NURS 8210 WEEK 9 DISCUSSION: ETHICS, CYBER ETHICS, AND SECURITY

NURS 8210 WEEK 9 DISCUSSION: ETHICS, CYBER ETHICS, AND SECURITY

NURS 8210 WEEK 9 DISCUSSION: ETHICS, CYBER ETHICS, AND SECURITY

In recent years, hackers have targeted medical records, from hospitals and other healthcare institutions, across the country. These records contain personal information, contact information, and most importantly, for the hackers, information that may prove useful in stealing an identity. Thus, healthcare organizations have made it a priority to protect patient records and privacy. However, with the influx of technological advancements and hacker determination, there is no perfect way to ensure that all records are secure and safe.

ORDER A CUSTOMIZED, PLAGIARISM-FREE NURS 8210 WEEK 9 DISCUSSION: ETHICS, CYBER ETHICS, AND SECURITY HERE

Good News For Our New customers . We can write this assignment for you and pay after Delivery. Our Top -rated medical writers will comprehensively review instructions , synthesis external evidence sources(Scholarly) and customize a quality assignment for you. We will also attach a copy of plagiarism report alongside and AI report. Feel free to chat Us

In addition to medical records, privacy concerns are relevant with any patient chart in any setting. For example, a chart left open on a computer monitor in a patient room, employee passwords and log-in information, and new employee access and screening all represent other ways in which ethics and security merge in healthcare and nursing practice.

For this Discussion, you will consider the importance of ethics as it relates to security. You will also reflect on how these topics might affect clinical practice and the connection to nursing informatics.

RESOURCES

Be sure to review the Learning Resources before completing this activity.

Click the weekly resources link to access the resources.

WEEKLY RESOURCES

LEARNING RESOURCES

Required Readings

American Nurses Association. (2015). Nursing informaticsLinks to an external site.: Scope and standards of practice (2nd ed.).

“Ethics in Nursing Informatics” (pp. 49–52)

“Standard 6: “Evaluation” (p. 78)

“Standard 7: “Ethics” (pp. 79–80)

“Standard 11: “Communication” (p. 86)

“Standard 12: “Leadership” (pp. 87–88)

Beckmann, M., Dittmer, K., Jaschke, J., Karbach, U., Köberlein-Neu, J., Nocon, M., Rusniok, C., Wurster, F., & Pfaff, H. (2021). Electronic patient record and its effects on social aspects of interprofessional collaboration and clinical workflows in hospitals (eCoCo): A mixed methods study protocolLinks to an external site.. BMC Health Services Research, 21(377). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-021-06377-5

Martin, K., Shilton, K., & Smith, J. (2019). Business and the ethical implications of technology: Introduction to the symposiumLinks to an external site.. Journal of Business Ethics,160, 307–317. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-019-04213-9

Nahm, E.-S., Poe, S., Lacey, D., Lardner, M., Van De Castle, B., & Powell, K. (2019). Cybersecurity essentials for nursing informaticistsLinks to an external site.. Computers, Informatics, Nursing, 37(8), 389–393. doi:10.1097/CIN.0000000000000570

Odeh, A., Keshta, I., & Abdeifattah, E. (2021). Machine learning techniques for detection of website phishing: A review for promises and challenges. IEEE 11th Annual Computing and Communication Workshop and ConferenceLinks to an external site. (CCWC), 813–818. doi:10.1109/CCWC51732.2021.9375997

Susser, D., Roessler, B., & Nissenbaum, H. (2019). Online manipulation: Hidden influences in a digital world. Georgetown Law Technology ReviewLinks to an external site., 4(1), 1–45. https://ssrn.com/abstract=3306006

Required Media

Coursera. (n.d.). Informatics and ethicsLinks to an external site. [Video].

https://www.coursera.org/lecture/health-informatics-professional/informatics-and-ethics-Pi1wm

Data Science Show. (2018, September 9). Ethical applications in health informaticsLinks to an external site. [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kJ_IHTnuxDI

Simplilearn. (2020, June 10). Cyber security in 7 minutes | What is cyber security: How it works? | Cyber security | SimplilearnLinks to an external site.

[Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=inWWhr5tnEA

Optional Resources

Sulmasy, L. S., López, A. M., Horwitch, C. A., & American College of Physicians, Professionalism and Human Rights Committee. (2017). Ethical implications of the electronic health record: In the service of the patient. Journal of General Internal MedicineLinks to an external site., 32. 935–939. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-017-4030-1

TO PREPARE

Review the Learning Resources associated with the topics of ethics, cyber ethics, and security.

