Topic: Whether anti-depression or cognitive behavioural therapy is more effective in treating insomnia
Topic: Whether anti-depression or cognitive behavioural therapy is more effective in treating insomnia
Search Terms
Age Group: Adults
Sex: Males and Females
Date Published: less than 15 years [Between 2009-2024]
Article: Peer-reviewed articles, Original research papers/primary articles, clinical case studies, meta-analysis articles
Inclusion
Manual in-person therapy
Anti-depressants taken orally and routinely
Manual PSG - recorded by sleep technician in sleep laboratory setting
Actigraphy - using device to record PSG
Insomnia Severity Index (ISI) as a scale to determine severity of insomnia
Short-term insomnia
Chronic insomnia
Primary insomnia
Co-morbid insomnia
Exclusion
Secondary insomnia
Transient insomnia
Benzodiazepine class medications
When screening make sure to note how the articles were sourced/screened:
Which database, if all the search terms, inclusions and exclusions were included, any filters used, how duplicates were identified etc.
Assessment Title: Capstone Project Individual Report
AssessmentWeighting:40%
Assessment Length:Minimum length = 3500 words-5000 - excluding the reference list, including in-text citations. This is an indicative number. We understand that different projects may have different deliverables.
Assessment Type:Individual
Based on the category of the projects (design, traditional, hybrid etc), your report may vary, but you should aim to follow the rubric below closely. Pay attention to the "Criteria for judgement" section.
Submit as a PDF document.
Document Label - Name/Tutorial date start time/Individual report HEA30001,example - Joe Jackson/Friday 02:30PM group 1/Individual report HEA30001
If your Deliverable cannot be fitted under the Results section (example-if your deliverable is a video - then paste a WORKING LINK into the Results section. For good presentation, include a snapshot, so that the examiner knows what to expect.Testif these links can be accessed by a third party. If it cannot be seen by the examination panel, at the time of marking, marks will be lost.
Rubric
Group Project Report (<5000 words) (1)
Group Project Report (<5000 words) (1)
Criteria Ratings Pts
This criterion is linked to a learning outcomeTitle page, Acknowledgements, Declaration, Table of contents
What is looked for - How well it is written. Formatting. Overall Presentation. 5to >3.0Pts
Excellent
All items stated under criteria are very professionally constructed. Exemplary presentation and layout. 3to >0Pts
Good
All items under the criteria are well constructed and laid out. Writing, formatting and lay-out could have a better professional touch.
5pts
This criterion is linked to a learning outcomeTitleCriteria for judgement -Represents the report well. Clear and concise. Has followed the tips provided in this unit. 5to >4.0Pts
Excellent
Title represents the project scope perfectly. 4to >2.0Pts
Good
Title represents the project scope well. Wordings used could be more apt. 2to >0Pts
Fair
Title represents the project well, but parts of it either represent the project too ambitiously or undermines the work done.
5pts
This criterion is linked to a learning outcomeAbstract/ Executive summary
Criteria for judgement -Represents the report well. Has a good structure. Has followed the tips provided in this unit. Clear and concise. Scientifically written. Within the word count (200 words) 5to >4.0Pts
Excellent
The structure of the abstract, content, descriptions and layout, represent the magnitude of work done well. Within word count. 4to >2.0Pts
Good
The abstract captures the content of the report well. All parts are fairly well represented. Some parts lack sufficient detail. 2to >0Pts
Fair
Fairly well written abstract. Could capture the magnitude of the report better. Constructed well, but some parts are less /more amplified than the others.
5pts
This criterion is linked to a learning outcomeIntroductionCriteria for judgement - This section has been written for a scientific audience who may not be too familiar with this area of work. There is sufficient information. Scientifically written. Well referenced. The content is packaged well. Word count - not more than 400 words. Has taken into consideration points shared under Group Report series 1 - Introduction. 10to >5.0Pts
Good
All aspects of the criteria are addressed well. Leads the reader well into the report. 5to >0Pts
Fair
Most aspects of the criteria are well addressed.
10pts
This criterion is linked to a learning outcomeLiterature Review (Background)
Criteria for judgement - A detailed literature review of various recommended resources in the field. Good structure, presentation and flow. Brings out the gaps and areas for development. Leads well into the project aims/research question. Scientifically written. Well referenced. Word count - <2000 words. Follows suggestions recommended in this unit. Follows the guidelines of the Industry Partner. Connects well to other sections of the report. Is a GOOD foundation to inform the next sections of this report. The reference list has been checked against the entries and shows a wide range of recommended references. The examiner has also noted from his/her own search on the topic, that the team has 'sufficiently' encompassed key information (from over the 'recommended' years) relevant to their project. 20to >15.0Pts
Excellent
An exemplary review that has followed ALL the criteria for judgement. 15to >10.0Pts
Good
The criteria for judgement have been followed to a large extent, however, some parts of the criteria have been well or over addressed, while others haven't. The literature review is a good attempt of building a foundation of knowledge for this project and connects partially well across sections. 10to >5.0Pts
Fair
The criteria for judgement have been followed, however, some parts of the criteria have been inadequately addressed. The literature review is at the most a fair attempt of building a foundation of knowledge for this project and does not connect well across sections. 5to >0Pts
Unsatisfactory
Lacks representation of some aspects of the criteria which has led to a barely satisfactory literature review.
