Sudo et 2004 Review

This week we’ll be reading this review article by Sudo et al. 2004. Please read the article closely, answer the following questions (save your answers in a Word document and the copy and paste them here): Sudo et 2004 Review

1. Provide the full reference to this article using this format: Author 1 Last Name, First name initials; Author 2 Last Name, First name initials, (Year of publication). Article title. Journal name in italics Volume#(Issue#): start_page:end_page.
   Example:
   Shendelman S, Jonason A, Martinat C, Leete T and Abeliovich A. 2004. DJ-1 is a redox-dependent molecular chaperone that inhibits alpha-synuclein aggregate formation. Plos Biology2(11): 1764-1773.
2. Is this article primary or secondary literature? If secondary literature, is it a meta-analysis? See: how to distinguish primary vs secondary literature.
3. What is the hypothesis being tested?
4. What is the experimental approach to testing the hypothesis?  What was measured?
5. What were the important quantitative results?
6. Explain whether the results support or contradict the hypothesis (based on the discussion section).
7. What do the results mean in terms of the broader issues that motivated the study (based on the conclusions)?

Don’t use quotes, you need to summarize the findings using your own words.

This week we’ll be reading this review article by Sudo et al. 2004.
Please read the article closely, answer the following questions (save your answers in a Word document and the copy and paste them here): Sudo et 2004 Review

1. Provide the full reference to this article using this format: Author 1 Last Name, First name initials; Author 2 Last Name, First name initials, (Year of publication). Article title. Journal name in italics Volume#(Issue#): start_page:end_page.
   Example:
   Shendelman S, Jonason A, Martinat C, Leete T and Abeliovich A. 2004. DJ-1 is a redox-dependent molecular chaperone that inhibits alpha-synuclein aggregate formation. Plos Biology2(11): 1764-1773.
2. Is this article primary or secondary literature? If secondary literature, is it a meta-analysis? See: how to distinguish primary vs secondary literature.
3. What is the hypothesis being tested?,
4. What is the experimental approach to testing the hypothesis?  What was measured?,
5. What were the important quantitative results?,
6. Explain whether the results support or contradict the hypothesis (based on the discussion section).,
7. What do the results mean in terms of the broader issues that motivated the study (based on the conclusions)? Sudo et 2004 Review

Don’t use quotes, you need to summarize the findings using your own words.