Jose is a 55-year-old Hispanic, male, migrant worker who speaks limited English. He presented to the emergency room with complaints of edema of the scrotum, urinary retention, and hematuria. He does not have any pertinent past medical history. He is married and has five young children. He states he has been having problems for a while but delayed seeing the doctor because of his work schedule and limited money. The doctor performs a digital rectal examination in the office and finds that Jose’s prostate is enlarged. Initial Post Male reproductive disorders can make a great impact on the patient’s life. Based on the case study, answer the following questions in your discussion post. Discuss the potential disease processes and signs and symptoms related to the disease process that Jose may be exhibiting? How would you provide multidimensional care to include cultural, psychosocial, spiritual, physical, and emotional needs for Jose?

INTRODUCTIONREQUIREMENTSRUBRICWEB LINKSCOMPETENCIES7003.1.1 : Comprehensive Assessment of Individuals and PopulationsThe graduate assesses the physical, biopsychosocial, cultural, spiritual, and environmental elements to improve health in patients and populations.7003.1.2 : Health Maintenance and Risk Reduction Assessment for Individuals and PopulationsThe graduate distinguishes comprehensive assessment strategies appropriate to evaluate the health of diverse patients across the life span.7003.1.3 : Outcome Goals and Interventions for Individuals and PopulationsThe graduate analyzes assessment data to create health promotion plans for patients and communities.7003.1.4 : Strategies of Maintaining Physical and Functional HealthThe graduate analyzes epidemiologic methods to assess the health of communities and populations.INTRODUCTIONThe “Epiville SARS Simulation” found in the Web Links section must be completed before starting this task.Assessing the health of a community or population requires a different skill set than assessing individual patients. Individuals are assessed using direct observation during the process of identifying the condition, needs, abilities, and preferences of a patient. The health of populations is assessed using data analytics that aggregate findings based on a predefined geographic area or a common characteristic. For example, a population can include the people in an entire county, state, or nation. Additionally, a population can include the people in a hospital unit, community, or any other group of individuals who have shared characteristics (e.g., older women or those who attend a common event at the same place and time). The disease investigator, or epidemiologist, defines the population of interest, which may change as the investigation progresses. Defining the population is extremely important as it is essential to describe an epidemic in terms of person, place, and time (PPT).For this task, you will create a professional multimedia presentation (e.g., Microsoft PowerPoint, Apple Keynote). This presentation will be based on your analysis of an investigation conducted in SARS Outbreak Study 1 and SARS Outbreak Study 2 within the “Epiville SARS Simulation” found in the Web Links section. You must complete your analysis of these simulations before you begin your task since all the information in your presentation will come from these simulations.Your presentation should be 30 slides or fewer. You will present the methods, processes, and results of your investigation of the Epiville SARS simulation that were essential to controlling the spread of this disease and preventing future outbreaks. Additionally, you will present information on the guiding principles that form the basis for investigating and managing infectious disease outbreaks.REQUIREMENTSYour submission must be your original work. No more than a combined total of 50% of the submission and no more than a 10% match to any one individual source can be directly quoted or closely paraphrased from sources, even if cited correctly. The originality report that is provided when you submit your task can be used as a guide.You must use the rubric to direct the creation of your submission because it provides detailed criteria that will be used to evaluate your work. Each requirement below may be evaluated by more than one rubric aspect. The rubric aspect titles may contain hyperlinks to relevant portions of the course.Tasks may not be submitted as cloud links, such as links to Google Docs, Google Slides, OneDrive, etc., unless specified in the task requirements. All other submissions must be file types that are uploaded and submitted as attachments (e.g., .docx, .pdf, .ppt).Create a multimedia presentation (e.g., Microsoft PowerPoint, Apple Keynote) of your outbreak investigation of the Epiville SARS simulation (suggested length of 20-30 slides) by doing the following:Note: While you need to create a presentation, you do not need to present it.A. Provide presenter notes for each slide.Note: Presenter notes must be included for each slide to cover the necessary level of explanation, analysis, and discussion.B. Provide a title slide including the following:• the title of the presentation• your name• your university• the date the presentation is givenC. Provide an outline of the main topics that will be included in your presentation in the order they will be presented.D. Describe the background of the Epiville SARS simulation outbreak (suggested length of 2–4 slides) by doing each of the following:1. Describe the case definition used in the Epiville SARS simulation and how the choice of case definition can influence an outbreak investigation.2. Describe key factors to consider when developing a case definition.3. Define the Epiville SARS simulation outbreak in terms of person, place, and time (PPT).4. List the six steps used in the Epiville SARS simulation outbreak investigation.E. Summarize the techniques used in the Epiville SARS simulation outbreak investigation (suggested length of 5-8 slides) by doing the following:1. List the different surveillance methods used to ascertain cases.2. Determine the number of cases that meet the case definition for suspect cases and probable cases.3. Describe the mode of transmission for both the Amoy Apartment Complex and the Star Hospital in the Epiville SARS simulation outbreak.4. Describe the process used to develop the working hypothesis for this outbreak, including the process used to identify the agent and the process used to identify the mode of transmission.5. Explain the best measure to describe the epidemic in the Epiville SARS simulation and how the measure is calculated.F. Present your case-control study design analysis (suggested length of 4–7 slides) by doing each of the following:1. Identify an appropriate study design to analyze this Epiville SARS simulation outbreak.2. List the data to be collected for the study design from part F1.3. Provide a screen capture of the Epiville SARS simulation outbreak plot, including a description of the type of epi curve.4. Analyze the incubation period of the agent and discuss the significance of knowing the incubation period of the SARS exposure.5. Describe the differences between an endemic, epidemic, and pandemic.a. Discuss the stage of the outbreak in the Epiville SARS simulation and how you made this determination.6. Calculate and present the case fatality rate and describe the significance of the rate.7. Calculate and present primary and secondary attack rates.G. Discuss the management of the Epiville SARS simulation outbreak (suggested length of 3–6 slides) by doing each of the following:1. Describe one of the three principles of outbreak management.2. Describe the measures that should be implemented to control the Epiville SARS simulation outbreak.3. Explain the rationale for recommending a specific surveillance type (i.e., active or passive).4. Present a plan for disseminating information on the outbreak to other agencies and the public.H. Summarize your presentation (suggested length of 2–3 slides), including three comments in which you reflect on your learning experiences in completing this task.I. Acknowledge sources, using APA-formatted in-text citations and references, for content that is quoted, paraphrased, or summarized.J. Demonstrate professional communication in the content and presentation of your submission.NOTE: The Performance Assessment should be uploaded as a separate attachment(s) and should not be included in the E-portfolio or submitted as a link.File RestrictionsFile name may contain only letters, numbers, spaces, and these symbols: ! - _ . * ' ( )File size limit: 200 MBFile types allowed: doc, docx, rtf, xls, xlsx, ppt, pptx, odt, pdf, txt, qt, mov, mpg, avi, mp3, wav, mp4, wma, flv, asf, mpeg, wmv, m4v, svg, tif, tiff, jpeg, jpg, gif, png, zip, rar, tar, 7zRUBRICA:PRESENTER NOTESNOT EVIDENTPresenter notes are not provided.APPROACHING COMPETENCEThe presenter notes do not include a level of explanation, analysis, and discussion.COMPETENTThe presenter notes include a level of explanation, analysis, and discussion.B:TITLE SLIDENOT EVIDENTA title slide is not provided.APPROACHING COMPETENCEThe title slide does not include each of the given points.COMPETENTThe title slide includes each of the given points.C:TOPIC OUTLINENOT EVIDENTAn outline of presentation topics is not provided.APPROACHING COMPETENCEThe outline does not include the main topics in the presentation, or the topics are not listed in the order they occur in the presentation. Or any of the topic names do not accurately describe the part of the presentation they introduce.COMPETENTThe outline includes the main topics in the presentation, and the topics are listed in the order they occur in the presentation. All topic names accurately describe the part of the presentation they introduce.D1:CASE DEFINITION OF OUTBREAKNOT EVIDENTA description of a case definition is not provided.APPROACHING COMPETENCEThe description does not include the required elements of a case definition, which is the definition used in the outbreak from the Epiville SARS simulation. Or the description does not logically show how the choice of case definition can influence an outbreak investigation using specific examples.COMPETENTThe description includes the required elements of a case definition, which is the definition used in the outbreak from the Epiville SARS simulation. And the description logically shows how the choice of case definition can influence an outbreak investigation, using specific examples.D2:CASE DEFINITION KEY