/38
0 votes, 0 avg
4

Structure of Research Proposal

Structure of Research Proposal

1 / 38

Category: Structure of Research Proposal

For preschool children with mild to moderate visual acuity impairment, are glasses and patching effective in improving visual acuity, compared with glasses alone or no treatment?

2 / 38

Category: Structure of Research Proposal

  • Set of ethical principles regarding human experimentation
  • Provides for a higher standard of human protection
  • Last revision – 2013
  • Basic principles:

respect for the individuals and their rights, including the right to make informed decision

subject's welfare must always take precedence over the interests of science and society

ethical considerations must always take precedence over laws and regulations

 

3 / 38

Category: Structure of Research Proposal

Formulating the Question: O

  • Types of outcomes (O):

–Criteria for defining

–Important to consumers, providers

–Unpublished data?

Things to consider:

  • Main outcomes, for inclusion in the 'Summary of findings' table, are those that are essential for decision-making, and should usually have an emphasis on patient-important outcomes.
  • Primary outcomes are the two or three outcomes from among the main outcomes that the review would be likely to be able to address if sufficient studies are identified, in order to reach a conclusion about the effects (beneficial and adverse) of the intervention (s).
  • Secondary outcomes include the remaining main outcomes (other than primary outcomes) plus additional outcomes useful for explaining effects.
  • Ensure that outcomes cover potential as well as actual adverse effects.
  • Consider outcomes relevant to all potential decision makers, including economic data.
  • Consider the type and timing of outcome measurements.

4 / 38

Category: Structure of Research Proposal

Elements of the question

1.Frame the question you want to answer

–Consider patients /interventions /comparisons /outcome

–Classify the type of question

–Identify appropriate study designs to address question

2.Find the best evidence

3.Critically appraise the evidence

4.Apply evidence

5 / 38

Category: Structure of Research Proposal

Question Look for evidence from:
Incidence, prevalence Surveys, cohort studies
Therapy Clinical trials
Screening Clinical trials
Diagnostic accuracy Clinical trials, cross-sectional studies
Prognosis Clinical trials, cohort studies
Harm Clinical trials, cohort studies, case-control studies
Etiology Cohort studies, case control studies

6 / 38

Category: Structure of Research Proposal

  • Patient population
  • Inclusion and exclusion criteria
  • Exposure definition/intervention composition, dose, timing
  • Comparison group/controls
  • Management protocol (e.g., cointerventions) for trials
  • Outcome definition (e.g., follow-up time, cause-specific
  • mortality)
  • Quality of design and execution
  • Analysis

7 / 38

Category: Structure of Research Proposal

  • Well-formulated questions determine:

–Criteria used to select studies

–Development of the search strategy

–Data to be abstracted

8 / 38

Category: Structure of Research Proposal

Question Classification
What proportion of the population is newly diagnosed with

this problem each year?

Incidence
What proportion of the population is currently living with this

problem?

Prevalence
What should be done to treat this problem? Therapy
Will detecting this problem early, before symptoms, make a

difference in my health?

Screening
How good is this test at detecting this problem? Diagnostic accuracy
What is the likely outcome of this problem? Prognosis
Will there be any negative side effects? Harm
What causes this problem? Etiology
How can this problem be prevented? Prevention

9 / 38

Category: Structure of Research Proposal

Topic: the association between the level of alcohol consumption and the incidence of stroke Research question: does moderate to heavy alcohol consumption reduce the risk of stroke?

  • Population = adults without prior stroke
  • Exposure = alcohol consumption presented in/could be converted to drinks per day; not solely binge or short term (24 hour); measured over> past 1 month or longer
  • Comparison = non-drinkers
  • Outcome = ischemic or hemorrhagic stroke or both; enough information to estimate RR, OR, AR, 95% Cls
  • Design = cohort studies

10 / 38

Category: Structure of Research Proposal

Full name: Ethical Principles and Guidelines for the Protection of Human Subjects of Research, Report of the National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research

Created by the National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research

  • Summarizes ethical principles for research in US
  • Principles:

–Respect for persons (autonomy)

–Beneficence (“Do not harm”)

–Justice

11 / 38

Category: Structure of Research Proposal

Declaration of Helsinki (DoH)

  • Basic principles:

respect for the individuals and their rights, including the right to make informed decision

subject's welfare must always take precedence over the interests of science and society

ethical considerations must always take precedence over laws and regulations

12 / 38

Category: Structure of Research Proposal

  • Done by searching literature, databases etc.

