HCA340 Harvard University Managing in Health & Human Services Article

HCA340 Harvard University Managing in Health & Human Services Article HCA340 Harvard University Managing in Health & Human Services Article Discipline: Medicine and Health Type of service: Article Review Spacing: Double spacing Paper format: APA Number of pages: 18 pages Number of sources: 10 sources Paper detalis: REVISION I have attached everything the author needs to make this paper a success, including but not limited to, syllabus and grading criteria. It is imperative the writer follows each specific instruction since the school is very picky and can denied the paper for any reason that was mandated but not followed in the paper. The form attached RLRA 2, is my hypothesis proposal along with 10 article references. If the author wishes, he/she can also add sources that he/she deemed relevant provided they follow the criteria set forth by the school regarding sources, the article review must compare minimum 10 articles. The writer has to compare and contrast the articles’ methods, results, and discussions. When in doubt refer to the syllabus and “guide to authors” forms uploaded. I prefer the writer takes it’s time if the instructions are followed to perfection. Any questions please dont hesitate to reach out. Thank You. HCA340 Harvard University Managing in Health & Human Services Article revision_instructions.docx guide_to_authors__spring_2018.pdf rlra_final_paper_rubric.pdf syllabus___research___literature_review__analysis___summer_2019.pdf reasons_why_rlra_papers_fail.pdf ORDER NOW FOR CUSTOMIZED AND ORIGINAL ESSAY PAPERS Revision Instructions One of the primary sources “Leadbetter et al” was not cited, i dont know if it was not included in the paper or the author forgot to cite it. The results states there were 5 articles compared but Leadbetter is missing. Page 2= Under Conclusion -“can serve as a superior alternative to traditional autopsies for a while a post-in a neonate or fetus”, if you can change “for a while” and don’t understand what is meant by a “post-in a neonate or fetus”, if you can please word it differently. Page 3= Introduction , first paragraph -Starting from “It remains” and the rest of the paragraph should be worded differently to avoid phrases like “at all time devastating” , “a post is a source of this info” and “prior decisions during the last legs of the deceased”. I felt this paragraph was not written clearly. Page 5= figure quoting 88 percent to 96 percent in still births against…” if you can please include from what article it was obtained. Page 14= under subheading “acceptability of virtual autopsy” -if you can change the wording on “positively concerning singleton”, fix non-moslem mother, and clarify “earlier gestation at delivery or TOP, and a maternal” -Under the same section: the statistic of ” thirty three fetuses and the one that follows beneath of “scores greater than 80” have no citation. Also words like “infected or defected” if you can please change or clarify what is meant by that. Page 14 under “discussion” -first sentenced “cash earlier stated” dont know what is meant by that. -I believe the writer explained my limitations in conducting this review instead of explaining the limitations and weaknesses of the studies examined under results. -also under discussion pg 14-15, the facts regarding hepatic iron and free air detection= no citation. Page 16= top of page if the author can explain what T1 and T2 means. Page 16= under subheading ” the results of this study confirm the research hypothesis” -if you can change/clarify what is meant by “showed the rite of an autopsy” Overall, minor details of spelling/grammar like in pg. 2 article instead of author, pg. 5 paediatry and supperior in the pages heading. If you can please just look over the paper in case there are others i did not catch. 1-Under data search heading: This is a bit vague. the search for articles would have to be fully replicable in case the committee wants to go search for the articles– describe the search and so, anyone else would be able to go through your steps and come up with exactly the same articles that you ended up with. if you really have to mention all the databases to capture all the searches, then that’s fine. This just matters a bit more because I only have 5 papers in my results, the committee will have to be very convinced that I have found all of the papers related to my hypothesis. If you have found more that is relevant please feel free to include them The sentence that include the general terms search, It would be better to give the string (with MeSH terms, etc.) that you used in pubmed. Or if you had several strings, use that. 2-Under inclusion/exclusion criteria: In general, dates should be a sharp cutoff. Saying things like “a high chance” makes your choice to include something sound subjective. 3-Under data validity: did you actually exclude any of the studies based on these criteria? If not, leave this out. 4- The data analysis section is not required, you can take it out 5-Under Results: for the two comparison studies, I would avoid describing two studies together like this. Do them one at a time. That way you can make sure that you give a full description for each study.You should say more about the study design. HCA340 Harvard University Managing in Health & Human Services Article Did they do both perform virtual and traditional autopsy on all 400? Were there any comparison groups? How were the subjects selected? Also get rid of the table, your results all need to be explained in standard sentences in paragraphs. 