| Course | NUR 5063 Patient-Centered Care |
|---|---|
| Module | Module 3 |
| Paper type | Health literacy and shared decision tool |
| Length | 1,180 words, about 4 pages plus title and reference pages |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | American College of Education |
| Program | MSN |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for NUR 5063 Module 3
Three Ways to Keep a Fast: A Picture-Based Shared Decision Tool in Nepali for Adults With Diabetes Who Fast on Ekadashi
Student Name
American College of Education
NUR5063: Patient-Centered Care
Module 3 Assignment
Instructor Name
January 26, 2027
The Decision Nobody Was Discussing
The cultural needs assessment in Module 2 found that many older Bhutanese Nepali women seen at the composite Northeast Ohio diabetes center fast twice a month on Ekadashi and during festivals, some without food or water for a full day, and that none of the women in the listening sessions had talked about fasting with a clinician. Three described episodes of low blood sugar while fasting. The center's only fasting guidance was a line in an English handout advising patients with diabetes not to fast.
That advice fails in two ways. It ignores a practice that carries religious meaning, so patients keep fasting and stop mentioning it. It also assumes a patient can read it. Low health literacy is linked with worse use of care and worse outcomes, including more hospital admissions and emergency visits and a poorer ability to take medicines correctly and understand labels (Berkman et al., 2011), and many elders in this community cannot read Nepali, let alone English. The real question is not whether a patient should fast but how a patient who will fast can do it safely, and that question has more than one reasonable answer. A question with several reasonable answers, where the right one depends on what the patient values, is exactly the kind of decision that calls for shared decision making.
Designing the Tool
No guideline addresses Ekadashi fasting, so the clinical content was adapted from practical guidance written for Muslim patients who fast during Ramadan, which groups patients by risk and advises that those at higher risk either avoid fasting or fast only with a medicine plan and glucose checks agreed beforehand (Hassanein et al., 2017). The center's endocrinologist and pharmacist reviewed the adaptation. The card offers three options. The first is a phalahar fast, in which the patient eats fruit, milk and other foods the tradition allows, with the usual medicines. The second is a full fast with a medicine plan the prescriber has written for fasting days and glucose checks at set times. The third is to keep the day through prayer and temple attendance without fasting, an option several women said older relatives had chosen with their priest's blessing. Every option shows the same stop rule: if the reading is low or the patient feels shaky, sweaty or confused, the fast is broken with juice or sugar and the family is told.
The format follows the evidence on pictures in health teaching. Houts et al. (2006) found that pictures closely linked to spoken or written text markedly improve attention and recall, that patients with low literacy benefit most, and that people with very low literacy do best with spoken directions plus pictures to take home. The card therefore uses one simple drawing for each option and for the stop rule, drawn with women from the community rather than borrowed from a stock set, with captions of no more than five words in Nepali. Each panel has a printed code the patient's phone camera can read, which plays a 40-second recording in Nepali by a community health worker. The patient's personal fasting-day medicine plan is filled in on the back by the nurse, using drawings of the patient's own pills.
Testing It With the People It Is For
A draft card was reviewed by six women from the community association, aged 52 to 76, four of whom could not read. Each was shown the card with its audio and then asked to explain in her own words what each option meant and what she would do if she felt shaky. Two changes came from this. A drawing of a glucose meter was mistaken for a phone by three women and was replaced by a drawing of a finger with a drop of blood. The word used for low sugar in the first recording was one the women associated with weakness in general, so the recording was redone with the phrase the women themselves used. In a second round, all six explained the stop rule correctly.
Using the Tool in a Three-Talk Conversation
Elwyn et al. (2017) describe shared decision making as a conversation that moves through three stages: team talk, where the nurse signals that there is more than one good path and invites the patient to help choose; option talk, where the paths are laid side by side; and decision talk, where what the patient cares about settles the choice. The card is designed to be used in that order.
In practice, with Mrs. G., the 64-year-old patient from the Module 1 cases, the nurse used a trained interpreter and began with team talk by saying that many women at the center fast, that there are safe ways to do it, and that the choice would be hers and her family's. Mrs. G. asked that her daughter-in-law stay. In option talk, the nurse went through the three panels while the audio played, then asked what mattered most to her about the fast. Mrs. G. said that fasting was a promise she had made for her late husband and that she could not give it up, but that she had eaten fruit on fasting days in the camp in Nepal when she was ill. In decision talk, she chose a phalahar fast on ordinary Ekadashi days and a full fast only on the anniversary of her husband's death, with a written plan from her prescriber for that day. The nurse recorded the choice as hers, sent it to the prescriber and scheduled a phone check the day after her next fast.
Confirming Understanding With Teach-Back
The conversation closed with teach-back. The nurse asked Mrs. G. to show her daughter-in-law, using the card, what she would eat on her next Ekadashi and what she would do if she felt shaky. She pointed to the fruit panel, then to the stop rule, and said she would drink juice and call her son. The nurse also asked the daughter-in-law to explain the stop rule, since she would be present on fasting days. Teach-back worked in 19 of the 20 studies gathered by one systematic review, with benefits ranging from knowledge recall to readmissions and quality of life, although the ways services put it into practice were seldom reported (Talevski et al., 2020). For that reason, the center will record teach-back as a separate step in the visit note, stating what the patient explained correctly and what had to be taught again.
Limits and Next Steps
The card has been tested for understanding with six women, not for its effect on low blood sugar events, and its clinical content is adapted from guidance written for another religious fast. Men who fast and patients on insulin will need their own versions. The next module places this tool inside a broader program that engages families across the transition from hospital to home, where many of the same literacy and decision problems appear at a moment of much higher risk.
