab-passLinks to an external site.
Complete your documentation using the documentation template in your resources and submit it into your Assignment submission link below.
To submit your completed assignment, save your Assignment as WK5Assgn2+last name+first initial.
Then, click on Start Assignment near the top of the page.
Next, click on Upload File and select both files and then Submit Assignment for review.

By submitting this assignment, you confirm that you have complied with Walden University’s Code of Conduct including the expectations for academic integrity while completing the Shadow Health Assessment.

Rubric
NURS_6512_Week_5_DCE_Assignment_2_Rubric
NURS_6512_Week_5_DCE_Assignment_2_Rubric
Criteria Ratings Pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Student DCE score(DCE percentages will be calculated automatically by Shadow Health after the assignment is completed.)Note: DCE Score – Do not round up on the DCE score.
60 to >55.0 pts
Excellent
DCE score>93
55 to >50.0 pts
Good
DCE Score 86-92
50 to >45.0 pts
Fair
DCE Score 80-85
45 to >0 pts
Poor
DCE Score <79... No DCE completed. 60 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Subjective Documentation in Provider Note Template: Subjective narrative documentation in Provider Note Template is detailed and organized and includes: Chief Complaint (CC), HPI, Current Medications, Allergies, Past Medical History, Family History, Social History and Review of Systems (ROS)ROS: covers all body systems that may help you formulate a list of differential diagnoses. You should list each system as follows: General: Head: EENT: etc. You should list these in bullet format and document the systems in order from head to toe. 20 to >15.0 pts
Excellent
Documentation is detailed and organized with all pertinent information noted in professional language….Documentation includes all pertinent documentation to include Chief Complaint (CC), HPI, Current Medications, Allergies, Past Medical History, Family History, Social History and Review of Systems (ROS).
15 to >10.0 pts
Good
Documentation with sufficient details, some organization and some pertinent information noted in professional language….Documentation provides some of the Chief Complaint (CC), HPI, Current Medications, Allergies, Past Medical History, Family History, Social History and Review of Systems (ROS).
10 to >5.0 pts
Fair
Documentation with inadequate details and/or organization; and inadequate pertinent information noted in professional language….Limited or/minimum documentation provided to analyze students critical thinking abilities for the Chief Complaint (CC), HPI, Current Medications, Allergies, Past Medical History, Family History, Social History and Review of Systems (ROS).
5 to >0 pts
Poor
Documentation lacks any details and/or organization; and does not provide pertinent information noted in professional language….No information is provided for the Chief Complaint (CC), HPI, Current Medications, Allergies, Past Medical History, Family History, Social History and Review of Systems (ROS)….or…No documentation provided.
20 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Objective Documentation in Provider Notes – this is to be completed using the documentation template that is provided. Document in a systematic order starting from head-to-toe, include what you see, hear, and feel when doing your physical exam using medical terminology/jargon. Document all normal and abnormal exam findings. Do not use “WNL” or “normal”. You only need to examine the systems that are pertinent to the CC, HPI, and History. Diagnostic result – Include any pertinent labs, x-rays, or diagnostic test that would be appropriate to support the differential diagnoses mentioned. Differential Diagnoses (list a minimum of 3 differential diagnoses). Your primary or presumptive diagnosis should be at the top of the list (#1).
20 to >15.0 pts
Excellent
Documentation detailed and organized with all abnormal and pertinent normal assessment information described in professional language….Each system assessed is clearly documented with measurable details of the exam.
Link to Danny Rivera cough assessment
You can also find all the information on google as well
Please include references for diagnosis and plan of care. References must be on apa and must be less than 5 years
Pay attention to model documentation in the documentation section
https://www.studocu.com/en-us/document/florida-state-college-at-jacksonville/medical-surgery-2/focused-exam-cough-all-shadow-health/14226059

