PUBH6000: Social, Behavioural and Cultural Factors in Public Health | EssayLink.net
|
|
ASSESSMENT 1 BRIEF |
|
Subject Code and Title |
PUBH6000: Social, Behavioural and
Cultural Factors in Public Health |
|
Assessment Task |
Case Study Report |
|
Individual/Group |
Individual |
|
Length |
1,500 words (+/- 10%) |
|
Learning Outcomes |
The Subject Learning Outcomes demonstrated by successful completion of
the task below include: a)
Critically examine principles of public health, and
interpret the stakeholders’ roles in addressing health inequalities and
inequities. b)
Critically analyse the impact of potential social
determinants on the health outcomes of different populations. c)
Critically analyse health outcomes in disadvantaged
populations. |
|
Submission |
12-week duration: Due by 11:55pm AEST/AEDT
Sunday end of Module 5 (Week 5) |
|
Weighting |
35% |
|
Total Marks |
100 marks |
Assessment Task
In this assessment, you are required to read a case scenario provided by your Learning Facilitator that will set the context for this task. You will use the details in the scenario to guide your research and prepare your report. A well-structured report will cover all the elements in the scenario.
Using critical thinking skills, you will develop a report that shows your ability to apply theory to practice. Your report should be 1500 words long and formatted according to the structure outlined below.
As part of the report, you must provide evidence of a literature review by demonstrating your search for literature using academically valid databases and the TUA library. Using the provided template, add at least 10 academic resources and summarise their relevance. These sources must be incorporated into your report as in-text citations and listed in your reference list. Refer to the APA referencing guidelines.
Please refer to the Instructions for details on how to complete this task.
Context
The social determinants of health have a significant impact on disease prevalence, overall health, and the well-being of communities. This assessment aims to deepen students' understanding of how these determinants affect population health outcomes. It provides an opportunity for you to demonstrate your knowledge of public health fundamentals and to apply theoretical and conceptual frameworks for health interventions to analyse the health of a population.
Instructions
1. Carefully review the case scenario provided by your Learning Facilitator, ensuring a thorough understanding of the context and key issues presented.
2. Conduct comprehensive research on relevant health issues and social determinants that impact the health outcomes of the population described in the scenario. Focus on current data and credible sources to support your analysis.
3. Develop your case study report following the structured format outlined below, ensuring clarity and coherence throughout your writing.
4. Begin with an introduction that outlines the primary health issues affecting the population in the scenario. To substantiate your discussion, incorporate relevant health indicators, statistical data, and other pertinent evidence.
5. Apply the Socio-ecological Model (SEM) to analyse the determinants of health relevant to the scenario. Your analysis should consider how these determinants influence health behaviours and outcomes across the following levels:
• Intrapersonal (Individual) level
• Interpersonal level
• Community level
• Societal level
Support your arguments with appropriate evidence at each level, demonstrating an understanding of how these factors interact and contribute to health outcomes.
6. Discuss how determinants of health at each level can lead to negative behaviours and adverse health outcomes. Use credible evidence to support your explanations and illustrate the pathways through which these determinants influence behaviour and health.
7. Include a minimum of 10 credible references, formatted according to the current edition of the APA referencing style. Ensure all in-text citations are correctly included and correspond to your reference list.
8. Document in the table in the appendix of the assessment structure your literature search process, including the keywords used, Boolean operators, and search engines or databases accessed, to demonstrate the thoroughness of your research.
9. Ensure your report is professional, well-structured, and adheres to Academic English conventions. Use the same font as specified in your assessment guidelines.
NOTE: AI writers such as Chat GPT and Google AI are NOT ALLOWED in this assessment. Using these AI writers will be considered academic misconduct - contract cheating.
Format parameters
• APA referencing style (Current edition); Page numbers.
• 1.5 spacing.
