discuss and criticize a scientific publication

[katy fina]

hello everybody , i need your help from here for crticize this scientific article i had find it difficult to do it alone , the title is ;The Importance of Bacterial and Viral

Infections Associated with Adult Asthma Exacerbations in Clinical Practice.and there is pdf

Bacterial-infection-asthma-G10-M (1).PDF

Edited April 1, 2016 by katy fina

[iNow]

Katy - Most readers will assume this is a homework assignment.

 

While members may be happy to help address specific questions you have, at this point you haven't asked any.

 

You'll not likely get much response until you share your own thoughts, what criticisms you've already identified about the article, and where specifically you're getting stuck.

[katy fina]

thanx for replying ,i didn't want to give people my homework to doing it ,criticize is just a little part of my presentation and i don't inderstand how i could criticize the author

[StringJunky]

Here's a pdf. tutorial article on how to critique a research paper:

 

Direct download link: https://www.ucalgary.ca/ssc/files/ssc/wss_critique_2014.pdf

 

Google what I've bolded to get more resources.

[katy fina]

thanx you very much string junky

[StringJunky]

thanx you very much string junky

Here's a pdf download link about putting together the discussion section of your critique:

 

http://www.sfedit.net/discussion.pdf

Edited April 1, 2016 by StringJunky

[iNow]

i don't inderstand how i could criticize the author

 

Do you see any flaws in their approach?

Perhaps they concluded something too soon?

Maybe they made too many assumptions or used too few data points.

 

Think less about criticizing. Think more about specific ways to improve the paper. How could it be made better? What else might you have done differently if you were the author?

[StringJunky]

Do you see any flaws in their approach?

Perhaps they concluded something too soon?

Maybe they made too many assumptions or used too few data points.

 

Think less about criticizing. Think more about specific ways to improve the paper. How could it be made better? What else might you have done differently if you were the author?

I suppose what one is essentially doing, as a reviewer, is highlighting the faults or findings in a paper, so that the research might later be refined by the author or others.

Edited April 1, 2016 by StringJunky