6-Under Agreement between Traditional Autopsy and Virtual Autopsy Results: when talking about 58 to 60 percent..This is a good example of a section of results that has numerical results (the percent agreement) but no measure of statistical significance. One might find a p value, or confidence intervals, or even a kappa test. If nothing is reported, then you should also say that the authors reported no measure of statistical significance. 7-At the end of the same paragraph, where PM-MRI is better…see if you can find numerical results (along with measures of statistical significance). So when you say PM-MRI is superior in hepatic iron overload, give the numeric value (e.g. percent correct) for PM-MRI and for the comparison, and then a measure of statistical significance, to further support the idea that is better. 8- For the results section: To summarize, what you need to do in the results, is focus just on one study at a time. Introduce the study. Then describe its design – the subjects, number, comparison groups, recruitment, and what was done to all subjects. Then describe the results, including bother the numerical result and measures of statistical significance. Then move on to the next study and do the same thing… Guide to Authors: Research: Literature Review and Analysis (RLRA) Article Preparation ALL PAPERS MUST INCLUDE: 1. TITLE PAGE 2. ABSTRACT PAGE (including Ultramini Abstract) 3. INTRODUCTION 4. METHODS 5. RESULTS 6. DISCUSSION 7. REFERENCES 8. FIGURES AND TABLES Title Page: ? Manuscript Title: Provide a concise, informative title, with no unnecessary words ? Author Name ? Affiliation: Your institution ? Author Information: Complete name, address, telephone number and e-mail address ? Mentor ? Article Word Count (exclusive of abstract and references) on the title page is required. ? Hypothesis: Add a separate section with the testable hypothesis Abstract Page: The Abstract should be structured into four paragraphs not exceeding 250 words total. It must be written in complete sentences, using past tense, active verbs, and third person. Abbreviations should be avoided. No literature should be cited in this section. The abstract must include your testable hypothesis and how you tested it. Sections: ? Hypothesis: describe the hypothesis of the study ? Methods: identify the study design and statistical methods used ? Results: describe the outcome of the study and the statistical significance, if appropriate ? Conclusions: state the significance of the results ? Word Count: provide a word count for the Abstract ? Keywords: following the abstract, provide 3 to 10 keywords for indexing purposes ? Ultramini Abstract (at the bottom of the Abstract Page): Maximum 50 words. Provide 1 to 3 sentences of no more than 50 words total, containing the essence of the paper. Introduction: The Introduction should provide a clear statement of the problem, the relevant literature on the subject, and the proposed approach or solution. The introduction must: ? Be well referenced ? Begin with an impactful statement ? Narrow to the focus of the paper Citations will be written in parenthesis in a consistent format throughout the paper. Methods: Should contain enough information to allow the study to be replicated, including: ? Databases used ? Search strategy ? Search terms ? Inclusion / exclusion criteria ? Other relevant information *Do not limit or filter searches to “full-text only”. Please contact the Librarian if you have difficulty accessing a relevant resource. Results: The results should be presented with clarity and precision.HCA340 Harvard University Managing in Health & Human Services Article Describe the study methods, controls (if any), numerical findings and statistical significance. If study authors did not provide statistical comparisons, this should be mentioned. Discussion, speculation and detailed interpretation of data should not be included in the Results. ? Results should be explained in a manner that compiles and integrates data contained in multiple studies. In other words, papers are organized in a logical fashion and placed in proximity when they are similar in scope and/or method. See page 7 of Syllabus for more details. ? Any included Figures, Table or graphs should be explained in detail in the text (with numerical data and associated statistics), and cited appropriately in a Legend. Figures, Tables or graphs should be placed in proximity to said text. ? If an Evidence Table was prepared, it should be attached as an Appendix at the end of the paper Discussion: Authors should explain what the results mean and how the results relate to the hypothesis presented as the basis of the study. The discussion should interpret the findings and should include: ? Explanation of the findings ? Interpretation of the Results ? Limitations ? Future directions ? Conclusion: State the conclusions in a few sentences at the end of the paper. References: General – how to cite: https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/560/05/ Author, A. A., Author, B. B., & Author, C. C. (Year). Title of article. Title of Periodical, volume number(issue number), pages. http://dx.doi.org/xx.xxx/yyyyy (list all authors for each reference, even when there are more than 6): Example: Farrugia, P., Petrisor, B. A., Farrokhyar, F., & Bhandari, M. (2010). Research questions, hypotheses and objectives. Canadian Journal of Surgery, 53(4), 278–281. Figures and Tables: Examples: Figure 1.Write the figure’s title here. Table 1. Write the table’s title