Critically evaluate the differences in performance between healthcare systems using a range of measures
ASSESSMENT BRIEF
Module Name: Comparative Healthcare Systems
Academic Year: 2024-25
Assessment Period: Trimester 2
Module Code
Level
Credit Value
Module Leader
UNL3014
6
30
Assessment code and title:
PR1 Presentation
Assessed Learning Outcomes:
c) Critically evaluate the differences in performance between healthcare systems using a range of measures
d) Recommend appropriate strategies for healthcare reform and communicate professionally to a prescribed set of audience
f) Identify and solve complex and devising a range of creative solutions that justify a chosen course of action
Weighting:
50%
Duration
10 minutes per student
Submission deadline:
Week 8
Poster must be uploaded before deadline on the VLE
You must check the module VLE page for the exact date and time of your poster presentation.
This will be published no later than Friday of teaching week 7
This is an individual assessment
Presentations will take place on campus in your allocated classroom.
You will share your poster electronically on the classroom computer.
You will present your poster for a maximum of 10 minutes.
Arrive 10 minutes early, prior to your scheduled presentation slot.
A schedule with your allocated presentation time will be posted to the VLE.
Submit an electronic copy of your poster to your tutor prior to the presentation.
Other key information:
An individual assessment:
Poster presentation critiquing the performance of at least 2 healthcare systems, with recommendations for reform (10 mins per student)
The Assessment Task:
Context
You are a Public Health Consultant and have been commissioned to design and present a global health informatic poster for World Health Organisation (WHO) assembly delegates. They are tracking the performance of healthcare systems with wide Universal Health Coverage (UHC) in the regions of Europe and America with the goal of setting priorities for them.
As these regions have experienced surges in non-communicable diseases, the WHO delegates have instructed you to present a critical poster evaluation of the healthcare system performances of UK and USA when addressing one major geriatric morbidity, namely, coronary health disease (CHD) among their at-risk elderly populations.
Your poster must also include a set of reform recommendations to widen their healthcare system responses to this disease burden.
The poster must combine images and text, and critically evaluate and compare the healthcare performances of the UK and USA with key health measures.
Assessment Guidance:
The 10-minute global health informatic poster presentation should be in one document.
As it is for a WHO assembly audience, it should be written with technical terminology and substantiated with health data and indicators.
The presentation must critically appraise and contrast the healthcare performances of UK and USA in relation to them addressing geriatric coronary heart disease (CHD)
Each country’s healthcare system performance response must be measured against the indicators below
The WHO health building block framework
Health trends
Health Adjusted Life Expectancy (HALE)
Disability Adjusted Living Years (DALY)
The Global Disease Burden (GDB) index
The presentation must also use these critical healthcare performance reviews to justify and propose at least two reform recommendations for UK and USA to adopt, so to increase the equitable health outcomes of their at-risk elderly citizens.
The global health poster should be structured in the following way:
Student number, module title and code, and assessment code
Title: ‘Healthcare System Performance Evaluations and Proposed Reforms for UK and USA: Strengthening their Capabilities to Respond to Ageing Population Health Need’
Background
Overview of the UK and USA healthcare systems and performance measures that will be critically evaluated, as well as the recommended strategic and operational reforms for their improvements
Measuring the Performance of the Healthcare Systems
Comparative appraisal of the healthcare system performances of the UK and USA, examining the extent to which their health building blocks make equitable health gains in the following ways:
Reductions in the prevalence and incidence rates of coronary heart disease (CHD) among their at- risk elderly populations
Improvements in their Health Adjusted Life Expectancy (HALE), Disability Adjusted Living Years (DALY) and Global Disease Burden (GDB) Index outcomes
Conclusions and Reform Recommendations
Summary of the UK and USA health building blocks and outcomes that have been critically contrasted and measured
A Synthesis of these comparative performance reviews with at least four proposed reform recommendations, which are strategically aligned with equipping their different healthcare systems to improve the health outcomes of their targeted geriatric citizens
Important note: although the concepts that you present must be related to the taught content, you should be creative when critically mapping and applying a range of health performance measures to your strategic health policy recommendations.
Reference list
As with all assessments, you will need to include citations to support the ideas that you are presenting using the Harvard referencing system. You should also include a list of recent academic literature entries in support of your presentation and, as with your citations, they must incorporate a Harvard referencing format.
Learning Outcomes
On successful completion of this assessment, you will be able to:
C, Critically evaluate the differences in performance between healthcare systems using a range of measures D, Recommend appropriate strategies for healthcare reform and communicate professionally to a prescribed set of audience
F, Identify and solve complex and devising a range of creative solutions that justify a chosen course of action
Academic Integrity and Misconduct
Unless this is a group assessment, the work you produce must be your own, with work taken from any other source properly referenced and attributed. For the avoidance of doubt this means that it is an infringement of academic integrity and, therefore, academic misconduct to ask someone else to carry out all or some of the work for you, whether paid or unpaid, or to use the work of another student whether current or previously submitted.
