HEPL017 Malnutrition and Advances in Nutritional Care Assessment Guide Autumn 2025 | UoR

Academic Year	Autumn 2025

HEPL017 Assessment Guide

HEPL017 Assessment Summary Table

Assessment title	Weighting	Due Date
Annotated Bibliography	30%	BEFORE 2 pm 28^th November
Case Study with reflection	70%	BEFORE 2pm 9^th January

HEPL017 Module Learning Outcomes

Outcome	Assessed by
Have an advanced, critical, evidence-based understanding of assessing nutritional status within the context of malnutrition.	Annotated Bibliography
Discuss factors that influence diet and nutritional needs, intake, and practices, including disease, nutrition, health, and digital literacy, religious and cultural beliefs, socio-economic, geographical, and environmental sustainability factors.	Case study
Apply a person-centred approach and appropriate communication skills throughout all areas of nutrition practice. Be able to systematically organise and communicate advanced healthcare information.	Case study
Critically reflect on their nutrition practice and demonstrate ethical and professional practice through upholding the UKVRN Standards of Ethics, Conduct and Performance	Case study

HEPL017 Specific Guidance for Each Assessment:

Assessment 1.

Date Due: BEFORE 2 pm 28th November
Word Count: 1,500 excluding references
Details:

What is An Annotated Bibliography? Some annotated references:

where each reference is followed by a 300-word descriptive and evaluative paragraph, i.e., ‘the annotation’. The purpose is to inform the reader of the relevance and quality of your selected studies.

Select one ORIGINAL STUDY for EACH of the following topics,

1. A malnutrition screening tool in a hospitalised patient group.
Guidance: Hospitalised patient group can include adults, infants, children, or the elderly.
2. Handgrip strength as a method for assessing nutritional status.
3. Vitamin D intake or status in care or nursing home residents.
4. Oral nutritional supplement drinks (ONS) intervention in children
Guidance: “Oral Nutritional Supplements drinks (ONS) are sterile liquids, semi-solids or powders, which provide macro and micronutrients.” BAPEN
5. Enteral tube feeding for critical care patients

Present the reference in Harvard style and write a 300-word annotation for each study selected.

There are many relevant ORIGINAL studies for each topic; we are not looking for a particular study, just one that fits the topic.

Assessment Criteria:

Study details (50% of marks)
Inclusion of an introductory sentence.
Useful methods to be able to communicate the quality of the study.
Key results relating to the topic, including values and significance if available. For example, the mean, standard deviations, and p values: “During the dietary intervention phase, dietary glycaemic index decreased from 54.5±3.5 to 48.6±5.1 (P<0.001)”.
Critical analysis (40% of marks)
Inclusion of specific study methods/ design limitations and strengths, for example, “only recruited white males.”
Overall communication of information (10% of marks)
Followed guidelines, reference complete as per Harvard style, clearly presented information, well organised in a formal/ scientific writing style, within word limit (+/- 10%)

Assessment 2.

Date Due: BEFORE 2 pm 9th January
Word Count: 3,500 words excluding references
Details: Case study with reflection

Evidence-based recommendations & awareness of patient circumstances (2,000 words, excluding reference list:

1. Choose ONE case study

This service user has come to see you. Answer the following:

2. What additional questions would you ask/ additional information would you like to inform your decision-making for person-centred care?

Demonstrate an understanding of the needs of individuals, incorporating financial, religious, and cultural awareness.

3. Based on evidence-based practice, what recommendations would you make – give detailed reasons for the decision.

Include relevant national/ international guidelines on the dietary and lifestyle management of the clinical condition, as well as any relevant studies published after the guidelines were published.

Include critical awareness: for example, useful study details to communicate your awareness of the quality of your sources of information.

Include references for all your sources of information.

Reflect how your proposed action adheres to the following AfN standards of ethics, conduct, and performance (750 words, excluding AfN statements:

UKVRN Standards of Ethics, Conduct & Performance

Prioritise Public Benefit: You must always think about the impact your decisions, actions, and advice can have on the public. For example, “only provide a service if it is grounded in robust science, within your scope of practice, and it is appropriate to do so.”
Practice safely and effectively: Be objective, fair, balanced, and proportionate in professional statements or recommendations made.
Work within own limits: Your knowledge, skills, and experiences will determine your scope of practice, and it is vital that you are aware of your own limitations and only undertake activities that are within the limits of your competence, obtaining further training or support where needed for other activities.
Communicate appropriately: The public benefits when communication is effective and delivered appropriately for the audience. Communication extends beyond just providing information to asking questions and listening. Effective and appropriate communication is an exchange of information, incorporating body language, tone of voice, imagery, and the words used.
Be honest and trustworthy: This is fundamental to maintaining trust and confidence in nutritionists and the nutrition profession. Any activities undertaken in the public domain reflect on the profession; this is not limited to the working day or to face-to-face interactions. To maintain confidence in the profession, registrants must demonstrate appropriate professional behaviour at all times.

