Political Science Assignment on Eating Disorders

PYMFEB ASSIGNMENT 1: CRITICAL REVIEW AND IMPACT EVALUATION

The purpose of this two-part assignment is to allow you to demonstrate your skills in critical evaluation of research and to evaluate the impact of research by investigating the subsequent developments in the field.

Choose your starter paper and question from the list below (eating disorder, borderline personality disorder, dementia).

Eating Disorders

Fairburn et al  (2015). A transdiagnostic comparison of enhanced cognitive behavior therapy (CBT-E) and interpersonal psychotherapy in the treatment of eating disorders. Behaviour Research and Therapy 70, 64-71

Critically review this paper. How has this study advanced our understanding of treatments for eating disorders? What has been the impact on clinical practice?

Part 1 Critical Review (750 words)

Write a critical review of the paper you have chosen. The overarching criteria the marker will look for include your understanding of the material presented, and the clarity of your critical review.

You can format the review in any way you like but the use of headers is recommended.

Set the context by summarising the key aims and findings of the paper in a paragraph.  Note that this paragraph must be included in the word count.

Describe the research question, say whether it has been clearly articulated, and assess whether it has been justified in the introduction to the paper.

Critically review the methods, analysis, and discussion. You may want to include some or all of the following areas, as well as others you feel are important.

  • Relevant ethical issues
  • Design
  • Participants
  • Measures
  • Analysis
  • The authors’ identification of the advantages and disadvantages of the study

 Part 2: Developments in the field (1500 words)

The purpose of the second part of the assignment is to allow you to explore and evaluate the way the field has developed since the paper was published.  To do this, you will need to identify developments regard to clinical practice or research. These developments may directly result from that paper or have developed in parallel. You may find it helpful to refer to practice guidelines such as NICE Guidelines. You will then reflect on the impact of the paper and its implications.

Marking criteria for the assignment

RELEVANCE: Questions are interpreted correctly; discussion is focused on the topic the questions; irrelevant content and discussion are excluded.

KNOWLEDGE & UNDERSTANDING: Recommended literature used and interpreted appropriately; selection and use of evidence shows understanding and insight; there is evidence of study beyond the recommended literature.

ANALYSIS & CRITICAL THINKING: The integration of evidence-based and data is clearly discussed to address the questions; there is clear evidence of analysis and problem-solving skills. Approach to questions shows originality in argument or problem solving; there is evidence of significant critical insight; there is reasoned questioning of assumptions; there are incidences of independent judgment.

SCHOLARSHIP & STYLE: Conclusions are well justified and complete; facts reported and statements made are accurate; writing is clear and fluent; there is an appropriate use of technical language for a professional audience; all sources appropriate; accurately acknowledged and formatted in a recognized style.