MD2007: Requirements And Criteria For Evaluating The MD2007 Research Proposal. Throughout The Word ‘Proposal’ Is Used For ‘Research Proposal’: Research Proposal Assignment, UCC, Ireland

Requirements

Requirements and criteria for evaluating the MD2007 Literature Review. Throughout the word ‘review’ is used for ‘literature review

The following are the requirements for the review:

⦁ Please name your document using the following format – lastname.firstnameinitial.student number.doc name
⦁ – thus hick.d.123456.lit_review.docx
⦁ Use a standard single column, 12pt Arial Regular, double spaced format.
⦁ Do not use a different font or spacing. You will lose marks if you do.
⦁ Include title, name/id/email, supervisor’s name, date, and abstract.
⦁ The abstract should not exceed 200 words and is not double spaced.
⦁ Do not include table of contents, list of tables, list of figures, ….
⦁ Include introduction, main sections, conclusion, and references /bibliography.
⦁ The referencing system in use by the School of Medicine is the Harvard System of Referencing.
⦁ You are not required to use a bibliography; however, you may use one if appropriate.
⦁ The format of the final document should be .doc or docx.
⦁ Word count excludes references.

Definition: A literature review is an objective, critical summary of published research literature relevant to a topic under consideration for research. Its purpose is to create familiarity with current thinking and research on a particular topic, and may justify future research into a previously overlooked or understudied area.

1. Introduction:
A concise definition of a topic under consideration (this may be a descriptive or argumentative thesis, or proposal), as well as the scope of the related literature being investigated. (Example: If the topic under consideration is ‘university lecturer’s diaries’, the scope of the review may be limited to published or unpublished works, works in English, works from a particular location, time period, or field, etc.)

The introduction should also note intentional exclusions. (Example: “This review will not explore the diaries of part time lecturers.”)

Another purpose of the introduction is to state the general findings of the review (what do most of the sources conclude), and comment on the availability of sources in the subject area.

2. Main Body:
There are many ways to organise the evaluation of the sources. Chronological and thematic approaches are each useful examples.

Each work should be critically summarised and evaluated for its premise, methodology, and conclusion. It is as important to address inconsistencies, omissions, and errors, as it is to identify accuracy, depth, and relevance.
Use logical connections and transitions to connect sources.

3. Conclusion
The conclusion summarises the key findings of the review in general terms. Notable commonalities between works, whether favourable or not, may be included here.

This section is the reviewer’s opportunity to justify a research proposal. Therefore, the idea should be clearly re-stated and supported according to the findings of the review.

4. References
As well as accurate in-text citations, a literature review must contain complete and correct citations for every source.