| Course | NU671 PMHNP Psychopathological Disorders and Psychotherapy |
|---|---|
| Unit | Unit 5 |
| Paper type | Seminar reflection |
| Length | About 820 words, 5 pages double-spaced |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Purdue University Global |
| Program | MSN |
| Updated | September 2026 |
Free sample paper for NU671 Unit 5
The Loop Included the Doctors: A Seminar Reflection on Body Dysmorphic Disorder, Three Dermatology Visits and a Recommendation I Withdrew
[Student Name]
Purdue University Global
NU671: PMHNP Psychopathological Disorders and Psychotherapy
Unit 5 Seminar Reflection
[Instructor Name]
[Date]
The patient and seminar group are composite; details are bracketed.
The Case and My Recommendation
Our fifth seminar case described Ms. [N.], a [34]-year-old paralegal who believes that the pores and faint scars on her cheeks are so obvious that people stare at her. She checks her face in any reflective surface, spends about [three] hours a day at the bathroom mirror, and picks at her skin to "smooth" it. She has seen three dermatologists this year, completed a course of isotretinoin, and had one laser treatment. Her partner says her skin looks normal. She has started calling in sick on days when her skin "looks bad."
I recognized body dysmorphic disorder, and I came prepared to recommend an SSRI and referral to a fourth dermatologist who specializes in scar revision, reasoning that if the treatments had not yet worked, a more skilled one might, and that relief of her distress would make therapy easier later. When the facilitator asked for opening views, I said so.
What the Group Did Instead
The facilitator asked us not to discuss treatment until we had drawn what keeps the problem going. That felt slow to me, but I went along.
We drew the loop on the whiteboard. A trigger, such as catching her reflection in a car window, led to the thought that her scars were glaring, a surge of shame and anxiety, and then checking and picking. Checking gave brief relief when her skin looked "acceptable," but more often it focused her attention on the flaw and made it seem larger. Picking produced real marks, which confirmed her fears. Avoidance, staying home and dimming lights, kept her from learning that others did not react to her skin.
Then a classmate, Denise, asked where the dermatology visits belonged on the diagram. We placed them alongside the checking: each visit was an attempt to fix the flaw, and each brief hope was followed by disappointment and more scrutiny. The treatments I wanted to add were already part of the loop, doing for her what the mirror did, only more expensively.
The Evidence That Changed My Mind
The facilitator then gave us the study I should have known. In a sample of [200] people with body dysmorphic disorder, [71] percent had sought and [64] percent had received nonpsychiatric medical or surgical treatment, most often dermatological, including isotretinoin for some; such treatment rarely improved their body dysmorphic symptoms (Crerand et al., 2005).
We also looked at what does help. In a randomized trial of [46] adults with the disorder, including some whose beliefs were delusional, cognitive behavioral therapy was significantly more effective than anxiety management at [12] weeks, with a large effect size (Veale et al., 2014). A trial of modular cognitive behavioral therapy found that half the participants responded by week [12], compared with [12] percent of those on a waitlist, and [81] percent of all treated participants responded by the end of treatment (Wilhelm et al., 2014).
How My View Changed
I had treated the dermatology visits as a neutral background, a sign that she was motivated to get better. After drawing the loop, I saw them as a safety behavior, one that kept the cycle going. My recommendation for a fourth dermatologist was not a neutral next step but another turn of the same loop.
I did not abandon the SSRI entirely; medication has a place in treating the disorder and may be useful for her. But I now think my recommendation had the order wrong. The first step should have been to understand the cycle and to help her see it, which would make the case for psychological treatment clearer to her than any referral.
I also noticed something about my own reasoning. I wanted to act, and drawing a loop felt like delay. The seminar showed me that understanding what maintains a problem is itself part of treatment, because it tells you which actions will feed the problem and which will break it.
What I Will Do Differently
1. Before recommending any treatment for a body-focused concern, I will ask what treatments the person has already had and where they sit in the maintaining cycle.
2. I will ask directly about body dysmorphic concerns when a patient has had repeated dermatological or cosmetic treatment with little satisfaction, since such patients may never mention the disorder.
3. When I draw a maintaining loop with a patient, I will include the actions of clinicians, family and others, not only the patient's own behavior.
4. I will be cautious about recommending further cosmetic or dermatological treatment for a patient with suspected body dysmorphic disorder, and I will discuss the concern with the dermatologist.
References
Crerand, C. E., Phillips, K. A., Menard, W., & Fay, C. (2005). Nonpsychiatric medical treatment of body dysmorphic disorder. Psychosomatics, 46(6), 549-555. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.psy.46.6.549
Veale, D., Anson, M., Miles, S., Pieta, M., Costa, A., & Ellison, N. (2014). Efficacy of cognitive behaviour therapy versus anxiety management for body dysmorphic disorder: A randomised controlled trial. Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics, 83(6), 341-353. https://doi.org/10.1159/000360740
Wilhelm, S., Phillips, K. A., Didie, E., Buhlmann, U., Greenberg, J. L., Fama, J. M., Keshaviah, A., & Steketee, G. (2014). Modular cognitive-behavioral therapy for body dysmorphic disorder: A randomized controlled trial. Behavior Therapy, 45(3), 314-327. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beth.2013.12.007
What the NU671 Unit 5 assignment asks for
In Unit 5 you revisit a seminar case discussion in writing and describe how your understanding changed. Most prompts ask for your starting view, what the group did or said, the evidence introduced, how your view shifted, and what you will do differently. Expect to write close to 900 words in your own voice, with citations for the evidence discussed. Instructors want to see your reasoning laid bare, including what made your first view appealing. The reflection should name the moment the change happened, not only its result. Commitments should be specific enough that a faculty member could check them in your next case with a similar presentation.
