This task assists you in meeting the following learning outcome for the topic:
LO1: Critically appraise research to inform evidence-based practice
Part A: Submitting a critical appraisal (no word count)
Choose 1 article from the list to be provided. All articles are available via the Readings list:
– Alatawi, M., & Good, J. (2025). Between therapy and reality: A lived-experience analysis of the priorities, progress and barriers in stuttering management. Journal of Fluency Disorders, 85, 106126-. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfludis.2025.106126Links to an external site.
– Suppa, A., Costantini, G., Asci, F., Di Leo, P., Al-Wardat, M. S., Di Lazzaro, G., Scalise, S., Pisani, A., & Saggio, G. (2022). Voice in Parkinson’s Disease: A Machine Learning Study. Frontiers in Neurology, 13, 831428-. https://doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2022.831428Links to an external site.
– Korkalainen, J., McCabe, P., Smidt, A., & Morgan, C. (2023). The Effectiveness of Rapid Syllable Transition Treatment in Improving Communication in Children with Cerebral Palsy: A Randomized Controlled Trial. Developmental Neurorehabilitation, 26(5), 309–319. https://doi.org/10.1080/17518423.2023.2218485Links to an external site.
Links to an external site.
Conduct a critical appraisal of your chosen article using an appropriate critical appraisal tool for the study type. Students will need to choose the appropriate critical appraisal tool for the task. Use one of the tools provided (do not use any other tools). Fill in all parts of the critical appraisal document and submit via FLO.
Make sure that you clearly identify which article you are appraising.
Critical appraisal tools to choose from:
JBI Randomised Control Trial critical appraisal tool: https://jbi.global/critical-appraisal-toolsLinks to an external site.
CASP Qualitative Studies Checklist: https://casp-uk.net/casp-tools-checklists/qualitative-studies-checklist/Links to an external site.
JBI cohort studies crtitical appraisal tool: https://jbi.global/critical-appraisal-toolsLinks to an external site.
Part B: Brief review of the article (400 words maximum – see below)
After completing the critical appraisal, briefly answer the following dot-points and submit via FLO. Completing the critical appraisal will assist you in answering the questions.
Provide:
justification for your choice of appraisal tool (100 words maximum)
– provide information here about what type of research design has been used and why it fits with the tool that you have chosen.
a brief assessment of the quality and trustworthiness of the paper based on your appraisal (300 words maximum)
– What do you think about the quality and trustworthiness of the article?
– What would make the article better quality / more trustworthy?
Note regarding the quality and trustworthiness of the articles:
– When you are looking at a quantitative article you are looking at the reliability and validity of the article.
– When you are looking at a qualitative article you are looking at the credibility, transferability, confirmability, and dependability of the article.
IMPORTANT NOTE: Each of the assessments relate to a chosen research article.
Assessment 1 asks you to conduct a critical appraisal of the article.
Assessment 2 asks you to examine the same article in more depth and write a critical review of the article
Assessment 3 asks you to identify a research question that arises from your reading of the article and briefly outline a research plan. Please note that this assessment is PAIRED.
AI TECHNOLOGY IS PERMITTED TO BE USED FOR THIS ASSESSMENT PIECE
At no point should client information be entered into an artificial intelligence format. This constitutes a breach of client confidentiality. If this occurs on clinical placement, this could become subject to an ethics complaint either through the workplace, or through Speech Pathology Australia. If it occurs with ‘simulated’ client data such as through case studies or using assessment with identifiable names, this will be treated as though it were a real breach, and the assessment will be marked with this in consideration.
In assessments in which AI can have limited or permissible use, the submission of an appendix may be requested, and this will be clearly marked in the instructions for assessment on FLO. This appendix may request details of the type(s) of AI used, a list of data entries presented in verbatim form, along with initial drafts of information submitted to AI. Failure to disclose these prompts may be reflected when the overall grade is assigned.
In assessments in which AI can have limited or permissible use, the submission of an appendix may be requested, and this will be clearly marked in the instructions for assessment on FLO. This appendix may request details of the type(s) of AI used, a list of data entries presented in verbatim form, along with initial drafts of information submitted to AI. Failure to disclose these prompts may be reflected when the overall grade is assigned.
Rubric
SPTH9120_assignment 1_2025
SPTH9120_assignment 1_2025
Criteria Ratings
This criterion is linked to a learning outcomeCritical appraisal tool
Prestructural (Fail)
Inappropriate critical appraisal tool chosen (e.g., SSED tool chosen for qualitative article). Steps in tool not completed and submitted.
Unistructural (Pass)
Relevant appraisal tool chosen All steps completed and submitted..
Multistructural
Detailed critical appraisal undertaken (e.g. explanations provided for each question)
Relational
Justified critical appraisal undertaken (e.g. justifications for statements made).
Extended Abstract
Well justified critical appraisal.
This criterion is linked to a learning outcomeCritical appraisal tool explanation
Prestructural (fail)
no details provided to explain tool choice
Unistructural (pass)
Details provided to explain tool choice
Multistuctural (Pass)
Justification for choice of tool provided.
Relational (pass)
Well-articulated justification for choice of tool provided.
This criterion is linked to a learning outcomeCritical appraisal report on quality and trustworthiness
Prestructural (fail)
Irrelevant material presented. Information is not conveyed as per task instructions.
Unistructural (pass)
Relevant material presented conveying information as per task instructions. Relevant comments regarding trustworthiness and quality.
Multistuctural (Pass)
Clear rationale presented regarding assessment of trustworthiness and quality.
Relational (pass)
Strong rationale presented regarding assessment of trustworthiness and quality with reference to relevant literature.
Extended Abstract (pass)
Summary of regarding trustworthiness and quality is succinct and clearly argued.
This criterion is linked to a learning outcomeOverall communication
Prestructural (fail)
Language obscures meaning OR Repeated and distracting errors of grammar, syntax or spelling OR Work that is poorly organized OR Sources not cited.
Unistructural (pass)
Meaning is clear. No errors grammar, syntax, or spelling. Sources correctly cited.
Multistuctural (Pass)
Clear written expression.
Relational (pass)
Written expression is clear, succinct and effective. No errors in grammar, syntax or spelling.
This criterion is linked to a learning outcomeAutomatic failure will result if any of the following are identified in your work:
Prestructural (fail)
* Omission of any of the assignment steps • Inappropriate choice of articles (e.g. article appraised is not from the provided list) • The appraisal tool chosen for the article is not appropriate / is not from the list provided • Errors of fact
Unistructural (pass)
work has met submission requirements
This criterion is linked to a learning outcomeProfessional conduct
Appropriate use of artificial intelligence acknowledged OR artificial intelligence has not been used for this assignemnt.
fail
AI used but not declared OR used inappropriately AND/OR unethically (refer to Student Declaration Form).
Pass (NGP)
AI used appropriately and ethically/ No AI used for this assessment.