FACTORSNOT EVIDENTA description is not provided.APPROACHING COMPETENCEThe description does not address all key factors to consider when developing a case definition using specific examples through show why the provided key factors should be considered.COMPETENTThe description addresses all key factors to consider when developing a case definition, using specific examples that show why the provided key factors should be considered.D3:OUTBREAK IN TERMS OF PPTNOT EVIDENTA definition of the outbreak is not provided.APPROACHING COMPETENCEThe definition of the outbreak does not accurately identify the outbreak in terms of PPT, or the definition is not supported with specific examples that show the importance of defining the outbreak in terms of PPT.COMPETENTThe definition accurately identifies the outbreak in terms of PPT, and the definition is supported with specific examples that show the importance of defining the outbreak in terms of PPT.D4:SIX STEPSNOT EVIDENTA list of 6 steps is not provided.APPROACHING COMPETENCEThe list of 6 steps does not accurately include each of the steps used in the Epiville SARS simulation outbreak investigation.COMPETENTThe list accurately includes each of the 6 steps used in the Epiville SARS simulation outbreak investigation.E1:SURVEILLANCE METHODSNOT EVIDENTA list of surveillance methods is not provided.APPROACHING COMPETENCEThe list of surveillance methods does not accurately include all surveillance methods used to ascertain cases in the Epiville SARS simulation outbreak investigation.COMPETENTThe list of surveillance methods accurately includes all surveillance methods used to ascertain cases in the Epiville SARS simulation outbreak investigation.E2:SUSPECT AND PROBABLE CASESNOT EVIDENTA number of cases is not provided.APPROACHING COMPETENCEThe number of cases that meet the case definition for suspect cases and probable cases is inaccurate.COMPETENTThe number of cases that meet the case definition for suspect cases and probable cases is accurate.E3:MODE OF TRANSMISSIONNOT EVIDENTA description of a mode of transmission is not provided.APPROACHING COMPETENCEThe description does not address the mode of transmission for both the apartment and hospital in the Epiville SARS simulation outbreak, or the description is not supported with specific examples.COMPETENTThe description addresses the mode of transmission for both the apartment and hospital in the Epiville SARS simulation outbreak, and the description is supported with specific examples.E4:WORKING HYPOTHESISNOT EVIDENTA description of the process used to develop the working hypothesis for the outbreak is not provided.APPROACHING COMPETENCEThe description inaccurately or incompletely shows the process used to develop the working hypothesis for the outbreak. Or the description of the process does not include how the agent or mode of transmission was identified.COMPETENTThe description accurately and completely shows the process used to develop the working hypothesis for the outbreak. The description of the process includes how the agent and mode of transmission were identified.E5:MEASUREMENT OF AN EPIDEMICNOT EVIDENTAn explanation of a measure to describe the epidemic in the Epiville SARS simulation is not provided.APPROACHING COMPETENCEThe explanation does not address the best measure to describe the epidemic in the Epiville SARS simulation or how the measure is calculated, or the explanation is not supported with specific examples.COMPETENTThe explanation addresses the best measure to describe the epidemic in the Epiville SARS simulation and how the measure is calculated, and the explanation is supported with specific examples.F1:STUDY DESIGNNOT EVIDENTA study design is not identified.APPROACHING COMPETENCEThe identified study design is not appropriate for analyzing the outbreak.COMPETENTThe identified study design is appropriate for analyzing the outbreak.F2:COLLECTED DESIGN DATANOT EVIDENTA list of data is not provided.APPROACHING COMPETENCEThe list does not include all the data that need to be collected for the study design from part F1.COMPETENTThe list includes all the data that need to be collected for the study design from part F1.F3:OUTBREAK PLOT SCREEN CAPTURENOT EVIDENTA screen capture of the Epiville SARS simulation outbreak plot is not provided.APPROACHING COMPETENCEThe screen capture of the Epiville SARS simulation outbreak plot does not include an accurate description of the type of epi curve.COMPETENTThe screen capture of the Epiville SARS simulation outbreak plot includes an accurate description of the type of epi curve.F4:INCUBATION PERIODNOT EVIDENTAn analysis of the incubation period of the agent is not provided, or a discussion is not provided.APPROACHING COMPETENCEThe analysis does not address the incubation period of the agent or discuss the significance of knowing the incubation period of the SARS exposure. Or the analysis is not supported with specific examples.COMPETENTThe analysis addresses the incubation period of the agent and discusses the significance of knowing the incubation period of the SARS exposure. The analysis is supported with specific examples.F5:DESCRIPTION OF DIFFERENCESNOT EVIDENTDifferences between an endemic, epidemic, and pandemic are not described.APPROACHING