Indian J Sex Transm Dis Indian J Sex Transm Dis
Official Publication of the Indian Association for the Study of Sexually Transmitted Diseases
Indian J Sex Transm Dis
The Journal | Search | Ahead Of Print | Current Issue | Archives | Instructions | Subscribe | Login    Users online: 868   Home Email this page Print this page Bookmark this page Decrease font size Default font size Increase font size


 
RESIDENT'S PAGE
Year : 2010  |  Volume : 31  |  Issue : 1  |  Page : 47-50
 

Formulating a researchable question: A critical step for facilitating good clinical research


Clinical and Translational Science Institute and Department of Internal Medicine, College of Medicine, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL, USA

Date of Web Publication3-Sep-2010

Correspondence Address:
Sadaf Aslam
Research Instructor, College of Medicine, Clinical and Translational Science Institute, University of South Florida, 2 Tampa General Circle, STC #6036, Tampa, FL 33606
USA
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/0253-7184.69003

Rights and Permissions

 

   Abstract 

Developing a researchable question is one of the challenging tasks a researcher encounters when initiating a project. Both, unanswered issues in current clinical practice or when experiences dictate alternative therapies may provoke an investigator to formulate a clinical research question. This article will assist researchers by providing step-by-step guidance on the formulation of a research question. This paper also describes PICO (population, intervention, control, and outcomes) criteria in framing a research question. Finally, we also assess the characteristics of a research question in the context of initiating a research project.


Keywords: Clinical research project, PICO format, research question


How to cite this article:
Aslam S, Emmanuel P. Formulating a researchable question: A critical step for facilitating good clinical research. Indian J Sex Transm Dis 2010;31:47-50

How to cite this URL:
Aslam S, Emmanuel P. Formulating a researchable question: A critical step for facilitating good clinical research. Indian J Sex Transm Dis [serial online] 2010 [cited 2021 Dec 1];31:47-50. Available from: https://www.ijstd.org/text.asp?2010/31/1/47/69003



   Introduction Top


A researchable question is an uncertainty about a problem that can be challenged, examined, and analyzed to provide useful information. [1] A successful research project depends upon how well an investigator formulates the research question based on the problems faced in day-to-day research activities and clinical practice. The underlying questions of a research project provide important information to decide whether the topic is relevant, researchable, and significant. A well-formulated research question needs extreme specificity and preciseness which guides the implementation of the project keeping in mind the identification of variables and population of interest. Here we will present a clinical scenario and see how clinical questions arise and help us in finding the evidence to answer our question.


   Formulating the Research Question Top


Case

A 2-year-old boy presents in an outpatient clinic with fever and severe pain in his right ear. He has a history of recurrent ear infections, and his mother expresses a concern that he has been on the antibiotic amoxicillin for the past few weeks. She is worried about the consequences of the long-term antibiotic use. She is also concerned about the outcome associated with recurrent ear infections. She wants to know if the prescribed amoxicillin is effective, or it can be substituted with another antibiotic because of its side effects such as frequent diarrhea.

Several questions arise from this case which can be broadly classified into background and foreground questions. The general questions about a clinical problem or a disease are called "Background Questions." [2] These questions generally ask what, when, how, and where about the disease, disorder, or treatment for instance, "What is otitis media?" or "How does amoxicillin work?" etc. These types of questions can be answered by going through review articles or text books.

The patient-oriented questions involving interpretation of a therapy or disease and consideration of risk vs. benefit for a patient or a group of patient are called "Foreground Questions." [2] These types of complex clinical questions are best answered by primary or pre-assessed studies in the literature. These questions mostly compare the two, either two drugs or treatments or two diagnostic methods, etc.

The PICO (population, intervention, control, and outcomes) format [Table 1] is considered a widely known strategy for framing a "foreground" research question. [3] Sackett et al. pointed out that breaking the question into four components will facilitate the identification of relevant information.
Table 1 :Considering PICO and FINER criteria for developing a research question[3,5]

Click here to view


Population or problem- addressing a specific population, its important characteristics and demographic information. From the above case, you can identify pediatric population with otitis media, the age range, sex, presenting complaint, and history.

Intervention or treatment of interest- the intervention can be a treatment, procedure, diagnostic test, and risk or prognostic factors. In this case, the intervention will be your plan to treat the patient which can be a new therapy, a diagnostic test, prognostic factor, or a procedure. For example, based on your observation in clinic, cefuroxime is another better treatment option as compared to amoxicillin in treating otitis media but you are not sure about its efficacy in pediatric population with otitis media.

Comparator or control-when a new therapy is compared with the existing one.

