This document provides guidelines for writing a paper that critiques a popular culture relationship book using both personal and academic expertise. It outlines the assignment requirements, including writing a 3-4 page paper with 3 main critique points supported by at least 3 academic sources. It provides a multi-step process for completing the assignment, including acquiring a book, reading it, drafting multiple versions of the paper, and ensuring proper formatting and citations. The document aims to help students demonstrate communication skills like analyzing information sources and taking a logical analytical stance.

1. POP-CULTURE/SELF-HELP RELATIONSHIP BOOK
CRITIQUE
Assignment Sheet & Guide (BECK – COMM 623)
Rationale:
The main goal for writing this paper is analyze a popular culture
relationship book, using both personal and academic expertise
to critique the claims made in the book. In doing this,
communication graduate students will demonstrate how to read
various information sources, identify key features of each,
critique and analyze these in a logical and orderly way,
recognize overlaps with other materials, and then take a stand of
their own. Finally the practice of professional writing is a
process, and this assignment adds to this process of practice and
incremental improvement.
Basics for the Paper:
· 3-4 pages double spaced, 12 pt. font, standard margins
· Professional objective writing style (“Based on evidence A,
this means that…”) as opposed to subjective writing style (i.e.,
“I believe that…” “In my experience…”)
· Title page (title, name, school, date)
· Properly cited paper and reference page in APA or MLA
format (+3 academic sources)
Steps for Completion:
1. Acquire a pop-culture/self-help book that you haven’t read
already. Examples of books in recent history that fit this mold
would be “Women are from Mars, men are from Venus,” “He’s
not that into you,” “Coping with Difficult People.” Acquire
professor’s approval for your selected text (DUE NEXT WEEK)
2. Read the entire book, taking notes on aspects (i.e., ideas,

2. arguments, examples) that jump out at you as significant or
relevant to class, relational communication field or research,
personal reasons, etc.
3. Draft #1: Organize your paper into three sections:
Overview of the book, three main points, and
Conclusion/Summary. NOTE: Content in each section below
represents ideas for what to write about, not necessarily a strict
list of requirements.
a. Overview: This section should introduce the book and your
critique, as well as give us a peek at the general relational
ground the book covers, how it informs the reader (i.e., advi ce,
description), and perhaps information about the writer. It
should ultimately convey the structure for the following section.
b. Three Main Points: Based on what you read, what jumps out
at you as the most important aspects of the reading as they
relate your experience of these ideas, the readings we do in this
class, overlapping theory, or big picture society stuff?
Remember this is a communication class, so keep in mind the
overall thrust should be about what your book and its points say
about communication lessons/behavior/messages.
c. Conclusion/Summary: Pull it together…what do these three
points (above) say in general about how the text informs not
only a general “mainstream America” audience, but also
relational/interpersonal/general communication scholars? Is it
garbage? Informed garbage? The new modern relationship
handbook? The next great American novel?
4. Draft #2: After you have sufficiently walked away and
thought about your ideas as they stand, rewrite, reject and
reintroduce, or revise your previous draft. Consider how ideas
flow together, how you summarize the collection of points you
make, and how you are using other academic sources or quotes
within the primary book to support your points. If a paragraph
seems flimsy or on the other hand too cumbersome, consider
what you want to say and if you are saying it with enough

3. substance or too much. Think about how paragraphs lead into
each other.
5. Final Draft #3: After you have walked away again, read the
paper for grammar, punctuation, quotation, or other writing
issues. Double check your use of objective vs. subjective
writing (if you are confused or having trouble with this, read
any of our assigned articles for ideas; they all use objective
writing). Double check your cited sources and your reference
page, and ensure you’ve used proper format. Correct tense
confusion, passive vs. active voice mistakes, etc.
6. Staple the paper in the upper-left hand corner of the paper.
Exhale. Turn it in!
Final Checklist (before Turn-in):
· Page limit met (do not count title page and reference list
toward page count)
· Correct text size, color, spacing and formatting used
· Writing structure reflects the three sections (Overview, Main
Points, Conclusion)
· Three academic sources have been used “in-text” to support
claims in a substantive way, and also are not on our class
reading list (you have found them independently)
· Paragraphs are mostly between 3 and 6 sentences long.
· Evidence, in the form of citations and quotations, is accurately
and completely cited according to APA or MLA style.
· Reference page reflects APA or MLA style, and features
everything you cite in the paper.
· Staple in the upper right hand corner; Pages are in the correct
order.
· Double check the entire document before you hand it in.
Everything should reflect your final and complete effort on the
paper.

