+1443 776-2705 panelessays@gmail.com

Assignment Content

  1. Compare the charts and graphs that your Learning Team members created for the Reports I, II, and III assignments and come to a consensus of the analysis of the data.  
  2.  Select a health care facility or service (e.g., hospital, physician practice, long-term care facility, ambulance service, pharmacy, or skilled nursing facility).  (Primary care)
  •  Create a  1-slide  of how your selected health care facility or service can benefit from the information you gathered and analyzed in the Reports I, II and III assignments. Be sure to include , ethical considerations that may factor into the benefits identified.  
  1.  Cite 1 reputable references to support your assignment (e.g., trade or industry publications, government or agency websites, scholarly works, or other sources of similar quality).

Running head: Virus prevalence estimates 1

Virus prevalence estimates 3

Virus Prevalence Estimates

Student’s Name

Institutional Affiliation

Virus Prevalence Estimates

The virus poses great risks to the states that are on the Southern side of the country. States to the South Eastern and Southwestern part of the country being the ones with the greatest risk. Most of these states are bordering the sea or are in close proximity to those states that border the sea. The states that border the sea are usually associated with high numbers of people visiting those states for various reasons with the common one being for leisure (Barrai et al, 2001). The risk prevalence over the stretch of the three months indicates that there is a higher percentage of an increase in the risk to the selected areas. April has the highest projections of the risk that the virus poses. This can be attributed to a large number of people that patronize these areas during these periods because the months trudge towards the summer season (Weaver, 2005). The virus can be spread through the various ways discussed and therefore as people move to these areas they contribute to the spread of the virus. Others may be carriers and others may be infected as a result of their visit to those areas. Therefore there is a great risk that the virus will pose in the oncoming months towards the summer period. This is based on the projections estimates from the trend of the risk in figure 1.

The following cities are at the highest risk of infection with the virus as per the April number of cases; Miami 299, Jacksonville 322, New Orleans 248, Austin 281 Phoenix 289, San Diego 258, long beach 215, Atlanta 220. Most of these cities are found in those states that border the sea with most of those states also following suit with the risk potential of the virus. They include Texas, Florida, Louisiana, Arizona, and California.

Map showing High-risk areas

Figure 1: High risk areas of the virus

The cities with the lowest risk according to the April risk potential on the cases reported are; Omaha 3, Colorado Springs 5, Indianapolis 7, Minneapolis 9. Most of these cities are found in the states that are in the mainland. The states that have the lowest risk include; Montana, Idaho, Wyoming, South Dakota, Utah. These states have no reports on the cases of the virus. Most of these states are located in the Northern part of the country and are in the mainland.

References Barrai, I., Rodriguez‐Larralde, A., Mamolini, E., Manni, F., & Scapoli, C. (2001). Isonymy structure of USA population. American Journal of Physical Anthropology: The Official Publication of the American Association of Physical Anthropologists, 114(2), 109-123. Weaver, A. (2005). The McDonaldization thesis and cruise tourism. Annals of tourism research, 32(2), 346-366.

,

Student’s Name

Professor’s name

Course Title

Date

Report

1. The top five cities for the infected cases include; Jacksonville, Miami, Phoenix, Austin and Houston.

2. Jacksonville has 322 cases as per 4/14/2017, Miami had 299 cases as per 4/28/2017, Phoenix had 289 cases as per 4/2/2017, Austin had 281 cases as per 4/17/2017 and Houston had 272 cases as per 4/27/2017.

3.

Phoenix = = 0.289%

Austin = = 0.281%

Houston = = 0.272%

Jacksonville = = 0.322%

Miami = = 0.299%

4. After evaluating the chart, it is possible to note that the occurrence of the disease changes over time. the cases are unpredictable whereas in other cities the cases occur regularly. For cities with low cases, health officials have the chance to anticipate their occurrence and take precaution or control measures. For the cities where the diseases occur sporadically, investigators could carry out studies to find out the causes and means of spread and then come up with necessary targeted actions to counter or prevent more spread of the disease. Apart from that, other aspects that could be recognized include seasonality of disease occurrence, secular trends in the disease occurrence, day of week, period of the disease, place of the disease or city, persons per 100,000, measure,

City

Date

Cases

New York

4/24/2017

189

Los Angeles

4/2/2017

201

Chicago

4/27/2017

14

Houston

4/27/2017

272

Philadelphia

4/24/2017

5

Phoenix

4/2/2017

289

San Antonio

4/7/2017

95

San Diego

4/2/2017

258

Dallas

4/24/2017

83

San Jose

4/23/2017

109

Austin

4/17/2017

281

Jacksonville

4/14/2017

322

San Francisco

4/9/2017

76

Indianapolis

4/11/2017

7

Columbus

4/9/2017

14

Fort Worth

4/29/2017

98

Charlotte

4/10/2017

19

Seattle

4/12/2017

65

Denver

4/2/2017

30

El Paso

4/28/2017

29

Detroit

4/28/2017

35

Washington D.C.