COMPETENCEThe described differences do not correctly compare an endemic, epidemic, and pandemic, or not all relevant differences are included.COMPETENTThe described differences correctly compare an endemic, epidemic, and pandemic, and all relevant differences are included.F5A:STAGE OF OUTBREAKNOT EVIDENTA discussion of the stage of the outbreak is not provided.APPROACHING COMPETENCEThe discussion does not provide a logical stage of the outbreak in the Epiville SARS simulation or logically show how the determination was made.COMPETENTThe discussion provides a logical stage of the outbreak in the Epiville SARS simulation and logically shows how the determination was made.F6:CASE FATALITY RATENOT EVIDENTA calculation of a case fatality rate is not provided, or a description of the significance of the rate is not provided.APPROACHING COMPETENCEThe calculated case fatality rate is incorrect, or the description does not accurately show the significance of the rate.COMPETENTThe calculated case fatality rate is correct, and the description accurately shows the significance of the rate.F7:PRIMARY AND SECONDARY ATTACK RATESNOT EVIDENTA calculation of primary attack rates, secondary attack rates, or both is not provided.APPROACHING COMPETENCEThe calculated primary or secondary attack rates are incorrect.COMPETENTThe calculated primary and secondary attack rates are correct.G1:OUTBREAK MANAGEMENT PRINCIPLESNOT EVIDENTA description of 1 principle of outbreak management or how the principle relates to the Epiville SARS simulation is not provided.APPROACHING COMPETENCEThe description does not accurately detail 1 principle of outbreak management or does not logically show how the principle relates to the Epiville SARS simulation.COMPETENTThe description accurately details 1 principle of outbreak management and logically shows how the principle relates to the Epiville SARS simulation.G2:OUTBREAK CONTROL MEASURESNOT EVIDENTA description of measures is not provided.APPROACHING COMPETENCEThe description includes measures, but any of the included measures are not appropriate measures to control the outbreak.COMPETENTThe description includes appropriate measures that should be implemented to control the outbreak.G3:SURVEILLANCE RECOMMENDATIONNOT EVIDENTAn explanation of the rationale for recommending a specific surveillance type is not provided.APPROACHING COMPETENCEThe explanation does not provide a logical rationale for recommending a specific surveillance type.COMPETENTThe explanation provides a logical rationale for recommending a specific surveillance type.G4:DISSEMINATING INFORMATION PLANNOT EVIDENTA plan for disseminating information on the outbreak is not provided.APPROACHING COMPETENCEThe plan does not include specific, appropriate details on how to disseminate information on the outbreak to other agencies or the public.COMPETENTThe plan includes specific, appropriate details on how to disseminate information on the outbreak to other agencies and the public.H:PRESENTATION SUMMARYNOT EVIDENTA summary of the presentation is not provided. Or fewer than 3 comments are included.APPROACHING COMPETENCEThe summary provides an inaccurate overview of the presentation. Or 3 comments are included, but any of the comments does not reflect on learning experiences that could logically result from completing the task.COMPETENTThe summary provides an accurate overview of the presentation. 3 comments are included that reflect on learning experiences that could logically result from completing the task.I:APA SOURCESNOT EVIDENTThe submission does not include in-text citations and references according to APA style for content that is quoted, paraphrased, or summarized.APPROACHING COMPETENCEThe submission includes in-text citations and references for content that is quoted, paraphrased, or summarized but does not demonstrate a consistent application of APA style.COMPETENTThe submission includes in-text citations and references for content that is quoted, paraphrased, or summarized and demonstrates a consistent application of APA style.J:PROFESSIONAL COMMUNICATIONNOT EVIDENTContent is unstructured, is disjointed, or contains pervasive errors in mechanics, usage, or grammar. Vocabulary or tone is unprofessional or distracts from the topic.APPROACHING COMPETENCEContent is poorly organized, is difficult to follow, or contains errors in mechanics, usage, or grammar that cause confusion. Terminology is misused or ineffective.COMPETENTContent reflects attention to detail, is organized, and focuses on the main ideas as prescribed in the task or chosen by the candidate. Terminology is pertinent, is used correctly, and effectively conveys the intended meaning. Mechanics, usage, and grammar promote accurate interpretation and understanding.WEB LINKSEpiville SARS SimulationEpiville is a low-fidelity simulation learning tool. The tool includes a set of interactive web-based exercises to help you master the main principles of an outbreak investigation, using epidemiologic methods.Real-Time PolymeraseArticle on Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction for Detecting SARS Cornoavirus, Beijing, 2003.Coronavirus Persistence in Vero CellsArticle on Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus persistence in Vero cells.