What is the difference between integrative healthcare and functional medicine?

Integrative healthcare focuses on combining conventional and complementary therapies within a patient-centred framework, often in a multidisciplinary setting. Functional medicine is a specific approach that seeks to identify and address root causes of disease through systems biology and personalised interventions. While both are holistic, integrative healthcare is broader in scope and more collaborative across disciplines.

How do I choose which complementary therapies to integrate?

Selection should be based on the best available evidence for safety and efficacy, patient preferences, and clinical appropriateness. Consider factors such as the condition being treated, potential interactions with conventional treatments, and the practitioner's qualifications. Always follow ethical guidelines and obtain informed consent.

Can integrative healthcare be used for mental health conditions?

Yes, integrative approaches are increasingly used for mental health, combining therapies like cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) with nutrition, mindfulness, and exercise. Evidence supports benefits for depression, anxiety, and stress-related disorders. However, it should complement, not replace, conventional psychiatric care, especially for severe conditions.

What career opportunities does this diploma open up?

Graduates can work as integrative healthcare practitioners in private practice, wellness centres, or alongside GPs in NHS settings. Roles include health coach, clinical lead in integrative medicine clinics, or consultant for healthcare organisations. The diploma also prepares you for further academic study or research in integrative health.

How is this qualification regulated in the UK?

The CFI Level 7 Extended Diploma is a vocationally-related qualification accredited by Crossfields Institute. It is not a statutory regulation like that for doctors or nurses, but it meets industry standards for integrative healthcare practice. Graduates should also register with relevant professional bodies (e.g., CNHC, BANT) for credibility and insurance purposes.

What is the role of nutrition in integrative healthcare?

Nutrition is a cornerstone of integrative healthcare, as diet profoundly affects physical and mental health. Practitioners use evidence-based dietary interventions to prevent and manage chronic diseases, support conventional treatments, and optimise well-being. This includes personalised nutrition plans, addressing deficiencies, and considering food sensitivities.

How to Revise CFI Level 7 Extended Diploma in Integrative Healthcare — Crossfields Institute Vocationally-Related Qualification Health & Social Care

see qualification specification

Examiner Tips for CFI Level 7 Extended Diploma in Integrative Healthcare

When discussing historical shifts, reference concrete milestones (e.g., the WHO’s 1978 Alma-Ata Declaration on primary health care, the 1990s NIH Office of Alternative Medicine) to demonstrate depth of understanding.
Ensure your analysis balances philosophical critique with practical implications: how does understanding historical and philosophical context directly improve modern integrative assessment, treatment planning, or interprofessional collaboration?
Use a critical voice: avoid merely describing paradigms; evaluate their limitations and contributions, and consider how emerging trends like precision medicine or systems biology may reshape integrative philosophy further.
When constructing management plans, always start with a thorough biopsychosocial assessment and reference NICE guidelines or equivalent frameworks where applicable.
Use case studies to demonstrate your ability to apply theory to practice, and explicitly link each intervention to a desired health outcome.
Always ground your responses in relevant UK legislation (e.g., Health and Social Care Act, CQC regulations) and professional standards (e.g., HCPC, GMC, CNHC).
Use real or hypothetical case studies to demonstrate how you would resolve operational challenges, such as managing a conflict between a physiotherapist and an acupuncturist within the practice.
When discussing business planning, show awareness of key financial metrics (break-even analysis, cost-benefit of therapies) and justify decisions with data.

Common Mistakes in CFI Level 7 Extended Diploma in Integrative Healthcare

Over-simplifying the philosophical differences between allopathic and holistic paradigms, often presenting them as a binary conflict rather than a spectrum of interaction and evolution.
Confusing integrative medicine with complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) without critically distinguishing their philosophical bases, evidential standards, and integration models.
Failing to move beyond a descriptive timeline of events to a critical analysis of why and how changes in medical philosophy occurred, missing the underlying societal and ethical imperatives.
Neglecting to consider the influence of global healthcare traditions (e.g., Ayurveda, Traditional Chinese Medicine) in shaping modern integrative philosophy, focusing solely on Western developments.