LAB ASSIGNMENT: ASSESSING THE ABDOMEN
A male went to the emergency room for seve

LAB ASSIGNMENT: ASSESSING THE ABDOMEN
A male went to the emergency room for severe midepigastric abdominal pain. He was diagnosed with AAA ; however, as a precaution, the doctor ordered a CTA scan.
Because of a high potential for misdiagnosis, determining the precise cause of abdominal pain can be time consuming and challenging. By analyzing case studies of abnormal abdominal findings, nurses can prepare themselves to better diagnose conditions in the abdomen.
In this Lab Assignment, you will analyze an Episodic note case study that describes abnormal findings in patients seen in a clinical setting. You will consider what history should be collected from the patients as well as which physical exams and diagnostic tests should be conducted. You will also formulate a differential diagnosis with several possible
RESOURCES
Be sure to review the Learning Resources before completing this activity.
Click the weekly resources link to access the resources.
WEEKLY RESOURCES
TO PREPARE
Review the Episodic note case study your instructor provides you for this week’s Assignment. Please see the “Course Announcements” section of the classroom for your Episodic note case study.
With regard to the Episodic note case study provided:
Review this week’s Learning Resources, and consider the insights they provide about the case study.
Consider what history would be necessary to collect from the patient in the case study.
Consider what physical exams and diagnostic tests would be appropriate to gather more information about the patient’s condition. How would the results be used to make a diagnosis?
Identify at least five possible conditions that may be considered in a differential diagnosis for the patient.
THE ASSIGNMENT
Analyze the subjective portion of the note. List additional information that should be included in the documentation.
Analyze the objective portion of the note. List additional information that should be included in the documentation.
Is the assessment supported by the subjective and objective information? Why or why not?
What diagnostic tests would be appropriate for this case, and how would the results be used to make a diagnosis?
Would you reject/accept the current diagnosis? Why or why not? Identify three possible conditions that may be considered as a differential diagnosis for this patient. Explain your reasoning using at least three different references from current evidence-based literature.
BY DAY 7 OF WEEK 6
Submit your Lab Assignment.
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.
To submit your completed assignment, save your Assignment as WK6Assgn1+last name+first initial.
Then, click on Start Assignment near the top of the page.
Next, click on Upload File and select Submit Assignment for review.

