| Course | NU245 Mental Health Nursing |
|---|---|
| Unit | Unit 3 |
| Paper type | Mental status write-up |
| Length | About 920 words, 6 pages double-spaced |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Purdue University Global |
| Program | BSN (prelicensure) |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for NU245 Unit 3
A Winter Coat in a Heated Dayroom: A Mental Status Write-Up of a Composite Twenty-Three-Year-Old on Day Three of a First Psychiatric Admission, Each Domain Recorded in Standard Terms and Every Judgment Resting on Something a Second Nurse Could Confirm
[Student Name]
Purdue University Global
NU245: Mental Health Nursing
Unit 3 Mental Status Write-Up
[Instructor Name]
[Date]
The patient is composite; quotations are paraphrased for teaching, values are bracketed where illustrative, and diagnosis is the treatment team's.
Identifying Information
[Mr. D.], composite, 23, single, a college student on leave, admitted voluntarily [three] days ago after his parents found him awake for several nights, saying the neighbors were sending messages through the walls. Interview conducted in the dayroom at [1000], about twenty minutes, with the assigned nurse present.
Appearance
Thin young man appearing his stated age. Wearing a heavy winter coat zipped to the chin in a room at about [72] degrees, jeans, socks without shoes. Hair uncombed, beard unshaven for several days. No visible injuries.
Behavior and Psychomotor Activity
Sat on the edge of the chair, facing the door. Eye contact brief and intermittent. Twice stopped mid-sentence, turned his head toward the corner of the room for about five seconds, then resumed. No tremor, no abnormal movements. Slowed overall movement.
Speech
Slow rate, soft volume, long pauses before answers. Speech clear, no slurring.
Mood and Affect
Mood, in his words: "Tired. Like everybody's watching." Affect observed: restricted in range, flat during most of the interview, briefly anxious when asked about the neighbors. Affect congruent with the stated mood.
Thought Process
Loose associations at times. Example, paraphrased: asked about sleep, he said he could not sleep because the walls were thin, then that thin people are trusted more, then that his professor had been thin. Goal-directed for short answers; lost the thread on longer ones.
Thought Content
Reports a belief that his neighbors send messages through the walls and that the messages are about him. Holds this firmly despite his parents' disagreement. Denies thoughts of harming himself or others when asked directly. No plan, no intent.
Perception
Reports hearing a man's voice from the walls, commenting on what he is doing, about "half the day." Observed: pauses with head turned toward the corner, as if listening, twice during the interview. Recorded as auditory hallucinations reported and behavior consistent with responding to internal stimuli.
I recorded what he said he heard and what I saw him do; I did not write that he was hearing voices at a moment I could not hear them.
Cognition
Alert. Oriented to person, place and month; gave the date as [two] days off. On a brief screen of orientation, registration, attention and recall (Folstein et al., 1975), he remembered [two] of the three objects at the five-minute check and could spell "world" backward with one error. Attention reduced by distraction during the voices. Recorded as tested, not estimated.
Insight and Judgment
Insight, in his words: "Maybe I'm just stressed. I don't know if I'm sick." Rated as partial: he accepts being in the hospital but not that the voices may be symptoms. Judgment: agreed to take his evening medication and to stay on the unit; came to the dayroom when asked.
Summary
A twenty-three-year-old on day three of a first admission with reported auditory hallucinations, a firmly held belief that neighbors send messages, loose associations, flat affect and partial insight. Cognition mildly reduced, likely by distraction. No reported thoughts of harm. These findings are observations for the treatment team, not a diagnosis (Halter, 2022).
Why the Write-Up Is Built This Way
A mental status examination is a snapshot of how a person appears and functions at one time, organized so others can compare it with later examinations (Trzepacz & Baker, 1993). Words like "disheveled," "bizarre" or "paranoid" tell the next reader the writer's conclusion without the evidence. Writing "winter coat zipped to the chin in a warm room" lets the next nurse see the same thing and notice when it changes, such as the day he takes the coat off.
Words Avoided and Why
Several common words were left out on purpose. "Disheveled" would have hidden the specific details, the coat, the uncombed hair, the missing shoes, that will show improvement later. "Paranoid" would have named a conclusion; the write-up instead records the belief about the neighbors and how firmly he holds it. "Responding to internal stimuli" is used only after the behavior that supports it is described, so a reader can disagree if the pauses had another explanation, such as fatigue or a noise in the hall. "Poor insight" was replaced by his own sentence, because his uncertainty, "I don't know if I'm sick," is closer to partial insight than to none, and that difference matters for how the team talks with him about treatment.
How the Findings Fit Together
The domains are recorded separately, but they are read together. His slowed movement, flat affect and soft, slow speech point in the same direction. The pauses fit the voices he reports. His mild trouble with recall is more likely distraction than a cognitive disorder, since attention dropped when he turned toward the corner and improved when the voices quieted. Noting how domains support or contradict each other is part of the write-up, not an extra.
