| Course | NURS 6401 Informatics in Nursing and Healthcare |
|---|---|
| Week | Week 3 |
| Paper type | Data flow map with narrative |
| Length | About 1,060 words, 6 pages |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Walden University |
| Program | Master of Science in Nursing (MSN) |
| Updated | September 2026 |
Free sample paper for NURS 6401 Week 3
One Respiratory Rate, Entered at 0200: A Data Flow Map From the Flowsheet Row to the Monthly Deterioration Review, and the Three Points Where the Number Changes Meaning
Student Name
College of Nursing, Walden University
NURS 6401: Informatics in Nursing and Healthcare
Instructor Name
Month Day, Year
One Respiratory Rate, Entered at 0200: A Data Flow Map From the Flowsheet Row to the Monthly Deterioration Review, and the Three Points Where the Number Changes Meaning
Why One Number
Respiratory rate is often the first vital sign to change when a patient deteriorates and one of the least reliably recorded (Cretikos et al., 2008). That makes it a good number to follow. This map traces a single respiratory rate of 24 breaths per minute, entered by a night nurse at 0200 for a patient on our neuroscience unit, from the moment it is typed to the last place it is read. The systems are described by function rather than by product name, since the configuration of any real record belongs to the organization that built it. Figure 1 shows the path in five boxes; the prose after it walks the same path and stops at each arrow.
Figure 1: The Path, Left to Right
Table 1
Figure 1 Shown as Boxes and Labeled Arrows
| Step | Box | Arrow leaving the box carries | Kind of move |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Flowsheet row: respiratory rate, entered by the nurse with the time of assessment | The value 24, the assessment time 0200 and the nurse's identity | Entry |
| 2 | The patient's record in the clinical database | The stored value, unchanged, with entry time 0214 added | Storage |
| 3a | Display: the vital signs graph in the chart | The value plotted at 0200 | Display (same value, read back) |
| 3b | Display: the early warning score column on the unit's patient list | The value converted into points and added to other vital signs | Display (value transformed) |
| 4 | Nightly extract to the reporting database | The worst value of each vital sign per patient per 24 hours | Copy (value selected) |
| 5 | Monthly deterioration review report | Counts of patients whose worst daily score crossed the escalation threshold, by unit and shift | Report (value aggregated) |
Legend: a display shows the stored value to a person; a copy moves the value into another database, where it can be changed without affecting the record.
Walking the Path
Entry. The nurse counts for thirty seconds, doubles the count and types 24 into the row. Two times now exist: the time of assessment the nurse chose, 0200, and the time of entry the system records, 0214. The nurse can change the value until the flowsheet is signed; after that, only a correction with a reason can change it. The number at this point means exactly what the nurse observed.
Storage. The database keeps the value, both times and the nurse's identity. Nothing about the meaning changes here, and no one but a database administrator could alter it outside the correction process.
Display on the graph. The vital signs graph plots 24 at 0200 next to earlier values. Anyone reading the chart sees the same number in its place in the sequence, and can see that it rose from 18 at 2200.
Display in the early warning score. This is the first point where the number changes meaning. On the patient list, the respiratory rate is no longer shown as 24; it becomes points added to points from heart rate, blood pressure, temperature, oxygen saturation and level of consciousness, in the manner of the National Early Warning Score, whose value lies in combining those measures to flag patients heading toward cardiac arrest, an unplanned move to intensive care or death (Smith et al., 2013). A reader of the patient list sees a total, not the rate. Two patients with the same total may have very different respiratory rates, and a nurse who trusts the total may never look at the rate that drove it.
The Second and Third Points of Change
The nightly extract is the second point. The reporting database does not receive every respiratory rate; it receives the worst value of each vital sign for each patient in each 24-hour period. If the same patient had a rate of 30 at 0600, the 24 at 0200 disappears from the reporting database altogether, although it remains in the record. The number now means the worst moment of the day, and anyone querying the reporting database cannot see the trend that the graph showed. Who can change it: the analyst who wrote the extract rules, usually without any nurse in the room.
The monthly deterioration review is the third point. There, the value no longer appears at all. It has become part of a count of patients whose worst daily score crossed the unit's escalation threshold. A manager reading that our unit had eleven such patients in a month cannot tell which vital sign drove each case, whether escalation happened or whether the value was entered on time. The meaning has moved from what one nurse saw to how often a threshold was crossed. Who can change it: the committee that sets the threshold and the analyst who builds the report.
At each of these three points the transformation is reasonable, and each serves a real purpose. The risk is that the people downstream do not know it happened. Unintended consequences of clinical information systems often arise not from errors in entry but from how systems combine, display and move information in ways that users do not expect (Ash et al., 2004).
What the Map Suggests
Three small changes would keep the meaning visible without removing any of the transformations. The patient list could show the respiratory rate alongside the total score when the rate contributes the most points. The extract could carry a count of values per patient per day, so that the reporting database shows whether the worst value came from one reading or from many. And the monthly report could state, on its first page, that it counts threshold crossings based on the worst daily value, so that readers know what the number means before they discuss it. Each change is a nursing request that an analyst could build, which is the translation this course keeps returning to (American Nurses Association [ANA], 2022). None of the three would slow anyone down, and each could be piloted for four weeks on a single unit before wider adoption. The test would be simple: ask five nurses and two managers what a number on the patient list and in the monthly report means, before and after the change, and see whether their answers move closer to what the number actually is.
