Assessment: Advancing Practice Through Research

Requirements: 

Notes: 

• do only 1,500 out of the 3000w mentioned in the guidelines. According to the customer, she will order the second half once she sees that the first half is done properly 
• APA7
• Have at least 8-10 citations
• You are critiquing Topic A: Diabetes control 

Task: 

1: read thru the paper and appraise it using the CASP RCT checklist https://casp-uk.net/images/checklist/documents/CASP-Randomised-Controlled-Trial-Checklist/CASP-RCT-Checklist-PDF-Fillable-Form.pdf

2: The guidelines are already pretty detailed. Please do the Introduction (300w) and 1200w of the critique.

What we score:

74%

Our Writer’s Comment 

This assignment is designed to assess students’ understanding of business practices.

To secure an A+ grade, adhere to these guidelines and make sure your work aligns with the grading criteria:

Step 1: Understand the Structure

You’ll be writing 1,500 words—300 words for the Introduction and 1,200 words for the Critique. Since you are critiquing a diabetes control study, you’ll need to assess the research methodology and quality using the CASP checklist. Make sure you focus on the most important aspects of the study, like the trial’s design, relevance, results, and conclusions.

Step 2: Writing the Introduction (300 Words)

The introduction is your chance to set the stage for the critique. Here’s what you should cover:

1. Briefly explain the importance of diabetes control: You don’t need to go into too much detail here, but give a quick overview of why controlling diabetes is a critical public health concern. You could mention how diabetes impacts millions of people globally and why research on improving diabetes management is crucial.
2. Introduce the research paper you’re critiquing: Mention the study’s title, main goal, and methodology (RCT). Make sure to describe briefly what the study aimed to investigate—such as how effective a particular intervention is for managing diabetes.
3. Introduce the CASP checklist: Explain that you’ll be using the CASP RCT checklist as a framework to critique the study’s validity, relevance, and impact. This gives the reader a clear idea of what to expect in the critique.

This section doesn’t need to be overly detailed—just give enough context so the reader understands why this study matters and how you’ll be assessing it.

Step 3: The Critique (1,200 Words)

For the critique, you’ll use the CASP RCT checklist, which asks 11 key questions. Since you have 1,200 words, you won’t cover every single point in depth, but you can focus on the most important aspects of the trial. Let’s break it down:

1. Was the trial randomized?

• Did the researchers use proper randomization methods to avoid bias? Explain how the participants were assigned to intervention groups and whether the randomization was sufficient.
• If there were issues with randomization, critique these and explain how they might impact the study’s results.

2. Was the allocation concealed?

• Discuss how well the allocation of participants was concealed. In RCTs, this is important to prevent bias. If allocation wasn’t properly concealed, it could influence the outcomes.

3. Were all participants accounted for?

• Look at how the study handled participant dropouts or withdrawals. If many participants dropped out or were excluded, it might affect the validity of the results. Did the authors explain why some participants were lost?

4. Were participants, staff, and study personnel ‘blinded’?

• Blinding is essential to reduce bias. Assess whether the participants and researchers were blinded to the treatment groups. If they weren’t, discuss how this might have influenced the study’s findings.

5. Were the groups similar at the start of the trial?

• A good RCT ensures that the groups being compared (intervention vs. control) are similar at the outset. Discuss whether the groups in this study were comparable in terms of age, gender, baseline diabetes control, etc. If there were significant differences, this could skew the results.

6. Were the participants’ outcomes measured in the same way?

• Consistency is key for measuring outcomes. Examine whether the same methods were used to assess outcomes in both the intervention and control groups. Inconsistencies could weaken the study’s validity.

7. Were the results precise and reliable?

• Discuss the statistical methods used and whether the results were statistically significant. Did the authors present confidence intervals or p-values? Explain whether these results are trustworthy and how they were interpreted.

8. Are the results applicable to the real world?

• Critique whether the results of this trial are generalizable to the broader population. Were the participants representative of typical diabetes patients? Could the intervention be realistically applied in other settings?

9. What are the potential biases or limitations?

• Every study has limitations. Were there biases in how the study was conducted? For example, were there issues with follow-up or missing data? Critique how well the authors acknowledged these limitations and how they might affect the overall conclusions.

10. Do the benefits outweigh the risks?

• Look at the balance between the intervention’s potential benefits and any risks or side effects. Did the study provide enough evidence to support the use of this intervention in clinical practice?

11. Was the funding source mentioned?

• Discuss whether the funding source of the study was disclosed and whether it could have influenced the results. Studies sponsored by pharmaceutical companies, for instance, may carry a risk of bias.

Step 4: Back It Up With Research

Since you need 8-10 citations, make sure you back up your critiques with references from relevant research. For example, if you’re critiquing the randomization process, you can cite guidelines or other studies that demonstrate how randomization should be handled in RCTs. This strengthens your argument and shows that your critique is based on solid evidence.

Why are we trusted by Singaporean part-time students?

1. Guaranteed Academic Success: We are so confident in the quality of our work that we offer a 200% money-back guarantee if it does not meet sure-pass standards. This reflects our unwavering dedication to delivering essays that consistently adhere to the highest academic benchmarks.
2. Positive Feedback: We take pride in the numerous testimonials from hundreds of satisfied students who have benefited from our services. These testimonials are a strong testament to the trust and satisfaction our clients have in our essay writing service. The positive reviews underscore the quality of our work and the significant impact we have had on our clients’ academic success.
3. Absolute Privacy: We place the highest priority on our clients’ confidentiality and privacy. Students can be assured that their personal information and interactions with our service are handled with the utmost security and discretion. We never share client details with any third parties.

Sample Assignment

We have done well for this piece, but are unfortunately unable to share with you. Why not have us work on a model assignment for you instead? You can know more about the service here.