NO AI AND NO PLAGERISM I added the sources and the hypothesis in the attached do

NO AI AND NO PLAGERISM
I added the sources and the hypothesis in the attached document.
Format
12 point font in Times New Roman, Georgia, Calibri, or Arial
1″ margins
Double-spaced
At least 1500 words, not counting the cover page, figures, or references
Consist of title page, introduction, main analysis, conclusions, and reference sections
General Formal Writing Guidelines
Scientific writing should be written in a formal, unbiased manner.
Do not use contractions.
Write our numbers less than 10, unless they are measurements.
Write scientific names out fully once in the body of the paper. You may then shorten for the rest of the paper.
Homo sapiens
H. sapiens
Title Page
While review papers do not typically have very long titles, they do need informative titles.
The title should help the reader to understand the main conclusion of your paper.
Make the title concise but be sure to include 3-4 key words.
Include your name, your instructor’s name, and the due date
Introduction
Be sure to set up the importance of the study question.
Give the reader the necessary background to prepare them for the study question. Do not include very general information, be specific to the purpose of your review.
End the introduction with the study research question, study approach, and thesis statement. For example:
In this review, the efficacy of capsaicin in the treatment of cancer cells is investigated through in vivo studies evaluating tumor growth, metastasis rates, and patient mortality. This evaluation demonstrated that while capsaicin has effects on these parameters, the doses required limit it’s utility as a clinical therapy.
Analysis
This section should be around 50-60% of your paper (At least two pages)
I am looking for at least three primary papers that you will analyze in this short paper. Longer review papers will compare more studies.
Every study you present should have data you use to address the study question.
THE MOST IMPORTANT PART – You need your analysis in this section. Compare and contrast the studies. What are their strengths and weaknesses? Do the conclusions of these studies agree or disagree with each other?
Be sure to create a clear narrative in the analysis section
I present an example below, with just blank variable names, but I hope you can get the idea.
Smith and Jones (2015) did not consider the effects of *variable 1* or *variable 2* on cell apoptosis. A follow up study by Smith and colleagues (2016) addressed one weakness in the first study by altering their experimental design to include mRNA and protein expression of *gene name* which accounted for *variable 1*.
You could then go on to talk about what the second study found and how considering *variable 1* altered the interpretation of the first studies results.
This approach not only allows transition between the studies, it also allows you to include the strengths and weakness of the studies and to compare and contrast the studies.
You don’t have to use the above approach, but I hope it give you some ideas on how you could set up your analysis.
You may also include a novel figure/graph/table that you create from the data in the primary literature to get the very best score possible on this section.
Perhaps all three of your studies looked at % cell death under different circumstances (such as pH and temperature). You could create a graph with the data from the different studies all on one graph where you put the variable (pH and temperature) on the x-axis and then % cell death on the y-axis. Then you could then address whether pH or temperature had a greater impact on cell death using the graph to answer your question.
Figures ( other than Graphical Abstract)
Original Figures are an optional element as part of the Body of the Paper
If Included Figures should be original (created by you) and NOT just copied and pasted from your source papers.
Original figures should summarize and synthesize data from multiple papers. The figure should include proper references of where the data came from, and a good figure legend.
The figure needs to be discussed in the text of your paper- Don’t just dump it in, and DON’T just include one throw away line about see Figure 1. What conclusion do you want the reader to come to from the figure? It may be a summary of data, a summary of experimental variables tested or conditions, species used, etc. So think about if you can use a figure to really hammer home your point!
Conclusions
Summarize what you have found and frame it in the context of answering the research question and thesis statement. Put your own spin on the “answer” to your question. Make judgement calls, if you are comparing how two drugs treat a certain disease, then which one do you think is the better one? Support your conclusion with the papers you reviewed.
What kinds of questions are still out there to be answered? What kinds of weaknesses are present in the body of literature addressing the question? Do you have suggestions for future studies?
References
You must have both in-text citations and a reference section.
Use Numeric in text References and follow ASM formatting.