References
Berkman, N. D., Sheridan, S. L., Donahue, K. E., Halpern, D. J., & Crotty, K. (2011). Low health literacy and health outcomes: An updated systematic review. Annals of Internal Medicine, 155(2), 97-107. https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-155-2-201107190-00005
Elwyn, G., Durand, M. A., Song, J., Aarts, J., Barr, P. J., Berger, Z., Cochran, N., Frosch, D., Galasiński, D., Gulbrandsen, P., Han, P. K. J., Härter, M., Kinnersley, P., Lloyd, A., Mishra, M., Perestelo-Perez, L., Scholl, I., Tomori, K., Trevena, L., ... Van der Weijden, T. (2017). A three-talk model for shared decision making: Multistage consultation process. BMJ, 359, Article j4891. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.j4891
Hassanein, M., Al-Arouj, M., Hamdy, O., Bebakar, W. M. W., Jabbar, A., Al-Madani, A., Hanif, W., Lessan, N., Basit, A., Tayeb, K., Omar, M., Abdallah, K., Al Twaim, A., Buyukbese, M. A., El-Sayed, A. A., & Ben-Nakhi, A. (2017). Diabetes and Ramadan: Practical guidelines. Diabetes Research and Clinical Practice, 126, 303-316. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.diabres.2017.03.003
Houts, P. S., Doak, C. C., Doak, L. G., & Loscalzo, M. J. (2006). The role of pictures in improving health communication: A review of research on attention, comprehension, recall, and adherence. Patient Education and Counseling, 61(2), 173-190. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2005.05.004
Talevski, J., Wong Shee, A., Rasmussen, B., Kemp, G., & Beauchamp, A. (2020). Teach-back: A systematic review of implementation and impacts. PLOS ONE, 15(4), Article e0231350. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0231350
Reading the NUR 5063 Module 3 instructions
Module 3 of NUR 5063 usually turns to health literacy and shared decision making. The typical task is either to design a plain-language or picture-based tool that helps patients make a decision, to describe a shared decision conversation using a recognized model, or both. Most prompts expect evidence on health literacy, a named decision model, testing or review of the tool, and a way to confirm understanding such as teach-back. Many sections continue the population from Module 2. The paper commonly reaches about five pages, with the tool attached as an appendix. The Canvas instructions state whether the tool must be tested with real people and whether it must be in a language other than English.
How this NUR 5063 Module 3 example is built
The paper begins with the decision nobody was discussing: patients fasted anyway, so the advice not to fast gave them no safe plan. It cites the literacy evidence and reframes fasting as a choice among options. The design section sources each clinical point from the nearest published guidance, reviewed by the center's endocrinologist, and ties each format choice, pictures, audio and a single card, to evidence. A testing section reports what community members misunderstood and what changed, such as redrawing the meter. The three-talk section defines team talk, option talk and decision talk and shows each with the composite patient from Module 1, whose own reason for fasting drives the decision. Teach-back with a family member follows, and a limits section closes.
NUR 5063 Module 3 rubric: what full marks look like
A tool paper here is judged mostly on design reasoning and evidence of use. The literacy row wants the problem documented with research and a clear reason the existing materials fail. Design points depend on clinical content taken from a named source and on every format choice explained, which is why the card's pictures and audio each cite evidence. Testing with members of the intended group, and reporting what changed afterward, is where the strongest papers separate themselves. For the decision model, credit goes to stages taken from Elwyn's own description and then acted out with a patient. Teach-back earns credit when it is described as it happened, with the family present. The last points go to organization, the attached tool and APA 7.
Common NUR 5063 Module 3 mistakes, and how to avoid them
Literacy papers most often shorten a handout and call it plain language without testing it. Another frequent problem is framing a cultural practice as the problem, so the tool argues against fasting rather than helping patients fast safely. Students also name shared decision making without showing the stages in a conversation. Source every dose and glucose threshold. Test the tool with a few people from the intended group and report their misunderstandings. Use teach-back and document it. Keep the tool to one decision. If your population makes a different decision, such as starting insulin or choosing dialysis, the desk can build a decision tool around that choice.
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 American College of Education 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 5063 and MSN sample papers
- NUR 5063 Module 1: Concept Analysis
- NUR 5063 Module 2: Cultural Needs Assessment
- NUR 5063 Module 4: Family Engagement Program
- NUR 5063 Module 5: Patient Experience Measures
- NUR 5063 Module 6: Patient-Centered Care Proposal
- NUR 5033 Module 5: Outcome Measurement Plan
- NUR 5043 Module 6: Leadership Philosophy and Plan
- NUR 5053 Module 2: Root Cause Analysis
- NUR 5053 Module 5: Measurement Plan and Run Chart
NUR 5063 Module 3 questions, answered
What does NUR5063 Module 3 usually ask for?
NUR5063 Module 3 usually asks you to address health literacy for a patient population, either by designing a plain-language tool, by describing a shared decision making conversation, or both. Your classroom's instructions decide which and whether the tool itself must be attached.
What counts as a shared decision in nursing?
Any choice with more than one reasonable option where the best one depends on what the patient values. Nurses often support these decisions around self-care, timing and daily routines. Explain why your decision qualifies before you describe the conversation.
How do I show my tool works for low-literacy patients?
Test it with people from the intended group and ask them to explain it back in their own words. Report what they misunderstood and what you changed, and use teach-back when the tool is used in care.
Where can I find a free NUR 5063 Module 3 sample paper?
Read it above with no charge: the Ekadashi fasting decision card paper, from the reframed problem and design choices through community testing, a three-talk conversation and teach-back, with references and margin notes.
What is the three-talk model?
Elwyn and colleagues describe shared decision making in three stages: team talk, where the clinician says a choice exists; option talk, where options are compared; and decision talk, where the patient's preferences lead to a decision.