Caruth School of Dental Hygiene...Dental Public Health & Research (4th Ed.) Author: Christine Nathe Published: 2017 ISBN: 978-0-13425-546-0 Introduction to Research in the Health Sciences

DDHS 4710: Applied Research Methods (Prepared September 2016) Page 1 of 24

Caruth School of Dental Hygiene Dallas, Texas

DDHS 4710: Applied Research Methods

Spring 2017

Course Director:

Faizan Kabani, RDH, MHA, MBA


Course Number and Name: DDHS 4710 / Applied Research Methods

Academic Year/Semester Offered: 2016-2017, Spring Semester

Course Meeting Details: Tuesdays, 9am-10am in Room 6

Course Type: Lecture, Seminar, and Independent Study Hybrid

Learning Format: Traditional Didactic, Online EBDM Courses, Group Discussion, Case-Based Scenarios, Exercises, Use of Computerized Technology, and Electronic Databases*. *Diverse educational instruction techniques will be employed to maximize student learning.

Course Director: Faizan Kabani, RDH, MHA, MBA ([email protected]) Suite 136 | 214.828.8483 Office | 214.874.4525 Facile Office Hours: Please email for all appointment requests

Other Participating Principal Investigators (PI): Eric Fox, RDH, MS Jane Cotter, RDH, MS Kathleen Muzzin, RDH, MS Leigh Ann Wyatt, BSDH, MA, MS Lisa Mallonee, BSDH, MPH, RD, LD Mary Vu, RDH, MS Patricia Campbell, RDH, MS

Course Description: This course is fundamentally designed to apply the principles of research methodology and evidence-based practices learned in DDHS 4715: Research Methods. The course is uniquely composed of didactic lectures, independent study, and seminar-related presentations of research conducted under mentorship of PI. The course emphasizes on the student’s application of (1) scientific and technical writing skills, (2) appraisal of scientific publications, and (3) public speaking skills via disseminating knowledge gained through scientific research at multiple scholastic colloquiums. This course empowers the student to become prudent consumers and producers of scientific knowledge in the contemporary global environment. Course Goals:

1. To provide the student with an opportunity to become actively involved in the research process through the application of the scientific method in research proposal writing.

2. To provide a structured experience where the student works independently and with a dental hygiene faculty mentor throughout the table clinic development process.

Course Objectives: By the end of the course, the student will be able to:

1. Apply critical appraisal skills in evaluating and disseminating oral health care research. 2. Design and appropriately execute an effective strategy for writing a research proposal. 3. Apply scientific writing skills in completing a table clinic abstract and research proposal. 4. Expand your knowledge in a researchable topic and communicate learnings to the public. 5. Maintain open communication between student, course director, and faculty mentor.


Learning Outcomes/Competencies:

COMPETENCIES FOR THE DENTAL HYGIENIST*

Domain I – Professionalism

Section 2: Information Management & Critical Thinking

Section 2.1: Apply critical thinking skills & evidence based decision making to the practice of dental hygiene. Section 2.2: Commit to self-assessment & lifelong learning in order to provide contemporary clinical care. Section 2.4: Employ the principles of scientific writing.

Section 3: Professional Identity

Section 3.1: Prepare for career opportunities within health care, industry, education, research, & other roles as they evolve for the dental hygienist. Section 3.2: Advance & promote the values of the profession through leadership, service activities & affiliation with professional organization. Section 3.3: Contribute towards the knowledge base of the dental hygiene profession.

*Refer to the Caruth School of Dental Hygiene’s “Competencies for the Dental Hygienist” for details. Evaluation Criteria/Methods:

ASSESSMENT CATEGORIES VALUE FORMAT

Table Clinic Oral Presentation 15% Collaborative Grade

Table Clinic Abstract 10% Collaborative Grade

Research Proposal Abstract 10% Collaborative Grade

Research Narrative 10% Individual Grade

Research Proposal Review of Literature 40% Individual Grade

Journal Club Participation 15% Individual Grade Note: 85% of the course grade is based on scientific writing, analysis, and public speaking skills. Students must pass the writing and public speaking components in order to pass on the course.

Grading Scale: A = 90-100 B = 80-89 C = 75-79 D = 70-74 F = <70 Remediation Policy: If the student is eligible, remediation will occur in the subsequent summer semester. Remediation will be specifically directed at the deficiency which resulted in the failing grade.


