Faculty of Medicine University Financial Reports and Health IT Discussion

Florida National University HSA-6197 Health Information System and Electronic Health Records Week 6 Financial Report in Medisoft Network Professional (MNP): Chapters 11 & 12 Objective: To critically reflect your understanding of the readings and your ability to apply them to your Health care Setting. ASSIGNMENT GUIDELINES (10%): Financial Report in Medisoft Network Professional (MNP). For this assignment, you will critically evaluate, create and generated a Medisoft Report and apply a specific financial report available in MNP within a Health Care Setting, for a specific patient, describe and select data to be include in a MNP report, create a patient ledger report, and create a standard patient list report. You are invigorated to choose a specific Health Care Facility as a reference to do this assignment You need to read the article (in the additional weekly reading resources localize in the Syllabus and also in the Lectures link) assigned for week 6 and develop a 4-6-page paper reflecting your understanding and ability to apply the readings to your Health Care Setting. Each paper must be typewritten with 12-point font and double-spaced with standard margins. Follow APA 7th edition format when referring to the selected articles and include a reference page. EACH PAPER SHOULD INCLUDE THE FOLLOWING: 1. Introduction (25%) Provide a short-lived outline of the three types of financial reports available in MNP (not a description) of each Chapter and articles you read, in your own words. 2. Medisoft Financial Report (50%): Create a Medisoft Report with the following information: Select data to be include in a MNP. Create three day Sheets: Patient Day Sheet, Procedures Day Sheet, and Payment Day Sheet. Analysis Report 3. Conclusion (15%) Briefly summarize your thoughts & conclusion to your critique of the articles and Chapter you read. How did these articles and Chapters impact your thoughts on Financial and clinical reports. Evaluation will be based on how clearly you respond to the above, in particular: a) The clarity with which you critique the articles; b) The depth, scope, and organization of your paper; and, c) Your conclusions, including a description of the impact of these articles and Chapters on any Health Care Setting. ASSIGNMENT RUBRICS Assignments Guidelines Introduction Your Critique Conclusion Total 10 Points 25 Points 50 Points 15 Points 100 points 10% 25% 50% 15% 100% ASSIGNMENT GRADING SYSTEM A B+ B C+ C D F Dr. Gisela LLamas 90% – 100% 85% – 89% 80% – 84% 75% – 79% 70% – 74% 60% – 69% 50% – 59% Or less.

  Excellent Good Fair Poor
Main Posting 45 (45%) – 50 (50%) 

Answers all parts of the discussion question(s) expectations with reflective critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources.

 

Supported by at least three current, credible sources.

 

Written clearly and concisely with no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.

 40 (40%) – 44 (44%) 

Responds to the discussion question(s) and is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.

 

At least 75% of post has exceptional depth and breadth.

 

Supported by at least three credible sources.

 

Written clearly and concisely with one or no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.

 35 (35%) – 39 (39%) 

Responds to some of the discussion question(s).

 

One or two criteria are not addressed or are superficially addressed.

 

Is somewhat lacking reflection and critical analysis and synthesis.

 

Somewhat represents knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.

 

Post is cited with two credible sources.

 

Written somewhat concisely; may contain more than two spelling or grammatical errors.

 

Contains some APA formatting errors.

 0 (0%) – 34 (34%) 

Does not respond to the discussion question(s) adequately.

 

Lacks depth or superficially addresses criteria.

 

Lacks reflection and critical analysis and synthesis.

 

Does not represent knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.

 

Contains only one or no credible sources.

 

Not written clearly or concisely.

 

Contains more than two spelling or grammatical errors.

 

Does not adhere to current APA manual writing rules and style.
Main Post: Timeliness 10 (10%) – 10 (10%) 

Posts main post by day 3.

 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) 

Does not post by day 3.
First Response 17 (17%) – 18 (18%) 

Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings.

 

Responds fully to questions posed by faculty.

 

Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources.

 

Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.

 

Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.

 

Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed.

 

Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.

 15 (15%) – 16 (16%) 

Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings.

 

Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.

 

Responses to faculty questions are answered, if posed.

 

Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources.

 

Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.

 13 (13%) – 14 (14%) 

Response is on topic and may have some depth.

 

Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication.

 

Responses to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed.

 

Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and a few or no credible sources are cited.

 0 (0%) – 12 (12%) 

Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.

 

Responses posted in the discussion lack effective professional communication.

 

Responses to faculty questions are missing.

 

No credible sources are cited.
Second Response 16 (16%) – 17 (17%) 

Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings.

 

Responds fully to questions posed by faculty.

 

Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources.

 

Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.

 

Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.

 

Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed.

 

Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.

 14 (14%) – 15 (15%) 

Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings.

 

Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.

 

Responses to faculty questions are answered, if posed.

 

Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources.

 

Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.

 12 (12%) – 13 (13%) 

Response is on topic and may have some depth.

 

Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication.

 

Responses to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed.

 

Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and a few or no credible sources are cited.

 0 (0%) – 11 (11%) 

Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.

 

Responses posted in the discussion lack effective professional communication.

 

Responses to faculty questions are missing.

 

No credible sources are cited.
Participation 5 (5%) – 5 (5%) 

Meets requirements for participation by posting on three different days.

 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) 

Does not meet requirements for participation by posting on 3 different days.
Total Points: 100