PUBH 7645 Global Health Policy in Practice Task 1: Current Global Health Controversies Part A Due: During Tutorials Week 5 & 6, Semester 2, 2020 Weighting: 10% Part B Due: Thursday 17th September,...

1 answer below »
Please refer to the Assessment Task 1 Task Sheet. There are two (2) parts that need to be completed. A three (3) minute written oral presentation with a maximum of 4 powerpoint slides and a 1000 word written report. Please note, the topic that has been allocated to me for this assignment is: 'Is a global approach required to truly tackle global influenza pandemic.'Any questions... please contact me. Many thanks :-)


PUBH 7645 Global Health Policy in Practice Task 1: Current Global Health Controversies Part A Due: During Tutorials Week 5 & 6, Semester 2, 2020 Weighting: 10% Part B Due: Thursday 17th September, 2020 (2pm), via Turnitin Weighting: 15% Task: You have recently accepted an internship position at the World Health Organisation. The internship requires you to produce a report in relation to a current global health controversy. The scenario will be allocated to you, and in your response you will need to describe the issue, examine the arguments and corresponding evidence base and recommend future research to address any knowledge gaps that may help to resolve the issue. Part A: Oral Presentation You are required to present a summary of your work on your scenario to colleagues in class in Weeks 5 & 6. This presentation is restricted to 3 minutes in length and should include a maximum of 4 PowerPoint slides covering the following elements: 1. Identify areas where you are seeking specific feedback from your colleagues 2. Brief introduction of scenario & identification of two sides of the argument or aspects to the problem 3. Accessing and assessing the evidence base to weigh up the two arguments 4. Discussion of potential lines of study to resolve the issue (how to increase the evidence base) You should make reference (using Vancouver) to relevant and the important and credible literature when presenting your arguments. There will be time allocated for a few brief questions at the end of each presentation. This is an important opportunity for you to seek feedback from your colleagues – and tutor – on any additional work you may need to do before finalising your written report. You should preface your presentation with specific areas/elements where you are seeking feedback (include this in your opening slide). Students who are enrolled externally (not the flexible delivery mode as the result of COVID19) are permitted to pre-record their oral presentations and submit via Blackboard in Week 5. See below for additional instructions. Part B: Written Report Drawing on your research, and any feedback you received from your oral presentation, prepare a 1,000 word written report for your supervisor at the World Health Organisation. Your report will consist of 3 parts (as per slides 2, 3 & 4 of your oral presentation) and consolidate and expand on the summary of work you presented to your colleagues. As with your oral presentation, be sure to clearly support your arguments with reference to relevant, peer-reviewed and credible literature. Do not use newspaper or internet articles. Ensure you use a report format to present your arguments. When constructing your response, you should consider the following elements: Elements: Detail: Purpose To inform and recommend Text type Report Audience and your role Your role: World Health Organisation intern Audience: Part A: MPH Peer group; Part B: WHO supervisor Conditions Part A: Oral Presentation Oral Presentation: 3 minutes Referencing style: Vancouver Individual task Submission details: To be presented live during the Weeks 5 & 6 Zoom tutorials External students only: Pre-record and submit via Blackboard (14:00, 3/9/20) Part B: Written Report Word Count: 1,000 words Referencing style: Vancouver Individual task Submission details: Submit via the Turnitin link in the Assessment Task 1 folder on Blackboard. Learning Objectives Assessed 6. Understand and apply the use of systematic reviews of health and medical literature to enable analysis of the evidence base 7. Demonstrate effective skills in written and oral communication Getting started: • Do some reading around the topic you have been allocated. Get a feel for why there is a question/controversy. • Find the most recent academic works in the area in high quality journals, to see where the research ends, and the unknown begins. • See if there are any systematic reviews or meta-analysis which provide a more structured survey of where the evidence is (but understand that it is still prone to opinion) • See if there are any narrative reviews highlighting the problems with the area… is it difficult to research? Is it ethically inaccessible? Do we have the technology yet? • Write some arguments down. Try a SWOT (Strengths; Weaknesses; Opportunities; Threats) analysis; work out what is missing? Could you design an experiment to respond to gaps in the evidence-base? PUBH 7645 Global Health Policy in Practice Task 1: Current Global Health Controversies Criteria and Standards for PUBH7645 Task 1 (Part A): Current Global Health Controversies (10%) Learning Objectives & Criteria 7 (>85%) Demonstrated evidence of exceptional achievement of course learning outcomes. 6 (75-84%) Demonstrated evidence of advanced achievement of course learning outcomes. 5 (65-74%) Demonstrated evidence of proficient achievement of course learning outcomes. 4 (50-64%) Demonstrated evidence of functional achievement of course learning outcomes. 3 (45-49%) Demonstrated evidence of developing achievement of course learning outcomes. 2 (20-44%) Minimal evidence of achievement of course learning outcomes. 1 (<19%) absence="" of="" evidence="" of="" achievement="" of="" course="" learning="" outcomes.