Rubric
NURS_6512_Week_6_Assignment_1_Rubric
NURS_6512_Week_6_Assignment_1_Rubric
Criteria Ratings Pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWith regard to the SOAP note case study provided, address the following:Analyze the subjective portion of the note. List additional information that should be included in the documentation.
12 to >9.0 pts
Excellent
The response clearly, accurately, and thoroughly analyzes the subjective portion of the SOAP note and lists detailed additional information to be included in the documentation.
9 to >6.0 pts
Good
The response accurately analyzes the subjective portion of the SOAP note and lists additional information to be included in the documentation.
6 to >3.0 pts
Fair
The response vaguely and/or with some inaccuracy analyzes the subjective portion of the SOAP note and vaguely and/or with some inaccuracy lists additional information to be included in the documentation.
3 to >0 pts
Poor
The response inaccurately analyzes or is missing analysis of the subjective portion of the SOAP note, with inaccurate and/or missing additional information included in the documentation.
12 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAnalyze the objective portion of the note. List additional information that should be included in the documentation.
12 to >9.0 pts
Excellent
The response clearly, accurately, and thoroughly analyzes the objective portion of the SOAP note and lists detailed additional information to be included in the documentation.
9 to >6.0 pts
Good
The response accurately analyzes the objective portion of the SOAP note and lists additional information to be included in the documentation.
6 to >3.0 pts
Fair
The response vaguely and/or with some inaccuracy analyzes the objective portion of the SOAP note and vaguely and/or inaccurately lists additional information to be included in the documentation.
3 to >0 pts
Poor
The response inaccurately analyzes or is missing analysis of the objective portion of the SOAP note, with inaccurate and/or missing additional information included in the documentation.
12 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeIs the assessment supported by the subjective and objective information? Why or why not?
16 to >13.0 pts
Excellent
The response clearly and accurately identifies whether or not the assessment is supported by the subjective and/or objective information, with a thorough and detailed explanation.
13 to >10.0 pts
Good
The response accurately identifies whether or not the assessment is supported by the subjective and/or objective information, with an explanation.
10 to >7.0 pts
Fair
The response vaguely and/or inaccurately identifies whether or not the assessment is supported by the subjective and/or objective information, with a vague explanation.
7 to >0 pts
Poor
The response inaccurately identifies whether or not the assessment is supported by the subjective and/or objective information, with an inaccurate or missing explanation.
16 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWhat diagnostic tests would be appropriate for this case, and how would the results be used to make a diagnosis?
20 to >17.0 pts
Excellent
The response thoroughly and accurately describes appropriate diagnostic tests for the case and explains clearly, thoroughly, and accurately how the test results would be used to make a diagnosis.
17 to >14.0 pts
Good
The response accurately describes appropriate diagnostic tests for the case and explains clearly and accurately how the test results would be used to make a diagnosis.
14 to >11.0 pts
Fair
The response vaguely and/or with some inaccuracy describes appropriate diagnostic tests for the case and vaguely and/or with some inaccuracy explains how the test results would be used to make a diagnosis.
11 to >0 pts
Poor
The response inaccurately describes appropriate diagnostic tests for the case, with an inaccurate or missing explanation of how the test results would be used to make a diagnosis.
20 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome· Would you reject or accept the current diagnosis? Why or why not?· Identify three possible conditions that may be considered as a differenial diagnosis for this patient. Explain your reasoning using at least three different references from current evidence-based literature.
25 to >22.0 pts
Excellent
The response states clearly whether to accept or reject the current diagnosis, with a thorough, accurate, and detailed explanation of sound reasoning. The response clearly, thoroughly, and accurately identifies three conditions as a differential diagnosis, with reasoning that is explained clearly, accurately, and thoroughly using at least three different references from current evidence-based literature.
22 to >19.0 pts
Good
The response states whether to accept or reject the current diagnosis, with an accurate explanation of sound reasoning. The response accurately identifies three conditions as a differential diagnosis, with reasoning that is explained accurately using three different references from current evidence-based literature.
19 to >16.0 pts
Fair
The response states whether to accept or reject the current diagnosis, with a vague explanation of the reasoning. The response identifies two or three conditions as a differential diagnosis, with reasoning that is explained vaguely and/or inaccurately using three references from current evidence-based literature.
16 to >0 pts
Poor
The response inaccurately or is missing a statement of whether to accept or reject the current diagnosis, with an explanation that is inaccurate and/or missing. The response identifies two or fewer conditions as a differential diagnosis, with reasoning that is missing or explained inaccurately using three or fewer references from current evidence-based literature.
25 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten Expression and Formatting – Paragraph Development and Organization: Paragraphs make clear points that support well-developed ideas, flow logically, and demonstrate continuity of ideas. Sentences are carefully focused–neither long and rambling nor short and lacking substance. A clear and comprehensive purpose statement and introduction are provided that delineate all required criteria.
5 to >4.0 pts
Excellent
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity. A clear and comprehensive purpose statement, introduction, and conclusion are provided that delineate all required criteria.
4 to >3.0 pts
Good
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 80% of the time. Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment are stated, yet are brief and not descriiptive.
3 to >2.0 pts
Fair
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 60%–79% of the time. Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment are vague or off topic.
2 to >0 pts
Poor
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity < 60% of the time. No purpose statement, introduction, or conclusion were provided. 5 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten Expression and Formatting - English writing standards: Correct grammar, mechanics, and proper punctuation 5 to >4.0 pts
Excellent
Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors.
4 to >3.0 pts
Good
Contains a few (1 or 2) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors.
3 to >2.0 pts
Fair
Contains several (3 or 4) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors.
2 to >0 pts
Poor
Contains many (≥ 5) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the reader’s understanding.
5 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritten Expression and Formatting – The paper follows correct APA format for title page, headings, font, spacing, margins, indentations, page numbers, running heads, parenthetical/in-text citations, and reference list.
5 to >4.0 pts
Excellent
Uses correct APA format with no errors.
4 to >3.0 pts
Good
Contains a few (1 or 2) APA format errors.
3 to >2.0 pts
Fair
Contains several (3 or 4) APA format errors.
2 to >0 pts
Poor
Contains many (≥ 5) APA format errors.
5 pts
Total Points: 100
Case Study 2: Focused Thyroid Exam
Kali, a 44 year old female is in the office for a complete physical examination. She complains of proptosis and feeling fatigued. Her TSH levels are elevated, she has hyperlipidemia, her neck appears swollen, and is overweight.
PLEASE FOLLOW THE RUBRIC CLOSELY
MUST BE IN APA
MUST HAVE INTEXT CITATIONS IN APA
MUST HAVE A REFERENCE PAGE
MUST MEET CRITERIA FOR REQUIREMENTS ABOVE
REFERENCE SMUST BE LESS THAN 5 YEARS

I need recommendation letter to enroll in American medical school. I have comple

I need recommendation letter to enroll in American medical school. I have completed my MBBS (Bachelor of Medicine and Bachelor of Surgery), and need to generate a letter for my MBBS professor to sign. This letter should be considered to be coming from a surgery department professor from Shihezi University in China.

