Recent Question/Assignment

LQB562 Report
MALDI-TOF MS
Matrix-assisted laser desorption ionisation – time of flight mass spectrometry (MALDI-TOF MS) is the most modern method for confirming the identity of bacterial and fungal colonies in the majority of diagnostic laboratories. You were introduced to this method of identification in LQB462 and are now required to prepare a report/factsheet on it.
For this assessment you are required to write a brief report on the MALDI-TOF MS testing of the predominant colony type that has been isolated from a clinical specimen, after routine culture on primary isolation media. The target audience will be professionals, medical scientists and health care workers to inform them of when, how and why MALDI-TOF MS is performed, explain the output results and how this may be used to identify the aetiological agents of infection.
Learning outcomes:
Upon the successful completion of this assignment, you will be able to:
1. Perform literature searches of peer-reviewed journals, as well as relevant websites
2. Describe the process of MALDI-TOF MS organism identification
3. Identify the limitations associated with the use of MALDI-TOF MS for organism identification
4. Discuss the importance of the use of MALDI-TOF MS within a clinical diagnostic microbiology laboratory
5. Present information in a manner that health professionals will understand.
Assessment weighting:
20% of the unit (see week one document for weightings of other assessment items)
Due date:
11:59pm Tuesday 5th May (week 10). Submission is to be made via Turnitin within the LQB562 BlackBoard page. Late submissions will not be accepted without prior approval from QUT and will receive a grade of zero (0). If you have applied for an extension and not received confirmation by the due date/time, it is recommended that you submit what you have completed so far (the system can be overridden by the unit coordinator if an extension is granted).
The submission will be checked for plagiarism using the “Originality check”. There is no limit to the number of times you may check your document before submission. Please refer to the statement on “Academic Dishonesty” within the week one document for information on QUT’s policy on plagiarism. Each assignment will be evaluated for plagiarism by the unit coordinator. The submission link will open well in advance of the due date. It is recommended that you check your similarity levels as many times as required prior to your final submission (this can be done and overridden by you as often as you need until the due date/time).
The Scenario:
A GP collects a wound swab from a patient, the swab is placed in transport media and sent to the laboratory with a request for m/c/s.
What to include in report/fact sheet:
m/c/s: Explain the workflow and timeline in a diagnostic laboratory, include the type of results obtained from each of these tests (Do not describe how these tests are done).
Timing: When is the MALDI-TOF MS performed?
What equipment/consumables are required to perform the MALDI-TOF MS?
The method: How is the MALDI-TOF MS performed? (describe)
The output: Describe the results that are provided by the instrument and how these may provide a confirmatory ID.
Limitations: Are there any limitations? How are they overcome?
Significance: Discuss the importance of this technique within a diagnostic laboratory. What are the advantages over conventional biochemical testing (e.g. API strips)?
References: see below.
Please also see the marking rubric below.
Format:
The report should be written in a maximum of four (4) A4 pages in an easy to read format. References are to be on the fifth/final page. Font size should not be smaller than, for example, 12-point Times New Roman, 11-point Calibri, 10-point Arial, and single line spacing can be used. If your report is longer than four (4) pages (excluding references) the marker will stop once fours pages are reached and marks will be awarded accordingly.
Margin sizes can be set to your design (no set size).
You are encouraged to use images/figures. Be sure to label and reference them.
The report can be written using a mix of full sentences and dot points, but not entirely dot points.
It is your responsibility to check the similarity score and what is highlighted as similar. Total similarity scores (~ 25%) and similarity scores from individual sources (~ 5%) should be kept to a minimum. It is not appropriate to copy a sentence from a source and then reference it – this is still classified as plagiarism. You must write in your own words and reference accordingly.
References:
For this assignment you must access scientific papers using PubMed (www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed) and other reputable sources. Please note: referencing your lecture/practical materials from any unit is NOT acceptable!
Use the Vancouver style (https://www.citewrite.qut.edu.au/cite/qutcite.jsp#vancouver-generalwhat), or if using EndNote, your referencing should be in the style of The Journal of Clinical Microbiology.
References in text: should be cited by number in parentheses (e.g. [1]), in the order of their appearance within the text, and listed by number order at the end of the document.
