Assessment guidance Introduction Techniques in how to evaluate and analyse published literature have been a focus of the module.

Radiographic Research Methods
Assessment guidance Introduction Techniques in how to evaluate and analyse published literature have been a focus of the module. A breadth of knowledge and understanding required to undertake these processes has been taught and the module has put emphasis on students learning by experience in the groupwork in both the seminars and tutorials. Coursework title A critical appraisal of two published literature sources using appropriate frameworks. Word count The stated word count is 1500 words. There is a tolerance to the word limit of plus or minus 10% (+/- 10%). All submitted work should make full use of the permitted word count. Coursework resources There are two journal articles that have been provided for the coursework. Both articles can be found on the module site (Assessment folder) and they are also available on-line. Both CASP guidelines can also be found in the assessment folder on the module site. Paper 1 Alzyoud, K., Hogg, P., Snaith, B., Flintham, K. & England, A. (2019) Impact of body part thickness on AP pelvis radiographic image quality and effective dose. Radiography 25, e11-e17. https://www.sciencedirect.com/journal/radiography/vol/25/issue/1 This paper should be critically appraised using the CASP Diagnostic test checklist (2018) Paper 2 Nortje, N. & Hoffman, W. A. (2018) Perspectives on the developments of professionalism as experienced by radiography students. Radiography 24, 110-114. This paper should be critically appraised using the CASP guidelines qualitative studies Coursework task The coursework task is to critically appraise aspects of the published literature sources using the appropriate frameworks. The submission must focus on how the research aim/question and background explain the rationale for the study and how the method used and the data collected have been used in meeting the study aim(s). The work must be analytical rather than descriptive. Learning outcomes to be met Knowledge and Understanding Successful students will typically be able to: Recognise the role of research in creating an evidence base, promoting best practice and driving professional development in radiography; Appreciate the nature and applications of the available quantitative and qualitative research methodologies in radiography; Recognise factors which determine the quality, suitability and ethicality of radiographic research; Be aware of systematic processes for literature searching and evaluation; Skills and Attributes Successful students will typically be able to: Identify suitable methodological approaches and tools for answering commonly encountered radiographic research questions; Evaluate the quality of published research, using appropriate frameworks. Expected structure The following structure is recommended, and use of sub-titles is expected: Introduction (approx. 150 words) This section should explain the purpose and process of critical appraisal. The titles of the two papers should not be included in full. It is enough to refer to the two papers as Alzyoud et al. (2019) and Nortje & Hoffman (2018). The type of journal and any associated impact factor may be mentioned Research aim/question and rationale (approx. 400 words) Each of the two papers should be considered separately, in two separate sections. How the aim or research question (where and as stated) relates to the rationale for the study for each paper should be discussed. Using the appropriate questions on each of the CASP frameworks should be used as guidance. A balanced and objective approach is expected. The writing must be supported by contemporary, relevant citations throughout, e.g. when considering the wording and focus of research questions. Method used and data collected (approx. 800 words) Each of the two papers should be considered separately, in two separate sections. With reference to published literature the appropriateness of the choice of method should be discussed. The method used should be explored and related to the data collected. Strengths and weaknesses should be analysed. Reliability, validity and generalisability should all be discussed. Conclusion (approx. 150 words) The submission should offer a conclusion that offers judgements on the quality of the two papers. Evaluative comments supported by citations must be used to support criticality. References A comprehensive and accurate reference list must be included.