PUBH6005: Epidemiology [ASSESSMENT 3]
| Question # 48347 | Writing | 1 year ago |
|---|
| $50 |
|---|
![PUBH6005: Epidemiology [ASSESSMENT 3]](https://www.studyfull.com/storage/profile-pics/default-1.jpg)
ASSESSMENT 3 BRIEF
Subject Code and Title
PUBH6005: Epidemiology
Assessment
Assessment 3: Critical Appraisal
Individual/Group
Individual
Learning Outcomes
This assessment addresses the following learning outcomes:
1. Critically examine various research designs, in observation and experimental studies
2. Understand the difference between association and causation, statistical and public health significance
3. Critically evaluate epidemiological studies, including potential for bias, confounding and chance errors
Submission
Due Sunday following the end of week 11 at 11:55pm
AEST/AEDT*
Word count and Weighting
2500 words and 50%
Total Marks
100 marks
*Please Note: This time is Sydney time (AEST or AEDT). Please convert to your own time zone
(eg. Adelaide = 11:25pm).
Context:
This assessment requires you to apply the knowledge and skills gained in all the modules to undertake a critical appraisal.
You will need to appraise 3 primary research articles of a topic and research question given to you by your facilitator.
To prepare for this assignment
1. Search the library database to find three primary research articles with different study designs that the research question given by your facilitator. You need to include any three study designs: case- control, cohort, RCT and/or Cross-sectional. These studies do not have to prove their hypothesis or agree with each other. Please note that marks will be deducted if all identified papers are of similar study design.
2. Please find three primary research study designs published preferably in the last 10 years.
3. Please note that you must clearly give the title of the research papers that you will include for critical appraisal in this assessment along with their reference in the body of the assessment and in the reference list.
4. Briefly explain how you found the three articles for critical appraisal, including the databases you used and the search strategy/keywords you searched with. Also mention which checklist you used to critically appraise three different study design articles.
5. Please upload the pdfs of the three primary research studies used for this assessment. Also give a snapshot of your name showing you logging into the Torrens library or any research database (MEDLINE/PubMed) or into Google Scholar with your search strategy used for this assessment as an Appendix in the word file of your assessment. You will be able to upload 3 separate pdfs (studies used for this assessment) and the word file of your assessment.
6. Critically appraise all three articles you found. Your answers are to be written in the tables provided to you which was based on CASP checklist and other types of checklist.
7. You must go through the HINTS to every question in the CASP and other relevant checklist before writing your answers in the template.
8. In the tables provided in the template, you are required to answer either “Yes”, “No”, “Unclear”.
9. For each of the answer of “Yes”, “No” or “Unclear”, you will need to provide the “Evidence” that you found in the article to support your answers.
10. For each of the “Evidence”, you will need to critically appraise stating your justification, compare and contrasting or/and providing solution.
11. The assessment needs to be submitted as a word file.
Referencing :
It is essential that you use appropriate APA style for citing and referencing research. Please see more information on referencing in the Academic Skills web-page; https://library.torrens.edu.au/ academicskills/apa/tool.
Submission Instructions
Submit this task via the Assessment 3 link in the main navigation menu in PUBH6005 Epidemiology. The Learning Facilitator will provide feedback via the Grade Centre in the LMS portal. Feedback can be viewed in My Grades.
Academic Integrity
All students are responsible for ensuring that all work submitted is their own and is appropriately referenced and academically written according to the Academic Writing Guide. Students also need to have read and be aware of Torrens University Australia Academic Integrity Policy and Procedure and subsequent penalties for academic misconduct. These are viewable online here; https:// www.torrens.edu.au/policies-and-forms
Students also must keep a copy of all submitted material and any assessment drafts.
Special Consideration
To apply for special
consideration for a modification to an assessment or exam due
to unexpected or extenuating circumstances, please consult
the Assessment Policy
for Higher Education Coursework and ELICOS and,
if applicable to your circumstance, submit a completed
Application for Assessment Special Consideration Form to your Learning Facilitator.
Resources for this assignment
Critical appraisal
Young, J. M., & Solomon, M. J. (2009). How to critically appraise an article. Nature Clinical Practice Gastroenterology & Hepatology, 6(2), 82-91.
CASP UK. Critical appraisal skills program checklists (2018). Retrieved from http://www.casp- uk.net/#!casp-tools- checklists/c18f8
Moola S, Munn Z, Tufanaru C, Aromataris E, Sears K, Sfetcu R, Currie M, Qureshi R, Mattis P, Lisy K, Mu P-F. Chapter 7: Systematic reviews of etiology and risk . In: Aromataris E, Munn Z (Editors). Joanna Briggs Institute Reviewer's Manual. The Joanna Briggs Institute, 2017.
