hpaa 220 - unc gillings school of global public...
TRANSCRIPT
HPM 951 Lara Lorenzetti
Spring 2018 UNC – Chapel Hill
1
HPM 951
Literature Reviews and Appraisal (Credit Hours: 2)
Department of Health Policy and Management
School of Public Health
Spring 2018 Syllabus
Faculty: Lara Lorenzetti
Email: [email protected]
Phone:
Office Hours: Mon, Wed, Thurs: 5 – 6:30pm
Course Overview
This 2.0 credit course is the second in a sequence of courses in research design and methods in
the executive DrPH. This course is designed to help students identify a topic and begin to
develop the background section for their dissertation. Well-conducted research can provide
important information for practitioners, policy makers, and service users. However, in order to
be useful, researchers and non-researchers must have the skills to seek out, critically analyze,
and synthesize research findings.
Learning Objectives and HPM Competencies
This course explores the nature and process of scientific inquiry in the field of public health.
Specifically, the course will establish a foundation for methodically identifying, exploring, and
evaluating literature relevant to students’ proposed dissertation topics. The course will also help
prepare students for productively reviewing literature in their future roles as senior leaders.
The primary goal of a systematic literature review is to develop a comprehensive picture of the
current knowledge about a specific topic. This course is taught from the perspective that a systematic
approach is “best” in all situations, including the practice-oriented situations more common to DrPH
students. For this reason, much of the language used is based on this systematic approach. However,
the characteristics of DrPH study questions do not always lend themselves to perfect adherence to a
systematic review model. Combined with the time constraints of a single semester, the ultimate goal
for students is to develop a literature review that examines a well-defined problem using an approach
based on the principles of a systematic review, while understanding how practical implementation of
the methods affects the final product.
HPM 951 Lara Lorenzetti
Spring 2018 UNC – Chapel Hill
2
Course Learning Objective
Competencies
1 Discuss how research and practice can
(and in some cases, cannot) inform one
another
Integrate scientific information, legal and
regulatory approaches, ethical frameworks, and
varied stakeholder interests in policy
development and analysis
2 Identify the purposes of literature
reviews in public health and the various
types of literature syntheses
Integrate knowledge, approaches, methods,
values, and potential contributions from multiple
professions and systems in addressing public
health programs
3 Conduct a literature search of a relevant
dissertation topic/issue using systematic
principles
Integrate knowledge, approaches, methods,
values, and potential contributions from multiple
professions and systems in addressing public
health programs
4 Accurately apply current knowledge to a
specific problem
Integrate scientific information, legal and
regulatory approaches, ethical frameworks, and
varied stakeholder interests in policy
development and analysis
5 Explain the concepts of construct and
external validity
Explain qualitative, quantitative, mixed methods
and policy analysis research and evaluation
methods to address health issues
6 Recognize common threats to construct
and external validity
Explain qualitative, quantitative, mixed methods
and policy analysis research and evaluation
methods to address health issues
7 Critically analyze the published literature
Explain qualitative, quantitative, mixed methods
and policy analysis research and evaluation
methods to address health issues
8 Synthesize findings of the published
literature
Communicate public health science to diverse
stakeholders for purposes of influencing behavior
and policies
Resources
Website
HPM 951 has its own website via Sakai, see: http://sakai.unc.edu. This syllabus is on the
website. Although I will not make major changes to due dates or course structure, you should
consider this syllabus a dynamic document. We can add or remove readings, add goals for
specific classes, and make clarifications to assignments. You should feel free to offer
suggestions as the class progresses.
Text
I do not have a required text book for this class. However, one very useful resource is the
Research Methods Knowledge Base by William Trochim. It is available for free at:
http://www.socialresearchmethods.net/kb/index.php.
HPM 951 Lara Lorenzetti
Spring 2018 UNC – Chapel Hill
3
Articles
Journal articles will be assigned throughout the semester, listed for each class date. The
purposes of the readings are to either 1) provide information and background on literature
reviews as a whole, or 2) to serve as examples of different types of reviews and those with
varying strengths and weaknesses. The articles that should be given first priority and read most
thoroughly are in bold. Other articles should be read not with a goal of understanding the
specific topic, but to understand the review process within them, while also keeping in mind the
learning objectives for that class. As such, I may note that you should focus on particular
sections of these articles.
All articles are available electronically via the Library/Reserves tab on our class Sakai site. All
articles are not yet on this website, but all can be found by searching for them on the UNC
Library web site.
