View a short video entitled ‘Bionic eye improves macular degeneration patient’s sight’ and evaluate.
LINK:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/health-33612558
Present your PROMPT evaluation of the video in the form of a table. (12 marks)
Presentation
How is the information structured and presented? Who is it meant for?
Is it communicated clearly in the right sort of language for its purpose?
The information on this article is well structured and has been written for national centre of smoking cessation and training (NCSCT).
The language is well presented and clearly communicated as key points are bullet pointed under each subheading. There are also informative diagrams which demonstrate fracture risk associated with past and current smoking.
Relevance
What is the information mainly about? Look at the introduction or overview – does it cover what you need to know?
Is it at the right level? Is it too specialised, or not specialised enough? The article is quite relevant it covers a lot of information the effect smoking has on bones, problems which can occur and diagrams of data/statistics.
There is a substantial amount of information and it’s at the right level I don’t think it too specialised.
Objectivity
Is the author’s position of interest made clear? Is the article biased, or motivated by a particular opinion or agenda?
Is the language emotive? Are there any hidden, vested interests? What may they be trying to sell?
The authors position of interest is made clear. It is precise and calm.
There are no hidden vested interests. The study is aimed to help the organisation and people who suffer from bone health due to smoking.
Method (for research reports only)
Is it clear how the data was collected?
Is the sample size (the number of subjects involved in the study) really representative?
Were the methods used appropriate? Do you trust them?
The method data is defined clearly and is clear where the information is from.
Good amount of information and studies.
Provenance
Is it clear where the information has come from? Can you identify the author(s) or organisation(s)?
What sort of publication is it? Is it a primary research report, or a review or an opinion article? Is it peer-reviewed?
Does the article provide citations and references that lead to further reading to back up the claims, and are they trustworthy sources?
All the sources of information are clear as the author and editors name are presented. There are 38 references to the article which indicates a high level of research has gone into this study to source relevant facts. Credentials seem trustworthy and reliable.
Last Completed Projects
| topic title | academic level | Writer | delivered |
|---|
