Central Sleep Apnea CSA 14 Pages not including title and ref page. APA Format (please follow the info in he attached Power Points and Screen shots) Thesis

Central Sleep Apnea CSA 14 Pages not including title and ref page. APA Format (please follow the info in he attached Power Points and Screen shots)

Thesis: I hypothesize that patients between the ages of 18 and 65 that have been diagnosed with
Central Sleep Apnea (CSA) could benefit greatly from the remede System in comparison to the alternative treatments
such as Positive Pressure Devices (PPD’s) and medication, ultimately decreasing morbidity
while improving patient compliance and quality of life.

c. Review of Literature (Results)
i. Comprehensive review and sharing of pertinent published medical literature
ii. Contains the raw data and statistical analysis from the resources you researched.
Statements made without this…are just statements.
iii. Qualify and quantify words used such as reduced, increased, significant, large,
remarkable, and important.
iv. Demonstrates support of your subtopics and thesis
v. Example (minimum of 3 subtopics):
1. Subtopic 1: narrative of x# of article supporting this subtopic
2. Subtopic 2: narrative of x# of article supporting this subtopic
3. Subtopic 3: narrative of x# of article supporting this subtopic
vi. Syllabus: this is a review of credible, relevant, and published medical literature related to
the topic and includes the statistical data with which arguments are being made in
support of, and in opposition to, the thesis. The intent is for each student, using their
subtopics (Tier 2 Heading) for organizational structure, to provide a review of factual
data and demonstrate synthesis of the articles.
1. Example: if your topic was on the “Prevention of Childhood diabetes” and the
three subtopics are exercise, nutrition, and education. A way to approach
presenting data would be to have approx. 5 or more articles in support of and in
opposition of each subtopic.

1. Example: if your topic was on the “Prevention of Childhood diabetes” and the
three subtopics are exercise, nutrition, and education. A way to approach
presenting data would be to have approx. 5 or more articles in support of and in
opposition of each subtopic.

d. Discussion
i. Thoughtfully organized synthesis of medical literature
1. Demonstrate relationships among publications (similarities, differences)
2. Integration of supporting research
3. Lays out your argument for your thesis, subtopics
4. Explains and brings relevance to the data presented in the Results section.
5. Example:
a. Synthesis of how narratives from the subtopics support your thesis
ii. This is a thoughtful synthesis of the relationships among the research studies cited (in
previous Tier 1 Heading – ROL) in order to further develop the paper an must include a
minimum of three subtopics (Tier 2 Heading). It brings meaning and relevance to the
data presented previously. Consider your target audience (fellow clinicians) and gear
your discussion and argument to that group.

1. Example: in the ROL, statistical significance of each of the subtopics would be
provided to bring validity to your argument. In the discussion, an explanation
would be given to show how each of the subtopics, collectively, prove argument.

f. Conclusion
i. This is the concluding division of the body of the paper and should contain:
1. Original summary of findings
2. Original discussion of the significance of those findings (particularly for pt care)
3. Presentation of practical implications for health care and clinical proactive from
those findings.

ii. Thesis and subtopics are restated and declared if they were proven or supported by your
resources
iii. A short summary of findings
iv. Discussion of the significance of findings
v. Discussion of the theoretical or practical implications of findings
vi. Recommendations for future studies

4. References

2. Minimum of 15 resources from relevant and current, peer-reviewed sources from the literature < 8 years old (I Have all 15 I will send them to you) a. Academic journals b. Databases c. NOT...magazines, Wikipedia, unpublished works Master’s Seminar LT JEREMY FISHER DRPH(C), MPAS, APA -C DISCUSSION Why Use a Systematic Review? • Systematic reviews contribute in three ways: • Knowledge summary • Policy making/informing practice • Springboard for future research Using YOUR Review • Primary purpose is to propose future research • However, can be a self-contained entity • Consider future research needs in the context of your review • Convey your findings for others • You did all the leg work for future researchers, take pride in that and convey what you have learned Discussion Section • The most important part of your paper! • Develop solutions • Synthesize your findings in a logical way • Develop deeper, more profound understanding • Minimum areas for a discussion section include: • • • • • Themes Strengths and weaknesses Implications Gaps in literature/knowledge Future research Themes • What did you find overall? • Explain the results • Try organizing in the same way as the results • How does it relate to current knowledge or beliefs? • Good place to bring in discussion of theories, applications in other areas not considered in your review • Was there anything unexpected? • What did you expect to find but did not? Strengths and Weaknesses of Research • Quality assessment of studies included in your review • Validity • External validity? • Again, focus tends to end up only on weaknesses… include strengths • Usefulness • Developing policy? • Interventions? • Programs? Strengths and Weaknesses of Research • Quality assessment of your review process • Influence on findings of: • Search process • Inclusion/exclusion criteria • Definitions Strengths and Weaknesses of Research • How can you assess and present information about study quality? • Put critical information in results (population, study design) but expand upon YOUR assessment of quality in the discussion • In what ways is it appropriate to include “poor quality” studies in a literature review? • Can be used to compare to other studies, especially with contradictory findings • Describe similarities and differences among studies • Tendency is to focus on weaknesses but also focus on strengths when there is a particularly good study Strengths and Weaknesses of Research • Biases • What did you do to limit your biases? • Were there instances of bias in the articles? • How do these biases impact your review? Implications • Can you answer YOUR question/statement? • Answer doesn’t have to be what you were expecting • What conclusions can be drawn from your review? • What recommendations can be made? • Why are the findings important? • Relate findings to similar studies • Consider alternatives • What is the take away message? Identifying Gaps in the Literature • Think about how current research can be translated into practice • What about current research limits that translation? • Needs to be done on different population, settings, type of studies • How differences in methods can lead to differences in conclusions? Future Research • Not simply “more research is required” • What needs to be known? • What has the review demonstrated that might help you to identify how to achieve the unknown? • Research on a particular population? • What are the areas in which we need improvement? • The population, the size of the samples, any research at all? Things to Avoid • Restating results • Use a brief intro clause or summary sentence but get back to the implications • Introducing new results in the discussion • “Meandering around” discussion points • Use clear, concise language • Tie everything together in a meaningful way • “Hard jumps” are confusing for the reader who does not have the same level of background knowledge as you- convey that knowledge to the reader • Watch your tense structure in this section Things to Avoid • Not using your own voice • The discussion is your thoughts on the results • Not linking back to your thesis statement • Briefly summarize your statement and intro… you have just written results with themes not necessarily stating your statement • Provide that direction for the reader to remind them why you were discussing those articles • Overinterpretation of results • Avoid speculation, inflating • Tangential issues • Degrading, demeaning discussion points Questions? Master’s Seminar LT JEREMY FISHER DRPH(C), MPAS, APA -C LITERATURE REVIEW What is a literature review? Literature review evaluates: • Prominent and the latest research by others • Plausibility of hypotheses/ research focus • Substantive/ practical significance of expected results • Ability to carry out a study What is it? • Literature review serves as a foundation for further scientific inquiry • Provides a basis for your research • A review of the evidence published so far… which close or expose gaps in our understanding of certain phenomena, problems, or issues • Has your topic/thesis statement been reviewed previously? • Are there competing or contradictory reviews? Studies? • Not merely a collection of facts and findings, but also a search for explanation and understanding of those facts Literature Review • How is this different than a research paper? • A research paper is develop a new argument • A research paper likely contains a literature review to provide background • A literature review summarizes and synthesizes arguments/ideas/research Literature review purpose • To make a case for the practical importance of your proposed project • Persuades the reviewer that you have a solid grasp of the subject matter and that you have read research articles in a critical and integrative manner. • What has been done thus far? • What has been tried before? • Qual vs Quant • Can the field move in a new? Clarify? • Provide a framework Types of Literature Review • Commentary • Providing more of a critical commentary on topic, including how/why it’s important and future roadmaps based on current literature • Narrative • Describe and discuss the state of scientific topic from a theoretical or contextual POV • Systematic • A well planned review to answer specific research questions using a systematic and explicit methodology to identify, select, and critically evaluate results of the studies included in the literature review • Meta-analysis • Statistical technique to combine the findings from independent studies. Beyond the scope of this class • Many others: integrative, scoping, critical, mapping, mixed methods, qual, rapid, stateof-the-art, umbrella… Type: Systematic • Prepared using a systematic approach to minimize biases and random errors • Approach is documented in the methods section • Systematic reviews are more likely to present accurate, current synthesis of research informing a particular question Type: Systematic • With systematic reviews and meta-analyses, methods are invoked much like a research study, but of previous studies • This produces results and findings about the state of