Hello, dear friend, you can consult us at any time if you have any questions, add WeChat: daixieit

Principles & Methods of Epidemiology: Paper Critique

Weighting: Paper critique: 1,500 words; 65% of overall grade

Due date: Friday 5th January 2024, 9.00am

Assignment description:

This is a written assessment. This assessment will be based on the following reading: McManus et al. Usual Cruciferous Vegetable Consumption and Ovarian Cancer: A Case-Control Study. Nutr Cancer 2018 May-Jun;70(4):678-683. doi: 10.1080/01635581.2018.1464346. You will also find the article on Coursera, under Resources/Assessments.

Utilising the concepts you have learned, please write a critique of the McManus et al. (2018) journal article that identifies, evaluates, and responds to the authors’ ideas, both positively and negatively.

As you complete this assessment, you may use further literature if you wish, but this is not necessary.

Please note that although guiding questions are provided, your submission should beanessay (not a series of questions and answers) and you do not need to follow the order of the guiding questions.

Critique questions:

1.    What is the main aim or research question?

2.    How do the authors explore this question? Summarise the main methodological elements of the study.

3.    Why do you think the authors have chosen this study design? Do you think that an alternative study design may have been more suitable? Explain why or why not.

4.    Using data from the paper, calculate and interpret the unadjusted Odds Ratio of ovarian cancer for high (Q5) vs. low (Q1) consumption of raw cruciferous vegetables. Is it similar or different to the adjusted OR and why?

5.    What are potential sources of information bias in this study? Have the authors made any efforts to address these? Were they successful? What else might have been done?

6.    What are potential sources of selection bias in this study? Have the authors made any efforts to address these? Were they successful? What else might have been done?

7.    What are potential sources of confounding in this study? Have the authors made any efforts to address these? Were they successful? What else might have been done?

8.    Taking into account the above and any other relevant factors, have the authors given a satisfactory answer to their research question?

9.    Do you think that there is a causal association between intake of cruciferous vegetables and ovarian cancer?

General Guidance:

You may wish to think about this general guidance:

This critique is not designed to be a summary of the manuscript.

Analyse the authors’ arguments, and whether they are successful in conveying their research and findings, but also think beyond what is mentioned in the manuscript. Think about how this article fits within the broader literature on the topic from a public health point of view.

Do not expand beyond 1500 words. The markers will not consider any text that is beyond the word limit.