Purpose:
This assessment is designed to give you an opportunity to investigate the evidence base for the treatment/management of a specific type of pain (of your choice). It will assess your ability to find, select and apply research and to evaluate sources for relevancy and quality.
Brief:
Imagine you have been commissioned by The New Zealand Pain Society to provide a summary of the current best practice management of a specific type of pain. This summary will be available on the NZPS website as a resource for other Health Professionals working in pain.
Instructions:
1. Select a specific type of either acute or chronic pain – eg: osteoarthritis of the knee, pain with dental procedures, labour pain or fibromyalgia.
2. Perform a literature search to investigate the evidence base for the treatment/management of this type of pain.
For help with literature searching see the resources provided on Blackboard under the Assignment 1: Annotated Bibliography section
3. Select five articles you feel demonstrate the current best practice in the management of your selected type of pain. The selected articles should:
a) demonstrate your understanding of the hierarchy of evidence. You should select the highest quality evidence available (eg: systematic review with or without meta-analysis, randomised controlled trials etc)
b) consider management from an interdisciplinary perspective – ensure you consider management options from across the biological, psychological and sociological perspectives, not just from within your own field.
c) include at least one article that utilises a qualitative research method – for example, semistructured interviews, focus groups etc. (not qualitative survey responses). Identify this article using a * at the very end of the annotation.
d) include one article that illustrates lower-level evidence (i.e.: from further down the hierarchy of evidence) than your other articles. Identify this article using a ** at the very end of the annotation.
For help with evaluating sources of information and the hierarchy of evidence see the Hierarchy of Evidence resources under the Assignment 1: Annotated Bibliography section in Blackboard.
Present an Annotated Bibliography for these 5 articles using the APA 7th referencing style.
For help with APA 7th referencing style, see the following resources provided on Blackboard:
• Otago Libraries Subject Guide on ‘Referencing/Citation Styles: APA’
Under the Assignment 1: Annotated Bibliography section in Blackboard, there are also additional resources on how to complete an annotated bibliography including an example assignment.
Ensure that you:
• Include a short Introduction of 300-400 words (approximately one page), covering things such as background, definitions, incidence/prevalence of the condition etc.
• Present your bibliography in alphabetical order
• Present each annotation on a separate page (one page for each annotation)
• Each annotation should be both descriptive and evaluative and should include:
o aim of each study o a summary of the details of the study design o a summary of the main findings and conclusions of the study o mention of the credibility/quality/limitations of the research o mention of how the study informs your clinical practice
• Include a short Conclusion (one-page maximum) that provides a summary of the current state of the evidence for the chosen pain condition
• Please use 12-point font and 1.5 or double-line spacing
• Ensure you identify your qualitative and lower-level evidence studies (using * and ** at the end of the annotation respectively)
4. Submit your Annotated Bibliography via the Assessment Submission Portal on Blackboard by the end of the day on Monday 28th August.
Please note: Unless a late submission request has been approved by the Paper Coordinator, a 5% penalty for late submission of Assignments will be applied.
This assessment will be marked out of 50 marks using the Marking Rubric below and is worth 50% of
your final grade.
Feedback and Help:
• Help with your assessment is available via the main Discussion Board on Blackboard. Please ask any questions here (rather than emailing in the first instance) so that everyone can benefit from the reply.
• An example is available on Blackboard for this assignment.
• There are great resources on Blackboard. I recommend you familiarise yourself with them, as well as the Marking Rubric below.
• If you’re stuck, feel free to email me with any questions.
PAIN711 2023 Assessment 1: Annotated Bibliography – Marking Rubric
Marks 4 3 2 1 – 0
Introduction
4 marks
Introduction skilfully sets the scene for bibliography by
comprehensively providing background details of the chosen condition.
Introduction sets the scene for bibliography by providing good
background detail of the chosen condition.
Introduction attempts to set the scene for bibliography but only
provides some background detail of the chosen condition.
Introduction does not provide background detail of the chosen condition.
Marks 4 3 2 1 – 0
Quantity of sources
4 marks
Bibliography cites the number of sources required including one qualitative and one lower-level source.
Bibliography missing 1 required source.
Bibliography missing 2 required sources.
Bibliography contains inadequate number of sources and/or is
missing both qualitative and low- quality source.
4 3 2 1 – 0
Citation format 4 marks
Citations are formatted correctly according to APA 7th.
Citations are mostly formatted correctly according to APA 7th.
Citations use APA 7th format but contain errors.
APA 7th format not used or contains numerous errors.
15 – 12 11 – 10 9 – 8 7 – 0
Quality of sources
15 marks
All sources cited can be considered reliable and/or trustworthy,
selection shows a thorough and eloquent understanding of hierarchy of evidence.
Most sources cited can be considered reliable and/or
trustworthy, selection shows some understanding of hierarchy of evidence.
Some sources cited can be considered reliable and/or
trustworthy but selection does not clearly show understanding of hierarchy of evidence.
Few or none of sources cited can be considered reliable and/or
trustworthy and/or selection does not show understanding of hierarchy of evidence.
15 – 12 11 – 10 9 – 8 7 – 0
Annotations
15 marks
Annotations show careful reading and clear understanding of source content, quality, and relevance.
Annotations show skilful critical appraisal and the implications for clinical practice have been thoroughly considered.
Annotations show reading and understanding of source content, quality, and relevance.
Annotations show critical appraisal and the implications for clinical practice have been considered.
Annotations show reading and understanding of source content, quality, and relevance, but with
weaknesses or omissions in a few
entries. Annotations either do not show critical appraisal and/or the implications for clinical practice has not been considered.
Annotations show superficial or no reading and understanding of source content, quality, and
relevance, with weaknesses or
omissions in most entries. No attempt has been made to
appraise and/or the implications for clinical practice have been omitted.
4 3 2 1 – 0
Conclusion
4 marks
Conclusion skilfully summarises the bibliography by providing a
compelling position on the current state of the evidence for the chosen condition.
Conclusion summarises the bibliography by providing a
position on the current state of the evidence for the chosen condition. Conclusion attempts to summarise the bibliography but
does not provide a clear position on the current state of the
evidence for the chosen condition.
Conclusion does not provide a clear position on the current state of the evidence for the chosen condition.
4 3 2 1 – 0
Writing Style
4 marks
All annotations are clearly and succinctly written using
appropriate language and are within word limit.
Annotations are mostly clear and use appropriate language and are within word limit.
Annotations are somewhat unclear and/or not succinct or do not
always use appropriate language and/or do not adhere to word limit.
Poorly written annotations using inappropriate language, and/or do not adhere to word limit.