Requirements and Expectations
Course Conduct and Responsibilities:
This course invokes an adult learning model. As instructor, my role is to help create an
effective learning environment, act as an expert resource, help students find other resources, and
facilitate learning.
Your role as class participants is to learn and help each other learn. You will do this by
preparing for class, participating in class discussion, and completing required assignments. You
are also expected to add value to the course by helping each other and serving as a resource to
your classmates.
HPM 951 Lara Lorenzetti
Spring 2018 UNC – Chapel Hill
4
Evaluation Method
Grade Components
Deliverables Cumulative %
Presentation of paper section 1 presentation 10
Paper development assignments 4 assignments @ 10% each 40
Term paper 1 term paper 50
Grading Scale
95 or above (H)
75-94 (P)
60-74 (L)
Below 60 (F)
Overview
The objective of this course is for students to develop their dissertation topics, which will be
aided by a literature review. The primary deliverable for this course is a term paper consisting
of a literature review on an approved topic. Additional papers assigned throughout the semester
are designed to aid in the development of your final term papers.
All written assignments should be submitted no later than 4pm the day class convenes. Late
assignments will be penalized 10% per day. This means paper development assignments will be
penalized 1 point per day. Late submission of the final paper will result in a deduction of 5
points per day. I understand that life happens and am willing to consider accepting late
assignments without penalty for unique circumstances. Work travel does not constitute a unique
circumstance.
Assignment and term paper requirements are detailed below.
HPM 951 Lara Lorenzetti
Spring 2018 UNC – Chapel Hill
5
Presentation of Literature Review Section
Once during the semester, you will present the current status of your paper on one of three
sections: background, methods, or results/discussion. The purpose of this is to give an
opportunity to receive feedback from classmates on your topic, as well as generate discussion
that is useful for everyone. You can present this in any way you like, with a few PowerPoint
slides or discussion only. Plan for about 15-20 minutes for the presentation and discussion.
You will be assigned ONE of the three presentation dates.
Although graded, these are considered works in progress. The grade is based more on your
presentation and effort at generating discussion, and less on the quality of the topic itself. These
are graded on a scale of 10/10.
Paper Development Assignments
Four papers are due throughout the semester. These assignments represent each of the major
sections of a literature review (see below). The purpose of these papers is to allow me to give
you feedback at various stages in the process. By the end of the semester, you will have
received feedback on each section of your term paper. (So your term papers should be very,
very good!)
These are graded on a scale of 10/10.
Term Paper
Your term paper will be a literature review on a topic of your choosing. This should be the
same as your dissertation topic. The literature review should help you become more familiar
with the work in the area, define the gaps in current knowledge, and, from that, help you
pinpoint the specific goal of your dissertation. The completed paper should resemble the first
chapter of your dissertation. This is DUE MAY 10th.
Although the final paper will not be a typical systematic literature review, it will still include
the basic components. Below is the grading scheme that will be used in assessing the final
paper. You should refer to this when completing the final paper and the individual sections
in the paper development assignments.
HPM 951 Lara Lorenzetti
Spring 2018 UNC – Chapel Hill
6
Term Paper Grading Rubric
I. Background
a. Background supports need for literature review 10 points
b. Clearly stated research question/objective 10 points
20 Points
II. Methods
a. Search methods are well-described and valid 5 points
b. Inclusion and exclusion criteria are comprehensive and reasonable 10 points
c. Process for reviewing articles is well-described and adequate 5 points
20 Points
III. Results
a. Overall search results are described 5 points
b. Findings are grouped into coherent themes or subjects 5 points
c. Studies are clearly and objectively described 10 points
20 Points
IV. Discussion
a. Findings discussed by theme to develop a cohesive description of current
knowledge 5 points
b. Quality of the studies are discussed 5 points
c. Study characteristics and quality are used to describe gaps in the current
literature 5 points
d. Limitations of the review process are discussed 5 points
20 Points
V. General
a. Tables and figures are used appropriately 5 points
b. Clarity of writing 15 points
20 Points
100 Points total
Assignment Submission
You will submit your assignments by posting to SAKAI.
HPM 951 Lara Lorenzetti
Spring 2018 UNC – Chapel Hill
7
UNC Honor Code
The principles of academic honesty, integrity, and responsible citizenship govern the
performance of all academic work and student conduct at the University as they have during
the long life of this institution. Your acceptance of enrollment in the University presupposes a
commitment to the principles embodied in the Code of Student Conduct and a respect for this
most significant Carolina tradition. Your reward is in the practice of these principles.
Your participation in this course comes with the expectation that your work will be completed
in full observance of the Honor Code. Academic dishonesty in any form is unacceptable,
because any breach in academic integrity, however small, strikes destructively at the
University's life and work.
If you have any questions about your responsibility or the responsibility of faculty members
under the Honor Code, please consult with someone in either the Office of the Student
Attorney General (966-4084) or the Office of the Dean of Students (966-4042).
Read “The Instrument of Student Judicial Governance” (http://instrument.unc.edu).
You are encouraged to collaborate on class assignments unless instructed otherwise. To
emphasize the importance of integrity and intellectual property in the profession, you are
required on each assignment to list those individuals with whom you collaborated.
Course Evaluation
The statement below describes the official course evaluation process. I find formal evaluations
critical to the ongoing development of my teaching. However, I also want you to feel that you
can provide feedback to me at any point throughout the semester. You can do this in-person, by
email, or you can drop an anonymous note in my mailbox. I want you to feel that you are
getting the education you deserve; so please let me know of concerns while I still have a chance
to remedy them.
The Department of Health Policy and Administration is participating in the Carolina Course
Evaluation System (CES), the university's new online course evaluation tool, enabled at the end
of each semester. Your responses will be anonymous, with feedback provided in the aggregate;
open-ended comments will be shared with instructors, but not identified with individual
students. Your participation in CES is a course requirement, as providing constructive feedback
is a professional expectation. Such feedback is critical to improving the quality of our courses,
as well as providing input to the assessment of your instructors.
HPM 951 Lara Lorenzetti
Spring 2018 UNC – Chapel Hill
8
CLASS SCHEDULE Session 1
January 5th Introduction to Literature Reviews & Appraisal
(LECTURE & DISCUSSION)
Session
Learning
Objectives:
What is research? Why is it important?
What are your experiences with literature reviews?
What databases are available for literature searches?
What reference managers are useful?
Readings: Pubmed: http://guides.lib.unc.edu/pubmedtentips
Systematic Reviews: http://guides.lib.unc.edu/systematic-reviews
Trochim W. (2006) Research Methods Knowledge Base, 2nd Edition.
Language of research and philosophy of research.
http://www.socialresearchmethods.net/kb/index.php
Gough, D. A., Oliver, S., & Thomas, J. (2013). Learning from research:
systematic reviews for informing policy decisions: a quick guide. London:
Nesta.
http://www.alliance4usefulevidence.org/assets/Alliance-FUE-reviews-
booklet-3.pdf
Reeves, S, Koppel I, et al. (2002) Twelve tips for undertaking a systematic
review. Medical Teacher; 24(4): 358-363.
Assignments None.
Session 2
January 9th Literature Reviews & Choosing a Topic
(LECTURE & DISCUSSION)
Session
Learning
Objectives:
Literature Reviews
What is a literature review and what purpose(s) does it serve in science,
public health, and research development?
What are the stages of a literature review?
Compare different types of literature reviews
Choosing a Topic
Moving from a broad research topic to a manageable research question.
What makes a research question interesting?
How do you design a good question?
Making a topic specific enough to manage.
Readings:
Albanese, M and Norcini J. (2002) Systematic Reviews: What are they
and why should we care? Advances in Health Sciences Education; 7:
147-151.
Grant, M. J., & Booth, A. (2009). A typology of reviews: an analysis of 14
review types and associated methodologies. Health Information &
Libraries Journal, 26(2), 91-108.
HPM 951 Lara Lorenzetti
Spring 2018 UNC – Chapel Hill
9
Cooper, HM. (1998) Synthesizing Research: A guide for Literature Reviews,
third edition: 1-40. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Cochrane Collaboration. (2005) Chapter 4: Formulating the problem.
Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. May 2005.
Watt, Cameron, Sturm, Lathlean, Babidge, Blamey, et al. Rapid versus full
systematic reviews: validity in clinical practice? ANZ J Surg 2009; 78:
1037.1040.
Skim these: Focus on what questions are being asked and whether the
questions are too narrow or too broad.
Anderson RM. (1995) Revisiting the behavioral model and access to medical
care: Does it matter? Journal of Health and Social Behavior; 36(1): 1-10.
Berkman LF. (2009). Social Epidemiology: Social Determinants of Health in
the United States: Are We Losing Ground? Annual Review of Public
Health; 30:27-41.
