Critical Appraisal Assessment: Methodology and Results

Assessment Attributes

Unacceptable

Poor

Functional

Proficient

Advanced

Exceptional

PART A (CASP Checklist, 30 marks)

Table 1:

CASP checklist is used to appraise the study with supporting comments.

*3 Tables must be of different study design. No marks for same study design.

(10 marks)

Fails to answer each question and provide relevant comments.

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5

All questions answered but some irrelevant comments.

3  3.5  4 4.5

Answered all questions and comments are relevant.

5 5.5 6

Answered all questions and comments are relevant with adequate justification.

Answered all questions and comments are relevant with highly developed justification.

Answered all questions and comments are relevant with highly developed, interesting

justification.

6.5 7 7.5

8 8.5 9

9.5 10

Table 2:

CASP checklist is used to appraise the study with supporting comments.

*3 Tables must be of different study design. No marks for same study design.

(10 marks)

Fails to answer each question and provide relevant comments.

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5

All questions answered but some irrelevant comments.

3  3.5  4 4.5

Answered all questions and comments are relevant.

5 5.5 6

Answered all questions and comments are relevant with adequate justification.

Answered all questions and comments are relevant with highly developed justification.

Answered all questions and comments are relevant with highly developed, interesting

justification.

6.5 7 7.5

8 8.5 9

9.5 10

Table 3:

CASP checklist is used to appraise the study with supporting comments.

*3 Tables must be of different study design. No marks for same study design.

(10 marks)

Fails to answer each question and provide relevant comments.

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5

All questions answered but some irrelevant comments.

3  3.5  4 4.5

Answered all questions and comments are relevant.

5 5.5 6

Answered all questions and comments are relevant with adequate justification.

Answered all questions and comments are relevant with highly developed justification.

Answered all questions and comments are relevant with highly developed,

interesting justification.

6.5 7 7.5

8 8.5 9

9.5 10

PART B (Essay, 70 marks)

Introduction: introduces the topic, outlines background information to the research question and finishes with the research question.

(10 marks)

Fails to write introduction & research question clearly.

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5

Poorly written introduction clearly & lack of specificity of research question.

3 3.5 4 4.5

Satisfactorily written introduction clearly & specific research question.

5 5.5 6

Well-constructed, coherent and clear introduction, & specific research question.

6.5 7 7.5

Highly developed, coherent and clear introduction, & specific research question.

8 8.5 9

Highly developed, coherent and clear introduction & exceptionally interesting or novel research question. 9.5 10

Method: explain how you found the three articles such as databases and the search strategy/keywords.

Mention which critical appraisal tools you used.

(10 marks)

Fails to write methodology clearly and inappropriate use of search strategy and CASP Checklist. 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5

Poorly written methodology clearly but with suboptimal use of search strategy and CASP Checklist.

3 3.5 4 4.5

Satisfactorily written methodology clearly with optimal use of search strategy and CASP Checklist.

5 5.5 6

Well-constructed methodology with competent use of search strategy and CASP Checklist.

6.5 7 7.5

Highly developed methodology with proficiency in search strategy and CASP Checklist.

8 8.5 9

Highly developed questions methodology with exceptionally interesting or novel in search strategy and CASP Checklist. 9.5 10

Results:

Answer directly to all the relevant CASP checklist questions. MUST present the table. Additionally, create a column to include ‘justification’ to your decision of each question.

*Please note that “comments” in Part A differs from ‘justification’ as it requires to explain more what you think about the comments.

(20 marks)

Fails to sufficiently presented the tables and irrelevant justification.

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3

3.5 4 4.5 5

Unsatisfactory presented the tables and inadequate justification.

5.5 6 6.5 7 7.5 8

8.5 9 9.5

Satisfactory presented the tables and adequate justification.

10 10.5 11 11.5

12 12.5

Well-constructed tables and competent justification.

13 13.5 14 14.5 15

Well-constructed tables and proficient justification.

15.5 16 16.5 17

17.5

Well-constructed tables and exceptionally interesting justification.

18 18.5 19 19.5 20

Discussion:

Discuss all three papers of different study designs in regards to bias, chance and confounding factors. All answers of ‘YES, NO and UNCLEAR’ in your result MUST be accompanied by an explanation on how you can avoid pitfalls (bias, confounding factor), improve on the current methodology, or to further support by comparing and contrasting other approaches to an issue. Provide suggestions or solutions for future research of your research question/topic.

(20 marks)

(4 marks each statement)

Fails to sufficiently discuss on:

1. Three study designs

2. Avoidance of pitfalls (bias, confounding factor),

3. Improvement of methodology

4. Compare and contrast other approaches.

5. suggestions or solutions for future research.

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3

3.5 4 4.5 5

Unsatisfactory discussion on:

1. Three study designs

2. Avoidance of pitfalls (bias, confounding factor),

3. Improvement of methodology

4. Compare and contrast other approaches.

5. suggestions or solutions for future research.

5.5 6 6.5 7 7.5 8

8.5 9 9.5

Satisfactory discuss on:

1. Three study designs

2. Avoidance of pitfalls (bias, confounding factor),

3. Improvement of methodology

4. Compare and contrast other approaches.

5. suggestions or solutions for future research. 10 10.5 11  11.5 12 12.5

Demonstrated competent discussion on:

1. Three study designs

2. Avoidance of pitfalls (bias, confounding factor),

3. Improvement of methodology

4. Compare and contrast other approaches.

5. suggestions or solutions for future research. 13 13.5 14 14.5 15

A highly developed discussion on:

1. Three study designs

2. Avoidance of pitfalls (bias, confounding factor),

3. Improvement of methodology

4. Compare and contrast other approaches.

5. suggestions or solutions for future research. 15.5 16 16.5 17 17.5

A sophisticated and exceptionally interesting discussion on:

1. Three study designs

2. Avoidance of pitfalls (bias, confounding factor),

3. Improvement of methodology

4. Compare and contrast other approaches.

5. suggestions or solutions for future research.

18 18.5 19 19.5 20

Conclusion:

Provide one concluding paragraph based on what you have discussed (5 marks)

Fails to sufficiently conclude the findings.

0 0.5

Unsatisfactory conclusion.

1 1.5

Satisfactory conclusion. 2 2.5

competent conclusion. 3 3.5

Proficient conclusion.

4 4.5

Exceptionally well concluded.

5

References (5 marks)

Wrong referencing style.

0 0.5

Gross mistakes in APA 6^th Edition style and improper in-text citation.

1 1.5 2

There minimal mistakes in APA 6^th Edition style and in-text citation.

2    2.5

No mistakes in APA 6^th Edition style and in-text citation.

3 3.5

No mistakes in APA 6^th Edition style and in-text citation.

4 4.5

No mistakes in APA 6^th Edition style and in-text citation.

5