research methodology lect 1.intro protocol.2015 (handout)
TRANSCRIPT
-
7/24/2019 Research Methodology Lect 1.Intro Protocol.2015 (Handout)
1/10
18/09/201
Research ProjectIntroduction
Reasons for doing a research project
Honours degree requirement
Professional development
-
7/24/2019 Research Methodology Lect 1.Intro Protocol.2015 (Handout)
2/10
18/09/201
What is research? Seeking through methodical processes to add to the
body of knowledge, by the discovery of nontrivial
facts and insights
Purposes
to review existing knowledge
to describe some situation or problem
to construct something useful
to provide an explanation
Approaches & phases in research
Approaches
Laboratory experiment
Field experiment
Case study
Survey
Common phases
Preparation
Production
Publication
-
7/24/2019 Research Methodology Lect 1.Intro Protocol.2015 (Handout)
3/10
18/09/201
Some of the questions a literature
review can answer
Literature search andreview on your topic
What are the keyresources?
What are the major issues anddebates about the topic?
What are the politicalstandpoints?
What are the origins anddefinitions of the topic?
How is knowledge on thetopic structured and
organised?
What are the mainquestions and problems
that have been addressedto date?
What are the key theories,concepts and ideas?
Why read? Give you ideas
To understand what other researchers have done in
the area
To broaden your perspective and set your work in
context To legitimize your argument
To enable effective criticism of previous work
To learn more about research methods
To spot areas which have not been researched
before
-
7/24/2019 Research Methodology Lect 1.Intro Protocol.2015 (Handout)
4/10
18/09/201
Reasons why papers are rejectedfrom publications
The study did not address an important scientific issue. The study was not original (someone else had already done the
same or a similar study).
The study did not actually test the authors hypothesis.
A different type of study should have been done.
Practical difficulties (in recruiting subjects, for example) led the
authors to compromise on the original study protocol.
The sample size was too small.
The study was uncontrolled or inadequately controlled.
The statistical analysis was incorrect or inappropriate.
The authors drew unjustified conclusions from their data.
The paper is so badly written that it is incomprehensible
Nadim, A. (2005). How to Write a Scientific Paper?ASJOG, 2, 255258
Reading at different stages for
different purposes Beginningto check what others have done, to
focus your ideas, shape your hypothesis, and
explore in your own context
Duringkeep up to date with development, to betterunderstand the methods you are using and the field
you are in, and as a source of data. To enrich your
arguments, and protect against duplication
Afterto see the impact of your work has had and to
develop further ideas for further research projects
-
7/24/2019 Research Methodology Lect 1.Intro Protocol.2015 (Handout)
5/10
18/09/201
Specify the information needed What kind of papers do I want?
How much detail do I need?
How comprehensive do I need to be?
How far back should I search?
The answers should come from the reasons for
reading
Identify relevant literature Many ways of finding literature
Librarian
Catalogues
Open shelves
Dictionaries & encyclopedias
Abstracts & reviews Databases & computers
Online: GoogleScholar http://scholar.google.com
Medline/PubMed http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/PubMed/
ScienceDirect http://www.sciencedirect.com
- use citations & related articles features
Offline: CDs in the library
-
7/24/2019 Research Methodology Lect 1.Intro Protocol.2015 (Handout)
6/10
18/09/201
Critically appraise what you read Time is limited
Separate the relevant ones from not so relevant
Others contain useful information mixed with rubbish
How rigorousis the research? i.e. how good is the
study?
What is the resultstelling us?
Is it relevant?
Use a simple checklist to identify useful information
Questions to ask Is the paper of interest?
Title, abstract
Why was the study carried out?
Introduction Should end with a clear statement of the purpose of the study
Without such statement may mean the authors had no clear
idea what they wanted to do or they did not find anything
-
7/24/2019 Research Methodology Lect 1.Intro Protocol.2015 (Handout)
7/10
18/09/201
Questions to ask
How good is the quality of the work?
Methods
Brief but should include enough detail to enable one to
judge quality & (to repeat the work)
Must include the samples, i.e. who was studied and how
they were recruited, or the identity of the test samples
For surveys, basic demographics must be there
What has been found?