CFI Level 7 Extended Diploma in Integrative Healthcare

CROSSFIELDS-INSTITUTE

vocational

This subtopic develops advanced research competencies for integrative healthcare practitioners, focusing on the critical appraisal of the existing evidence base, selection and justification of research methods, and the design of ethically sound research protocols. Mastery enables learners to produce academically rigorous proposals that drive evidence-based practice and innovation in the field.

Learning Outcomes

Assessment Guidance

Key Skills

Key Terms

Assessment Criteria

Assessment criteria

Advanced Research Skills

Transforming Business Practice

Transforming Healthcare

Critical Appraisal of Medicine, Healthcare and Integrative Medicine Research

Holistic Assessment: The Therapeutic Relationship, Motivational Interviewing and Clinical Decision Making in Integrative Healthcare

Holistic Management: Social Prescribing, a Community Approach in Integrative Healthcare

Independent Study on Innovation in Integrative Healthcare

Integrative Healthcare Approaches and Management of Conditions 1

Integrative Healthcare Approaches and Management of Conditions 2

Managing a Dynamic Integrative Healthcare Practice

The Modern Context of Integrative Healthcare: Philosophy, History and Changing Times in Medicine

Topic Overview

The CFI Level 7 Extended Diploma in Integrative Healthcare is a vocationally-related qualification designed for healthcare professionals seeking to integrate conventional and complementary approaches within a holistic framework. This diploma covers advanced principles of integrative healthcare, including patient-centred care, evidence-based practice, and the ethical integration of therapies such as nutrition, herbal medicine, and mind-body interventions. It emphasises the importance of understanding the whole person—physical, emotional, social, and spiritual—to promote optimal health and well-being.

This qualification is crucial for those aiming to lead in integrative healthcare settings, such as clinics, wellness centres, or private practice. It builds on foundational knowledge of anatomy, physiology, and healthcare systems, requiring students to critically evaluate research and apply integrative models in complex clinical scenarios. By mastering this diploma, students develop the skills to design personalised care plans, collaborate with multidisciplinary teams, and advocate for integrative approaches within mainstream healthcare.

Within the wider Health & Social Care sector, this diploma addresses the growing demand for holistic and patient-led care. It aligns with UK healthcare policies promoting integrated care systems and the NHS Long Term Plan, which emphasises prevention and personalised medicine. Students will explore how integrative healthcare can improve outcomes for chronic conditions, mental health, and ageing populations, making this qualification highly relevant for modern healthcare challenges.

Key Concepts

Core ideas you must understand for this topic

→Holistic assessment: Evaluating physical, psychological, social, and spiritual factors to create a comprehensive patient profile.
→Evidence-based integrative practice: Critically appraising research from both conventional and complementary medicine to inform clinical decisions.
→Patient-centred care: Empowering patients through shared decision-making and respecting individual values and preferences.
→Interprofessional collaboration: Working effectively with diverse healthcare practitioners to deliver coordinated care.
→Ethical and legal frameworks: Understanding regulations governing integrative healthcare, including scope of practice and informed consent.

What You Need to Demonstrate

Key skills and knowledge for this topic

Award credit for clearly summarising the main characteristics of the IM evidence base, including its interdisciplinary nature, methodological diversity, and key gaps or limitations.
Award credit for demonstrating a systematic critical evaluation of research evidence or business documents, explicitly linking strengths and weaknesses to the learner's proposal rationale.
Award credit for justifying the chosen research methods and design with reference to ethical principles, practical feasibility, and the specific demands of the integrative healthcare context.
Award credit for producing a research protocol that includes all required sections (aims, literature review, methodology, ethics, timeline) and is written in a coherent, professional style appropriate to the sector.
Award credit for demonstrating a systematic approach to data collection and analysis that clearly aligns with the original research proposal.
Look for evidence that the presentation of research data is structured, accurate, and effectively communicated to support transparent decision-making.
Expect explicit critical reflection on personal values and biases, with concrete examples of how these were managed to ensure research integrity.
Credit should be given for a business plan that is logically structured, written in a professional tone, and incorporates accurate citation and referencing throughout.

