Source Evaluation

 

Week 4 Discussion: Source Evaluation

55 unread replies.55 replies.

Required Resources
Read/review the following resources for this activity:

  • Textbook: pp. 273-280, 289-293
  • Lesson
  • Minimum of 1 scholarly source (one of the listed con-position articles)

Apply the following writing resources to your posts:

Initial Post Instructions

Part 1: Research & Review
Choose one of the con articles below to review and discuss with your classmates. If you have a different con article you would like to use, please discuss it with your professor in advance.

Topics

Con-Position Articles

Patient Portals

Wong, D. & Morgan-Lynch, S. (2017, December). Patient portals and young people: addressing the privacy dilemma of providing access to health information (Links to an external site.)Journal of Primary Health Care, 9(4), 240-243.

Cosmetic Surgery

Khunger, N. (2014, September). Risk assessment and prevention of complications in aesthetic surgery (Links to an external site.)Journal of Cutaneous & Aesthetic Surgery, 7(3),141-142. (Click on View record in DOAJ to access article.)

Cost of Cancer

Goldman, D.P. & Philipson, T. (2014). Five myths about cancer care in America (Links to an external site.)Health Affairs, 33(10), 1801-1804. (Click on Full Text Finder to access article.)

Surrogacy

Gullino, S. (2015, October). Surrogacy breaks the bond of motherhood (Links to an external site.)Ethics & Medics, 40 (10), 1-4.

Organ Donation

Shaw, D.M. (2017, July). The consequences of vagueness in consent to organ donation (Links to an external site.)Bioethics, 31 (6), 424-43.

Private Hospitalization

Natterman, J. & Rayne, P. (2017). The prisoner in a private hospital setting: What providers should know (Links to an external site.)Journal of Health Care Law & Policy, 19 (1), 119-147.

Workplace stress

Langille, J. (2017). Fight or flight…or fix? Employers must work with employees to address workplace stress (Links to an external site.)Canadian Journal of Medical Laboratory Science, 79(4), 26-29.

Part 2: Application
Discuss how credible the source is using the CRAAP evaluation model. Detail as many of the 5 components as possible:

  1. Currency: How up-to-date is the resource? Why is the date of publication important?
  2. Relevance: How significant is the information in the resource to the topic? Is there a direct coalition to the subject matter? Is the source a primary or secondary source? What makes the source appropriate for an academic paper?
  3. Authority: What makes the source credible? What is the publishing body? What are the authors’ credentials? Provided info on both.
  4. Accuracy: Was the source peer-reviewed (how do you know?)? Were sources cited in the work? What makes the source reliable?
  5. Purpose: Why was this source created? What is its original intent (inform? persuade? entertain?). Did you notice any particular agenda or bias in the source?

Please use specific examples and cite your sources in APA format. Sometimes, we have to do extra research on the authors or publishing bodies. Those sources should be cited as we

 
ORDER THIS PAPER OR A SIMILAR ONE WITH PRO WRITING TUTORS AND GET AN AMAZING DISCOUNT"