Learning Materials:

REQUIRED RESOURCES

Dental Public Health & Research (4th Ed.) Author: Christine Nathe Published: 2017 ISBN: 978-0-13425-546-0 Introduction to Research in the Health Sciences (6th Ed.) Authors: Stephen Polgar and Shane Thomas Published: 2014 ISBN: 978-0-70204-194-5

RECOMMENDED RESOURCES

Evidence-Based Dentistry for the Dental Hygienist Edited by Julie Frantsve-Hawley Published: 2014 ISBN: 978-0-86715-646-1 Real World Research (4th Ed.) Authors: Colin Robson and Kieran McCartan Published: 2016 ISBN: 978-1-11874-523-6

Attendance and Make-up Policy: There is no attendance policy but it is to your advantage to attend the lectures, participate in class discussions and hear announcements. You must take the exams according to the published schedule. Illness must be documented by a doctor’s excuse. If a problem arises, discuss it with the course instructor before the examination. For University excused absences, refer to Student Rule 7 for details. For an excused absence, a missed exam must be made up within one week of the excused absence.

Laboratory/Clinic Policies and Procedures: Not applicable.

Special Accommodation for Persons with Disabilities: The Americans with Disabilities Act is a federal anti-discrimination statute that provides comprehensive civil rights protection for persons with disabilities. Among other things, this legislation requires that all students with disabilities be guaranteed a learning environment that provides for reasonable accommodation of their disabilities. If you believe you have a disability requiring an accommodation, please contact Associate Dean for Academic Affairs in charge of Disability Services, Room 514, or call 214-828-8208 for more information.

Academic Integrity Statement and Policy: “An Aggie does not lie, cheat or steal, or tolerate those who do.”

Upon accepting admission to Texas A&M University, a student immediately assumes a commitment to uphold the honor Code, to accept responsibility, and to follow the philosophy and rules of the Honor System. Students will be required to state their commitment on examinations, research papers, and other academic work. Ignorance of the rules does not exclude any member


of the TAMU community from the requirements or the processes of the Honor System. See for additional details regarding the university honor code.


TENTATIVE CLASS SCHEDULE (Spring 2017) DDHS 4710: Applied Research Methods

SESSIONS LEARNING MODULES

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

Week 1 1/10/17

Course Overview: • Syllabus, Rubrics, & Expectations • Journal Club Requirements • Research Narrative Requirements • Research Proposal Requirements • Table Clinic Requirements

Research Narrative à Research Proposal • Formulating PICO Research Questions • Articulating Null Hypothesis • Research Proposal Components • Composing Robust Abstracts

Pre-Reading Materials: -Robson (Ch. 1, 3, & 16) ACTION ITEMS: -Schedule Appt. with PI

Week 2 1/17/17

Art & Science of Disseminating Research • Grantsmanship Workshop • Scientific & Technical Writing • Presenting/Publishing Research

Pre-Reading Materials: -Robson (Ch. 19)

Week 3 1/24/17

Caruth Journal Club: PI _____________: Groups 1 & 2 Independent Study: (Meet with PI)

• TDHEA COMPETITION: (Optional) – 1/27/2017 • ACTION ITEM: Submit Table Clinic Proof with PI Approval to Media • ACTION ITEM: Submit Research Narrative to PI for Final Grading • Draft Table Clinic Abstract (250-Words) • Draft Research Proposal (Title, Research Question, Hypothesis)

Week 4 1/31/17 DDHS 4010: NBDHE Dental Anatomy Review

Week 5 2/7/17


• Draft Research Proposal (Introduction & Review of the Literature)

Week 6 2/14/17




Week 7 2/21/17

Caruth Journal Club: PI _____________: Groups 7 & 8

PI _____________: Groups 9 & 10 Independent Study: (Meet with PI)


Week 8 2/28/17



Week 9 3/7/17



Week 10 3/14/17

PRACTICE TABLE CLINIC PRESENTATIONS

Week 11 3/20/17-3/24/17

SPRING BREAK

Week 12 3/27/17 NBDHE EXAMINATION

Week 13 Week of 4/3/17

TABLE CLINIC PRESENTATIONS: 1. Panel Judging: Monday, April 3, 2017 PM 2. Student Research Day: Wednesday, April 5, 2017 PM 3. DDHS Table Clinic Night: Thursday, April 6, 2017 PM

Week 14 Week of 4/10/17 RESEARCH SECTION: SENIOR EXIT EXAM

Week 15 Week of 4/17/17

Financial Aid Exit Interview Research Exit Exam Remediation

Weeks 16 & 17 4/24/17-5/5/17 PREPARATIONS FOR WREB TESTING

Weeks 18 & 19 5/8/17-5/19/17 PREPARATIONS FOR COMMENCEMENT


Research Narrative – Introduction & Expectations A. General Purpose & Significance: A ‘research narrative’ is a professional composition of evidence-based knowledge that will be articulated on the table clinic. The research narrative exercise provides a unique and beneficial opportunity for student presenters to communicate major discussion points in a clear, concise, and systematic manner. Moreover, the iterative practice of refining the research narrative facilitates learning on identifying, synthesizing, and highlighting on the points of most significance (POMS) that will be discussed in the table clinic presentation. A research narrative is NOT a research proposal. A research narrative can assist investigators in identifying a “knowledge gap” that can potentially evolve into an original research proposal. B. Required Components:

1. Innovative Opening Statement 2. Engaging Topical Introduction 3. Establishing Contemporary Significance/Relevance 4. Major Constructs Discussed Concisely 5. Concluding Remarks 6. Compelling Call for Action

C. Course Assignment: Students are expected to conduct a narrative literature review to gain knowledge on the research topic of choice. Students will be required to schedule at least one appointment with the research course director before finalizing the research topic (submit literature review matrix with ≥5 PUBLISHED RESOURCES PRIOR to the meeting with the research course director). Students are expected to collaborate with their research partner(s) and faculty mentor in the fall semester, AFTER RESEARCH TOPIC IS APPROVED to develop a research narrative. The research narrative is an INDIVIDUAL SUBMISSION. Students are expected to compose a 500-word-minimum paper that systematically articulates scientific, evidence-based, knowledge on their research topic. Students are to apply scientific and technical writing skills in completing this assignment. The FINALIZED research narrative is DUE by 5:00pm on Friday, January 27, 2017. The research narrative is expected to have BETWEEN 8-12 PUBLISHED SOURCES. PI will evaluate the research narrative utilizing the ‘Rubric for Research Narrative’ and provide formative feedback by the end of the fall semester. Students are expected to review/internalize the feedback received from PI and integrate the recommendations into the finalized research narrative. The finalized research narrative will account for 10% of the total grade in the subsequent spring semester’s DDHS 4710: Applied Research course.


Research Proposal – Introduction & Expectations A. General Purpose & Significance: The primary purpose of a research proposal is to articulate the significance of conducting an original scientific investigation. Fundamentally, original research aims to advance scientific knowledge from the known into the unknown dimensions of human intelligence. Researchers submitting a research proposal are requesting endorsement to conduct original research; thus, the syntax of a research proposal is necessarily conjugated in the future tense. A research proposal typically builds upon a research narrative. The iterative practice of refining a research proposal facilitates learning on identifying, synthesizing, and highlighting on the points of most significance (POMS) that will be articulated in the context of a professional dissemination. The composition of a research proposal facilitates students’ learning in applying the principles of the scientific method and research process in the context of their specific research question. B. Signposted Research Paper Components: (REQUIRED)*

Research Proposal Components* Post-Proposal Components Title Methodology Abstract (250-Words) Results Introduction Discussion Review of the Literature Conclusion

C. Course Assignment: Students are expected to reference the previously completed narrative literature review as a guiding post for identifying a significant ‘knowledge gap’ that warrants further scientific investigation. Students are expected to collaborate with their research partner and faculty mentor to compose the preliminary components of a research proposal. Students will be required to schedule at least one appointment with the research course director before finalizing the research question. (submit literature review matrix with ≥8-12 PUBLISHED SOURCES PRIOR to the meeting).

The research proposal is a GROUP SUBMISSION. Students are expected to compose a 750-word-minimum paper that systematically articulates scientific, evidence-based, knowledge on their research topic. Students are to apply scientific and technical writing skills in completing this assignment. The research proposal is DUE by 5:00pm on Friday, March 31st. The research proposal is expected to have BETWEEN ≥10-15 PUBLISHED SOURCES. PI will evaluate the research narrative utilizing the ‘Rubric for Research Proposal’. Submit to the Turnitin link on BlackBoard – acceptable submissions will manifest with 10% originality score or better. Students are STRONGLY ENCOURAGED to advance research proposals towards dissemination in mediums such as peer-reviewed journal publications and/or poster presentations.


