Opinion vs. Research Based Resources

Stacy Collins   |   02 September, 2021   |   1166   |   3980

The main objective of this research which was prepared by the source where everyone can buy term papers online https://specialessays.com/buy-a-term-paper-online/ is to ess the value and credibility of each of the two igned articles by way of determining how these articles differ from studies published in a scholarly journal. The first article, the publication by Draper et al, concerns the promotion of health in lieu of management of illness. To determine the value and credibility of the aforesaid study, it is essential to utilize methods of evaluation of sources’ credibility. As far as the 3 C’s method is concerned, it is possible to verify that there is a wide range of additional sources related to the necessity of promoting health instead of managing illnesses. Also, it was ascertained that that the study by Draper et al. presents no new insights into the problem of health, and no scientific novelty. Their findings reflect the already known facts on the effectiveness of preventive medicine. The second strategy, CARS checklist method makes it possible to understand that there is no evidence of quality control. Also, the study is overgeneralized and incomprehensive. The topic is too general, but the emphasis is narrow, and the extent is short. As far as the second igned article is concerned, Schoen et al aim at comparing the health care system views and experiences in five nations. From the perspectives of both the 3 C’s Method and CARS Checklist Method, it is possible to infer that the publication by Schoen et al is not credible. The credibility of the article is undermined by the following facts. First and foremost, the authors base their conclusions exclusively on the findings of the Commonwealth Fund 2001 International Health Policy Survey. This means that their research has one-sided and secondary nature. They failed to provide comprehensive evidence and conduct surveys themselves. Second, the authors’ explanations are too short but overweighed with data and lack references. Third, they failed to provide a bibliography or reference list.