» Articles » PMID: 29563838

From Ideas to Studies: How to Get Ideas and Sharpen Them into Research Questions

Overview
Journal Clin Epidemiol
Publisher Dove Medical Press
Specialty Public Health
Date 2018 Mar 23
PMID 29563838
Citations 5
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Where do new research questions come from? This is at best only partially taught in courses or textbooks about clinical or epidemiological research. Methods are taught under the assumption that a researcher already knows the research question and knows which methods will fit that question. Similarly, the real complexity of the thought processes that lead to a scientific undertaking is almost never described in published papers. In this paper, we first discuss how to get an idea that is worth researching. We describe sources of new ideas and how to foster a creative attitude by "cultivating your thoughts". Only a few of these ideas will make it into a study. Next, we describe how to sharpen and focus a research question so that a study becomes feasible and a valid test of the underlying idea. To do this, the idea needs to be "pruned". Pruning a research question means cutting away anything that is unnecessary, so that only the essence remains. This includes determining both the latent and the stated objectives, specific pruning questions, and the use of specific schemes to structure reasoning. After this, the following steps include preparation of a brief protocol, conduct of a pilot study, and writing a draft of the paper including draft tables. Then you are ready to carry out your research.

Citing Articles

Understanding the Experiences of Clinicians Accessing Electronic Databases to Search for Evidence on Pain Management Using a Mixed Methods Approach.

Arumugam V, MacDermid J, Walton D, Grewal R Healthcare (Basel). 2023; 11(12).

PMID: 37372845 PMC: 10297955. DOI: 10.3390/healthcare11121728.


Must-have Qualities of Clinical Research on Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning.

Kocak B, Cuocolo R, Pinto Dos Santos D, Stanzione A, Ugga L Balkan Med J. 2022; 40(1):3-12.

PMID: 36578657 PMC: 9874249. DOI: 10.4274/balkanmedj.galenos.2022.2022-11-51.


Prediction or causality? A scoping review of their conflation within current observational research.

Ramspek C, Steyerberg E, Riley R, Rosendaal F, Dekkers O, Dekker F Eur J Epidemiol. 2021; 36(9):889-898.

PMID: 34392488 PMC: 8502741. DOI: 10.1007/s10654-021-00794-w.


Comparisons between countries are essential for the control of COVID-19.

Pearce N, Lawlor D, Brickley E Int J Epidemiol. 2020; 49(4):1059-1062.

PMID: 32601669 PMC: 7337754. DOI: 10.1093/ije/dyaa108.


Formulating a good research question: Pearls and pitfalls.

Fandino W Indian J Anaesth. 2019; 63(8):611-616.

PMID: 31462805 PMC: 6691636. DOI: 10.4103/ija.IJA_198_19.

References
1.
Pearce N, Lawlor D . Causal inference-so much more than statistics. Int J Epidemiol. 2017; 45(6):1895-1903. PMC: 5841844. DOI: 10.1093/ije/dyw328. View

2.
Thabane L, Ma J, Chu R, Cheng J, Ismaila A, Rios L . A tutorial on pilot studies: the what, why and how. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2010; 10:1. PMC: 2824145. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2288-10-1. View

3.
Greenland S . Induction versus Popper: substance versus semantics. Int J Epidemiol. 1998; 27(4):543-8. DOI: 10.1093/ije/27.4.543. View

4.
Richardson W, Wilson M, Nishikawa J, Hayward R . The well-built clinical question: a key to evidence-based decisions. ACP J Club. 1995; 123(3):A12-3. View

5.
Susser M . The logic of Sir Karl Popper and the practice of epidemiology. Am J Epidemiol. 1986; 124(5):711-8. DOI: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a114446. View