4/3/2017

61

Boston

4/13/2017

28

Memphis

4/25/2017

31

Nashville

4/24/2017

23

Portland

4/2/2017

18

Oklahoma City

4/27/2017

11

Las Vegas

4/27/2017

146

Baltimore

4/24/2017

26

Louisville

4/2/2017

17

Milwaukee

4/7/2017

12

Albuquerque

4/2/2017

51

Tucson

4/24/2017

114

Fresno

4/23/2017

187

Sacramento

4/17/2017

51

Kansas City

4/14/2017

38

Long Beach

4/9/2017

215

Mesa

4/11/2017

231

Atlanta

4/9/2017

220

Colorado Springs

4/29/2017

5

Virginia Beach

4/10/2017

4

Raleigh

4/12/2017

8

Omaha

4/2/2017

3

Miami

4/28/2017

299

Oakland

4/28/2017

84

Minneapolis

4/3/2017

9

Tulsa

4/13/2017

127

Wichita

4/25/2017

83

New Orleans

4/10/2017

248

Arlington

4/12/2017

11

Cases by City

Case s New York Los Angeles Chicago Houston Philadelphia Phoenix San Antonio San Diego Dallas San Jose Austin Jacksonville San Francisco Indianapolis Columbus Fort Worth Charlotte Seattle Denver El Paso Detroit Washington D.C. Boston Memphis Nashvill e Portland Oklahoma City Las Vegas Baltimore Louisville Milwaukee Albuquerque Tucson Fresno Sacramento Kansas City Long Beach Mesa Atlanta Colorado Springs Virginia Beach Raleigh Omaha Miami Oakland Minneapolis Tulsa Wichita New Orleans Arlington 189 201 14 272 5 289 95 258 83 109 281 322 76 7 14 98 19 65 30 29 35 61 28 31 23 18 11 146 26 17 12 51 114 187 51 38 215 231 220 5 4 8 3 299 84 9 127 83 248 11

City

Cases

,

Report II

Shawnette Jones

Since the location of the highest widespread virus outbreaks have been recognized, it is important to know now what age group is mostly affected by the virus. Documenting these given age groups shall assist to determine the kinds of resources which shall be necessary at these locations to correctly treat these patients.

Age Groups Most Affected

Following the World Health Organization (2019) show that children, pregnant women and adults are particularly the ones who are vulnerable and take a relatively biggest share of the diseases load. The analysis of the given information, show that the progression of the age group most affected starting with the highest are under 18,61 and over 31-60 and finally 19-30 that correspond to the research of the World Health Organization on most vulnerable groups of individuals.

Age Groups Least Affected

The age groups least affected are the 19-30 years old in addition to those under 31- 60 years old. Generally, this kind of group comprises of the young adults as well as individuals in their middle ages. The reason why this group is probably least affected is due to the fact that this age brackets the body immune system is possibly more strong in preventing and fighting infections thus making the individual much healthier (Lesourd & Meaume, 1994).

Bar Graph Showing Ages Affected

Chart Evaluation

The bar graph above illustrates that the least age groups affected are ones between 19 to 30 years old. According to Morse (2001) explain that the observed age outlines can impact after intolerance diagnosing, identifying as well as cases recording, changes in exposure as well as variances invulnerability to the virus. Therefore by determining if change with age is contingent on exposure or vulnerability requires an evaluation of exposures in individual with and without the illness. Individual influences results to virus occurrences that can be recognized in nearly all incidents.

Prevalence Rates

The prevalence rate for this disease changes among the diverse age groups in every city. According to United States Census Bureau (2017) explanation the current population of the United States of America is 325,365,189 as of December 18, 2017. Therefore to determine the prevalence rate per 100,000 for this disease equals, the number of infection in the particular age group divided by the United States population, then multiplied by 100,000.

The following chart shows the prevalence rate for each age group in each of the top five cities affected by this disease.

City

<18 Prevalence Rate

19-30 Prevalence Rate

31-60 Prevalence Rate

61+ Prevalence Rate

Jacksonville

0.02858

0.00584

0.01875

0.04579

Miami

0.05225

0.00553

0.00922

0.02490

Phoenix

0.04457

0.00615

0.00984

0.02828

Austin

0.04641

0.00369

0.01199

0.02428

Houston

0.03012

0.00492

0.01598

0.03258

Conclusion

Finally, the study of age groups that are mainly affected and vulnerable as well as the previous data on the locations of outbreaks shall provide us clue and knowledge to come up with a treatment for the disease. Also, it is relevant to determine what age groups are highest affected and the prevalence rates in these particular groups in order that further effective resources and techniques may be determined, eventually resulting to a disease-free community.

References

Lesourd, B. M., & Meaume, S. (1994). Cell mediated immunity changes in ageing, relative importance of cell subpopulation switches and of nutritional factors. Immunology letters40(3), 235-242.

Morse, S. S. (2001). Factors in the emergence of infectious diseases. In Plagues and politics (pp. 8-26). Palgrave Macmillan, London.

World Health Organization (WHO). (2019). Environmental health inequalities in Europe. Public Health.

United States Census Bureau. (2017 December 18). U.S. & world population clock. Retrieved

from https://www.census.gov/popclock/

Aged Affected

< 18 Jacksonville Miami Phoenix Austin Houston 93 170 145 151 98 19-30 Jacksonville Miami Phoenix Austin Houston 19 18 20 12 16 31-60 Jacksonville Miami Phoenix Austin Housto n 61 30 32 39 52 61+ Jacksonville Miami Phoenix Austin Houston 149 81 92 79 106