Provide a Continual Professional Development (CPD) reflection and plan to stay up to date: 750 words

Reflect on how the assignment as a CPD activity has impacted you

Reflection is the process of thoughtfully considering and evaluating your actions, experiences, and learning to gain deeper insights and improve future practice. …reflection is a crucial tool for personal and professional development, allowing you to assess how your knowledge, skills, and behaviours align with best practices. It encourages continuous learning, promotes self-awareness, and fosters the ability to adapt and grow in response to new evidence or challenges. Integrating reflection into your CPD provides essential context by helping to connect your learning to real-world practice. You can enhance your effectiveness, ensure high standards of care, and stay current with evolving trends and research in the field of nutrition

CPD Requirements for UKVRN Registrants – Association for Nutrition Page 11

How do you propose to stay up to date on this topic in the future? Provide a short plan with examples of courses/conferences you could attend online or in person, and websites you could visit
CPD Requirements for UKVRN Registrants – Association for Nutrition Page 9 for examples of CPD

Assessment Criteria:

Scientific Content & awareness of patient circumstances (60% of marks)

National/ international guidelines on the dietary management of the clinical condition and any relevant studies published since publication.
Include critical awareness of the quality of your information sources.
Demonstrates an understanding of the needs of individuals, incorporating financial, religious, and cultural awareness.

Reflection on how the proposed action adheres to the following AfN standards of ethics, conduct, and performance (15% of marks)

Continual Professional Development (CPD) reflection and plan to stay up to date (15% of marks)

Overall communication of information (10% of marks):

Followed guidelines, reference complete as per Harvard style, clearly presented information, well organised in a formal/ scientific writing style, within word limit (+/- 10%)

HEPL017 Mitigating Circumstances

Sometimes circumstances outside of your control may affect your studies, e.g., illness or family issues. In these cases, you can always talk to your Academic Guidance Tutor, the Student Union, or someone in the Wellbeing team for advice.

If you need additional time to complete an assessment or defer work to the next submission date, you can submit a request via the mitigating circumstances portal.
You can find the portal and more details on the NEST: Mitigating Circumstances

The options:

1) Self – Self-Certification Request: 1 week extension, no supporting evidence is required. You can only request a self-certification once a year, but you must log your request through the mitigating circumstances portal.
2) Extension: 2-week extension, supporting evidence is required (except for students with SOAs).
3) Deferral: Coursework is deferred to the next examination and assessment period. Supporting evidence is required.

(NB. if a deferral is granted, this may impact your graduation date, or could increase your workload in the next assessment period. If you are an international student, you should also consider visa restrictions.

If you do not submit a request for Mitigating Circumstances (and you don’t have a SoA), or if your request is not approved, late penalties will apply.

You must log all requests through the mitigating circumstances portal

HEPL017 Appendix

Explanation of grading for postgraduate work

Descriptors	Grade	%	Degree equivalent
Outstanding	A+	80+	Distinction
Excellent	A	70 – 79	Distinction
Good	B	60 – 69	Merit
Satisfactory	C	50 – 59	Pass
Weak	D	40 – 49	Fail (may be condonable)
Unsatisfactory	F	0 – 39	Fail

Generic marking criteria for postgraduate work

Grade Categories and Generic Assessment Criteria (M Level)

100

An assessment that could not be bettered within the time available

Distinction work in this range demonstrates:

attainment beyond the intended learning outcomes outstanding level of originality and creativity, providing a significant new perspective on the question or topic
a clear, elegant, and well-supported argument, based on the integration and sophisticated critical evaluation of a substantial body of knowledge
suitability for publication in high high-quality journal

Distinction work in this range demonstrates:

exemplary attainment of learning outcomes
a high level of insight and critical evaluation of the material
a comprehensive and up-to-date account of relevant theoretical and empirical material at the forefront of the discipline
a thorough understanding and integration of material supporting a cogent argument
excellent writing of a high academic standard

Merit work demonstrates:

convincing attainment of learning outcomes
evidence of critical evaluation and development of an independent argument
comprehensive up-to-date range of relevant theoretical and empirical material showing wide reading
clear understanding of key concepts
generally good writing and structure

The pass work demonstrates:

acceptable attainment of learning outcomes
evidence of some critical evaluation but little originality
adequate coverage and understanding of material largely based on teaching material or core texts
some errors or omissions
evidence of a basic argument, but insufficiently supported or developed
adequate writing, with some problems with organisation

Condonable Fail work demonstrates:

insufficient evidence of meeting learning outcomes
insufficient engagement with the task/question
limited scope, understanding, or relevance of the material presented, including errors or gaps in knowledge
use of unsupported assertions or evidence of inadequate reading
writing of inadequate academic standard

Failure in this range demonstrates:

a standard significantly below the learning outcomes
little or no evidence of understanding or meaningful response to the task/question
significant limitations in understanding or relevance of material presented, including marked errors or gaps in knowledge
frequent use of unsupported assertions or evidence of inadequate reading
significant problems with the standard and coherence of the writing

Fail work of 0 demonstrates:

nothing of merit, or
non-submission, or