="" identify="" 20%="" considered="" and="" clear="" identification="" of="" multiple="" aspects="" of="" the="" presentation="" where="" feedback="" is="" sought="" clear="" identification="" of="" multiple="" aspects="" of="" the="" presentation="" where="" feedback="" is="" sought="" identification="" of="" multiple="" aspects="" of="" the="" presentation="" where="" feedback="" is="" sought="" some="" identification="" of="" aspects="" of="" the="" presentation="" where="" feedback="" is="" sought="" attempts="" to="" identify="" one="" aspect="" of="" the="" presentation="" where="" feedback="" is="" sought,="" however="" this="" lacks="" clarity="" minimal="" to="" no="" identification="" of="" aspects="" of="" the="" presentation="" where="" feedback="" is="" sought="" some="" engagement="" with="" the="" assessment="" task;="" however="" no="" demonstrated="" evidence="" of="" understanding="" of="" the="" concepts="" in="" the="" field="" of="" study="" understand="" confirming="" knowledge;="" using="" knowledge="" 20%="" mastery="" knowledge="" of="" the="" fundamental="" arguments="" associated="" with="" a="" global="" health="" controversy="" substantial="" knowledge="" of="" the="" fundamental="" arguments="" associated="" with="" a="" global="" health="" controversy="" good="" knowledge="" of="" the="" fundamental="" arguments="" associated="" with="" a="" global="" health="" controversy="" adequate="" knowledge="" of="" the="" fundamental="" arguments="" associated="" with="" a="" global="" health="" controversy="" superficial="" understanding="" of="" the="" fundamental="" arguments="" associated="" with="" a="" global="" health="" controversy="" deficiencies="" in="" understanding="" the="" fundamental="" arguments="" associated="" with="" a="" global="" health="" controversy="" some="" engagement="" with="" the="" assessment="" task;="" however="" no="" demonstrated="" evidence="" of="" understanding="" of="" the="" concepts="" in="" the="" field="" of="" study="" analyse="" taking="" apart="" 15%="" skilful="" &="" accurate="" analysis="" of="" a="" global="" health="" controversy="" through="" the="" effective="" use="" of="" systematic="" reviews="" comprehensive="" analysis="" of="" a="" global="" health="" controversy="" through="" the="" effective="" use="" of="" systematic="" reviews="" competent="" analysis="" of="" a="" global="" health="" controversy="" through="" the="" use="" of="" systematic="" reviews="" analysis="" of="" a="" global="" health="" controversy="" through="" the="" use="" of="" systematic="" reviews="" simple="" analysis="" of="" a="" global="" health="" controversy="" that="" attempts="" to="" draw="" on="" systematic="" reviews="" limited="" analysis="" of="" a="" global="" health="" controversy="" that="" fails="" to="" draw="" on="" systematic="" reviews="" some="" engagement="" with="" the="" assessment="" task;="" however="" no="" demonstrated="" evidence="" of="" understanding="" of="" the="" concepts="" in="" the="" field="" of="" study="" evaluate="" judging="" the="" outcome="" 15%="" expert="" and="" critical="" evaluation="" of="" gaps="" in="" the="" evidence-base="" to="" determine="" thoughtful="" lines="" of="" study="" to="" resolve="" the="" issue="" critical="" evaluation="" of="" gaps="" in="" the="" evidence-="" base="" to="" determine="" thoughtful="" lines="" of="" study="" to="" resolve="" the="" issue="" considered="" evaluation="" of="" gaps="" in="" the="" evidence-="" base="" to="" determine="" lines="" of="" study="" to="" resolve="" the="" issue="" evaluates="" the="" evidence-="" base="" to="" determine="" a="" line="" of="" study="" to="" resolve="" the="" issue="" attempts="" to="" evaluate="" the="" evidence-base="" to="" determine="" a="" possible="" line="" of="" study="" to="" resolve="" the="" issue,="" however="" the="" solution="" lacks="" clarity="" inability="" to="" evaluate="" the="" evidence-base="" and/or="" to="" determine="" a="" line="" of="" study="" to="" resolve="" the="" issue="" some="" engagement="" with="" the="" assessment="" task;="" however="" no="" demonstrated="" evidence="" of="" understanding="" of="" the="" concepts="" in="" the="" field="" of="" study="" communication="" 15%="" exploits="" the="" conventions="" of="" an="" oral="" presentation="" to="" communicate="" at="" an="" expert="" level.="" uses="" the="" conventions="" of="" an="" oral="" presentation="" to="" communicate="" at="" a="" professional="" level.="" uses="" the="" conventions="" of="" an="" oral="" presentation="" to="" communicate="" at="" an="" effective="" level.="" uses="" some="" of="" the="" conventions="" of="" an="" oral="" presentation="" to="" communicate="" appropriately.="" communicates="" information="" or="" ideas="" with="" limited="" clarity="" and="" inconsistent="" adherence="" to="" the="" conventions="" of="" an="" oral="" presentation.="" communicates="" information="" or="" ideas="" in="" ways="" that="" are="" frequently="" incomplete,="" confusing="" and="" not="" appropriate="" to="" the="" no="" demonstrated="" evidence="" of="" achievement="" learning="" objectives="" &="" criteria="" 7="" (="">85%) Demonstrated evidence of exceptional achievement of course learning outcomes. 6 (75-84%) Demonstrated evidence of advanced achievement of course learning outcomes. 5 (65-74%) Demonstrated evidence of proficient achievement of course learning outcomes. 4 (50-64%) Demonstrated evidence of functional achievement of course learning outcomes. 3 (45-49%) Demonstrated evidence of developing achievement of course learning outcomes. 2 (20-44%) Minimal evidence of achievement of course learning outcomes. 1 (<19%) absence of evidence of achievement of course learning outcomes. conventions of an oral presentation. research & referencing 15% well-judged selection of an extensive selection of sources; all appropriately acknowledged with consistent & accurate referencing. substantial number & range of sources; appropriately acknowledged with a high level of accuracy in referencing. significant number and range of sources; appropriately acknowledged with minor inaccuracies in referencing. adequate number and range of sources; sources acknowledged with some minor inaccuracies in referencing. limited number and range of sources; some sources not acknowledged with major inaccuracies in referencing. very limited to no sources presented; many absence="" of="" evidence="" of="" achievement="" of="" course="" learning="" outcomes.="" conventions="" of="" an="" oral="" presentation.="" research="" &="" referencing="" 15%="" well-judged="" selection="" of="" an="" extensive="" selection="" of="" sources;="" all="" appropriately="" acknowledged="" with="" consistent="" &="" accurate="" referencing.="" substantial="" number="" &="" range="" of="" sources;="" appropriately="" acknowledged="" with="" a="" high="" level="" of="" accuracy="" in="" referencing.="" significant="" number="" and="" range="" of="" sources;="" appropriately="" acknowledged="" with="" minor="" inaccuracies="" in="" referencing.="" adequate="" number="" and="" range="" of="" sources;="" sources="" acknowledged="" with="" some="" minor="" inaccuracies="" in="" referencing.="" limited="" number="" and="" range="" of="" sources;="" some="" sources="" not="" acknowledged="" with="" major="" inaccuracies="" in="" referencing.="" very="" limited="" to="" no="" sources="" presented;="">
Answered Same DayAug 10, 2021

