The link to the paper

The link to the paper https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4931896/ The task is to write a critical summary of the paper. This does not include the (APA or Vancouver) reference list at the end of the paper, it does include all words in the main body of the paper (e.g. headings, title, in-text citations). Including -The need to differentiate between narrow notions of health education and broader approaches to health promotion informed by the Ottawa Charter material which points towards the need to understand and engage with specific social and political; -The value of engaging with the social dimensions of health; and discussions about the strengths and limitations of individualistic versus social approaches to understanding health, as well as the concept of social practice. Although there is an infinite number of ways you might critically engage with a paper (e.g. on the basis of its study design or methodological strengths and limitations) Do not base your critical engagement on a methodological issue. Of course methodological issues are important and a valid basis for critical engagement, but you are being asked to demonstrate your capacity for conceptual analysis, using concepts taught as part of this course, and the word limit does not allow you to do both. You are asked to do two things in the critical part of the summary. Make sure that you include a clear statement about the position you are developing in writing your critical summary, and then develop it through close analysis of your chosen paper. Do not make a series (or list of points), we are asking you to write an argument. Reflect on the implications of your position on this paper for those involved in designing health promotion initiatives. Here you can either discuss the implications of your position on the paper for health promotion generally, or you can narrow your focus down to a particular domain of health promotion. It is not possible to pass this assignment if you simply write a summary of the paper. Remember, to critique something does not necessarily mean to find flaws in it, engaging critically with a paper means reflecting on the papers strengths and weaknesses. As you are asked to make one coherent point, you may find that although you can see several strengths and weaknesses, the paper focuses on just one of these. Use the following structure: Summary of original paper (show the understanding of the paper and provide a context for your critique) suggest a 300 word limit Summary of the argument or idea on which you have chosen to focus and the position you are going to develop a sentence or 2 Your critique (explain and build your position on the idea on which you are focusing) suggest a 350 word limit The implications of your position for those involved in health promotion suggest a 250 word limit Conclusion (sum up, explain the difference between the original argument and the critique you have made) suggest a 100 word limit Include the following headings in your written assignment: Summary Main point Critique Implications for health promotion Conclusion

"Is this question part of your assignment? We can help"

ORDER NOW