Diet analysis, pathophysiology and SMART goals
Part II has three sub-questions and the third is the one that gets dropped: how the patient's diet interacts with the common medications for their disease. That is where the paper stops being a nutrition essay.
Editorial process
Last reviewed · August 15, 2026
One patient profile carries all three parts
Choose the patient profile first and then keep every later section tied to that one person, because the paper is graded on continuity rather than on breadth. Part I analyses the diet, which means working from what the profile actually records rather than from general dietary advice: total intake against requirement, macronutrient distribution, sodium, added sugar, fibre, and whichever nutrient matters for this patient's condition. Follow the sample paper's list structure for calculations, as the instructions specify, because a calculation section written as prose is harder to mark and the requirement is explicit. Part II then has three separate demands and they must each be answered. Anatomy: what the diet is doing to the organ systems involved. Pathophysiology: how it accelerates or slows the disease process specifically, which means naming the mechanism rather than asserting that a poor diet worsens the condition. Those two answers should read differently: one is about structure and the other is about trajectory.
The third demand in Part II is the one papers skip — the common medications associated with the disease and how this diet interacts with them. That is a real clinical question with concrete answers: vitamin K intake against warfarin, potassium against ACE inhibitors or potassium-sparing diuretics, grapefruit against statins and several other drug classes, carbohydrate distribution against insulin timing, calcium and iron against levothyroxine absorption. Name the drug class, the dietary component and the direction of the effect. Part III then asks for SMART goals, and the acronym is the rubric: each goal specific, measurable, achievable, relevant and time-bound, written for the patient rather than about them. 'Reduce sodium' is not a goal; 'keep sodium under 2,000 mg a day, checked against labels, for the next four weeks' is. Two peer-reviewed sources minimum, integrated into the paragraphs rather than appended at the end as a formality.
Likely learning objectives
Inferred from the brief — check these against your own rubric.
- 01Analyse a specific patient's recorded intake rather than diet in general.
- 02Connect dietary intake to anatomy and to disease progression separately.
- 03Identify diet-medication interactions for a named condition.
- 04Write patient goals that satisfy every element of the SMART criteria.
Read the full question
Review every instruction before using the planning guidance that follows.
Course-wide instructions that accompany this question
You must proofread your paper. But do not strictly rely on your computer’s spell-checker and grammar-checker; failure to do so indicates a lack of effort on your part and you can expect your grade to suffer accordingly. Papers with numerous misspelled words and grammatical mistakes will be penalized. Read over your paper – in silence and then aloud – before handing it in and make corrections as necessary. Often it is advantageous to have a friend proofread your paper for obvious errors. Handwritten corrections are preferable to uncorrected mistakes. Use a standard 10 to 12 point (10 to 12 characters per inch) typeface. Smaller or compressed type and papers with small margins or single-spacing are hard to read. It is better to let your essay run over the recommended number of pages than to try to compress it into fewer pages. Likewise, large type, large margins, large indentations, triple-spacing, increased leading (space between lines), increased kerning (space between letters), and any other such attempts at “padding” to increase the length of a paper are unacceptable, wasteful of trees, and will not fool your professor. The paper must be neatly formatted, double-spaced with a one-inch margin on the top, bottom, and sides of each page. When submitting hard copy, be sure to use white paper and print out using dark ink. If it is hard to read your essay, it will also be hard to follow your argument.
Turn the brief into deliverables
- 01A 4.5-page APA paper excluding title and reference pages.
- 02A diet analysis using the sample paper's list structure for calculations.
- 03Separate answers on anatomy, pathophysiology and medication interaction.
- 04SMART goals written for the patient, with an evidence-based plan of care.
- 05At least two peer-reviewed sources integrated into the text.
Analyse, then explain, then plan
Analyse the diet
Work through intake against requirement for the chosen profile, using the specified list structure.
Diet and anatomy
Explain what this intake does to the organ systems involved.
Diet and disease progression
Show how the diet accelerates or slows this specific pathophysiology.
Diet and medications
Identify the common drugs for this condition and how the diet interacts with them.
SMART goals and plan of care
Write goals meeting every SMART element, with an evidence-based education plan.
Two peer-reviewed sources, integrated
Recommended databases
- The patient profiles and assignment details supplied
- CINAHL
- PubMed Central
- NCBI Bookshelf
- National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases
Search sequence
- 1.Read the chosen profile closely and list what it actually records before searching anything.
- 2.Look up the standard drug classes for the condition, then search each against the dietary components you identified.
- 3.Find a peer-reviewed source on dietary intervention outcomes for this condition, so the plan of care is evidence-based rather than conventional.
- 4.Check the sample paper in the templates area for the calculation format before writing that section.
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.
- 01
Chronic Kidney Disease (CKD)
National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases · 2026
Worked dietary restrictions tied to a disease process, which is the shape Part II's first two questions need.
- 02
Heart-Healthy Living - What Is Heart-Healthy Living?
National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute · 2024
Evidence-based dietary targets that can be converted into measurable SMART goals.
- 03
Evidence-Based Medicine
StatPearls, NCBI Bookshelf · 2024
Frames what counts as evidence for the plan of care, keeping recommendations off habit.
- 04
Overweight & Obesity Statistics - NIDDK
National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases · 2024
Population data for situating the individual analysis, useful in the introduction.
Review before submission
Common mistakes
- Omitting the medication-interaction question, which is a third of Part II.
- Giving general dietary advice instead of analysing the profile's recorded intake.
- Writing goals that are not measurable or not time-bound, which fails the SMART criteria.
- Writing the calculations as prose when the sample paper's list structure is specified.
- Appending citations rather than integrating them into the paragraphs.
Submission checklist
- Have you answered all three parts of Part II, including medications?
- Do the calculations follow the sample paper's list structure?
- Is every goal specific, measurable, achievable, relevant and time-bound?
- Are the goals addressed to the patient rather than about them?
- Are both peer-reviewed sources integrated into the paragraphs?
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.