Learning Goal: I’m working on a nutrition project and need a sample draft to help me learn.
Use the assigned readings, lectures, and supplemental activities from this module’s content to answer the following (100 points total):
NOTE: Please number your responses and copy/paste the EXACT questions below into your document – THANK YOU! 🙂
1) What are common risk factors for poor nutritional status in older adults? (10 points)
2) Describe the effects of malnutrition on physiologic function in geriatric patients. (10 points)
3) Review the patient information provided in Chapter 5, Case 1: Malnutrition and Depression (p. 214-216) and provide a nutrition assessment for this patient, using the ABCD’s of nutrition assessment. (30 points)
4) Based on the assessment you completed in question (3) above, what nutrition interventions would you recommend to improve this patient’s nutritional status? (30 points)
5) What other members of the health care team/community might you collaborate with to help improve the nutrition status of the patient you assessed in question (3) above? (10 points)
6) Are there any specific macronutrients (e.g., carbohydrate/fat/protein) and/or micronutrients (e.g., vitamins/minerals) that are of particular concern for older adults? What supplements might be recommended to address these concerns? NOTE: Be sure to only make suggestions that are supported by adequate research evidence (10 points)
**Please note that your assignment will be checked for originality. Your responses should represent YOUR OWN ORIGINAL WORK in your OWN ORIGINAL WORDS. The use of direct quotes is NOT permitted on this assignment. Please be sure to adequately paraphrase any information you are using from the textbook and online/other sources. Failure to do so will result in the deduction of points and can result in a grade of “0” (no credit) for the assignment.
Rubric
NTR 510 Case Study Grading Rubric
NTR 510 Case Study Grading Rubric
| Criteria |
Ratings |
Pts |
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeQ1
|
| 10 to >8.0 pts
Meets Expectations
Response fully addresses the question utilizing insightful & sophisticated content descriptions. The topic is explored in depth with relevant and specific examples. Response contained no more than two errors in writing mechanics.
|
8 to >5.0 pts
Nearly Meets Expectations
Response mostly addresses the question but lacks in-depth insight. Examples may lack connection and/or relevancy to the topic. The writing contained 3-4 errors in writing mechanics.
|
5 to >0 pts
Does Not Meet Expectations
Response might be vague, somewhat basic, or off-topic. The writing contained more than 4 errors in writing mechanics.
|
|
10 pts
|
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeQ2
|
| 10 to >8.0 pts
Meets Expectations
Response fully addresses the question utilizing insightful & sophisticated content descriptions. The topic is explored in depth with relevant and specific examples. Response contained no more than two errors in writing mechanics.
|
8 to >5.0 pts
Nearly Meets Expectations
Responses addresses the question but lacks in-depth insight. Examples may lack connection and/or relevancy to the topic. The writing contained 3-4 errors in writing mechanics.
|
5 to >0 pts
Does Not Meet Expectations
Response might be vague, somewhat basic, or off-topic. The writing contained more than 4 errors in writing mechanics.
|
|
10 pts
|
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeQ3
|
| 10 to >8.0 pts
Meets Expectations
Response fully addresses the question utilizing insightful & sophisticated content descriptions. The topic is explored in depth with relevant and specific examples. Response contained no more than two errors in writing mechanics.
|
8 to >5.0 pts
Nearly Meets Expectations
Responses addresses the question but lacks in-depth insight. Examples may lack connection and/or relevancy to the topic. The writing contained 3-4 errors in writing mechanics.
|
5 to >0 pts
Low to No Marks
Response might be vague, somewhat basic, or off-topic. The writing contained more than 4 errors in writing mechanics.
|
|
10 pts
|
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeQ4
|
| 10 to >8.0 pts
Meets Expectations
Response fully addresses the question utilizing insightful & sophisticated content descriptions. The topic is explored in depth with relevant and specific examples. Response contained no more than two errors in writing mechanics.
|
8 to >5.0 pts
Nearly Meets Expectations
Responses addresses the question but lacks in-depth insight. Examples may lack connection and/or relevancy to the topic. The writing contained 3-4 errors in writing mechanics.
|
5 to >0 pts
Does Not Meet Expectations
Response might be vague, somewhat basic, or off-topic. The writing contained more than 4 errors in writing mechanics.
|
|
10 pts
|
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeQ5
|
| 10 to >8.0 pts
Meets Expectations
Response fully addresses the question utilizing insightful & sophisticated content descriptions. The topic is explored in depth with relevant and specific examples. Response contained no more than two errors in writing mechanics.
|
8 to >5.0 pts
Nearly Meets Expectations
Responses addresses the question but lacks in-depth insight. Examples may lack connection and/or relevancy to the topic. The writing contained 3-4 errors in writing mechanics.
|
5 to >0 pts
Does Not Meet Expectations
Response might be vague, somewhat basic, or off-topic. The writing contained more than 4 errors in writing mechanics.
|
|
10 pts
|
|
Total Points: 50
|