HLTH 5194 – Capstone Project Assessment Task: Literature Search Value & Length 20% of final grade, 1800 words Task Description Each member of your team summarises 10 references that relate to your...

1 answer below »
This is literature review assignment have a look please


HLTH 5194 – Capstone Project Assessment Task: Literature Search Value & Length 20% of final grade, 1800 words Task Description Each member of your team summarises 10 references that relate to your project. Rationale This assignment provides an opportunity for you to demonstrate to develop key deliverable outcomes for a project. The following course objectives are linked to this assessment: CO3, C05, C06 Marking Criteria & standards of performance Your performance in this assessment will be assessed individually against the weightings provided for each section of the task (see below). You are required to demonstrate an understanding of some of the literature related to your project. To enhance the academic integrity of your project, it is important that each member of the project team reviews and summarises different references. Demonstrating a critical assessment of the literature you review will be linked to higher performance. Criteria F2 F1 PASS 2 PASS 1 CR D HD 1. A minimum of 10 (ten) relevant references were summarised Not presented or did not address the question. The minimum number of references was not summarised and included irrelevant material. The minimum number of references were summarised but included three or more irrelevant references. The minimum number of relevant references was achieved but included not more than two irrelevant references. The minimum number of relevant references was achieved and only one reference was irrelevant. The minimum number of relevant references was achieved and all references were relevant. More than the minimum number of references were included and all were relevant. Mark = 20 done 2. Reference Summaries Not presented or did not address the question. Inadequate information presented in each summary. Basic summary provided for each reference. Some difficulty in understanding the one or more of the summaries. Summaries are basic but all can be readily understood. Summaries are generally logical and comprehensive, but some may still be a too basic. Summaries are logical and comprehensive but may not be succinct. Summaries are logical, comprehensive and succinctly presented. Mark = 20 3. Reference inclusion decision Not presented or did not address the question. Decisions to include or exclude 2 or more references omitted. Decisions to include or exclude references as part of the final report are provided but are unclear. Decisions to include or exclude references as part of the material for the final report were adequate. Decisions to include or exclude references as part of the material for the final report are clear and logical, but do not exhibit evidence of critical thinking. Decisions to include or exclude references as part of the material for the final report are clear and logical, and show some evidence of critical thinking. Decisions to include or exclude references as part of the material for the final report are clear and logical, succinct and justified in the context, showing high-level critical thinking. Mark = 20 4. Citation included and conforms to UniSA Harvard author-date system No or few references presented and/or did not adhere to referencing standards, presented non-related references. Some citations omitted. Did not adhere to UniSA/Harvard referencing conventions. All citations provided. More than 3 references were not cited using the UniSA/ Harvard referencing conventions. All citations provided. Attempt made to adhere to UniSA/Harvard referencing conventions but errors in some references. All citations provided. Attempt made to adhere to UniSA/Harvard referencing conventions. Few errors present. All citations provided. Adhered to UniSA/Harvard referencing conventions. Mark = 20 5. Writing Very poor writing & presentation with inadequate sentence & paragraph structure, grammar, vocabulary, spelling, punctuation, Well below/ above word limit, not sequenced, no logical flow. Paper poorly written re: sentence & paragraph structure, grammar, vocabulary, spelling, punctuation, Significantly above/below word limit, poorly sequenced, poor logical flow. Some problems with: sentence & paragraph structure, grammar, vocabulary, spelling, punctuation, Word limit under/over, discussion not always logical or well sequenced. Fair: sentence & paragraph structure, grammar, vocabulary, spelling, punctuation, Word limit met; discussion mostly logically sequenced. Good: sentence & paragraph structure, grammar, vocabulary, spelling, punctuation, Word limit met; Discussion clear & logically sequenced. Excellent: sentence & paragraph structure, grammar, vocabulary, spelling, punctuation, Word limit met; Discussion well-sequenced with logical flow. Exemplary: sentence & paragraph structure, grammar, vocabulary, spelling, punctuation, Word limit met; Discussion well-sequenced with logical flow. Mark = 20 Date Marked Marker Grade Achieved Page 2 of 2 Literature Search Exercise Introduction As part of the portfolio you are creating, we are asking you to undertake a literature search. The search will provide you with the material that the group needs to include in the final report. So, in doing this work you will contribute the material for a significant part of your group’s report. Requirements Each person in the group is required to find 10 unique sources of information that may be appropriate to include in the literature review section of the report. The types of literature that may be appropriate will be academic journal articles and grey literature (e.g., government reports etc.). Of course, books may be appropriate and it there may be some sources from the media (for example, the resilience projects may need to cite something from the media given the media attention on the plight of international students affected by the pandemic). For each reference you will need to: 1. Cite the material 2. Summarise the material – this is probably a paragraph. Paraphrase the material and use quotes only if it is especially helpful. Remember, this summary will be the material that is incorporated into the group’s final report. 