NURS 503 Week 2 Healthy People Health Indicator Overview Paper Example

Reviewed by Rachel Stanton, MSN, RN · Liberty University · Updated

This NURS 503 Week 2 example is a complete Health Indicator Overview Paper on the Healthy People 2030 leading health indicator for knowledge of HIV status, objective HIV-02. Liberty University NURS 503, the MSN population health course, gives this indicator paper 150 points in Module/Week 2 and asks for five to seven pages in APA format on one leading health indicator, backed by three to five scholarly sources beyond the textbook and Scripture; older guides name Healthy People 2020, so the sample uses the current 2030 objectives. It reports the indicator's definition, its baseline of 85.8% in 2017 and 87.2% in 2022 against a 95% target, and the gap among young people, where only 56 of every 100 aged 13 to 24 knew their status. It explains why the indicator matters for transmission, what drives it and what nurses can do, with a Christian reflection on stigma.

CourseNURS 503 Managing Population Health (NURS503)
Module/Week2
AssignmentHealthy People Health Indicator Overview Paper
Paper typeHealth indicator overview paper
Lengthabout 1,401 words, 5 double-spaced pages plus title page and references. Course guide: 5 to 7 pages with 3 to 5 scholarly sources in addition to the course textbook and the Bible
FormatAPA 7 student paper
Points150
SchoolLiberty University Online
ProgramMSN
Where it sitsModule/Week 2 in Liberty's published NURS 503 course guide; current sections can differ
UpdatedOctober 2026

Free sample paper for NURS 503 Week 2

1

Thirteen in a Hundred Still Do Not Know: An Overview of the Healthy People 2030 Leading Health Indicator on Knowledge of HIV Status

 

[Student Name]

School of Nursing, Liberty University

NURS 503: Managing Population Health

Healthy People: Health Indicator Overview Paper

[Instructor Name]

[Date]

Why this part earns its pointsThe title gives the gap in one number, which signals a data-driven paper before the first paragraph.
2

Thirteen in a Hundred Still Do Not Know: An Overview of the Healthy People 2030 Leading Health Indicator on Knowledge of HIV Status

In 2022, about 87 of every 100 people living with HIV in the United States knew they had it. The remaining 13 did not, and because they did not know, they could neither start treatment nor take steps to protect partners. Healthy People 2030 names knowledge of HIV status as one of its leading health indicators, the small set of objectives chosen to drive action on the nation's most important health problems. This paper describes the indicator and its data, explains why it matters for population health, examines its determinants and the populations most affected, and considers the role of nurses in moving it toward its target.

The Indicator

Objective HIV-02 aims to increase knowledge of HIV status among people aged 13 years and older who are living with HIV (Office of Disease Prevention and Health Promotion [ODPHP], n.d.). It is designated a leading health indicator. The baseline was 85.8% in 2017, the target for 2030 is 95.0%, and the most recent value, for 2022, is 87.2%, a change the Healthy People tracking system classifies as improving. The 95% target matches the first of the international 95-95-95 goals, under which 95% of people with HIV know their status, 95% of those diagnosed receive treatment and 95% of those treated achieve viral suppression.

The indicator measures something that cannot be counted directly. Because people who do not know they have HIV have not been diagnosed, the figure is an estimate built from surveillance data on diagnoses, the stage of infection at diagnosis and models of how long infection goes undetected (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [CDC], 2024). That method means the indicator is reported with a lag of several years.

Why this part earns its pointsExplaining how the indicator is estimated shows the writer understands the data, not just the headline number.
3

Trends and the Size of the Gap

A gain of 1.4 percentage points in five years is real progress, but it is slow relative to the target. Moving from 87.2% to 95% would require diagnosing most of the remaining undiagnosed population by 2030. Expressed in people rather than percentages, the gap matters more: with roughly 1.2 million people living with HIV in the United States, each percentage point represents about 12,000 people. A national indicator that looks nearly complete at 87% still describes well over a hundred thousand people who have not yet been told.

Why the Indicator Matters

Knowledge of status is the first step on the HIV care continuum, and every later step, entering care, starting antiretroviral therapy and reaching viral suppression, depends on it. People who achieve and maintain viral suppression have effectively no risk of transmitting HIV through sex. CDC modeling of transmission in 2016 found that people who were unaware of their infection, whether recently or longer infected, generated about 38% of all new transmissions, and that transmission rates were highest among those acutely infected and unaware (Li et al., 2019). In population terms, earlier diagnosis ranks among the strongest levers for cutting new infections, and it is also what allows each person to begin treatment that preserves their health.

Determinants

Individual Factors

Many people who have HIV do not consider themselves at risk, and some avoid testing because of fear of the result or of how others would treat them. Stigma attached to HIV and to the groups most affected by it remains a barrier to seeking a test.

