DNP 805 Topic 5: a clinical question for data mining
The technique you would refuse is the part that shows understanding, because rejecting one on principled grounds means you know what each technique assumes about your data.
Editorial process
Last reviewed · August 15, 2026
Data mining answers a different shape of question
Data mining answers questions about patterns in data that already exists, which is a different shape from the hypothesis-testing question you have been building all programme. So do not recycle your PICOT. A good mining question sounds like which combinations of admission characteristics precede unplanned thirty-day readmission in our heart failure population, or which sequences of documented interventions cluster together before a pressure injury is recorded. Both are exploratory, both need volume, and neither presumes you already know the predictors. State the clinical problem first and then the question, because a marker needs to see that the question could not have been answered by simply looking, which is the only justification for reaching for these techniques at all. State the clinical problem first and the question second, because a marker needs to see that ordinary reporting had already failed. A mining question that a standard monthly report could have answered is not a mining question, whatever technique you attach to it.
Match technique to question rather than listing techniques you have heard of. Classification predicts a labelled outcome and needs labelled historical cases. Clustering finds structure with no outcome label and is what you use when you suspect subgroups but cannot name them. Association rule mining surfaces co-occurrence, which is how order sets and comorbidity patterns get discovered. Regression estimates the size of an effect you already suspect. Then answer the refusal question properly: name a technique and say why your data defeats it. Clustering on a few hundred records will produce clusters that are noise. Association rules on sparse coded fields will surface the trivially obvious. A neural network on a problem requiring an explanation a clinician must accept trades away the interpretability that makes the finding actionable. Any one of those, said precisely, carries the post. Say which of those your data cannot support, and the refusal writes itself.
Likely learning objectives
Inferred from the brief — check these against your own rubric.
- 01Distinguish an exploratory data-mining question from a hypothesis-testing one.
- 02Match specific techniques to what a question assumes about the data.
- 03Justify rejecting a technique on grounds of data structure or interpretability.
- 04Recognise the volume and labelling requirements of each technique.
Read the full question
Review every instruction before using the planning guidance that follows.
Course-wide instructions that accompany this question
Important information for writing discussion questions and participation Hi Class, Please read through the following information on writing a Discussion question response and participation posts. Contact me if you have any questions. Important information on Writing a Discussion Question Your response needs to be a minimum of 150 words (not including your list of references) There needs to be at least TWO references with ONE being a peer reviewed professional journal article. Include in-text citations in your response Do not include quotes—instead summarize and paraphrase the information Follow APA-7th edition Points will be deducted if the above is not followed Participation –replies to your classmates or instructor A minimum of 6 responses per week, on at least 3 days of the week. Each response needs at least ONE reference with citations—best if it is a peer reviewed journal article Each response needs to be at least 75 words in length (does not include your list of references) Responses need to be substantive by bringing information to the discussion or further enhance the discussion. Responses of “I agree” or “great post” does not count for the word count. Follow APA 7th edition Points will be deducted if the above is not followed Remember to use and follow APA-7th edition for all weekly assignments, discussion questions, and participation points. Here are some helpful links Student paper example Citing Sources The Writing Center is a great resource Welcome to class Hello class and welcome to the class and I will be your instructor for this course. This is a -week course and requires a lot of time commitment, organization, and a high level of dedication. Please use the class syllabus to guide you through all the assignments required for the course. I have also attached the classroom policies to this announcement to know your expectations for this course. Please review this document carefully and ask me any questions if you do. You could email me at any time or send me a message via the “message” icon in halo if you need to contact me. I check my email regularly, so you should get a response within 24 hours. If you have not heard from me within 24 hours and need to contact me urgently, please send a follow up text to. I strongly encourage that you do not wait until the very last minute to complete your assignments. Your assignments in weeks 4 and 5 require early planning as you would need to present a teaching plan and interview a community health provider. I advise you look at the requirements for these assignments at the beginning of the course and plan accordingly. I have posted the YouTube link that explains all the class assignments in detail. It is required that you watch this 32-minute video as the assignments from week 3 through 5 require that you follow the instructions to the letter to succeed. Failure to complete these assignments according to instructions might lead to a zero. After watching the video, please schedule a one-on-one with me to discuss your topic