Bhutta ZA, Ali S, Cousens S, et al. Alma-Ata: Rebirth and revision 6 -
Interventions to address maternal, newborn, and child survival: what
difference can integrated primary health care strategies make? Lancet. Sep
13 2008;372(9642):972-989.
Jackson NW, Howes FS, Gupta S, Doyle JL, Waters E. (2005) Policy
interventions implemented through sporting organizations for promoting
healthy behaviour change. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews;
Issue 2 Article No: CD004809.pub2. DOI:
10.1002/14651858.CD004809.pub2.
Mavedzenge SMN, Doyle AM, Ross DA. HIV Prevention in Young People in
Sub-Saharan Africa: A Systematic Review. Journal of Adolescent Health.
Dec 2011;49(6):568-586.
Assignments: None.
Session 3
January 16th How research findings can inform practice & Research Methods, Part I
(LECTURE)
Session
Learning
Objectives:
Research Informing Practice
What are the implications of research findings on policy and practice?
How have these things been done in the published literature?
How can you use a conceptual model to consider research in the context
of practice?
Research Methods
Introduction to basic research methods.
What is makes research valid? Reliable?
HPM 951 Lara Lorenzetti
Spring 2018 UNC – Chapel Hill
10
What are the different types of validity?
How are these important to literature reviews?
Readings:
Focus on the background and methods sections, paying particular
attention to the specificity of the question and the definitions of the key
ideas.
Anderson P, Chisholm D, Fuhr D. (2009) Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness
of policies and programmes to reduce the harm caused by alcohol. The
Lancet; 373:2234.
Chaudhry B, Wang J, Wu S, et al. Systematic review: impact of health
information technology on quality, efficiency, and costs of medical care.
Annals of internal medicine. May 16 2006;144(10):742-752.
Schuster MA, McGlynn EA, Brook RH. (1998) How good is quality of
health care in the United States? Milbank Quarterly; 76(4): 517-563.
Thompson Coon J, Boddy K, Stein K, Whear R, Barton J, Depledge MH.
Does participating in physical activity in outdoor natural environments
have a greater effect on physical and mental wellbeing than physical
activity indoors? A systematic review. Environ Sci Technol. Mar 1
2011;45(5):1761-1772.
Methods:
Liberati A, Altman D, Tetzlaff J, Mulrow C, Gotzche P, Ioannidis J, et al.
(2009). The PRISMA Statement for Reporting Systematic Reviews
and Meta-Analyses of Studies That Evaluate Health Care
Interventions: Explanation and Elaboration. Annals of Internal
Medicine; 151: W-65
Assignments:
Ungraded assignment: Submit preliminary research question(s) to Lara for
review
Session 4
January 23st Searching for Literature
(LECTURE)
Session
Learning
Objectives:
Learning Session with Mary White, Global Public Health Librarian at the
Health Sciences Library
How do you identify, retrieve, and review the existing literature on a
research question?
What databases are available for literature searches?
How do you use keywords?
How do you develop inclusion/exclusion criteria?
Readings: Pubmed: http://guides.lib.unc.edu/pubmedtentips
Systematic Reviews: http://guides.lib.unc.edu/systematic-reviews
HPM 951 Lara Lorenzetti
Spring 2018 UNC – Chapel Hill
11
Greenhalgh T, Peacock R. (2005) Effectiveness and efficiency of search
methods in systematic reviews of complex evidence: Audit of primary
sources. British Medical Journal; 331: 1064-1065.
Assignments:
1st Paper Development Assignment: State your review question and show
what variables (or concepts) will be compared and the nature of the
relationship. Include a conceptual model as a diagram or table. This should
be essentially a draft of the background section of your final paper.
Identify the problem
Relationship between the problem and the cause(s)
Conceptually define variables
Rationale for relationship
Importance
Session 5
January 30th Wading through the Literature
(LECTURE)
Session
Learning
Objectives:
Learning Session with Mary White, Global Public Health Librarian at the
Health Sciences Library
Refining your methods section and preparing to manage results.
What strategies can you use to abstract, review, and manage your articles?
How do you plan to organize the literature together into major findings?
Readings: Greenhalgh T, Peacock R. (2005). Effectiveness and efficiency of search
methods in systematic reviews of complex evidence: Audit of primary
sources. British Medical Journal; 331: 1064-1065.
Assignments: None.
