A systematic literature review comparing the sensitivity and specificity of mammography and ultrasound in the diagnosis of breast cancer

Paper must follow the following rubric:Title:
In this section, the title of the article is presented. The title should demonstrate succinctly and specifically highlight the focus, approach and key variables of the project.Introduction (background and rationale):Background:In this section, the author introduces the topic and focus of the investigation, highlighting key facts and terminology that the reader will need to be familiar with to understand the wider article.RationaleIn this section, the research project is justified. The author should highlight any knowledge gaps (lacunae) that this study has attempted to address. Published literature should be analysed critically to support discussion of why this particular project should be undertaken at this time.Research QuestionIn this section, the author distils the problem that the article is seeking to explore into a single succinct question. By the conclusion of the article, it should be clear if this question has (or can) been answered by the investigation.Research AimIn this section, the author summarises the overall intention of the project into a single succinct statement. It should be clear from the aim what the reader intends to achieve from the project and by the conclusion of the article it should be clear if this aim has been achieved or not.Research ObjectivesIn this section, the author should supply approximately 3-5 objectives, which detail the actions that allow achievement of the aim. These objectives should meet the SMART criteria.Methodology – Design and ReproducibilityIn this section, the author should supply the methods that they undertook to collect and analyse their data. Details should be specific and exhaustive at all times, identifying every action undertaken within the search strategy and analysis of the sources. A 3rd-party should be able to fully recreate the study from these details.Methodology – Table of ArticlesIn this section, the author should compile a record of all literature that was yielded by the search strategy, for use in the study. The table should include enough detail to allow for identification of the studies in the reference list (which itself must include every entry in this table).Methodology – EthicsIn this section, the author should demonstrate an understanding of the concept, purpose and application of research ethics. There should be clear discussion of ethical principles related to the project and the writer should detail how they have adhered to ethical practice at all stages of the project and article authorship.Literature Review – ReadingTo complete this activity, the author should demonstrate through their writing that they have a deep insight into their topic under investigation via thorough engagement with relevant and contemporary literature.Literature Review – Presentation of FindingsTo meet this criterion, the author should present the key data and findings of the articles that have been yielded by the search strategy. Data should be faithfully and fully represented, making it clear to the reader the secondary data that has been collected in the study. An overview or record of full findings can be included in the appendices, but it must be referred to in the main text and there must be discussion of key elements of this data in the main body of the article.Literature Review – Synthesis of FindingsTo meet this criterion, the author should explore the data from the sources in comparison and combination with each other, to build a picture of what the overall body of literature is saying.Literature Review – Critical AnalysisTo meet this criterion, the author should critically analyse the yielded literature and their underlying methods to determine the weight of evidence behind each outcome and claim.Discussion – InterpretationTo meet this criterion, you need to build upon the data that you have presented and critiqued to provide an overall viewpoint as to what your collected data suggests. This is achieved via identification and discussion of themes in relation to the study question and aim.Discussion – Contextualisation of ResultsTo meet this criterion, the results should be considered in relation to wider literature surrounding the topic. The discussions should be critically explored in relation to key: debates, practices, knowledge gaps or guidelines that are relevant to the topic so that the reader can judge the project’s significance in relation to the subject.Discussion – Completion of Question, Aim and ObjectivesWithin the discussion, it should be clear to the reader whether the outcomes of the study have fully allowed completion of the question aims and objectives. This does not need to be overtly stated by the author, but they may choose to do so with justification for their viewpoint.Discussion – LimitationsWithin the discussion, the author should highlight if there were any limitations that prevented the question from being fully answered or impacted on the overall scope of the project. This highlights on the inherent weaknesses and limitations of the methodological approach.ConclusionsWithin the conclusions, the author summarises the findings of their research. Within this section the overall results of the underlying research project are considered rather than individual articles and new data is not introduced.Recommendations of ResearchWithin this section, the author highlights any recommendations for practice and future research that are suggested by the outcomes of this study. Not every study will provide evidence that a change in practice is warranted and this is equally valid providing the same level of justification from the research outcomes is provided.Referencing – AccuracyCitations and references for this assignment should fully conform to the Harvard system of referencing, as described by Cite them Right. The output of any referencing management software should be thoroughly checked for conformity with this system.Referencing – RangeThe article should be supported consistently with a wide range of relevant and contemporary literature.FormattingThe article should be structured clearly to allow ease of reading. Headings should be used to denote chapters and any materials included in the appendices should be ordered and referred to within the main body text.AbstractThis section comprises of a short form summary of every chapter of the articles. It should be consistent with the resultant sections and not introduce new data or omit key ideas or outcomes.Academic writing The article should be written to an academic standard expected of a Level 6 student. This should include features such as: scientific terminology, formal tone, use of 3rd person voice, past tense and consistently accurate spelling and grammar.Make sure all referances included are english and related to my topic, the word count includes the main body, all citations, text bones. The word count does not include the referance list, tables and graphs, diagrams. I Have also attached the criteria with more info and have also attached what i have started, the bold text in my essay where done by my superivisor on things i had not yet completed. My writing hasnt reached the standard level yet and i would like to reach above 70%. Please make sure it is not plagerised as well.