Principles:

  • Generate appropriate keywords
  • Choose database (e.g. Cochrane, Pubmed)
  • Conduct the search (use Boolean operators AND, OR etc.)

13 / 38

Category: Structure of Research Proposal

Each _____________ has five elements:

1.Domain  (eg, anxiety)

2.Specific measurement (s)  (eg, Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale)

3.Specific metric (s)  (eg, change from baseline)

4.Method (s) of aggregation  (eg, mean, median)

5.Time point (s)  (eg, 3 months, 6 months)

14 / 38

Category: Structure of Research Proposal

  • Private interests affect research process
  • Ways to avoid

–Prevention

–Public Disclosure

–Follow Procedure

15 / 38

Category: Structure of Research Proposal

Exposure

Outcome

Setting

Population

16 / 38

Category: Structure of Research Proposal

Resources for how to frame your question

Formulate the Topic

  • Confirm the need for a new review
  • Develop an analytic framework
  • Use a standard format to articulate each question of interest

–For example, PICO(TS)

  • State a rationale for each question
  • Refine each question

Patient or population at hand

Intervention or Exposure

Comparison

Clinical Outcomes

Additional elements: Time, Setting (eg, primary care, specialty, inpatients etc.)

17 / 38

Category: Structure of Research Proposal

Intervention

Outcomes

Population

condition

18 / 38

Category: Structure of Research Proposal

Declaration of Helsinki (DoH)

–Research should be based on a thorough knowledge of the scientific background

–Risk and benefits should be carefully assessed

–Research should be conducted by suitably trained investigators

–Experimental investigations should always be compared against the best methods

19 / 38

Category: Structure of Research Proposal

  • Describe common issues related to research ethics (copyrights, plagiarism, publications, conflict of interest, research misconduct, validity, feasibility etc.)
  • Explain the role of Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) in research process
  • Describe approach to research process in SJSM

20 / 38

Category: Structure of Research Proposal

  • Independent reviewing body
  • Functions:

–Evaluation of investigational protocols prior to research

–Validity and ethical integrity of research

–Accuracy of the informed consent

–Treatments and procedures do not present an undue risk

–Periodic review of the data so that a trial can be stopped

  • Study cannot commence without IRB approval

21 / 38

Category: Structure of Research Proposal

Formulating the Question: C

  • For trials:

–Placebo

–Standard therapy

–No treatment

  • For epi:

–No exposure

–Non-cases  (hospital, neighborhood, etc.)

22 / 38

Category: Structure of Research Proposal

Formulating the Question: P

  • Types of people (P)

–Define condition or disease, including explicit diagnostic criteria

–Population and setting of interest  (age, ethnicity, sex, community, hospital, outpatient)

Things to consider:

  • How is the disease/condition defined?
  • What are the most important characteristics that describe these people (participants)?
  • Are there any relevant demographic factors (eg, age, sex, ethnicity)?
  • What is the setting (eg, hospital, community etc.)?
  • Who should make the diagnosis?
  • Are there other types of people who should be excluded from the review (because they are likely to react to the intervention in a different way)?
  • How will studies involving only a subset of relevant participants be handled?

23 / 38

Category: Structure of Research Proposal

  • Assessment of the practicality of a proposed project or system
  • Assessed by the SJSM Research Committee

–Usually during RHMI/RHMII Courses

  • Feasibility analysis determines if research is

–technically feasible

–feasible within the estimated cost

will be profitable

24 / 38

Category: Structure of Research Proposal

  • Research question:

Is drug therapy associated with long-term morbidity and mortality in older persons with moderate hypertension?

P = Older persons with moderate hypertension

I = Drug therapy

C = Not stated  (presumably any intervention other than the named drug therapy)

O = Long-term morbidity and mortality

25 / 38

Category: Structure of Research Proposal

  • Generally not possible to formulate an answerable question without knowing a bit about what data are available
  • Need to guard against testing a post hoc hypothesis

26 / 38

Category: Structure of Research Proposal

  • Frame the question: figure out what your question is

–Patients, interventions, comparison group, outcomes

  • Classify: what type of question is this and what is the best evidence to address that question?