Results
The (processed) data should be therenot just statistics
Raw data should not be there
Tables and figures should be self explanatorywith titles,
legends & brief explanation if necessary
The data in the text part and Tables/Figures should not be
duplicated/repeated
Are the aim/objectives in the introduction addressed in the
results?
What are flaws and inconsistencies in the study? Is there
any explanation provided in the discussion? Do they affect
the reliability/accuracy/ validity of the results?
-
7/24/2019 Research Methodology Lect 1.Intro Protocol.2015 (Handout)
8/10
18/09/201
What are the implications? Discussion/abstract
How far the results can be generalised
What is new here?
How important is it?
What does it mean for healthcare/pharmacy/basic sciences?
Is it relevant to my work?
What else is of interest?
Useful references (esp. review papers)
Important or novel ideas
Methodology may be useful/of interest
Developing a research proposalSection Research protocol Preliminary report
(2-5 pages) (
-
7/24/2019 Research Methodology Lect 1.Intro Protocol.2015 (Handout)
9/10
18/09/201
Introduction3 paragraphs
1. define the topic of study, e.g. disease state, medication errors
2. establish the importance of the topic of study (epidemiology,
cost/effectiveness of prevention/treatment etc)
3. describe the rationale for the study, e.g. a gap in knowledge,
application of new knowledge to a specific problem, or describing
outcomes in a specific institution
Slack, M. K., et al. (2015). Writing a research proposal: a workshop course developed for
Pharm D students. Pharmacy Education, 15, 1017
Introduction - exampleTitle: Synthesis and evaluation of some dialkylaminochalcones as
acetylcholinesterase inhibitors against Alzheimers disease
1. define the topic of study
Alzheimers disease (AD) is the most common type of
dementia, accounting for 50 to 75% of all cases (Blennow et al., 2006).
It is a progressive neurodegenerative disease characterized clinically
by insidious onset of memory and cognition impairment, emergence ofpsychiatric symptoms and behavioral disorder, and impairment of
activities of daily living, which is mainly found in the elderly (Hong-Qi et
al., 2012). It is among the leading causes of death in industrialized
countries and so far no definitive treatment or cure for AD has been
found (Recanatini et al., 1997). In 2013, the estimated cost of caring for
elderly people in USA with AD and other dementias was more than 200
billion USD (Alzheimers Association, 2013).
-
7/24/2019 Research Methodology Lect 1.Intro Protocol.2015 (Handout)
10/10
18/09/201
Title: Synthesis and evaluation of some dialkylaminochalcones as
acetylcholinesterase inhibitors against Alzheimers disease
2. establish the importance of the topic of study
Acetylcholinesterase (AChE) inhibitors have to date demonstrated
the greatest clinical success in AD treatment. These medications are
employed to reduce the rate at which acetylcholine (ACh) is broken down,
thereby increasing the concentration of ACh in the brain and combating
the loss of ACh caused by the death of cholinergic neurons (Speck-
Planche et al., 2012). Among the different AChE inhibitors that have been
identified, only donepezil, rivastigmine and galantamine are FDA-
approved and have been shown to be efficacious and relatively safe for
treating AD patients (Gauthier, 2002). However, these drugs only relieve
some of the psychological and behavioral symptoms of AD patients rather
than curing the disease and many side effects had been reported, suchas, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, anorexia, muscle cramps, bradycardia,
urinary incontinence, syncope and fatigue (Segal-Gidan et al., 2011).
Therefore discovery of more effective and potentially safer AChE inhibitors
is crucial to improve the treatment of AD.
Title: Synthesis and evaluation of some dialkylaminochalcones as
acetylcholinesterase inhibitors against Alzheimers disease
3. describe the rationale for the study
Flavonoids have been found to possess some beneficial
pharmacological activities, including neuro-protective effects and AChE
inhibitory activity. In particular, some chalcone derivatives are more potent
AChE inhibitors than rivastigmine (Sheng et al., 2009), while othersappear to have insignificant AChE inhibitory activity (Amor et al., 2005).
Hence, further investigations on chalcones AChE inhibition activity are
needed to evaluate their potential for the treatment of AD.