Inside the NU671 Unit 5 example
The reflection begins with the case as presented and the author's recommendation, stated plainly. The next section describes the group drawing the loop on the whiteboard, from trigger and thought to checking, picking and avoidance, and then a classmate's question about where the dermatology visits belonged. A highlighted sentence captures the realization. The evidence section reports the proportion of people with the disorder who sought and received cosmetic or dermatological treatment and its poor results, then the two randomized trials of cognitive behavioral therapy. A section explains how the author's view changed, including the recommendation's wrong order. Four numbered commitments close the reflection. Each commitment refers back to a moment in the seminar.
Reading the NU671 Unit 5 grading rubric
Grading for this reflection typically covers depth of self-examination, accuracy about the disorder and the evidence, identification of the turning point, integration of the maintaining cycle and practical learning. Self-examination earns full points when the writer explains why the first view was attractive. Accuracy is checked on diagnostic features and on the study results cited. The turning point should be a specific moment in the discussion. Integration rewards reflections that describe the loop in enough detail to show how clinician actions fit into it. Practical learning points go to commitments that change what the writer will ask or recommend in a similar case, rather than general resolutions to be more careful.
Common NU671 Unit 5 mistakes, and how to avoid them
Many reflections summarize the case and the discussion without saying what the writer thought at the start. Another common problem is presenting a change of view without the evidence that caused it. Students sometimes describe body dysmorphic disorder as vanity, which misreads the distress and the risk. Some reflections drop medication entirely after learning about therapy, when medication still has a role. Others list commitments that cannot be checked. And forgetting that clinicians and cosmetic treatments can be part of a patient's maintaining cycle leaves out the most useful insight the seminar offered. A final trap is writing the reflection as if the group was wrong to slow down, which misses the lesson the facilitator built into the session.
Get an NU671 Unit 5 example written to your instructions
What loop did your NU671 seminar draw in Unit 5, or what does the written alternative ask? Describe it briefly, add what you expected to say going in, and attach the rubric. The reflection comes back within 24-48h, free on a first request, showing where the writer began, the loop in labeled links, the moment it shifted and a habit that can be checked. 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 NU671 papers and MSN samples
- NU671 Unit 1: Blood Phobia and Avoidance Post
- NU671 Unit 2: Binge Eating Developmental Course
- NU671 Unit 3: Hoarding Maintaining Cycle Analysis
- NU671 Unit 4: Diathesis-Stress, Caregiver Depression
- NU671 Unit 6: Theory of Change Comparison
- NU671 Unit 7: Evidence Summary
- NU671 Unit 8: Early Session Outline
- NU671 Unit 9: Therapeutic Alliance Paper
- NU671 Unit 10: Integrated Therapy Proposal
- NU670 Unit 5: Depression Biotypes Seminar Reflection
- NU657 Unit 5: Central Line Preparation, Low Platelets
- NU656 Unit 5: High-Flow Oxygen Seminar Reflection
- NU655 Unit 5: Seminar Reflection, Massive Hemoptysis
NU671 Unit 5 questions, answered
Our seminar discussed treatment anyway; does that change things?
In that case the reflection can focus on whether the loop was fully drawn before treatment came up, and what changed when it was. The principle this course keeps returning to, understanding what sustains a problem before choosing how to interrupt it, still gives the reflection its spine even if the session moved faster than that.
Should the reflection include a diagram?
Only if the prompt allows one. Most reflections are prose, and a loop described link by link in sentences is easy to follow. Where a diagram is permitted, a simple one can sit beside the text, but the reflective commentary around it remains what is assessed. A figure without reflection is an analysis, not this genre.
Is it acceptable to disagree with the group?
Yes, provided the dissent is argued. A reflection explaining why you remained unconvinced on one point, with evidence, shows thinking as clearly as one describing a change of mind. Keep the account fair to the position you disagree with, and make clear which parts of the group's reasoning you did accept.
Where can I find a free NU671 Unit 5 sample paper?
This page contains the full NU671 Unit 5 seminar reflection on body dysmorphic disorder, including the loop the group drew, the evidence that changed the author's view and four commitments, with three references. Send your seminar notes if you would like one built around your own discussion.
Do dermatology treatments help body dysmorphic disorder in NU671 Unit 5?
Rarely. In a study of 200 people with the disorder, 71 percent had sought and 64 percent had received nonpsychiatric medical or surgical treatment, most often dermatological, and such treatment rarely improved their body dysmorphic symptoms.