Module: Specialist Topic in Psychology & Wellbeing

Latest Module Specifications

Current Academic Year 2025 - 2026

Module Title	Specialist Topic in Psychology & Wellbeing
Module Code	PSY1069 (ITS: PSYC515)
Faculty	Science & Health	School	Psychology
NFQ level	9	Credit Rating	15

Description

This module is designed to ensure that graduate students master both the theory and the practice of conducting a systematic review of a specialist applied topic directly related to their studies. Students will be expected to identify, in consultation with their academic supervisor, a topic for systematic review and to conduct the review over the course of their master’s programme. The module will require that students attend a range of seminars and workshops designed to support them in identifying and selecting a topic and in the process of conducting the systematic review to publishable standards.

Learning Outcomes

1. 1E02E428-BAC6-0001-E938-16D3E87046C0
2. Articulate the goals, principles and methods of conducting a systematic review.
5. 1
6. 1E02E428-BE82-0001-3B51-E7E070557430
7. Demonstrate a critical appreciation of the need for evidenced-based practice in the field of psychology and related disciplines through the process of formulating a review question and writing a review protocol.
10. 2
11. 1E02E428-C56A-0001-47A0-E310135D1182
12. Search for and identify relevant primary studies.
15. 3
16. 1E02E428-C6D1-0001-6CEE-C3C74F00182C
17. Demonstrate the ability to appraise and integrate published data in a synthesis of published studies.
20. 4
21. 1E02E428-CCB2-0001-13E8-1CB8E5C013F5
22. Demonstrate competency in interpreting and presenting the results of the review findings in a report or monograph format.
25. 5
26. 1E02E428-D40C-0001-F8B9-1BB6DAAD6E10
27. Critically evaluate published literature reviews and demonstrate ability to identify the potential relevance of newly emerging research findings to their own research and/or area of psychological practice.
30. 6

*Type*	*Hours*	*Description*
Workload	Full time hours per semester
Seminars	36	seminars workshops linked to completion of CAs and conducting the systematic review
Directed learning	16	Academic supervision
Directed learning	23	Library and on-line learning
Assignment Completion	50	Preparation of Review Protocol
Assignment Completion	250	Preparation of Systematic Review
Total Workload: 375

Section Breakdown
CRN	11497	Part of Term	Semester 1 & 2
Coursework	100%	Examination Weight	0%
Grade Scale	40PASS	Pass Both Elements	N
Resit Category	RC1	Best Mark	N
Module Co-ordinator	Catherine Fassbender	Module Teacher

Type	Description	% of total	Assessment Date
Assessment Breakdown
Assignment	Review protocol	25%	n/a
Assignment	Systematic Review Report	75%	n/a

Reassessment Requirement Type
Resit arrangements are explained by the following categories; RC1: A resit is available for both^* components of the module. RC2: No resit is available for a 100% coursework module. RC3: No resit is available for the coursework component where there is a coursework and summative examination element. ^* ‘Both’ is used in the context of the module having a coursework/summative examination split; where the module is 100% coursework, there will also be a resit of the assessment

Pre-requisite	None
Co-requisite	None
Compatibles	None
Incompatibles	None

All module information is indicative and subject to change. For further information,students are advised to refer to the University's Marks and Standards and Programme Specific Regulations at: http://www.dcu.ie/registry/examinations/index.shtml

Indicative Content and Learning Activities

Indicative Content
• Attendance at School-based seminars/workshops covering topics such as: • Evidenced-based practice in psychology and related disciplines. • Introduction to research synthesis, meta-analysis and systematic reviews. • Formulating a review question • Preparing and writing a review protocol (PROSPERO format) • Developing a detailed search strategy • Finding, screening and selecting primary studies both as a primary author and secondary reviewer for your review partner • Quality Assessment: overview and methods • Risk of bias (e.g. publication bias, p-hacking & questionable research practices, awareness of importance of statistical power, sample size, multiple comparisons etc.). • Data extraction • Data synthesis (narrative, qualitative and quantitative) and data interpretation • Writing a systematic review • Verified completion of library and web-based training. • Identification of an appropriate systematic review topic, undertaken in consultation with an academic supervisor and the module co-ordinator. • S • Maintenance of a Review Portfolio – documenpecified learning activities (preparing and writing a review protocol, developing a detailed search strategy, finding, screening and selecting primary studies, quality assessment, data extraction, data synthesis and data interpretation, writing a systematic review) undertaken in consultation with an academic supervisor.

Indicative Reading List

Books:

Boland, A. (2017). .: 0, Doing a Systematic Review: A Studentâ€™s Guide., Sage; London, UK,
Gough, D., Oliver, S., Thomas, J. (2017).: 0, An Introduction to Systematic Reviews., Sage. London, UK.,
Centre for Reviews and Dissemination. (2009).: 0, Systematic Reviews: CRDs guidance for undertaking reviews in health care CRD., University of York. [Online]. Available at: http://www.york.ac.uk/inst/crd/index_guidance.htm,
Egger, M., Smith, G.D., Altman, D.G. (Eds). (2016): 0, Systematic reviews in Health Care., John Wiley & Sons. Chichester, UK.,
Higgins JPT, Thomas J, Chandler J, Cumpston M, Li T, Page MJ, Welch VA (editors).: 2023, Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions version 6.0 (updated July 2019)., 6.4, Cochrane, 2023 [Online]. https://training.cochrane.org/handbook/current,
Mhairi Campbell,1 Joanne E McKenzie,2 Amanda Sowden,3 Srinivasa Vittal Katikireddi, Sue E Brennan, Simon Ellis, Jamie Hartmann-Boyce, Rebecca Ryan, Sasha Shepperd, James Thomas, Vivian Welch, Hilary Thomson: 2020, Synthesis without meta-analysis (SWiM) in systematic reviews: reporting guideline, 368:l6890, British Medical Journal,
Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD, et al.: 2021, The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. B, 2021;372:n71., British Medical Journal, online http://www.prisma-statement.org/,
Allison Tong, Kate Flemming, Elizabeth McInnes, Sandy Oliver and Jonathan Craig: 2012, Enhancing transparency in reporting the synthesis of qualitative research: ENTREQ, 12:181, BMC Medical Research Methodology, http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2288/12/181,

Articles:
None

Other Resources

1: Booklists and web resources will be recommended on an individual basis based on the nature of the student’s project.,