Deliens, T., Clarys, P., De Bourdeaudhuij, I., & Deforche, B. (2014). Determinants of eating behaviour in university students: A qualitative study using focus group discussions. BMC Public Health,

Deliens, T., Clarys, P., De Bourdeaudhuij, I., & Deforche, B. (2014). Determin" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">inants of eatin" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">ing behaviour in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in university students: A qualitative study usin" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">ing focus group discussions. BMC Public Health, 14(1), 53. doi:10.1186/1471-2458-14-53 Deliens, T., Clarys, P., De Bourdeaudhuij, I., & Deforche, B. (2014). Determin" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">inants of eatin" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">ing behaviour in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in university students: A qualitative study usin" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">ing focus group discussions. BMC Public Health, 14(1), 53. doi:10.1186/1471-2458-14-53 Evaluate the study and write a critique, usin" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">ing the textbook and relevant journal articles to support your analysis of the study. Use the followin" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">ing section headin" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">ings and content in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in your paper. Introduction State the purpose of the paper. Clearly identify the study bein" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">ing critiqued, by title and authors. Summarize the research question, hypothesis (if a quantitative study), and background in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">information on the topic from the study's literature review. Did the authors present a well-balanced summary of current knowledge about the topic? Is there any apparent bias in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in the literature review? Methods Differentiate the research design (experimental or non-experimental) and approach (qualitative or quantitative), samplin" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">ing method, and data collection methods. Indicate the sample size, variables and measures (if a quantitative study), statistical tests (if a quantitative study), codin" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">ing and analysis procedures (if a qualitative study), and any assumptions made by the researchers. Were the procedures chosen appropriate for the study? What alternative methods would you suggest? Ethical Aspects Analyze ethical issues pertain" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">inin" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">ing to this study. Did the researchers explicitly address ethical issues in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in the article? If not, was there evidence in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in the report that the participants' safety and confidentiality were protected? Was an approval process by an Institutional Review Board or similar ethics review committee mentioned? Were any of the practices ethically questionable (deception, coercion, etc.)? Results Present a summary of the results of the analysis performed in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in the study. Did the authors keep their in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">interpretations and conclusions separate from the analysis results (evidence)? Discussion and Conclusion Analyze and critique the conclusions drawn by the researchers. Do the conclusions follow logically from the results of the analysis? Evaluate the overall efficacy of the research study by identifyin" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">ing the strengths and weaknesses of aspects of its design and implementation. Identify the limitations noted by the researchers and add any limitations you see that were not mentioned in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in the article. Describe the directions for future research proposed by the authors and evaluate their appropriateness. Recommend at least one idea for a future study that will overcome some of the limitations of this study. Keep in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in min" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">ind that this suggested future study will serve as the basis for your Fin" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">inal Paper. Your paper should be four to six pages in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in length (excludin" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">ing title and reference pages) and formatted accordin" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">ing to APA style as outlin" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">ined in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in the Ashford Writin" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">ing Center. Utilize a min" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">inimum of five sources that were published within" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in the last 10 years and are documented in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in APA style