here. Effective Formatting: ? Use upper- and lowercase type: It is much easier to read than all capital letters ? Use a consistent typeface and size (i.e. Times New Roman, 12 point) ? Double space your paper ? Include page numbers Manuscript Submission: All Preliminary Drafts and Final Papers must be submitted via Moodle (LMS) + via email to your mentor in Microsoft Word or Word compatible formats. Saba RLRA Final Paper Rubric Title: The title should be informative and appropriate to the content of the paper. ACCEPTABLE: The title is brief and focused. May not clearly indicate the content of the paper. GOOD: Brief, focused, informative and OUTSTANDING: Brief, narrowly focused, appropriate, and indicates the purpose of informative and appropriate, and clearly the paper. indicates the purpose of the paper. The title captures the readers interest. Hypothesis: Paper must contain a clearly stated, testable hypothesis that is proven or disproven 3points ACCEPTABLE: Hypothesis is clearly stated, but the student may not directly reference the hypothesis for the remainder of the paper. 4points GOOD: Hypothesis is clearly stated and the central purpose or argument is in evidence throughout the paper. 7points ACCEPTABLE: Summarizes the paper’s methods and results with the hypothesis clearly stated. May not follow the recommended structured format. 8points GOOD: Appropriately formatted, informative, and complete. Summarizes the paper’s methods and results with the hypothesis clearly stated. 7points ACCEPTABLE: Demonstrates a general understanding of relevant concepts. A limited synthesis of multiple studies is evident. 8points GOOD: Demonstrates an understanding of relevant concepts, all studies are relevant to research question and hypothesis. Sufficient detail is provided to understand conclusions, without just listing studies. Synthesis of multiple studies is evident. 10points OUTSTANDING: Demonstrates clear understanding of relevant concepts and is a thorough literature review. Wellarticulated and makes interesting or creative points. Appropriate use of tables and figures. Appropriate synthesis of results across studies with attention to methodological heterogeneity and quality. 15points ACCEPTABLE: Demonstrates adequate understanding of the results in relation to the question. 17points GOOD: Demonstrates adequate understanding of the results in relation to the question. Articulates limitations of the review. 19points OUTSTANDING: Keen interpretation and strong understanding of the results in relation to the literature, clearly articulates limitations and provides possible avenues for future study. 15points ACCEPTABLE: Although attributions are provided, some statements seem unsubstantiated. Limited peer reviewed sources, including some older/out of date references. HCA340 Harvard University Managing in Health & Human Services Article There are minor errors in the APA format. 17points GOOD: All references are current and peer reviewed. All claims are adequately supported. APA format is appropriately used. 19points OUTSTANDING: References are current and peer-reviewed, from well-known professional journals. Evidence provided to support claims is compelling and properly attributed. APA format is used accurately and consistently throughout. 8points GOOD: Proofread and in the recommended format, with very few issues with spelling, grammar, etc. 10points OUTSTANDING: Thoroughly proofread and contains no issues with formatting, spelling, grammar, etc. 8points 10points Abstract: The abstract should clearly state the hypothesis as well as summarize the methods and results (~250 words). Introduction: The introduction should begin broadly, gain focus, be referenced and explain why the study is important. Methods: The methods should describe the search strategy, inclusion/exclusion criteria and data analysis. Results: The results should demonstrate clear understanding and synthesize outcomes across studies (not merely a listing of studies). **An evidence table cannot suffice as a results section. If an evidence table is used it should be included as an appendix. Discussion: The discussion should demonstrate interpretation of the results, note limitations and identify areas for future study. References: References should be presented in a standard format and demonstrate the contemporary nature of the paper. 6points OUTSTANDING: The paper is focused around a clearly stated hypothesis. The writer’s central purpose or argument is readily apparent to the reader throughout the paper. 10points OUTSTANDING: Abstract is the proper length. Clearly states the hypothesis; succinctly summarizes the paper’s methods and results in a manner that makes the reader eager to read the remainder of the paper. 3points 4points 6points ACCEPTABLE: Begins broadly, may GOOD: Begins broadly, gains focus, OUTSTANDING: Begins broadly, quickly includes references, and addresses why gains focus, is appropriately referenced struggle to gains focus, includes limited the study is important. and clearly articulates why the study is references. important. 7points 8points 10points ACCEPTABLE: Briefly describes a limited GOOD: Describes an appropriate strategy OUTSTANDING: Clearly describes an strategy for literature search, study for literature search, study excellent strategy for literature search, inclusion/exclusion criteria, and methods inclusion/exclusion criteria, methods of study inclusion/exclusion criteria, and of data synthesis. Student may have data synthesis. methods of data synthesis. Reader is neglected some important key words or confident in their ability to replicate the well known studies. search strategy and results. 