Research-proposal-development.ppt

1、Development of a health policy research proposal,Common problems observed in the proposals,Too ambitious and not realistic Descriptions of methodology being too simple and not being sensible Availability and accessing of data is not clear Lack of justifications for the budget (lack of linkage of act

2、ivities planned and the budget proposed),Structure of a research proposal,Statement of problems Literature review Research objectives Methodology Workplan/including administration/use of results Budget,Statement/identifications of problems,Analysing the problems - clarify the viewpoints of managers,

3、 health workers, and researchers in relation to the problems - further specify and describe the core problems - analysing the problems (factors associated with the problems, etc.) Deciding on the focus and scope of the research Formulating the problem statement,Common problems in this section,Most p

4、roposals have done a good job. However, some proposals have made this part too general or broad,Review of available literature and information,Why is it important to review already available information when preparing a research proposal (avoiding duplication, help you define problems precisely, hel

5、p you become more familiar with the research approaches, etc. What are the possible sources of information? (published and unpublished papers, project documents, individual, groups and organisations working on similar areas, etc.) Where can we find these different sources (international level, natio

6、nal level, and regional/provincial level)?,Common problems in this section,Failed to review adequate published and unpublished literature. Failed to look at what other countries have done (lessons and experiences) Failed to link the literature review with your study objectives,Formulation of researc

7、h objectives,What do we want to carry out the research? What do we hope to achieve? General objective: state what researchers expect to achieve by the study in general terms. Specific objectives should be systematically address the various aspects of the problem as defined under “Statement of the pr

8、oblems” and the key factors that are assumed to influence or cause the problem. They should specify WHAT you will do in your study, WHERE and for WHAT purpose.,Formulation of research objectives,Present the objectives in a coherent way Clearly phrased in operational terms Realistic Use of action ver

9、bs,Common problems in this section,Aim and objectives are not well developed or not measurable Too ambitious and not realistic Too general, lack of specific focuses,Research questions?,In the line of each research objective, specific research questions should be developed and are to be addressed by

10、the research projects. Common problems: not really propose specific questions in the section; put questions which are not closely linked to the project objectives,What shall we do next after defining research objectives and questions?,Review specific research objectives and/or research questions car

11、efully to judge if the objectives and/or questions have a nature of exploration, testing hypothesis/theory, or evaluation of policy/intervention impact. These natures may imply the use of different research methods for data collection.,Quantitative, qualitative or both?,Sometimes the logic of a stud

12、y, including the way research questions/objectives (or hypotheses) are framed, can clearly indicate whether a quantitative or qualitative approach and methods should be used, and that logic flows through naturally into the design, sampling, data collection and data analysis. However, sometimes we ma

13、y have difficulties deciding appropriate methods for data collection. Both quantitative and qualitative methods seem to be applicable according to the research objectives/questions.,When we use quantitative methods?,To conceptualise a problem and question in terms of an experimental comparison based

14、 on some intervention or treatment, with clear outcome variables in mind. To examine or describe trends in the use of (medical) services/techniques; To test theory,When we use qualitative methods,To explore problems and/or impact of actions To focus on interpretations, meanings and the cultural sign

15、ificance of some behaviour. To understand or examine some problems/issues that are not easily measurable in a quantitative way To generate theory or hypotheses,Research design/quantitative and qualitative approaches,The design is the basic plan for a piece of empirical research and it includes four

16、main components: 1) strategy, 2) conceptual framework, 3) who or what will be studied, and 4) the tools and procedures to be used for data collection,Qualitative methods,Key informant interview/in-depth interview Focus group discussion Observation Participatory appraisal You need to know clearly pro

17、s and cons for each qualitative method used.,Evidence-based medicine/health policy,Which methods: Cochrane review vs. systematic review; or narrative review? Search strategy,Description of methods,After the study design has been clearly described, you need to present how you are going to use each re

18、search method step by step (e.g. focus group discussion) Data analysis needs to describe each analytic method which will be used in the data analysis and its justification.,Common problems in this section,Methods, too simple and lack of detailed descriptions how many cities/CHS centres should be sel

19、ected and what are the selection criteria, and why, quantitative and qualitative methods, sampling, selection of participants and its criteria, etc. Key techniques - ? E.g. economic analysis method (which specific one?) and epidemiological analysis (which one?),Common problems in this section,Techni

20、cal route is not logic or does not make sense (which activity should be carried out first and which carried out second, would all the research activities follow the same route?) Framework too general and does not link to your objectives,Several suggestions on selecting methods,Re-examine the researc

21、h questions and the way they are phrased what are the implication for types of data? Are we interested in making standardised comparisons, sketching contours and dimensions, quantifying relationships between variables and accounting for variance? Or are we more interested in studying a phenomenon or

22、 situation in detail, holistically and in context, focusing on interpretations and/or process? What guidance do we find from the literature about this topic on this methodological questions,Several suggestions on selecting methods,What are the practical consequence of each alternative (including resources and time frame, and collaboration with clients)? Which way would we learn more? Which sort of research is more “my style or type”?,Workplan and budget,Who will do what and when? Milestone/deliveries by