Session 6
February 13th Research Methods, Part II
(LECTURE)
Session
Learning
Objectives:
Consider research design and conclusion validity; use these to grade the
quality of your literature.
How do you make sense of the often confusing, contradictory, and
fragmentary literature on a research question?
How do you judge the quality of the evidence?
Readings:
Cochrane Collaboration. (2005) Chapter 6: Assessment of study quality.
Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. May
2005.
Liberati A, Altman D, Tetzlaff J, Mulrow C, Gotzche P, Ioannidis J, et al.
(2009). The PRISMA Statement for Reporting Systematic Reviews
and Meta-Analyses of Studies That Evaluate Health Care
Interventions: Explanation and Elaboration. Annals of Internal
Medicine; 151: W-65.
Steinberg EP, Luce BR. (2005) Evidence based? Caveat emptor! Health
Affairs; 24(1): 80-92.
HPM 951 Lara Lorenzetti
Spring 2018 UNC – Chapel Hill
12
Assignments:
2nd Paper Development Assignment: Basic strategy for how you will begin
searching for literature. This should essentially be a draft of the methods
section of your final paper.
Sources you will use
Key words, search strategies
Inclusion/exclusion criteria
Session 7
February 27th Presentation of Background and Methods Sections
(DISCUSSION)
Session
Learning
Objectives:
Presentation of Background and Methods Sections
Readings: None
Assignments:
Presentations of background and methods sections: For the students assigned
to this date, prepare a short presentation of your background and methods
sections.
For background, include:
Research question and rationale
Definitions of major concepts
Relevance of the question to informing practice.
Conceptual model, if applicable
For methods, include:
Sources
Search strategy
Inclusion / exclusion criteria
You should be prepared for discussion addressing:
Adequacy and appropriateness of the question—is the relationship
well-defined and specific?
Potential for useful findings—have the concepts been defined in a way
that can lead to sensible conclusions?
How the findings can inform practice—is the topic important?
Appropriateness of chosen source(s) and possible alternate sources.
Validity of search strategy.
Validity of inclusion criteria.
PRESENTERS: TBD
Session 8
March 20th Using Literature Reviews
(DISCUSSION)
Session
Learning
Objectives:
Using the literature review to inform your dissertation proposal.
Does your review of the literature expose any gaps in current knowledge
on your topic?
HPM 951 Lara Lorenzetti
Spring 2018 UNC – Chapel Hill
13
Readings: Chan PS, Jain R, Nallmothu BK, Berg RA, Sasson C. Rapid Response Teams:
A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Arch Intern Med. Jan 11
2010;170(1):18-26.
Dusetzina SB, Higashi AS, Dorsey ER, Conti R, Huskamp HA, Zhu S,
Garfield CF, Alexander GC. (2012). Impact of FDA Drug Risk
Communications on Health Care Utilization and Health Behaviors: A
Systematic Review. Med Care. 2012 Jan 18. [Epub ahead of print].
PMID:22266704
Orizio G, Merla A, Schulz PJ, Gelatti U.(2011). Quality of online pharmacies
and websites selling prescription drugs: a systematic review. J Med
Internet Res. 2011 Sep 30;13(3):e74.
Wang CJ, Ellender SM, Textor T, Bauchner JH, Wu JY, Bauchner H, Huang
AT. (2011). A proposed framework for understanding the forces behind
legislation of universal health insurance: lessons from ten countries.
Health Serv Res. Dec; 46(6pt2):2101-18.
Wong WC, Luk CW, Kidd MR. Is there a role for primary care clinicians in
providing shared care in HIV treatment? A systematic literature review.
Sex Transm Infect. Mar 2012;88(2):125-131.
Assignments:
3rd Paper Development Assignment. Description of major findings. This
should essentially be a draft of the results section of your final paper.
Session 9
April 3rd Interpreting Findings from Literature Reviews
(DISCUSSION)
Session
Learning
Objectives:
Use the Doak article to examine how differences in methods can lead to
different conclusions.
Readings: Doak, Heitman, Summerbell, and Lissner. (2009). Prevention of
childhood obesity—what type of evidence should we consider
relevant? Obesity Reviews 10: 350-356.
Davis P, Howden-Chapman P. (1996) Translating research findings into
health policy. Social Science and Medicine; 43(5): 865-872.
Brownson R, Fielding J, and Maylahn C. (2009). Evidence-Based Public
Health: A Fundamental Concept for Public Health Practice.
Assignments: None.