What to Watch Over the Next Days
Whether the pauses and the coat continue, whether sleep improves, whether the belief about the neighbors softens and whether insight shifts with treatment.
References
Folstein, M. F., Folstein, S. E., & McHugh, P. R. (1975). "Mini-mental state": A practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. Journal of Psychiatric Research, 12(3), 189-198. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3956(75)90026-6
Halter, M. J. (2022). Varcarolis' foundations of psychiatric-mental health nursing: A clinical approach (9th ed.). Elsevier.
Trzepacz, P. T., & Baker, R. W. (1993). The psychiatric mental status examination. Oxford University Press.
What the NU245 Unit 3 assignment asks for
Unit 3 commonly asks for a mental status examination write-up on a patient from the clinical setting or a provided case. Prompts usually list the domains in a set order and ask for objective, specific findings. Instructors look for observations a second nurse could confirm, the patient's own words where relevant, careful separation of observed and reported findings and avoidance of judgmental labels. A short summary that does not diagnose is often required. Safety questions about harm to self or others should be recorded. Two pages is enough for most write-ups, and the course text is the usual source for terms.
How this NU245 Unit 3 example is built
Identifying information comes first, then each domain under its own heading. Appearance records the coat, hair and missing shoes rather than a single label. Mood appears in quotation marks beside observed affect. Thought process gives a paraphrased example of loose associations. Perception separates his report of a voice from the observed pauses; that is where the highlighted sentence and a margin comment sit. Cognition reports a brief screen result. Insight quotes him and is rated partial. A summary lists findings without diagnosing. A section explains the structure, citing a mental status textbook, then a section on words avoided, another on how findings fit together, and what to watch next.
NU245 Unit 3 rubric: what earns full points
Mental status rubrics in NU 245 typically allocate credit to completeness of domains, objectivity, accurate terminology, use of the patient's words, safety assessment and a concise summary. Completeness credit depends on every domain appearing in order. Objectivity credit rewards observable descriptions rather than conclusions. Terminology credit goes to correct use of terms such as restricted affect and loose associations, each supported by an example. Credit for the patient's words is earned in mood and insight. Safety credit requires direct questions about harm recorded with answers. Summary credit goes to a brief synthesis that leaves diagnosis to the team. Separating reported from observed findings in perception is often the deciding factor between good and excellent work.
Common NU245 Unit 3 mistakes, and how to avoid them
Mental status write-ups often lose credit by using labels such as disheveled, paranoid or bizarre with no description, which tells the next reader a conclusion but not the evidence. Another common mistake is writing that a patient is hallucinating at a moment the nurse could not confirm, instead of recording the report and the behavior separately. Some students estimate cognition rather than testing it. Others summarize with a diagnosis. Describe each domain in observable terms, quote mood and insight, give an example for each thought process term, test orientation and recall, ask about harm directly and keep the summary descriptive. Note which findings support each other, and which seem to conflict, since a conflict is often the most useful thing to report.
Get an NU245 Unit 3 example written to your instructions
Mental status formats differ: some programs use a checklist with narrative boxes, others a free narrative in fixed order. Attach the form this assignment calls for, plus the rubric and a description of the presentation, without identifiers. The sample then records an invented person with a matching presentation, domain by domain, in standard terms. Free for the first custom sample, ready within 24-48h. The paper above is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official Purdue University Global document.
More NU245 papers and BSN samples
- NU245 Unit 1: Stigmatizing Language Discussion Post
- NU245 Unit 2: Mania Communication Analysis
- NU245 Unit 4: Case Study Analysis
- NU245 Unit 5: Medication Rationale
- NU245 Unit 6: Safety Assessment Narrative
- NU245 Unit 7: Group Process Reflection
- NU245 Unit 8: Ethics and Legal Brief
- NU245 Unit 9: Care Plan
- NU245 Unit 10: Seminar Reflection
- NU225CL Unit 3: Sickle Cell Crisis Concept Map
- NU225 Unit 3: Intussusception Case Study
- NU145 Unit 3: Erikson Initiative vs Guilt Application
- NU144CL Unit 3: Tracheostomy Patient Workup
NU245 Unit 3 questions, answered
Where can I find a free NU245 Unit 3 sample paper?
A complete NU245 Unit 3 mental status write-up is here for a composite young man on day three of a first admission, every domain recorded in standard terms, with three sources. Bring your patient's findings and we can help you put them in this form.
Which domains does the NU245 Unit 3 write-up cover?
Ten areas in a fixed order, from how the person looks and moves through speech, emotion, thinking, perception and cognition to insight and judgment.
How are mood and affect recorded differently?
Mood is written in the patient's own words, such as tired and watched. Affect is what the nurse sees in face, voice and gesture, described as restricted, flat or full.
How should hallucinations be recorded in NU245 Unit 3?
Record what the patient reports hearing and, separately, the behavior observed, such as pausing to listen, so each part can be confirmed.
Why avoid words like disheveled?
They state a conclusion without evidence. Describing specific details, like a winter coat in a warm room, lets later nurses see change.