Assessment Criteria

Key criteria assessors look for in your portfolio

Award credit for clearly summarising the main characteristics of the IM evidence base, including its interdisciplinary nature, methodological diversity, and key gaps or limitations.
Award credit for demonstrating a systematic critical evaluation of research evidence or business documents, explicitly linking strengths and weaknesses to the learner's proposal rationale.
Award credit for justifying the chosen research methods and design with reference to ethical principles, practical feasibility, and the specific demands of the integrative healthcare context.
Award credit for producing a research protocol that includes all required sections (aims, literature review, methodology, ethics, timeline) and is written in a coherent, professional style appropriate to the sector.
Award credit for demonstrating a systematic approach to data collection and analysis that clearly aligns with the original research proposal.
Look for evidence that the presentation of research data is structured, accurate, and effectively communicated to support transparent decision-making.
Expect explicit critical reflection on personal values and biases, with concrete examples of how these were managed to ensure research integrity.
Credit should be given for a business plan that is logically structured, written in a professional tone, and incorporates accurate citation and referencing throughout.
Award credit for demonstrating a clear research design that aligns with the approved proposal, including ethical considerations and methodological justification.
Credit should be given for presenting data using appropriate formats (e.g., tables, charts, thematic analysis) and for interpreting findings in relation to the research questions.
Award credit for articulating how the research contributes to transforming healthcare practice, with logical arguments and decisions grounded in the evidence.
Look for evidence of critical self-reflection, explicitly identifying personal values and biases and discussing their potential impact on data collection and analysis.
Credit for an academic writing style, including logical structure, coherent argument, and accurate citation and referencing throughout the draft paper.
Award credit for demonstrating a systematic approach to identifying and addressing bias in research design, including selection, performance, and detection biases.
Assessor look for evidence of evaluating the validity and reliability of both quantitative and qualitative methodologies, with specific reference to hierarchies of evidence.
Credit given for the ability to synthesize findings from conventional, complementary, and integrative studies into a coherent argument that justifies clinical decision-making.
Award credit for demonstrating a critical understanding of the theoretical underpinnings of the therapeutic relationship, including transference/countertransference dynamics, and how these inform holistic assessment.
Credit where the learner effectively applies motivational interviewing spirit (partnership, acceptance, compassion, evocation) and core skills (OARS) in a simulated or real consultation, with reflection on patient engagement.
Marks for integrating clinical decision-making models (e.g., shared decision-making, evidence-based practice) with holistic assessment data, demonstrating how diverse information sources (physical, emotional, social, spiritual) are synthesised to formulate a person-centred care plan.
Recognise when the learner critically evaluates their own use of self in the therapeutic relationship, identifying areas for professional development.
Award marks for demonstrating cultural competence and sensitivity in assessment practice, tailoring motivational interviewing techniques to diverse patient populations.
Award credit for demonstrating a critical understanding of the biopsychosocial model underpinning social prescribing.
Evidence of mapping local community assets and their relevance to diverse client groups with specific health needs.
Clear justification of referral criteria, risk assessment, and safeguarding protocols when linking clients to community services.
Integration of theoretical frameworks (e.g., salutogenesis, self-determination theory) into the design of a social prescribing initiative.
Award credit for demonstrating a systematic and critical review of current academic literature and grey literature to identify genuine gaps in integrative healthcare provision.
Assessors should look for a well-argued rationale that clearly links the proposed innovation to improved patient-centred outcomes and aligns with contemporary healthcare policy (e.g., NHS Long Term Plan).
Evidence of engagement with ethical, legal, and professional regulatory frameworks (e.g., NICE guidelines, CE marking for devices, voluntary registers) when designing the innovation must be present.
Marks should be allocated for a feasible implementation and evaluation strategy, including SMART objectives, stakeholder analysis, and consideration of resource implications.
Award credit for demonstrating a critical understanding of the evidence base for each selected integrative therapy, including referencing current research and guidelines.
Assess for the ability to design a comprehensive, holistic management plan that integrates conventional and complementary approaches, with clear rationale and measurable outcome criteria.
Look for evidence of safe practice, including recognition of contraindications, potential interactions, and scope of practice boundaries.
Expect the learner to reflect on the role of interprofessional working and patient empowerment within integrative care pathways.
Award credit for demonstrating a critical evaluation of the evidence base for at least two integrative approaches to a specified condition, comparing outcomes and risks.
Assessors should expect clear justification of how patient preferences and cultural considerations are integrated into the management plan.
Marks are awarded for formulating a comprehensive, holistic management strategy that includes measurable goals, multidisciplinary collaboration, and a review process.
Award credit for demonstrating a critical understanding of legal and ethical frameworks governing integrative practice, including professional boundaries and informed consent.
Credit for evidence of effective multidisciplinary team leadership, showing how to foster collaboration between diverse healthcare professionals while maintaining accountability.
Recognise application of change management principles to adapt practice operations in response to evolving healthcare landscapes, supported by relevant models (e.g., Kotter’s 8 steps).
Assess ability to design and implement quality assurance systems that measure patient outcomes and integrate feedback for continuous improvement.
Award credit for demonstrating a critical analysis of the philosophical tensions between biomedical reductionism and holistic, systems-based approaches to health, referencing key thinkers or movements.
Credit should be given for evidence of thorough historical evaluation, such as detailing the impact of the Flexner Report (1910), the holistic health movement of the 1970s, or the establishment of integrative medicine centres.
Look for the ability to contextualise changing times in medicine by linking societal, economic, and political drivers (e.g., rise of consumerism, healthcare costs, digital health) to the evolution of integrative healthcare.
Award credit for demonstrating synthesis of theory and practice, such as proposing how historical and philosophical insights can inform contemporary clinical reasoning within an integrative framework.

