A provisional psychosis diagnosis revised twice, akathisia, cannabis and a relapse after stopping medication shape six months of one composite young man's care in the NU678 Unit 7 longitudinal case. Searches like "nu 678 unit 7 assignment example", "nu678 unit 7 sample" and "nu678 unit 7 example" land here.
What a finished NU678 Unit 7 longitudinal patient case looks like
Four visit sections and a synthesis fill some seven pages. The initial visit records symptoms, daily high-potency cannabis use, a negative medical workup in brackets and a working diagnosis of unspecified schizophrenia spectrum disorder, with substance-induced psychosis still possible. It starts [aripiprazole] at [a low dose], orders baseline weight, glucose and lipids, and refers him to a coordinated specialty care program. Week [three] brings restlessness recognized as akathisia and a decision shaped by the starting dose. Week [twelve] shows fewer voices, cannabis reduced but not stopped, weight up [three] kg, and a revised diagnosis of schizophreniform disorder, since symptoms persisted well beyond a month of reduced use. Month [six] follows a relapse after he stopped the medication, and a discussion of a long-acting injectable. The synthesis reads the four decisions together.
How a NU678 Unit 7 example is structured
Each visit section follows the same order, what changed, what was decided and why, and what the decision assumed from the visit before, so the reader can trace reasoning across time rather than reading four notes. Diagnosis is treated as a hypothesis that time tests: the paper explains the duration thresholds separating substance-induced psychosis, schizophreniform disorder and schizophrenia, and shows the label moving as the months accumulate. Every drug and dose sits in brackets. Evidence is cited where it shapes a decision: the RAISE early treatment program trial (Kane et al., 2016) for the specialty care referral, and the metabolic monitoring schedule from the ADA and APA consensus statement (2004) for the week-twelve check. The synthesis names the thread running through all four visits, his wish to keep working, and argues that the injectable discussion succeeded because it was framed around that goal.
Provisional on day one
The first diagnosis is written as unspecified, with substance-induced psychosis kept open. The case explains that only time, and his cannabis use over the following weeks, could distinguish the possibilities.
A restlessness recognized
At week three he paces and cannot sit through the visit. The section identifies akathisia, weighs [a dose reduction] against [an added agent], and notes that the low starting dose narrowed the options.
Twelve weeks, a new label
Symptoms persisting well past a month of reduced cannabis use move the diagnosis to schizophreniform disorder. The section states the duration thresholds involved and what would move it again.
Stopping when well
At month six he relapses after stopping the medication because he felt fine. The case records his reasoning respectfully and treats the relapse as information for the next decision, not as noncompliance.
An injectable framed around work
The long-acting option is discussed in terms of his apprenticeship and fewer missed shifts. The synthesis argues that tying the decision to his goal is what made it acceptable to him.
Where marks go in NU678 Unit 7
The assignment tests whether reasoning carries across visits, so four separate notes, each starting fresh, fail its central test even when each note is sound. Diagnoses fixed on day one and never revisited suggest the writer has not considered how duration and substance use change the picture. Graders expect each decision to reference what came before and to show where a plan changed after it failed. Drugs and doses stated without brackets or monitoring appear as confident prescribing without a safety frame. A relapse described as noncompliance, with no account of the patient's reasons, misses the recovery orientation the course expects. Credit also shrinks for evidence cited without dates, for metabolic monitoring omitted, and for a synthesis that summarizes instead of naming the thread connecting the visits.
Get a NU678 Unit 7 example written to your instructions
Does your NU678 case prompt supply a patient, or ask for one followed across your rotation? Either way, the patient here is a composite. Send the required visits, headings and rubric. Delivery takes 24-48h, the first case is free, and each visit reasons from the last, with each drug and dose bracketed.
NU678 Unit 7 questions, answered
How many visits should a longitudinal case cover?
Usually three to five, enough for a diagnosis to be tested and a plan to be revised. Each visit needs a decision worth examining, so choose points where something changed, such as a side effect, a relapse or new information, rather than routine follow-ups. The synthesis then explains how the decisions connect.
May the case draw on someone I actually treated?
Your submitted case may draw on your clinical experience, de-identified under your program's rules, and those encounters are yours. A sample is always a composite, invented so that no real patient can be recognized. Build yours carefully, since a combination of age, occupation and diagnosis can identify someone even without a name.
Should the diagnosis change over the course of the case?
When the facts support it. Psychotic, mood and substance-related presentations often need time before a diagnosis settles, and showing that process is a strength. Explain what information drove each revision. A diagnosis that never changes is fine if the case supports it, but the paper should say why no revision was warranted.