Top Banner
Research Methodology Somsak Wongsawass ASEAN Institute for Health Development 4 March 2011
15
Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Page 1: Overviews Research Methodology

Research Methodology

Somsak WongsawassASEAN Institute for Health

Development4 March 2011

Page 2: Overviews Research Methodology

Defining research

Research is a process for: collecting analysing interpreting

information to answer questions.

Page 3: Overviews Research Methodology

The Research Process (Kumar, 2005, p.19)

Page 4: Overviews Research Methodology

Why literature review?

• LR is the foundation and inspiration of substantial, useful research.

• Most graduate students receive little or no formal training in how to analyze and synthesize the research literature.

• LR acquires the skills and knowledge.• Critically appraise and synthesize the

current state of knowledge relating to the topic under investigation, as a mean of identifying gaps .

Page 5: Overviews Research Methodology

Sources of information

Keywords related to the research topic Beware of different terms used

Problems too little versus too much inclusion versus exclusion

Page 6: Overviews Research Methodology

Reviewing the literature

• Skim reading of the abstract and main body

• What and why it has been done and how it was done.

• Position current knowledge in the field and elucidate gaps of knowledge.

• Identify themes and detail structure of final review.

Page 7: Overviews Research Methodology

Define scope

Page 8: Overviews Research Methodology

Construction of review

• Introduction• Main body

Theoretical literature and methodological literature

Examine theoretical literature and empirical literature in separate sections

Divide the literature into content themes Examining the literature chronologically

• Conclusion – integrate all the theme summaries, gaps and weakness should be evident, suggestion of research needs

Page 9: Overviews Research Methodology

How to use the concept of study type in evaluating journal articles

To get as close as possible to the “truth” No study is ever perfect. If your expectation is too HIGH => reject all

the articles you review

Page 10: Overviews Research Methodology

5 Steps

1. What is the study objective, hypothesis, or research question? study factor /outcome factor?

2. What study would give the highest quality of evidence for this hypothesis/objective?

3. What is the best study type you consider feasible?

4. What study type was actually used?5. Is the conclusion of the paper reasonable

in the light of how compares with 2 and 3?

Page 11: Overviews Research Methodology

Objective

• Causality• Does an intervention

work?• Is a factor a cause,

determinant of, predictor or risk factors for a specific problem?

• Magnitude • How common is the

health problem?

• Evaluation of diagnostic tests• Is the test a good

indicator of existing disease?

• Is the test a good indicator of future disease?

Possible study types

• RCT• Cohort• Case control with well defined

study base• Case control with poor defined

study base• Cross-sectional analytic• Descriptive

• Descriptive (cross-sectional for prevalence, prospective for incidence)

• Cross sectional analytic

• Cohort• Population-based case control

study• Hospital based case control

study

Quality

• The tops • Nest best• Almost as good

• Weak

• Fair-weak • Very weak:

• Appropriate

• Appropriate

• Best• Al most as good• weak

Page 12: Overviews Research Methodology
Page 13: Overviews Research Methodology
Page 14: Overviews Research Methodology
Page 15: Overviews Research Methodology

Proposal

STRONG• Appearance• Red flag (specific

aims)• Conceptual

framework (figures and diagrams)

• Review criteria (state of the art: clear, logical and brief)

• Hypotheses• Soundness of

method

WEAK Lack of Original ideas Diffuse, unfocused Lack of published

relevant work, uncritical approach

Lack of experience in essential methodology

Uncertainty of future directions (so what?)

Lack of sufficient experimental detail