Review

1. According to Dr. Hoppin, what does it take to do a good review of an original scientific article (6 points)? Dr. Hoppin discussed four main responsibilities in guiding reviewer in the reviewing process of scientific paper. When reviewing a scientific article, the role of reviewers is to shear their experience, knowledge, time and provide constructive criticisms and suggestions. The reviewer has to be motivated by providing suggestions for improving the article to be more educational, informative

Loucas, C. E., James, A., Hollis, C., Birchwood, M., & Kendall, T. (2015). Efficacy and safety of pharmacological and psychological interventions for the treatment of psychosis and schizophrenia in children, adolescents and young adults: A systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One, 10(2) doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0117166 Purpose The purpose of this study was to examine the effectiveness and safety issues surrounding pharmacological and psychological interventions as treatments

when completing a task, there are often rules and guidelines that need to be followed. Institutional Review Boards, also known as IRBs, are put in place to make sure rules are followed when they approve research done on human subjects of bio-medical and behavioral research. Two of these rules are that risks to subjects are minimized and risks to subjects are reasonable in relation to anticipated benefits. I believe that IRBs are needed when doing research, but need better understand, and be more

may be experienced as a result of these studies. We live in a world that is continuously changing and as we move forward, it is past experiences that influence how things are done in the present, and what may become in the future. The Institutional Review Board (IRB) exists to protect research subjects and ensure their rights are safeguarded and protected. This paper will discuss the role of the IRB and the protection of human subjects, the dilemma of societal advancements versus its cost on human

DATA SOURCE A DATA SOURCE is a review site i where reviews are posted by people about businesses, products, or services. These sites can use Web 2.0 techniques to collect reviews from social site users or may have professional writers to give their reviews on the current topic or the product or anything else that is in news. Commonly used review sites includes Epinions.com, Twitter and Amazon.com. etc. Review sites are mostly supported by advertising. Some business review sites may allow to pay for

author's perspective we see one view, from a publisher's another, and from       the reviewer's yet another. This is especially true of Charles W.       Chesnutt's  The Marrow of Tradition. If one observes both the contemporary       reviews of the novel and letters exchanged between Chesnutt and his       friends and publisher, Houghton, Mifflin, and Co., one will see the       disparity in opinions regarding the work. Chesnutt himself felt the work       was of at

I am feeling pretty good about the class still. A lot of the techniques we are learning about for efficient, accurate, and helpful searching of a corpus I find very interesting. I need to take some more time to review the indexer Python code we were supplied so I feel completely comfortable with how it is achieving the indexing. • Describe what you learned. Particularly the handling of misspelled search terms or wildcard items was the thing that I feel like I really

position since July 1st 2016. Dr. Musser talked about how he had to use writing to apply for the position he is in, the several types of writing that he is responsible for, to whom he writes, the technology used and if the writing that he does gets review by others. To apply for the position he is in now he had to demonstrate several abilities that involved writing. According to the article

Collins belongs the credit of having introduced into fiction those most mysterious of mysteries, the mysteries which are at our own doors.” So said Henry James in an unsigned review of another author’s work. But his view was certainly not shared by all those who cast their opinions into the fray. An unsigned review in the Saturday Review said of Collins’ work, “Estimated by the standard of great novels, the Woman in White is nowhere. Somewhere between these two points are friends and correspondents of Mr

In the article titled “Testing for Recombinant Erythropoietin,” by Delanghe JR, Bollen M, and Beullens M, the intended audience is able to recognize the data and discussions presented in this article, as a review of a research study that had been conducted. Review articles are distinguishable from other scientific articles due to the format in which the article is designed. This article in particular included several of these distinguishable factors, such as the overall discussions on specific tests