27 / 38

Category: Structure of Research Proposal

  • Investigators should disclose sources of financing
  • Financial disclosure is essential to help ensure an objective interpretation of research data

28 / 38

Category: Structure of Research Proposal

PICO (TS) method:

  • Patient or population at hand
  • Intervention or Exposure
  • Comparison
  • Clinical Outcomes
  • Additional elements: Time, Setting (eg, primary care, specialty, inpatients etc.)

29 / 38

Category: Structure of Research Proposal

  • Applies to design and methods
  • Findings represent research phenomenon
  • Internal validity:

–Affected by flaws within the study itself

–Usually problems with design/research instrument

  • External validity:

–Extent to which you can generalize your findings

–Eg, can you apply your findings to larger groups?

30 / 38

Category: Structure of Research Proposal

Incidence, prevalence What is the incidence of low birth weight in minority populations

compared to the majority population?

Therapy Is exercise effective in improving quality of life in persons with COPD?
Screening Is PSA to detect prostate cancer effective in reducing mortality?
Diagnostic Accuracy How effective is an MRI at detecting new breast cancers in follow-up of women with breast cancer having lumpectomy?
Prognosis What is the effect of pregnancy on exacerbating the symptoms of MS?
Harm What proportion of postmenopausal women receiving Ca++/vita D can expect to have kidney stones?
Etiology Is coffee consumption causally associated with developing pancreatic cancer?

31 / 38

Category: Structure of Research Proposal

  • Well-formulated questions (and analytic frameworks):

–Determine final criteria used to select studies for review

–Which data will be abstracted

32 / 38

Category: Structure of Research Proposal

Question Classification
What proportion of the population is newly diagnosed with

this problem each year?

Incidence
What proportion of the population is currently living with this

problem?

Prevalence
What should be done to treat this problem? Therapy
Will detecting this problem early, before symptoms, make a

difference in my health?

Screening
How good is this test at detecting this problem? Diagnostic accuracy
What is the likely outcome of this problem? Prognosis
Will there be any negative side effects? Harm
What causes this problem? Etiology
How can this problem be prevented? Prevention

33 / 38

Category: Structure of Research Proposal

50 yo m, with no risk factors comes to see you in your clinic and asks you whether he should take aspirin to prevent CV disease

  • P: A healthy adult
  • I: Aspirin
  • C: No aspirin
  • O: Cardiovascular disease
  • T: In 5 years

Asking a PICO(T) question:

 

In an otherwise healthy man with no risk factors or medical conditions, what is the benefit of taking aspirin vs. no aspirin in preventing cardiovascular disease in 5 years?

34 / 38

Category: Structure of Research Proposal

  • Permission before a healthcare intervention
  • Always required in research
  • Valid informed consent is based upon:

Disclosure: discussion of pertinent information

Understanding: ability to comprehend

Capacity: ability to make decisions

Voluntariness: freedom from coercion/manipulation

  • Surrogate consent considered when

–Research participant is incompetent

–Physically or mentally incapable of giving consent

–Participant is a minor

  • Surrogate should act in the subject's best interest

Additional guidelines and regulations

  • Good clinical practice (GCP)

–International guide

–Quality standard for conducting clinical trials

  • Common Rule:

–US research guidelines

Tri-Council Policy Statement

35 / 38

Category: Structure of Research Proposal

  • Presenting someone else’s work as your own
  • Regardless of the author consent
  • May be intentional or unintentional
  • Applies to text, graphs, illustrations etc.

36 / 38

Category: Structure of Research Proposal

  • Aka Kennedy-Kassebaum Act (1996)
  • Consists of 5 titles
  • Privacy rule:

–National regulations for the use and disclosure of Protected Health Information (PHI)

  • Security Rule:

–Deals specifically with Electronic Protected Health Information (EPHI)

37 / 38

Category: Structure of Research Proposal

Narrow Questions Broad Questions
May not be applicable to multiple settings, populations, or exposures May not be valid (apples and oranges)
Can result in spurious or biased conclusions (like subgroup analysis):

•Efficacy of aspirin in preventing strokes in women

•Association between dysfunctional uterine bleeding and BMI, in African American women

•Reviewer familiar with literature can narrow question, to exclude articles with conflicting results

Searches may be more time-consuming

Synthesis and interpretation difficult

Difficult to maintain

•Can split broad question into subparts

38 / 38

Category: Structure of Research Proposal

  • Fabrication, falsification, or plagiarism
  • Fabrication

–making up data or results

  • Falsification

–manipulating research data

–changing or omitting data

Your score is

The average score is 94%

0%

 

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked