| Course | NUR 610 Genomics and Population Health |
|---|---|
| Module | Module 6 |
| Paper type | Presentation topic outline, slides with notes |
| Length | About 680 words, 5 pages |
| Format | APA 7 slide deck with speaker notes |
| School | Arizona State University |
| Program | MS in Nursing |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for NUR 610 Module 6
Three Possible Cases, One Choice: A Ten-Slide Outline of Final Presentation Topics in Genomics
Student Name
Edson College of Nursing and Health Innovation, Arizona State University
NUR 610: Genomics and Population Health
Instructor Name
Month Day, Year
Slide 1: Purpose of This Outline
Three candidate topics for a 30-minute case study presentation in genomics and population health. Each assessed for case, frameworks, evidence and feasibility. Recommendation on the final slide.
Speaker notes: This outline compares three possible topics for my final presentation. Each grew out of a weekly board, and each would apply frameworks from the course. I end with the topic I recommend and why.
Slide 2: Topic 1: Familial Hypercholesterolemia Cascade Screening
Case: a county health department considers offering to contact relatives of people with familial hypercholesterolemia. Population: about one in 313 people affected; most undiagnosed.
Speaker notes: The first topic is a public health program for familial hypercholesterolemia, a Tier 1 genomic application. Its prevalence is about 0.32% (Beheshti et al., 2020), and the gap between prevalence and diagnosis makes it a strong population health case.
Slide 3: Topic 1: Frameworks and Sources
Frameworks: socioecological model; Kass's six-question public health ethics framework; CDC tiers of evidence. Key sources: Beheshti et al. (2020); Knowles et al. (2017); Kass (2001).
Speaker notes: I would use the socioecological model to explain who is missed, Kass's framework to evaluate the program's ethics, and the tier system to justify why this application deserves public health investment (Kass, 2001).
Slide 4: Topic 1: Feasibility
Strong evidence base; clear ethical tension between privacy and prevention; local relevance; risk of overlap with earlier boards.
Speaker notes: This topic is very feasible, with good sources and a clear ethical argument. The risk is that it repeats my Week 2 and Week 3 posts, so I would need to extend it, for example by designing the program in detail.
Slide 5: Topic 2: Tuberculosis Sequencing and Stigma
Case: whole-genome sequencing in a shelter outbreak suggests a likely source case. Question: how should public health use transmission data without blame?
Speaker notes: The second topic uses pathogen genomics. Sequencing can show which cases are linked and sometimes suggest the direction of spread (Walker et al., 2013), which raises questions of blame and privacy.
Slide 6: Topic 2: Frameworks, Sources and Feasibility
Frameworks: models of disease causation; Kass's framework; tension between protecting and restricting rights. Sources: Walker et al. (2013); Geller et al. (2014). Feasibility: strong ethics, technical science, fewer policy examples.
Speaker notes: This topic has a strong ethical core and connects to the course's infectious disease weeks. The challenge is explaining the science clearly in a short time and finding published policies on how health departments use sequencing data.
Slide 7: Topic 3: Polygenic Risk Scores in Primary Care
Case: a Phoenix clinic considers using polygenic scores to guide early statin use. Issue: accuracy is far higher for people of European descent.
Speaker notes: The third topic is equity. Martin et al. (2019) showed that current polygenic scores perform much better in people of European ancestry, so clinical use could widen disparities.
Slide 8: Topic 3: Frameworks, Sources and Feasibility
Frameworks: health equity versus inequality; unintended consequences; Kass's fairness criterion. Sources: Martin et al. (2019). Feasibility: important and timely, but fewer real programs to evaluate.
Speaker notes: This topic is timely and central to equity, but because few clinics use polygenic scores yet, the case would be more hypothetical than the others.
Slide 9: Comparison
| Criterion | Topic 1 | Topic 2 | Topic 3 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Evidence base | Strong | Moderate | Moderate |
| Ethical tension | Privacy versus prevention | Blame versus control | Equity |
| Real-world program | Yes | Yes | Few |
| Course frameworks | Several | Several | Several |
Speaker notes: All three topics fit the course. The first has the strongest evidence and real programs to evaluate, the second the sharpest ethical tension, and the third the clearest equity lesson.
Slide 10: Recommendation
Chosen topic: familial hypercholesterolemia cascade screening, extended to program design and an equity analysis that borrows from Topic 3. Next steps: draft the argument, gather program examples, request feedback.
Speaker notes: I recommend the first topic, extended beyond my earlier posts into a full program design with an equity analysis. That combines the strongest evidence with an ethics-based argument and lets me draw on what I learned about equity. I welcome feedback on whether this scope fits 30 minutes.