For further guidance on what constitutes plagiarism, contract cheating or collusion, or any other infringement of academic integrity, please read the University’s Academic Integrity and Misconduct Policy. You will also find useful resources on the VLE: Referencing and Academic Integrity page.
N.B. The penalties for academic misconduct are severe and can include failing the assessment, failing the module and expulsion from the university.
Extensions
No extensions are available for this assessment.
For full details please refer to the Extensions Policy. Extensions are only available for first sits – they are not available for resits.
Mitigating Circumstances
For guidance on mitigating circumstances please go to Mitigating Circumstances where you will find detailed guidance on the policy as well as guidance and the form for making an application.
Please note, however, that an application to defer an assessment on the grounds of mitigating circumstances should normally be made in advance of the submission deadline or examination date.
Marking Rubric
This is what you will be marked against. You need to check it regularly against your work to ensure you are on the right track.
Learning Outcome (LO)
Distinction (A)
Merit (B)
Commended (C)
Pass (D)
Fail (F)
UONL Learning Outcomes – Level 6
Work that is distinguished is of very high quality, with a broad knowledge base and demonstrates a sustained ability to analyse key aspects of the assessment tasks.
Work of commendable quality demonstrating a strong conceptual grasp of assessment tasks in relation to learning outcomes.
Work that is of sound quality, demonstrating a good understanding of learning outcomes which is sufficient and appropriate to the task or activity.
Work of a broadly satisfactory quality demonstrates evidence of achieving the requirements of the learning outcomes.
Work falls short of the threshold standards. Work addresses the assessment task to some extent but overall is limited in its approach and is outweighed by major deficiencies in the work
c) Critically evaluate the differences in performance between healthcare systems using a range of measures
Excellent critical evaluation of different healthcare systems. An in-depth critical appraisal of how the World Health Organization (WHO) health building block framework can be used to reduce the prevalence and incidence of disease and increase the health equitability of aging populations across.
Ideas presented are informed by appropriate supporting material which has been evaluated using academic rigor.
A strong critical knowledge and evaluation of the performance
measures associated with the different healthcare systems. Critical appraisal of how the World Health Organization (WHO) health building block framework can be used to reduce the prevalence and incidence of disease and increase the health equitability of aging populations across different systems.
Consistent use of relevant subject-based supporting material to illustrate points.
A good critical knowledge and evaluation of the performance measures associated with the different healthcare systems. Critical appraisal of how the WHO health building block framework can be used to reduce the prevalence and incidence of disease amongst aging populations across different systems.
There was evidence of independent research
that was substantiated with credible and relevant sources. However, some errors were evident.
Basic/descriptive information was provided on the differences in performance between healthcare systems. Critical evaluation was lacking.
There was evidence of independent research with some credible and relevant sources. However, certain elements of discussion are irrelevant and a descriptive/basic discussion of performance measures in different systems.
Certain components of healthcare system and performance measures were discussed in the poster. However, the work did not differentiate healthcare systems as required. Some or all the sources used lacked credibility. The learning outcome was partly addressed. Overall, work falls short of threshold standards.
d) Recommend appropriate strategies for
Healthcare reform and communicate professionally to a prescribed set of audience
The poster effectively targeted healthcare systems. Knowledge of appropriate strategies for healthcare reform is broad and communicated accurately and effectively.
Wider supporting material used is also applied with rigor appropriate to the subject.
The poster presentation effectively targeted healthcare systems
A strong understanding of appropriate strategies for healthcare reform was demonstrated. Consistent use of relevant subject- based supporting material to illustrate points.
The poster presentation targeted Healthcare systems. A good understanding of appropriate strategies for healthcare reform was demonstrated. Used relevant examples appropriate to the case study to illustrate points/ good use of wide relevant literature.
The poster presentation targeted healthcare systems. Some aspects of the learning outcomes have been met but the discussion of appropriate strategies for healthcare reform was descriptive and basic. Some aspects of the work may also include irrelevant/inaccurate information about healthcare reform.
Limited information is provided on appropriate strategies for healthcare reform. Overall falls short of the quality of examples that only partially illustrate points/are not relevant to the case study.
f) Identify and solve complex and devising a range of creative solutions that justify a chosen course of action
The student creatively developed a set of sophisticated health Reform recommendations to solve a wide range of complex healthcare system.
Recommendations were fully justified using academic rigor
Recommendations made on healthcare system reform are creative and appropriate to the case study.
Recommendations were justified.
Consistent use of relevant subject-based supporting material to illustrate points.
Good recommendations were made for healthcare reform however, the recommendations were only partly justified.
Relevant literature was used to illustrate points
Recommendations to address healthcare system problems were made, however, the recommendations were basic and did not fully target the case study and not justified
The poster presentation targeted healthcare systems.
However, knowledge of appropriate strategies for healthcare reform is limited/not communicated accurately and effectively.
Supporting material not applied appropriately to the subject.
Get Fresh Answer: £99 100% Plagiarism Free & Custom Written,