Available from https://reviewersmanual.joannabriggs.org/
Thinking about bias
Skelly, A. C., Dettori J. R., & Brodt, E. K. (2012). Assessing bias: the importance of considering confounding. Evidence Based Spine Care Journal, 3(1), 9-12
Note: Please refer to the Academic Writing Guide as available in the Academic Skills section on your Learning Portal
Assessment Rubric
Assessment Attributes
Fail
(Yet to achieve minimum standard) 0-49%
Pass (Functional) 50-64%
Credit (Proficient) 65-74%
Distinction (Advanced) 75-84%
High Distinction (Exceptional) 85-100%
Knowledge and understanding of the primary study design features including study subject selection, bias, confounding , chance and statistical analysis.
Percentage for this criterion = 40%
Limited knowledge and understanding of the study design features including subject selection, bias, confounding factors, chance, statistical analysis:
Fail to correctly answer most questions from the relevant checklist in reference to the study design features including, subject selection, bias, confounding factors, chance, statistical analysis
Functional knowledge and understanding of the study design features including subject selection, bias, confounding factors, chance, statistical analysis:
Answered some questions from the relevant checklists with correct identification and description of the study design features including, subject selection, subject selection, bias, confounding factors, chance, statistical analysis
Proficient knowledge and understanding of the study design features including subject selection, bias, confounding factors, chance, statistical analysis:
Answered most questions from the relevant checklists with correct identification and description of the study design features including, subject selection, bias, confounding factors, chance, statistical analysis
Advanced knowledge and understanding of the study design features including subject selection, bias, confounding factors, chance, statistical analysis:
Answered all questions from the relevant checklists with correct identification and clear description of the study design features including, subject selection, bias, confounding factors, chance, statistical analysis
Exceptional knowledge and understanding of the study design features including subject selection, bias, confounding factors, chance, statistical analysis:
Answered all questions from the relevant checklists with correct identification and clear description of the study design features including subject selection, bias, confounding factors, chance, statistical analysis
A logical and clear critical appraisal of the research articles
Evaluation of the primary study design features including study subject selection, bias, confounding factors, chance, statistical analysis generalisability, clinical implication and practice.
Percentage for this criterion = 50%
Limited evaluation of the study design features including, subject selection, bias, confounding factors, chance, statistical analysis:
Fail to analyze, interpret and evaluate most questions from the relevant checklists with regards to the study design features including, subject selection, bias, confounding factors, chance, statistical analysis.
No evaluation of the research articles provided
Functional evaluation of the study design features including, subject selection, bias, confounding factors, chance, statistical analysis:
Analysed, interpreted and evaluated some questions from the relevant checklists with regards to the study design features including subject selection, bias, confounding factors, chance, statistical analysis.
Limited evaluation of the research article provided
Proficient evaluation of the study design features including subject selection, bias, confounding factors, chance, statistical analysis:
Analysed, interpreted and evaluated most questions from the relevant checklists with regards to the study design features including subject selection, bias, confounding factors, chance, statistical analysis.
An evaluation of the research provided but with limited supporting evidence
Advanced evaluation of the study design features including subject selection,, bias, confounding factors, chance, statistical analysis:
Analysed, interpreted and evaluated all questions from the relevant checklists with regards to the study design features including subject selection, bias, confounding factors, chance, statistical analysis.
A logical evaluation of the research article, with additional supporting evidence
Exceptional evaluation of the study design features including subject selection,, bias, confounding factors, chance, statistical analysis:
Analysed, interpreted and evaluated all questions from the relevant checklists with regards to the study design features including subject selection, bias, confounding factors, chance, statistical analysis.
A sophisticated evaluation of the research articles with additional supporting evidence
Correct citation of key resources and evidence
Percentage for this criterion = 10%
Demonstrates inconsistent use of good quality, credible and relevant resources to support and develop ideas.
Snapshot of search strategy or search strategy itself is missing
Sufficient research technique not demonstrated Referencing is omitted or does not resemble APA.
Demonstrates use of credible and relevant resources to support and develop ideas, but these are not always explicit or well developed.
Search strategy is not clear. Snapshot for the same is missing or not clear.
More comprehensive research technique required Referencing resembles APA, with frequent or repeated errors.
Demonstrates use of credible resources to support and develop ideas. Search strategy is present but not clear. Snapshot or the same in the Appendix is not clear.
Good research technique demonstrated
Referencing resembles APA, with occasional errors.
Demonstrates use of good quality, credible and relevant resources to support and develop arguments and statements. Search strategy is present but has errors in it.
Snapshot of the search strategy also has errors.
Detailed research technique demonstrated APA referencing is free from errors.
Demonstrates use of high- quality, credible and relevant resources to support and develop arguments and position statements. Clear search strategy is present. The snapshot with the search strategy is very clear.
Comprehensive research technique demonstrated APA referencing is free from errors.
The following Subject Learning Outcomes are addressed in this assessment
SLO b)
Critically examine various research study designs, in observation and experimental studies
SLO c)
Analyse and interpret measures of association
SLO e)
Critically appraise epidemiological studies to answer a specific research question on types of biases, chance, confounding factors,
causation and association.
Attachments:
![PUBH6005: Epidemiology [ASSESSMENT 3]](https://www.studyfull.com/front-end/img/guarantee.png)
