Worksheet For Reading A Research Study Article In A Scholar ✓ Solved

Worksheet for Reading a Research Study Article in a Scholarl

Worksheet for Reading a Research Study Article in a Scholarly Journal: Use this worksheet to record notes on a peer-reviewed research study. Complete the following items for the article you review:

1. Title: What is the journal article's title?

2. Citation: Write an APA-style citation for the article.

3. Abstract — What topic and specific research question does the abstract identify?

4. Abstract — Why is this study useful to your research project?

5. Introduction — What is the purpose of the study?

6. Introduction — What terms does the article operationalize or define?

7. Introduction — Summarize the background information provided.

8. Methods — Is the study qualitative, quantitative, or mixed?

9. Methods — Briefly describe the methodology and sample size.

10. Results — Briefly describe key results from the data analysis.

11. Discussion — Complete: The data reported here provide evidence of ...

12. Discussion — What are the study's limitations?

13. Discussion — What recommendations for future research are made?

14. Conclusion — Summarize the authors' conclusions about the research question.

15. References — Provide two references listed in the article's reference list.

Paper For Above Instructions

Student and Project Context

Your Name: Example Student

Your research question or working thesis: Does a brief, manualized cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) protocol administered to university students significantly reduce measured symptoms of generalized anxiety compared with an active control?

Completed Worksheet (Model Answers and Guidance)

1. Title

Example answer: “Brief Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy for University Student Anxiety: A Randomized Controlled Trial.” When completing this item, list the exact title as printed on the article to ensure accurate citation and retrieval.

2. Citation

Example APA-style citation (model): Smith, L. A., & Nguyen, T. P. (2021). Brief cognitive-behavioral therapy for university student anxiety: A randomized controlled trial. Journal of Clinical Student Mental Health, 12(2), 85–101. Provide the exact authors, year, article title, journal name, volume(issue), and page range; follow APA 7th edition formatting conventions (APA, 2019).

3. Abstract — Topic and Research Question

Abstract synthesis: The abstract states the topic—evaluating a brief CBT intervention for clinically significant anxiety among university students—and the specific research question: whether an 8‑session manualized CBT course reduces anxiety symptoms compared to an active stress-management control. The abstract should clearly identify population, intervention, comparator, outcome, and study design (PICOS) to orient readers (Higgins & Green, 2011).

4. Abstract — Usefulness to Research Project

Why useful: This study directly addresses the research question by testing an accessible therapeutic approach in the target population (students). It provides effect-size estimates, methodological details, and limitations that inform the literature review and justify the current project (Creswell, 2014).

5. Introduction — Purpose of the Study

Purpose statement: The introduction frames rising prevalence of anxiety among students, gaps in brief evidence-based interventions on campus, and the current study’s purpose—to evaluate efficacy and feasibility of an 8-session CBT program in reducing anxiety and improving functioning (Beck et al., 1979; Hofmann et al., 2012).

6. Introduction — Operationalized Terms

Terms defined: The article operationalizes “clinically significant anxiety” (GAD-7 score ≥10), “brief CBT” (manualized 8 sessions with core cognitive restructuring and behavioral experiments), and “treatment response” (≥50% reduction on primary anxiety scale). Authors should explicitly define key constructs so measures and eligibility are clear (Polit & Beck, 2017).

7. Introduction — Background Summary

Background summary: The introduction reviews prevalence estimates of student anxiety, prior CBT efficacy trials in community and clinical samples, and limitations of existing trials (e.g., small samples, lack of active controls). It emphasizes need for pragmatic RCTs within college counseling settings (Hofmann et al., 2012; Mischel et al., 1972).

8. Methods — Study Type

Research design: This is a quantitative randomized controlled trial (RCT) with pre-post and follow-up assessments. Identify whether qualitative methods (e.g., participant interviews) are included; in this model they are not, so it's purely quantitative (Schulz et al., 2010).

9. Methods — Methodology and Sample

Method summary: Participants were university students screened for elevated anxiety (GAD-7 ≥10), randomized to brief CBT (n = 75) or active stress-management control (n = 73). Primary outcome measured by GAD-7 at baseline, post-treatment (8 weeks), and 3-month follow-up. Analysts used intention-to-treat mixed-effects models adjusting for baseline scores and demographic covariates. Describe recruitment methods, inclusion/exclusion criteria, randomization procedures, blinding (if any), and analytic approach (Cohen, 1988; Polit & Beck, 2017).

10. Results — Key Findings

Sample results: The CBT group demonstrated a significantly greater reduction in GAD-7 scores at post-treatment (mean reduction = 7.2, SD = 4.1) than the control (mean reduction = 3.4, SD = 3.8), yielding a between-group standardized effect size d = 0.85 (95% CI: 0.60–1.10), p < .001. Secondary outcomes (functional impairment, depressive symptoms) also favored CBT. Mixed models showed sustained effects at 3 months. Report confidence intervals, effect sizes, and exact p-values for transparency (Cohen, 1988).

11. Discussion — Interpreting Evidence

Completion: The data reported here provide evidence of a clinically meaningful benefit of brief CBT compared with an active control in reducing anxiety symptoms among university students, with moderate-to-large effect sizes and maintained gains at 3-month follow-up.

12. Discussion — Study Limitations

Limitations cited: Single-site sample limits generalizability; reliance on self-report measures introduces reporting bias; limited diversity in sample (e.g., overrepresentation of psychology majors); follow-up limited to 3 months; potential therapist allegiance effects. Authors should acknowledge these and discuss their impact on interpretation (Schulz et al., 2010).

13. Discussion — Recommendations for Future Research

Recommendations: Larger multisite RCTs, longer follow-up periods, inclusion of objective functioning metrics (e.g., academic performance), investigation of mechanisms (mediators and moderators), cost-effectiveness analyses, and adaptation for digital delivery were recommended to extend findings (Creswell, 2014).

14. Conclusion

Authors’ conclusion: Brief, manualized CBT is an effective, feasible intervention for reducing anxiety among university students and merits broader implementation paired with further effectiveness and implementation research.

15. References from the Article's Reference List (Example)

Two references the article cites (example): Beck, A. T., Rush, A. J., Shaw, B. F., & Emery, G. (1979). Cognitive Therapy of Depression. New York: Guilford Press. Spielberger, C. D. (1983). Manual for the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.

Interpretive Guidance and Practical Notes

When completing this worksheet for your own chosen article, extract direct quotations or paraphrases for the abstract and introduction items, copy the title and citation precisely, and record methodological specifics (randomization, sample size, instruments, statistical tests). For results, report effect sizes and CIs rather than only p-values to allow readers to gauge clinical importance (Cohen, 1988). For discussion and limitations, note whether authors explicitly address threats to internal and external validity and whether their recommendations align with identified limitations.

References

• American Psychological Association. (2019). Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (7th ed.). Washington, DC: APA.
• Beck, A. T., Rush, A. J., Shaw, B. F., & Emery, G. (1979). Cognitive Therapy of Depression. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
• Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
• Creswell, J. D. (2014). Mindfulness-based interventions: prospects for research and practice. Annual Review of Psychology, 65, 51–80.
• Hofmann, S. G., Asnaani, A., Vonk, I. J., Sawyer, A. T., & Fang, A. (2012). The efficacy of cognitive behavioral therapy: A review of meta-analyses. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 36(5), 427–440.
• Mischel, W., Ebbesen, E. B., & Zeiss, A. R. (1972). Cognitive and attentional mechanisms in delay of gratification. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 21(2), 204–218.
• Polit, D. F., & Beck, C. T. (2017). Nursing Research: Generating and Assessing Evidence for Nursing Practice (10th ed.). Philadelphia, PA: Wolters Kluwer.
• Schulz, K. F., Altman, D. G., & Moher, D.; CONSORT Group. (2010). CONSORT 2010 statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. BMJ, 340, c332.
• Spielberger, C. D. (1983). Manual for the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
• World Health Organization. (2019). Mental health: strengthening our response. Retrieved from https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/mental-health-strengthening-our-response