HLTH101: Assessment 1 - Evaluation of Information on COVID Vaccines

This report evaluates four internet-based information sources related to COVID-19 vaccination: James Gallagher's article on BBC News, Dr. Liz Mumper's work from the Children's Health Defense Team, Associate Professor Archa Fox's piece from The Conversation, and Philip Krause's article in The Lancet. The evaluation assesses each source's type, peer review status, editorial policies, intended audience, and advertising content. It analyzes the tone, referencing, verifiability, and payment aspects of the content, as well as the authors' qualifications, affiliations, and other publications. The report also determines the overall reliability and validity of each source. Furthermore, it defines reliability and validity, explaining their importance in the context of professional information evaluation. The report concludes that the information from these sources is reliable and valid, providing essential insights regarding COVID-19 vaccines. The report also includes the student's definitions of reliability and validity, emphasizing their significance in professional contexts and the ability to produce accurate, reproducible results.

HLTH101 Assessment 1 Evaluation of Information
Gallagher (2021) Mumper (accessed 27
January 2021)
Fox (2021) Krause et al (2020)
The
Publication:
Type?
Peer
reviewed?
Editorial
policy?
Audience?
Advertising?
The publication is Editorial
based.
The article is peer reviewed
and its editorial policy is based
on information related to
healthy and science
correspondent.
The publication is in form of
a article written by Dr Liz
Mumper who belongs to
Children's health defence
team.
The target audience is the
general society who have to
be provided information
about the detailed answers of
safety of COVID vaccine
(Scherer and et. Al 2018)).
The article is a academic
journal.
The audience is mainly
students who are studying in
University of western
Australia.
The article is written
by Phillip Katuse and
is published on the
Lancet. The article is
addressed to general
public as there can be
evaluation of the
present situation of
COVID 19 vaccine
trails.
The Content:
Tone?
Referenced?
Verifiable
information?
Paid?
Information is verifiable as it
is published on BBC website.
The source of information is
paid but is available for
general public.
The overall tone of the
article is clear and according
to the point of safety of
COVID vaccine.
The information is
completely verifiable
because Dr, Mumper is CEO
and president of RIMLAND
centre that has established
mentor clinicians interested
in children with neuro
development problems.
The tone of article is clear and
explanatory. There are key
justifications of the four
myths that is related with
whether the Pfizer vaccine is
approved in Australia.
The content is
referenced properly.
The information is
according to the logic
of dealing with issues
to define the success of
vaccine as per the
initials of trails
comparing COVID 19
vaccines.
The Author:
Qualifications
?
Affiliation?
Other
publications?
The writer is James Gallagehr
who is working in the health
and science correspondent
department of BBC.
The qualification of author is
that she is CEIO and
president of The RIMLAND
centre. She has attended
medical college of Virginia
and has been part of
residency training at
university of Virginia.
The author is Archa fox who
is associate professor and
ARC future fellow. The
qualification of archa Fox is
that she is chair of RNA
network of Australia and
director if international RNA
society.
Philip Krause is
working in centre of
Biologics Evaluation
and research in the US
food and drug
administration,
Washington, DC,
USA.
Conclusion:
Reliability?
Validity?
The information part of this
source is completely reliable
and valid as it is providing the
required information related to
COVID vaccine update.
The information is reliable as
and valid as the whole article
is written by experienced
faculty who has served 16
years as clinical faculty.
The reliability and validity of
information is based on
technical information that is
assisting in the process of
understand whether the Pfizer
vaccine is approved and can
be used by general public in
Australia. The main idea is to
justify where the Pfizer
vaccine is approved and can
be used by general public.
The overall
information is valid
and reliable as it is
related with whether
the COVID 19 vaccine
trails are seeking
worthwhile efficacy as
per requirements of the
present changing
scenario.
Name: Student Number:

HLTH101 Assessment 1 Evaluation of Information
Validity: Validity is regarded as the degree of test score that can
be interpreted to be used for a particular intended purpose.
Importance to the profession when evaluating information:
Validity is very important as it help in determining the degree to
which the measure is according to the requirements (Mochon and
Schwartz, 2020)). Validity is very necessary as it is related with the
ability to generalise the overall findings. It is very important to
ensure that information is reliable and the test are able to produce
accurate results as these have to be reproducible. From the point of
validity of information it is a indicator of measuring whether the
information can be used in a particular situation (Suhr and Berry,
2017). Validity is necessary as I provides the adherence to
measuring of existing knowledge and theory of a concept. It is
covering all aspects of a specific concept and correspond to other
valid measures that helps in determining professional knowledge.
Reliability: Reliability is the probability of a system, product or
service that will perform its intended function according to specified
time period. It is related with operation in a defined environment
without nay failure. It is the probability of system that has to be
understood according to the way it is performing its intended
function.
Importance to the profession when evaluating information:
reliability is regarded as the degree to which scores from a test are
constant from one use of test to next. Reliability is very necessary in
terms of profession because there are tow major types of reliability
such as internal reliability is based on assessment of consistency of
results across different items that are part of a test and external
reliability is related with the extent of measuring the varies from its
one use to another (Slipac, Zeljko and Šljivac, 2019).
In relation with present profession reliability is very important
because it is a measurement of the whole instrument according to
the overall set standards of quality. Whether the collected
information is correct it is necessary to ensure that the source is
complete reliable and is providing the necessary insights in the
course of particular profession (Wei, Liu and Tang, 2018). Sometimes
if the source is not reliable then the collected information might
complete mislead a particular areas of research or report. This can
have a adverse impact on the professional qualities and competence
of a individual with respect of the quality of their work.
References
Mochon, D., & Schwartz, J. (2020). The importance of construct validity in consumer research. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 30(1), 208-214.
Suhr, J. A., & Berry, D. T. (2017). The importance of assessing for validity of symptom report and performance in attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder
(ADHD): Introduction to the special section on noncredible presentation in ADHD. Psychological Assessment, 29(12), 1427.
Slipac, G., Zeljko, M., & Šljivac, D. (2019). Importance of reliability criterion in power system expansion planning. Energies, 12(9), 1714.
Wei, P., Liu, F., & Tang, C. (2018). Reliability and reliability-based importance analysis of structural systems using multiple response Gaussian process
model. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 175, 183-195.
Scherer,, & et. Al (2018). Full publication of results initially presented in abstracts. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, (11).
Name: Student Number: