January 27,2022
Grade 12- Circinus
Avila, J-nelle L.
Halapan, Trishia C.
Merca, Stiven M.
Navarro, Krishna Gail M.
Ortiz, Sid M.
January 27,2022
Title
The title directly relates to the topic of the study which is all about detecting
bacterial infection. But for us, the title was a bit lengthy as it contained two compound
adjectives such as sample-to-answer and lab-on-a-disc. It would have been better if
lab-on-a-disc was abbreviated and replaced with modified LOAD system. The title would
then be, Sample-to-answer on molecular diagnosis of bacterial infection using an
integrated LOAD system. With that being said, we think it is appropriate to give the title
3 points.
Materials
The list of materials is complete and specified, providing full descriptions of
various laboratory equipment and apparatus, giving proper citations to different
laboratory techniques. However, the Figure 1 A and B should have been in the materials
or procedures section instead of the introduction section as it somehow disrupts the flow
of the introductory paragraph. Moreover, the description for Figure 1 is too long and it
should have been cut at most two sentences and put the rest in the materials section.
Nevertheless, we decided to give it a rating of 3.
Introduction
The introduction was adequately made. The author properly stated the goals of
the study which concerns bacterial infection, providing the necessary statistics and
other relevant information such as other methods of detecting these infections.
Furthermore, it has proper grammar, and contains citations to studies he mentioned,
which makes the paper all the more valid and factual. Although it mentioned a lot of
technical terms that are hard to understand for nonprofessionals like us, then again, this
type of study is intended for the author’s peers. We decided to rate the introduction a 4.
Procedure
The way they presented their procedures from start to finish was very scientific
and specific. The terms used were very technical and may not be understood by the
January 27,2022
average reader. However, it should be understood that laboratory reports of this caliber
are more geared towards the authors’ peers and researchers in similar fields.
Step-by-step courses of action and exact measurements of the quantifiables used were
specified which makes data sourcing easier for researchers looking into this report for
their own research methodologies. This also does the same for repeatability. Moreover,
proper use of the English language was observed. As such, this section deserves a 4.
Data and Results
In this study, the researchers provided a concise report of the findings based on
the data acquired. The data they presented was clear and impartial in the form of
descriptive statistics such as the frequency distribution and variability of the dataset,
which they highlighted in figure 3 and figure 4. Specifically, they presented these data
through line graphs and scatter graphs instead of only using textual elements.
Moreover, we do not see any vague or ambiguous phrases here, for example, using
"apparently" or "assume" in their interpretation of the results. The authors have also
reported their findings clearly and without prejudice, as they have not imposed one
completely different outcome from the results they have originally observed. They have
maintained using past tense while evaluating and presenting the relevance of the data,
which is admirable. In terms of organization, we commend the authors for including
sub-sections or sub-headings relating to the research aims, hypotheses, and models of
the study. As a result, their explanation of the outcomes and findings is logically
ordered. Simply, the 4 rating is justified based on how the data and the results were
presented.
Analysis
The researchers presented their analyses of the results comprehensively and
logically. They elaborately explained why they came up with such results. Just like in the
case of the valve, before they presented the result, they first explained how the
treatment affects and influences it. Moreover, in the analysis part, they backed it up with
related studies as well and exhaustively discussed the implications of the results they
obtained. That's why we decided to give them a rating of 4 in their analysis part.
January 27,2022
Conclusion
The conclusion of the sample laboratory report begins with a brief summary of
what their study is all about and how it works. Although it was brief, the authors were
still able to explain their study comprehensively. They were also able to discuss the
interpretation of the gathered data and results but we think that it was vague and could
have been elucidated more. In conclusion, the discussion of the results obtained should
also be in relation to the hypotheses, however, the authors of our chosen laboratory
report have failed to do this. On a brighter note, they were certainly able to provide
discussions of their procedure as well as their findings, which are very essential in a
conclusion. Overall, we would give their conclusion a 3.
4
3
Title
3
Materials
3
Introduction
4
Procedure
4
Data
4
Results
4
Analysis
4
Conclusion
Total Score:
2
1
3
29
Overall, the paper was professionally written, contained proper grammar and
punctuations, included citations of studies from verified research institutions.
Structure-wise, the transition of the paragraphs in each section of the paper was
comprehensive and well-written. Though there were minor lapses in the paper,
nevertheless, it provided crucial information and included the fundamental parts of a
laboratory report.