Overview
It is imperative that clinicians adopt a questioning, critical, and evidence-based approach to clinical practice to ensure high-quality, safe, and effective care for the community. In this unit you will learn how to apply an acceptable framework to develop an evidence-based question, utilise learnt strategies to conduct a scoping or systematic review and to evaluate, synthesise and communicate research applicable to critical care through the use of scoping or systematic review processes.
Details
Pre-requisites or Co-requisites
There are no requisites for this unit.
Important note: Students enrolled in a subsequent unit who failed their pre-requisite unit, should drop the subsequent unit before the census date or within 10 working days of Fail grade notification. Students who do not drop the unit in this timeframe cannot later drop the unit without academic and financial liability. See details in the Assessment Policy and Procedure (Higher Education Coursework).
Offerings For Term 1 - 2024
Attendance Requirements
All on-campus students are expected to attend scheduled classes – in some units, these classes are identified as a mandatory (pass/fail) component and attendance is compulsory. International students, on a student visa, must maintain a full time study load and meet both attendance and academic progress requirements in each study period (satisfactory attendance for International students is defined as maintaining at least an 80% attendance record).
Recommended Student Time Commitment
Each 12-credit Postgraduate unit at CQUniversity requires an overall time commitment of an average of 25 hours of study per week, making a total of 300 hours for the unit.
Class Timetable
Assessment Overview
Assessment Grading
This is a graded unit: your overall grade will be calculated from the marks or grades for each assessment task, based on the relative weightings shown in the table above. You must obtain an overall mark for the unit of at least 50%, or an overall grade of ‘pass’ in order to pass the unit. If any ‘pass/fail’ tasks are shown in the table above they must also be completed successfully (‘pass’ grade). You must also meet any minimum mark requirements specified for a particular assessment task, as detailed in the ‘assessment task’ section (note that in some instances, the minimum mark for a task may be greater than 50%). Consult the University’s Grades and Results Policy for more details of interim results and final grades.
All University policies are available on the CQUniversity Policy site.
You may wish to view these policies:
- Grades and Results Policy
- Assessment Policy and Procedure (Higher Education Coursework)
- Review of Grade Procedure
- Student Academic Integrity Policy and Procedure
- Monitoring Academic Progress (MAP) Policy and Procedure – Domestic Students
- Monitoring Academic Progress (MAP) Policy and Procedure – International Students
- Student Refund and Credit Balance Policy and Procedure
- Student Feedback – Compliments and Complaints Policy and Procedure
- Information and Communications Technology Acceptable Use Policy and Procedure
This list is not an exhaustive list of all University policies. The full list of University policies are available on the CQUniversity Policy site.
- Apply an acceptable framework to develop an evidence-based question
- Utilise learnt strategies to conduct a scoping or systematic review
- Evaluate, synthesise and communicate research applicable to critical care through the use of scoping or systematic review processes.
Alignment of Assessment Tasks to Learning Outcomes
| Assessment Tasks | Learning Outcomes | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | |
| 1 - Written Assessment - 25% | |||
| 2 - Reflective Practice Assignment - 10% | |||
| 3 - Literature Review or Systematic Review - 65% | |||
Alignment of Graduate Attributes to Learning Outcomes
| Graduate Attributes | Learning Outcomes | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | |
| 1 - Knowledge | |||
| 2 - Communication | |||
| 3 - Cognitive, technical and creative skills | |||
| 4 - Research | |||
| 5 - Self-management | |||
| 6 - Ethical and Professional Responsibility | |||
| 7 - Leadership | |||
| 8 - Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Cultures | |||
Alignment of Assessment Tasks to Graduate Attributes
| Assessment Tasks | Graduate Attributes | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | |
| 1 - Written Assessment - 25% | ||||||||
| 2 - Reflective Practice Assignment - 10% | ||||||||
| 3 - Literature Review or Systematic Review - 65% | ||||||||
Textbooks
There are no required textbooks.
IT Resources
- CQUniversity Student Email
- Internet
- Unit Website (Moodle)
- Microsoft Excel
- Endnote referencing software
All submissions for this unit must use the referencing style: Harvard (author-date)
For further information, see the Assessment Tasks.