Health System Factors

Testing depends on being offered a test. For years HIV testing in health care settings required separate written consent and pre-test counseling, which made it slow and easy to skip. In 2006 the CDC recommended routine opt-out HIV screening for patients aged 13 to 64 in all health care settings, with separate written consent and prevention counseling no longer required as part of routine screening (Branson et al., 2006). Federal prevention guidance later went further, recommending that adolescents and adults between 15 and 65 be screened, along with younger or older people at increased risk (U.S. Preventive Services Task Force, 2019), a grade A recommendation that requires most health plans to cover screening without cost sharing. In practice, many clinicians still test only when a patient appears to be at risk, which misses people who do not disclose or do not recognize risk.

Policy and Community Factors

State laws, health insurance coverage, the availability of free community testing and the presence of emergency departments and clinics that offer routine screening all shape the indicator locally. The population health perspective in the course text emphasizes that such factors, operating across sectors, often matter more than individual choices (Nash et al., 2016).

Why this part earns its pointsDeterminants are grouped by level, which shows the population health lens the course teaches rather than a list of risk factors.
4

Populations Most Affected

The national figure hides large differences. Adolescents and young adults have the lowest awareness of any age group: in 2022 about 56 of every 100 people aged 13 to 24 with HIV knew their status, although that was an improvement from about 42 in 2018 (CDC, 2024). Young people with HIV are also less likely than older adults to have a regular source of care where a test would be offered. Differences by race and ethnicity, sex and region reflect differences in access to care, stigma and testing practices, and the South carries a large share of new diagnoses. A program to improve the indicator must therefore look beyond the national average to the groups and places where awareness is lowest.

From Diagnosis to Care

Knowing one's status matters only if it leads to treatment, so any effort to raise the indicator must be paired with reliable linkage to HIV care. The modeling by Li et al. (2019) found that people who knew they had HIV but were not in care generated the largest share of transmissions, about 43%, which shows that a diagnosis without linkage adds little to population health. For a clinic or emergency department, that means a positive screening result should trigger a defined sequence: confirmation testing, disclosure by a trained clinician, an appointment with an HIV provider, often within days, and follow-up to confirm the patient attended. Programs that measure only the number of tests performed can look successful while patients are lost between the result and the first visit.

Measuring Progress Locally

The national indicator is reported years after the fact and cannot show whether a local program is working. A health system or health department that wants to move the indicator needs its own measures, such as the proportion of eligible patients offered a test, the proportion who accept, the number of new diagnoses and the proportion of new diagnoses linked to care within 30 days. Nash et al. (2016) describe measurement as central to population health management, because a defined population can be tracked over time in a way that individual encounters cannot. These process and outcome measures will form the evaluation plan for the intervention project later in this course.

The Nurse's Role

Nurses are present at nearly every point where a test could be offered: emergency departments, primary care, urgent care, prenatal care, school-based clinics and community programs. Advanced practice nurses can make routine opt-out screening part of standard care in their practices, build reminders into the electronic record, and ensure that every positive result leads to a confirmed linkage to HIV care. Nurses also shape whether testing feels routine or stigmatizing, through the words they use when offering it. In public health and community roles, nurses can support testing outreach for young people, who are least likely to know their status, through school-based clinics, college health services and community events where testing is offered alongside other routine care. Nurse educators, finally, can prepare new nurses to offer a test as plainly as they offer a blood pressure check.

A Christian Perspective on Stigma

The Gospels describe Jesus responding to a man with leprosy, a condition that brought exclusion from community life, by stretching out his hand and touching him (English Standard Version Bible, 2001/2016, Mark 1:40-41). The touch came before the healing and communicated that the man still belonged. For nurses, offering HIV testing to every patient as a routine part of care, rather than singling out those who seem to be at risk, is one way of removing the shame that keeps people from being tested, and it reflects the same refusal to treat anyone as untouchable.

Conclusion

Knowledge of HIV status is a leading health indicator because diagnosis opens the door to treatment and prevention. The national figure has improved from 85.8% to 87.2% but remains well short of the 95% target, and awareness among young people is far lower. Routine opt-out screening, attention to the groups with the lowest awareness and reliable linkage to care are the most direct ways nurses can help close the gap, and they set the direction for the intervention project later in this course.

5

References

Branson, B. M., Handsfield, H. H., Lampe, M. A., Janssen, R. S., Taylor, A. W., Lyss, S. B., & Clark, J. E. (2006). Revised recommendations for HIV testing of adults, adolescents, and pregnant women in health-care settings. MMWR Recommendations and Reports, 55(RR-14), 1-17.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2024). Estimated HIV incidence and prevalence in the United States, 2018-2022 (HIV Surveillance Supplemental Report, Vol. 29, No. 1). https://www.cdc.gov/hiv-data/nhss/estimated-hiv-incidence-and-prevalence.html

English Standard Version Bible. (2016). Crossway. (Original work published 2001)

Li, Z., Purcell, D. W., Sansom, S. L., Hayes, D., & Hall, H. I. (2019). Vital signs: HIV transmission along the continuum of care, United States, 2016. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 68(11), 267-272. https://doi.org/10.15585/mmwr.mm6811e1

Nash, D. B., Fabius, R. J., Skoufalos, A., Clarke, J. L., & Horowitz, M. R. (2016). Population health: Creating a culture of wellness (2nd ed.). Jones & Bartlett Learning.