Journal Club – Introduction & Expectations

A. General Purpose & Significance: Evidence-based research is the scientific basis for health care and its associated practices. Introducing fundamental concepts and constructs in the research process is an important for translating theory into practice. There are multiple mediums for clinicians to access current evidence including databases, CE meetings, and participating in journal club exercises. A ‘Journal Club’ is broadly defined as a collective group of individuals who regularly meet to discuss and evaluate current, published, literature on particularly relevant topics. Journal club provides a unique format for the development of critical evaluation skills for the clinician by encouraging precise questioning of research methodology, implications for policy and practice, etc. The selection of articles to appraise are based primarily in relevant peer-reviewed journals that have been approved for publishing by experts in their respective fields. The uniqueness of this review format ideally serves to ensure the quality, relevance, appropriateness, and limitations of the scientific research. Journal clubs support an interdisciplinary endeavor for high-quality professional development while embracing diverse adult learning theories and frameworks. Evidence suggests that participation in journal clubs develop participants analytical, critical, evaluative, reflective, and presentation skills. Source: Klausner, C., & Gwozdek, A. (2007, April). Life-Long Learning: Lessons from a Journal Study Club. Journal of Dental Hygiene, 81(2), 1-10.

1. Journal Club at Texas A&M College of Dentistry:

The Caruth School of Dental Hygiene will host Caruth Journal Club (CJC) as an integrated component of the DDHS 4710: Applied Research Methods course. The overarching goal of the CJC is to assist dental hygiene students with both public speaking and critical appraisal skills. The Research Course Director serves as the faculty facilitator for CJC. The Public Health Sciences (PHS) and Periodontics Departments also host journal clubs as an integral component of their post-doctoral residency programs. The dates, times, and articles will be shared as they are made available for both the PHS and Periodontics journal clubs. 2. Course Assignment: Students are to collaborate with their co-investigators and identify one article to critically appraise within their Literature Review Matrix. The research groups will share the selected article in advance allowing all other classmates to prepare as well. All research groups will take turns, over successive weeks, in serving as presenters for one CJC. Student presenters will be provided feedback and graded on application of andragogic and critical appraisal skills. Students are expected to also participate in at least one PHS AND at least one Periodontics journal club during the spring semester. It is the responsibility of each student to read and independently critique the article(s) in advance utilizing the template provided. During the journal club session, students are expected to observe and contribute (where applicable) to the active discussions. At the end of the session, students are expected to submit both an attendance sheet and their independent critique of the article(s).


Table Clinic – Introduction & Expectations (Adapted from the ADHA)

A. General Purpose & Significance: A ‘table clinic’ is a professional table top presentation that intertwines both oral communication skills and engaging media to inform, clarify, and/or review material on a current topic. A table clinic DOES NOT present as an exhibition of materials or extend into original research. Table clinic presentations display useful and timely information in an original, interesting manner. This information may be a technique, theory, service, trend, or expanded opportunity in the practice of dental hygiene and/or the realm of oral and systemic health. Table clinics should present synthesized information in a direct and concise manner with an element of action to stimulate attention and interest. As a clinician and presenter you have an opportunity to expand your knowledge in a special area of interest, arouse research curiosity, and increase professional awareness in a unique and creative manner. B. Table Clinic Categories/Themes:

Source: Conceptual Model for the 2016 ADHA National Research Agenda


C. Course Assignment: Students are able to select a research partner of their choice – there may be one group of three if the class has an uneven quantity of students. Students are expected to collaborate with their research partner(s) and faculty mentor in the fall semester to develop a table clinic that will be presented in the subsequent spring semester. Students will be required to present their table clinics on (1) Classroom Practice Presentation Session, (2) Panel Judging Session (3) Student Research Day and (4) Dallas Dental Hygiene Association’s CE Meeting. The details of these events will be shared when confirmed. The table clinics will be rank ordered by a panel of judges using a standardized criterion – the results are calculated and the highest ranking table clinics are publicly recognized. It is important to note that these results WILL NOT influence the student’s course grade, but WILL contribute towards identifying candidates to receive the Student Research Award. The HIGHEST RANKING research group will be endorsed by the Caruth School of Dental Hygiene to present their table clinic at the American Dental Hygienists’ Association Summer Annual Session. The details of these events will be shared when the dates/times are confirmed. The table clinic is a GROUP SUBMISSION where students are expected to participate and contribute proportionately. Students are expected to also submit PEER EVALUATIONS to subjectively identify individual group member’s proportionate contribution. Students are to collaborate with their Principal Investigator in ensuring the timely submission of all relevant table clinic documents to Media. It is the student’s responsibility to follow-up with Media to obtain a digital proof. Once a digital proof is disbursed, students are to obtain final approval from PI before resubmitting to Media for final publishing. D. Grading & Evaluation:

Students will be graded on both content and presentation, respectively. Evaluators will utilize the Table Clinic Oral Presentation rubric when assessing group presentations. The table clinic evaluation will serve as a GROUP GRADE. Therefore, all group members should collaborate proportionately and cohesively.

Table clinic presentations should be signposted with categories including: (1) Title, (2) Authors, (3) Abstract/Introduction/Significance, (4) Educational Objectives, (5) Content-Specific Information, (6) Relevant Images, Tables, and/or Graphs, and (7) References.

• Anticipate and prepare for questions and discussions from the audience after presenting. • Communicate synthesized information clearly within 5-7 MINUTES. • Presentation should be professional and rooted in sound science with qualified references. • Practice to improve communication skills. Seek constructive feedback from colleagues. • Utilize appealing visual aids to reinforce your research effectively. • Handouts are optional supplements to the presentation but can leave lasting impressions. • Students are required to wear attire suitable for the professional presentation context.


DDHS 4710: Applied Research Methods Literature Review Matrix

Students: _____________________________________________________

CITATION STUDYDESIGN RESEARCHQUESTION RELEVANTIMPLICATIONS


DDHS 4710: Applied Research Methods Research Narrative

Protocol Director: _____________________________________________ Grade: _______ / ________

Principal Investigator: _________________________________________ Grade: _______ / ________

Individual Rubric for Research Narrative – 10 points

Evaluation Categories

Remediation Indicated

0 – 0.8 points

Progressive Development 0.9 – 1.7 points

Competency Demonstrated 1.8 – 2.5 points

Establishing Significance:

Research Topic Literary Evidence

Student unable to establish clear rationale/significance of research. Literature review did not include

evidence to support research.

Student establishes limited rational/significance for research.

Literature review includes evidence to support research.

Student clearly establishes rationale/significance of research.

Literature review demonstrates compelling need for research.

Systematic Presentation: Logical Flow of Ideas Balanced Objectivity

Student submits narrative that is grossly unbalanced introducing

bias/subjectivity. Major concerns with progression of ideas.

Student submits narrative that is generally balanced and objective.

Moderate concerns with the progression of ideas.

Student submits narrative that is clearly balanced and objective.

Minimal concerns with the progression of ideas.

Professional Writing: Research Formatting

Scientific Terminology Citation Prose & Syntax

Standard formatting guideline for research proposals not followed. Narrative excluded professional vocabulary and syntax. Gross

evidence of academic dishonesty.

Standard formatting guideline for research proposals followed.

Narrative includes professional vocabulary and syntax. Moderate

concerns with proper citations.


Narrative includes proficient use of professional terminology and syntax.

No citation concerns.

Miscellaneous Timeliness

Word Count

Narrative submitted after deadline without official excuse. Word count

under/over 25% of expectations.

Narrative submitted in timely manner. Word count is under/over

15% of expectations.

Narrative submitted in timely manner. Word count is under/over


Comments:


DDHS 4710: Applied Research Methods Research Proposal-Review of the Literature



Individual Rubric for Research Proposal-Review of the Literature – 40 points



0 – 3.3 points


Competency Demonstrated 6.8 – 10 points



Student unable to establish clear rationale/significance of research. Literature review did not include

evidence to support research.

Student establishes limited rational/significance for research.

Literature review includes evidence to support research.

Student clearly establishes rationale/significance of research.

Literature review demonstrates compelling need for research.

Systematic Presentation: Logical Flow of Ideas Balanced Objectivity

Student submits proposal that is grossly unbalanced introducing

bias/subjectivity. Major concerns with progression of ideas.

Student submits proposal that is generally balanced and objective.

Moderate concerns with the progression of ideas.

Student submits proposal that is clearly balanced and objective.

Minimal concerns with the progression of ideas.



Standard formatting guideline for research proposals not followed. Proposal excluded professional vocabulary and syntax. Gross

evidence of academic dishonesty.


