Quality Standards of Qualitative Research in Applied Linguistics: A Conceptual Review

This study inspects different dimensions of ensuring standards in qualitative research within the field of applied linguistics. It presents a conceptual review of already established key quality standards of qualitative research, their application, their significance followed by the recommendations to ensure quality standards in applied linguistics qualitative research. For this purpose, the researchers have considered journal articles, book chapters and books published between 2002 and 2023 on digital databases to examine the key standards of ensuring trustworthiness and their application in the field of applied linguistics qualitative research. The study presents recommendations for novice researchers who are attempting to conduct qualitative studies ensuring the maximum level of trustworthiness and credibility and making their studies sound in terms of quality standards

Diagnostic accurateness of AST/ALT for esophageal variceal bleeding diagnosis considering endoscopy as gold standard

Aim: To assess the diagnostic accurateness of AST / ALT ≥ 1 for detecting esophageal varices’ considering endoscopy as gold standard. Study Design: A Cross-sectional study. Place and duration of study: The study was conducted at Hayatabad Medical Complex, Peshawar during the period from January 2022 to December 2022. Methodology: Using non-probability purposive sampling, 180 patients with liver cirrhosis between the ages of 18 and 65, of either sex, were selected. On endoscopy, esophageal varices were confirmed, and the AST/ALT Ratio was calculated. Results: Of the 180 patients in total, 120 (66.7%) were men and 60 (33.3%) were women. The sampled population's mean age was 51.20 ±6.9 years. The average duration of CLD was 5.42 years with a range of 2 to 10 years. 118 (65.5%) patients had an AST/ALT ratio greater than 1, 105 (58.3%) had varices detected during endoscopy, and 75 (41.7%) had no varices. The results showed that the sensitivity was computed to be 96.8%, the specificity to be 55.2%, the negative predictive value to be 90.2%, the positive predictive value to be 77.1%, the false negative rate to be 6.9% and the false positive rate to be 41.5%.&nbsp