“AÑO DE LA UNIDAD, LA PAZ Y EL DESARROLLO"

UNIVERSIDAD PRIVADA SAN JUAN BAUTISTA

FACULTAD DE CIENCIAS DE LA SALUD

FACULTAD DE CIENCIAS DE LA SALUD PROFESIONAL DE MEDICINA

HUMANA "DR. WILFREDO ERWIN GARDINI TUESTA"

CURSO: INGLÉS EN SALUD

DOCENTE: VICKY JEANNINE PANDURO CORREA

TEMA:

DEPRESSION, ANXIETY, STRESS IN STUDENTS AND TEACHERS:

ANALYSIS FROM COVID 19

ESTUDIANTE:
 Quispe Carbajal Zulle Natali.

SEDE:
SEDE: FILIAL
FILIAL LIMA
LIMA
1 SEDE: FILIAL
CHORRILLOS
CHORRILLOS –– PERU
PERU
CHORRILLO
2023LIMA -
CICLO
CICLO- -V V 2023
PERÚ 20223
 UNIVERSIDAD PRIVADA SAN JUAN BAUTISTA

ÍNDICE

1 Cover
Presentation of the report

Critical presentation
2 Of the title, authors and abstract of the scientific article

3 Authors affiliation

4 Keywords

5 Critical presentation of the Introduction

6 Critical presentation of the material and methods

 Critical presentation of the discussion
7

2
 QUALIFIED PRACTICE N° 01: CRITICAL PRESENTATION OF THE ORIGINAL
ARTICLE

DOI: 29069612008

1. CRITICAL PRESENTATION OF THE TITLE

Depression, Anxiety, stress in students and teachers: Analysis from
Covid 19

The title contains 11 words with an acceptable fog index of less than 15 words according
to Gunning, which allows us to fully understand the reading. It's written in an affirmative
tone. The investigation is clear, concise and precise in terms of the topic of the article.
Acronyms or abbreviations are not appreciated.

2) PUNCTUATION: 19

PUNCTUATION
GUIDELINES TO EVALUATE THE TITLE YES DOUBTFUL NO
2 1 0

1. The content of the study is clear, it

contains a research problem and main
variables.

2. tis understandable and easy to understand

3. Concise (≤ 15 words, which
indicates the Gunning index).
4. Identify the keywords of the report
5. Use full words without abbreviations, or
initials. 6.Use an affirmative tone.

7.It is grammatically correct

8.Use plain language

9.Use clear and direct terms, without using
terms gimmicky.
10. Uses essential words

3
2. CRITICAL PRESENTATION OF THE AUTHORS AND AFFILIATIONS

1). The authors of the article comply with the standards that the magazine
"Revista Venezolana de Gerencia, vol. 26, no. 94, 2021 University of Zulia,
Venezuela" requests in its publication.
We see that the article has 4 authors, mentioning them in the journal, with
their first name followed by their last nameof each author. They were
considered since they carried out the investigation and elaboration of the
writing.
The article makes the 4 authors responsible since the magazine requests it,
they are students of different universities which are: "National University of
Chimborazo" and "State University of Bolívar".
On the other hand, the affiliations of each author are correctly differentiated.
according to the institution to which they belong, in alphabetical order and
with superscript "1,2,3 and 4", also includes email, university and country.
However, the department in which they work is not specified.
We also appreciate the link on the page to access said magazine.

4
a) PUNCTUATION: 10

PUNCTUATION
GUIDELINES FOR EVALUATING AUTHORS
YES DOUBTFUL NO
2 1 0

1.Adequate number of authors. The

item/number complexity ratio
of authors is consistent.

2. It is a multidisciplinary article, the team

researcher is made up of students from
various areas of knowledge which
cooperate with the research topic.

3.The authorship is justified and

responsible.
The criteria are correct

4.The main authors are experienced.

on the research topic.

5.It presents little redundancy of the

publication of the
article.

5
3. CRITICAL PRESENTATION OF THE ABSTRACT AND KEY WORDS

1.- This magazine has what it takes to be a reliable and quality article, it
has a good structure which includes; objective, methodology, results and
conclusion, for a correct interpretation of the magazine, but it is
recommended that the words decrease in the abstract part, since it has a
total of 212 words.
Therefore, it exceeds the maximum of 200 words that are required in an
abstract. We can say that it is concise and was prepared with clear,
precise and simple terms of the most important ideas of the article. The
abstract is in the English and Spanish languages, both of which were
reviewed by an experienced translator, to ensure their quality.

6
a) PUNCTUATION: 13

PUNCTUATION
GUIDELINES FOR EVALUATING THE ABSTRACT YES DOUBTFUL NO
2 1 0

1.It allows to identify the basic content

in a fast and exact.

2. Clearly describe:
The objective/hypothesis in the first
paragraph.
The design/methodology in the
second paragraph.
The main results in the third
paragraph.
The conclusions in the fourth
paragraph.

3. It is clear, easy to understand

4. It is concise (250 words)

5. Presents results with numerical values

(rates, percentages, proportions).

6. Use complete words (do not use

abbreviations, or acronym).

7. It is self-sufficient, self-explanatory.

7
4. CRITICAL PRESENTATION OF THE INTRODUCTION

1.- The introduction is well elaborated since it has a complete theoretical

framework, since it contains concepts and background so that this article
can be understood in a simple way. On the other hand, it is correctly written
with logic. The objective is concise, but it is described in a very general way.
Also the research problem is not specified and the main study variables are
not shown. The bibliographical references belong to the topic discussed. Finally,
the article according to the Gunning fog index is 15, that is, it is in a regular
range of comprehension for the reader.