h.hosking2@cqu.edu.au
Module/Topic
Introduction
Chapter
Events and Submissions/Topic
Module/Topic
Overview of study designs
Chapter
Events and Submissions/Topic
Discussion forum post Due: Week 2 Sunday (11 March 2024) 11:45pm AEST
Module/Topic
Understanding Reviews
Chapter
Events and Submissions/Topic
Module/Topic
Methodological Search Strategies
Chapter
Events and Submissions/Topic
Discussion forum post Due: Week 4 Sunday (25 March 2024) 11:45pm AEST
Module/Topic
Review Methodologies
Chapter
Events and Submissions/Topic
Module/Topic
Chapter
Events and Submissions/Topic
Module/Topic
Review Methodologies
Chapter
Events and Submissions/Topic
Discussion forum post Due: Week 6 Sunday (15 April 2024) 11:45pm AEST
Module/Topic
Presentation of Results
Chapter
Events and Submissions/Topic
Module/Topic
Structure your Scoping Review
Chapter
Events and Submissions/Topic
Discussion forum post Due: Sunday (29 April 2024) 11:45pm AEST
Module/Topic
Discussion and Conclusions
Chapter
Events and Submissions/Topic
Module/Topic
Abstracts
Chapter
Events and Submissions/Topic
Discussion forum post Due: Week 10 Sunday (13 May 2024) 11:45pm AEST
Module/Topic
Finalise Scoping Review Submission
Finalise Reflective Practice Assignment
Chapter
Events and Submissions/Topic
Module/Topic
Finalise your Scoping Review
Chapter
Events and Submissions/Topic
Module/Topic
Finalise and submit your Scoping Review
Chapter
Events and Submissions/Topic
Module/Topic
Chapter
Events and Submissions/Topic
1 Written Assessment
You are required to select a topic of interest for your Scoping Review which aligns with paramedicine and critical care. This topic will be used for Assessment 1 - Scoping Review Methodological Proposal and Assessment 3 - Scoping Review. You will also be required to reflect on your chosen topic and the Scoping Review process in Assessment 2 – Reflective Practice Assignment.
Once you have selected your topic, you are required to complete a Scoping Review Proposal consisting of following the tasks:
- Rational for your selection of this topic
- Proposed title for your Scoping Review
- Population, Context, Concept
- Research Question
- Aims and Objectives
- Search Strategy – including your proposed use of key words, synonyms, wildcards, truncation, justification of inclusion and exclusion criteria and data base selection
- Briefly consider extraction method
- Upload 3-5 relevant PDF full-text articles found in your preliminary search
On return of Assessment 1 - Scoping Review Methodological Proposal, you will be required to amend your Scoping Review Methodology as needed to complete Assessment 3 - Scoping Review.
Weighting: 25%
Due: Week 5 Friday April 5 2024 11:45 pm AEST
Week 5 Friday (5 Apr 2024) 11:45 pm AEST
Week 6 Friday (19 Apr 2024)
- The written assessment should be presented in an essay format.
- The written assessment must address each of the topic tasks and incorporate content description as detailed above.
- Avoid superficial points or comments and be clear and concise.
- Include in-text referencing and a reference list (Harvard referencing style)
- There is a minimum word count of 1500 words (+/- 10%) (excluding references and the full-text articles. Upload all full-text articles separately).
This written assessment is worth 25% of your overall unit mark.
- Apply an acceptable framework to develop an evidence-based question
- Knowledge
- Cognitive, technical and creative skills
- Research
- Ethical and Professional Responsibility
2 Reflective Practice Assignment
Assessment 2 - Reflective Practice Assignment comprises two parts: participation in Discussion forums, and a final reflective practice piece that summarises your thoughts based on the Discussion forum contributions. You will join the discussion forums in Moodle to discuss and reflect on topics relevant to developing a scoping review or systematic review.
Part A
Every second week from Week 2 a discussion topic will be posted on the unit's Moodle site. Your task is to participate in each of the discussions that are generated in weeks 2, 4, 6, 8 and 10 by 11:45pm AEST of the Sunday of each corresponding week. Your comments should demonstrate your understanding of the weekly discussion topic, together with the research that you have undertaken in response to it. You must also show evidence that you have engaged with the content by responding to the postings of other students and/or the unit coordinator. You will have a week to submit your weekly response in the discussion thread.
Your responses (approximately 200 words) must cover these three (3) aspects :
- Be focused on the weekly topic and provide a thorough and thoughtful response
- Include your opinion and reflection
- Provide evidence as required
Part B
Final Reflective Practice submission (1000 words +/- 10%)
The final summary is a piece of reflective writing of approximately 1000 words where you discuss your journey in the development of your skills to undertake a scoping or a systematic review. Students are encouraged to use the material posted on the forums but are to ensure that this is cited (ie. the date you posted this information/response on the forum and the forum you posted this on).
Please note: students are encouraged to write in the first person for both Parts A and B.
