MyAssignmenthelp
Get Help From World's No.1 Online Tutoring Company
Get Online Tutoring through WhatsApp
Call Now: (+61) 416-195-006
Get Online Tutoring through WhatsApp
This assessment item requires you to undertake a mini / abridged systematic review (a special type of literature review) on an intervention related to COVID-19 / SARS-CoV-2. As you are required to select your own topic, significant assistance is available during workshops one and two.
When completing this task, you are required to apply the core principles of evidence-based clinical practice:
To assist with the layout / structure, a template is provided, and must be used. Your assignment must include the following sections and where noted, individual word limits must be adhered to:
A BACKGROUND of 400 words demonstrating your understanding the topic, nature of the question being explored and rationale for why the topic is important to review. The background section must be supported (and referenced) by high-quality evidence. There are no restrictions on the type of evidence used to support this section. This section must include (use subheadings as per the template):
REMEMBER, use the highest quality evidence available in this section.
A METHODS section of 150 words describing your search strategy must include:
Please note: If you search PubMed, this means that you have searched Medline (however this doesn’t count as searching two databases).
More information will be provided on the methods section and search strategy during first few weeks of the unit.
An INTERNAL VALIDITY CRITICAL APPRAISAL of 1,000 words demonstrating your analysis and synthesis of the four (4) RCT / non-randomised controlled trials (or other tutor approved study) that you have selected to answer your PICO question. Critically appraise the studies in-light of your discipline and discuss the strengths and weaknesses of each study. When critically appraising your studies, it is essential to compare and contrast the quality of the papers.
You must NOT include any systematic reviews, case reports, case series, cross-sectional, narrative or qualitative papers in this section.
Assessment of risk of bias in included studies: This is a critical component of the assessment. Your paper must systematically appraise each of the four studies selected using the intervention appraisal questions from chapter 4 of unit’s textbook (listed below). For each internal validity question you will identify if there is a high, low or unclear risk of bias and name the specific risk of bias/error (ie. Selection bias) impacted.
Also, you must also consider the potential impact of confounding and chance, overall study design strengths and weaknesses and any other factor that may have impacted the results.
Tip: In this section, compare and contrast your selected studies. Is one better than another? How? Why? What is the type and level of risk of bias for each study?
A RESULTS section of approx. 200 words. This is a vital component of the assessment. Outline a brief written summary (including statistical results) of the main findings of the effects of the intervention relevant to your PICO question. This section should directly answer your PICO question and not discuss all of the findings of the selected studies. Remember, do not directly copy the results section of your chosen studies; this is called plagiarism. This section will typically include dichotomous, continuous or time-to-event results.
A HOW MIGHT WE USE THIS EVIDENCE TO INFORM PRACTICE? section of 300 words which will address areas such as external validity and limitations of the appraised evidence. In writing this section, it is essential to consider if the results can be applied to your patients / your population of interest. If they can/cannot be applied, why? When developing this section, it is vital to take into account the internal validity and results sections above.
A CONCLUSION of 250 words, which provides an answer to your PICO question (must be supported by your paper). You should also:
An AUDIT (reflection) of 200 words discussing the effectiveness and efficiency with which you completed steps 1
– 4 of the process. When completing the audit, consider your strengths and areas requiring further development. Please write this section in the first person.
A REFERENCE list using the QUT APA referencing style. Refer to the QUT CiteWrite resource for more information.
Your discussion section must adhere to the task sheet. You must answer the six internal validity questions, consider if the studies had enough participants to minimise the play of chance, summarise the results and consider how the study results might be used to inform practice. It is also important that you critically appraise all four articles together. For example: appraise the randomisation for all four papers, then concealment for all four papers, etc. For more information review chapter 4 of the unit’s textbook.
Significantly more information, discussion, activities and guidance is provided weeks 1 – 7 of the unit to assist.
You have the opportunity to submit one (1) version of your paper to check your similarity report before the actual submission deadline. Submit the draft via the draft check Turnitin link in Blackboard.
Your assignment must be submitted via the Literature Review Turnitin link by the due date/time (located in the submission of your FINAL assignment section). This is the only method through which assessments can be submitted. Only one (1) file can be submitted.
Please note: you MUST submit the final version of your paper via the “Literature Review” Turnitin link in Blackboard. If your paper is not submitted via the “Literature Review” Turnitin link by the due date/time, it will be deemed to be a non-submission, and a result of zero (0) will automatically be recorded. Any submission uploaded using the “Draft Submission” link will not be considered.
Ensure that you understand QUT’s policies on academic misconduct and assessment submission.
If your application for extension is denied or not approved by the due date, submit the work that you have completed. The unit coordinator is NOT able to approve extension or deferment. Failure to submit the assessment item by the due date and time will result in a score of zero (0).
Your paper must conform to the following standards (marks are deducted for non-compliance):
Markers use the task, marking and criteria sheet (this document) to evaluate your paper.
Your papers will be marked electronically via Turnitin. Once all papers have been marked, results and written feedback will be available via Turnitin. It is anticipated that you will receive your results in week 12.
Each of you will enter this unit with differing levels of experience. To assist in developing your capabilities, we will provide you with the following:
Adapted From: Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, The PRISMA Group (2009). Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta Analyses: The PRISMA Statement. PLoS Med 6(7): e1000097. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed1000097
For more information and the flowchart template, visit www.prisma-statement.org.
No, while it is a literature review, and quite a number of components of the task are similar to a “standard” literature review, it is not exactly the same. This assessment task should be viewed as a mini or abridged systematic review.
It is also important to remember that a key component of the task (40% of the marks) relates to the:
During the first few weeks of the semester, significantly more information will be provided to assist you in understanding the requirements. Opportunities will also be provided to discuss any questions that may arise.
No, use template. Ensure all components within the methods section is completed.
Include everything in your assignment. Do not use an appendix.
Just a single one with the combined results.
No. Single line spacing for diagrams and tables is acceptable. The remainder of your assignment must use double line spacing.
Yes.
No,
You can use any type of evidence in the background section. As this is an academic paper, you should use the highest quality (appropriate) sources of evidence to support your discussion.
Write it as a single question only.
Yes.
Yes. If you are unable to open the template, it is your responsibility to email the unit coordinator before the due date/time.
As this is an abridged / mini systematic review, you are allowed to select any papers that both answer your PICO question AND meet the inclusion/exclusion criteria.
Hint: What potential risk of bias does this introduce to your paper? This should be included in the limitations section of your paper.
Your critical appraisal must follow the submission template provided. It is also important that you critically appraise all four articles together. For example: appraise the randomisation for all four papers, then concealment for all four papers, etc.
No. If you have concerns about the statistical results that are/are not included in your paper, please talk with your tutor early and we will provide individual feedback.
Remember, you do need to calculate the loss to follow-up percentage as this is a secondary school level calculation.
Target intervention is manual aspiration which is used as first line treatment in many parts of the world for PSP. The target is to take out the air stuck in the pleural cavity, eliminate recurrence and to reduce hospital admissions. Lidocaine is used as an anaesthetic to numb the area where insertion is later carried out. Xray is usually used to check the success of the procedure. Furthermore, Patients do not usually have to be monitored by health professionals after the procedure so they are free to go to their residence and can follow up via outpatients. (Luh, 2010)
Want to contact us directly? No Problem. We are always here for you
Get Online
Online Tutoring Services