PSY307CW25AH: Health Psychology
Assignment: Biopsychosocial Case Formulation
(25% of final mark)
Students must submit a 1,250 to 1,500 word essay that accurately applies the biopsychosocial model to a simulated clinical case. Both the clinical case and assignment documents are posted in Moodle and should be closely reviewed before starting this assignment.
After reviewing the clinical case, the student should:
- Conduct a literature review (utilize CUE library resources) to identify peer- reviewed research and scientific opinions that accurately and comprehensively describe 2-3 key explanatory variables within the case, highlighting important:
- predisposing factors;
- precipitating factors;
- perpetuating factors; and,
- protective factors.
- Formulate the case, drawing from psychological research to describe clinical information and generate an insightful description of biopsychosocial factors associated with the patient’s clinical state.
The case formulation must be written in essay format. All data, figures and sources must be referenced appropriately. Both the report and references must adhere to APA 7th edition style for full marks.
Referencing the Clinical Case:
The clinical case does not need to be included in the reference list of your paper; however, an in-text citation may be required if you include a direct quotation or excerpt from the case in your essay.
The specific page of the case can be referenced, as follows:
- Parenthetical citation: (Clinical case, p. ##)
- Narrative citation: Within the case, Fred stated: “…” (p. ##).
Submission requirements:
The assignment must be submitted via Moodle by April 7, 2024.
PSY 307C W25 AH – Health Psychology
Marking Rubric for Biopsychosocial Case Formulation: (25 marks)
| Excellent | Very Good | Satisfactory | Unsatisfactory |
Identification of Biopsychosocial Factors / 8 | A highly insightful review of peer-reviewed research relevant to the case. Relevant biological, psychological and social factors were identified and relationships/interactions are well-described. | A comprehensive review of peer-reviewed research relevant to the case. Relevant biological, psychological and social factors were identified but relationships between them were unclear or poorly defined. | A satisfactory review of peer-reviewed research relevant to the case. Biological, psychological and social factors were identified with at least one major omission or error. | A limited or low-quality review of research relevant to the case. The biopsychosocial model was not reflected in the case formulation, or several major omissions or errors existed. |
Application of Scientific Knowledge / 8 | Excellent critical analysis and robust evaluation of clinical findings. The case formulation is likely to have a major impact on clinical diagnoses and/or care decisions made by a multidisciplinary team. | Demonstrates good ability to evaluate relevant issues, concepts, and theories. The case formulation would have minimal impact on clinical diagnoses and/or care decisions. | Demonstrates limited ability to evaluate relevant issues, concepts, and theories. The case formulation is factual but derivative; it is not likely to advance diagnosis or care decisions. | Minimal evidence of independent thinking or evaluation. Might mislead or distract other professionals from making a diagnosis or advancing care decisions. |
Demonstrated Knowledge of Psychology / 6 | Highly insightful integration of psychological theories. The case formulation describes biopsychosocial phenomena with a high degree of accuracy. | Accurate and effective use of psychological theories. The case formulation describes biopsychosocial phenomena with only minor inaccuracies and/or conceptual gaps. | Limited or inaccurate use of psychological theories. The case formulation is vague or lacks coherence (major inconsistencies or conceptual gaps). | Inaccurate discussion of psychological theories. The case formulation is fundamentally unclear and/or incoherent. |
APA 7th Edition Referencing / 3 | Referencing is consistent, complete, and accurate. Trivial or minor errors might be observed. | Referencing is adequate. Might contain small or systematic errors. | Referencing is inadequate. Might be missing some citations or references. | Referencing is inadequate. Several citations are missing, or there are major errors in referencing. |