References
American Nurses Association. (2022). Nursing informatics: Scope and standards of practice (3rd ed.).
Ash, J. S., Berg, M., & Coiera, E. (2004). Some unintended consequences of information technology in health care: The nature of patient care information system-related errors. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, 11(2), 104-112. https://doi.org/10.1197/jamia.M1471
Cretikos, M. A., Bellomo, R., Hillman, K., Chen, J., Finfer, S., & Flabouris, A. (2008). Respiratory rate: The neglected vital sign. Medical Journal of Australia, 188(11), 657-659. https://doi.org/10.5694/j.1326-5377.2008.tb01825.x
Smith, G. B., Prytherch, D. R., Meredith, P., Schmidt, P. E., & Featherstone, P. I. (2013). The ability of the National Early Warning Score (NEWS) to discriminate patients at risk of early cardiac arrest, unanticipated intensive care unit admission, and death. Resuscitation, 84(4), 465-470. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resuscitation.2012.12.016
What the NURS 6401 Week 3 instructions ask for
Mapping is the task this week: you trace how a piece of clinical data moves through information systems, from collection to use, and explain the transformations, the people involved and the implications for data quality or patient care. Prompts often require a diagram and a written explanation of several pages. Many ask you to consider who can change the data at each step. Choose one data element and one path rather than the whole record. Describe systems by function instead of vendor names, and check whether your section wants a specific diagram convention or accepts a clear table-style figure.
How the NURS 6401 Week 3 example is put together
The opening section explains why respiratory rate was chosen, citing work on it as a neglected vital sign, and sets the scope to one value on one night. Figure 1, shown as a table, lists five boxes and what each arrow carries. The prose then walks the path, noting the two times recorded at entry and who can change the value after signing. The early warning score section explains the first change in meaning, citing the NEWS validation study. A second section covers the worst-value extract and the threshold count. The paper closes with three requests, each tied to one point of change, and a simple way to test them.
Where the marks sit in the NURS 6401 Week 3 rubric
Data flow rubrics usually score accuracy of the flow, clarity of the diagram, analysis of transformations, discussion of data quality or safety implications, use of evidence and writing. Accuracy asks whether each step is plausible and labeled. The diagram row rewards arrows that name what moves rather than software. Analysis carries the most weight and rewards identifying where data change and who controls each change. Implications should connect to patient care or decisions. Evidence is expected for claims about the data element and about system effects, and the writing row checks that narrative and figure follow the same order. Some rubrics also ask for recommendations, which the example supplies as three small requests tied to specific points in the flow.
NURS 6401 Week 3 help from the desk
The common mistake is a diagram of the entire hospital with unlabeled arrows and no single data element traced through it. Another is naming real products and screens, which adds nothing and may share an employer's configuration. Some maps stop at storage and never reach the point where data are used. Many papers describe the figure without analyzing it. Follow one value, label every arrow with what moves, stop at each transformation and ask who could change the value there, then say what a later reader might misunderstand. End with a change someone could actually build. Before submitting, check that the figure and the prose use the same step numbers so a grader can move between them.
Get a NURS 6401 Week 3 example written to your instructions
Send the prompt, the rubric and the observation your section asked you to trace, and the desk builds a custom figure with its narrative. First one is free and lands in 24-48h. The figure arrives as an editable diagram rather than a flat picture, so relabeling boxes for your own setting stays simple.
More NURS 6401 papers and MSN samples
- NURS 6401 Week 1: Discussion post
- NURS 6401 Week 2: Definition paper
- NURS 6401 Week 4: Documentation analysis
- NURS 6401 Week 5: Role comparison
- NURS 6401 Week 6: Decision support review
- NURS 6401 Week 7: Privacy memo
- NURS 6401 Week 8: Discussion post
- NURS 6401 Week 9: Case analysis
- NURS 6401 Week 10: Position paper
- NURS 6401 Week 11: Competency review
- NURS 6380 Week 3: Heart failure learner concept map
- NURS 6370 Week 3: Syllabus section
- NURS 6351 Week 3: Competency self-assessment
- NURS 6341 Week 3: Search strategy
NURS 6401 Week 3 questions, answered
Does the map have to use my employer's systems?
The example works from a described system rather than a named one, which is the version that travels safely into a classroom. Screens, build documents and interface details belong to the organization that owns them. A composite lets the analysis run at full strength while keeping anything proprietary out of a paper that goes into a classroom.
How much narrative does a figure assignment need?
Enough that the figure is read rather than merely presented, which in this example is three pages against one page of drawing. Prompts that set page counts usually intend the figure to sit outside them. A map with two paragraphs under it is the version that reliably loses analysis points, whatever the drawing looks like.
Where can I find a free NURS 6401 Week 3 sample paper?
The figure, laid out as a labeled table, and the full narrative are posted on this page free. If your section asks you to trace a different data element, the desk can write a custom map around it at no charge.
Which data element should I trace for NURS 6401 Week 3?
Choose one that is entered by nurses and used by someone else later, for example a respiratory rate, a pain rating or a fall risk total. A value that feeds a calculated score or a report gives the clearest points of transformation.
Does the NURS 6401 data flow figure have to be a drawing?
Sections vary. A drawn diagram is common, but a clearly labeled table showing each step and what moves between steps can serve the same purpose where the prompt allows it. Check your rubric before choosing.