Total: 0.50

Case Analysis – Collaborating with Outside Providers
Prior to beginning work on this assignment, read the PSY650 Week Three Treatment Plan and Case 9: Bulimia Nervosa in Gorenstein and Comer (2014). Please also read the Waller, Gray, Hinrichsen, Mounford, Lawson, and Patient (2014) “Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy for Bulimia Nervosa and Atypical Bulimic Nervosa: Effectiveness in Clinical Settings,”Halmi (2013) “Perplexities of Treatment Resistance in Eating Disorders,” and DeJesse and Zelman (2013) “Promoting Optimal Collaboration Between Mental Health Providers and Nutritionists in the Treatment of Eating Disorders” articles.
Assess the evidence-based practices implemented in this case study. In your paper, please include the following.
Explain the connection between each theoretical orientation used by Dr. Heston and the treatment intervention plans utilized in the case.
Describe the cognitive-behavioral model of the maintenance of bulimia nervosa.
Explain why Rita was reluctant to participate in Dr. Heston’s request for her to keep a record of her eating behaviors. Use information from the Halmi (2013) article “Perplexities of Treatment Resistance in Eating Disorders” to help support your statements.
Recommend outside providers (psychiatrists, medical doctors, nutritionists, social workers, holistic practitioners, etc.) to the assist Rita in achieving her treatment goals. Use information from the DeJesse and Zelman (2013) “Promoting Optimal Collaboration between Mental Health Providers and Nutritionists in the Treatment of Eating Disorders” article to help support your recommendations.
Describe some of the challenges and ethical issues that Dr. Heston may encounter when working collaboratively with the professionals that you recommended. Apply ethical principles and standards of psychology relevant to your description of Dr. Heston’s potential collaboration with outside providers.
Evaluate the effectiveness of the treatment interventions implemented by Dr. Heston, supporting your statements with information from the case and two to three peer-reviewed articles.
Recommend three additional treatment interventions that would be appropriate in this case. The recommended articles for this week may be useful in generating your response to this criterion. Justify your selections with information from the case.
The Case Analysis – Collaborating with Outside Providers
Must be 4 to 5 double-spaced pages in length (not including title and references pages) and formatted according to APA style .
Must include a separate title page with the following:
Title of paper
Student’s name
Course name and number
Instructor’s name
Date submitted
Must use at least two peer-reviewed sources Must document all sources in APA style Center.
Must include a separate references page that is formatted according to APA style .
Carefully review the Grading Rubric for the criteria that will be used to evaluate your assignment.
GRADiNG RUBRIC IS AS FOLLOWS:
Description:
Total Possible Score: 9.00
Explains the Connection Between Each Theoretical Orientation Used By Dr. Heston And The Treatment Intervention Plans Utilized In The Case
Total: 0.50
Distinguished – Thoroughly explains the connection between each theoretical orientation used by Dr. Heston and the treatment intervention plans utilized in the case. Proficient – Explains the connection between each theoretical orientation used by Dr. Heston and the treatment intervention plans utilized in the case. Minor details are missing. Basic – Minimally explains the connection between each theoretical orientation used by Dr. Heston and the treatment intervention plans utilized in the case. Relevant details are missing.
Below Expectations – Attempts to explain the connection between each theoretical orientation used by Dr. Heston and the treatment intervention plans utilized in the case; however, significant details are missing. Non Performance – The explanation of the connection between each theoretical orientation used by Dr. Heston and the treatment intervention plans utilized in the case is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the assignment instructions.
Describes The Cognitive-Behavioral Model Of The Maintenance Of Bulimia Nervosa
Total: 0.50
Distinguished – Thoroughly describes the cognitive-behavioral model of the maintenance of bulimia nervosa.
Proficient -Describes the cognitive-behavioral model of the maintenance of bulimia nervosa. Minor details are missing.
Basic – Minimally describes the cognitive-behavioral model of the maintenance of bulimia nervosa. Relevant details are missing.
Below Expectations – Attempts to describe the cognitive-behavioral model of the maintenance of bulimia nervosa; however, significant details are missing.
Non Performance – The description of the cognitive-behavioral model of the maintenance of bulimia nervosa is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the assignment instructions.
Explains Why Rita Was Reluctant To Participate In Dr. Heston’s Request For Her To Keep A Record Of Her Eating Behaviors Using Information From The Halmi (2013) Article To Support The Statements Made
Total: 1.00
Distinguished – Thoroughly explains why Rita was reluctant to participate in Dr. Heston’s request for her to keep a record of her eating behaviors using information from the Halmi (2013) article to support the statements made. Proficient – Explains why Rita was reluctant to participate in Dr. Heston’s request for her to keep a record of her eating behaviors using information from the Halmi (2013) article to support the statements made. Minor details are missing or unclear.
