5. The World of Research

Vivian R. Ramsden and Scott Tunison

Overview

Research contributes to the creation, dissemination, application and translation of knowledge (Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons, 2015; Shaw et al., 2017). This Module addresses the two most important steps in the research process when developing a research project: (i) the literature review and (ii) the formulation of a research question(s). The methods used to answer the research questions are often co-created with communities and Supervisors/Research Advisory Committees.

The ability to appraise and synthesize diverse sources of information critically is the cornerstone of the development of research. As you undertake the literature review, carefully consider the underlying perspectives and assumptions made by the authors of the articles that you review.

The specific research question(s) to be studied should evolve from a literature review and the subsequent synthesis of the relevant literature on or around the topic of interest. A good research question should articulate the nature, context, and significance of the problem, topic, or area to be studied.

Research design or methods for your study is dependent upon how best to answer the research question(s). The study may be quantitative, qualitative, or mixed methods (both) depending on the information needed to answer the question(s).

Learning Objectives

When you have finished this module, you should be able to:

  1. Design and implement an academic literature review. Specifically, you will be able to
    1. examine the body of literature in your field of interest to assemble a body of relevant publications, and
    2. assemble and critically evaluate these publications to
    3. inventory the literature that best informs your area of study.
  2. Undertake a comprehensive review and analysis of the literature and write a synthesis of the relevant literature from which the research question(s) evolve.
  3. Employ the PICOT and FINER criteria to design high-quality research question(s).

Understanding the Literature Review and Synthesis Process

“The literature review is to a research question what the foundation is to a home. Without a solid foundation, the house is likely to fall down, and without a detailed look into the literature, the project is likely to be simplistic, naive and an inferior repetition of work already completed by someone else” (Birmingham, 2000).

The literature review and synthesis of the relevant literature process should be thought of as a funnel – starting with a broad search around your research idea or area of interest (Watson et al., 2022) (see Figure 5-1).

Through the process of reviewing the literature, area(s) are identified as requiring further research or providing the opportunity for creation, dissemination, application and/or translation of knowledge.

Then, the written synthesis of the literature is usually divided into sections that present themes or identify trends, including relevant theory. You are not trying to list all the material published, but to synthesize and evaluate it according to the guiding concept of your research question(s) (Taylor, 2008). Thus, the writing of the synthesis of the literature should offer the reader a pathway through the existing knowledge, and arrive at the end with a research question (or questions).

The “funnelled” steps of the literature review and synthesis of the relevant literature process are outlined in the following graphic:

Steps of the literature review and synthesis of the relevant literature process: 1) Broad, general statement about why the topic is of interest. 2) Background/overview relevant to the topic within the context in which it will be investigated. 3) Synthesis of previous research including purpose, population studied, sample size, type of data collected, methods used and analyses undertaken. 4) Synthesis of research findings, conclusions, interpretations & application. 5) Strengths and weaknesses of the research, biases identified, gaps in the knowledge, future research required. 6) Critical analysis/appraisal of the research that has been done including opinions/reflection on research that has been conducted leading to identification of research question(s). 7) Formulate research question(s).
Figure 5-1: Steps of the Literature Review and Synthesis Process

Designing High-Quality Research Question(s)

Defining the Research Question(s)

The research question(s) should evolve from the literature review (Watson et al., 2022). It is important that the question(s) be clear and specific. PICOT criteria (Rios et al., 2010; Richardson et al., 1995), as outlined in Table 1, is often used to help describe the research question(s). Not all parts of it are applicable to all research questions, but it is often useful in framing and clearly identifying the research question(s). In particular, the timeframe may not be applicable.

Identifying each of these elements will help you to ensure that the literature review has covered all of the relevant elements and, if more information is needed, you can search for it in the most appropriate database(s).

Table 1: PICOT Criteria

  Criteria What to Define
P Problem or Population
  • What condition or what groups of people are you interested in?
I Intervention
  • What are you interested in that could change practice?
C Comparison
  • Are you comparing two distinct aspects?
O Outcome
  • What result are you interested in?
T Timeframe
  • What is the time frame(s) for measuring the outcome(s)?

Assessing the Research Question(s)

In the process of narrowing down your topic to a research question, you will want to assess continually whether it can, in fact, be answered (Watson et al., 2022). The FINER criteria (Goodrich, 2005; Hulley et al., 2013), as outlined in Table 2, are useful for determining if your question(s) can be answered. FINER is an acronym for feasible, interesting, novel, ethical, and relevant. Once you have decided on your research question(s), use these criteria to evaluate it critically.