Consider the role of each of these topics for clinical practice, as well as the importance of understanding each of these topics.

BY DAY 3 OF WEEK 9

Post a cohesive response to the following:

What are the key challenges that healthcare practitioners encounter when balancing patient care with the requirement for stringent data protection? How can healthcare organizations ensure patient confidentiality while effectively leveraging digital tools to enhance care delivery?

BY DAY 6 OF WEEK 9

Read a selection of your colleagues’ responses and respond to at least two of your colleagues on two different days by expanding upon their responses or sharing additional or alternative perspectives.

NURS_8210_Week9_Discussion_Rubric

NURS_8210_Week9_Discussion_Rubric

Criteria Ratings Pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeRESPONSIVENESS TO DISCUSSION QUESTION (20 possible points) Discussion post minimum requirements: The original posting must be completed by Day 3 at 10:59 pm CT. Two response postings to two different peer original posts, on two different days, are required by Day 6 at 10:59 pm CT. Faculty member inquiries require responses, which are not included in the peer posts. Your Discussion Board postings should be written in Standard Academic English and follow APA 7 style for format and grammar as closely as possible given the constraints of the online platform. Be sure to support the postings with specific citations from this week’s learning resources as well as resources available through the Walden University library and other credible online resources (guidelines, expert opinions etc.)
20 to >19.0 pts

Excellent

• Discussion postings and responses are responsive to and exceed the requirements of the Discussion instructions. • The student responds to the question/s being asked or the prompt/s provided. Goes beyond what is required in some meaningful way (e.g., the post contributes a new dimension, unearths something unanticipated) • Demonstrates that the student has read, viewed, and considered a variety of learning resources, as well as resources available through the Walden University library and other credible online resources (guidelines, expert opinions etc.) • Exceeds the minimum requirements for discussion posts.

19 to >15.0 pts

Good

• Discussion postings and responses are responsive to and meet the requirements of the Discussion instructions. • The student responds to the question/s being asked or the prompt/s provided. • Demonstrates that the student has read, viewed, and considered a variety of learning resources, as well as resources available through the Walden University library and other credible online resources (guidelines, expert opinions etc.) • Meets the minimum requirements for discussion posts.

15 to >12.0 pts

Fair

• Discussion postings and responses are somewhat responsive to the requirements of the Discussion instructions. • The student may not clearly address the objectives of the discussion or the question/s or prompt/s. • Minimally demonstrates that the student has read, viewed, and considered a variety of learning resources, as well as resources available through the Walden University library and other credible online resources (guidelines, expert opinions etc.) • Does not meet the minimum requirements for discussion posts; has not posted by the due date at least in part.

12 to >0 pts

Poor

ORDER A CUSTOMIZED, PLAGIARISM-FREE NURS 8210 WEEK 9 DISCUSSION: ETHICS, CYBER ETHICS, AND SECURITY HERE

• Discussion postings and responses are unresponsive to the requirements of the Discussion instructions. • Does not clearly address the objectives of the discussion or the question/s or prompt/s. • Does not demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered a variety of learning resources, as well as resources available through the Walden University library and other credible online resources (guidelines, expert opinions etc.) • Does not meet the requirements for discussion posts; has not posted by the due date and did not discuss late post timing with faculty.
20 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeCONTENT REFLECTION and MASTERY: Initial Post (30 possible points)

30 to >29.0 pts

Excellent

Initial Discussion posting: • Post demonstrates mastery and thoughtful/accurate application of content and/or strategies presented in the course. • Posts are substantive and reflective, with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings and current credible evidence. • Initial post is supported by 3 or more relevant examples and research/evidence from a variety of scholarly sources including course and outside readings.

29 to >23.0 pts

Good

Initial Discussion posting: • Posts demonstrate some mastery and application of content, applicable skills, or strategies presented in the course. • Posts are substantive and reflective, with analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings and current credible evidence. • Initial post is supported by 3 or more relevant examples and research/evidence from a variety of scholarly sources including course and outside readings.

23 to >18.0 pts

Fair

Initial Discussion posting: • Post may lack in depth, reflection, analysis, or synthesis but rely more on anecdotal than scholarly evidence. • Posts demonstrate minimal understanding of concepts and issues presented in the course, and, although generally accurate, display some omissions and/or errors. • There is a lack of support from relevant scholarly research/evidence.