• Font style: Academic accepted (e.g. Arial, Tahoma)
• A font size of 11 or 12 points
• Submit your work in Word.Doc format only. Please DO NOT use PDF format
Use the following structure to write your assessment:
PUBH6000 Assessment 1
(Add the title of the Case Study)
Student name, Student ID
Word count
(Please delete all instructions in Blue before submitting your work)
Context of potential health issues among the population
Provide a comprehensive introduction that describes the health issues impacting the population in the scenario. Include relevant health indicators, such as prevalence, mortality, and morbidity data, supported by current statistics and evidence. This detailed overview should highlight the key health challenges faced by the community. (Approx. 300 words)
Social Determinants of Health
Utilise the socio-ecological model (SEM) to analyse the determinants influencing health behaviours and outcomes within the scenario. This analysis should be structured across four levels, with supporting evidence for each:
• Intrapersonal (Individual) Level: Consider knowledge, attitudes, beliefs, genetics, and personal health practices.
• Interpersonal (Relationship) Level: Examine influences from family, friends, peers, and social networks that impact health behaviours.
• Community Level: Analyse the role of local environments, community resources, healthcare services, and social norms.
• Societal Level: Discuss broader societal influences, including policies, economic factors, cultural norms, and media influences.
This section should provide a detailed and evidence-based analysis of how these determinants shape health outcomes in the population. (Approx. 800 words)
Influence of Key Determinants on Health Behaviours and Outcomes
Explain how determinants at each level contribute to negative health behaviours and adverse health outcomes of the population in the scenario. Support your discussion with current evidence from academic literature, illustrating the pathways through which social, economic, and environmental factors influence individual and collective health. (Approx. 500 words)
Conclusion
Summarise the key points of your assessment succinctly, emphasising the importance of understanding social determinants and their impact on health. Avoid introducing new information; instead, focus on synthesising the main insights from your analysis. The conclusion should provide a clear and concise overview of the assessment's findings and implications. (Approx. 100-150 words)
References (Not part of word count)
Include at least 10 references formatted according to APA current edition standards. These should be credible academic sources that support your analysis and discussion.
Appendix (Not part of word count)
Evidence of Research
Document your research process by providing details of your literature search, including the date, database used, search terms, filters applied, results obtained, and key papers selected. For example:
|
Date of search |
Database |
Search terms, filters added and Boolean Operators |
Result |
Papers
extracted |
|
12/03/2024 |
PUBMED |
((Social
determinants of health) AND (climate change)) AND (Australia) Filters: Full
text, from 2013 - 2024
|
64 full-text peerreviewed articles |
(Patrick et al., 2023), DOI https://doi.org/10.1 177/000486742211 07872 |
Referencing (Standard text. Please don’t delete or edit)
It is essential that you use current APA style for citing and referencing the sources that you use.
Please see more information on citing and referencing guidelines on the Academic Success webpage.
Assessment Support
For a range of additional resources and support to help you complete your assessment, please consult the Study Support page on the Student Hub.
Academic Integrity
All students are responsible for ensuring that their submitted work is original, adheres to academic writing standards outlined in the Torrens University Academic Writing Guide, and is appropriately referenced according to the guidelines provided in the Torrens University APA Referencing Guide.
Students need to have read and be aware of the Torrens University Australia Academic Integrity Policy, Academic Integrity Procedure and subsequent penalties for academic misconduct. For more information, please refer to the Academic Integrity guidelines and the Torrens University Library.
Students must also keep all required evidence in making an assessment; a copy of all submitted material and any assessment drafts.
Generative AI
Please refer to the Torrens University Library for guidance on the use of Generative AI. Please speak to your learning facilitator regarding the use of GenAI tools in your assessments.
Submission Instructions
Submit this task via Assessments > Briefs & Submissions in the main navigation menu in SUBJECT CODE: Subject name. Please name your file using the following format:
o SubjectCode_Surname_FirstNameInitial_AssessmentNumber
e.g. MGMT6002_Jones_S_Assessment 2.docx
Your marked assessment can be viewed in MyLearn.
Assessment Due Dates and Late Penalties (Standard text. Please don’t delete or edit)
Assessments may be submitted on or before the due date. Late penalties apply for assessments that are submitted after the due date.
Refer to:
• Assessment Policy for Higher Education Coursework (HE) and ELICOS Torrens University | Think Education
• Assessment Special Consideration Guidelines for Students (HE Coursework) Torrens University | Think Education
• Student Hub for Assessment Extension Information.
