Human Systems & Pathophysiology 2

HSP202_Assessment_3_Brief_IntegratedCaseStudy_Module Due 5.2 Page 1 of 6
Context
For this assignment, you will be provided a case study to analyse with key points to consider. The
clinical reasoning skills required will prepare you for case analysis during and after a health
consultation.
You will use clinical deduction skills to analyse the signs and symptoms of the case study
presentation. The task of this assignment will involve using correct terminology to discuss the
disease condition, along with critically appraising relevant literature for the condition presentation.
This is an opportunity to apply your specific knowledge of Pathophysiology of the body systems to
begin considering differential diagnosis and a working diagnosis for the case scenario. This
assignment will prepare you for future subjects in your course where you will be required to
recommend (with clear justifications to the indications) laboratory findings, linking them to the
condition presented.

ASSESSMENT 3 BRIEF
Subject Code and Title HSP202 Human Systems & Pathophysiology 2
Assessment Integrated Case Study
Individual/Group Individual
Length 1000 words (+/- 10%)
Learning Outcomes The Subject Learning Outcomes demonstrated by successful
completion of the task below are listed at the end of this document.
Submission Due by 11:55pm AEST Sunday end of Module 5.2 (week 10).
Weighting 35%
Total Marks 100 marks

HSP202_Assessment_3_Brief_IntegratedCaseStudy_Module Due 5.2 Page 2 of 6
Instructions
1. Begin by reading the provided case scenario and instruction guide for Assessment 3 found in
the Assessment area.
Task: To complete the assessment:
2. Collect relevant information for the case study provided and write answers to the following
sections below. Recommend using the following headings in the order given:
a. Case history outline
b. Case history Discussion
c. Review of examination findings (provided)
d. Interpretation of investigation findings
e. Identification of Red Flags
f. Possible differential diagnoses (identify two (2) excluding the working diagnosis in a
table outlining evidence for and against)
g. Summary on the impact of disease (including the pathophysiology)
h. Reference List
3. Write concisely and adhere to the word count. Any content over 1150 words may not be
graded.
4. Any tables incorporated are included in the word count.
5. In-text references are included in the word count.
6. The reference list is not included in the word count.
7. Students should also refer to the marking rubric for this assessment for further guidance.
Referencing
It is essential that you use appropriate APA style for citing and referencing research. Please see more
information on referencing here
http://library.laureate.net.au/research_skills/referencing
Submission Instructions
Submit final information sheet under Assessment 3 link via Assessment in main navigation menu in
the Blackboard subject site. The Learning Facilitator will grade your submission and results can be
found under My Grades
.
File information: Use the finale name (surname _ initial of first name_ Subject code_
Assessment number. In Microsoft word format)
File formatting: make sure you have a case study cover page including subject name and
code, assessment number, your name, student ID, word count and case number.
The document should be in Arial or Times new roman font (size 12, double spacing).
HSP202_Assessment_3_Brief_IntegratedCaseStudy_Module Due 5.2 Page 3 of 6
Assessment sections checklist.

Refer to Assessment 3 Instruction Guide for expected content for
each section.
Yes/No
1 Section I: Case History Outline
Y History presentation is outlined in orderly, clear and concise manner
2 Section II: Case History Discussion
Y History findings are discussed in a logical way drawing together the
important symptoms of the case.
3 Section III: Review of Examination Findings
Y Examination findings are reviewed and considered in a logical
way, drawing together the important signs of the case.
4 Section IV: Interpretation of investigations
Y The meaning of investigations for the case are made clear and
implications outlined.
5 Section V: Identification of Red Flags
Y Point out Red flags pertinent to the case and describe
relevance clearly and concisely.
6 Section VI: Possible Differential Diagnoses
Y Outline possible differential diagnosis (x2) with a short
description of main points, with evidence for and against
presented for each.
7 Section VII: Summary of Impact of disease
Y Final summary discussed and impact on the patient
considered.
8 Section XI: Format, Grammar & Referencing
Y Overall coherence, quality of work & genuine effort to tie
elements of the case together is evident.
Cover page attached

HSP202_Assessment_3_Brief_Integrated Case Study_ Module Due 5.2 Page 4 of 6
Assessment Rubric: Integrated Case Study

Assessment Attributes Fail
(Yet to achieve minimum
standard)
0-49%
Pass
(Functional)
50-64%
Credit
(Proficient)
65-74%
Distinction
(Advanced)
75-84%
High Distinction
(Exceptional)
85-100%
Identification
Knowledge and
understanding
Outline and discussion
of a case history.
Percentage for this
criterion = 40%
Did not attempt to
present history in an
orderly, clear and concise
manner.
Did not attempt discuss
information presented in
history or analysis of
information not relevant.
Minimal attempt to present
history, but presentation
lacking in one or two of the
following: orderliness, clarity,
conciseness or the
information presented is
lacking relevance.
Minimal attempt to discuss
symptoms. Information is
presented for case history,
however demonstrates lack
of clinical understanding and
relevance.
The information in the
presented history is
relevant.
Discussion and analysis of
history is relevant but
limited in scope,
orderliness, clarity or
conciseness
Coherent history is outlined
for the case study and
demonstrates very good
clinical understanding.
Discussion of history
demonstrates thorough
clinical understanding for
the case study.
Excellent standard of
demonstrating clear
understanding and clinical
judgment.
Breadth and scope of
discussion and analysis of
history is expertly
delivered.
Analysis and
application with
synthesis of new
knowledge
Review of examination
findings and
interpretation of red
flags for a case
scenario.
Percentage for this
criterion = 30%
Did not attempt to review
findings or consider
relevant red flags for the
case scenario.
Investigations were not
mentioned.
Minimal attempt to review
findings. Information
presented on physical
examination and red flags but
limited in clinical
understanding and relevance.
Attempt made to summarise
investigations but limited in
rationale to demonstrate
clinical judgment.
Review of physical
examination is relevant but
limited in scope.
Interpretation of red flags is
relevant for the case study.
Good attempt to clinically
consider signs & symptoms
for the case study.
Good attempt to
summarise investigations
and clinical judgment
demonstrated. Further
options may still have been
explored.
Very good review of
physical examination
demonstrating thorough
clinical understanding for
the case study.
Red flags for the case study
are interpreted with very
clinical evaluation of the
scope of signs and
symptoms for the case
study.
Very good summarisation of
investigations with clearly
explained rationale
demonstrating breadth of
clinical judgment.
Excellent review of physical
examination demonstrating
expert clinical
understanding and clinical
judgment.
Clear interpretation of red
flags, demonstrating
excellent clinical
understanding and
evaluation of the scope of
signs and symptoms for the
case.
Excellent summarisation of
investigations.

