SDOH Affecting Family and Family Health Status
SDOH Affecting Family and Family Health Status
30 points
Criteria Description
SDOH Affecting Family and Family Health Status
5. Excellent
30 points
The SDOH directly affecting family health status are relevant, accurately identified and thoroughly described. The direct impact to the family, and why the factors are prevalent to the family, are discussed in detail. The discussion is well supported and illustrates insight into SDOH and their effect on family health status.
4. Good
26.7 points
The overall SDOH affecting family health status are accurately identified and described. The SDOH identified are relevant to the family. The direct impact to the family, and why the factors are prevalent to the family, are discussed.
3. Satisfactory
23.7 points
Key SDOH affecting family health status are summarized. The SDOH identified are relevant to the family. The direct impact to the family, and why the factors are prevalent to the family, are generally discussed. More support or rationale is needed in some areas.
2. Less than Satisfactory
22.5 points
SDOH affecting family health status are partially presented. SDOH listed are not relevant to the family. The direct impact to the family, and why the factors are prevalent to the family, are unclear. There are inaccuracies.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
SDOH affecting family health status, and the direct impact to the family, are not presented.
Age-Appropriate Screening Recommendations
30 points
Criteria Description
Age-Appropriate Screening Recommendations
5. Excellent
30 points
Screenings presented for each family member are age appropriate and highly relevant. Screenings correlate to the information gathered through family health assessment. Strong rationale and support is presented.
4. Good
26.7 points
Screenings presented for each family member are age appropriate. Screenings are relevant and based on the information gathered through family health assessment. Some minor rationale or support is needed.
3. Satisfactory
23.7 points
Screenings are presented for each family member. Screenings are generally age appropriate, but entirely not relevant based on the information gathered through family health assessment. More rationale and support is required.
2. Less than Satisfactory
22.5 points
Screenings are presented for some family members. The screenings are not age appropriate. Screenings are not relevant to the information gathered through family health assessment.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Age-appropriate screenings are not presented.
Assessment of Health Model
30 points
Criteria Description
Assessment of Health Model
5. Excellent
30 points
A health model is selected and thoroughly described. A detailed discussion of how the model will assist in creating a plan of action is presented. Reasons for why it is best for this family are clearly outlined. Strong rationale and support are provided to support reasoning.
4. Good
26.7 points
A health model is selected and described. A discussion of how the model will assist in creating a plan of action is presented. Reasons for why it is best for this family are provided. Some rationale or support is needed.
3. Satisfactory
23.7 points
A health model is selected and described. A summary of how the model will assist in creating a plan of action is presented. A general overview for why it is best for this family is provided. More rationale and support is required.
2. Less than Satisfactory
22.5 points
A health model is selected to assist in creating a plan of action. The description of the model is incomplete. It is unclear why the chosen model is best for this family.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
A health model to assist in the creation of a plan of action is not presented. The model chosen is not a health model.
Application of Health Model
30 points
Criteria Description
Application of Health Model
5. Excellent
30 points
The health model is used to create a relevant and viable family-centered health promotion. The steps to achieve the desired outcome are described in detail. Appropriate strategies for communication with the family are clearly presented. The health promotion is well-designed and demonstrates an ability to assimilate findings and appropriately apply theoretical knowledge to achieve desired outcomes.
4. Good
26.7 points
The health model is used to create a relevant family-centered health promotion. The steps to achieve the desired outcome are illustrated. Strategies for communication with the family are presented.
3. Satisfactory
23.7 points
The health model is used to create a general family-centered health promotion. The steps to achieve the desired outcome require more detail to illustrate a clear plan of action. A general plan for communication with the family is presented. More rationale and support is required.
2. Less than Satisfactory
22.5 points
Steps for a family-centered health promotion are partially presented. The health promotion is not based on the health model. Significant aspects are missing. There are major inaccuracies.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Family-centered health promotion using selected health model is omitted.
Thesis Development and Purpose
7.5 points
Criteria Description
Thesis Development and Purpose
5. Excellent
7.5 points
Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.
4. Good
6.68 points
Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper. Thesis is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose.
3. Satisfactory
5.93 points
Thesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose.
2. Less than Satisfactory
5.63 points
Thesis is insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not clear.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.
Argument Logic and Construction
7.5 points
Criteria Description
Argument Logic and Construction
5. Excellent
7.5 points
Clear and convincing argument that presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative.
4. Good
6.68 points
Argument shows logical progressions. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative.