7points Other points: Spelling, ACCEPTABLE: Only minor issues with grammar, tables, figures, etc. formatting, spelling, grammar, etc. May not have consistently followed recommended formatting. 7points Research: Literature Review & Analysis Saba University School of Medicine Summer 2019 Professors/Coordinator Dr. James Bruzik Phone: 978-862-9600 ext 405 [email protected] (Course Director) Sam Johnson Phone: 416-3456 ext 237 [email protected] Sarah Hammond Phone: 978-862-9600 Ext 422 [email protected] (Course Coordinator) 1. Introduction: Students will produce a hypothesis-based review of the primary literature relevant to a contemporary medical issue, problem or controversy. Papers will follow a specific format specified in this syllabus and outlined in the RLRA Guide to Authors (Appendix C). The hypothesis-based review must demonstrate a thorough understanding of the topic, methodology and implications of the cited primary literature, especially with respect to clinical trials. The final product will be 20-30 pages excluding appendices and references, double spaced, 10-12 point font, default margins, suitable for publication with references to the literature cited. A simple summary of the medical literature on a specific topic (standard review article), is not an acceptable format for this assignment. Students that produce exceptional hypothesis-based reviews will be encouraged to consider submitting their final papers for peer-reviewed publication with the support of the RLRA faculty. 2. Course duration: The course begins in the 4th semester and is completed during the 6th semester. 3. General teaching methods: One-on-one mentoring by an assigned faculty mentor 4. Course Objectives: Throughout the course you will develop skills related to: A.) Searching clinical and basic science literature in a systematic manner, following an B.) C.) D.) E.) F.) G.) H.) I.) J.) K.) L.) M.) 5. HCA340 Harvard University Managing in Health & Human Services Article appropriate search methodology Establishing inclusion and exclusion criteria for primary literature searches Understanding clinical and basic scientific research Critical appraisal of primary literature Developing a research question from a broad topic Developing a clear hypothesis derived from a research question Formulating a plan and timetable for completion of a detailed, primary literature-based project Integrating basic and clinical science to address contemporary issues in medicine Synthesizing information from multiple sources into a coherent presentation Interpersonal skills in a mentor – mentee relationship Reflecting on social and ethical consequences of medicine Independently producing a scholarly product Effective written communication skills Course Content: o o o o o 6. Research questions Hypothesis generation Critical appraisal of the primary literature Independent research Effective written communication Course Competencies: ? 2 SCIENTIFIC & MEDICAL KNOWLEDGE: Students must demonstrate knowledge about established and evolving biomedical, clinical, and associated sciences and application of this knowledge to the practice of medicine throughout the life cycle. The medical graduate will be expected to: a. Demonstrate knowledge of the scientific and humanistic foundations of medicine Methods of Teaching: Independent study with mentor guidance Methods of Assessment: Writing assignments (RLRA Preliminary Draft – Formative; RLRA Forms 1 and 2, and RLRA Final Paper – Summative). See Appendix A for grading criteria In order to satisfy the SCIENTIFIC & MEDICAL KNOWLEDGE: 2a Competency, the students must receive a passing grade on their final paper. ? 3 LIFELONG LEARNING, SCHOLARSHIP, & COLLABORATION: Students must be able to examine and evaluate their patient care practices, appraise and assimilate scientific evidence, and use this information to improve their abilities. The medical graduate is expected to: a. Display intellectual curiosity, willingness to examine assumptions and commitment to lifelong learning Methods of Teaching: Independent study with mentor guidance Methods of Assessment: Writing assignments (RLRA Preliminary Draft – Formative; RLRA Forms 1 and 2, and RLRA Final Paper – Summative). See Appendix A for grading criteria. c. Use information technology to access medical information and support his or her own education Methods of Teaching: Independent study with mentor guidance Methods of Assessment: Writing assignments (RLRA Preliminary Draft – Formative; RLRA Forms 1 and 2, and RLRA Final Paper – Summative). See Appendix A for grading criteria. d. Apply knowledge of scientific methods to locate, appraise, and assimilate evidence from scientific studies Methods of Teaching: Independent study with mentor guidance Methods of Assessment: Writing assignments (RLRA Preliminary Draft – Formative; RLRA Forms 1 and 2, and RLRA Final Paper – Summat … Purchase answer to see full attachment Student has agreed that all tutoring, explanations, and answers provided by the tutor will be used to help in the learning process and in accordance with Studypool’s honor code & terms of service . Get a 10 % discount on an order above $ 100 Use the following coupon code : NURSING10

Read more
15% OFF your first order
Use a coupon FIRST15 and enjoy expert help with any task at the most affordable price.
Claim my 15% OFF Order in Chat

Good News ! We now help with PROCTORED EXAM. Chat with a support agent for more information