HSP202_Assessment_3_Brief_Integrated Case Study_ Module Due 5.2 Page 5 of 6

Evaluation of disease
condition for a case
scenario.
Identification of
possible differential
diagnoses and impact
of disease for a case
scenario.
Percentage for this
criterion = 20%
Lack of understanding of
underlying general
pathological and
physiological principles as
they relate to impact of
disease.
No possible diagnosis
listed or impact on patient
discussed. No explanation
given for inclusion or
exclusion of specific
conditions.
Resembles a recall or
summary of underlying
general pathological and
physiological principles as
they relate to impact of
disease.
Possible diagnosis presented
and adequate attempt to
discuss the impact on the
patient’s life.
Some differential diagnostic
considerations not explained
fully and limited explanation
given for inclusion or
exclusion of some
diagnostics.
Information substantiated
by evidence from the
research/course materials
for underlying general
pathological and
physiological principles as
they relate to impact of
disease.
Possible differential
diagnosis mostly draws
upon relevant information
presented in the case study
with good rationale for the
listed differential diagnostics
considered. More relevant
options may still have been
explored.
Information substantiated
by robust evidence from
the research/course
materials and extended
reading to the
underlying general
pathological and
physiological principles as
they relate to impact of
disease.
Possible differential
diagnosis identified and is
relevant to the case
scenario.
Very good attempt to
discuss the impact on
the patient’s life
demonstrating breadth
of clinical judgment.
Concise and clear
summary of relevant
rationale for inclusion
and exclusion of
differential diagnosis
considerations outlined.
Information substantiated
by robust evidence from
the research/course
materials and extended
reading regarding the
underlying general
pathological and
physiological principles as
they relate to impact of
disease.
Possible differential
diagnosis identified and the
impact on the patient’s life.
Concisely demonstrates
relevant clinical judgment.
Rationale is written well
and draws together
relevant points for inclusion
and exclusion of diagnostic
considerations.
Referencing
Correct citation of key
resources and evidence
Inconsistent use of good
quality, credible and
relevant resources to
support and develop
ideas
.
Demonstrates use of
credible and relevant
resources to support and
develop ideas, but these
are not always explicit or
well developed.
Demonstrates use of high
quality, credible and relevant
resources to support and
develop ideas.
Demonstrates use of good
quality, credible and
relevant resources to
support and develop
arguments and statements.
Demonstrates use of high
quality, credible and
relevant resources to
support and develop
arguments and position
statements.

HSP202_Assessment_3_Brief_Integrated Case Study_ Module Due 5.2 Page 6 of 6

Percentage for this
criterion =10%
Limited/no correct
citation of key resources
and evidence with
substantial errors.
Mostly correct citation of
key resources and evidence
with some major errors.
Correct citation of key
resources and evidence with
minor errors.
Shows evidence of wide
scope within the
organisation for sourcing
evidence.
Correct citation of key
resources and evidence.
Shows evidence of wide
scope within and outside
the organisation for
sourcing evidence.
Correct citation of key
resources and evidence.

 

YOU MAY ALSO READ ...  Response 6.1
The following Subject Learning Outcomes are addressed in this assessment
SLO a) Define and integrate the classifications, terminology and apply general pathological principles in relation to the development of human
disease across body systems.
SLO b) Describe and explain the pathophysiology, aetiology, risk factors and clinical manifestations of the main health disorders, and apply this
knowledge to disorders of the musculoskeletal, integumentary, haematologic, respiratory, endocrine, renal and reproductive systems.
SLO c) Apply the underlying general pathological and physiological principles as they relate to degeneration and aging of the human body
systems.
SLO d) Identify general diagnostic approaches in conjunction with the interpretation of health information and laboratory findings, including the
development of differential diagnosis.

 

YOU MAY ALSO READ ...  Week 9

Assignment status: Already Solved By Our Experts

(USA, AUS, UK & CA Ph. D. Writers)

CLICK HERE TO GET A PROFESSIONAL WRITER TO WORK ON THIS PAPER AND OTHER SIMILAR PAPERS, GET A NON PLAGIARIZED PAPER FROM OUR EXPERTS

Order from Australian Expert Writers
Best Australian Academic Writers

QUALITY: 100% ORIGINAL PAPER – NO PLAGIARISM – CUSTOM PAPER