Determinants of High Maternal Mortality in Ogun State, Nigeria

Assessment Coversheet
and Feedback Form
Faculty of....
School of....
Complete the details marked in the coloured text and leave everything else blank. Where appropriate,
copy and paste your submission after the first pages as indicated. You are reminded of the University
regulations on cheating. Except where the assessment is group-based, the final piece of work which is
submitted must be your own work. Close similarity between submissions is likely to lead to an
investigation for cheating. You must submit a file in an MSWord or equivalent format as tutors will use
MSWord to provide feedback including, where appropriate, annotations in the text.
Student Name Do not complete if subject to anonymous
marking Reasonable Adjustments
Student Number 18143623 Check this box [x] if the Faculty
has notified you that you are
eligible for a Reasonable
Adjustment (including additional
time) in relation to the marking
of this assessment. Please note
that action may be taken under
the University’s Student
Disciplinary Procedure against
any student making a false claim
for Reasonable Adjustments.
Course and Year Masters of Public Health, 2018
Module Code LBR7339
Module Title Research Methods of Enquiry
Module Tutor Dr Ben Appleby, Dr Chris Inman
Personal Tutor
First
Marker
Name:
Anne Phillips
First
Marker
Signature:
Date: 12/02/19
Feedback: General comments on the quality of the work, its successes and where it could be improved
SR Protocol (Qualitative or Quantitative)
Background/Rationale
The context for the protocol was introduced and mostly well-written in terms of
background but this did need underpinning with evidence. Your literature search
was better and evidenced well.
The rationale for your topic seems to move from a descriptive approach to a
systematic review as suggested by your title to a literature search so inconsistencies
demonstrated some apparent misunderstanding.
Review Methods
You did use PICO but did not justify your episiotomy or your justification for a
quantative approach – this needed to be evidence to demonstrate your
understanding also.
Be clear to set the scene for the type of review that will be carried out. Clear
signposting improves academic writing. PRISMA is stated in Study Selection, but
should be stated as a guide for the design of the protocol.
Search Strategy
A reasonable application and illustration of Boolean logic but your search terms
were not cited.
Study Selection Criteria
Elements of eligibility criteria are addressed. In several areas further explanation is
required. A differentiation between research paradigms was missing.
Quality Assessment
Provisional
Uncapped Mark
Marks will be
capped if this was a
late submission or
resit assessment and
may be moderated
up or down by the
examination board.
30 %
1

Study quality will be guided by Cochrane, this is not clear.
Data Synthesis
Use of data extraction table and some categories highlighted but perhaps you ran
out of time as this was incomplete as was your outcome data table You also
finished the assignment there without an explanation or a conclusion.
Conclusions
Missing.
LEARNING OUTCOMES MET
1.Differentiate between quantitative and qualitative research approaches and
paradigms in relation to the types of research question they are designed to address
NO
2.Compose focused research questions and search strategies to locate evidence and
identify gaps in the evidence base Partially
3.Critically appraise reviewed evidence to established hierarchies of evidence to
distinguish between studies with robust or limited methodological integrity NO
4.Rigorously justify a research design and its associated data collection and data
analysis strategies to address a pertinent research question NO
Comment
A brief summary which needs to be resubmitted – please seek personal supervision
for your resubmission.
Feed Forward: How to apply the feedback to future submissions
Please see annotated feedback
Quality and use of Standard English and Academic Conventions
Spelling Errors Style is Colloquial Standard is a Cause for Concern
Grammatical
Errors x Inappropriate Structure If the box above has been ticked you should
arrange a consultation with a member of
staff from the Centre for Academic Success
via [e-mail]
Punctuation Errors x Inadequate Referencing
Moderation Comments (Please note that moderation is carried out through ‘sampling’. If this section is
left blank, your work is not part of the sample.)
2

Moderation is done via sampling. Your work was not part of the sample.
Moderator
Name:
Moderator
Signature: Date:
3

Marking Criteria – Please study this page carefully
Postgraduate bands
0 – 39%
Fail
40 – 49%
Fail
50 – 59%
Pass
60 – 69%
Strong Pass
(merit)
70 – 79%
Very Strong
Pass
(distinction)
80 – 100%
Exceptionally
Strong Pass
(distinction)
Criterion
1
Mark:
see
above
Differentiate between quantitative and qualitative research approaches and paradigms in relation
to the types of research question they are designed to address
Extremely
limited
knowledge
regarding
differentiatin
g between the
various
research
approaches
and
paradigms
Inadequately
differentiates
between the
various
research
approaches
and
paradigms
Able to
differentiate
between the
various
research
approaches
and
paradigms
Clearly
differentiates
between the
various
research
approaches
and
paradigms
Comprehensi
vely
differentiates
between the
various
research
approaches
and
paradigms
Discerningly
differentiates
between the
various
research
approaches
and paradigms
Criterion
2
Mark:
see
above
Compose focused research questions and search strategies to locate evidence and identify gaps
in the evidence base
Unable to
compose
focused
research
questions and
search
strategies
Inadequately
composes
focused
research
questions and
search
strategies
Adequately
composes
focused
research
questions and
search
strategies
Competently
composes
focused
research
questions and
search
strategies
Very
competently
composes
focused
research
questions and
search
strategies
Exceptionally
competently
composes
focused
research
questions and
search
strategies
Criterion
3
Mark:
see
above
Critically appraise reviewed evidence to established hierarchies of evidence to distinguish
between studies with robust or limited methodological integrity
Lacks critical
appraisal
ability
regarding
appraising
reviewed
evidence to
established
hierarchies of
evidence to
distinguish
Insufficient
critical
appraisal of
reviewed
evidence to
established
hierarchies of
evidence to
distinguish
between
studies with
Adequately
critically
appraises
reviewed
evidence to
established
hierarchies of
evidence to
distinguish
between
studies with
Good critical
appraisal of
reviewed
evidence to
established
hierarchies of
evidence to
distinguish
between
studies with
robust or
Very
comprehensi
ve critical
appraisal of
reviewed
evidence to
established
hierarchies of
evidence to
distinguish
between
Outstandingly
critically
appraises
reviewed
evidence to
established
hierarchies of
evidence to
distinguish
between
studies with
4

between
studies with
robust or
limited
methodologic
al integrity
robust or
limited
methodologic
al integrity
robust or
limited
methodologic
al integrity
limited
methodologic
al integrity
studies with
robust or
limited
methodologic
al integrity
robust or
limited
methodologica
l integrity
Criterion
4
Mark:
see
above
Rigorously justify a research design and its associated data collection and data analysis
strategies to address a pertinent research question
No evidence
of
understandin
g of the
relevant
knowledge
base to
justify a
research
design and its
associated
data
collection
and data
analysis
strategies
Inadequately
justifies a
research
design and its
associated
data
collection
and data
analysis
strategies to
address a
pertinent
research
question
Sufficient
justification
of a research
design and its
associated
data
collection
and data
analysis
strategies to
address a
pertinent
research
question
Good
justification
of a research
design and its
associated
data
collection
and data
analysis
strategies to
address a
pertinent
research
question
Rigorously
justifies a
research
design and its
associated
data
collection
and data
analysis
strategies to
address a
pertinent
research
question
Rigorously and
sophisticatedly
justifies a
research
design and its
associated data
collection and
data analysis
strategies to
address a
pertinent
research
question
5

6