References
Beheshti, S. O., Madsen, C. M., Varbo, A., & Nordestgaard, B. G. (2020). Worldwide prevalence of familial hypercholesterolemia: Meta-analyses of 11 million subjects. Journal of the American College of Cardiology, 75(20), 2553-2566. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2020.03.057
Geller, G., Dvoskin, R., Thio, C. L., Duggal, P., Lewis, M. H., Bailey, T. C., Sutherland, A., Salmon, D. A., & Kahn, J. P. (2014). Genomics and infectious disease: A call to identify the ethical, legal and social implications for public health and clinical practice. Genome Medicine, 6(11), 106. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13073-014-0106-2
Kass, N. E. (2001). An ethics framework for public health. American Journal of Public Health, 91(11), 1776-1782. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.91.11.1776
Knowles, J. W., Rader, D. J., & Khoury, M. J. (2017). Cascade screening for familial hypercholesterolemia and the use of genetic testing. JAMA, 318(4), 381-382. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2017.8543
Martin, A. R., Kanai, M., Kamatani, Y., Okada, Y., Neale, B. M., & Daly, M. J. (2019). Clinical use of current polygenic risk scores may exacerbate health disparities. Nature Genetics, 51(4), 584-591. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41588-019-0379-x
Walker, T. M., Ip, C. L. C., Harrell, R. H., Evans, J. T., Kapatai, G., Dedicoat, M. J., Eyre, D. W., Wilson, D. J., Hawkey, P. M., Crook, D. W., Parkhill, J., Harris, D., Walker, A. S., Bowden, R., Monk, P., Smith, E. G., & Peto, T. E. A. (2013). Whole-genome sequencing to delineate Mycobacterium tuberculosis outbreaks: A retrospective observational study. The Lancet Infectious Diseases, 13(2), 137-146. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1473-3099(12)70277-3
Reading the NUR 610 Module 6 assignment instructions
This term's syllabus divides the presentation grade, 30% of the course, into an outline assignment worth 10% and a final presentation worth 20%. The outline is a 10-slide outline of potential presentation topics, with a minimum of three and a maximum of four topics, following a sample outline template. Week 12 is a final presentation brainstorm in which students identify topics in ethics and genomics, begin to craft an ethics-based argument and learn the expectations for the final presentation. Expect the outline to show each topic's case, frameworks and sources, and to help your instructor guide your choice. Bring ideas to the Week 12 brainstorm, since classmates and the instructor can help you judge which topic supports the strongest ethics-based argument.
How this NUR 610 Module 6 example is built
The outline uses its ten slides efficiently: one slide of purpose, two or three slides per topic, a comparison table and a recommendation. Each topic is assessed on the same points, case, frameworks, sources and feasibility, so the instructor can compare them easily. Speaker notes explain the reasoning behind each judgment. The recommendation chooses one topic, explains why and how it will be extended beyond earlier boards, and invites feedback on scope. Six references support the three topics. The comparison table on slide 9 gives the instructor a one-glance summary, which is useful when reviewing many outlines. Each topic grew from a weekly board.
NUR 610 Module 6 rubric: what earns full marks
Outline assignments are typically graded on meeting the format (ten slides, three or four topics), relevance of topics to genomics and population health, identification of applicable frameworks from the course, appropriate sources, and thoughtful assessment of feasibility. Faculty look for topics that can support an ethics-based argument rather than a description. A comparison and a clear recommendation show judgment. Noting how the final presentation will go beyond earlier assignments addresses a common concern with topics drawn from weekly boards. Outlines that explain how a chosen topic will avoid repeating earlier work show planning that faculty value when approving topics. Realistic judgments about time and sources also matter. Faculty also check that each topic is specific enough to fill thirty minutes.
NUR 610 Module 6 help with common mistakes
Students sometimes propose topics that are too broad, such as genomics and ethics in general. Frame each as a specific case. Another mistake is listing topics without frameworks or sources; show how each would be analyzed. Use the sample outline template if one is provided. Keep to ten slides. Include a recommendation, even if the instructor makes the final choice. If you would like help shaping candidate topics for your outline, send the template and your ideas to the desk. For each topic, list at least two sources you have actually read, so your feasibility judgment rests on evidence rather than on hope. Ask for feedback early.
Write yours, or have the desk draft it
This paper is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official Arizona State University document. Read it for the moves, then write your own to the instructions in your classroom. If you want one built to your exact prompt and rubric, the first custom sample is free and arrives in 24 to 48 hours.
More NUR 610 and MS in Nursing sample papers
- NUR 610 Module 1: Social Determinants and Genomics Discussion
- NUR 610 Module 2: Public Health Ethics and Genomics Discussion
- NUR 610 Module 3: Genomics and Infectious Disease Ethics Discussion
- NUR 610 Module 4: Precision Medicine and Population Health Discussion
- NUR 610 Module 5: Health Equity and Genomics Discussion
- NUR 610 Module 7: Final Genomics Case Study Presentation
- NUR 671 Module 1: Assumptions in Education Discussion
- NUR 521 Module 4: Technology Solutions to a Practice Issue Presentation
- NUR 670 Module 5: Checkpoint: How Does Curriculum Development Evolve Over Time?
- NUR 552 Module 7: Course Synthesis: Critical Reflection Paper
NUR 610 Module 6 questions, answered
Where can I find a free NUR 610 Module 6 sample paper?
The presentation outline is shown above in full: ten slides comparing three candidate topics in genomics and population health, with frameworks, sources, feasibility and a recommendation.
What is the NUR 610 presentation outline?
A 10-slide outline of three or four potential final presentation topics, worth 10% of the course grade.
How much is the NUR 610 final presentation worth?
The syllabus lists the presentation at 30% of the grade: 10% for the outline and 20% for the presentation.
How do I choose a NUR 610 presentation topic?
Choose a specific genomic case with a clear ethical tension, good sources and course frameworks that apply.
Can I use a topic from an earlier NUR 610 discussion?
Yes, but extend it beyond what you posted, for example by designing a program or adding new frameworks.