Special Consideration (Standard text. Please don’t delete or edit).
To apply for special consideration for a modification to an assessment task or exam due to unexpected or extenuating circumstances, please consult the Assessment Policy for Higher Education Coursework and ELICOS and, if applicable to your circumstance, submit a completed Application for Assessment Special Consideration Form to your learning facilitator.
Instructions
Assessment Rubric
|
Assessment Criteria |
High Distinction (Exceptional) 85-100% |
Distinction (Advanced) 75-84% |
Credit (Proficient) 65-74% |
Pass (Functional) 50-64% |
Fail (Yet to achieve minimum standard) 0-49% |
|
Demonstrate
an understanding of potential health issue(s) within a specific population. Percentage
for this criterion =20% |
The assessment displays a highly sophisticated
understanding of potential health issue(s) within a specific population. The analysis is comprehensive, and the writing
integrates the most relevant and recent evidence. The assessment used the correct
case scenario, including the correct health issue and population. |
The assessment thoroughly understands potential
health issue(s) within a specific population.
The analysis demonstrated the capacity to explain
and apply unit concepts justified by relevant and credible evidence. The assessment used the correct
case scenario, including the correct health issue and population. |
The assessment displays an appropriate understanding
of potential health issue(s) within a specific population, supported with credible
evidence. The assessment used the correct
case scenario, including the correct health issue and population. |
The assessment displays a basic level of understanding of
potential health issue(s) within a specific population, supported by some
credible evidence. The assessment demonstrates limited application of the case
scenario and the correct health issue, but the population is not clearly
defined. |
The assessment does not display an understanding of
potential health issue(s) within a specific population from the case study. The assessment used the wrong case scenario,
health issue, and population. The evidence is not credible. |
|
|
The assessment includes a highly
advanced |
The assessment presents an
excellent application of the |
The assessment demonstrates a strong |
The assessment presents limited
ability to apply |
The assessment does not
demonstrate the ability to |
|
Apply the
Ecological Model to analyse social determinants of health issues within a
specific population. Percentage
for this criterion =35% |
application of an Ecological Model to thoroughly
analyse the social determinants of health at all levels within the specific
context of the case scenario and the population. An expertly crafted ecological model analysis at all
levels. The analysis is expertly
explained and welljustified by relevant, highquality evidence from credible
sources. |
Ecological Model to thoroughly analyse the social
determinants of health at all levels within the specific context of the case
scenario and the population. An appropriate ecological model analysis at all
levels. The analysis is very well explained and justified
with relevant and credible evidence. |
application of the ecological model to analyse the
social determinants of health within the specific context of the case
scenario and the population. A correct ecological model analysis with only minor
errors at no more than one level. The analysis is reasonably well
explained and justified by credible evidence. |
knowledge and understanding of the Ecological Model to
analyse social determinants of health within the specific context of the case
scenario and the population. An acceptable ecological model analysis with some
errors at multiple levels. This is overly descriptive and
lacks sufficient supporting evidence. |
apply knowledge and understanding of the Ecological
Model to analyse social determinants of health within the context of the case
scenario and the population. Limited or flawed ecological
model with significant errors across most levels. The assessment used the wrong
case study, health issue, and population. |
|
Assess
the impact of social determinants of health on the health behaviour and
outcomes of the population. |
Highly proficient understanding of critical concepts
of health behaviours. The assessment demonstrates a
highly proficient ability to appraise the influence of social determinants of
health on behaviours within the context of the |
Proficient
understanding of key concepts of health behaviours. The assessment demonstrates a
proficient ability to appraise the influence of social determinants of health
on behaviours within the context |
Good understanding of key concepts of health
behaviours. The assessment demonstrates an
acceptable ability to appraise the influence of social determinants of health
behaviours within the context of the specific |
Limited
understanding of key concepts of health behaviours. The assessment demonstrates basic
ability to appraise the influence of social determinants of health within the
context of the specific case scenario and population. |
Very limited understanding of key concepts of health
behaviours. The assessment provides a limited
appraisal of the influence of social determinants of health within the
context of the specific case scenario and population. |
|
Percentage for this criterion = 25% |
specific case scenario and
population. |
of the specific case scenario and
population. |
case scenario and population. |
|
|
|
Evidence
of research and use of the academic literature. Percentage
for this criterion = 10% |
Shows evidence of the use of more than four library
databases and search engines with proficient advanced keywords and Boolean
operators. A proficient search history strategy is included in
the appendix, free from errors. Provide more than 15 references and demonstrate
expert use of high-quality, credible and relevant research sources to support
and develop arguments and position statements. Shows extensive evidence of reading beyond the key reading |
Shows evidence of the use of three to four library
databases and search engines with proficient use of keywords and Boolean
operators, no mistakes and the findings are relevant to the topic. The strategy for search history is included in the
appendix, and minor issues (e.g., an incorrect keyword) have been identified.