Outcome- is the effect of the intervention. For example, its effectiveness in controlling pain. Therefore, the outcome in the above case can be the relief of pain, the resolution of infection, or decreasing the risk of developing resistance. A good primary outcome should be easily quantifiable, specific, valid, reproducible, and appropriate to your research question. [4]

In a typical clinical setting, a clinician needs to know about background and foreground questions depending upon the experience about a particular disease and therapy. Once background questions are answered, more complex questions are addressed. The clinical questions arise from the central issues in a clinical work. [2] For example, identifying causes or risk factors (etiological questions), comparing diagnostic tests based on sensitivity and specificity (diagnostic query), identifying best treatment options (therapeutic question), and outcome of the treatment (prognostic question).

After determining a foreground question, the PICO approach is followed. Dissecting the question into parts makes it easy and searchable. As evident in this case, there are several relevant questions, for example: what are the outcomes associated with recurrent ear infection, what are the possible effects of long-term use of antibiotic, and what are the harms associated with current treatment? Now if you gather all the information from PICO approach, the following researchable questions can be formulated.

In children with acute otitis media (P), is cefuroxime (I) effective in reducing the duration of symptoms (O) as compared to amoxicillin (C)?

In children suffering from otitis media, will cefuroxime result in the improvement of symptoms and reduction in developing resistance?

Does treatment with amoxicillin increase the risk of developing resistance in children suffering from otitis media?

Does surgical procedure has better outcome for the treatment of otitis media in children after repeated antibiotic therapy?

From the above case, we have formulated multiple questions based on our patient's illness and concerns. Now we can use the strategy of "selecting" the best question. [2] For example, which question has more significance for the patient's well-being, which question is relevant to our knowledge needs and which question might lead to interesting answers for our patients and clinical query? Further, we need to consider the feasibility of finding the evidence in a short period.


   Assessing the Research Question in the Context of a Study Design Top


As proposed by Hulley et al. [Table 1], a research question should be formulated keeping in mind the FINER (feasible, interesting, novel, ethical, and relevant) criteria [5] and that the answer should fill gaps in the existing knowledge. The following points should be considered while assessing a research question.

Determining the required resources


The feasibility of conducting a research project is based on the research question and should be considered early in the process in order to avoid waste of resources and intellectual energy. This is sometimes difficult for a new investigator and they need guidance from their mentors. [4]

  • Consider doing a pilot or proof of concept study to asses the feasibility;
  • Consult a biostatistician early in the project in order to choose less costly design and common outcomes;
  • Consider feasibility of enrolling the intended number of subjects from the population of your interest. Also, consider expanding your inclusion criteria and modifying exclusion criteria if it is difficult to enroll the intended number; and
  • Consider cost of each element of the study design, research staff, and resources.


Significance of making it interesting and relevant

An important question may not seem interesting the way it is presented. It is a challenge to present a research question clearly and engage the interest and attention of the reviewers. Research is too much work to not have a passion for what you are investigating. You will have more support for your study, and it will be easier to publish if the topic is novel and also interests your collaborators, colleagues, and the community at large. It is important to pursue a research question with a passion of getting the truth out of the matter. [5] This is how we all perceive research; commitment to a high-quality systematic and unbiased completion of an innovative project. If your question can explain a given problem while pointing toward a specific aspect which is missing then your project can get a great deal of support.

Conducting literature review

The innovation of any research question is determined by a thorough literature search. Any replication of the study already existing in the literature is not worth repeating as it is. Depending upon the research question, sometimes the study can be replicated if your question approaches an existing problem in a refreshing way. This can be achieved by using a different populations, different techniques, new conceptual approaches, or linking two different studies in which outcomes did not solve the problem. [5] Once a preliminary question has been formulated, literature search should be done to find out what is known or unknown about the topic. The goal of the literature review is to determine what research has been conducted on the topic of interest? and how has it been conducted? and what are the gaps in the knowledge?. It is recommended to use PubMed, MedlinePlus, CINAHL, or Web of Science as the main search databases, but other databases can be used as well. PubMed clinical query is an easy and user-friendly database to search for evidence related to clinical practice. This also provides information to search MEDLINE by doing categorical searches, for example, therapeutic, diagnostic, etiological, and prognostic. The American College of Physicians (ACP) and clinical evidence from BMJ Publishing Group are excellent systems to find evidence on therapeutic questions. Other search engines such as OVID has a large selection of texts and journals which provides access to other databases such as Cochrane library in getting full text articles and systematic reviews. Gray et al. suggested 4 Ss for literature review: Systems: use of comprehensive resources, Synopses: extracting high-quality studies and abstracts, Syntheses: systematic reviews, and Studies: original research studies. [6] In the hierarchy of evidence-based medicine, systematic reviews are considered the best method for evidence. Systematic reviews are rigorous methods of collecting and synthesizing the results of many high-quality studies. Conducting a thorough literature search also helps in finding information on the methodology, calculating the sample size, and also the type of analysis as we are looking to find a difference. This information is necessary to help structure a new study and to identify gaps in the knowledge base of the scientific community.

Refining research question

A focused research question leads to a systematic planning of a research project. The difficulty in framing a research question is not due to the lack of ideas. The challenge is to transform a novel research question into a valid study design which is the next step in refining a research question.


   Summary Top


Asking a well-formulated research question is a starting point in conducting a quality research project and in evidence-based clinical practice. The framework presented in this paper can be helpful for a clinician to formulate a question and search for an answer and for a researcher to develop a new research project. The classical approach is to identify a research question followed by a thorough literature search keeping in mind the PICO and FINER criteria. If it is a well-defined research question, it will lead to an appropriate study design and methodology. Discussing your research question with knowledgeable peers, department chair, mentor, and the biostatistician from the start will lead to the completion of a successful project. Other steps such as type and phase of the clinical trial, budget, informed consent, sites, resource constraints of both personnel and facilities, and timeline should also be considered while formulating a research question. We have introduced the concept of background and foreground questions and also the types of different questions that can arise (therapy, harm, diagnosis, and prognosis). We have described several strategies here while highlighting the major steps that will help investigators in framing a question with the goal of finding an answer based on evidence or initiation of a new research project. It is always good to focus on a single research question based on its relevance to patient's health or one primary objective to drive the study design. [4] Once we have formulated our research question, we need to keep track of the progress toward finding an appropriate answer and then finally applying the results to a specific patient population. In short, a researchable question is what leads toward the facts rather than opinion [7] and is clearly linked to the overall research project goal.


   Acknowledgments Top


The authors would like to acknowledge Dr. J.K Kosambiya, Dr. Eknath Naik, and Dr. Ambuj Kumar for their time in reviewing the paper and providing useful insights.

 
   References Top

1.Wood MJ, Ross-Kerr JC, From question to proposal. Basic steps in planning nursing research. 7 th ed. Jones and Bartlett Publishers; 2006.  Back to cited text no. 1      
2.Straus SE, Richardson WS Glasziou P, Haynes RB. Evidence based medicine: How to practice and teach EBM. 3 rd ed. Elsevier Churchill Livingstone; 2005.  Back to cited text no. 2      
3.Sackett D, Richardson WS, Rosenburg W, Haynes RB. How to practice and teach evidence based medicine. 2 nd ed. Churchill Livingstone; 1997.  Back to cited text no. 3      
4.Thabane L, Thomas T, Ye C, Paul J. Posing the research question: Not so simple. Can J Anaesth 2009;56:71-9.  Back to cited text no. 4  [PUBMED]  [FULLTEXT]  
5.Hulley SB, Cummings SR, Browner WS, Grady DG, Newman TB. Designing clinical research. 3 rd ed. Lippincott Williams and Wilkins; 2007.  Back to cited text no. 5      
6.Gray GE, Gray LK. Evidence-based medicine: Applications in dietetic practice. J Am Diet Assoc 2002;102:1263-72; discussion 1272.  Back to cited text no. 6  [PUBMED]  [FULLTEXT]  
7.Beitz JM. Writing the researchable question. J Wound Ostomy Continence Nurs 2006;33:122-4.  Back to cited text no. 7  [PUBMED]  [FULLTEXT]  



 
 
    Tables

  [Table 1]