20pts
This criterion is linked to a learning outcomeAim of the Project
Criteria for judgementYou may have conveyed some of this in the introduction. This is where you might either replicate it (if you feel nothing more can be done), or improvise it based on the literature review findings.Clear. Succinct. Scientifically written.It should be possible to map the whole report these aims/aim.You can have sub-aims, goals, hypothesis. It can be represented in sentence or diagrammatic form. 5to >3.0Pts
Excellent
Criteria for judgement have been followed closely. Exemplary clarity in the aims and can be seen connected throughout the report. 3to >0Pts
Good
Some parts of the report do not connect very well to the aims. After having read the whole report, it seems that the aims could have been a bit more descriptive,
5pts
This criterion is linked to a learning outcomeMethodsCriteria for judgement -Every project category will have a different style of presenting methods. What you have put into the methods follows instructions in this unit and advice of your tutor.Tips from lectures and Canvas links have been used.Rationale behind choosing the method is stated.* Wherever apt -Inclusion and Exclusion criteria are clear.Details of the methods are clearly described and referenced. If modified from a previous study - mentioned.Extensive supporting protocols are provided as appendices and linked into this section.Flow-charts showing the process of creating the deliverable from resources are clear (for such projects)*If this method is before an experiment, there are lines stating how the results will be observed, documented, analysed and validated.*Additional tools unique to the study (not mentioned here) are adequately described.*The methods is clear enough for another project-group to read-off and perform the project with the 'same quality.' 10to >8.0Pts
Excellent
Methods section has followed ALL the expected criteria for the 'project category type' as listed under "criteria for judgement." 8to >4.0Pts
Good
Methods section has followed most of the expected criteria for the 'project category type' as listed under "criteria for judgement." 4to >0Pts
Fair
Methods section has followed only few of the expected criteria for the 'project category type' as listed under "criteria for judgement." This section would have appeared more complete had there been more detail in ________
10pts
This criterion is linked to a learning outcomeResults and analysis
Criteria for judgement -Where an analysis is required - Results have been stated logically, clearly and has been neatly represented through graphs, tables etc. Software or statistical tests and outputs are clearly explained.Where a systematic analysis of literature is required - tables and figures are provided as in the examples provided.Where a design output is required - these are of good quality, can be retrieved from the links provided.All result types follow the standards expected by the IP.The IP is satisfied with the final output. 20to >15.0Pts
Excellent
Exemplary output (depending on the type of project). The IP is extremely satisfied. All aspects of the criteria for judgement have been followed. 15to >10.0Pts
Good
Results have been stated in a detailed manner and possesses some analysis. Information could be presented better for the 'type of project', following the criteria for judgement and IP's expectations. 10to >5.0Pts
Fair
Results have been stated in a basic manner and possesses some analysis. Information could be presented better for the 'type of project', following the criteria for judgement and IP's expectations. 5to >0Pts
Unsatisfactory
Results have been stated in a basic manner and lacks in-depth analysis. Information could be presented better, following the criteria for judgement.
20pts
This criterion is linked to a learning outcomeConclusionCriteria for judgement -The Conclusion wraps the report up and provides the 'take-home' message of the study well. Important implications of the work are stated. (200 words) 5to >4.0Pts
Excellent 4to >2.0Pts
Good 2to >0Pts
Fair
5pts
This criterion is linked to a learning outcomeOverall quality of the report
Criteria for judgement -Well formatted. Paginated. Followed all instructions. Good flow of information from start to end. All parts of the report are well connected. 5to >4.0Pts
Excellent 4to >2.0Pts
Good 2to >0Pts
Fair
5pts
This criterion is linked to a learning outcomeReferencesCriteria for judgement -Has followed the Swinburne Harvard or APA 7ed system throughout or the system recommended by the IP (email proof required). 5to >2.5Pts
Excellent
1-3 errors 2.5to >0Pts
Fair
>3 errors
5pts
This criterion is linked to a learning outcomeAppendices - All submissions - suitably completed
2. Group Contract3. Group Meeting Records 5to >2.5Pts
Good 2.5to >0Pts
Fair
5pts
Total points:100