Assessment Guidance

Guidance for achieving higher grades

💡Directly map your research protocol to the gaps identified in your critical literature review to demonstrate a clear rationale and originality.
💡Integrate ethical considerations throughout the protocol rather than treating them as an afterthought—address recruitment, consent, confidentiality, and risk mitigation for each method.
💡Adopt a consistent academic referencing system (e.g., Harvard or APA) and ensure all sources are current, credible, and directly relevant to integrative healthcare.
💡Adopt a consistent reflective model (e.g., Gibbs or Kolb) to structure the self-reflection section, ensuring it is evidence-based and actionable.
💡Explicitly map each business plan section to specific research findings, using visual aids like tables or decision matrices to show traceability.
💡Before submission, audit your referencing against the required style guide, checking both in-text citations and the reference list for completeness and accuracy.
💡Treat the business plan as a professional document; avoid informal language and ensure the executive summary can stand alone for an assessor.
💡Maintain a reflective journal from the start of your project to capture real-time insights into your biases and decision-making; this will strengthen the reflexivity section of your paper.
💡Draft your findings chapter early and seek feedback on its clarity and alignment with research questions, ensuring your arguments are explicit and evidence-based.
💡Use a reference management tool from the outset to avoid last-minute errors, and cross-check every citation against your reference list before submission.
💡When appraising a study, always start by identifying the research question and study design, then systematically assess internal and external validity before drawing conclusions.
💡Use established critical appraisal tools (e.g., CASP, SIGN) as a framework, but demonstrate critical reasoning by justifying any adaptations for integrative healthcare contexts.
💡In your written assignment, explicitly link the appraised evidence to a specific clinical scenario or patient outcome to show practical integration.
💡In written assignments, explicitly link theory to practice by providing concrete examples from your clinical experience or case studies that illustrate each component of holistic assessment and the therapeutic relationship.
💡For practical assessments, focus on demonstrating the spirit of MI through your verbal and non-verbal communication, ensuring the patient feels heard and empowered, rather than simply completing a sequence of questions.
💡When discussing clinical decision-making, use a recognised framework (e.g., the Integrative Healthcare Decision-Making Model) and show how you weigh different forms of evidence, including patient preferences and clinical expertise.
💡Reflective practice is key; include critical reflections on your own performance, identifying what you did well and areas for improvement, supported by literature.
💡Ensure your evidence demonstrates integration: show how the therapeutic relationship enhances assessment, how MI guides the conversation to inform decision-making, and how all are woven together in a holistic plan.
💡Use case studies to illustrate the practical application of social prescribing pathways, ensuring you link theory to practice.
💡Critically appraise the evidence base for social prescribing outcomes, referencing recently published evaluations and NICE guidelines.
💡Demonstrate reflection on the challenges of interprofessional collaboration and how to overcome them within community settings.
💡In assignment work, show how you would tailor a social prescribing plan to a specific client profile, addressing holistic needs.
💡Ground your innovation in a clear theoretical framework of integrative care (e.g., the biopsychosocial model, salutogenesis) to demonstrate depth of understanding.
💡Explicitly map your proposal against relevant policy drivers and quality standards to show strategic alignment and increase the likelihood of real-world adoption.
💡Include a critical reflection on your own professional learning throughout the research process, highlighting how it has shaped your identity as a future leader in integrative healthcare.
💡Use appendices judiciously to present detailed implementation tools, such as logic models, Gantt charts, or draft patient information leaflets, to strengthen the practical credibility of your work.
💡When presenting case studies, always structure your analysis using a recognized integrative framework (e.g., biopsychosocial model) to demonstrate systematic consideration.
💡Justify every therapeutic recommendation with evidence from both conventional and complementary literature, showing balanced critical judgment.
💡Explicitly address safety protocols and ethical considerations, as these are high-weighting assessment points in vocational qualifications.
💡When constructing management plans, always start with a thorough biopsychosocial assessment and reference NICE guidelines or equivalent frameworks where applicable.
💡Use case studies to demonstrate your ability to apply theory to practice, and explicitly link each intervention to a desired health outcome.
💡Always ground your responses in relevant UK legislation (e.g., Health and Social Care Act, CQC regulations) and professional standards (e.g., HCPC, GMC, CNHC).
💡Use real or hypothetical case studies to demonstrate how you would resolve operational challenges, such as managing a conflict between a physiotherapist and an acupuncturist within the practice.
💡When discussing business planning, show awareness of key financial metrics (break-even analysis, cost-benefit of therapies) and justify decisions with data.
💡Emphasise patient-centred outcomes and shared decision-making as a cornerstone of integrative care, linking this to improved patient satisfaction and practice reputation.
💡When discussing historical shifts, reference concrete milestones (e.g., the WHO’s 1978 Alma-Ata Declaration on primary health care, the 1990s NIH Office of Alternative Medicine) to demonstrate depth of understanding.
💡Ensure your analysis balances philosophical critique with practical implications: how does understanding historical and philosophical context directly improve modern integrative assessment, treatment planning, or interprofessional collaboration?
💡Use a critical voice: avoid merely describing paradigms; evaluate their limitations and contributions, and consider how emerging trends like precision medicine or systems biology may reshape integrative philosophy further.
💡Use specific examples from case studies to illustrate how integrative principles are applied in practice. Examiners look for real-world application, not just theoretical knowledge.
💡Critically evaluate research studies, noting strengths and limitations. Show awareness of different levels of evidence (e.g., RCTs vs. qualitative studies) and how they inform integrative practice.
💡Link your answers to UK healthcare policies, such as the NHS Long Term Plan or NICE guidelines, to demonstrate understanding of the regulatory and policy context.

