Caffeine Consumption and Academic Performance among Medical Students

of Dow University of Health Science (DUHS), Karachi, Pakistan

Authors: Muhammad Sami Khan1, Nighat Nisar2, Syed Arsalan Ahmed Naqvi3, Faryal Nawab4
https://annals-ashkmdc.org/oldsite/pdfs/2017/3/6.pdf
Evaluation on Background of the study:
By addressing factual material on the subject, the researchers provided sufficient
background knowledge. The needed knowledge regarding how caffeine works was successfully
explained by the researchers. The researcher talked about everything from the amount of caffeine
in a typical cup of coffee to how long it takes for the caffeine to kick in. There was also a brief
history of how coffee became popular among students, particularly university students. Caffeine
was also mentioned as a widely consumed substance found in various products such as Coca-
Cola. On the later part of the background of study, the reason why academic students opt to
indulge in caffeine were discussed and the relationship between the student and other caffeinated
products were approached.

Evaluation on Statement of the Problem:

The statement of the problem clearly discussed the aim of the study which is to determine
the association between all types of caffeine containing substances used and academic
performance among medical students of a large public sector medical college of Pakistan. The
General statement of the problem was specific. Unfortunately, it would have been more precise
through applying the specific problems of the research, but nonetheless, it’s applicable.

Strengths
-Information was sufficient.
-The use of words was clear and pleasant.
-Facts were supported by existing research
studies.
-The discussions were specific and centered
with the research topic.
-The researchers successfully incorporated the
topic specifically to the targeted audience.
-The vision of the researcher was completely
reflected on the output.
Weaknesses
-The researchers failed to include the specific
problems in Chapter 1
-Proper citations of data were not
administered.
-The length was short which disabled the
researches to discuss additional information
about the topic.
-There were concepts and terms that weren’t
thoroughly explained.