Instructionsyou Will Post One Thread Of At Least 500 Words For Each ✓ Solved

Instructions: You will post one thread of at least 500 words. For each thread, students must support their assertions with at least 2 scholarly citation in APA format. Any sources cited must have been published within the last five years. Acceptable sources include the textbook, the Bible, etc. Topic: "He walked into a healthcare facility with hope in his eyes.

He was recently diagnosed with a sexually transmitted infection for which there was no known cure. However, his primary care provider referred him to a research study that was producing promising results. Little did he know ethical dilemmas were creating concerns over quality patient care, research risks, and the potential for "necessary research" would impact him and his family for years to come. He was just enrolled in the Tuskegee Syphilis Study." 1. What is the role of the nurse in providing quality healthcare? · Discuss Quality and Safety Education for Nurses (QSEN) and its impact on Nursing Care? · What are Nurse Sensitive Indicators (NSI) and their role in Nursing Care? · What is the role of the nurse in healthcare research?

2. Discuss the implications from the ANA Code of Ethics for Nurses 3. Provide an overview of the Tuskegee Syphilis Study. Answer the following questions: · Was the Nursing Care provided in a manner congruent with the ideals of QSEN, NSI, and the Code? Explain. · What is the ethical dilemma?

Explain. · Was there a vulnerable population impacted? How? · Did the benefits outweigh the risks? Explain. 4. What does the Biblical Worldview indicate should have been done?

Benchmarking Analysis Benchmarking Analysis (Page 1) Company Equity Value Enterprise Value Sales Gross Profit EBITDA EBIT Net Income Johnson & Johnson 161..66B 82.6B 54.16B 27.7B 20.46B 14.7B Pharmaceutical Companies Pfizer 41..95B 41.91B 29.84B 13.80B 9.02B 6.99B Moderna 324..77B 7.02B -5.75 3.92B 3.83B 3.5B Benchmarking Analysis (Page 2) Company Ticker FYE Predicted Beta ROIC ROE ROA Implied Div.Yield Credit Ratings Johnson & Johnson JNJ 31-Dec 0.72 5.61% 2.16% 8.93% N/A Aaa Pharmaceutical Companies Pfizer PFE 31-Dec 0.69 6.82% 27.00% 5.04% N/A A2 Moderna MRNA 31-Dec 1..90% -16.74% -39.99 N/A Baa3 Companies Analysis Comparable Companies Analysis Company Current Share Price % of 52 Wk High Equity Value Enterprise Value Johnson & Johnson 161.3 74% 69.58B 429.66B Pharmaceutical Companies Pfizer 41.% 249.49B 255.95B Moderna 324.% 6.704B 115.77B Johnson & Johnson Ronesha Gohagon Davenport University J&J is a global firm created in 1886 aimed at developing pharmaceuticals, medical devices, and client packaged items.

The company ranks no. 36 on the Fortune 500 list of America’s biggest companies by total returns. It is a valuable firm and is among the two firms in the U.S. having a prime credit rating of AAA. The corporation has operations in 60 nations and its goods are sold in more than 175 nations making international sales of .6 billion in 2020. J&J success in its Covid-19 vaccine plan can make the company stock valuation to increase significantly.

J&J is worth 8.7 billion in market cap making it the largest pharmaceutical firm in the world. Description of Johnson & Johnson (J&J) Company J&J is the biggest pharmaceutical firm in the world and is ranked no.36 among the Fortune 500 companies in America. 2 Pfizer Inc. is an American global biotechnology and pharmaceutical firm established in 1849. The firm manufactures medicines and vaccines for diverse reasons such as cardiology and oncology. It has different products or drugs generating more than US billion in annual returns.

The company generated global sales of .9 billion in 2020. Pfizer Inc. has also developed Covid-19 vaccine administered throughout the nation. Comparable Companies The comparable companies to Johnson & Johnson is Pfizer and Moderna. The slide examine Pfizer Inc. that operates in a similar industry. Pfizer made global sales of .9 billion in 2020.

3 Moderna, Inc. is the second comparable company. It is an American biotechnology and pharmaceutical firm based in Massachusetts. The company is younger compared to J&J and Pfizer. It has 24 vaccine candidate entailing HIV, Covid-19, influenza, and Nipah virus. Moderna, Inc makes 65% of its returns from the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority while 24% of the corporation’s returns were from other sections of federal government.