Weighting: 10%
Due: Week 11 Friday 24 May 2024 11:45 pm AEST
Week 11 Friday (24 May 2024) 11:45 pm AEST
Review/Exam Week Friday (7 June 2024)
- The written assessment should be presented in an essay format.
- Use in-text referencing (citing any Discussion forum posts) and a reference list (Harvard referencing style)
- There is a minimum word count of 1000 words (+/- 10%) (excluding references).
This written assessment is worth 10% of your overall unit mark.
- Utilise learnt strategies to conduct a scoping or systematic review
- Knowledge
- Cognitive, technical and creative skills
- Research
- Self-management
- Ethical and Professional Responsibility
3 Literature Review or Systematic Review
You are required to finalise your Scoping Review in Assessment 3 – Scoping Review.
In this assessment, you will be required to develop and complete your Scoping Review Project. You will amend your proposed Scoping Review Methodology as needed to develop an effective search strategy. You will then be required to implement this search strategy to find, screen and extract data from resources relevant to your Research Question. Following the PRISMA-ScR checklist, this written assessment must be in essay format and include the following:
- Title
- Abstract
- Introduction – rational, objectives
- Methods – protocol and registration, eligibility criteria, information sources, search, selection of sources of evidence, data charting process, data items, synthesis of results
- Results – selection of sources of evidence, characteristics of sources of evidence, results of individual sources of evidence, synthesis of results
- Discussion – summary of evidence, limitations, conclusions
- Funding
The scoping review should be 2500 words (10+/-) in length excluding the structured abstract, appendices, figures, tables, and references. A minimum of 20 and maximum of 25 journal articles will need to be cited throughout the paper. This review should be relevant to paramedicine and critical care.
Published Scoping Reviews require a team of authors. However, for the purpose of this assessment, all tasks are to be done individually. If you are interested in publishing your Scoping Review after completion of PMSC29005, please discuss this with your Unit Coordinator.
As this is a written assessment, you must include in-text referencing and a reference list.
Weighting: 65%
Due: Review/Exam Week Friday 7 June 2024 11:45 pm AEST
Review/Exam Week Friday (7 June 2024) 11:45 pm AEST
Exam Week Friday (14 June 2024)
- The written assessment should be presented in an essay format.
- The written assessment must address each of the main topic tasks as detailed in the task description above, following the PRISMA ScR checklist.
- Avoid superficial points or comments and be clear and concise.
- As this is a written assessment, you must include in-text referencing and a reference list.
The scoping review should be 2500 words (10+/-) in length excluding the structured abstract, appendices, figures, tables, and references. A minimum of 20 and maximum of 25 journal articles will need to be cited throughout the paper. This review should be relevant to paramedicine and critical care. This written assessment is worth 65% of your overall unit mark.
- Apply an acceptable framework to develop an evidence-based question
- Evaluate, synthesise and communicate research applicable to critical care through the use of scoping or systematic review processes.
- Knowledge
- Communication
- Cognitive, technical and creative skills
- Research
- Self-management
- Ethical and Professional Responsibility
- Leadership
As a CQUniversity student you are expected to act honestly in all aspects of your academic work.
Any assessable work undertaken or submitted for review or assessment must be your own work. Assessable work is any type of work you do to meet the assessment requirements in the unit, including draft work submitted for review and feedback and final work to be assessed.
When you use the ideas, words or data of others in your assessment, you must thoroughly and clearly acknowledge the source of this information by using the correct referencing style for your unit. Using others’ work without proper acknowledgement may be considered a form of intellectual dishonesty.
Participating honestly, respectfully, responsibly, and fairly in your university study ensures the CQUniversity qualification you earn will be valued as a true indication of your individual academic achievement and will continue to receive the respect and recognition it deserves.
As a student, you are responsible for reading and following CQUniversity’s policies, including the Student Academic Integrity Policy and Procedure. This policy sets out CQUniversity’s expectations of you to act with integrity, examples of academic integrity breaches to avoid, the processes used to address alleged breaches of academic integrity, and potential penalties.
What is a breach of academic integrity?
A breach of academic integrity includes but is not limited to plagiarism, self-plagiarism, collusion, cheating, contract cheating, and academic misconduct. The Student Academic Integrity Policy and Procedure defines what these terms mean and gives examples.
Why is academic integrity important?
A breach of academic integrity may result in one or more penalties, including suspension or even expulsion from the University. It can also have negative implications for student visas and future enrolment at CQUniversity or elsewhere. Students who engage in contract cheating also risk being blackmailed by contract cheating services.
Where can I get assistance?
For academic advice and guidance, the Academic Learning Centre (ALC) can support you in becoming confident in completing assessments with integrity and of high standard.
What can you do to act with integrity?