8
a) PUNCTUATION: 35

PUNCTUATION
GUIDELINES FOR EVALUATING AUTHORS YES DOUBTFUL NO
2 1 0

1. Clearly present the steps for the

investigation

2. Capture the reader's attention from the

introduction invite the reader to continue
reading.

3. The style is direct.

4. The general theme, what is the field of

study, is initially presented and then
move on to the research problem.

5. The research problem is correctly

identified and defined

6. The background of the problem is

presented without delay.

7. The main reason of which is the

selected problem is clear. His
research is warranted to fill an information
gap.

8. The problem is important, it is current, it

is susceptible observation and measurement

9. The investigation of the problem is

feasible and measurable

9
 PUNCTUATION
GUIDELINES FOR EVALUATING AUTHORS
YES DOUBTFUL NO
10. The literature review of the introduction 2 1 0
identifies what is currently known (based
on published) on the research problem.
Clearly identify what and why research.

11. The literature review is relevant

and appropriate for the study problem

12.The literature review reflects information

on background of the problem, necessary
to support the justification for the study.

13. References cited in the text are fine

documented and current.

14. The relationship of the study problem

with previous research is direct and clear.

15. The literature review presents a range

of experiences, theories, opinions with
points of view diverse and complementary
on the problem.

16. The literature review of the introduction

identifies, from the literature, important
gaps in information about the problem.

17. The organization of the literature review

introductory is logical, according to
categories and date of publication.

9
 PUNCTUATION
GUIDELINES FOR EVALUATING AUTHORS
YES DOUBTFUL NO
2 1 0

18. The literature review is much more than

a mere ordered list of citations: each
reference has a justification, its place is
decisive and, in no case, it is arbitrary.

19. The research is not isolated and is

linked to existing theories.

20. The research describes a theoretical

framework already existing or formulate
your own.

21. The theoretical framework is developed

in the form logical and understandable.

22. The theoretical framework is useful to

clarify concepts, relationships between them
and with the topic studied

23. The study selects the variables

adequate predictors and results

10
 PUNCTUATION
GUIDELINES FOR EVALUATING AUTHORS YES DOUBTFUL NO
2 1 0
24. The predictor and outcome variables
werem state clearly, precisely and
unambiguous

25. The association between the chosen

variables is described indicating its quality of
predictor (independent) and outcome
(dependent)

26. Extraneous
(confounding) variables are
recognize and indicate their degree of control
in the study

27. The most important variables of the study

are defined operationally, by same as their
condition grades
28. The formulation of the objectives is
appropriate to the research question (problem
and its variables
29. The objectives indicate unequivocally
what is what the researcher try to do
(record and measure)

30. The descriptive objectives are few,

concrete, measurable and feasible

31. The objectives announce the subsequent

achievement of specific, unambiguous, clear
and precise results.

9
 PUNCTUATION
GUIDELINES FOR EVALUATING AUTHORS YES DOUBTFUL NO
2 1 0
32. The objectives are presented written in
affirmative form, with active verbs transitive, in
the infinitive tense, subject to a single
interpretation.
33.The wording of the objectives differs
clearly character goals
descriptive of those others of character
analytical.
34. The hypotheses clearly express,
precise and concise, a relationship (or
difference) between two or more
variables.
35. Hypotheses explain or predict that
relationship or difference between two or more
variables in terms of results expected.
36. The formulation of the hypotheses includes
the study variables, the population of study,
and the predicted outcome (effect).
37. The predictor and outcome variables
identified in the study hypotheses They are
operationally defined
38. Each hypothesis of the study refers to just
a relationship between two variables, for clarity
understanding (simple hypothesis).

39. The address of the investigated relationship

is unequivocally established in the
writing the hypothesis

9
 GUIDELINES FOR EVALUATING AUTHORS
PUNCTUATION
YES DOUBTFUL NO
40. Each hypothesis is logically related to the 2 1 0
problem of investigation.

41.The introduction ends with the

formulation of the question or objective
research. In it is mentioned adequately the
study population, the main variables
(predictors and result) and the type of
relationship/comparison between them.
41. Gunning's index is adequate
(less than 16).

9
5.- CRITICAL PRESENTATION OF THE MATERIAL AND METHODS

The article proposed for this work presents very good points to touch on,
however, below in the results we evaluate part by part of the materials and
methods. This is an exploratory and descriptive cross-sectional study, this
tells us that it is not a long-term study, referring to the fact that the
materials and methods used will give us results according to the group of
participants and methods used in the determined time.

In addition we have to take into account the variants among which enters
the sex, age, situation of the people who are within this group. Therefore,
these variables will modify the expected results.

10
A) PUNTUACION: 11

10
10
6.CRITICAL PRESENTATION OF THE DISCUSSION

10
 The article proposed for this work presents very good points to touch on, below in
discussion part by part of the paragraphs about the article. This is an exploratory and
descriptive cross-sectional study, this tells us that it is not a long-term study, referring
to the fact that the discussion used will give us the discussion of the case according to
the group of participants and patients with depression problems used in the
determined study time.

We also have to take into account the discussions about the situation of people who are
within this group of anxiety, stress and depression during covid 19.

a) PUNCTUATION: 9

10
 x

10