Basic – Partially explains why Rita was reluctant to participate in Dr. Heston’s request for her to keep a record of her eating behaviors using information from the Halmi (2013) article to support the statements made. Relevant details are missing and/or unclear.
Below Expectations – Attempts to explain why Rita was reluctant to participate in Dr. Heston’s request for her to keep a record of her eating behaviors using information from the Halmi (2013) article to support the statements made; however, significant details are missing and unclear.
Non Performance – The explanation of why Rita was reluctant to participate in Dr. Heston’s request for her to keep a record of her eating behaviors using information from the Halmi (2013) article to support the statements made is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the assignment instructions.
Recommends Outside Providers (Psychiatrists, Medical Doctors, Nutritionists, Social Workers, Holistic Practitioners, Etc.) To The Assist Rita In Achieving Her Treatment Goals Using Information From The DeJesse, et al. (2013) Article
Total: 1.50
Distinguished – Recommends fully appropriate outside providers (psychiatrists, medical doctors, nutritionists, social workers, holistic practitioners, etc.) to the assist Rita in achieving her treatment goals using information from the DeJesse, et al. (2013) article.
Proficient – Recommends appropriate outside providers (psychiatrists, medical doctors, nutritionists, social workers, holistic practitioners, etc.) to the assist Rita in achieving her treatment goals using information from the DeJesse, et al. (2013) article. Minor details are missing.
Basic – Recommends somewhat appropriate outside providers (psychiatrists, medical doctors, nutritionists, social workers, holistic practitioners, etc.) to the assist Rita in achieving her treatment goals using information from the DeJesse, et al. (2013) article. Relevant details are missing.
Below Expectations – Attempts to recommend outside providers (psychiatrists, medical doctors, nutritionists, social workers, holistic practitioners, etc.) to the assist Rita in achieving her treatment goals using information from the DeJesse, et al. (2013) article; however, significant details are missing.
Non Performance -The recommendation of outside providers (psychiatrists, medical doctors, nutritionists, social workers, holistic practitioners, etc.) to the assist Rita in achieving her treatment goals using information from the DeJesse, et al. (2013) article is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the assignment instructions.
Describes Some Of The Challenges And Ethical Issues That Dr. Heston May Encounter When Working Collaboratively With The Professionals Recommended
Total: 0.50
Distinguished – Thoroughly describes some of the challenges and ethical issues that Dr. Heston may encounter when working collaboratively with the professionals recommended.
Proficient – Describes some of the challenges and ethical issues that Dr. Heston may encounter when working collaboratively with the professionals recommended. Minor details are missing.
Basic – Minimally describes some of the challenges and ethical issues that Dr. Heston may encounter when working collaboratively with the professionals recommended. Relevant details are missing.
Below Expectations -Attempts to describe some of the challenges and ethical issues that Dr. Heston may encounter when working collaboratively with the professionals recommended; however, significant details are missing.
Non Performance – The description of some of the challenges and ethical issues that Dr. Heston may encounter when working collaboratively with the professionals recommended is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the assignment instructions.
Applies Ethical Principles And Standards Of Psychology Relevant To Dr. Heston’s Potential Collaboration With Outside Providers
Total: 1.00
Distinguished – Thoroughly and appropriately applies ethical principles and standards of psychology relevant to Dr. Heston’s potential collaboration with outside providers. Proficient – Appropriately applies ethical principles and standards of psychology relevant to Dr. Heston’s potential collaboration with outside providers. Minor details are missing. Basic – Minimally and somewhat appropriately applies ethical principles and standards of psychology relevant to Dr. Heston’s potential collaboration with outside providers. Relevant details are missing.
Below Expectations – Attempts to apply ethical principles and standards of psychology relevant to Dr. Heston’s potential collaboration with outside providers; however, they are not appropriately applied or significant details are missing. Non Performance – The application of ethical principles and standards of psychology relevant to Dr. Heston’s potential collaboration with outside providers is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the assignment instructions.
Evaluates the Effectiveness Of The Treatment Interventions Implemented By Dr. Heston, Supporting Statements With Information From The Case And A Minimum Of Two Peer-Reviewed Articles From The Library
Total: 1.50
Distinguished – Thoroughly evaluates the effectiveness of the treatment interventions implemented by Dr. Heston, fully utilizing supporting statements with information from the case and a minimum of two peer-reviewed articles from the library.
