Question

When critiquing an observational study, which four factors should be analyzed?

A.Methodology, Results, Discussion, Conclusion
B.Introduction, Results, Discussion, Conclusion
C.Introduction, Methodology, Results, Discussion
D.Methodology, Causes, Results, Discussion

this was in my math class, so that is why the subject is mathematics. Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Answer 1

Option:A

Explanation:

The observation study involves

1) Methodology:

"Methodology is the philosophical framework within which the research is conducted or the foundation upon which the research is based”

2) Result:

Results section is just a presentation of the data. The results need to be presented in enough detail for someone not familiar with the scientific paper to understand them.

3) Discussion:

It unrolls the main results, explain their meanings. Put there the new questions and perspectives, describe the most interesting points for the entire field. Define the possible answers, write down why and how and what for, your suggestions.

4)Conclusion:

It is a summary of the discussion or the whole work. You can put there the main points and results, their factual meaning for the field and a possible further direction. I like to describe this as "discussion's points and facts without the discussion."

Answer 2

The correct answer is option C. Introduction, Methodology, Results, Discussion

Explanation:

When critiquing an observational study, the following four factors should be analyzed == Introduction, Methodology, Results, Discussion.

Critiquing means the evaluation of any theory in a detailed and analytical way. This method is also called the IMRaD format.