The list of references should appear after the main body of text and should be in the following format: surnames and initials of authors, year, title of paper, use the title abbreviation for all journal titles (except single word titles), volume number, first and last page numbers:
For example: Smith, R.Y & Wesson, B.Z. (1994). New techniques for shot-gun cloning. J Clin. Micro. 1166: 1775-1784.
Websites should be limited to ONLY reputable sources. The full electronic address (URL) must be provided, together with the date accessed. WebMD or the likes are NOT reputable sources! Further information on referencing formats may be obtained from the QUT cite/write website: www.citewrite.qut.edu.au/. Please consult this site for referencing styles for books and other resources.
Please provide only ONE citation per reference. For example, this format has the option to provide multiple copies of the same citation when figures from publications are used.
Abbreviations:
In the written report, each abbreviated term must be written in full the first time it is used, followed by the abbreviation in brackets. Thereafter, the abbreviation should be used. For example: 16S ribosomal RNA (rRNA), subsequently write as 16S rRNA.
Nomenclature:
The first time you write the name of a bacterium, parasite or fungus within the assignment, the genus and species must be written in full and these names must be italicized. For example: Streptococcus pneumoniae. For each subsequent reference to the same organism, you should then abbreviate the name (i.e. S. pneumoniae).
Criteria Achievement standards Marking
High distinction (9-10) Distinction (8) Credit
(7) Pass
(5-6) Fail (3-4) Low Fail (0-2) Standard achieved Weight Mark
Content
50% All the correct required content
(workflow, timeline, materials &
methods, output, limitations,
significance) has
been included in the report at an
excellent standard. Majority of the correct
required content
(workflow, timeline, materials &
methods, output, limitations,
significance) has
been included in
the report at a very good standard. Most of the correct required content
(workflow, timeline, materials &
methods, output, limitations,
significance) has
been included in
the report at a good standard. Some of the correct required content
(workflow, timeline, materials & methods, output, limitations,
significance) has been included in the report at a fair level. Incorrect or inappropriate
content is presented in the report. Little to no content is presented in the report. 0.5
Relevance of information
10% All information is supported by
references and is relevant to the topic. Majority of the information is supported by
references and is relevant to the topic.
Most of the information is supported by
references and is relevant to the topic. Some of the information is supported by
references and is relevant to the topic. Little information is supported by
references and is relevant to the topic. Little to no information is supported by
references and is relevant to the topic. 0.1
Presentation, formatting & written
expression
25% All structure & formatting
requirements have been met. The
report is concise, with distinct
sections, and logical flow within and
between sections.
Figures, graphs, images used
appropriately & effectively.
Excellent use of professional
language & English expression (incl terminology, spelling, grammar) Most structure & formatting
requirements have been met. The
report is concise, with distinct
sections, and logical flow within and
between sections.
Figures, graphs, images used
appropriately &
effectively. Very good use of
professional
language & English expression (incl terminology,
spelling, grammar)
Some structure & formatting
requirements have been met. The
report is concise, with distinct
sections, and logical flow within and
between sections.
Figures, graphs, images used
appropriately &
effectively. Good
use of professional language & English expression (incl terminology, spelling, grammar) A few structure & formatting
requirements have
been met. The report is concise, with
distinct sections, and
logical flow within and between sections.
Figures, graphs, images used
appropriately &
effectively. Poor use of professional
language & English expression (incl
terminology, spelling, grammar) Little evidence of formatting or
structure. No clear
sections or logical flow. Figures,
graphs, images not used. Very poor
language, English
expression, spelling, grammar &/or syntax. Text heavy. Absence of formatting/structur
e. No clear sections or logical flow.
Figures, graphs, images not used.
Very poor language, English
expression, spelling, grammar &/or syntax. Text heavy. 0.25
Referencing Sources are very credible, relevant, are current and valid. Sources are Sources are credible, relevant, and current. Some issues with citing Sources are somewhat credible, relevant, & mostly current/ Problems Sources are not particularly credible, irrelevant &/or not current. Problems Sources are not credible, irrelevant, &/or not current.
Sources cited using No references provided
0.15
15% very well cited in
both the report and the reference list
using referencing style. sources or with
reference list using referencing style. with citing sources
or with reference list using
referencing style. with citing sources or with reference list using referencing style. incorrect referencing style.
TOTAL 40 1