Documentation / Electronic Health Record
Document: Provider Notes
Document: Prov

Documentation / Electronic Health Record
Document: Provider Notes
Document: Provider Notes
Student Documentation Model Documentation
Identifying Data & Reliability
patient is a 28 year old African american with a BMI of 31, high blood pressure and elevated temperature
Ms. Jones is a pleasant, 28-year-old obese African American single woman who presents to establish care and with a recent right foot injury. She is the primary source of the history. Ms. Jones offers information freely and without contradiction. Speech is clear and coherent. She maintains eye contact throughout the interview.
General Survey
patient had a fall a week ago and had a scrabe in the right foot, visited the ER, an x ray was done and no broken bone noted, was treated foe pain with tramadol in the ER, PATIENT HAVE A FAMILY PYSICIAN, denies regular doctors visits, last visit for regular checkup was over 2 years ago, patienyt have a history of childwood asthma, increase monthly period and is type 2 diabetes
Ms. Jones is alert and oriented, seated upright on the examination table, and is in no apparent distress. She is well-nourished, well-developed, and dressed appropriately with good hygiene.
Chief Complaint
scabe on foot, painful with no relieve from pain medications, rate pain as 8/10, pain worst with weight bearing to affected foot, takes tramadol prn
“I got this scrape on my foot a while ago, and I thought it would heal up on its own, but now it’s looking pretty nasty. And the pain is killing me!”
History Of Present Illness
patient is type 2 diabetic, on metformin but not taken medication at this time, have a glucometer at home but does not check her blood sugar
Ms. Jones reports that a week ago she tripped while walking on concrete stairs outside, twisting her right ankle and scraping the ball of her foot. She sought care in a local emergency department where she had x-rays that were negative; she was treated with tramadol for pain. She has been cleansing the site twice a day. She has been applying antibiotic ointment and a bandage. She reports that ankle swelling and pain have resolved but that the bottom of the foot is increasingly painful. The pain is described as “throbbing” and “sharp” with weight bearing. She states her ankle “ached” but is resolved. Pain is rated 7 out of 10 after a recent dose of tramadol. Pain is rated 9 with weight bearing. She reports that over the past two days the ball of the foot has become swollen and increasingly red; yesterday she noted discharge oozing from the wound. She denies any odor from the wound. Her shoes feel tight. She has been wearing slip-ons. She reports fever of 102 last night. She denies recent illness. Reports a 10-pound, unintentional weight loss over the month and increased appetite. Denies change in diet or level of activity.
Medications
metformin not taken
preventil inhaler
tramadol
tylenol
motrin
Acetaminophen 500-1000 mg PO prn (headaches) • Ibuprofen 600 mg PO TID prn (menstrual cramps) • Tramadol 50 mg PO TID prn (foot pain) • Albuterol 90 mcg/spray MDI 2 puffs Q4H prn (Wheezing: “when around cats,” last use three days ago)
Allergies
allergy to penicillin rash and hives
and cats
Penicillin: rash • Denies food and latex allergies • Allergic to cats and dust. When she is exposed to allergens she states that she has runny nose, itchy and swollen eyes, and increased asthma symptoms.
Medical History
type 2 diabetes
asthma
heavy monthly periods
headaches
Asthma diagnosed at age 2 1/2. She uses her albuterol inhaler when she is around cats and dust. She uses her inhaler 2 to 3 times per week. She was exposed to cats three days ago and had to use her inhaler once with positive relief of symptoms. She was last hospitalized for asthma “in high school”. Never intubated. Type 2 diabetes, diagnosed at age 24. She previously took metformin, but she stopped three years ago, stating that the pills made her gassy and “it was overwhelming, taking pills and checking my sugar.” She doesn’t monitor her blood sugar. Last blood glucose was elevated last week in the emergency room. No surgeries. OB/GYN: Menarche, age 11. First sexual encounter at age 18, sex with men, identifies as heterosexual. Never pregnant. Last menstrual period 3 weeks ago. For the past year cycles irregular (every 4-8 weeks) with heavy bleeding lasting 9-10 days. No current partner. Used oral contraceptives in the past. When sexually active, reports she did not use condoms. Never tested for HIV/AIDS. No history of STIs or STI symptoms. Last tested for STIs four years ago. Hematologic: Denies bleeding, bruising, blood transfusions and history of blood clots. Skin: Reports acne since puberty and bumps on the back of her arms when her skin is dry. Complains of darkened skin on her neck and increase facial and body hair. She reports a few moles but no other hair or nail changes.
Health Maintenance
does not exercise and does not pay attention to her diet
Last Pap smear 4 years ago. Last eye exam in childhood. Last dental exam “a few years ago.” PPD (negative) ~2 years ago. No exercise. 24-hour Diet Recall: States that she skipped breakfast yesterday, and would typically have a baked good for breakfast, a sandwich for lunch, and a meatloaf or chicken for dinner. Her snacks consist of pretzels or French fries. Immunizations: Tetanus booster was received within the past year, influenza is not current, and human papillomavirus has not been received. She reports that she believes she is up to date on childhood vaccines and received the meningococcal vaccine in college. Safety: Has smoke detectors in the home, wears seatbelt in car, and does not ride a bike. Does not use sunscreen. Guns, having belonged to her dad, are in the home, locked in parent’s room.
Family History
family history of high cholesterol, colon cancer, diabetes, asthma , high blood pressure
• Mother: age 50, hypertension, elevated cholesterol
• Father: deceased in car accident one year ago at age 58, hypertension, high cholesterol, and type 2 diabetes
• Brother (Michael, 25): overweight
• Sister (Britney, 14): asthma
• Maternal grandmother: died at age 73 of a stroke, history of hypertension, high cholesterol
• Maternal grandfather: died at age 78 of a stroke, history of hypertension, high cholesterol
• Paternal grandmother: still living, age 82, hypertension
• Paternal grandfather: died at age 65 of colon cancer, history of type 2 diabetes
• Paternal uncle: alcoholism
• Negative for mental illness, other cancers, sudden death, kidney disease, sickle cell anemia, thyroid problems
Social History
have support from coworkers and church group. lives with mother and sister
denies being sexually active
Never married, no children. Lived independently since age 20, currently lives with mother and sister in a single family home to support family after death of father one year ago. Employed 32 hours per week as a supervisor at Mid-American Copy and Ship. She enjoys her work and was recently promoted to shift supervisor. She is a part-time student, in her last semester to earn a bachelor’s degree in accounting. She hopes to advance to an accounting position within her company. She has a car, cell phone, and computer. She receives basic health insurance from work, but is deterred from healthcare due to out-of-pocket costs. She enjoys spending time with friends, attending Bible study, volunteering in her church, and dancing. Tina is active in her church and describes a strong family and social support system. She reports stressors relating to the death of her father and balancing work and school demands, and finances. She states that family and church help her cope with stress. No tobacco. Occasional cannabis use from age 15 to age 21. Reports no use of cocaine, methamphetamines, and heroin. Uses alcohol when “out with friends, 2-3 times per month,” reports drinking no more than 3 drinks per episode. She drinks 4 caffeinated drinks per day (diet soda). No foreign travel. No pets. Not currently in an intimate relationship, ended a three-year serious monogamous relationship two years ago. She plans on getting married and having children someday.
Review of Systems
wound to right foot, drainage noted, wound swabs done and sent to lab for culture and sensitivity, wound irrigated with normal saline, new dressing applied
(No Model Documentation Provided)
Objective
wound measurements obtain, patient of Dr Derwith, irregular doctors visist, takes inhalers prn, poorly controlled blood sugars, not taken metformin at home
Wound: 2 cm x 1.5 cm, 2.5 mm deep wound, red wound edges, right ball of foot, serosanguinous drainage. Mild erythema surrounding wound, no edema, no tracking.
Assessment
wound assessmnet and wound debt noted drainge noted, social support system,
(No Model Documentation Provided)
Plan
start patient on insulin, treat infection, plan for regular visits, treat high blood pressure

