Appraising
Goodwills
FURTHERNOTEONASSIGNMENT2.docxFURTHER NOTE _ Assignment 2
The number of papers to appraise - Please only chose ONE study/paper to appraise, it will be very challenging and require too much word count, if you go with 2 studies. Also, make sure to choose the right appraising tool to assess the paper, based on the design of the study chosen.
The number of appraisal tools used - I suggest using one appraisal tool to make your job easier, however, if you want to complement the assessment using multiple appraisal tools, it will be totally ok (e.g., CASPS, and JBI).
CASP for systematic reviews - There is a general CASP tool for all systematic reviews. Please use the link below to access the PDF. Any type of systematic review can be assessed by this general CASP tool for systematic reviews. For example, scoping review, and integrative review.
Protocol papers - Please be advised that for the purpose of assignment 2, you should NOT use any frameworks or protocols. It is required to choose a peer-reviewed primary paper with data, that you would be able to assess the findings, and discussion sections as well. The protocol is mainly a pre-defined research design to conduct an experiment/study. The framework mainly shows a roadmap for the implementation of theoretical work in practice.
Journal – Please be advised that the journal is different from the title of the paper. Journal is a scholarly publication that collects a diverse range of papers, with different research designs (e.g., quantitative, qualitative, mixed-method, systematic reviews). The papers are written by researchers. Each journal can focus on a specific field, such as psychology, sociology, nursing, medicine, and health promotion. Some of the journals can be quite multi-disciplinary.
Authors – There is no need to do thorough research about the authors. Only look at their affiliation in the paper itself, most of the time, they provide affiliation. So, when you look at the affiliation, you can assess/judge if they have the expertise in this regard. Of course, it will be great if you google the authors and find further information about their background, etc. Also, no need for citation/reference for this section. Only a few sentences can be sufficient.
Critical appraisal - Please make sure that NOT simply copy & paste the information from the paper chosen. Please read the information on the purpose and philosophy behind appraising evidence, before starting to write your assignment. You require to provide critical interpenetration and argument based on the appraisal tool chosen that why the X paper is high quality, moderate quality, or low quality. The assessment needs to be done for all different sections of the paper, from the title to the conclusion. Also, you need to discuss if you use the chosen paper to guide your practice. I suggest choosing a high-quality paper that you can also use for the purpose of assignment three and for improving your practice.
Appraisal tool type/name - Under the appraisal tool section of your report, you will refer to the appraisal tool used by you to appraise the paper. In case you appraise a systematic review. When you discuss the method/finding section, you can also highlight what appraisal tools were used (if any) by authors to appraise the included articles in their systematic review.
Assessing poor versus high-quality paper - Choosing the paper should be your choice, and it is not important if it is a good or a poor paper. The important part is that when you assess it, you should be able to provide a good argument that if the evidence is poor or good, why, and if we can use it in practice! No score will be deducted if you choose a poor paper for evaluation, as far as in your assessment you be critical about it and highlight why it is a poor paper. However, overall, as mentioned before, I suggest choosing a high-quality paper that you be able to use for assignment three (improving the poor practice).
Overall, if the journal is Q1, it indicates that the paper should be a high-quality one. But, at the same time, when you assess all various sections of the paper, you will provide further critical arguments that why this paper is good evidence to be used in practice.
Referencing - Some examples of possible references can be: 1) The paper you appraise, itself; 2) If you provide any specific justification or fact from other literature in regards to the suitability of the research design, gaps in the literature, how to write a research title, etc. then of course citation is required. No citation is needed for your own interpretation of the information based on the appraisal tool checklist. References for this assignment can be mainly applicable to the discussion and conclusion, how this research is useful for practice, and its translation into practice.
Food for thought – please look at the two below papers from a Q1/high-ranking journal. The two papers have the same research question with conflicting answers - think critically and discuss how you interpret these sorts of evidence to make the right decision for personal and professional practices?! What is your suggestion for recommending evidence at the population level? Should decisions be made at all at the population/public level or should we try to make health-related decisions on an individual basis - considering the specific context of each individual, and not one size fits all?
· Public health guidelines should recommend reducing saturated fat consumption as much as possible:
· NO https://academic.oup.com/ajcn/article/112/1/19/5848526?login=true
· Public health guidelines should recommend reducing saturated fat consumption as much as much as possible:
· YES https://academic.oup.com/ajcn/article/112/1/13/5848529?login=true
Please be advised that “This article series is designed as an Oxford-style debate. As such, participants are required to argue pro and con positions, even when that opinion may differ from their own. The views expressed in this debate do not necessarily reflect the opinion of the participants, The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, or the American Society for Nutrition.”