4. Dr. Beck’s Suggestions & Helpful Tips:
· Take clear (not excessive) notes as you read, with the goal of
helping yourself to organize the paper later on. When you are
immersed in a text/source sometimes a connection to a theory,
example, or another source is most clear at that particular
moment. Don’t lose the moment!
· Each of us knows how long it takes to write papers, but I’m
asking you to write something “three drafts” worthy. If you
turn in a “one draft” worthy paper it will most likely show. Put
in the time and you will have a higher quality product (which is
the bar for graduate level work).
Rubic_Print_FormatCourse CodeClass CodeAssignment
TitleTotal PointsHLT-362VHLT-362V-OL191Article Analysis
2130.0CriteriaPercentage1: Unsatisfactory (0.00%)2: Less Than
Satisfactory (65.00%)3: Satisfactory (75.00%)4: Good
(85.00%)5: Excellent (100.00%)CommentsPoints
EarnedContent100.0%Two Quantitative Articles10.0%Fewer
than two articles are presented. None of the articles presented
use quantitative research.N/ATwo articles are presented. Of the
articles presented, only one articles are based on quantitative
researchN/ATwo articles are presented. Both articles are based
on quantitative research.Article Citation and
Permalink10.0%Article citation and permalink are
omitted.Article citation and permalink are presented. There are
significant errors. Page numbers are not indicated to cite
information, or the page numbers are incorrect.Article citation
and permalink are presented. Article citation is presented in
APA format, but there are errors. Page numbers to cite
information are missing, or incorrect, in some areas.Article
citation and permalink are presented. Article citation is
presented in APA format. Page numbers are used in to cite
information. There are minor errors.Article citation and
permalink are presented. Article citation is accurately presented
in APA format. Page numbers are accurate and used in all areas

5. when citing information.Broad Topic Area/Title10.0%Broad
topic area and title are omitted.Broad topic area and title are
referenced but are incomplete.Broad topic area and title are
summarized. There are some minor inaccuracies.Broad topic
area and title are presented. There are some minor errors, but
the content overall is accurate.Broad topic area and title are
fully presented and accurate.Hypothesis10.0%Definition of
hypothesis is omitted. The definition of the hypothesis is
incorrect.Hypothesis is summarized. There are major
inaccuracies or omissions.Hypothesis is generally defined.
There are some minor inaccuracies.Hypothesis is defined.
Hypothesis is generally defined. There are some minor
inaccuracies.Hypothesis is accurate and clearly
defined.Independent and Dependent Variable Type and Data for
Variable10.0%Variable types and data for variables are
omitted.Variable types and data for variables are presented.
There are major inaccuracies or omissions.Variable types and
data for variables are presented. There are inaccuracies.Variable
types and data for variables are presented. Minor detail is
needed for accuracy.Variable types and data for variables are
presented and accurate.Population of Interest for the
Study10.0%Population of interest for the study is
omitted.Population of interest for the study is presented. There
are major inaccuracies or omissions.Population of interest for
the study is presented. There are inaccuracies.Population of
interest for the study is presented. Minor detail is needed for
accuracy.Population of interest for the study is presented and
accurate.Sample10.0%Sample is omitted.Sample is presented.
There are major inaccuracies or omissions.Sample is presented.
There are inaccuracies.Sample is presented. Minor detail is
needed for accuracy. Page citation for sample information is
provided.Sample is presented and accurate. Page citation for
sample information is provided.Sampling
Method10.0%Sampling method is omitted.Sampling is
presented. There are major inaccuracies or omissions.Sampling
is presented. There are inaccuracies. Page citation for sample

6. information is omitted.Sampling is presented. Minor detail is
needed for accuracy.Sampling method is presented and
accurate.How Was Data Collected10.0%The means of data
collection are omitted.The means of data collection are
presented. There are major inaccuracies or omissions.The means
of data collection are presented. There are inaccuracies. Page
citation for sample information is omitted.The means of data
collection are presented. Minor detail is needed for accuracy.
Page citation for sample information is provided.The means of
data collection are presented and accurate. Page citation for
sample information is provided.Mechanics of Writing (includes
spelling, punctuation, grammar, and language use)10.0%Surface
errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of
meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is
employed.Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the
reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) or word
choice are present. Sentence structure is correct but not
varied.Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are
not overly distracting to the reader. Correct and varied sentence
structure and audience-appropriate language are employed.Prose
is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be
present. The writer uses a variety of effective sentence
structures and figures of speech.The writer is clearly in
command of standard, written, academic English.Total
Weightage100%
Disclaimer: This is a machine generated PDF of selected
content from our products. This functionality is provided solely
for your
convenience and is in no way intended to replace original
scanned PDF. Neither Cengage Learning nor its licensors make
any
representations or warranties with respect to the machine
generated PDF. The PDF is automatically generated "AS IS"

