| Course | NRNP 6634 Psychiatric Mental Health Advanced Practice Nursing Care of Adults and Older Adults |
|---|---|
| Week | Week 3 |
| Paper type | Mental status examination |
| Length | About 780 words, 5 pages |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Walden University |
| Program | MSN Psychiatric Mental Health Nurse Practitioner (PMHNP) |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for NRNP 6634 Week 3
Mental Status Examination: A 72-Year-Old Woman, Domain by Domain, With Mood Quoted, Affect Observed, and a MoCA of 23 Read Item by Item
Student Name
College of Nursing, Walden University
NRNP 6634: Psychiatric Mental Health Advanced Practice Nursing Care of Adults and Older Adults
Instructor Name
Month Day, Year
Mental Status Examination: A 72-Year-Old Woman, Domain by Domain, With Mood Quoted, Affect Observed, and a MoCA of 23 Read Item by Item
Appearance
Composite patient, the woman whose interview was written up in week 2. Appears her stated age. Dressed in a cardigan buttoned one button off, clean slacks, and house slippers; hair combed; no makeup, which her daughter later said she wore daily until spring. A wedding ring worn on a chain around her neck. Visible weight loss suggested by a loose waistband held with a safety pin.
Behavior and Psychomotor Activity
Sat still with hands folded for most of the interview; few spontaneous gestures. Eye contact directed at the floor or her hands for most of the interview, meeting the examiner's eyes when asked a direct question and then looking down. Latency of 3 to 5 seconds before many answers. No tremor, no tics, no abnormal movements. Rose from the chair slowly, using the armrests.
Speech
Rate slow; volume soft, requiring her to repeat two answers; quantity reduced, with answers of a few words unless prompted; prosody flat, with little variation in pitch. Articulation clear; no word-finding pauses beyond the latency above.
Mood and Affect
Mood, in her words: "Empty. Like I'm waiting for something and I don't know what."
Affect, as observed: restricted in range; tearful twice, both times when her sister was mentioned; one brief smile when describing her granddaughter's recital. Congruent with the stated mood: the observed affect matches the emptiness she describes, with reactivity preserved for grief and for her granddaughter.
Her Geriatric Depression Scale score of 11 of 15 from the waiting room (Yesavage et al., 1982) is consistent with the observed affect and is recorded here beside it.
Thought Process and Content
Process: linear and goal-directed; slowed; no tangentiality, circumstantiality, or loosening of associations; she lost her train of thought once and recovered it when given the last few words she had said.
Content: preoccupied with her memory and with the loss of her sister; expressed guilt that she "should have made Ruth see a doctor about the chest pain." Passive death wish as recorded in the interview, without active suicidal thoughts, plan, or intent at the time of examination. No homicidal thoughts. No delusions elicited; asked whether she feels she deserves punishment or that others are against her, she said no.
Perception
Denies auditory or visual hallucinations; did not appear to respond to internal stimuli during the interview.
Asked specifically about seeing people or animals in the house at night, a question worth asking in an older adult with memory complaints and new sleep medication use, she said no.
Cognition, With a Screen and Its Numbers
Alert throughout. She gave her name, the clinic's name and city, the full date, and why she was here without error. Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), version 8.1, administered in a quiet room: total 23 of 30, with 1 point added for 12 or fewer years of education not applicable (she completed 2 years of college). The MoCA was designed to detect mild cognitive impairment in people who score in the normal range on the Mini-Mental State Examination, using a cutoff of 26 (Nasreddine et al., 2005). By item: visuospatial and executive, 4 of 5 (clock hands placed correctly, numbers crowded); naming, 3 of 3; attention, 4 of 6 (digit span correct forward and backward, lost 2 points on serial sevens, with slow responses); language, 2 of 3 (fluency 9 words in 1 minute, short of the 11 needed for the point); abstraction, both pairs correct, 2 of 2; delayed recall, 2 of 5 free recall, rising to 5 of 5 with category and multiple-choice cues; orientation, 6 of 6.
Observation on the pattern: the lost points cluster in attention, fluency, and free recall, with recall improving to full marks when cued. A retrieval pattern of this kind is often seen with depression and differs from the storage deficit typical of Alzheimer disease, but a screen cannot settle that; the pattern is recorded here for the differential, not interpreted as a diagnosis.
Insight and Judgment
Insight: partial. She recognizes that her mood has changed and that her memory complaints followed her sister's death, and she said, "Maybe some of this is the sadness." She also attributes all of it to "the start of what my mother had." Judgment: intact for the decisions observed; she stopped highway driving on her own when her concentration worsened, and she agreed to her daughter taking over the bills. The APA practice guideline recommends that the evaluation include a mental status examination with cognitive assessment (American Psychiatric Association, 2015); the findings above are the basis for the differential that follows.
