MD578: The Obesity Paradox – BtMl, Body Composition, and Health Status: Lifestyle Risk Factor Modification Assignment, NUI

Question 1: Provide a 2,000-word literature review for one of the following toPics:

• Choice A: The obesity paradox – BtMl, body composition, and health status
• Choice B: Evidence-based weight-loss interventions for adults
• Choice C: Plant-based diets and cardiovascular health
• Choice D: The fat type and quantity controversy, should dietary fat guidelines
  for CVD prevention change?

Question 2: Critically discuss the rationale and evidence for your chosen topic within the context of preventive cardiology Practice.

Title and abstract

• provide a succinct title that accurately reflects the content of the review.
• provide a short abstract summarizing the relevance of the topic to preventive cardiology, the review methodology used, the main findings, conclusions, future recommendations, and keywords.

Introduction

• introduced your topic area, outlining the specific objectives (or research question) that your literature review will scope out, within the context of preventive cardiology
• The objectives of your literature review should be clearly stated’
• Briefly outline why you chose your topic, possible reasons may include gaps in the resejrch; conflicts in evidence; or new perspective of immediate interest.

Critically analyze the Literature for your chosen topic

• Describe the search methodology used, the findings, and selection process.
• Demonstrate the ability to identify unbiased and valid studies that are relevant to the topic, taking into consideration the word count.
• Demonstrate evidence of organizing the literature, using themes and concepts, making comparisons and discussing strengths and weaknesses’
• Synthesize and evaluate the evidence for your chosen topic into a summary of what is known and not known.

Discuss why your literature review is relevant, appropriate and useful

• Demonstrate originality in your own perspective of the literature.
• identify areas of controversy in the literature’
• Formulate questions that need further research’

Conclusion

• provide a balanced conclusion that summarises the main points made. The conclusion should not include any new material.
• implications for preventive cardiology practice and/or future research recommendations that have been clearly identified within the review should be summarised.