You supervisor asked you to record the present paper-based medical system and list at least five advantages of the EHR-based health information as justification for the transition. Your assignment should be 3-5 APA formatted pages excluding the Cover and Reference pages.
Your supervisor also recommended you the following resources to consult.
Oachs, P. K and Watters, A. L. (2020). Chapter 26: Project Management. Health Information Management: Concepts, Principles and Practice. 6th Ed. AHIMA press.
Benefits of Electronic Health Record https://www.healthit.gov/topic/health-it-basics/benefits-ehrs
Project Planning for Beginners. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZWmXi3TW1yA
A Primer on Project Management in Healthcare. https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/ecpe/a-primer-on-project-management-for-health-care/
How to implement EHR https://www.healthit.gov/playbook/
What information the EHR contains https://www.healthit.gov/faq/what-information-does-electronic-health-record-ehr-contain
EMR vs EHR Differences https://www.healthit.gov/buzz-blog/electronic-health-and-medical-records/emr-vs-ehr-difference
Basic Project Management 101. https://www.thebalancecareers.com/project-management-101-2275338
Project Scope. https://www.projectmanager.com/blog/project-scope
What is a Project Scope: https://video.search.yahoo.com/yhs/search?fr=yhs-sz-001&hsimp=yhs-001&hspart=sz&p=project+scope#id=2&vid=f48b8ce62878854d58e78efcf8f7fcda&action=click
Due Date
Jan 25, 2022 11:59 PM
Hide Rubrics
Rubric Name: Grading Rubric
Print Rubric
This table lists criteria and criteria group names in the first column. The first row lists level names and includes scores if the rubric uses a numeric scoring method. You can give feedback on each criterion by tabbing to the add feedback buttons in the table.Criteria
90-100%
80-89%
70-79%
0-69%
Criterion Score
Understanding of Issue 20%
20 points
The work demonstrates clear understanding of the subject, including its:
(1) history and evolution, (2) internal and external contributing factors, (3) participants and stakeholders, and (4) significance.
17.8 points
The work demonstrates significant understanding of the subject, including its:
(1) history and evolution, (2) internal and external contributing factors, (3) participants and stakeholders, and (4) significance.
15.8 points
The work demonstrates minimal understanding of the subject, including its:
(1) history and evolution, (2) internal and external contributing factors, (3) participants and stakeholders, and (4) significance.
5 points
The work demonstrates little or no understanding of the subject, including its:
(1) history and evolution, (2) internal and external contributing factors, (3) participants and stakeholders, and (4) significance.
Score of Understanding of Issue 20%,/ 20
Clarity of Presentation (Logic, References) 25%
25 points
The work demonstrates sound and compelling logic in incorporating relevant research in terms of (1) applicability, (2) sufficiency (i.e. more than one source), and (3) currency.
The document is well organized, straightforward, easy to understand, and leads the reader to an informed conclusion.
22.25 points
The work demonstrates adequate logic in incorporating relevant research in terms of (1) applicability, (2) sufficiency (i.e. more than one source), and (3) currency.
The document is generally well organized, straightforward and somewhat easy to understand, but includes extraneous information or questionable findings as it leads the reader to a conclusion.
19.75 points
The work demonstrates questionable logic, relies on literature that is dated or somewhat irrelevant in terms of (1) applicability, (2) sufficiency, or (3) currency.
The document is somewhat disjointed, not easy to understand, and the conclusion is difficult to discern.
0 points
The work employs faulty logic, relying on research that is (1) not applicable, (2) too limited to support the analysis, or (3) not current.
The document is poorly organized, difficult to understand, or fails to reach a cogent conclusion.
Score of Clarity of Presentation (Logic, References) 25%,/ 25
Comprehensiveness of Analysis 35%
35 points
The work demonstrates clear, insightful critical thinking, incorporating relevant research in identifying the (1) issues, (2) interactions, and (3) implications of the topic.
The work considers both readily identifiable factors and more obscure matters, explore risks and benefits, and examines multiple aspects that can or may influence the topic being examined.
31.15 points
The work demonstrates a general understanding based on relevant research in identifying the (1) issues, (2) interactions, and (3) implications of the topic.
The work considers readily identifiable factors, but omits researching more obscure matters, focus more on benefits than associated risks, and examines the main aspects that can or may influence the topic being examined.
27.65 points
The work offers superficial analysis, relying on generalized research addressing the (1) issues, (2) interactions, and (3) implications of the topic.
The work considers only readily identifiable factors, focuses mostly on benefits versus risks, and examines only the prominent factors that influence the topic being examined.
5 points
The work demonstrates marginal or no understanding of the topic or the (1) issues, (2) interactions, and (3) implications thereof.
The work provides minimal or no evidence to support observations, rely on surface level information or commercial claims, or bases conclusions on limited information.
Score of Comprehensiveness of Analysis 35%,/ 35
Quality of Writing (Grammar, Format) 15%
15 points
The sentence structure is complete, with correct spelling, punctuation, and capitalization, and varied diction and word choice.
The assignment length is correct. Correct APA formatting is employed.
13.35 points
The sentence structure has minor errors (fragments, run-ons), with correct spelling, punctuation, and capitalization, but limited diction and word choice.
The assignment length is correct. It has some APA formatting errors.
11.85 points
The sentence structure has several errors in sentence fluency, with multiple fragments, run-ons, and poor spelling, punctuation, or word choice.
The assignment length is inadequate. It includes several APA errors.
1 point
The sentence structure has serious and persistent errors in sentence fluency, sentence structure, spelling, punctuation, or word choice.
The assignment length is inadequate. It includes multiple APA errors.
Score of Quality of Writing (Grammar, Format) 15%,/ 15
Intrinsic Qualities (Innovation, Insight) 5%
5 points
The analysis exhibits exceptional inquisitiveness in exploring deeper truths and complex underlying factors, with the goal of developing innovative and insightful solutions.
4.45 points
The analysis applies inquisitiveness in exploring deeper truths and complex underlying factors, seeking somewhat creative answers.
3.95 points
The analysis examines issues within an acceptable or routine framework. The conclusions are sound and well considered, but do not generate a novel means of addressing the topic or developing a solution.
0 points
The analysis accepts things at face value, fails to explore viable alternatives, or does not propose advanced approaches to the topic being examined.
Score of Intrinsic Qualities (Innovation, Insight) 5%,/ 5
Rubric Total ScoreTotal
Score of Grading Rubric,/ 100Criterion score has been overridden
Overall Score
Overall Score
Level 411 points minimum
Level 38 points minimum
Level 25 points minimum
Level 10 points minimum
Submit Assignment
Files to submit
(0) file(s) to submit
After uploading, you must click Submit to complete the submission.
Add a FileRecord Audio
Comments
Paragraph
Lato (Recommended)
19px (Default)
SubmitCancel
Last Completed Projects
| topic title | academic level | Writer | delivered |
|---|