Systematic review Meta-analysis of novel molecular technologies on the diagnosis of emerging infectious diseases/neglected tropical diseases

Form:
Area Criteria

Lay Abstract There is a clear summary of the research project
The language used is clear and easy to understand
The key findings are stated
The limitations of the study are evaluated
Future study is described in a way that could be understood by a member of the public

Scientific Abstract There is a clear summary of the research project
There is a description of the context and aim of the study
The key findings are stated
The limitations of the study are evaluated
Future study is described

Introduction The introduction contextualises the project in current literature, citing important papers in the field
There is a logical order to the piece of work
There is a comprehensive background and persuasive narrative for doing the project, linked to aims and clear hypothesis
Potential outcomes are stated

Methods Methods used are described in the style of a journal
Qualifies use of all methods
Methods are described in a way that is reproducible to a 3rd party.

Results The data are presented clearly/logically with suitable statistics used
The graphs are properly labelled with a clear legend that can be understood without reading the rest of the paper
Data figures are properly presented
Discussion
There is a comprehensive debate, discussion and account of results and data
The findings are compared with the aims and hypothesis
The results are put into context of what is already known, citing important papers in the field
The impact of results is/are clearly stated
The weaknesses of data evaluated with suggestions for improvement?

Conclusions
& Future
Work
There is a clear and concise summary of the data?
The conclusions are in keeping with the data presented
The significance of data and potential applications/future studies are stated and accurate

References Suitable number of references
References from peer-reviewed research papers
Correct format of referencing used
Lab Book/Research Record Record is comprehensive with nothing missing
Work could be easily produced using record
Record is formal, orderly, and methodical
Presentation Clear layout and flow of work
Written in scientific prose, with correct grammar, syntax, tense, voice, and scientific language.
Diagrams support text, are clear and informative, with stand-alone legends.

THIS REQUIREMENT.
1.3.1 Key Points to Consider
During your journey in developing your thesis, consider and reflect on the following questions:
• Does your project clearly state the question/problem it is addressing and explain its
importance?
• What methodologies will you employ to answer this question? What has been done
previously in your specialist topic area, what do your results contribute to the existing
scientific literature? What are the implications of your results outside of academia?
• Does your thesis demonstrate a detailed knowledge, understanding and ability to assimilate
complex information & ideas from a wide array of up to date existing literature sources? Are
you able to extend existing knowledge with your own theories/ideas?
• Are you able to demonstrate good scientific writing, with a succinct, yet flowing and logical
style?
The Research Plan/Literature review should be between 500-1000 words.
Please liaise with your supervisor whether a research plan or literature review is more
appropriate to your individual project.
Suggested format for a research plan:
• Project title
• Background to the proposed project – explain the reasons for your study supported by a
minimum of 3 references  (Harvard))
• Aims and objectives of the study
• Method(s)/technique(s) to be used
• Planned outputs and potential outcomes of the project
References – a minimum of 3 references should be given
1 Research Dissertation Paper
The research dissertation paper is written to disseminate your work in detail and to convey the
depth of your understanding of your project. It should be clearly organised, written in scientific
language and explicitly present your findings – guidelines are available on Blackboard.
Lay abstract should be written in language that could be easily understood by a member of the
general public and be less than 100 words, otherwise the dissertation should be written in
scientific prose understandable to an academic with some background knowledge of the field.
Has a word limit of 5000 words (±10%)
• Must have a minimum of 15 suitable references i.e. from a diverse range of sources and
up to date according to the area of work. Generally speaking a scientific study of this size
could have anywhere between 20-100 depending on the area, so don’t aim for 15, let
your ideas and theories dictate how many references you need.
• Please note that referencing scientific work is not about quoting other studies.
Quotations can be used if necessary, but generally speaking a reference should be used
where you are attributing the thoughts, ideas and experiments of others. It is for you to
assimilate the available scientific literature and present it in a coherent and logical.