CAP # 9 feedback

Student’s Name
Professor’s Name
Course Number
Date
CAP # 9 Feedback
Points
Title page with the focused clinical question Provided with all information
10 points Provided however not complete
5 points Not provided
0 points Both the title page and the PICO questions are provided.
10 Points
Clinical relevance statement Clear and concise clinical bottom line from both articles.
20 points Clinical bottom line reported however not clearly stated or lacking information
15 points Clinical bottom line not stated or not clear
10 points The article has a clearly stated clinical relevance statement which seeks to assess which pitching strategy is associated with high ball speeds and an increase in joint loading. The paper has a clear and concise clinical bottom line that relates the knowledge learned from the article with occupational therapy.
20 points
Study summary Comprehensive information provided an article
30 points Most information provided on search—missing one-three items for comprehensive information
25 points Minimal information/detail on specific search
15 points The article provides comprehensive information regarding all the procedures of the research, findings, discussion, and conclusion.
The paper is a comprehensive review of the article since it captures the significant details and information from the article.
30 points
Study appraisal Identification/statement of study strengths as well as threats to validities
25 points Partial statement of study strengths and limitations for both or one article incomplete
20 points Limited statement of study strength and/or threat in both articles
10 points The article documents all the strengths and weaknesses of the research study.

The paper exhaustively reviews all the strengths and threats reported in the article in a clear and concise manner.
25 points
Proper grammar, use of syntax and delivery of information Consistent use of proper grammar, spelling, syntax and clear delivery of information
10 points One-three errors in spelling, grammar, etc.
5 points More than three errors in spelling, syntax, and grammar
3 points There are numerous grammar errors related to spelling and syntax
3 points
Proper referencing format listed articles (APA or AMA)
Citations in the proper format
5 points More than two APA or format errors
3 points No citation formatting
1 point There are many unnecessary in-text citations.
3 points
TOTAL 91 points
Comments:
The article is informative and provides extensive information and data in the quest to determine which pitching strategy is most effective due to the increased number of upper extremity injuries. The primary motive of the research was to facilitate greater joint loading and improved pitching. An occupational therapist can use this knowledge to help rehabilitate individuals who acquired injuries during pitching. The paper, on the other hand, is exhaustive since it offers a comprehensive review of the article and precisely the study summary and study appraisal. The paper is generally satisfactory although numerous grammar and syntax errors need to be corrected. Additionally, there are many unnecessary in-text citations widespread throughout the paper. Paraphrasing most of these sections is prudent.