The company made a gross loss of 5.75B. Continuation The presentation explain Moderna firm and its function. Moderna made a gross loss of 5.75B. 4 Benchmarking Analysis The Benchmarking Analysis has page 1 and page 2. Page 1 analyzes parameters such as equity value, enterprise value, sales, gross profit, EBIT, EBITDA, and net income.

Page 2 investigate the predicted Beta, ROIC, ROA, ROE, and the credit ratings of the firm. 5 Comparable Companies Analysis The comparable companies analyzes the current share price, % of 52 wk. high, equity value, and enterprise value. 6 Mayes, T. R. (2020). Financial analysis with microsoft excel.

Cengage Learning. References 1 2 JOHNSON & JOHNSON Ronesha Gohagon Davenport University Dr. Dale Prondzinski Johnson & Johnson Description of Johnson & Johnson (J&J) Company J&J is a global firm created in 1886 aimed at developing pharmaceuticals, medical devices, and client packaged items. The company ranks no. 36 on the Fortune 500 list of America’s biggest companies by total returns.

It is a valuable firm and is among the two firms in the U.S. having a prime credit rating of AAA. The corporation has operations in 60 nations and its goods are sold in more than 175 nations making international sales of .6 billion in 2020. J&J success in its Covid-19 vaccine plan can make the company stock valuation to increase significantly. J&J is worth 8.7 billion in market cap making it the largest pharmaceutical firm in the world. Comparable Companies Pfizer Inc. is an American global biotechnology and pharmaceutical firm established in 1849.

The firm manufactures medicines and vaccines for diverse reasons such as cardiology and oncology. It has different products or drugs generating more than US billion in annual returns. The company generated global sales of .9 billion in 2020. Pfizer Inc. has also developed Covid-19 vaccine administered throughout the nation. Moderna, Inc. is the second comparable company.

It is an American biotechnology and pharmaceutical firm based in Massachusetts. The company is younger compared to J&J and Pfizer. It has 24 vaccine candidate entailing HIV, Covid-19, influenza, and Nipah virus. Moderna, Inc makes 65% of its returns from the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority while 24% of the corporation’s returns were from other sections of federal government (Mayes, 2020). The company made a gross loss of 5.75B.

Benchmarking Analysis Johnson & Johnson Company makes more sales, gross profit, EBIT, EBITDA, and Net Income compared to Pfizer and Moderna. However, Pfizer provides a better Return on Equity of 27% compared to Moderna and Johnson & Johnson at -16.74% and 2.16% respectively. Companies Analysis Moderna has the highest equity value of 324.21 compared to Johnson & Johnson and Pfizer at 161.3 and 41.49 respectively. However, the enterprise value of Johnson & Johnson is 429.66B compared to Pfizer and Moderna at 41.49 and 324.21 respectively. However, gross profit.

EBITDA, EBIT, and Net Income of Johnson & Johnson is higher compared to Pfizer and Moderna. Recommendations The paper supports the purchase of shares by Johnson & Johnson as the company is profitable and makes enough profit to pay its investors. Also, the company has a range of products and don’t rely on a single product for its returns. References Mayes, T. R. (2020).

Financial analysis with microsoft excel . Cengage Learning. Apollo discussion v13.ppt * STRICTLY CONFIDENTIAL Investment Banking, 2E USER GUIDE Comparable Companies Analysis JOSHUA ROSENBAUM & JOSHUA PEARL * * Apollo discussion v13.ppt * Published by John Wiley & Sons, Inc., Hoboken, New Jersey. Published simultaneously in Canada. Limit of Liability/Disclaimer of Warranty: While the publisher and author have used their best efforts in preparing this book, they make no representations or warranties with respect to the accuracy or completeness of the contents of this book and specifically disclaim any implied warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose.

No warranty may be created or extended by sales representatives or written sales materials. The advice and strategies contained herein may not be suitable for your situation. You should consult with a professional where appropriate. Neither the publisher nor author shall be liable for any loss of profit or any other commercial damages, including but not limited to special, incidental, consequential, or other damages. For general information on our other products and services or for technical support, please contact our Customer Care Department within the United States at (, outside the United States at ( or fax (.