18 to >0 pts

Poor

Initial Discussion posting: • Post lacks in substance, reflection, analysis, or synthesis. • Posts do not generalize, extend thinking or evaluate concepts and issues within the topic or context of the discussion. • Relevant examples and scholarly resources are not provided.
30 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeCONTRIBUTION TO THE DISCUSSION: First Response (20 possible points)

20 to >19.0 pts

Excellent

Discussion response: • Significantly contributes to the quality of the discussion/interaction and thinking and learning. • Provides rich and relevant examples and thought-provoking ideas that demonstrates new perspectives, and synthesis of ideas supported by the literature. • Scholarly sources are correctly cited and formatted. • First response is supported by 2 or more relevant examples and research/evidence from a variety of scholarly sources including course and outside readings. • Responds to questions posed by faculty.

19 to >15.0 pts

Good

Discussion response: • Contributes to the quality of the interaction/discussion and learning. • Provides relevant examples and/or thought-provoking ideas • Scholarly sources are correctly cited and formatted. • First response is supported by 2 or more relevant examples and research/evidence from a variety of scholarly sources including course and outside readings. • Responds to questions posed by faculty.

15 to >12.0 pts

Fair

Discussion response: • Minimally contributes to the quality of the interaction/discussion and learning. • Provides few examples to support thoughts. • Information provided lacks evidence of critical thinking or synthesis of ideas. • There is a lack of support from relevant scholarly research/evidence. • No response to questions posed by faculty.

12 to >0 pts

Poor

Discussion response: • Does not contribute to the quality of the interaction/discussion and learning. • Lacks relevant examples or ideas. • There is a lack of support from relevant scholarly research/evidence. • No response to questions posed by faculty.

20 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeCONTRIBUTION TO THE DISCUSSION: Second Response (20 possible points)

20 to >19.0 pts

Excellent

Discussion response: • Significantly contributes to the quality of the discussion/interaction and thinking and learning. • Provides relevant examples and thought-provoking ideas that demonstrates new perspectives, and extensive synthesis of ideas supported by the literature. • Second response is supported by 2 or more relevant examples and research/evidence from a variety of scholarly sources including course and outside readings. • Scholarly sources are correctly cited and formatted. • Responds to questions posed by faculty.

19 to >15.0 pts

Good

Discussion response: • Contributes to the quality of the interaction/discussion and learning. • Provides relevant examples and/or thought-provoking ideas • Second response is supported by 2 or more relevant examples and research/evidence from a variety of scholarly sources including course and outside readings. • Scholarly sources are correctly cited and formatted. • Responds to questions posed by faculty.

15 to >12.0 pts

Fair

Discussion response: • Minimally contributes to the quality of the interaction/discussion and learning. • Provides few examples to support thoughts. • Information provided lacks evidence of critical thinking or synthesis of ideas. • Minimal scholarly sources provided to support post. • Does not respond to questions posed by faculty.

12 to >0 pts

Poor

Discussion response: • Does not contribute to the quality of the interaction/discussion and learning. • Lacks relevant examples or ideas. • No sources provided. • Does not respond to questions posed by faculty.
20 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeQUALITY OF WRITING (10 possible points)
10 to >9.0 pts

Excellent

Discussion postings and responses exceed doctoral level writing expectations: • Use Standard Academic English that is clear, concise, and appropriate to doctoral level writing. • Make few if any errors in spelling, grammar, that does not affect clear communication. • Uses correct APA 7 format as closely as possible given the constraints of the online platform. • Are positive, courteous, and respectful when offering suggestions, constructive feedback, or opposing viewpoints.

9 to >8.0 pts

Good

Discussion postings and responses meet doctoral level writing expectations: • Use Standard Academic English that is clear and appropriate to doctoral level writing • Makes a few errors in spelling, grammar, that does not affect clear communication. • Uses correct APA 7 format as closely as possible given the constraints of the online platform. • Are courteous and respectful when offering suggestions, constructive feedback, or opposing viewpoints.

8 to >6.0 pts

Fair

Discussion postings and responses are somewhat below doctoral level writing expectations: • Posts contains multiple spelling, grammar, and/or punctuation deviations from Standard Academic English that affect clear communication. • Numerous errors in APA 7 format • May be less than courteous and respectful when offering suggestions, feedback, or opposing viewpoints.

6 to >0 pts

Poor

Discussion postings and responses are well below doctoral level writing expectations: • Posts contains multiple spelling, grammar, and/or punctuation deviations from Standard Academic English that affect clear communication. • Uses incorrect APA 7 format • Are discourteous and disrespectful when offering suggestions, feedback, or opposing viewpoints.
10 pts

Total Points: 100