Relationship between diet and progression of cancer

posted in: Term Paper Writing Service | 0

Assessment 2: Write a critical literature review based topic: “A prognostic review that looks at the relationship between diet and progression of cancer” and as per ( Search strategy recent work)

( 3500 words-excluding method, tables , graphs and reference). Weightage 70%



Produce a robust, reproducible, comprehensive critique of the literature relevant to your discipline and research interest.

Learning outcomes

This assessment task is aligned to the following learning outcomes:

  1. Analyse, refine and manage results of a systematic literature search
  2. Provide an evidence-based rationale for further research or practice change

Assessment details

Your aim is to produce a robust, reproducible, comprehensive critique of the literature” in an appropriate format that includes a discussion justifying future research and/or practice change. A structure for assignment was provided below. An estimation of the maximum word count per section is provided but there can be variations.

Title: 20 words [not included in word count total]

– Provide a succinct, clear and informative title for your critical review.

Introduction: 1000 words

– Give a justification for conducting the review specifying what his review will add to the existing literature. Consider: How? Why? What could happen if this important review of information on this topic is not done, distributed and used? Outline who will benefit (e.g. consumers, carers, professionals, policy makers, and community and society as a whole). Include your problem statement and background to clarify what is already known on your topic and to define relevant key terms/theories. Your research question and an aim should also be included along with, ideally, a thesis statement.

Method: 1000 words [not included in word count total]

– You should incorporate your revised Assignment1(the Method section) Into this critical literature review – to a maximum of 1000 words. You will have used the feedback provided to make any necessary changes to the method.


Result: 1000, excluding table/s

  • –  Presentasummaryofthefinalincludedstudiesinanintegratedwayincludingdescriptive findings such as population of the studies and their characteristics, designs, countries studies being conducted.
  • –  Providemoreadvancedsynthesisoftheinformation(e.g. Differentinterventionsbeingusedin the studies, comparisons between them, different themes and key issues emerging).
  • –  Includeresultstable/s,e.g.Table2withsamplesize,agerangeofparticipants,methodof data collection, findings and other relevant study variables. Do not do critically interpret any of the studies in this section (save for Discussion).

Discussion: 1000

  • –  Linktocontentofintroductionwhileavoidingrepetition;discussextentofcurrentknowledge on topic referring to background citations.
  • –  Providecriticalinterpretationofthekeyfindingswhile referring to thestudiesinresultstable/s (e.g., Table 2) but do not introduce new results in this section (revise Results sections if you become aware of new results). Identify current issues, concerns, viewpoints, and arguments.
  • –  Commentonstrengthsandweaknessesofyourmethods,theincludedstudydesigns,andyour key findings.
  • –  Discussimplicationsforfutureresearchand/orpracticechange,justifyingrecommendations and including (e.g. possible study designs or strategies to implement).

Conclusion and recommendations: 500

– Summarisethemainideaspresentedinthereview,repeatingthesisstatement(ifgivenin Introduction) and give recommendation/s. Only include information already presented and discussed in the review; this is a summary in your own words so no in-text citations are required and you should not introduce any new material or ideas (if you think of anything new, go back and add it to the relevant section).


– Supportstatementscorrectlywithin-textcitationsandappropriatereferencing.ApplytheAPA 6th edition style correctly throughout, including a correctly formatted References section.


– The tone should be directed toward an intelligent, non-expert audience. Avoid plagiarism and self-plagiarism by allowing time to check the similarity report on Turnitin and revising, re- submitting before the due date. Use an easily readable typeface (e.g., Times New Roman, a 12-point font and set the paper at one and a half line spaces). Follow conventions for labelling tables (above the table) and graphics (centred below). Write all numbers less than ten in words and never start a sentence with a numeric symbol. For example, “Thirteen studies met the inclusion criteria for this literature review. Three of the 11 retrospective studies used a control group.”





Marking rubrics








Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *