PUBH7600 Assessment 2
Structured critical appraisal of a research article
Due date 6 May 2025, 2 pm EST
Instructions
This assessment is based on the learning objectives and concepts from Modules 2,3,5 and 6 and the required readings. This assessment will contribute 50% towards the overall assessment for this course.
Article to review:
Chen et al. (2025) “Ultraprocessed food consumption and obesity development in Canadian children” JAMA Network Open 8 (1): e2457341
Read the article. Undertake a structured critical appraisal of the article by answering the questions. Please justify your answers with information from the article, and your viewpoint, based on the critical thinking skills and knowledge you have developed in this course. When answering each question, you are required to use your own words, not just a “copy and paste” from the article. The questions give you an indication of the recommended length of your answers.
Your assignment should be typed as a Microsoft Word document, with adequate space left between questions. Be as succinct and clear as possible in your answers and use the suggested length of response for a question and the marking rubric as a guide to how much detail is required.
Once you have completed your assignment, attach the coversheet, upload and submit it for marking through the Turn-It-In link on Blackboard by 2 pm on 6 May 2025.
Question 1: Study design
a) What is the main research question of the article? Include the PICO elements in your answer. (1-2 sentences).
b) Identify the type of study design used in this article. List and contrast the key advantages and limitations of this study design (1-2 paragraphs)
c) Was this the most appropriate design to answer the research question? Justify your answer (1 paragraph)
Question 2: Study Participants
a) What was the source population for the study outlined in this article? (2-3 sentences)
b) How were participants recruited/selected in the study? (1-2 paragraphs)
c) Do you think the study had any selection bias? Why or why not? Describe the potential impact of results (1-2 paragraphs)
Question 3: Measurement
a) Identify the main exposure recorded in this article. How was it defined and measured? (2-3 sentences)
b) Identify the key outcomes for this article. How were they defined and measured? (1-2 paragraphs)
c) Do you think this study had any measurement bias? Why or why not? Describe the potential impact on results (2-3 paragraphs)
Question 4: Chance
a) Did the study have enough participants to minimise the role of chance? Describe the potential impact on results. (2-3 sentences)
Questions 5: Interpreting results
a) How were the main results reported and interpreted by the authors? (1-2 paragraphs)
Question 6: Confounding
a) Did the authors attempt to control for confounding? How did they do this? Have all potential confounders been considered? (1 paragraph)
Question 7: Validity
a) Based on your critical examination of this study (from question 1 to 6), would you consider it to be internally valid? Why or why not? (1/2 – 1 page)
b) Do you think the finding of this study are generalizable to other populations? Why or why not? (1/2 page)
Question 8: Causality
a) Discuss the evidence the authors present on whether the observed associations could be causal. Use up to three of Bradford Hill’s “criteria” to support your argument (up to 1 page)