7. and "AS
AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. CENGAGE
LEARNING AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY
DISCLAIM ANY
AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES,
INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES
FOR AVAILABILITY,
ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-
INFRINGEMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A
PARTICULAR
PURPOSE. Your use of the machine generated PDF is subject to
all use restrictions contained in The Cengage Learning
Subscription and License Agreement and/or the Gale OneFile:
Nursing and Allied Health Terms and Conditions and by using
the
machine generated PDF functionality you agree to forgo any
and all claims against Cengage Learning or its licensors for
your use of
the machine generated PDF functionality and any output derived
therefrom.
Establishment of an analysis model based on measurement
of hepatitis B viral infection serum markers.
Authors: Yang Guang, Li Yuzhong and Liu Hui
Date: Feb. 18, 2019
From: BMC Infectious Diseases(Vol. 19, Issue 1)
Publisher: BioMed Central Ltd.
Document Type: Report
Length: 2,045 words
DOI: http://dx.doi.org.lopes.idm.oclc.org/10.1186/s12879-019-
3813-x
Abstract:
Background
Using serum markers of hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection, we

8. aimed to develop a quantitative model that explains the
complicated
immune response to this infection.
Methods
Serum samples from HBV-infected patients were randomly
selected and divided into groups based on HBV-DNA positivity
or
negativity. Quantitative markers of HBV were measured.
Formulae for Antibody index (IAb) [(anti-HBs * 1/anti-HBe +
anti-HBs *
1/anti-HBc + 1/anti-HBc * 1/anti-HBe).sup.0.5] and Antigen
index (IAg) [(HBsAg * HBeAg).sup.0.5] were introduced.
Results
IAg values were statistically higher (p < 0.05) in the HBV-
DNA-positive group than in the -negative group, but no
statistically
significant difference in IAb values was observed. When IAb
values were > 50, IAg values were mostly < 250; when IAg
values were
> 250, IAb values were mostly < 50.
Conclusion
IAb and IAg values can efficiently reflect the status of immune
response to HBV and may be suitable for assessment of the
infection
process and the possible outcome of infection.
Keywords: Hepatitis B, Biomarker, Mathematical model
Full Text:
Author(s): Yang Guang1 , Li Yuzhong1 and Liu Hui1

9. Background
Hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection is a major public health issue
worldwide [1-3]. The virus causes both chronic and acute
infections.
The host immune response causes both hepatocellular damage
and clearance of viral antigen [4-6]. Serum markers of HBV
infection
might help with assessment of various issues such as prognosis
[7-9].
Standard methods and reliable, commercial kits have been used
to detect either HBV antigens or antibodies produced by the
host.
Such methods may detect hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg),
antibody to hepatitis B surface antigen (anti-HBs), hepatitis B e
antigen (HBeAg), antibody to hepatitis B e antigen (anti-HBe),
or antibody to hepatitis B core antigen (anti-HBc); however,
interpretation of these assays is complex [10-12]. The immune
response to HBV is initiated after the virus enters the body and
shows
a complex relationship between the incidence and outcome of
HBV, i.e. whether the patient is a disease carrier, or will
develop
chronic infection [7-9].
In previous assessments of anti-HBs, anti-HBe and anti-HBc
responses, the data for each antibody were qualitative and the
assessment for each marker was independent. Currently,
quantitative serum markers of HBV infection have been used
widely;
however, the classical assessment rules based on qualitative test
results continue to be used with quantitative results in
associated