Proposal includes professional vocabulary and syntax. Moderate

concerns with proper citations.


Proposal includes proficient use of professional terminology and syntax.

No citation concerns.


Word Count

Proposal is submitted after deadline without official excuse. Word count


Proposal is submitted in timely manner. Word count is under/over


Proposal is submitted in timely manner. Word count is under/over


Comments:


DDHS 4710: Applied Research Methods Research Proposal Abstract (250 words)



Team Rubric for Research Proposal Abstract – 10 points



0 – 0.8 points





Student unable to articulate a clear rationale/significance of research in a synthesized manner. Abstract does not include evidence to substantiate

further research on topic.

Student articulate a partial or limited rationale for research. Abstract includes sufficient

information to support progressive research on topic.

Student clearly articulates a sound rationale in a synthesized manner.

Abstract provides clarity of thought and demonstrates significance of

research investigation.

Collaborative Professionalism:

Timeliness & Demeanor

Student had minimal communication with partner and

mentor. Student exhibited inappropriate demeanor. Student did

not consistently adhere to project submission deadlines.

Student had intermittent and/or episodic communication with mentor and partner. Student

demonstrated minor discrepancies in professional demeanor and/or

timeliness in submission deadlines.

Student maintained frequent and progressive communications with

partner/mentor. Student consistently displayed professional demeanor and

adhered to all project deadlines.



Standard formatting guideline for abstracts not followed. Abstract

excluded professional vocabulary and syntax. Gross evidence of

academic dishonesty.

Standard formatting guideline for abstracts followed. Abstract

includes professional vocabulary and syntax. Moderate concerns with

proper citations.

Standard formatting guideline for abstracts followed. Abstracts

includes proficient use of professional terminology and syntax.

Minimal citation concerns.


Word Count

Abstract submitted after deadline without official excuse. Word count


Abstract submitted in timely manner. Word count under/over 5%

of desired expectations.

Abstract submitted in timely manner. Word count is under/over 3% of

desired expectations.

Comments:


DDHS 4710: Research Methods Table Clinic Abstract (250 words)



Team Rubric for Table Clinic Abstract – 10 points



0 – 0.8 points





Student unable to articulate a clear rationale/significance of research in a synthesized manner. Abstract does not include evidence to substantiate

further research on topic.

Student articulate a partial or limited rationale for research. Abstract includes sufficient

information to support progressive research on topic.

Student clearly articulates a sound rationale in a synthesized manner.

Abstract provides clarity of thought and demonstrates significance of

research investigation.

Collaborative Professionalism:

Timeliness & Demeanor

Student had minimal communication with partner and mentor. Student

exhibited inappropriate demeanor. Student did not consistently adhere

to project submission deadlines.

Student had intermittent and/or episodic communication with mentor and partner. Student

demonstrated minor discrepancies in professional demeanor and/or

timeliness in submission deadlines.

Student maintained frequent and progressive communications with

partner/mentor. Student consistently displayed professional demeanor and

adhered to all project deadlines.



Standard formatting guideline for abstracts not followed. Abstract

excluded professional vocabulary and syntax. Gross evidence of

academic dishonesty.

Standard formatting guideline for abstracts followed. Abstract

includes professional vocabulary and syntax. Moderate concerns with

proper citations.

Standard formatting guideline for abstracts followed. Abstracts

includes proficient use of professional terminology and syntax.

Minimal citation concerns.


Word Count

Abstract submitted after deadline without official excuse. Word count


Abstract submitted in timely manner. Word count under/over 5%

of desired expectations.

Abstract submitted in timely manner. Word count is under/over 3% of

desired expectations.

Comments:


DDHS 4710: Research Methods Table Clinic Oral Presentation (Adapted from 2004 Read/Write/Think ©)

Group: __________________________________ Grade: _______ / ________ Self-Eval? Y N

Team Rubric for Table Clinic Oral Presentation – 15 points



0 – 1.25 points

Progressive Development

1.26 – 2.50 points

Competency Demonstrated

2.60 – 3.75 points Nonverbal Skills:

Eye Contact, Composure, Attire, &

Body Language

Students exhibited minimal/no eye contact with the audience and primarily

reads from notecards. No descriptive gestures. Distractive fidgety behaviors. Coarsely exhibits unprofessional attire

Students exhibited moderate eye contact with slight notecard reading tendencies. Distractive behaviors are noticeable but

complemented with more purposeful and welcoming gestures. ≤1 evident error in

professional attire on each student.