Provide 13 to
15 references and consistently demonstrate expert use of high-quality,
credible, and relevant research sources to support and develop appropriate
arguments and statements. Show evidence of reading beyond
the key texts |
Shows
evidence of the use of at least two library databases and search engines with
appropriate use of keywords and Boolean operators, minor mistakes, and most
of the findings are relevant to the topic.
The
search history strategy, included in the appendix, contains some information
that needs to be corrected or addition (e.g., missing database name and
keywords). Provide 10-12 references, demonstrating consistent use of
high-quality, credible, and relevant research sources integrated into the
writing, which contribute to the argument. |
Demonstrates evidence of using at least one library
database and search engines, albeit with mistakes. Some findings are irrelevant to the topic, such as
the lack of appropriate keywords or Boolean operators, and references are
only occasionally relevant. The search history strategy is partially included in
the appendix, but it is incomplete and contains significant errors. Provide 10 references and
demonstrate consistent use of credible and relevant research sources to
support and develop ideas; however, these are not always explicit or
welldeveloped |
There is no evidence of the use of library databases
or search engines, and the findings do not relate to the topic. The appendix lacks evidence of the search history
strategy. Provide fewer than 10 references
and show an inconsistent use of quality, credible, and relevant research
sources to support and develop ideas. |
|
Assessment fulfils general academic standards and
general criteria. Percentage
for this criterion = 5% |
Expertly
written and adheres to the academic genre and uses the given assessment
structure. The report systematically and critically discriminates
between assertions of personal opinion and information substantiated by
robust evidence from independent research. |
Very
well-written and adheres to the academic genre while using the given
assessment structure. The assessment discriminates between assertions of personal
opinion and information substantiated by evidence from independent research. |
Well-written
and adheres to the academic genre and use the given assessment
structure. The assessment discriminates
between assertion of personal opinion and information substantiated by
evidence from independent research. |
Written
according to the academic genre and using the given assessment structure,
with some mistakes. The assessment highlights some errors in distinguishing
between personal opinion and factual information supported by independent
research. |
Poorly
written with many errors, and does not meet the academic genre, nor does it
use the given assessment structure. The assessment fails to differentiate personal opinion from
factual information and presents little to no evidence of independent
research. |
|
Use of APA style. Percentage
for this criterion = 5% |
There are
no mistakes in using the APA Style; all relevant in-text citations include
page numbers or paragraph numbers. All
references are included and well formatted.
All reference DOIs and links are included and correct. |
There are
no mistakes in using the APA style, but not all relevant in-text citations include
a page number. All
references are included in both the in-text citations and the reference list,
but minor formatting (Hanging indentation) mistakes are present. All reference DOIs and most of the links are included. |
There are
minor mistakes in using the APA style, such as missing page numbers in intext
citations. All
references are included in both the in-text citations and the reference list,
although some formatting mistakes are present. All reference links and DOIs are included, but some are
incorrect. |
There are
some mistakes in using the APA style. Some missing citations in either the in-text or reference
list, along with incorrect reference links or DOIs. |
There are
significant mistakes in using the APA style.
Missing most in-text citations and/or reference list.
Missing most reference links or DOIs. |
of 10