a field/science • The methods are usually detailed and specified to demonstrate repeatability • Therefore, systematic reviews may be considered “more scientific” and objective than other reviews A word of caution: • Regardless of the type, there are good reviews and bad reviews! Systematic Review • It all starts with a question! • • • • Ideally the topic is both specific and open-ended Insert your thesis statement here Develop your review to support the statement Make the literature work for you Systematic Literature Review Components • Methods • • • • • Sources Search Terms Eligibility Criteria Screening and Article Selection Analysis and Abstraction • Results • Description of Literature •Discussion • • • • Quality of the Studies Gaps in Current Literature Implications for Future Research Limitations of Review Process •Conclusion Systematic Review: How to Start • Continue to refine your statement… it may even change after the literature review is concluded. • Have a separate page for just your statement. Write down every iteration you make! • Do small searches to discover a focus then start making more meaningful searches as you refine the statement • Write everything down, save it, so you have a historical way to obtain the information you access later! • Write down what is working and isn’t working • This will help you develop your inclusion/exclusion/methods Systematic Review: Quick Note • You should be working on your methods and literature review at the SAME time • There is no way to refine your searches without your methods Systematic Review: How to Start • Once you have a basic statement/theme and crude methods… • Find other reviews • These reviews don’t have to be in the same field but help to see how a particular field structures their reviews • Try to get a grasp for the contextualization of the findings and organizational structure • Utilize similar techniques in your preparation • Find models and frameworks • This will help your organizational pattern Systematic Review: How to Organize • Chronological • Discuss materials in the order in which they were written • No continuity of subjects, later works typically discuss previous works • Publication • Chronological order based on progression. Example: A change in a medical procedure which creates defined period of time (trend). • Trend • Creating defined trends. Example: History of a topic. Create defined time periods (pre-1699; 1700-1799, etc). Then order based on time (later works describing earlier times would be grouped in the earlier trend) • Methodological • Typically deemphasizes content and focuses on the methods of the researcher or writer Systematic Review: How to Organize • THEMATIC • Focused around a topic or issue rather than progression of time • Time can still be an important factor and might present itself as a theme • Example: Topic- Whaling. Themes- How whales are portrayed; vessel technology; hunting technology; Impact on whales; Impact on ecosystem; etc. • Time obviously plays an important role in the above themes but is NOT the emphasis of the review • Themes can be combined into groups and subgroups • Additional sections may be required in any review • Current Situation • History Systematic Review: How to Evaluate • Read the literature for: • Understanding • Developing questions • You want to gain a deep understanding to further your insight • Analyze for: • Inclusion/exclusion • Meaning • Gaps in knowledge • The actual evaluation should be your METHODS • This entire process (Systematic Review) is a cyclic and you will feel yourself traveling in circles with no apparent end in sight… but there is an end! Systematic Review: How to Write • Use Evidence • Refer to several other sources like any other research paper • Be Selective • Only use the most important points in each source to highlight in the review • The information you select should relate directly to the review’s focus • This applies to thematic, methodological, or chronological • Don’t humanize studies… (this study said, the literature spoke of, …) • Use Quotes Sparingly • The survey nature of the literature review does not allow for in-depth discussion of detailed quotes • Quotes could be ok if you are describing specific search terms, results, etc but avoid whole sentences Systematic Review: How to Write • Summarize and Synthesize • Within each paragraph as well as throughout the review • Keep your own voice • • • • The review presents others’ ideas but your voice should remain front and center Weave references to other sources into your own text Start and end with your own ideas/words Sources support your words • Use caution when paraphrasing • Be sure to represent the author’s information or opinions that are not your own • Revise, Revise, Revise. Refine, Refine, Refine • Rework/rewrite language, tone, material. Present the material and not an argument • Use familiar terminology of your audience. Check format. Systematic Review: Now What?! • Write your statement down • Find literature reviews for format/organization/ideas • Start searching based on your statement • Refine article selection and statement • Keep list of terms, results, key studies (Reference Managers!) • Build a list of what is working and what is failing- use for methods later • Revise, Revise, Revise. Refine, Refine, Refine Next Class • Methods • Article Summary Table III. IV. Review of Literature (Results) a. Sub topic #1: Current approved methods of treatment for CSA (Numbered articles that support this sub point) #2g, #4, #9d, #10c b. Sub topic #2: Findings of the use of alternative methods of treatment of CSA. (Numbered articles that support this sub point) #8b-c, #11b-c, #12a-b c. Sub topic #3: Findings of pivotal and piloted study of the remede System (Numbered articles that support this sub point) #1a-b, #3a-b, #5a, #6b, #7a,#13a- b, #14a-b Discussion a. Sub topic #1: Complications to health for each methods of treatment(Numbered articles that support this sub point) #1, #3, #5, #6, #7b, #8d, #110, #12, #13, #14 b. Sub topic #2: Discussion of the efficacy of each method of treatment. (Numbered articles that support this sub point) #1, #3, #5, #6, #7b, #8d, #11d, #12, #13, #14 Limitations a. Numbered articles that support the statement(s) made, if applicable) b. Future Research (Numbered articles that support the statement(s) made, if applicable) Conclusion V. VI. Review of Literature (Results) 25 ► Value and Importance: Qualify and quantify words used such as significant, large, remarkable, and important. You must expound on terms like these and state whether and how it may be statistically or clinically significant. Typically contains the raw or statistical data from the studies researched. Include the number of participants in each paper/study, p values and confidence intervals. ► See lecture on Review of Literature (Results) 26 Discussion Demonstrate how your subtopics support your thesis ► Cover the key points – it formulates, condenses, and examines the main points from the article resources. DO NOT try to restate everything you had in the results/review section Purchase answer to see full attachment