References
American Psychiatric Association. (2015). The American Psychiatric Association practice guidelines for the psychiatric evaluation of adults (3rd ed.). https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.books.9780890426760
Nasreddine, Z. S., Phillips, N. A., Bédirian, V., Charbonneau, S., Whitehead, V., Collin, I., Cummings, J. L., & Chertkow, H. (2005). The Montreal Cognitive Assessment, MoCA: A brief screening tool for mild cognitive impairment. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 53(4), 695-699. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-5415.2005.53221.x
Yesavage, J. A., Brink, T. L., Rose, T. L., Lum, O., Huang, V., Adey, M., & Leirer, V. O. (1982). Development and validation of a geriatric depression screening scale: A preliminary report. Journal of Psychiatric Research, 17(1), 37-49. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3956(82)90033-4
What the NRNP 6634 Week 3 instructions ask for
The third week of NRNP 6634 typically asks for a full mental status examination. You describe each domain with observable evidence: appearance, behavior, speech, mood quoted, affect observed, thought process and content, perception, cognition with any screening scores and their items, and insight and judgment. Faculty penalize adjectives that stand in for evidence. Cite screening tool validation in APA 7. Prose or a structured format may be accepted. The patient can be composite or from practice with identifiers removed. Cognitive screening should show which items were missed. NRNP 6634 faculty want each domain to carry evidence such as a quote, an observation or a score. Report MoCA items missed and her education level. Keep mood and affect in separate lines. Note insight and judgment with an example from the interview.
How this NRNP 6634 Week 3 example is built
The finished exam runs domain by domain under its own headings and stays close to what was visible. Appearance carries dress, grooming, apparent age against stated age and whatever the room could see. Behavior records psychomotor activity and eye contact as movements rather than as impressions. Speech is described by rate, volume, quantity and prosody. Mood appears in quotation marks as the patient gave it, affect appears separately as what the examiner watched, and the fit between the two is stated. Thought process is characterized by how ideas connected across answers. Thought content records what was present and what was asked about and denied, and perception is recorded the same way. Cognition covers orientation, attention, recall and one brief screen reported with its instrument and its scale. Insight and judgment close the file, each carrying something the patient actually said.
Reading the NRNP 6634 Week 3 rubric
An exam graded on observation loses points wherever an adjective stands where evidence belonged. Anxious, agitated, pleasant and cooperative each cost something when nothing beside them shows a reader what produced the word, and the accuracy criterion is left with nothing to check. Collapsing mood and affect into one line removes a distinction most rubrics name on a row of its own. Alert and oriented, written as though it covered cognition, gives up the attention, recall and executive material entirely. Copying findings from the intake note rather than from the visit costs currency, since this document records one moment. Domains left out score as omitted rather than as unremarkable. The exams holding full marks read as though a second clinician had been in the room and would have written the same lines.
NRNP 6634 Week 3 help: mistakes that cost marks
Mental status exams lose points wherever an adjective stands in for evidence, such as anxious or pleasant. Describe what you saw. Another common gap is mixing mood and affect. Quote mood and observe affect. Writers also report a MoCA total without the items missed, which hides the pattern. List them. Avoid diagnosing in the mental status section. Note education level when interpreting the MoCA. Keep the exam consistent with the interview from Week 2. Close with insight and judgment supported by examples. Writers also forget to compare her presentation with what her daughter describes as her usual self. Add it. Another frequent slip is describing thought content without asking about suicidal thinking. Record the answer.
Get a NRNP 6634 Week 3 example written to your instructions
Send your Week 3 prompt and whichever exam template or rubric your section uses, and the desk writes the observed findings out in full as a worked example under your own headings. The first one is free, back inside 24-48 hours, written for the presentation you were handed rather than the one described here.
More NRNP 6634 papers and PMHNP samples
- NRNP 6634 Week 1: Discussion Post
- NRNP 6634 Week 2: Psychiatric Interview Write-Up
- NRNP 6634 Week 4: Discussion Post
- NRNP 6634 Week 5: Differential Analysis
- NRNP 6634 Week 6: Diagnostic Formulation
- NRNP 6634 Week 7: Treatment Plan
- NRNP 6634 Week 8: Discussion Post
- NRNP 6634 Week 9: Risk Assessment
- NRNP 6634 Week 10: Prescribing Rationale
- NRNP 6634 Week 11: Reflection
- NRNP 6635 Week 3: Anxiety Rule-Out Note
- NRNP 6624 Week 3: CBT Technique Rationale
- NRNP 6644 Week 3: Collateral Summary
- NRNP 6590 Week 3: Credentialing Plan
NRNP 6634 Week 3 questions, answered
Can the exam be written from a patient I saw?
It should not be, and the example is not. The document works from a composite older adult assembled for the purpose, with nothing in it that could return a reader to a person. Encounters from your placement belong in your own clinical documentation and stay there. What the example transfers is the level of description each domain expects, which holds for any presentation your section hands you.
What makes a cognitive entry strong?
Numbers with their scale, and the conditions around them. A screen reported as a result against its total, taken with hearing aids in place and in the patient's first language, tells a reader what the figure is worth. The same screen reported as normal tells them nothing, and accuracy criteria have no way to credit it. The example records those conditions on the same line.
Is the exam written as a table or as prose?
The example uses headed short paragraphs, one for each domain, which is the form most sections accept and the easiest to grade against a row by row rubric. Tables are fine where a template supplies one, and some classrooms provide exactly that. What the criteria want is every domain present and separately labeled, so nothing has to be inferred from a running paragraph.
Where can I find a free NRNP 6634 Week 3 sample paper?
The domain-by-domain mental status exam is printed here with mood quoted, affect observed and the MoCA of 23 read item by item.
What is her MoCA score in NRNP 6634 Week 3?
23, read item by item rather than reported only as a total.