10. http://dx.doi.org.lopes.idm.oclc.or g/10.1186/s12879-019-3813-x
analysis and studies. Therefore, we developed a new analytical
model based on quantitative measurement of serum markers of
HBV
infection. The model explains the complicated immune response
to this infection; the advantages of quantitative detection could
be
fully applied.
Methods
Data source
In total, 128 original data were collected from hospital patients
with HBV infection (defined as HBsAg, HBeAg, anti-HBe or
anti-HBc
positive; 76 males; mean age of all patients 57.4 [+ or -] 13.6
years) at the Second Affiliated Hospital of Dalian Medical
University,
China. These patients were newly diagnosed by their physicians
and blood samples were collected before they received antiviral
treatment. There is seroconversion from an HBeAg-positive
phase to an HBeAg-negative, and anti-HBe-positive phase
during the
natural course of infection [13]. Of 128 such patients, 23, 18
and 87 cases were respectively in HBeAg-positive, HBeAg-
negative, and
anti-HBe-positive phase.
Laboratory tests
HBV markers (HBsAg, anti-HBs, HBeAg, anti-HBe, and anti-
HBc) were measured using a chemiluminescent microparticle
immunoassay (Cobas E601 analyzer; F. Hoffmann-La Roche

11. Ltd., Basel, Switzerland) per the manufacturer's protocols. Anti -
HBs
levels [greater than or equai to]10 mIU/ml were considered
positive. Sample value/cut-off values (S/CO) were used as
quantitative
indicators for HBsAg, HBeAg, anti-HBe, and anti-HBc. S/CO
[greater than or equai to]1.0 was defined as positive for HBsAg
and
HBeAg. The levels of anti-HBe and anti-HBc in the assays for
these molecules are inversely proportional to S/CO; thus, S/CO
ratios
[less than or equai to]1.0 were considered anti-HBe and anti-
HBc positive.
A real-time fluorescence quantitative PCR system (Roche
LightCycler 480II, Roche Ltd., Basel, Switzerland) and
commercial
diagnostic kits were used for the quantitation of HBV-DNA.
The detection values were set at 500 IU/mL and serum samples
with
>500 IU/mL were considered positive for HBV-DNA.
Establishment of quantitative model
HBsAg (a serological marker of HBV infection, both acute and
chronic) and HBeAg (found in the blood when virus is present)
were
designated as representing the infection phase; the quantitative
value for the infection phase was defined as the Antigen index
(IAg).
Anti-HBs, anti-HBe and anti-HBc antibodies (found after an
acute infection or in chronic HBV carriers) were designated as
representing the immune response phase; the quantitative value
of the immune response phase was defined as the Antibody
index
(IAb).

12. IAb was taken as an example to explain the establishment of the
model. The quantitative levels of anti-HBs, anti-HBc and anti-
HBe
antibodies were used to establish a three-dimensional co-
ordinate system; the area of the triangle they formed was the
quantitative
value of infection phase (Fig. 1). The area of the triangle was
calculated as:[formula omitted]
Fig. 1:
Schematic diagram of the quantitative analysis model of the
immune response to hepatitis B virus (HBV)
Note, anti-HBc and anti-HBe were determined by applying the
competition method, for which (1/anti-HBe and 1/anti-HBc)
should be
substituted.
As 0.5 * sin60 was constant, it could be omitted in analysis.
Because the quantitative value (S) is a large number that is
impractical to work with, the square root of S can be substituted
as
demonstrated below.
[formula omitted]
The calculation theory for IAg was consistent with that for IAb.
The formula for IAg is as follow:[formula omitted]
Statistical analysis
The IAg and IAb indices were not normally distributed; hence
they are stated as quartile values. Difference between groups

13. were
analyzed using the Mann-Whitney U -test. The relationship
between the IAg and IAb indices was assessed using Spearman
correlation. Data were considered statistically significant when
the probability of a type I error was [less than or equai to]0.05.
Data
were analyzed using SPSS ver. 13.0 software for Windows.
Results
Table 1 shows raw data for the HBV markers IAg and IAb in the
HBV-DNA-positive and -negative groups. IAg values were
higher in
the HBV-DNA-positive group than in the HBV-DNA-negative
group (p < 0.05). No significant difference in IAb level was
observed
between the groups.
Comparison of the HBV marker between two groups of HBV-
DNA
Figure 2 shows the distribution of IAg and IAb in patients (x-
axis, IAb values; y-axis, IAg) as a scatter plot to observe the
relationship
between IAg and IAb. As shown in Fig. 2, when the values of
IAb were greater than 50, the values of IAg were mostly less
than 250;
when the values of IAg were over 250, the values of IAb were
mostly less than 50. Levels of HBV-DNA in groups of scatter
plot are
shown in Table 2.
Fig. 2:

14. Relationship between IAg and IAb in 128 patients
Levels of HBV-DNA in different groups
Figure 3 shows relationship between IAb and HBV-DNA in 128
patients. HBV-DNA (lgDNA) was decreased with that IAb value
increased. When the values of IAb were greater than 300, the
values of HBV-DNA were mostly negative.
Fig. 3:
Relationship between HBV-DNA (data were logarithmically
transformed) and IAb in 128 patients
Discussion
Tests for HBV markers (e.g. anti-HBs, anti-HBe and anti-HBc
antibodies) now provide quantitative data, so a mathematical
model can
be established and the information used to fully evaluate the
degree of immune response to HBV. Our model (IAb and IAg),
established using three quantitative antibody and two antigen
tests, may be a way of analyzing and studying different
outcomes of
HBV infection. Our results showed that when IAb values were
more than 50, IAg values were mostly less than 250; when IAg
values
were over 250, IAb values were mostly less than 50. These
results indicated that increased immune response to HBV can
inhibit
virus proliferation, and that the mathematical model and the
cutoff values were valid in efficiently reflecting viral infection.
Although accurate quantification of HBV can be conducted in
infected patients using molecular biological methods, IAg and
IAb are

15. important indexes of the extent of in vivo viral proliferation;
these two tests (for HBV DNA or serum biomarkers) are related
but
different [14-16]. HBV infection causes immunologically-
mediated damage [17-20], therefore IAg and IAb are directly
related to HBV
pathogenesis. No significant difference in IAb was observed
between the HBV-DNA-positive and -negative groups,
suggesting an
important role of the immune response to HBV in pathogenicity
and recovery from HBV infection.
Our results also showed that IAg were mostly negative with IAb
values > 50 and the values of HBV-DNA were mostly negative
when
the values of IAb increase > 300, implying that risk of
infectivity to other people decreased with the increase of IAb.
Therefore, the
new laboratory parameters IAb and IAg may be suitable tools to
assess infection state during the natural course of HBV
infection and
further use of these data in the prediction of HBV infection
outcome. We suggest that both IAb and IAg negative status
(IAb < 50, IAg
< 250) implies an early stage in an infection; IAg-positive (IAg
> 250) implies a higher proliferation of the virus; IAb-positive
(IAb > 50)
implies a stage in loss of tolerance to infection and immune
response to HBV; IAb > 300 implies a stage of recovery from an
infection;
both IAb and IAg positive are rare.
One limitation of this study is that more sensitive test was not
used to better categorize HBV-DNA negative/positive patients.
Howerver, the main purpose of this study was to establish a new
index for assessment of the HBV infection process; our HBV-

16. DNA
result from a real-time fluorescence quantitative PCR system
could be accepted for this purpose. In the future, relationship of
IAb and
IAg should be observed with more parameters, such as the
elevation of liver enzymes and HBV-DNA with using higher
sensitive
system.
Conclusion
IAb and IAg values can reflect efficiently immune response
status to HBV and may be suitable for assessment of the
infection
process and the possible outcome of the HBV infection. The
detailed clinical significance of IAb and IAg should now be
determined
by performing studies on various relevant areas of interest
related to this disease.
Abbreviations: anti-HBc: Antibody to hepatitis B core antigen;
anti-HBe: Antibody to hepatitis B e antigen; anti-HBs: Antibody
to
hepatitis B surface antigen; HBeAg: Hepatitis B e antigen;
HBsAg: Hepatitis B surface antigen; HBV: Hepatitis B virus;
IAb: Antibody
index; IAg: Antigen index
Competing interests: The authors declare that they have no
competing interests.
Acknowledgements: We thank Dong Feng for help with data
acquisition.
Funding

17. None.
Availability of data and materials
The datasets used and/or analysed during the current study are
available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.
Correspondence: Liu Hui:
Author details: Aff1 0000 0000 9558 1426, grid.411971.b,
College of Medical Laboratory, Dalian Medical University, ,
116044,
Dalian, China.
References
1. Twagirumugabe T, Swaibu G, Walker TD, Lindh M, Gahutu
JB, Bergström T, Norder H. BMC Infect Dis. 2017;17(1):32.
2. Hongfei W, Yunyan Z, Fei Y, Hui L. Comput Biol Med.
2013;43:1167.-1170.
3. Liu H, Ma Y, Wang H, Liu Q. Vaccine. 2012;30:3483.-3487.
4. Bertoletti A, Ferrari C. J Hepatol. 2016;64(1 Suppl):S71.-
S83.
5. Maini MK, Gehring AJ. J Hepatol. 2016;64(1 Suppl):S60.-
S70.
6. Liu H, Han Y, Wang B. J Virol Methods. 2011;173:271.-274.
7. Lin C, Kao JH. Clin Mol Hepatol. 2016;22(4):423.-431.