Answer To: PUBH 7645 Global Health Policy in Practice Task 1: Current Global Health Controversies Part A Due:...

Nishtha answered on Aug 22 2021
137 Votes
PUBH 7645 GLOBAL HEALTH POLICY IN PRACTICE
TASK 1: CURRENT GLOBAL HEALTH CONTROVERSIES
The pandemic situation is an outbreak, where there is a wide spread chances of human-to-human infection. This pandemic creates negative cons
equences like affecting political, economic and social lives of the people. The seriousness of pandemic increases is when it has high mortality and hospitalization rate. The pandemic do not see any international or global border. Hence, it is important that global approach be require in order to deal with the pandemic influenza. The biggest thing is that we need to get other nations up to par on disease control.
Over 3/4th of the world population lives where their sanitation in person, place and diet is hopelessly bad. The primary issue here is the food processing industry and the restaurant industry in these nations needs to be brought up to standard. Every nation’s government should have some plans if there is a chance of pandemic (1). The contingency budget would help every nation in this condition. Non-availability of the funds would create negative consequences. Closure of borders before the time, quarantine polices should have been implemented in the earlier phase.
Every infected nation has warning but they clearly ignoring them, before it goes worse. Principle of prevention is better than cure; it is the only available tool, which could help nation to minimise and truly to tackle the pandemic situation. Unless and until there would be any medicine or vaccine come in the market. No pandemic situation could be tackle globally if there is no public co-operation in terms of exhibiting restraint and practice of self-discipline.
Influenza virus is known for its continuous mutation and it has been postulated that the virus eventually mutated toward less pathogenic strain. This makes sense, as virus does not mean to kill people, it just wants to multiply – there is no benefit to the virus in killing people, it just means there are less carriers around. Therefore, a less aggressive strain would actually survive longer. A fatal influenza flu that affected more than one-third population of the entire killed nearly 200 million people. The first pandemic of 1918 dis not resolved at all it just faded away (2).
On the contrary,...
SOLUTION.PDF

Answer To This Question Is Available To Download

Related Questions & Answers

More Questions »

Submit New Assignment

Copy and Paste Your Assignment Here