This assessment item requires you to submit annotated bibliographies on five (5) scientific journal articles along with a research question, method that describes how you searched for the articles and an overall summary of the information that has been presented in the annotated bibliographies. The word limit is 2000 +/- 10% (1800 - 2200) words. An annotated bibliography is a concise evaluation (annotation) of each of the five articles that follows the bibliographic (reference) information. The purpose of an annotated bibliography is to collect information and organise your sources for further research. Each bibliographic annotation will be 200-250 words and will:

• Provide the bibliographic citation (reference) using Vancouver referencing style
• State the background of the author(s) and reliability of the article
• State who the intended audience was
• Introduce the content of the article (aim and methods)
• Outline the main scope or argument of the article along with identifying the conclusion/s made by the author
• Report any unique or special features of the article that are helpful, for example tables, figures, charts or graphs
• Discuss the relevance or usefulness of the article for your research
• State the strengths and limitations of the article
• Present your reflection or reaction to the article.

The annotated bibliography and summary should have:

• A title: This will be pertinent to what is discussed in the assessment
• At least four (4) keywords: These are used for your literature search
• A valid clinical question: This is the question you answer in this assessment and will be presented in a clear PICO format
  
• A described method to your literature search: databases searched for inclusion and exclusion criteria, Boolean/MeSH search terms
• At least five (5) references collected through the literature search. Remember to include high quality, high impact, and high citation references
• The annotated bibliography
• A summary of the literature findings. You will summarise the five (5) references and consolidate the findings. More references can be included in the summary if it helps explain and answer your question although this is not compulsory. Additional references will need to be referenced at the end of the document.

Communication with the unit coordinator and your assigned tutors is required throughout the term to ensure you are progressing in the right direction. As with all university assessments, colluding with other students on non-group work tasks is considered academic misconduct and will be dealt with in adherence with the CQU student academic integrity policy and procedure.

Assessment criteria for MEDS21006 Medical Science Research Project 2 (detailed marking rubric is available on the Moodle site).

Title:

• Reflects the theme of the paper
• Correct spelling and grammar
• Appropriate language

Keywords:

• Minimum of 4 unique and relevant keywords 
• The literature searches finds what the keywords describe

References:

• Are in Vancouver style
• Relevant and reliable
• Citation index (quality of references) of the reference source journal has been considered

Annotated bibliography:

• Demonstrates a wide range of reading which is relevant to the research question
• Written with academic rigour and gives a clear and concise description of the main theme of the paper
• Contains concise summarisation of important findings, central theme and scope
• Summarises the strengths and limitations of paper
• Describes how it is useful for your research
• Contextualises the problem – relates literature to problem or issue
• Demonstrates an ability to search, assess and manage literature information.  Demonstrates critical thinking and positions the research within the conceptual framework of the discipline with sufficient amount and quality of data or information that is well presented systematically, intelligently interpreted and relevant.

Clinical Question:

• A valid research question, described in a precise and unambiguous way that is relevant to the literature and reflects the purpose of the paper
• Describes the context in which the question arises using the PICO method to frame the question.

Summary of the references:

• Describes the motivation for the study
• Summarises the findings of the five references used
• Discusses the importance of the findings
• Demonstrates originality and creativity of topic and contribution to the field
• The analysis is described appropriately, aligns with the question raised, shows sophistication, is iterative and relates to the literature
• Author cogently expresses insights gained from the study and study limitations
• Critically analyses in an objective and coherent manner

Written style, presentation, and communication:

• Synthesises information into a unified and coherent whole demonstrating internal consistency and logical flow demonstrating a clear progression from research question through to conclusion
• Written in a scholarly style that is culturally and ethically aware
• Written to foster intellectual debate
• Demonstrates creativity and originality

In this assessment, you will develop and apply skills to enable you to write a research paper. This assessment scaffolds from assessment 1 in MEDS21006. The research paper should be suitable for your discipline and will either be:

1. The write up of the research project you commenced in MEDS21003, subsequently received ethics approval to do, and have collected data for, or
2. A narrative review on a topic related to the one you commenced in MEDS21003 or a new topic.

The skills you will develop include the ability to synthesise and critically analyse reading material, to articulate an academic argument and to reflect on your own bias and assumptions. You will use these skills throughout your career as a health professional.