Proficient – Evaluates the effectiveness of the treatment interventions implemented by Dr. Heston, utilizing supporting statements with information from the case and a minimum of two peer-reviewed articles from the library. Minor details are missing or inaccurate.
Basic – Minimally evaluates the effectiveness of the treatment interventions implemented by Dr. Heston, somewhat utilizing supporting statements with information from the case and a minimum of two peer-reviewed articles from the library. Relevant details are missing and/or inaccurate.
Below Expectations -Attempts to evaluate the effectiveness of the treatment interventions implemented by Dr. Heston; however, does not utilize supporting statements with information from the case and a minimum of two peer-reviewed articles from the library, or significant details are missing and inaccurate.
Non Performance – The evaluation of the effectiveness of the treatment interventions implemented by Dr. Heston, supporting statements with information from the case and a minimum of two peer-reviewed articles from the library is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the assignment instructions.
Recommends Three Additional Treatment Interventions That Would Be Appropriate In This Case
Total: 1.00
Distinguished – Clearly recommends at least three additional treatment interventions that would be fully appropriate in this case.
Proficient – Recommends three additional treatment interventions that would be appropriate in this case. Minor details are missing or unclear.
Basic – Recommends three additional treatment interventions that would be somewhat appropriate in this case. Relevant details are missing and/or unclear.
Below Expectations -Recommends additional treatment interventions in this case; however, fewer than three are recommended, the recommendations are not appropriate, or significant details are missing and unclear.
Non Performance – The recommendation of three additional treatment interventions that would be appropriate in this case is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the assignment instructions.
Written Communication: Control of Syntax and Mechanics
Total: 0.25
Distinguished – Displays meticulous comprehension and organization of syntax and mechanics, such as spelling and grammar. Written work contains no errors and is very easy to understand.
Proficient – Displays comprehension and organization of syntax and mechanics, such as spelling and grammar. Written work contains only a few minor errors and is mostly easy to understand.
Basic – Displays basic comprehension of syntax and mechanics, such as spelling and grammar. Written work contains a few errors which may slightly distract the reader.
Below Expectations – Fails to display basic comprehension of syntax or mechanics, such as spelling and grammar. Written work contains major errors which distract the reader.
Non-Performance – The assignment is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the instructions.
Written Communication: Page Requirement
Total: 0.25
Distinguished – The length of the paper is equivalent to the required number of correctly formatted pages. Proficient – The length of the paper is nearly equivalent to the required number of correctly formatted pages. Basic – The length of the paper is equivalent to at least three quarters of the required number of correctly formatted pages.
Below Expectations – The length of the paper is equivalent to at least one half of the required number of correctly formatted pages. Non-Performance – The assignment is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the instructions.
Written Communication: APA Formatting
Total: 0.25
Distinguished – Accurately uses APA formatting consistently throughout the paper, title page, and reference page.
Proficient – Exhibits APA formatting throughout the paper. However, layout contains a few minor errors. Basic – Exhibits limited knowledge of APA formatting throughout the paper. However, layout does not meet all APA requirements. Below Expectations – Fails to exhibit basic knowledge of APA formatting. There are frequent errors, making the layout difficult to distinguish as APA.
Non-Performance – The assignment is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the instructions.
Critical Thinking: Explanation of Issues
Total: 0.25
Distinguished – Clearly and comprehensively explains the issue to be considered, delivering all relevant information necessary for a full understanding.
Proficient – Clearly explains the issue to be considered, delivering enough relevant information for an adequate understanding.
Basic – Briefly explains the issue to be considered, delivering minimal information for a basic understanding.
Below Expectations – Briefly explains the issue to be considered, but may not deliver additional information necessary for a basic understanding.
Non-Performance – The assignment is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the instructions. Written Communication: Resource Requirement
Total: 0.50
Distinguished – Uses more than the required number of scholarly sources, providing compelling evidence to support ideas. All sources on the reference page are used and cited correctly within the body of the assignment.
Proficient – Uses the required number of scholarly sources to support ideas. All sources on the reference page are used and cited correctly within the body of the assignment.
Basic – Uses less than the required number of sources to support ideas. Some sources may not be scholarly. Most sources on the reference page are used within the body of the assignment. Citations may not be formatted correctly.
Below Expectations – Uses an inadequate number of sources that provide little or no support for ideas. Sources used may not be scholarly. Most sources on the reference page are not used within the body of the assignment. Citations are not formatted correctly.
Non-Performance – The assignment is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the instructions.
Powered by