Every order is original, expert-done, and screened for AI — full report on request.See how it works

Assignment questions
Health Information ManagementDiscussion postHealth informatics

Health informatics evaluation models discussion guide

A 550-word APA discussion post using four numbered level-one headings: which of three assigned scenarios you were given and two evaluation models that could be applied to it, why you chose those models and how you would use them, why the evaluation's goal and viewpoint matter, and an assessment of why an evaluation should rest on a model at all.

Editorial process

Last reviewed · August 12, 2026

01

Why does the brief open with an analogy about differing viewpoints?

The prompt opens with an analogy about the same scene shown from different characters' points of view, and that analogy is the assignment rather than decoration. Its claim is that a health information technology evaluation has no single correct method, because the method follows from whose question you are answering. The three scenarios are built to make the point: a training programme for a bedside medication verification system is a question about whether clinicians will use it and how well; a chief medical officer asking about adverse events after a decision support rollout is a question about outcomes; evaluating the opinions of physicians, nurses and the public towards a planned surgery centre is a question about attitudes across groups who do not share a stake. Those three demand different evidence, and choosing a model without naming the viewpoint is the failure the whole discussion is designed to expose.

Heading two asks not just why you selected the models but how you would use them, and the second half is where posts thin out. Naming the Technology Acceptance Model is not using it. Using it means saying what you would measure — perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use, gathered by survey from the clinicians who were trained, at a point after go-live when the novelty has worn off. Using Diffusion of Innovations means identifying adopter categories and tracking uptake over time rather than at a single moment. Whichever pair you pick, describe the instrument, the population and the timing, because those three details are what turn a model from a label into a design. The requirement for two models is also an invitation to contrast. Two models that would produce the same survey of the same people at the same moment have not been chosen thoughtfully, and the post loses the comparison the heading was built to elicit.

The last two headings are conceptual, and they are short by design. Heading three asks why the goal and the viewpoint change the model, which is where you should apply the opening analogy explicitly to your own scenario: say what a different viewpoint on the same project would have required, and how the study would have changed. Heading four asks whether basing an evaluation on a model matters at all, and the strongest answer concedes something before defending the position — an unmodelled evaluation can still collect data, but it has no principled basis for deciding what to measure or what a result means. With 550 words across four headings you have around 140 words each, so headings three and four should each carry one tight argument rather than a survey of evaluation theory. Pick the single strongest point for each and give it room to be made properly.

Likely learning objectives

Inferred from the brief — check these against your own rubric.

  • 01
    Match an evaluation model to the question a specific stakeholder is asking.
  • 02
    Turn a named model into a study design with instrument, population and timing.
  • 03
    Choose two models that genuinely contrast rather than duplicate.
  • 04
    Explain how a change of viewpoint would change an evaluation's design.
  • 05
    Argue for model-based evaluation while conceding what an unmodelled evaluation can still do.
Assignment instructionsQuoted verbatim

Read the full question

Review every instruction before using the planning guidance that follows.

Have you ever watched a movie in which the same scene was shown several times but as viewed by different individuals? Or, have you watched a detective show in which the witnesses all had differing accounts? The same can hold true for conducting an evaluation of a health information technology project. How you plan and conduct the evaluation is largely dependent on the viewpoint you assume and the perspective with which you approach the evaluation. Consider a new patient discharge protocol at a small hospital. Do you want to know how the patient feels about the process? Do you want to gather the opinions of nurses who are using this process? Perhaps you want to determine if it is saving the hospital money by freeing up bed space in a more timely fashion. Obtaining each of these viewpoints would require a different approach. Depending on the goal of your evaluation, the model and viewpoint you opt to use will likely vary. In this Discussion, determine which evaluation model would be most effective for evaluating the health information technology described in one of the scenarios below. Your Instructor will assign a specific scenario by Day 1 of this week. Scenario 1: You have recently provided a training program to help nurses and physicians become proficient in the use of a new bedside medication verification (BMV) system. Scenario 2: The Chief Medical Officer at your hospital is interested in finding out the impact of a new decision support system on the number of adverse events occurring in the past year. Scenario 3: You are helping with the design of a new outpatient surgery center to be built adjacent to the hospital. You are tasked with evaluating the opinions of physicians, nurses, and the general public toward this facility. To prepare: Review the information on the types of evaluation models covered in this week’s Learning Resources. Determine which model would be most appropriate to use for evaluation in the scenario to which you were assigned. Consider why the viewpoint of the scenario or situation would impact the model used. View the scenario from a different viewpoint, and consider how a different model might be used. Reflect on the importance of basing an evaluation on a model. By tomorrow 12/13/2016 at 9pm, post a minimum of 550 words in APA format with a minimum of 3 references from the list below, which include the level one headings as numbered below: 1) Post which scenario (1, 2, or 3) you were assigned and two different models that could be utilized to approach the evaluation. 2) Explain why you selected those models and how you would use them. 3) Explain why it is important to consider the intended goal of the evaluation and the viewpoint that is selected. 4) Finally, assess the importance of basing an evaluation on a model. Justify your response. Common Models in Health Informatics Evaluation Discussion
02