 Table 2: FINER Criteria

  Criteria Questions to Ask
F Feasible
  • Is your research question feasible?
  • In regard to time and money required, is it affordable?
  • Is it manageable in scope?
I Interesting
  • Is it interesting to the investigator?
N Novel
  • Is the question novel?
    • Does it propose to confirm or refute previous findings?
    • Does it propose to extend previous findings?
    • Will it potentially provide new findings?
E  Ethical
  • Can the research be conducted without violating ethical principles?
R Relevant
  • Is it relevant to scientific knowledge? Future directions?

EADM 990 Required Tasks

The following task must be completed to obtain your EADM 990 credit. Submit your work within Canvas by the date indicated in the Syllabus.

Conduct a mini literature review focused on a topic of your choice* by locating at least 3 relevant articles. Follow the “funnelled” steps of the literature review and synthesis process outlined above (see Figure 5-1). Prepare a one-page synthesis of the literature reviewed, and finish with a potential research question.

* To make the literature review most purposeful, you can anticipate upcoming learning and research requirements in your HPE program (e.g., in other courses you are currently taking or will be taking soon). You may wish to locate the list of courses and read about requirements and assessments in each syllabus, accessed through the U of S Course and Program Catalogue.

Post your mini literature review & synthesis paper to the appropriate Canvas Discussion board.

Optional Activities

Discussion questions:

  1. What is the purpose of a literature review?
  2. Examine the following paper, thinking about how the construction of the abstract helps others locate this research. What are the key words or Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) found in this abstract?
  3. How would you know whether the literature review is broad enough to answer the questions you are proposing or are interested in?
  4. What would you be looking for in each article that you review?
  5. In what ways will the literature be used to develop research questions?

Extension activities:

  1. Revisit the research question that you posed at the end of your mini literature review & synthesis paper in order to:
    • Define the research question using the PICOT criteria.
    • Assess the research question using the FINER criteria.

Additional Resources & Links

The University of Saskatchewan’s Librarians are a wealth of advice and information about how to conduct academic research. Visit the library’s website at library.usask.ca or contact a librarian through Ask Us.

References

Birmingham, P. (2000).  Reviewing the literature. In D. Wilkinson (Ed.). The researcher’s toolkit: The complete guide to practitioner research (pp. 25-40). Routledge Falmer.

Goodrich Andrade, H. (2005). Teaching with rubrics: The good, the bad, and the ugly. College Teaching, 53(1), 27-30.

Hulley, S. B., Cummings, S. R., Browner, W. S., Grady, D. G., & Newman, T. B. (2013). Designing clinical research (4th ed.). Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.

Richardson, W., Wilson, M., Nishikawa, J., & Hayward, R. (1995). The well-built clinical question: A key to evidence-based decisions. ACP Journal Club, 123(3).

Rios, L. P., Ye, C., & Thabane, L. (2010). Association between framing of the research question using the PICOT format and reporting quality of randomized control trials. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 10(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-10-11.

Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada (2015). The CanMEDS 2015 Physician Competency Framework. http://canmeds.royalcollege.ca/uploads/en/framework/CanMEDS%202015%20Framework_EN_Reduced.pdf.

Shaw, E., Oandasan, I., & Fowler, N. (Eds.). (2017). CanMeds-FM 2017: A competency framework for family physicians across the continuum. Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada. http://cfpc.ca/uploadedFiles/Resources/Resource_Items/Health_Professionals/CanMEDS-Family-Medicine-2017-ENG.pdf.

Taylor, D. (2008). The literature review: a few tips on conducting it. University of Toronto, Health Sciences Writing Centre. http://www.writing.utoronto.ca/advice/specific-types-of-writing/literature-review.

Watson, E., Jacobson, N., & Ramsden, V. R. (2022). CLR 800 Module 4, College of Medicine, University of Saskatchewan.

 

License

Icon for the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License

Essential Skills for Graduate Studies (HPE) Copyright © 2022 by Roberta Campbell-Chudoba; Michael Cottrell; Alison Kraft; Julie Maier; Dirk Morrison; Vivian R. Ramsden; and Scott Tunison is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License, except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book