for your project by the second week of class. Use this link to schedule a 15-minute session. Please, call me at the time of your appointment on my number. Please note that I will NOT call you. Please, be advised I do NOT accept any assignments by email. If you are having technical issues with uploading an assignment, contact the technical department and inform me of the issue. If you have any issues that would prevent you from getting your assignments to me by the deadline, please inform me to request a possible extension. Note that working fulltime or overtime is no excuse for late assignments. There is a 5%-point deduction for every day your assignment is late. This only applies to approved extensions. Late assignments will not be accepted. If you think you would be needing accommodations due to any reasons, please contact the appropriate department to request accommodations. Plagiarism is highly prohibited. Please ensure you are citing your sources correctly using APA 7th edition. All assignments including discussion posts should be formatted in APA with the appropriate spacing, font, margin, and indents. Any papers not well formatted would be returned back to you, hence, I advise you review APA formatting style. I have attached a sample paper in APA format and will also post sample discussion responses in subsequent announcements. Your initial discussion post should be a minimum of 200 words and response posts should be a minimum of 150 words. Be advised that I grade based on quality and not necessarily the number of words you post. A minimum of TWO references should be used for your initial post. For your response post, you do not need references as personal experiences would count as response posts. If you however cite anything from the literature for your response post, it is required that you cite your reference. You should include a minimum of THREE references for papers in this course. Please note that references should be no more than 5 years old except recommended as a resource for the class. Furthermore, for each discussion board question, you need ONE initial substantive response and TWO substantive responses to either your classmates or your instructor for a total of THREE responses. There are TWO discussion questions each week, hence, you need a total minimum of SIX discussion posts for each week. I usually post a discussion question each week. You could also respond to these as it would count towards your required SIX discussion posts for the week. DNP 805 Topic 5 Discussion 1 Select a specific clinical problem and post a clinical question that could potentially be answered using data mining. Identify data mining techniques you would apply to this challenge, and provide your rationale I understand this is a lot of information to cover in 5 weeks, however, the Bible says in Philippians 4:13 that we can do all things through Christ that strengthens us. Even in times like this, we are encouraged by God’s word that we have that ability in us to succeed with His strength. I pray that each and every one of you receives strength for this course and life generally as we navigate through this pandemic that is shaking our world today. Relax and enjoy the course! Exit Grid View List View Excellent Point range: 90–100 Good Point range: 80–89 Fair Point range: 70–79 Poor Point range: 0–69 Introduction to the case (1 page) Briefly explain and summarize the case for this Assignment. Be sure to include the specific patient factors that may impact your decision making when prescribing medication for this patient. 9 (9%) – 10 (10%) The response accurately, clearly, and fully summarizes in detail the case for the Assignment. The response accurately and clearly explains in detail the specific patient factors that impact decision making when prescribing medication for this patient. 8 (8%) – 8 (8%) The response accurately summarizes the case for the Assignment. The response accurately explains the specific patient factors that impact decision making with prescribing medication for this patient. 7 (7%) – 7 (7%) The response inaccurately or vaguely summarizes the case for the Assignment. The response inaccurately or vaguely explains the specific patient factors that impact decision making with prescribing medication for this patient. 0 (0%) – 6 (6%) The response inaccurately and vaguely summarizes the case for the Assignment, or is missing. The response inaccurately and vaguely explains the specific patient factors that impact decision making with prescribing medication for this patient. Decision #1 (1–2 pages) • Which decision did you select? • Why did you select this decision? Be specific and support your response with clinically relevant and patient- specific resources, including the primary literature. • Why did you not select the 18 (18%) – 20 (20%) The response accurately and clearly explains in detail the decision selected. The response accurately and clearly explains in detail why the decision was selected, with specific clinically relevant resources that fully support the decision selected. 