Common Mistakes

Common errors to avoid in your coursework

Failing to differentiate between levels of evidence or conflating opinion-based sources with empirical research when summarising the evidence base.
Selecting research methods without adequate justification or ignoring the ethical implications unique to integrative healthcare, such as patient safety in complementary therapies.
Writing a protocol that lacks specificity, omits critical elements like sample size calculations or data analysis plans, or uses inappropriate terminology for the intended audience.
Superficial or purely descriptive analysis of research data, lacking the depth of critical interpretation required at Level 7.
Failing to explicitly link research findings to strategic business decisions, resulting in a disjointed plan.
Neglecting to reflect on personal biases or providing only generic reflections that do not demonstrate genuine self-awareness.
Inconsistent or inaccurate referencing that undermines the academic credibility of the business plan.
Students often treat the reflection on values and biases as an afterthought, providing superficial comments rather than a deep, critical analysis integrated throughout the research process.
A frequent error is presenting data without sufficient analysis or linking back to the research objectives, leaving findings disconnected from the overall argument.
Many students struggle with referencing, either by omitting citations for key ideas or by using inconsistent referencing formats, which undermines academic integrity.
Confusing statistical significance with clinical significance, leading to overestimating the practical relevance of research findings.
Failing to differentiate between the epistemological foundations of conventional biomedical research and holistic integrative methodologies, resulting in inappropriate appraisal criteria.
Neglecting to consider the context of the research setting and applicability to diverse patient populations or practice settings.
Treating holistic assessment as merely a checklist of symptoms across domains, rather than a dynamic, interactive process informed by the therapeutic relationship.
Using motivational interviewing as a prescriptive technique rather than embodying its spirit, leading to a confrontational or directive style that undermines patient autonomy.
Failing to differentiate between clinical decision-making in integrative healthcare versus conventional settings, by not considering the evidence base and potential interactions of complementary therapies.
Neglecting self-awareness and the impact of one's own biases on the therapeutic relationship, leading to reduced patient engagement.
Over-reliance on intuition without integrating evidence-based practice, or vice versa, disregarding the holistic context.
Failing to distinguish social prescribing from traditional medical referrals, ignoring the non-clinical facilitation role.
Overlooking the importance of client consent, shared decision-making, and motivational interviewing in the referral process.
Assuming a one-size-fits-all approach without considering cultural, socioeconomic, and accessibility barriers.
Neglecting to evaluate outcomes or measure the impact of social prescribing on client wellbeing and service utilization.
Students often conflate simple service improvement with innovation, failing to articulate the novel, transformative nature of their proposal.
A frequent oversight is neglecting to address barriers to implementation such as interprofessional resistance, funding constraints, or lack of empirical evidence for complementary approaches.
Many learners provide a superficial evaluation plan that does not clearly specify measurable outcome indicators or a robust methodology for data collection and analysis.
There is a tendency to disregard the importance of patient and public involvement (PPI) in shaping the innovation, leading to proposals that are not fully person-centred.
Failing to critically appraise the quality of evidence for complementary therapies, leading to over-reliance on anecdotal or low-quality sources.
Overlooking potential interactions between conventional medications and complementary supplements, which could compromise patient safety.
Designing care plans that are not truly integrative but merely list therapies in parallel without demonstrating synergistic combination or prioritization.
Neglecting to consider the patient's psychosocial context and personal preferences, resulting in a one-size-fits-all approach.
Many learners present generic integrative plans without tailoring interventions to the specific pathophysiology or stage of the condition.
A common error is failing to acknowledge the limitations of complementary therapies or overstating their evidence without critical appraisal.
Treating integrative practice as a simple addition of therapies, without recognising the need for cohesive governance and shared clinical protocols.
Overlooking the financial viability of the practice, such as underestimating costs of compliance, insurance, or maintaining multiple treatment modalities.
Assuming one leadership style fits all; failing to adapt communication and decision-making approaches for a diverse team with varying professional cultures.
Neglecting the importance of evidence-based integration, instead relying solely on anecdotal evidence or tradition without critical appraisal.
Over-simplifying the philosophical differences between allopathic and holistic paradigms, often presenting them as a binary conflict rather than a spectrum of interaction and evolution.
Confusing integrative medicine with complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) without critically distinguishing their philosophical bases, evidential standards, and integration models.
Failing to move beyond a descriptive timeline of events to a critical analysis of why and how changes in medical philosophy occurred, missing the underlying societal and ethical imperatives.
Neglecting to consider the influence of global healthcare traditions (e.g., Ayurveda, Traditional Chinese Medicine) in shaping modern integrative philosophy, focusing solely on Western developments.
Misconception: Integrative healthcare is the same as alternative medicine. Correction: Integrative healthcare combines conventional medicine with evidence-based complementary therapies, not as a replacement but as a complementary approach within a coordinated care plan.
Misconception: Any complementary therapy can be integrated without evidence. Correction: Only therapies with robust evidence for safety and efficacy should be integrated; students must critically evaluate research and avoid pseudoscience.
Misconception: Patient-centred care means the patient always decides treatment. Correction: It involves shared decision-making where the practitioner provides expert guidance while respecting patient preferences, but clinical judgment and safety remain paramount.