3. Satisfactory
5.93 points
Argument is orderly, but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis.
2. Less than Satisfactory
5.63 points
Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources.
Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)
7.5 points
Criteria Description
Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)
5. Excellent
7.5 points
Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.
4. Good
6.68 points
Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. A variety of sentence structures and effective figures of speech are used.
3. Satisfactory
5.93 points
Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are used.
2. Less than Satisfactory
5.63 points
Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register), sentence structure, or word choice are present.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is used.
Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)
3 points
Criteria Description
Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)
5. Excellent
3 points
All format elements are correct.
4. Good
2.67 points
Template is fully used; There are virtually no errors in formatting style.
3. Satisfactory
2.37 points
Template is used, and formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present.
2. Less than Satisfactory
2.25 points
Template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken; lack of control with formatting is apparent.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Template is not used appropriately or documentation format is rarely followed correctly.
Documentation of Sources
4.5 points
Criteria Description
Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style)
5. Excellent
4.5 points
Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error.
4. Good
4.01 points
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct.
3. Satisfactory
3.56 points
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present.
2. Less than Satisfactory
3.38 points
Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Sources are not documented.
Health Promotion Action Plan.
Name
Instructor
Course
Date
Health Promotion Action Plan.
In recent times, there has been an increased emphasis on the social determinants of health (SDOH) and their effects on the health of people and their families. SDOH encompass the conditions under which people are born, raised, reside, work, and grow older, which can impact their health outcomes. SDOH can have a substantial impact on the health and wellness of family members, which can affect their physical, mental, and social well-being. The objective of this study is to identify the SDOHs that are affecting the health of a specific family, suggest appropriate screenings for each family member based on their age, select a health model, and create a plan of action that outlines the necessary steps to develop a family-centred health promotion strategy.
SDOH that Affects Family Health Status:
The family under consideration comprises a father, a mother, and two teenage children. The SDOH that impacts their health status includes socioeconomic status, access to healthcare, education, social support, and cultural beliefs (CDC, 2018). The family belongs to a low-income group, and the father is the only breadwinner, working long hours to make ends meet. This limits their access to quality healthcare services, and they cannot afford preventative care or regular screenings. The family also lacks social support, as they have recently moved to a new town, and have not established social connections. The mother has a limited education, and they hold cultural beliefs that undermine the importance of preventive healthcare.
Impact of SDOH on the Family:
The lack of access to quality healthcare and social support, coupled with limited education, has a severe impact on the family's health status (Koh et al., 2020). The father has undiagnosed hypertension, and the mother has untreated depression. The children also have not had age-appropriate screenings, and they have no regular physician. Additionally, the lack of social support and cultural beliefs can lead to a delay in seeking healthcare services and prevent the family from adopting healthy behaviours.
Reasons for Prevalence of SDOH:
The prevalence of these SDOHs in this family is due to their socioeconomic status and lack of resources (Braveman et al., 2018). Limited access to quality healthcare and social support can lead to poor health outcomes and increased health disparities. Additionally, the cultural beliefs of the family may contribute to their reluctance to seek healthcare services.
Age-Appropriate Screenings for Each Family Member:
The data collected from the family health evaluation suggests the need for the following age-appropriate screenings, as recommended by the AAP (2021):
1 Father: Blood pressure screening, cholesterol screening, and diabetes screening.
2 Mother: Depression screening and cervical cancer screening.
3 Teenage son: Vision and hearing screening, and dental check-up.
4 Teenage daughter: HPV vaccine, menstrual health screening, and dental check-up.
Health Model Selection:
The health model chosen for this family is the Health Belief Model (HBM) (Rosenstock et al., 2017). This model is ideal for the family as it focuses on individual beliefs and attitudes towards healthy behaviours. The HBM aims to increase perceived susceptibility and severity of the condition, barriers to behaviour change, and self-efficacy. The HBM is effective in promoting preventive health behaviours such as cancer screenings, vaccinations, and physical activity.
👀 Other Visitors are Viewing These APA Essay Samples:
-
Timeline and Assessment of Launching Health Program
2 pages/≈550 words | 7 Sources | APA | Health, Medicine, Nursing | Coursework |
-
BSN Essential and QSEN Competency That Applies to Mental Health and Violence
1 page/≈275 words | 4 Sources | APA | Health, Medicine, Nursing | Coursework |
-
National Database of Nursing Quality Indicator
2 pages/≈550 words | 5 Sources | APA | Health, Medicine, Nursing | Coursework |