Session 10
April 10th Literature Reviews – Results and Interpretation
(PRESENTATIONS)
Session
Learning
Objectives:
Student presentations of results and discussion sections.
Readings: None
HPM 951 Lara Lorenzetti
Spring 2018 UNC – Chapel Hill
14
Assignments:
Presentations of results and discussion sections: For the students assigned to
this date, prepare a short presentation of your results and discussion sections.
Summarize your research question and results, but focus on your main
findings, potential limitations, and threats to validity throughout the research
process.
Be prepared for discussion related to:
Whether you were able to answer your original research question.
Possible limitations to your search strategy and limitations of the
articles you’ve included.
How threats to validity affect your ability to draw conclusions that are
relevant to practice.
PRESENTERS: TBD
Session 11
April 17th Peer Review Session
(WORKING SESSION)
Session
Learning
Objectives:
During class, students will review and provide feedback on a partner’s
paper, paying particular attention to interpretation of findings.
Readings: None
Assignments:
4th Paper Development Assignment: Summarize the current state of
knowledge, what’s lacking, and how you will use this to inform your
dissertation. This should essentially be a draft of the discussion section of
your final paper.
HPM 951 Lara Lorenzetti
Spring 2018 UNC – Chapel Hill
15
COURSE TOPICS MAPPING
Session Session Topic
CAHME
Content Areas
1 Introduction to Literature Reviews &
Appraisal
III.B.11 Written, verbal, and
interpersonal communication skills
III.B.12 Statistical analysis and
application
2 Literature Reviews & Choosing a Topic III.B.2 Health policy formulation,
implementation, and evaluation
3 How research findings can inform practice &
Research Methods, Part I
III.B.12 Statistical analysis and
application
4 Searching for Literature III.B.11 Written, verbal, and
interpersonal communication
5 Wading through the Literature III.B.11 Written, verbal, and
interpersonal communication
6 Research Methods, Part 2 III.B.12 Statistical analysis and
application
7 Presentation of Background and Methods
Sections
III.B.11 Written, verbal, and
interpersonal communication
8 Using Literature Reviews III.B.17 Strategy formulation and
implementation
III.B.2 Health policy formulation,
implementation, and evaluation
9 Interpreting Findings from Literature
Reviews
III.B.17 Strategy formulation and
implementation
III.B.2 Health policy formulation,
implementation, and evaluation
10 Literature Reviews – Results and
Interpretation
III.B.11 Written, verbal, and
interpersonal communication
11 Peer Review Session III.B.11 Written, verbal, and
interpersonal communication
HPM 951 Lara Lorenzetti
Spring 2018 UNC – Chapel Hill
16
Mapping of review components, skills needed, class sessions, and assignments.
Review Component
Skills Needed Class sessions Assignments
Overall Understand a literature review and types What is a literature review?
Topic Narrowing to a manageable size Choosing a topic
Statement of topic (not graded)
Presentation of Background Section
What is an interesting question? How do reviews inform practice?
Background
Identify a problem Choosing a topic
Background section (draw a conceptual model)
Conceptually define/consider variables and relationships
How do reviews inform practice? Understand how topic is important and will inform practice
Methods
Basic research methods
Research methods, I
Methods section Presentation of Methods
Section
Operationally define variables
Inclusion criteria
Plan search strategy Searching for literature
Plan review strategy
Results
Review findings Wading through the literature
Results section
Organize findings
Research methods, II
Assess validity and quality of findings
Discussion
Assess overall validity of literature
Discussion section Presentation of Discussion
Section
Determine gaps relevant to research question
Identify ways to improve/fill gaps Using literature reviews
Identify weaknesses in search strategy
Complete Review
Final Paper
HPM 951 Lara Lorenzetti
Spring 2018 UNC – Chapel Hill
17
Dates, Assignments, and Topics
1/5
/20
18
1/9
/20
18
1/16
/20
18
1/2
3/2
018
1/3
0/2
018
2/6
/20
18
2/1
3/2
018
2/2
0/2
018
2/2
7/2
018
3/6
/20
18
3/1
3/2
018
3/2
0/2
018
3/2
7/2
018
4/3
/20
18
4/1
0/2
018
4/1
7/2
018
4/2
4/2
018
5/1
/20
18
5/1
0/2
018
Class 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Ass
ign
men
ts
Student Presentations
Background
Methods
Results
Discussion
Final Paper
Pa
per
Se
ctio
ns Topic
Background
Methods
Results
Discussion