Case Study- The Case of the Newborn Nightmare

Posted: January 20th, 2023

part 1
1.what challenges Dr Maddison is facing?
2. What information does he have so far about the infection?
3. What are some possible causes of skin infections? List at least five different organisms.
4. What should Dr Maddison’s next move be in determining the cause of the babies’ infection?
Part2
1. You are a microbiologist in charge of reading the gram stain for this case. From your instructor obtain a specimen. Unless it is already stained, stain the specimen and examine it microscopically. Record your observations of Gram reaction and morphology of any bacteria you observe. Also record the presence of any host cells, such as epithelial cells or white blood cells.
2. List at least 2 genera of clinically significant bacteria that are consistent with your observations.
3. List at least two kinds of culture media that will support the growth of the above organisms.
Part3
1. Did your assessment of the Gram positive stain agree with Dr Maddison’s? If not, can you explain why your answer might have been different?
2. Assuming that the microorganisms are indeed Gram positive cocci, tell the purpose of the media selected by Ms. Mosel to attempt to culture the organism.
3. Which aerobic Gram positive cocci are normal flora in the skin?
4. Of aerobic Gram positive cocci grow on the plates, what initial tests should be performed to identify them?
(Part 4 is a table I will attach document)
Part5 I already did ✔️
Part 6 no questions needed
Rubric for Research Paper

 
 
Outstanding – 20pts
Good  – 15pts
Fair – 10pts
Unacceptable – 5pts

 
Outline
 
Excellent section headings, indicative of a steady “flow” to the overall paper. Topics and subtopics clearly indicated.
Professional looking.
Good section headings, indicative to a steady “flow” to the overall paper. Topics clearly indicated, could use more subtopics.
 
Fair section headings, indicative that the paper has “flow”. Topics and subtopics not clearly indicated. Unclear organization of thoughts.
 
Disorganized appearance.
Relevant topics missing or incorrect, paper has no indicative “flow”.
Not professional.

Abstract
 
Highly informative, complete and easy to understand. Appropriate vocabulary is used.
Abstract makes you want to read the paper.
Informative, complete and understandable. Appropriate vocabulary is used.
Somewhat informative and understandable.
 
Not very informative or understandable.
 

Structure
 
Thesis is clear, easy to find, and appropriate to the assignment.
Thesis is supported by the rest of the paper.
Paper contains a “roadmap” for the reader.
There is a logical “flow” to the topics/arguments. Conclusion follows clearly from the arguments presented.
Thesis is clear and appropriate.   Thesis fairly well supported.
Paper is fairly well organized.
Conclusion follows from the rest of the paper.
Thesis is fairly clear.
Inconsistent support for thesis. Paper weakly organized. Conclusion is acceptable.
Thesis unclear and/or inappropriate.
Thesis not supported.
Paper is not organized. Conclusion doesn’t follow from the rest of the paper.

Research
 
The evidence comes from a wide variety of valid sources. The bibliography is complete and reflects appropriate sources.
 
The evidence comes from the minimum valid sources. The bibliography is complete.
Valid sources are inconsistently used.  The bibliography contains minor formatting errors.
 
Multiple sources cited  incorrectly.
Bibliography missing.
 

Critical
Thinki
 
ng
Arguments are pertinent to the topic.
Arguments are logical, supported with evidence. The key arguments have been made – no major points have been left out.
Arguments are
pertinent to the topic.   Arguments are fairly logical and reasonably supported.
Most key arguments have been made.
Arguments are not consistently pertinent, logical, or supported. Few key arguments have been made.
Arguments not pertinent. Arguments rarely, if at
all, logical and supported.
Almost no key arguments have been made.