Students regularly exhibited eye contact with minimal attachments to notecards.

Purposeful gestures and composure. Professional attire.

Verbal Skills: Enthusiasm,

Articulation, Diction, & Elocution

Students displayed negative/no interest in research topic. Vocalization patterns

exhibited inaudibility, incoherence, and muddling. Presentation delivery had

significant concerns with filler words. Scientific terminology not employed.

Students displayed positive interest in research topic. Tone of voice was

audible and expressive. Presentation delivery had ≤5 instances with use of filler words. Scientific terminology

employed and explained, where needed.

Students displayed positive interest and enthusiasm throughout presentation.

Tone of voice was audible, expressive, and confident. Presentation delivery had ≤3 instances with use of filler words. Scientific terminology employed and

explained, where needed. Content & Structure:

Subject Matter Expertise,

Organization, & Syntax

Students overtly demonstrated lack of current knowledge and practice of

research topic. Incongruent sequencing of content. ≥3 notable errors in visual/written composition.

Students demonstrated current knowledge and understandings of contemporary practice relative to

research topic. Content is logically sequenced. ≥2 notable errors in

visual/written composition.

Students demonstrated current knowledge and understandings of contemporary practice relative to

research topic. Content is logically sequenced. ≤1 notable errors in

visual/written composition.

Management: Time Management

Q&A Protocol

Students did not complete within ≤1 min. of specified time. Students did not

competently engage with audience for Q&A or fail to provide acceptable

responses to unanswerable questions.

Students completed within ≤1 minute of specified time. Students positively

engaged with audience during Q&A providing acceptable responses to

unanswerable questions.

Students completed within ≤1 minute of specified time. Students welcomed and

proficiently engaged with audience during Q&A providing acceptable

responses to unanswerable questions. Comments:


Caruth School of Dental Hygiene Table Clinic & Oral Presentation Evaluation Form

Event: Dallas Dental Hygienists’ Association – Student Table Clinic Night Coordinates: April 6, 2017 from 6pm-8pm (17th Floor Roberts Hospital) Title of Table Clinic Presentation: __________________________________________________ Student Investigators: (Please Circle One Below)

Frank & Omar Shalane & McKenzie Christopher & Mayra Brenna & Naz Addi & Prerna

Zhinow, Nergez, & Karlie Valeria & Ariana Stacy & Ashton Claire & Mary Katelyn &

Ashley Sidra & Callie Kim & Eric Duyen & Tran Melina & Iksaa

Evaluation Metrics: 1=Strongly Disagree 2=Disagree 3= Agree 4= Strongly Agree

Section I:

Content and

Structure (16 pts.)

A. Topic addresses current issues relevant to oral health care

B. Students established significance of research topic

C. Content is logically sequenced and aesthetically organized

D. Minimal errors in visual and/or written composition

1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4

Section II:

Verbal and

Non-

Verbal

Skills

(28 pts.)

A. Students displayed positive interest & enthusiasm

B. Tone of voice was audible, expressive, and confident

C. Minimal use of filler words (i.e. uh, um, ah, etc.)

D. Scientific terminology used and explained, where needed

E. Students regularly exhibited eye contact to audience

F. Students maintained composure with purposeful gestures

G. Students dressed in professional attire from head to toe

1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4

1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4

1 2 3 4

Section

III: Time

and Q&A

Mgt.

(16 pts.)

A. Students completed within ≤1 minute of specified time

B. Students welcomed questions and engaged with audience

C. Students smoothly transitioned between talking points

D. Students were able to effectively managed their time

1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4

Total Points: ________ / 60


Journal Club Article Review Guide Adapted from PHS Department

Student Name: ______________________ Date of Attendance: _____________ Article(s) Critiqued: ________________________________________________ Research Question: What is the problem being explored? What question(s) does the study address? ______________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ Clinical & Public Health Significance: Why are the research questions significant? Is this a current, peer-reviewed, published article? ______________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ Study Approach & Methodology: What is the study design and time frame examined? Is this qualitative and/or quantitative study? ______________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ Subject Selection Criterion: Who are the subjects? How were participants selected, sampled, and recruited in the study? Did the researchers employ randomization? ______________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ Variables Examined/Measured: What/How was the dependent, independent, and extraneous variables examined in the study? How were each of the variables measured (i.e. dichotomized, Likert scale, etc.)? ______________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