16 (16%) – 17 (17%) The response accurately explains the decision selected. The response explains why the decision was selected, with specific clinically relevant resources that support the decision selected. The response accurately explains 14 (14%) – 15 (15%) The response inaccurately or vaguely explains the decision selected. The response inaccurately or vaguely explains why the decision was selected, with specific clinically relevant resources that inaccurately or vaguely support the decision 0 (0%) – 13 (13%) The response inaccurately and vaguely explains the decision selected. The response inaccurately and vaguely explains why the decision was selected, with specific clinically relevant resources that do not support the decision selected, or is missing. other two options provided in the exercise? Be specific and support your response with clinically relevant and patient- specific resources, including the primary literature. • What were you hoping to achieve by making this decision? Support your response with evidence and references to the Learning Resources (including the primary literature). • Explain how ethical considerations may impact your treatment plan and communication with patients. Be specific and provide examples. The response accurately and clearly explains in detail why the other two responses were not selected, with specific clinically relevant resources that fully support the response. The response accurately and clearly explains in detail the outcome the student was hoping to achieve with the selected decision, with specific clinically relevant resources that fully support the response. The response accurately and clearly explains in detail how ethical considerations impact the treatment plan and communication with patients. Examples provided fully support the decisions and responses provided. why the other two responses were not selected, with specific clinically relevant resources that support the response. The response accurately explains the outcome the student was hoping to achieve with the selected decision, with specific clinically relevant resources that support the response. The response accurately explains how ethical considerations impact the treatment plan and communication with patients. Examples provided support the decisions and responses provided. selected. The response inaccurately or vaguely explains why the other two responses were not selected, with specific clinically relevant resources that inaccurately or vaguely support the response. The response inaccurately or vaguely explains the outcome the student was hoping to achieve with the selected decision, with specific clinically relevant resources that inaccurately or vaguely support the response. The response inaccurately or vaguely explains how ethical considerations impact the treatment plan and communication with patients. Examples provided may support the decisions and responses provided. The response inaccurately and vaguely explains why the other two responses were not selected, with specific clinically relevant resources that do not support the decision selected, or is missing. The response inaccurately and vaguely explains the outcome the student was hoping to achieve with the selected decision, with specific clinically relevant resources that do not support the response, or is missing. The response inaccurately and vaguely explains how ethical considerations impact the treatment plan and communication with patients, or is missing. Examples provided do not support the decisions and responses provided, or is missing. Decision #2 (1–2 pages) • Which decision did you select? • Why did you select this decision? Be specific and support your response with clinically relevant and patient- specific resources, including the primary literature. • Why did you not select the other two options provided in the exercise? Be specific and support your response with clinically relevant and patient- specific resources, including the primary literature. • What were you hoping to 18 (18%) – 20 (20%) The response accurately and clearly explains in detail the decision selected. The response accurately and clearly explains in detail why the decision was selected, with specific clinically relevant resources that fully support the decision selected. The response accurately and clearly explains in detail why the other two responses were not selected, with specific clinically relevant resources that fully support the response. 16 (16%) – 17 (17%) The response accurately explains the decision selected. The response explains why the decision was selected, with specific clinically relevant resources that support the decision selected. The response accurately explains why the other two responses were not selected, with specific clinically relevant resources that support the response. The response accurately explains the outcome the student was 14 (14%) – 15 (15%) The response inaccurately or vaguely explains the decision selected. The response inaccurately or vaguely explains why the decision was selected, with specific clinically relevant resources that inaccurately or vaguely support the decision selected. The response inaccurately or vaguely explains why the other two responses were not selected, with specific clinically relevant resources that inaccurately or 0 (0%) – 13 (13%) The response inaccurately and vaguely explains in detail the decision selected. The response inaccurately and vaguely explains why the decision was selected, with specific clinically relevant resources that do not support the decision selected, or is missing. The response inaccurately and vaguely explains why the other two responses were not selected, with specific clinically relevant resources that do not support the decision selected, or is missing. achieve by making this decision? Support your response with evidence and references to the Learning Resources (including the primary literature). • Explain how ethical considerations may impact your treatment plan and communication with patients. Be specific and provide examples. The response accurately and clearly explains in detail the outcome the student was hoping to achieve with the selected decision, with specific clinically relevant resources that fully support the response. The response accurately and clearly explains in detail how ethical considerations impact the treatment plan and communication with patients. Examples provided fully support the decisions and responses provided. hoping to achieve with the selected decision, with specific clinically relevant resources that support the response. The response accurately explains how ethical considerations impact the treatment plan and communication with patients. Examples provided support the decisions