critical apprise of the work (feel free to edit any part (add or remove informat

critical apprise of the work (feel free to edit any part (add or remove information to make it perfect and met the requirement), proofreading and copyediting to make it professional. if you could please remove any unnecessary information to make it exactly 2000 words that would be perfrct.

Reviewing articles is an important aspect of postgraduate development. The abili

Reviewing articles is an important aspect of postgraduate development. The ability to read and critically evaluate an article is something that we want to help you hone within this activity.
Therefore please review this article as if you had been requested by a specialty journal to be a reviewer. Consider its quality; is it well written? Is it well referenced? Comment on the type of study employed and its level of evidence. Give your view on whether this article deserves publication. Do the review concisely – within 500 words.
Yang, S., Liu, Y., Zhang, S., Wu, F., Liu, D., Wu, Q., Zheng, H., Fan, P. and Su, N. (2023) ‘Risk of diabetic ketoacidosis of SGLT2 inhibitors in patients with type 2 diabetes: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials’, Frontiers in Pharmacology, 14, 1145587. Available at: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fphar.2023.1145587/full
Harvard referencing with British spelling.

Week at a Glance
MEASURES USED IN EPIDEMIOLOGY
One important application of epid

Week at a Glance
MEASURES USED IN EPIDEMIOLOGY
One important application of epidemiology is to identify factors that could increase the likelihood of a certain health problem occurring within a specific population. Epidemiologists use measures of effect to examine the association or linkage in the relationship between risk factors and emergence of disease or ill health. For instance, they may use measures of effect to better understand the relationships between poverty and lead poisoning in children, smoking and heart disease, or low birth weight and future motor skills. The following are some common measures used in epidemiology:
Odds ratio: The odds ratio quantifies the association between an independent variable (exposure) and a dependent variable (outcome). It is calculated as the odds that an effect will occur given the presence or exposure to a studied variable, compared to the odds when there is no exposure (e.g., lung cancer and smoking)
Risk ratio (also called relative risk): Also quantifies the association between an independent variable and a dependent variable. The risk of an effect occurring in one population versus another population (e.g., preeclampsia in women <35 versus >35). Risks greater than one suggest that exposure to a given variable is associated with an increase in the risk of the outcome, and a risk ratio of less than one indicates that the exposure is associated with a decrease in the risk of the outcome.
Mortality: Measure of deaths in a particular population during a specified time interval. If this is attributed to a specific cause, it is referred to as cause-specific mortality.
Morbidity: Measure of instances of illness or disability in a population from a given cause (e.g., heart disease) during a specified time interval
Incidence: The occurrence of new cases of an effect or disease in a population over a defined time period relative to the size of the population at risk (e.g., new cases of COVID-19 in a population over a 7-day period/1000 people)
Prevalence: The number of all cases of an effect or disease, not just new ones, in a population at a given time relative to the size of the population (e.g., number of people with autism/1000)
What is the significance of these measures of effect for nursing practice? In this Discussion, you will consider this pivotal question.
RESOURCES
Be sure to review the Learning Resources before completing this activity.
Click the weekly resources link to access the resources.
WEEKLY RESOURCES
TO PREPARE:
Select item 1, 2, or 3 to use for this Discussion. Consider the definitions, differences, and utility of the two terms listed under your item selection. Your response will need to include both terms in the item selected.
Odds ratio and risk ratio
Mortality and morbidity
Incidence and prevalence
Consider how these epidemiologic measures strengthen and support nursing practice.
Assess practice limitations of not using these measures in nursing practice.
Conduct additional research in the Walden Library and other credible resources, and then locate two examples in the scholarly literature that support your insights.
BY DAY 3 OF WEEK 5
Post a cohesive scholarly response that addresses the following:
Explain how your selected measures of effect strengthen and support nursing practice. Provide at least two specific examples from the literature to substantiate your insights.
Assess limitations of not using measures of effect in nursing practice.
Required readings
Curley, A. L. C. (Ed.). (2020). Population-based nursing: Concepts and competencies for advanced practice (3rd ed.). Springer.
Chapter 3, “Epidemiological Methods and Measurements in Population-Based Nursing Practice: Part I”
Friis, R. H., & Sellers, T. A. (2021). Epidemiology for public health practice (6th ed.). Jones & Bartlett.
Chapter 3, “Measures of Morbidity and Mortality Used in Epidemiology”
Chapter 9, “Measures of Effect
NB
MUST BE IN APA
INCLUDE SUBHEADINGS
MUST HAVE AT LEAST THREE REFERENCES IN APA
REFERENCES MUST BE LESS THAN FIVE YEARS
NO DATE REFERENCES NOT ALLOWED