CRITIQUING A RESEARCH PAPER Student's Name: Elements of the Critique: 1. TITLE: 3. ABSTRACT 4. INTRODUCTION & REVIEW of LITERATURE: 5. MATERIALS & METHODS 6. RESULTS 7. DISCUSSION & CONCLUSION, 8. REFERENCES 9. GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS & IMPLICA TIONS 2. AUTHOR(s)

Instructions: For each of the 39 items below respond using one of the following three options: - S for “Satisfactory” - Detailed comments concerning elements critiqued. A simple "No" is not sufficient. You must explain why the element is open to criticism. - ITJ for "Incompetent To Judge" and indicate the person in your own setting form whom you would obtain a valid opinion. The number of points assigned to each element is proportional to the number of elements that can be critiqued in each section (see decimal points in parentheses next to each item number). If you need more space to answer, please use the back of the page. Reference: Bordage G. Considerations on Preparing a Paper for Publication. Teaching and Learning in Medicine. 1989. 1(1):47-52.

I. TITLE 1. (.33) The title correctly represents the content and breath of the study reported: the title is not misleading. 2. (.33) The title is clear, concise and gives importance to the study; the title captures the attention of the reader. If not suggest a title.

II. AUTHOR(S)

_

3. (.33) The titles (diploma. appointment) and address of the author(s) are clearly indicated: the author(s) credentials can be appreciated. III. ABSTRACT 4. (.33) The abstract covers each and every component of the study and not only selected aspects: see reader's decision to read the paper or not: Objectives (purpose. goals. or research question) Design Subjects Setting Outcomes Materials Results Conclusion

5. (.33) The abstract contains precise information, actual data: the main results are presented. 6. (.33) The implications and benefits reported are