MREP Essay Structure PDF

Preview

Summary

Essay structure for a critical review of 2 research papers...

Description

School of Health and Life Sciences Academic Session 2019-20

Student Matriculation Number: Programme:

BSc (Hons) Physiotherapy

Level:

2

Module Code:

M2B022655-18-A

Module Title:

Methodology and Research for Effective Practice (MREP)

Assignment Title:

Critical appraisal of 2 papers

Submission Date: Word Count:

This assignment is my own work. It has not and will not be presented for assessment for any other module or piece of work which accrues credit for the award for which I am currently studying

Quantitative Paper Step one, do CASP tool to give you positive and negative notes, need good critiques, not just descriptive. Critiques are positives AND negatives. Doesn’t have to be a bad things. Looking at 60 words per critique. Get rid of overly descriptive details (don’t talk about the study).

Intro (5 Marks)   

Briefly introduce the study State which critical appraisal tool using as guide Justify why critical appraisal tool chosen

Overall this section demonstrates an outstanding introduction to the topic of the appraisal, clearly showing its relevance. Both the intended critical appraisal tool and the content of the appraisal are consistently and clearly justified and signposted.

Main Body (35 Marks) Introduction and literature review   

Is the reason for the research clearly outlined? Has appropriate literature been considered? Is the research question clear?

Methods 



 



 

What study design was used? o Was this appropriate? o Why/Why not? Random allocation? o Why is this important? o How was this done? o Was this appropriate? Allocation concealment? o Why is this important? Blinding o Were participants/health workers blinded? o Why is this important? Sampling o What sampling method was used? o Was this appropriate? o Impact of sampling method Participants o Clear inclusion/exclusion criteria? Intervention





o Was the intervention well described? o Why is this important? Outcomes o Are any details given of the reliability/validity of outcome measures? o Why is this important? o What was the follow-up? o Was this appropriate? o Was the outcome assessor blinded – why is this important? Data analysis o Were all participants accounted for (intention to treat analysis?) o Why is this important? o Was data analysis appropriate? o How were results presented?

Results    

How were results presented? Were participants comparable at baseline? Why should this be considered? What were the main results? Significant results? Were any adverse events reported?

Discussion and conclusion sections   

Were the findings of the study placed in context? Were appropriate conclusions drawn? Were strengths/weaknesses acknowledged o Were these appropriate?

Ethical issues   

What ethical issues are addressed in the paper? Briefly reiterate the main findings of the study Implications for practice/research

There is consistent and exceptional demonstration of knowledge and depth of understanding of research methods and concepts. Overall this section demonstrates consistent and exceptional quality of criticality, outstanding analysis with clear evidence of originality of thought. All components of the research process appropriately considered. There is evidence of extensive reading and inclusion of relevant contemporary high quality literature beyond that suggested by module materials. Overall this assignment demonstrates an exceptional and consistent academic writing style at a highly advanced academic level (appropriate spelling, grammar, sentence composition, and overall assignment structure). The focus of the assignment is clearly demonstrated throughout. Referencing is always accurate in list and text. Adheres appropriately to presentation guidelines.

Conclusion (5 Marks)  

Briefly reiterate the main findings of the study Implications for practice/research

Overall this section demonstrates an exceptional conclusion to this appraisal. It highlights the main strengths and weaknesses of the paper whilst consistently placing critical comment on the value to practice.

Qualitative Paper Intro (5 Marks)   

Briefly introduce the study State which critical appraisal tool using as guide – CASP need to explain why Justify why critical appraisal tool chosen

Overall this section demonstrates an outstanding introduction to the topic of the appraisal, clearly showing its relevance. Both the intended critical appraisal tool and the content of the appraisal are consistently and clearly justified and signposted.

Main Body (35 Marks) Introduction and literature review - question 1 CASP   

Is the reason for the research clearly outlined? Has appropriate literature been considered? o Is it relevant – up to date (last 10-years) Are the research aims clear?

Methods - questions 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 CASP     



Was a qualitative approach appropriate? Why/Why not? What method was used? Was this appropriate? Why/Why not? Sampling – What sampling method was used? Was this appropriate? Impact of sampling method Participants – Clear inclusion/exclusion criteria? Appropriate to meet research aims? Outcomes - How was data collected? Was this appropriate, why/why not? o How was data collected – by lead researcher – relationship between researcher and participants Data analysis – How was the data analysed? Was this appropriate? o coding, not explicitly explained o Researchers coded information

Results - questions 8 & 9   

How were results presented? What were the main results? Was data presented to support findings?

Discussion and conclusion   

Were the findings of this study placed in context with other literature? Were strengths/limitations acknowledged? Were appropriate conclusions drawn?

Ethical issues - question 7  

What ethical issues are addressed in the paper? Briefly reiterate the main findings of the study



Implications for practice/research

There is consistent and exceptional demonstration of knowledge and depth of understanding of research methods and concepts. Overall this section demonstrates consistent and exceptional quality of criticality, outstanding analysis with clear evidence of originality of thought. All components of the research process appropriately considered. There is evidence of extensive reading and inclusion of relevant contemporary high quality literature beyond that suggested by module materials. Overall this assignment demonstrates an exceptional and consistent academic writing style at a highly advanced academic level (appropriate spelling, grammar, sentence composition, and overall assignment structure). The focus of the assignment is clearly demonstrated throughout. Referencing is always accurate in list and text. Adheres appropriately to presentation guidelines.

Conclusion (5 Marks)  

Briefly reiterate the main findings of the study Implications for practice/research

Overall this section demonstrates an exceptional conclusion to this appraisal. It highlights the main strengths and weaknesses of the paper whilst consistently placing critical comment on the value to practice....