Office of Disease Prevention and Health Promotion. (n.d.). Increase knowledge of HIV status: HIV-02. Healthy People 2030. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. https://odphp.health.gov/healthypeople/objectives-and-data/browse-objectives/sexually-transmitted-infections/increase-knowledge-hiv-status-hiv-02

U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. (2019). Screening for HIV infection: US Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. JAMA, 321(23), 2326-2336. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2019.6587

What the NURS 503 Week 2 instructions ask

The first paper in NURS 503 is the Health Indicator Overview Paper in Module/Week 2. Liberty's course guide asks students to write five to seven pages in current APA format focused on one leading health indicator, supported by three to five scholarly sources in addition to the course textbooks and the Bible. The guide was written when Healthy People 2020 was current; most instructors now expect a Healthy People 2030 leading health indicator. Expect the paper to identify the indicator and its objective, report its baseline, target and most recent data, describe the populations most affected, explain the determinants that drive it and its importance for population health, and discuss the nurse's role in moving it toward the target.

How this NURS 503 Week 2 example is built

The paper begins with the indicator itself, quoting the objective, its code and its leading health indicator status from Healthy People 2030, then gives the national numbers with years and the target. A trends section explains what the change from 85.8% to 87.2% means and where it falls short. The importance section uses CDC modeling showing that people unaware of their infection generated more than a third of transmissions in 2016. Determinants are grouped as individual, health system and policy factors, including the shift to opt-out testing. Disparities by age are reported from CDC's 2018 to 2022 estimates. The nurse's role and a reflection on stigma close the paper.

NURS 503 Week 2 grading rubric: where the points go

The NURS 503 indicator paper is typically graded on accurate identification of the indicator with current data, analysis of its significance for population health, discussion of determinants and affected populations, the nurse's role, integration of scholarly sources plus the textbook and the Bible, and APA writing within five to seven pages. Data accuracy weighs heavily: the baseline, target and latest values must match the Healthy People site, with years. Analysis earns more than description, so explaining why a modest gain still leaves thousands undiagnosed scores better than restating percentages. The source requirement is specific, three to five scholarly sources beyond the textbook and the Bible, so count them before submitting.

NURS 503 Week 2 help: mistakes that cost points

The most common error in this paper is writing about a disease instead of an indicator, for example a general paper about HIV with no Healthy People objective, baseline or target. Start with the objective code and data. Another is using Healthy People 2020 numbers when 2030 data are available, or quoting data without years. Students also skip the affected populations, which is where the most important analysis usually lies, or list determinants without explaining them. Keep the Bible integration connected to the topic, cite government data with the agency as author, and check that the three to five scholarly sources are peer-reviewed or recognized reports.

Related NURS 503 sample papers

Other NURS 503 weeks

More MSN sample papers

NURS 503 Week 2 questions, answered

What is the NURS 503 Health Indicator Overview Paper?

It is a 5 to 7 page paper in Module/Week 2 on one leading health indicator, with its objective, current data, determinants, affected populations and the nurse's role, supported by 3 to 5 scholarly sources plus the textbook and the Bible.

Where can I find a free NURS 503 Week 2 sample paper?

A full NURS 503 Week 2 indicator paper on knowledge of HIV status, with current Healthy People 2030 data, references and margin notes, sits above in shaded sheets, open to any reader.

Which leading health indicator should I choose for NURS 503?

Choose one from the Healthy People 2030 leading health indicators that has current national data and that you can carry into the population health intervention project later in the course, since the final paper builds on it.

What is the Healthy People 2030 objective for knowledge of HIV status?

Objective HIV-02 aims to increase knowledge of HIV status among people aged 13 and older living with HIV, from a 2017 baseline of 85.8% to a target of 95.0%; the most recent value is 87.2% in 2022.

Should I use Healthy People 2020 or 2030 in NURS 503?

Use Healthy People 2030 unless your instructor says otherwise. Healthy People 2020 ended in 2020, and its objectives and data have been replaced by the 2030 framework.

Use it as a model, or ask for your own

This paper is an original model written by our desk for study. It is not a submitted student paper and not an official Liberty University document. Read it for structure and reasoning, then write your own to the instructions in your Canvas course. If you want a version built to your exact prompt and rubric, the first custom sample is free and arrives in 24 to 48 hours.