3. Justify the inclusion of the material or the exclusion of the material. For example, “the report detailed the methodology used for costing DRGs in Australia” might be a statement that is used to include a paper for those undertaking the costing projects. Clearly, the best outcome for your report will be having all 10 references that you look at being categorised as “included”. However, you should realise that the purpose of reviewing the literature is to assimilate material that you have selected as being of value. You are not searching for material that will be excluded – remember you still have summarise it, so you want to maximise the return on your endeavours. Presentation You can present the work as a table (source, summary, justification for inclusion/exclusion) or as a Word document where you present each paper (use source, summary, justification for inclusion/exclusion as subheadings). It should be a single file. Make use of the library Have the group make a time to meet with the librarian to discuss the best way to tackle the literature search. The library and library staff are useful resources for you. Question 1 – How do we select the articles to review? Answer: Probably work as a group to find 40 references (assumes 4 people per group). Decide how you will divide these references among the team. Question 2 – Do I write an individual assignment? Answer: Yes. Remember though that your individual work will be used by the group. Question 3 – What if we can’t find 40 references? Answer: This seems unlikely. If you’ve searched properly the hardest decision may be which references to omit. Question 4 – Can we use more than 40 references? Answer: Certainly. We have specified the minimum that we think will help you write a very good report. Question 5 – Can I assess the same references as another member of my group? Answer: You might want to agree the “rules” that your group uses for including or excludinig a reference and perhaps all assess one reference the same as a practice exercise. However, your submitted work will include unique references only. Question 6 – Should I only focus on literature that is highly specific to my team’s project? Answer: Not necessarily. It may be appropriate to have one or more general references. For example, for those undertaking the governance projects, it’s likely that they’ll have literature from that relates to the NHS, while those working on the Match Studio projects will have some general references dealing with “resilience”. Question 7 – What’s the word count? Answer: 1,800 words – so that’s about 180 words for each reference. This is a guide. Question 8 – What’s the due date? Answer: 12pm Monday, 19th April 2021. 1 Assignment 3 Literature search checklist You are required to read and summarise 10 articles/references that relate to your project. (You will use these later in the “background” section of your final report.) Critically review the references – are they relevant? What are the main points/findings of the reference? NOTE: Be as concise as you can, use shorter rather than longer paragraphs and sentences. The report must include the following: Title page · Title: HLTH 5194 Literature search · Description: Assignment 3 for HLTH 5194 [insert your name] [insert your student ID number] [insert your Project name] Introduction Does your introduction clearly identify your specific search topic area and why it is important to your project? The summaries See the attached template Have you included the details for each reference (as per the UniSA Harvard style guide)? Have you listed the main points of the article/reference? – this can be a bulleted list Have you written a summary for each reference? Have you discussed the usefulness of the reference and whether you will include it in your final report? Have you given a reason for this? Have you given the reference a ‘usefulness’ rating of high/medium/low? Have you included a minimum of 10 references? References Make sure your references adhere to the Harvard referencing style requirements For guidance on referencing see the referencing checklist Presentation and formatting Have you checked your text for grammar, spelling and punctuation? Are your arguments presented logically? Have you written in a clear and concise (to the point) manner? Is your writing style appropriate? Is it objective, persuasive and supported by evidence? Is it too informal (do not use contractions e.g., ‘is not’ is correct,’ isn’t’ is not correct)? Is your text organised in clear sections with headings and subheadings? Have you used size 12 font and 1.5 line spacing? Is your summary 1800 words or less? (Note: Tables, diagrams, and the reference list are not included in word count, but in-text references, section headings and appendices are included in the word count). You can check the word count by highlighting the relevant text and clicking on the word count option under the ‘review’ tab in Word. Hlth 5194 Assignment 3 Checklist, Prepared by
Answered 2 days AfterApr 20, 2021HLTH5194University Of South Australia