Turn the brief into deliverables

  1. 01
    A discussion post of at least 550 words in APA format.
  2. 02
    The four numbered level-one headings specified in the brief.
  3. 03
    The assigned scenario identified, with two evaluation models that could be applied to it.
  4. 04
    An explanation of why those models were selected and how you would use them.
  5. 05
    An explanation of why the evaluation's intended goal and chosen viewpoint matter.
  6. 06
    An assessment of the importance of basing an evaluation on a model, with justification.
  7. 07
    A minimum of three references from the assigned reading list.
03

Four numbered headings at roughly 140 words each

01

Heading 1: scenario and two models

State which scenario you were assigned and name two models suited to it.

02

Heading 2: why these, and how

For each model, give the instrument, the population sampled and the timing of measurement.

03

Heading 3: goal and viewpoint

Apply the opening analogy to your scenario: name a different stakeholder and say how the study would change.

04

Heading 4: why use a model at all

Concede that unmodelled evaluation collects data, then argue what a model supplies that ad hoc measurement cannot.

05

Trim and reference

Check the word count, the numbered headings and the three assigned-reading citations.

04

Where the acceptance and diffusion models are documented

Recommended databases

  • Walden Library (CINAHL, MEDLINE)
  • NCBI Bookshelf
  • AHRQ Digital Healthcare Research
  • HealthIT.gov

Search sequence

  1. 1.
    Read your assigned scenario first and write down whose question it is before opening any reading.
  2. 2.
    Pick the two models from the assigned list that answer different kinds of question about that scenario.
  3. 3.
    For each, find one application study so you can describe a real instrument rather than inventing one.
  4. 4.
    Draft headings three and four last; they depend on the design choices made in heading two.
05

Reference shortlist

These are authoritative starting points, not a ready-made bibliography. A qualified reviewer must confirm that each source fits the assignment and supports the claim beside which it is cited.

Nothing here is cleared for citation until you have read it.

  1. 01

    Clinical Decision Support

    AHRQ Digital Healthcare Research · 2024

    Implementation and evaluation studies of decision support, directly relevant if you were assigned the adverse-events scenario.

  2. 02

    Clinical Decision Support

    Office of the National Coordinator for Health IT (healthit.gov) · 2024

    The policy framing of what health IT is expected to achieve, which is one way of naming the goal an evaluation is measuring against.

  3. 03

    Clinical Decision Support Systems

    Fundamentals of Clinical Data Science, NCBI Bookshelf · 2019

    System-level vocabulary for describing what is being evaluated, so the design section can be precise about the object of study.

  4. 04

    TeamSTEPPS 3.0

    Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality · 2024

    A worked example of a training programme with published evaluation measures, useful if you were assigned the bedside medication verification training scenario.

06

Review before submission

Common mistakes

  • Describing the models in the abstract instead of applying them to the assigned scenario.
  • Naming two models without saying what you would measure, from whom, and when.
  • Choosing two models that would produce the same study, which wastes the contrast the brief asks for.
  • Treating the opening analogy as scene-setting rather than as the argument the post is about.
  • Answering heading four with an unqualified defence, when conceding the counter-case is stronger.
  • Ignoring the numbered level-one headings, which the brief specifies explicitly.

Submission checklist

  • The assigned scenario number is stated at the start.
  • Two evaluation models are named and are genuinely different in what they would measure.
  • Each model is described as a design: instrument, population, timing.
  • Heading three applies the viewpoint argument to your own scenario, not to the general idea.
  • Heading four concedes what an unmodelled evaluation can do before defending model use.
  • Four numbered level-one headings, matching the brief.
  • Three or more references drawn from the assigned readings, in APA format.
  • At least 550 words.

Use this guide to plan and review your own work. Follow your institution's rules and read our academic-integrity policy.

Written by

Aaron Bishop

MA, Education

assignment interpretation and research-methods coaching across disciplines

Aaron leads the EssayCrackers editorial desk. He works on how assignment briefs are read — what a rubric is actually asking for, and where students most often answer a different question than the one set.

Reviewed by

Dr. Nathan Cole

PhD, Rhetoric & Composition

Argumentation and thesis development

Nathan teaches first-year composition and directs a university writing center. He reviews EssayCrackers guides for argumentative soundness and citation accuracy.

Want feedback on your plan before you draft?

Get help interpreting the brief, checking your evidence strategy, and strengthening your outline while keeping the work your own.

Get assignment guidance
Start your order