Frequently Asked Questions

Common questions students ask about this topic

Before You Start

Prior knowledge that will help with this topic

•Understanding of human anatomy and physiology at Level 5 or equivalent.
•Familiarity with research methods and evidence-based practice in healthcare.
•Basic knowledge of common complementary therapies (e.g., acupuncture, herbal medicine) and their theoretical foundations.

Key Terminology

Essential terms to know

1. Summarise the main characteristics of the existing IM evidence base.2. Critically evaluate research evidence or relevant business documents to underpin their proposal writing.3. Explore and apply the use of different research methods and designs relevant to their desired project area, including ethical considerations.4. Produce a full research protocol outlining their proposed work, written in the appropriate academic or business style.
1. Carry out an original piece of research as outlined in the proposal.2. Analyse and present research data in an appropriate manner, and present clear arguments and decisions based on the findings.3. Reflect on and understand their own values and biases that may influence their results.4. Complete a business plan written clearly in an appropriate business style, and acknowledging the work of others through citation and referencing.
1. To carry out an original piece of research as outlined in the proposal.2. To analyse and present research data in an appropriate manner, and present clear arguments and decisions based on the findings.3. Reflect on and understand their own values and biases that may influence their results.4. To complete a draft research paper written clearly in an academic style, and acknowledging the work of others through citation and referencing.
see qualification specification
see qualification specification
see qualification specification
see qualification specification
see qualification specification
see qualification specification
see qualification specification
see qualification specification

Ready to learn?

AI-powered learning tailored to this unit

CFI Level 7 Extended Diploma in Integrative Healthcare

Assessment criteria

Topic Overview

Key Concepts

What You Need to Demonstrate

Assessment Criteria

Assessment Guidance

Common Mistakes

Frequently Asked Questions

Before You Start

Key Terminology

Ready to learn?

Related Topics in CROSSFIELDS-INSTITUTE vocational Health & Social Care

CFI Level 3 Diploma in Foundations of Palliative, End of Life and Bereavement Care (Sue Ryder approach)

CFI Level 7 Diploma in Integrative Healthcare Research

CFI Level 7 Extended Diploma in Sports Nutrition: IOPN Accredited

Crossfields Institute Level 7 Diploma in Sports Nutrition: IOPN Accredited

Key Marking Points