and responses provided. vaguely support the response. The response inaccurately or vaguely explains the outcome the student was hoping to achieve with the selected decision, with specific clinically relevant resources that inaccurately or vaguely support the response. The response inaccurately or vaguely explains how ethical considerations impact the treatment plan and communication with patients. Examples provided may support the decisions and responses provided. The response inaccurately and vaguely explains the outcome the student was hoping to achieve with the selected decision, with specific clinically relevant resources that do not support the response, or is missing. The response inaccurately and vaguely explains how ethical considerations impact the treatment plan and communication with patients, or is missing. Examples provided do not support the decisions and responses provided, or is missing. Decision #3 (1–2 pages) • Which decision did you select? • Why did you select this decision? Be specific and support your response with clinically relevant and patient- specific resources, including the primary literature. • Why did you not select the other two options provided in the exercise? Be specific and support your response with clinically relevant and patient- specific resources, including the primary literature. • What were you hoping to achieve by making this decision? Support your response with evidence and references to the Learning Resources (including the primary literature). • Explain how ethical 18 (18%) – 20 (20%) The response accurately and clearly explains in detail the decision selected. The response accurately and clearly explains in detail why the decision was selected, with specific clinically relevant resources that fully support the decision selected. The response accurately and clearly explains in detail why the other two responses were not selected, with specific clinically relevant resources that fully support the response. The response accurately and clearly explains in detail the outcome the student was hoping to achieve with the selected decision, with specific clinically relevant resources that fully 16 (16%) – 17 (17%) The response accurately explains the decision selected. The response explains why the decision was selected, with specific clinically relevant resources that support the decision selected. The response accurately explains why the other two responses were not selected, with specific clinically relevant resources that support the response. The response accurately explains the outcome the student was hoping to achieve with the selected decision, with specific clinically relevant resources that support the response. The response accurately explains how ethical considerations 14 (14%) – 15 (15%) The response inaccurately or vaguely explains the decision selected. The response inaccurately or vaguely explains why the decision was selected, with specific clinically relevant resources that inaccurately or vaguely support the decision selected. The response inaccurately or vaguely explains why the other two responses were not selected, with specific clinically relevant resources that inaccurately or vaguely support the response. The response inaccurately or vaguely explains the outcome the student was hoping to achieve with the selected decision, with specific clinically relevant 0 (0%) – 13 (13%) The response inaccurately and vaguely explains in detail the decision selected. The response inaccurately and vaguely explains why the decision was selected, with specific clinically relevant resources that do not support the decision selected, or is missing. The response inaccurately and vaguely explains why the other two responses were not selected, with specific clinically relevant resources that do not support the decision selected, or is missing. The response inaccurately and vaguely explains the outcome the student was hoping to achieve with the selected decision, with specific clinically relevant resources that do not support the considerations may impact your treatment plan and communication with patients. Be specific and provide examples. support the response. The response accurately and clearly explains in detail how ethical considerations impact the treatment plan and communication with patients. Examples provided fully support the decisions and responses provided. impact the treatment plan and communication with patients. Examples provided support the decisions and responses provided. resources that inaccurately or vaguely support the response. The response inaccurately or vaguely explains how ethical considerations impact the treatment plan and communication with patients. Examples provided may support the decisions and responses provided. response, or is missing. The response inaccurately and vaguely explains how ethical considerations impact the treatment plan and communication with patients, or is missing. Examples provided do not support the decisions and responses provided, or is missing. Conclusion (1 page) • Summarize your recommendations on the treatment options you selected for this patient. Be sure to justify your recommendations and support your response with clinically relevant and patient-specific resources, including the primary literature. 14 (14%) – 15 (15%) The response accurately and clearly summarizes in detail the recommendations on the treatment options selected for this patient. The response accurately and clearly explains a justification for the recommendations provided, including clinically relevant resources that fully support the recommendations provided. 12 (12%) – 13 (13%) The response accurately summarizes the recommendations on the treatment options selected for this patient. The response accurately explains a justification for the recommendation provided, including clinically relevant resources that support the recommendations provided. 