General Comments & Overall Conclusion
The group provided a description of Nexium and its extended indications for peptic and duodenal ulcer. Based on the marking scheme guide, and learning outcomes, the group failed to meet the minimum requirements to pass this assignment.
The assignment is graded as “Not Acceptable” with 28 points out of possible 80.
Critical Issues
The write up showed a lack of understanding of what was required and how to tackle the assignment. Therefore, the expected learning outcomes were not met. However, the group demonstrate the potential with further work, if the requirements are clear to them. The write up is largely a descriptive approach of Nexium with limited evidence of analysis, reflection and critical evaluation of repurposing. For instance, while the group adopted the approach of using Nexium to respond to the assignment, the lack of critical thinking is shown by a generalization of the concept of repurposing with only one example (about 12 of the 15 references are with respect to peptic ulcers). In other words, can the experience with Nexium be generalized for other drugs with respect to repurposing? The group adopted one single approach to respond to the question, and this single view was evident throughout the write up. Thus, even if their approach was considered, the lack of critical analysis is a major flow for this group. …show more content…
For example, under conceptual understanding, no definition of repurposing was provided, and under life cycle management, no response was given at all whether repurposing should be part of, and how to include it in life cycle management of a
The group provided a description of Nexium and its extended indications for peptic and duodenal ulcer. Based on the marking scheme guide, and learning outcomes, the group failed to meet the minimum requirements to pass this assignment.
The assignment is graded as “Not Acceptable” with 28 points out of possible 80.
Critical Issues
The write up showed a lack of understanding of what was required and how to tackle the assignment. Therefore, the expected learning outcomes were not met. However, the group demonstrate the potential with further work, if the requirements are clear to them. The write up is largely a descriptive approach of Nexium with limited evidence of analysis, reflection and critical evaluation of repurposing. For instance, while the group adopted the approach of using Nexium to respond to the assignment, the lack of critical thinking is shown by a generalization of the concept of repurposing with only one example (about 12 of the 15 references are with respect to peptic ulcers). In other words, can the experience with Nexium be generalized for other drugs with respect to repurposing? The group adopted one single approach to respond to the question, and this single view was evident throughout the write up. Thus, even if their approach was considered, the lack of critical analysis is a major flow for this group. …show more content…
For example, under conceptual understanding, no definition of repurposing was provided, and under life cycle management, no response was given at all whether repurposing should be part of, and how to include it in life cycle management of a