来自英国代写的顾客授权发布的evidence based medicine，MD7001作业要求片段，我们不会发布MD7001的answer在网站，我们曾经写过MD7001及相关的evidence based medicine写过很多作业，考试，如果你也需要代写这个课程的作业请联系客服WX:QQ 5757940 ，代写人的代写服务覆盖全球华人留学生，可以为UK的学生提供非常准时精湛的服务，小作业assignment代写、essay代写享适时优惠，project、paper代写、论文代写支持分期付款，网课、exam代考预约时刻爆单中赶紧来撩。
Write a critical appraisal of research that is published as a primary research article (not a systematic review, review protocol or meta analysis) in a recognised peer-reviewed journal in the last 3 years (2019, 2020 or 2021)
You must choose an article that is different from the examples given to you during taught sessions. You should evaluate the research in the publication and consider the ethics of the research to meet the learning outcomes for this assessment.
Learning outcomes assessed: -
- Critically appraise relevant scientific and clinical literature, including ethical considerations
- Be able to articulate research outcomes in appropriate language
Task in more detail
Select a single primary research article published in the last 3 years and write a critical appraisal of it. You must clearly demonstrate an ability to analyse and evaluate the research in the article (please don’t focus on appraising how well the article has been written, we are interested in the science/research not the writing style) and consider the ethical implications of the research and how they have been dealt with in the publication in order to meet the two learning outcomes for this assessment. As with all level 7 assessments, you must show in depth knowledge, the use of appropriate sources for evidence, evaluation of the literature and clear communication (see the marking criteria for this assessment for details).
Structure of the appraisal
Details of the research article being appraised- Full reference for the publication that is being appraised, plus at least one sentence about the journal that it is published in (remember this must be a peer reviewed journal) You can consider its Impact factor also. The word count of the submission (appraisal) not including the references.
Once you have given these details you do not have to cite the paper all the way through your appraisal but make it clear when you are writing about the article you are appraising and other research that you might cite. It is easy to get these confused in your writing.
You should explain what the paper aimed to do (what was the research question?) and evaluate if this was appropriate or not. To do this you should explain where this paper fits in with the general research area in your introduction (this shows evidence of wider reading around the topic). You could consider if this is the first paper of its kind, or if it is a novel idea or building on previous work.
Appraisal of methods
This is usually the largest section of your appraisal. You should discuss if the methods are sound, appropriate and repeatable. We will not take your word for this, you must support your ideas with citations from the literature. Do not simply state ‘the methods are sound’ as that is only your opinion, you must explain why they were the right kind of methods for the research question in the paper. You can consider what other researchers have done to address similar research questions to help you with this. If the methods are not appropriate or could be improved to answer the specific research question, what are your suggestions for this? You might not be able to discuss all of the issues with the methods, so pick key ones to discuss. Remember the positives are just as important in evaluation as the negatives, critical here does not mean negative only.
You must clearly consider the ethics of the research; you can explain how the authors have considered the ethics and consider if this was appropriate or not. You should consider the need for the research in the first place based on other research in the field as part of your ethical considerations. Don’t simply state that the research had ethical approval, or it follows the Helsinki guidelines, you must consider what that means. We accept that this section may have less citations than other sections due to the nature of ethical consideration.
Appraisal of the results and discussion
You should discuss if the authors have analysed their results appropriately to make the conclusions that they make. Do the authors summarise all the issues with the research, or have you seen other issues that were not highlighted. Did the authors answer the research question with their research?
The real idea of critical appraisal is to make a decision at the end what the evidence can be used for. Overall, was it valid evidence to answer all of the research questions the authors proposed to answer? What contribution has the paper made to the wider evidence supporting the area of research?
e.g. if the paper is about a drug treating type 2 diabetes but the patients used had a mixture of type 1 and 2 diabetes, can the evidence really inform us about this drug in type 2 diabetes? If not, what can it tell us instead?
Your conclusions should summarise what you have found out from appraising this piece of research, therefore there should be no citations and it should be highly focused on what you have found. It should not be a description of the conclusions from the paper, they should be your conclusions from carrying out the appraisal. This shows your skills in using evidence-based medicine to support decision making.
These should be in APA7 format. If you need support with this please contact Aacdemic skills department.
If you are a student from an English-speaking country, please feel free to contact us at [email protected] and we will provide you with an excellent writing service.
作为现存十年的代写服务机构，我们没有任何学术丑闻，我们保护顾客隐私、多元化辅导、写作、越来越多的小伙伴选择代写人为他们解决棘手的各类作业难题，保障GPA，为留学梦助力！ 我们的客服团队及写手老师总是能第一时间响应顾客的各类作业需求，有些人即使有重要的事甚至带伤上场协助考试。Final季，忙的时候一天十几场考试还在继续坚持着，我知道，他们明明可以不用这么辛苦的…但是他们为了坚守承诺，为了另一端屏幕外的那一份期望，他们没有选择退缩、时刻为同学们提供最好的！这么有温度的代写还不添加备用一下？WX/QQ： 5757940