11 (11%) – 11 (11%) The response inaccurately or vaguely summarizes the recommendations on the treatment options selected for this patient. The response inaccurately or vaguely explains a justification for the recommendations provided, including clinically relevant resources that inaccurately or vaguely support the recommendations provided. 0 (0%) – 10 (10%) The response inaccurately and vaguely summarizes the recommendations on the treatment options selected for this patient, or is missing. The response inaccurately and vaguely explains a justification for the recommendations provided, including clinically relevant resources that do not support the recommendations provided, or is missing. Written Expression and Formatting – Paragraph Development and Organization: Paragraphs make clear points that support well-developed ideas, flow logically, and demonstrate continuity of ideas. Sentences are carefully focused—neither long and rambling nor short and lacking substance. A clear and comprehensive purpose statement and introduction are provided that delineate all required criteria. 5 (5%) – 5 (5%) Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity. A clear and comprehensive purpose statement, introduction, and conclusion are provided that delineate all required criteria. 4 (4%) – 4 (4%) Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 80% of the time. Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment are stated, yet they are brief and not descriptive. 3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%) Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 60%–79% of the time. Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment is vague or off topic. 0 (0%) – 3 (3%) Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity < 60% of the time. No purpose statement, introduction, or conclusion were provided. Written Expression and Formatting – English writing standards: Correct grammar, mechanics, and proper punctuation 5 (5%) – 5 (5%) Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors. 4 (4%) – 4 (4%) Contains a few (1 or 2) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. 3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%) Contains several (3 or 4) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. 0 (0%) – 3 (3%) Contains many (≥ 5) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the reader’s understanding. Written Expression and Formatting – The paper follows correct APA format for title page, headings, font, spacing, margins, indentations, page numbers, parenthetical/in- text citations, and reference list. 5 (5%) – 5 (5%) Uses correct APA format with no errors. 4 (4%) – 4 (4%) Contains a few (1 or 2) APA format errors. 3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%) Contains several (3 or 4) APA format errors. 0 (0%) – 3 (3%) Contains many (≥ 5) APA format errors. Total Points: 100
Turn the brief into deliverables
- 01A named clinical problem.
- 02A clinical question that data mining could answer.
- 03At least one technique with a rationale tied to the question.
- 04At least one technique explicitly rejected, with support.
Problem, question, technique, then the technique you refuse
The clinical problem
Name the problem and why existing reporting has not resolved it.
The question
Frame an exploratory question about patterns in existing data.
Techniques and rationale
Select techniques and tie each to the question's data assumptions.
The technique you would not use
Name one and explain what about your data or setting defeats it.
Finding a worked example of each technique
Recommended databases
- JAMIA
- PubMed Central
- AHRQ Digital Healthcare Research
- Your organisation's data warehouse documentation
Search sequence
- 1.Find one published study using each technique you propose, in a clinical setting.
- 2.Check how many records those studies needed before the method produced anything.
- 3.Confirm whether your outcome is labelled in the record or would have to be derived.
- 4.Look for one paper reporting a method that failed, which supports the refusal.
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
Identifying multi-resolution clusters of diseases in ten million patients with multimorbidity in primary care in England
Communications Medicine · 2024
Clustering across ten million primary care records, which shows both what the technique finds and the scale it needs.
- 02
Clustering long-term health conditions among 67728 people with multimorbidity using electronic health records in Scotland
PLOS ONE · 2023
A second clustering study at a different scale, useful for arguing about how much data a method actually requires.
- 03
Clinical Decision Support Systems
Fundamentals of Clinical Data Science, NCBI Bookshelf · 2019
Connects mined patterns to the decision support that would have to act on them, which is where interpretability becomes a requirement.
- 04
Ethics and governance of artificial intelligence for health
World Health Organization · 2021
Governance expectations for algorithmic methods in health, the strongest available ground for refusing an uninterpretable technique.
Review before submission
Common mistakes
- Recycling a PICOT question that hypothesis testing already answers.
- Listing techniques without matching any of them to the question's structure.
- Skipping the refusal question or answering it in one unsupported line.
- Proposing classification when there are no labelled historical outcomes.
- Ignoring how much data the technique needs to produce anything real.
Submission checklist
- Could your question have been answered just by looking at a report?
- Does each technique match what the question assumes?
- Is the rejected technique rejected for a data reason, not a preference?
- Have you said how many records the approach would need?
- Would a clinician be able to act on the kind of output you describe?
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.