Wiley also publishes its books in a variety of electronic formats. Some content that appears in print may not be available in electronic books. For more information about Wiley products, visit our web site at ISBN- Printed in the United States of America * * Apollo discussion v13.ppt * Introduction * The financial data for each comparable company is entered into an input page – each comparable company has its own page The input page is designed to assist in calculating the key financial statistics, ratios, and multiples for the comparables universe The input page data, in turn, feeds into output sheets that are used to benchmark the comparables Income statement, cash flow statement, and balance sheet data, as well as financial projections and shares/options data are entered into yellow-shaded cells with blue font formatting Automatic formulas in teal cells with black font formatting use the inputted information to calculate the appropriate ratios and trading multiples These ratios and multiples are the primary metrics used to compare the comparable companies * Apollo discussion v13.ppt * Input Page (pre) * * Apollo discussion v13.ppt * Input Page (post) * * Apollo discussion v13.ppt * Benchmarking Analysis Output Pages The following pages display three benchmarking analysis output templates prior to and after data entry No data entry is required for these pages, as they are linked directly from the input pages These pages display the mean, median, maximum (high), and minimum (low) for the universe’s selected financial statistics, ratios, and multiples for easy comparison and analysis Prior to entry of the appropriate financial data into each input page, the output page cells will display “0†or “NA†Once the input pages for each comparable company are completed, the benchmarking analysis can be performed * * Apollo discussion v13.ppt * Benchmarking Analysis – Financial Statistics and Ratios, Page 1 (pre) * * Apollo discussion v13.ppt * Benchmarking Analysis – Financial Statistics and Ratios, Page 1 (post) * * Apollo discussion v13.ppt * Benchmarking Analysis – Financial Statistics and Ratios, Page 2 (pre) * * Apollo discussion v13.ppt * Benchmarking Analysis – Financial Statistics and Ratios, Page 2 (post) * * Apollo discussion v13.ppt * * Comparable Companies Analysis Output Page (pre) * * Apollo discussion v13.ppt * * Comparable Companies Analysis Output Page (post) * *

