compare differences between trigeminal neuralgia and giant cell arteritis

January 11, 2023

compare differences between trigeminal neuralgia and giant cell arteritis

Order Number	6954549649648
Type of Project	ESSAY/DISERTATION
Writer Level	PHD/MASTERS CERTIFIED
Format	APA/MLA/HARVARD/OXFORD
Academic Sources	10 -20
Page Count	4-8 PAGES

Instructions/Descriptions

compare differences between trigeminal neuralgia and giant cell arteritis

Application of Course Knowledge: Compare and contrast the assigned topics in your initial discussion post. The goal of this assignment goes beyond simply listing information for each disease; it requires a careful examination of both disorders with a thoughtful discussion of both the similarities and the differences of each. Consider the clinical presentation of each client to the office. Describe their clinical presentation and how their history would impact their diagnosis.

Address each of the following components using your own words:

Presentation: Demographics, onset of symptoms, history of present illness, associated risk factors

Pathophysiology: Similarities and differences in pathophysiology Assessment: Physical assessment techniques, appropriate diagnostic testing

Diagnosis: Additional differential diagnoses to consider, positive findings for each diagnosis

Management: Similarities and differences in pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic treatments, client education, referral, and follow-up care

Need scholarly evidence to back up claims.

[Order Now]

compare differences between trigeminal neuralgia and giant cell arteritis

RUBRIC

Excellent Quality

95-100%

Introduction

45-41 points

The context and relevance of the issue, as well as a clear description of the study aim, are presented. The history of searches is discussed.

Literature Support

91-84 points

The context and relevance of the issue, as well as a clear description of the study aim, are presented. The history of searches is discussed.

Methodology

58-53 points

With titles for each slide as well as bulleted sections to group relevant information as required, the content is well-organized. Excellent use of typeface, color, images, effects, and so on to improve readability and presenting content. The minimum length criterion of 10 slides/pages is reached.

Average Score

50-85%

40-38 points

More depth/information is required for the context and importance, otherwise the study detail will be unclear. There is no search history information supplied.

83-76 points

There is a review of important theoretical literature, however there is limited integration of research into problem-related ideas. The review is just partly focused and arranged. There is research that both supports and opposes. A summary of the material given is provided. The conclusion may or may not include a biblical integration.

52-49 points

The content is somewhat ordered, but there is no discernible organization. The use of typeface, color, graphics, effects, and so on may sometimes distract from the presenting substance. It is possible that the length criteria will not be reached.

Poor Quality

0-45%

37-1 points

The context and/or importance are lacking. There is no search history information supplied.

75-1 points

There has been an examination of relevant theoretical literature, but still no research concerning problem-related concepts has been synthesized. The review is just somewhat focused and organized. The provided overview of content does not include any supporting or opposing research. The conclusion has no scriptural references.

48-1 points

There is no logical or apparent organizational structure. There is no discernible logical sequence. The use of typeface, color, graphics, effects, and so on often detracts from the presenting substance. It is possible that the length criteria will not be reached.