Topic：
My major is health science management, so the topic might be related to the health social marketing.
15,000 word dissertation
Reflects the learning outcomes (see Module handbook,Guidelines booklet & eLearning Portal)
Written in good English, with correct referencing
Appraises between 6 and 12 primary research papers in relevant subject related to your Masters programme
Follows the systematic appraisal protocol
Two bound copies submitted – check with your supervisor and/ or Programme Leader
Learning outcomes
On successful completion of this module you will be able to:
1. Conceptualise the research topic and establish its relevance to the practice area/field of expertise.
2. Examine critically the ethical and philosophical issues related to the appraisal and included studies.
3. Define the study protocol in terms of the research question and scope (variables/factors/settings to be studied), inclusion criteria, search strategies, critical appraisal techniques, data extraction and analysis and synthesis methods.
4. Implement a systematic appraisal to examine the research question.
5. Demonstrate appropriate critical appraisal skills.
6. Analyse and interpret the extracted data from the included studies giving due regard to issues of reliability, validity, rigour, trustworthiness and reflexivity.
7. Report the outcomes of the study in a written format for an academic audience, with reference to relevant guidelines.
Formative:
A protocol document following a prescribed template needs to be submitted by email to your supervisor (check with your module leader or supervisor for the date).
Summative:
You are required to complete a dissertation following prescribed guidelines (see eLP for more detail).
The dissertation is the means by which your achievement of the module learning outcomes is assessed and should be written with the guidance of your supervisor.
Word length: No more than 15,000 words.
Presentation: Dissertations must be typed, double or 1.5 -spaced (single-spaced for abstract, references and appendices) on A4 white paper. Margins should be as follows: 4cm at the left (to allow for binding), 2.5cm at the top, bottom and right. Pages must be numbered.
Front cover: See eLP for a template of the front cover.
Binding: You are responsible for arranging your own binding.
Your SA will address research question(s) from your specific practice or field of expertise
These questions may address:
• Effectiveness of single, definable interventions in order to state and recommend best practice, provide evidence based guidelines for practice or policy
• Evaluation of appropriateness, acceptability, process, or outcomes of complex human services in order to improve, develop or inform practice or policy
• Theoretical and ideological issues of relevance to health, social and education practice and or policy
• Relationships between practitioners and service users
What types of papers?
Published work to be included in the appraisal may be:
entirely quantitative
entirely qualitative
mixed method (needs to be justified & discussed with supervisor)
The choice depends on the methodological fit with the question
Your studies MUST come from:
• Peer reviewed journals
Your studies MUST be:
• Primary research i.e. original paper by the researcher (s). Avoid serial or several papers based on same sample
Please do not include SRs, Commissioned Reports or opinion based articles (although these can legitimately be used in your Lit Review)
Indicative Reading List
Please also see the web links on the eLP
Bettany-Saltikov, J.(2012) How to Do a Systematic Literature Review in Nursing: A Step-By-Step Guide.Berkshire: Open University Press.
Booth, A. Papaioannou,D. Sutton, A. (2012) Systematic Approaches to a Successful Literature Review.London. Sage
Bryman, A. (2012)Social Research Methods. Fourth Edition. Oxford. Oxford University Press
Gough, D., Oliver, S. and Thomas, J. (2012) An Introduction to Systematic Reviews. London: Sage
Harden A, Garcia J, Oliver S, Rees R, Shepherd J, Brunton G, Oakley A (2004) ‘Applying systematic review methods to studies of people’s views: an example from public health’. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 58, 794-800.
Khan K, Kunz R, Kleijnen J, Antes G. (2011) Systematic reviews to support evidence-based medicine. 2nd edition. London: Royal Society of Medicine.
NHS Centre for Reviews and Dissemination http://www.york.ac.uk/inst/crd/
NHS Health Technology Assessment Programme www.ncchta.org
Oakley A (2003) ‘Research evidence, knowledge management and educational practice: early lessons from a systematic approach’. London Review of Education.1 (1) 21-33.
Pearson A (2004) ‘Balancing the evidence: incorporating the synthesis of qualitative data into systematic reviews’. JBI Reports, 2: 45-64.
Pettigrew, M. and Roberts, H. (2006) Systematic Reviews in the Social Sciences: A Practical Guide. Blackwell: Oxford.
Thomas J, Harden A, Oakley A, Oliver S, Sutcliffe K, Rees R, Brunton G, Kavanagh J (2004) ‘Integrating qualitative research with trials in systematic reviews: an example from public health’. British Medical Journal, 328, 1010-1012
