Asssigment

Criteria

Ratings

Pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSuccinctly, in 1–2 pages, address the following:• Briefly explain the neurobiological basis for PTSD illness.

15 to >13.0 pts

Excellent 90%–100%

The response includes an accurate and concise explanation of the neurobiological basis for PTSD illness.

13 to >11.0 pts

Good 80%–89%

The response includes an accurate explanation of the neurobiological basis for PTSD illness.

11 to >10.0 pts

Fair 70%–79%

The response includes a somewhat vague or inaccurate explanation of the neurobiological basis for PTSD illness.

10 to >0 pts

Poor 0%–69%

The response includes a vague or inaccurate explanation of the neurobiological basis for PTSD illness. Or, response is missing.

1

5 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome• Discuss the DSM-5-TR diagnostic criteria for PTSD and relate these criteria to the symptomology presented in the case study. Does the video case presentation provide sufficient information to derive a PTSD diagnosis? Justify your reasoning. Do you agree with the other diagnoses in the case presentation? Why or why not?

25 to >22.0 pts

Excellent 90%–100%

The response includes an accurate and concise description of the DSM-5-TR diagnostic criteria for PTSD and an accurate explanation of how they relate to the symptomology presented in the case study…. The response includes a concise explanation of whether the case provides sufficient information to derive the PTSD and other diagnoses. Justification demonstrates strong diagnostic reasoning and critical thinking skills.

22 to >19.0 pts

Good 80%–89%

The response includes an accurate description of the DSM-5-TR diagnostic criteria for PTSD and an adequate explanation of how they relate to the symptomology presented in the case study…. The response includes an explanation of whether the case provides sufficient information to derive the PTSD and other diagnoses. Justification demonstrates adequate diagnostic reasoning and critical thinking skills.

19 to >17.0 pts

Fair 70%–79%

The response includes a somewhat vague or inaccurate description of the DSM-5-TR diagnostic criteria for PTSD and a somewhat vague or inaccurate explanation of how they relate to the symptomology presented in the case study…. The response includes a vague or inaccurate explanation of whether the case provides sufficient information to derive the PTSD and other diagnoses. Justification demonstrates somewhat inadequate diagnostic reasoning and critical thinking skills.

17 to >0 pts

Poor 0%–69%

The response includes a vague or inaccurate description of the DSM-5-TR diagnostic criteria for PTSD and a vague or inaccurate explanation of how they relate to the symptomology presented in the case study. Or, response is missing…. The response includes a vague or inaccurate explanation of whether the case provides sufficient information to derive the PTSD and other diagnoses. Justification demonstrates poor diagnostic reasoning and critical thinking skills. Or, response is missing.

25 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome• Discuss one other psychotherapy treatment option for the client in this case study. Explain whether your treatment option is considered a “gold standard” treatment from a clinical practice guideline perspective, and why using gold standard, evidence-based treatments from clinical practice guidelines is important for psychiatric-mental health nurse practitioners.

30 to >26.0 pts

Excellent 90%–100%

The response includes an accurate and concise explanation of one other psychotherapy treatment option for the client in this case study…. The response clearly and concisely explains whether the recommended treatment option is a “gold standard” treatment and why using gold standard, evidence-based treatments from clinical practice guidelines is important for PMHNPs.

26 to >23.0 pts

Good 80%–89%

The response includes an accurate explanation of one other psychotherapy treatment option for the client in this case study…. The response adequately explains whether the recommended treatment option is a “gold standard” treatment and why using gold standard, evidence-based treatments from clinical practice guidelines is important for PMHNPs.

23 to >20.0 pts

Fair 70%–79%

The response includes a somewhat vague or incomplete explanation of one other psychotherapy treatment option for the client in this case study…. The response provides a somewhat vague or incomplete explanation of whether the recommended treatment option is a “gold standard” treatment and why using gold standard, evidence-based treatments from clinical practice guidelines is important for PMHNPs.

20 to >0 pts

Poor 0%–69%

The response includes a vague and inaccurate explanation of one other psychotherapy treatment option for the client in this case study, or the treatment option is innappropriate. Or, response is missing…. The response provides a vague or incomplete explanation of whether the recommended treatment option is a “gold standard” treatment and why using gold standard, evidence-based treatments from clinical practice guidelines is important for PMHNPs. Or, response is missing.

30 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome·   Support your approach with specific examples from this week’s media and at least three peer-reviewed, evidence-based sources. PDFs are attached.

15 to >13.0 pts

Excellent 90%–100%

The response is supported by specific examples from this week’s media and at least three peer-reviewed, evidence-based sources from the literature that provide strong support for the rationale provided. PDFs are attached.

13 to >11.0 pts

Good 80%–89%

The response is supported by examples from this week’s media and three peer-reviewed, evidence-based sources from the literature that provide appropriate support for the rationale provided. PDFs are attached.

11 to >10.0 pts

Fair 70%–79%

The response is supported by examples from this week’s media and two or three peer-reviewed, evidence-based sources from the literature. Examples and resources selected may provide only weak support for the rationale provided. PDFs may not be attached.

10 to >0 pts

Poor 0%–69%

The response is supported by vague or inaccurate examples from the week’s media and/or evidence from the literature, or is missing.

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 is provided which delineates all required criteria.

5 to >4.0 pts

Excellent 90%–100%

Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity…. A clear and comprehensive purpose statement, introduction, and conclusion are provided that delineates all required criteria.

4 to >3.5 pts

Good 80%–89%

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 descriptive.

3.5 to >3.0 pts

Fair 70%–79%

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.

3 to >0 pts

Poor 0%–69%

Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity < 60% of the time.... No purpose statement, introduction, or conclusion were provided.

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 90%–100%

Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors.

4 to >3.5 pts

Good 80%–89%

Contains 1 or 2 grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors.

3.5 to >3.0 pts

Fair 70%–79%

Contains 3 or 4 grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors.

3 to >0 pts

Poor 0%–69%

Contains many (≥ 5) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the reader’s understanding.

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, parenthetical/in-text citations, and reference list.

5 to >4.0 pts

Excellent 90%–100%

Uses correct APA format with no errors.

4 to >3.5 pts

Good 80%–89%

Contains 1 or 2 APA format errors.

3.5 to >3.0 pts

Fair 70%–79%

Contains 3 or 4 APA format errors.

3 to >0 pts

Poor 0%–69%

Contains many (≥ 5) APA format errors.

Total Points: 100