Answer To: HLTH 5194 – Capstone Project Assessment Task: Literature Search Value & Length 20% of final grade,...

Bidusha answered on Apr 22 2021
139 Votes
Assignment 3 Literature search checklist
You are required to read and summaries 10 articles/references that relate to your project. (You will use these later in the “background” section of your final report.)
Critically review the references – are they relevant? What are the main points/findings of the reference?
NOTE: Be as concise as you can, use shorter rather than longer paragraphs and sentences.
The report must include the following:
Title page
· Title: HLTH 5194 Literature search
· Description: Assignment 3 for HLTH 5194
[insert your name]

[insert your student ID number]
[insert your Project name]
Introduction
Does your introduction clearly identify your specific search topic area and why it is important to your project?
The summaries
See the attached template
Have you included the details for each reference (as per the UniSA Harvard style guide)?
Have you listed the main points of the article/reference? – this can be a bulleted list
Have you written a summary for each reference?
Have you discussed the usefulness of the reference and whether you will include it in your final report? Have you given a reason for this?
Have you given the reference a ‘usefulness’ rating of high/medium/low?
Have you included a minimum of 10 references?
References
Make sure your references adhere to the Harvard referencing style requirements
For guidance on referencing see the referencing checklist
Presentation and formatting
Have you checked your text for grammar, spelling and punctuation?
Are your arguments presented logically?
Have you written in a clear and concise (to the point) manner?
Is your writing style appropriate? Is it objective, persuasive and supported by evidence? Is it too informal (do not use contractions e.g., ‘is not’ is correct,’ isn’t’ is not correct)?
Is your text organised in clear sections with headings and subheadings?
Have you used size 12 font and 1.5 line spacing?
Is your summary 1800 words or less?
(Note: Tables, diagrams, and the reference list are not included in word count, but in-text references, section headings and appendices are included in the word count). You can check the word count by highlighting the relevant text and clicking on the word count option under the ‘review’ tab in Word.
Hlth 5194 Assignment 3 Checklist, Prepared by Vanessa North, June 2021    Page 1 of 2
The summaries template
Project name: Identify the average cost of colonoscopy procedure DRG G48B (minor complexity) for for uninsured patients at Calvary Central District Hospital (CCDH)
Introduction: The summaries provided consists of the various reference acquired from scholarly articles that talk about various aspects of colonoscopy procedure that takes place.
Use the following table to present your search findings
    1.
    Reference
(adhere to Harvard referencing)
    Waye, J.D., Lewis, B.S. and Yessayan, S., 1992. Colonoscopy: a prospective report of complications. Journal of clinical gastroenterology, 15(4), pp.347-351.
    
    Main points of this reference
    The main objective is to evaluate the association between Colonoscopy and CRC deaths. Colonoscopy is addressed for screening and preventing colorectal cancer (CRC), although randomized trials backing the usefulness of this practice are not available.
    
    Summary of the reference
    Number of case patients were 10 292 and 51 460 controls were identified; 719 case patients (7.0%) and 5031 controls (9.8%) among them went through colonoscopy. When compared to controls, case patients were less likely to have gone through attempted colonoscopy (adjusted conditional odds ratio [OR], 0.69 [95% CI, 0.63 to 0.74; P < 0.001]) or complete colonoscopy (adjusted conditional OR, 0.63 [CI, 0.57 to 0.69; P < 0.001]). Complete colonoscopy was strongly associated with fewer deaths from left-sided CRC (adjusted conditional OR, 0.33 [CI, 0.28 to 0.39]) but not from right-sided CRC (adjusted conditional OR, 0.99 [CI, 0.86 to 1.14]).
    
    Will you include this reference in your final report? Why/why not?
    Yes, I would like to include it in my final report because it has a detailed description of how colon cancer is not alwys the death of a patient.
    
    Usefulness (high/medium/low)
    The usefulness is high.
    2.
    Reference
(adhere to Harvard referencing)
    Wang, P., Xiao, X., Brown, J.R.G., Berzin, T.M., Tu, M., Xiong, F., Hu, X., Liu, P., Song, Y., Zhang, D. and Yang, X., 2018. Development and validation of a deep-learning algorithm for the detection of polyps during colonoscopy. Nature biomedical engineering, 2(10), pp.741-748.
    
    Main points of this reference
    The detection and removal of precancerous polyps via colonoscopy is the gold standard for the prevention of colon cancer. However, the detection rate of adenomatous polyps can vary significantly among endoscopists.
    
    Summary of the reference
    It is shown that a machine-learning algorithm can identify polyps in clinical colonoscopies, in real time and with high sensitivity and specificity. We developed the deep-learning algorithm by using information from 1,290 patients, and proved it on newly collected 27,113 colonoscopy images from 1,138 patients with at least one detected polyp (per-image-sensitivity, 94.38%; per-image-specificity, 95.92%; area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, 0.984), on a public database of 612 polyp-containing images (per-image-sensitivity, 88.24%), on 138 colonoscopy videos with histologically confirmed polyps (per-image-sensitivity of 91.64%; per-polyp-sensitivity, 100%), and on 54 unaltered full-range colonoscopy videos without polyps...
SOLUTION.PDF

Answer To This Question Is Available To Download

Related Questions & Answers

More Questions »

Submit New Assignment

Copy and Paste Your Assignment Here