Statistical Analysis: What statistical tests and software were used by the researchers? Were the results appropriately adjusted to reduce error? ______________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ Data Results: What were the results of the research? Were they statistically and/or clinically significant? ______________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ Limitations: Were study limitations explicitly addressed? What are the limitations of the study? ______________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ Conclusion/Discussion: What are the implications of the conclusion? What are the next steps for research on this topic? ______________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ Overall Manuscript Structure & Composition: Did the authors follow general guidelines in demarcating and labeling the different components of the research process? Were the tables and/or graphs labeled with descriptive footnotes? ______________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ Follow-Up Questions to Authors: ______________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


______________________________________________________________________________

Caruth Journal Club Self & Peer Evaluation Rubric Presenter: _____________________________________________ Date: ______________

Evaluator: □ Self □ Peer □ Faculty □ Course Director □ Other: ________

Directions: Please circle the appropriate numbers below that best describe the presenter’s critical appraisal and public speaking skills. Constructive feedback in the comments section are encouraged and appreciated. The results of the evaluation will be aggregated by the Research Course Director and shared with the presenter. Prudent efforts will be employed to maintain confidentiality of individual evaluators. Thank you in advance for your cooperation.

Evaluation Metrics: 1=Strongly Disagree 2=Disagree 3= Agree 4= Strongly Agree

Assessment Categories Point Value Establishing Journal Article Significance:

1. Provides adequate background knowledge on research topic 2. Identifies journal article’s relevance to contemporary OHCPs 3. Identifies author’s research question and/or null hypothesis 4. Discusses author’s credentials, affiliations, and/or endorsements

1 2 3 4 N/A 1 2 3 4 N/A 1 2 3 4 N/A 1 2 3 4 N/A

Critical Appraisal of Research Methodology & Biostatistics: 1. Appropriately explains research design 2. Describes inclusion and exclusion criterion 3. Identifies study’s sample size and alpha (α) value 4. Discusses dependent, independent, and extraneous variables 5. Identifies statistical test employed and software used 6. Articulates concerns with methodology and/or biostatistics

1 2 3 4 N/A 1 2 3 4 N/A 1 2 3 4 N/A 1 2 3 4 N/A 1 2 3 4 N/A 1 2 3 4 N/A

Critical Appraisal of Results, Discussion, & Conclusion: 1. Appropriately identifies significant findings 2. Discusses magnitude of significant coefficients 3. Explains potential impact/application to contemporary OHCPs 4. Articulates concerns with external/internal validity and reliability 5. Describes strengths, limitations, and need for further research

1 2 3 4 N/A 1 2 3 4 N/A 1 2 3 4 N/A 1 2 3 4 N/A 1 2 3 4 N/A

Overall Presentation, Public Speaking, & Engagement: 1. Presenter demonstrated breadth of knowledge on subject matter 2. Presenter is sensitive to the audience’s diverse learning styles 3. Presenter made appropriate eye contact with entire audience 4. Presenter’s tone of voice was audible, expressive, and confident 5. Presenter had minimal use of filler words (i.e. uh, um, ah, etc.) 6. Presenter appropriately managed time, reserving space for Q&A

1 2 3 4 N/A 1 2 3 4 N/A 1 2 3 4 N/A 1 2 3 4 N/A 1 2 3 4 N/A 1 2 3 4 N/A


Comments: ___________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________


DDHS 4710: Applied Research Methods

Memorandum of Understanding (Please initial each line) _________ I have read and understand the course syllabus and my responsibilities to successfully complete DDHS 4710: Applied Research Methods. _________ I have read and understand the institutional policies on academic honesty and have pledged accordingly to the Aggie Honor Code. _________ I have read and understand the course syllabus provides a tentative timeline and that the course director has the ability to adapt/modify the syllabus, as needed. The course director will provide written notice to all students in as advance as possible for any changes that may arise. Print Student Name: ________________________________________

Student Signature: _________________________________________

Date Signed: ______________________________________________

Research Course Director Use Only: Received by: ___________________________________ Date Received: _________________________________

Documents

Caruth School of Dental Hygiene...Dental Public Health & Research (4th Ed.) Author: Christine Nathe Published: 2017 ISBN: 978-0-13425-546-0 Introduction to Research in the Health Sciences