Article Critique

Article Critique Assignment: (Verbal) Paper Discussion - scientific article critique - 10 minutes in length - Topic: will be provided soon (scientific article on topic of chronic illness) or you can choose your own article of interest (peer-reviewed, design paper, with intervention and results and discussion) - Objective: critique the article, author's writing, methods, study designs, objectively & subjectively summarizing results of article, what analysis approach(es) used?, specific intervention delivered?, and tons more *****Teacher is not a tough grader, he just wants us be able to understand how to effectively critique an article and give our own opinions**** ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::GUIDELINES::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: 1. Summarize the paper, major points, talk about the sample(s), purpose, results, discussion, opinion 2. Critique - of significance (i.e. is this important? based on literature. etc.) - *do a literature search to see if this study can fill the gap in literature - present problem, then gap in literature, with your opinion (lack of study? lack of effective intervention study? lack of associations?) - highlight need t do intervention studies - make judgement on significance of paper 3. Approach (Design issues, Methods, Analysis) - random sampling strategy? Randomized Control Trial? etc - ethical isues? - approval info? concerns? - commitment on their intervention strategies? (highlight theories!) - and measurement strategies - validity of assessment? 4. Outcome Assessment - for example, is BMI a good measure for this? - highlight limiations - is it a continuous measurement? 5. Critique Procedure - why are some groups excluded? does it impact validity/representation? - is it Randomized? not? why/how? or why not? 6. Critique Analysis Approach - sampling - intervention strategies - theories applied - retention/attrition - impact of severity Also, -Is it an optimal design? -Get examples from papers on Discussion section -How do they interpret results in the paper? enough or not? -Is it consistent or inconsistent results? why inconsistent? -Talk about additional theories needed -Limitations on design? on sample? on approach? -Alternate feasible strategy? -Confounding? ( how it misinterprets or can misinterpret results. -ANALYZE!) -Did the author comprehensively discuss limitations? -Future directions? -Public health implications?