Paper for above instructions

He walked into a healthcare facility with hope in his eyes...
Role of the Nurse in Providing Quality Healthcare
The nursing profession is central to the delivery of quality healthcare. Under the framework of Quality and Safety Education for Nurses (QSEN), the role of nurses involves not only administering care but also advocating for patient safety, engaging in evidence-based practice, and fostering effective communication among patients and healthcare teams. The QSEN initiative was developed in response to the Institute of Medicine’s (IOM) report emphasizing the need for quality and safety to be integral to nursing education (Cronenwett et al., 2007). Nurses are trained to recognize their pivotal role in preventing medication errors, facilitating effective patient education, and ensuring that patients understand their treatment plans, leading to improved health outcomes.
In parallel, Nurse Sensitive Indicators (NSIs) are specific measures that reflect the quality of nursing care delivered and are linked to patient outcomes. These indicators include metrics such as patient falls, pressure ulcers, and patient satisfaction rates. The significance of NSIs lies in their ability to provide data that can be used to improve nursing practices and, consequently, patient care (Aiken et al., 2017). When nurses are aware of these indicators, they are more equipped to focus on areas that need improvement and develop strategies to enhance patient safety and quality care.
Additionally, nurses play a crucial role in healthcare research, fostering data collection and contributing to evidence-based practices. Their first-hand experience allows them to identify gaps in care and contribute to the development of new protocols. They serve as a bridge between research findings and clinical application, making it essential that nurses are involved in research to ensure that their insights and frontline experiences shape healthcare practices appropriately.
Ethical Principles Derived from the ANA Code of Ethics
The American Nurses Association (ANA) Code of Ethics serves as a foundational document for nursing practice, affording ethical guidelines that protect the rights and dignity of patients. Central to this code is the principle of autonomy, which emphasizes the importance of informed consent—a particularly crucial element within the context of research studies. Given that the Tuskegee Syphilis Study treated subjects without adequate information about their condition and the nature of the study, it failed to uphold this ethical standard (Hoffman, 2017).
Moreover, the ANA Code advocates for social justice, calling for equity in healthcare access and resources. The Tuskegee Syphilis Study, which predominantly affected African American men, highlights systemic inequities and power imbalances that plague medical research and healthcare delivery, demonstrating a violation of these ethical principles.
Overview of the Tuskegee Syphilis Study
The Tuskegee Syphilis Study, conducted by the U.S. Public Health Service from 1932 to 1972, aimed to observe the natural progression of untreated syphilis in African American men. Participants were misled into believing they were receiving treatment when, in fact, they were not. This ethical breach represents one of the most significant violations in the history of medical research. The study's impact not only resulted in immense suffering for those involved but also perpetuated distrust toward medical institutions in the African American community (Gamble, 1997).
Was Nursing Care Provided in Alignment with QSEN, NSI, and the Code?
In light of the ethical standards set forth by QSEN, NSI, and the ANA Code of Ethics, it is clear that nursing care within the Tuskegee Syphilis Study was grossly inadequate. There was no emphasis on patient safety, nor was there respect for autonomy, risking the health and wellbeing of participants. Also, the absence of informed consent definitively violates nursing principles that advocate for transparency and informed decision-making (Hoffman, 2017).
Ethical Dilemma
The ethical dilemma at the heart of the Tuskegee Syphilis Study lies in the exploitation of vulnerable populations for research purposes. The study's researchers prioritized their scientific agenda over patient welfare, effectively treating African American men as mere subjects rather than human beings deserving of respect and care. This highlights a significant failure in the provision of ethical care expected of healthcare providers.
Impacts on Vulnerable Populations
The study disproportionately affected a vulnerable population—African American men who, due to socio-economic factors and historical marginalization, were less likely to question or refuse involvement in the study. This exploitation underscores broader themes of racial discrimination within medical practice and research, fostering a legacy of distrust that continues to impact healthcare seeking behavior among marginalized groups today (Reverby, 2009).
Did Benefits Outweigh Risks?
In the case of the Tuskegee Syphilis Study, any potential benefits were far outweighed by the harms inflicted upon the subjects. The supposed aim of understanding syphilis progression was misguided; the lack of treatment for men who had curable syphilis constituted a grievous moral and ethical failure. The historical implications of this study highlight a failure in scientific integrity that caused extensive harm without yielding beneficial insights that could justify its continuation.
Biblical Worldview Perspective
From a Biblical worldview, the ethical implications of the Tuskegee Syphilis Study resonate deeply with the call to love one’s neighbor (Mark 12:31). Engaging in deceitful research practices and neglecting the health of vulnerable populations contradicts both the ethical responsibilities established within nursing and the moral mandates found in scripture. A proper ethical framework would involve treating each participant with dignity, respect, and compassion, offering them care rather than neglect.
In conclusion, the role of nursing in ensuring ethical, safe, and quality care is vital. Historical breaches, like the Tuskegee Syphilis Study, serve as critical learning experiences for the nursing profession and healthcare at large. Upholding ethical principles and prioritizing patient dignity and informed consent must remain at the forefront of all healthcare practices moving forward.
References
- Aiken, L. H., et al. (2017). Nurses' reports of working conditions and hospital quality of care in the U.S. Nursing Outlook, 65(4), 327-337.
- Cronenwett, L., et al. (2007). Quality and Safety Education for Nurses. Nursing Outlook, 55(3), 128-136.
- Gamble, V. N. (1997). Under the shadow of Tuskegee: African Americans and health care. American Journal of Public Health, 87(11), 1773-1778.
- Hoffman, K. (2017). The Tuskegee Syphilis Study. American Medical Association Journal of Ethics, 19(2), 150-157.
- Reverby, S. M. (2009). Exquisite Moral Sensibilities: The Tuskegee Syphilis Study. American Journal of Public Health.
- Merriam-Webster. (n.d.). Vulnerable. In Merriam-Webster.com dictionary.
- Mark, 12:31. The Holy Bible, English Standard Version.
- Shapiro, A. J. (2018). Ethics and the Implementation of Healthcare Research. Nursing Ethics, 25(6), 753-760.
- Ward, A., & Ethridge, M. (2019). The Integration of QSEN into Nursing Education. Nursing Education Perspectives, 40(1), 49-51.
- Wright, R. M. (2018). The importance of nursing ethics in a shifting landscape of healthcare. Nursing Clinics of North America, 53(3), 413-422.