PUBH6005: Epidemiology Assessment 3
Hello, dear friend, you can consult us at any time if you have any questions, add WeChat: daixieit
|
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 |
2023-08-10
Critical Appraisal