The research paper should be 2500 +/- 10% (2250 to 2750) words long with the word count excluding the structured abstract, figures, tables, and references. At least 20 journal articles will need to be cited throughout the paper.

Communication with the assigned tutor and unit coordinator is required throughout the term to ensure you are progressing in the right direction. As with all university assessments, colluding with other students on non-group work tasks is considered academic misconduct and will be dealt with in adherence with the CQU student academic integrity policy and procedure.

Assessment criteria for the narrative review - detailed marking rubric is available on the Moodle site.

Structured Abstract

• The abstract is written as a short, robust, stand-alone summary of the work or paper that adequately summarises the findings
• Includes the following subheadings: Background, Aims, Review Design, Method, Results and Conclusions 
• Identifies major results
• Is written to an appropriate length (max 250 words).

Introduction

• Leads the reader from a general area of research to a specific area of research
• Describes the motivation for the study
• Describes the context in which the question arises
• Discusses the importance of the findings
• Includes problem statement
• Makes clear the research question to be addressed
• Demonstrates originality and creativity of topic and contribution to the field.

The body of the paper (method, results and discussion)

• The methodology is well explained, unambiguous, logical and practical, or presented as a figure which is referred to in the text
• Results are well presented either as narrative and/or appropriately developed tables/figures that support the review
• Discussion is written comprehensively and critiques the literature
• Demonstrates a wide range of reading which is relevant to the research question
• Contextualises the problem – relates literature to problem or issue
• Includes a discussion of the literature that is selective, synthetic, analytical and thematic
• Demonstrates an ability to search, assess and manage literature information. Demonstrates critical thinking and positions research within the conceptual framework of the discipline
• The analysis is appropriately discussed, aligns with the question and hypothesis raised, shows sophistication, is iterative and relates to the literature, with sufficient amount and quality of data or information, well presented systematically, intelligently interpreted and relevant
• The author cogently expresses insights gained from the study, suggests ideas for further research and discusses study limitations.

Conclusion

• Written in a way that draws conclusions from the study and relates to major points arising from research
• Summarises and provides perspective on the findings, refers back to the introduction and ties the whole paper together. States the study’s strengths and weaknesses; discusses the implication and how the study enhances the knowledge in the profession. Makes recommendations for applications for the discipline and discusses future directions for research
• The critical analysis presented is insightful and well supported and demonstrates sound critical judgment in all aspects of the research
• Contains a statement of validity – significance is strongly justified

Written style, presentation, and communication

• Synthesises information into a unified and coherent whole demonstrates internal consistency and logical flow. There is a clear progression from research question through to conclusion
• Written in a style that is culturally and ethically aware
• Critically analyses own work in an objective and reflective manner
• Data and findings are presented astutely, creatively and effectively
• Uses visual presentation to maximum effect using the best presentation approach for purpose and audience
• Written and presented in a scholarly style
• Findings are communicated in a style that incorporates specialist and non-specialist audiences and are very clearly articulated but demonstrate critical judgment
• Independently written and can foster intellectual debate
• Contributes information that is relevant and of value to the field concerned
• Demonstrates creativity and originality
• Complete, accurate and relevant in-text referencing
• Accurate, relevant and complete reference list
• Appropriate language, clear, accurate and used to maximum effect
• Outstanding command of grammar and spelling with thorough editing

Contribution to the field

• Relative to the limited time available for a research project – a meticulous, substantial exploration of limits and strengths
• Contribution of a novel or new knowledge to the development of current theory, research or practice

Assessment criteria for the research paper:

The assessment criteria are the same as for the narrative review, with the addition of:

Materials and Methods:

• The description of data collection methodology is detailed and flawless
• The steps in data collection are defined in appropriate detail allowing the reader to be able to reproduce the study
• The population/sampling, location, restriction/limiting conditions, sampling techniques, procedures, materials, and variables are discussed unambiguously
• Any lab equipment, specific instruments, subjects, computer or mathematical models are explained
• Any bias in data collection is clearly explained.

Results:

• Results are described in an orderly fashion using text and illustrative methods
• Summaries of statistical analyses are described
• Tables and figures appropriately used in support of the text
• Negative results are also reported.