Best writers. Best papers. Let professionals take care of your academic papers

Order a similar paper and get 15% discount on your first order with us
Use the following coupon "FIRST15"
ORDER NOW

Research Proposal Draft for Peer Review

Research Proposal Draft for Peer Review.

I’m studying for my Health & Medical class and need an explanation.

Compose a draft of your research proposal. You do not need to include the human subjects information. The five- to six-page proposal should include:

  • Introduction – 1/2 page
  • Problem Statement and Hypothesis – 1 page
  • Literature Review – 1/2 page per article x 5 articles = 2 1/2 pages
  • Methods – 1 page

Your title page, references, and appendices are not included in the 5-6 pages.

Failure to complete this assignment on time will result in a grade of “0” for the entire peer review process (Modules 8 and 9).

It would be beneficial to submit your draft to the University Writing Center for feedback prior to submitting it at the end of this module for peer review.

Competencies:
1. Select quantitative and qualitative data collection methods appropriate for a given public health context.
2. Analyze quantitative and qualitative data using biostatistics, informatics, computer-based programming and software, as appropriate.
3. Interpret results of data analysis for public health research, policy, or practice.
5. Design a population-based policy, program, project, or intervention.
6. Propose strategies to identify stakeholders and build coalitions and partnerships for influencing public health outcomes.
7. Advocate for political, social, or economic policies and programs that will improve health in diverse populations.
8. Select communication strategies for different audiences and sectors.
9. Communicate audience-appropriate public health content, both in writing and through oral presentation.


Peer Review of Research Proposal Drafts

provide a quality, professional peer review of the two Research Proposal Drafts assigned to you. Respond to each of the questions posted in the peer review tool. Justify your comments.

Competencies:
2. Analyze quantitative and qualitative data using biostatistics, informatics, computer-based programming and software, as appropriate.
3. Interpret results of data analysis for public health research, policy, or practice.
4. Discuss the means by which structural bias, social inequities, and racism undermine health and create challenges to achieving health equity at organizational, community, and societal levels.
5. Design a population-based policy, program, project, or intervention.
9. Communicate audience-appropriate public health content, both in writing and through oral presentation.
10. Perform effectively on interprofessional teams.

Rubric

Research Proposal for Peer Review Rubric

Research Proposal for Peer Review Rubric

Criteria Ratings Pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeIntroduction

2.0 to >1.79 pts

A

Student provides a clear, concise, and complete introduction, including a statement of the context of the study and the benefit this research would provide to the field of public health

1.79 to >1.59 pts

B

Student provides a complete introduction, although this could be more clear and/or concise; a cursory discussion of the context of the study and the benefit this research would provide to the field of public health is included

1.59 to >1.39 pts

C

Student provides an introduction, although this could be more clear, concise, and complete; no context or benefit to the field of public health is noted

1.39 to >0 pts

F

Student fails to provide an introduction, or the introduction provided is not clear; there is no context or benefit to the field of public health noted

2.0 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeProblem Statement and Hypothesis

5.0 to >4.49 pts

A

Student provided a clear, concise, and complete problem statement and hypothesis

4.49 to >3.99 pts

B

Student provides both a problem statement and a hypothesis; one of these components is lacking in critical thinking and detail to support it

3.99 to >3.49 pts

C

Student provides a problem statement and a hypothesis; these components lack critical thought and detail

3.49 to >0 pts

F

Student fails to provide a problem statement and hypothesis, or the problem statement and/or hypothesis provided are unclear and/or illogical

5.0 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeLiterature Review

5.0 to >4.49 pts

A

Literature review is focused and clearly and concisely connects the themes and issues of the various sources

4.49 to >3.99 pts

B

Literature review is focused and connects the themes and issues of most of the sources together; this could be more concise or cohesive

3.99 to >3.49 pts

C

Literature review is cursory and while it’s apparent that there are some themes or issues across the sources, this is somewhat disjointed

3.49 to >0 pts

F

Literature review lacks focus; it’s challenging for the reader to determine the theme of the literature review

5.0 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeMethods

5.0 to >4.49 pts

A

Methods section clearly and thoroughly details the methods, measurement instruments, and/or procedures that will be used to address the problem statement; all potential issues and limitations are addressed

4.49 to >3.99 pts

B

Methods section details the methods, measurement instruments, and/or procedures that will be used to address the problem; some of these could benefit from more detail to connect to the problem being addressed

3.99 to >3.49 pts

C

Methods section gives a cursory treatment to the methods, measurement instruments, and/or procedures that will be used to address the problem; limitations are not adequately addressed

3.49 to >0 pts

F

Methods section is missing or the methods, measurement instruments, and procedures that will be used to addressed the problem are inadequate, illogical, or unclear; potential issues and limitations are not addressed

5.0 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWriting style

3.0 to >2.69 pts

A

Excellent mechanical, grammatical, and style form; writing style is at an appropriate scholarly level

2.69 to >2.39 pts

B

Good mechanical, grammatical, and style form, with only minimal, minor errors; writing style at an adequate scholarly level

2.39 to >2.09 pts

C

Acceptable mechanical, grammatical, and style form, with a few repeated errors; writing style could be improved with a few minor tweaks to achieve an adequate scholarly level

2.09 to >0 pts

F

Poor mechanical, grammatical, and style form; writing style is not at an adequate scholarly level

3.0 pts

Total Points:

Research Proposal Draft for Peer Review