18. 8. Makvandi M. World J Gastroenterol. 2016;22(39):8720.-
8734.
9. Xiang Y, Chen P, Xia JR, Zhang LP. Genet Mol Res.
2017;16:1.
10. Ningyu Z, Ying Z, Hui L. J Med Virol. 2015;87:1008.-1012.
11. Liu H, Han Y, Wang B. Clin Chim Acta. 2011;412(11-
12):1022.-1025.
12. Han Y, Wang B, Liu H. J Clin Virol. 2011;52(4):295.-299.
13. Kramvis A, Kostaki EG, Hatzakis A, Paraskevis D. Front
Microbiol. 2018;9:2521.
14. Du X, Liu Y, Ma L, Lu J, Jin Y, Ren S, He Z, Chen X.
Medicine (Baltimore). 2017;96(7):e6088.
15. Chu CM, Shyu WC, Liaw YF. Dig Dis Sci. 2010;55(2):446.-
451.
16. Thompson AJ, Nguyen T, Iser D, Ayres A, Jackson K,
Littlejohn M, Slavin J, Bowden S, Gane EJ, Abbott W, Lau GK,
Lewin SR,
Visvanathan K, Desmond PV, Locarnini SA. Hepatology..
2010;51(6):1933.-1944.
17. Das A, Maini MK. Dig Dis. 2010;28(1):126.-132.
18. Dunn C, Peppa D, Khanna P, Nebbia G, Jones M, Brendish
N, Lascar RM, Brown D, Gilson RJ, Tedder RJ, Dusheiko GM,
Jacobs M, Klenerman P, Maini MK. Gastroenterology..
2009;137(4):1289.-1300.
19. Shang C, Wang Z, Liu H. J Virol Methods. 2017;240:42.-48.

19. 20. Zhang JY, Zhang Z, Lin F, Zou ZS, Xu RN, Jin L, Fu JL,
Shi F, Shi M, Wang HF, Wang FS. Hepatology.. 2010;51(1):81.-
91.
doi: 10.1186/s12879-019-3813-x
Please note: Some tables, figures or graphics were omitted from
this article.
Copyright: COPYRIGHT 2019 BioMed Central Ltd.
http://www.biomedcentral.com/bmcinfectdis/
Source Citation (MLA 8th Edition)
Guang, Yang, et al. "Establishment of an analysis model based
on measurement of hepatitis B viral infection serum markers."
BMC
Infectious Diseases, vol. 19, no. 1, 2019, p. NA. Gale OneFile:
Nursing and Allied Health,
link.gale.com/apps/doc/A581368574/PPNU?u=canyonuniv&sid=
PPNU&xid=e863569e. Accessed 8 Feb. 2021.
Gale Document Number: GALE|A581368574
http://www.biomedcentral.com/bmcinfectdis/
Article Analysis 2
Article Citation
and Permalink
(APA format)
Article 1
Bogovic, P., Logar, M., Avsic-Zupanc, T., Strle, F., & Lotric-

20. Furlan, S. (2014). Quantitative evaluation of the severity of
acute illness in adult patients with tick-borne
encephalitis. BioMed Research
International. https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/ A427024670/PPNU
?u=canyonuniv&sid=PPNU&xid=22869eaf
Link:
https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A427024670/PPNU?u=canyonuni
v&sid=PPNU&xid=22869eaf
Article 2
Guang, Y., Yuzhong, L., & Hui, L. (2019). Establishment of an
analysis model based on measurement of hepatitis B viral
infection serum markers. BMC Infectious Diseases, 19(1), NA.
https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A581368574/PPNU?u=canyonuni
v&sid=PPNU&xid=e863569e
Link:
https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A581368574/PPNU?u=canyonuni
v&sid=PPNU&xid=e863569e
Point
Description
Description
Broad Topic Area/Title
Define Hypotheses
Define Independent and Dependent Variables and Types of Data
for Variables

21. Population of Interest for the Study
Sample
Sampling Method
How Were Data Collected?
© 2019. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.
2