This article has been cited by
1 Acupuncture for radiation-induced toxicity in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma: a systematic review based on PICO criteria
Pierluigi Bonomo, Giulia Stocchi, Saverio Caini, Isacco Desideri, Veronica Santarlasci, Carlotta Becherini, Vittorio Limatola, Luca Giovanni Locatello, Giuditta Mannelli, Giuseppe Spinelli, Carmelo Guido, Lorenzo Livi
European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology. 2021;
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
2 Efficacy outcomes and safety measures of intravenous tirofiban or eptifibatide for patients with acute ischemic stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective studies
Jingting Liu, Yihong Yang, Hongbo Liu
Journal of Thrombosis and Thrombolysis. 2021;
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
3 What Makes Deprescription of Psychotropic Drugs in Nursing Home Residents with Dementia so Challenging? A Qualitative Systematic Review of Barriers and Facilitators
Amalie Elisabeth Moth, Pernille Hřlmkjćr, Anne Holm, Maarten Pieter Rozing, Gritt Overbeck
Drugs & Aging. 2021; 38(8): 671
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
4 Conflict prevention, de-escalation and restraint in children/youth inpatient and residential facilities: A systematic mapping review
Ane Slaatto, Anneli V. Mellblom, Lise Cecilie Kleppe, Gunn Astrid Baugerud, John Kjřbli
Children and Youth Services Review. 2021; 127: 106069
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
5 ‘I know my place’; a meta-ethnographic synthesis of disadvantaged and vulnerable women's negative experiences of maternity care in high-income countries
Stephanie Heys, Soo Downe, Gill Thomson
Midwifery. 2021; 103: 103123
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
6 Knowledge, attitudes, and perceptions about cervical cancer, and the uptake of cervical cancer screening in Nigeria: An integrative review
Iheanyi Uchendu, Jaqui Hewitt-Taylor, Angela Turner-Wilson, Candidus Nwakasi
Scientific African. 2021; 14: e01013
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
7 Rethinking PICO in the Machine Learning Era: ML-PICO
Xinran Liu, James Anstey, Ron Li, Chethan Sarabu, Reiri Sono, Atul J. Butte
Applied Clinical Informatics. 2021; 12(02): 407
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
8 Systematic Review of the Effects of Coffee or Its Components on Platelets and Their Regulators
Liliana Sofia da Silva Gache, Josiana Vaz, Juliana Almeida-de-Souza
Journal of Caffeine and Adenosine Research. 2021; 11(3): 51
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
9 Supporting strategies for enhancing vegetable liking in the early years of life: an umbrella review of systematic reviews
Lucinda K Bell, Claire Gardner, Esther J Tian, Maeva O Cochet-Broch, Astrid A M Poelman, David N Cox, Sophie Nicklaus, Karen Matvienko-Sikar, Lynne A Daniels, Saravana Kumar, Rebecca K Golley
The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition. 2021; 113(5): 1282
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
10 Comparison Between Cyanoacrylate Embolization and Radiofrequency Ablation for Superficial Venous Incompetence: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
Mingyi Chen, Shuangmeng Mou, Gengwu Dai, Jinliang Hu
Dermatologic Surgery. 2021; 47(8): e214
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
11 How cutting-edge trial design can assess outcomes
Ary Serpa Neto, Ewan C. Goligher, Carol L. Hodgson
Current Opinion in Critical Care. 2021; 27(5): 520
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
12 Treatment of pigmentary disorders using picosecond laser in Asian patients: A meta-analysis and systematic review
Wenxin Dong, Na Wang, Xiaohai Yuan, Wei Zhang
Dermatologic Therapy. 2021; 34(1)
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
13 Effect of high-flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: A meta-analysis
Li Duan, Caide Xie, Na Zhao
Journal of Clinical Nursing. 2021;
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
14 Magnesium sulfate reduces postoperative pain in women with cesarean section: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
Siguang Ma, Yanju Zhang, Qian Li
Pain Practice. 2021;
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
15 Diagnostic Accuracy Studies in Radiology: How to Recognize and Address Potential Sources of Bias
Athanasios Pavlou, Robert M. Kurtz, Jae W. Song, André Luiz Ferreira Costa
Radiology Research and Practice. 2021; 2021: 1
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
16 Preliminary image findings of lower limb stress fractures to aid ultrasonographic diagnoses: A systematic review and narrative synthesis
Madeleine Schaper, James Harcus
Ultrasound. 2021; 29(4): 208
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
17 Sarcopenia predicts adverse outcomes in an elderly population with coronary artery disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Qiqi Xue, Jie Wu, Yan Ren, Jiaan Hu, Ke Yang, Jiumei Cao
BMC Geriatrics. 2021; 21(1)
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
18 Knowledge of stoma care among nurses working in acute settings: an integrated review
Aisling Dunne, Owen Doody, Carmel Bradshaw
Gastrointestinal Nursing. 2021; 19(7): 40
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
19 Benefits of sucrose octasulfate (TLC-NOSF) dressings in the treatment of chronic wounds: a systematic review
Harikrishna Nair, N Venkateshwaran, Selva Seetharaman S, Wuquan Deng, Apinan Uthaipaisanwong, Emilio Galea
Journal of Wound Care. 2021; 30(Sup4): S42
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
20 Cost-effectiveness of point-of-care C-Reactive Protein test compared to current clinical practice as an intervention to improve antibiotic prescription in malaria-negative patients in Afghanistan
Simon Dickinson, Huey Yi Chong, Toby Leslie, Mark Rowland, Kristian Schultz Hansen, Dwayne Boyers, Ismaeel Yunusa
PLOS ONE. 2021; 16(11): e0258299
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
21 The American Society of Pain and Neuroscience (ASPN) Practical Guidelines to Study Design and Scientific Manuscript Preparation in Neuromodulation
Yashar Eshraghi, Krishnan Chakravarthy, Natalie H Strand, Prasad Shirvalkar, Nathaniel M Schuster, Rany T Abdallah, Ricardo Vallejo, Dawood Sayed, David Kim, Chong Kim, Kathleen Meacham, Timothy Deer
Journal of Pain Research. 2021; Volume 14: 1027
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
22 Effectiveness of chlorhexidine in preventing infections among patients undergoing cardiac surgeries: a meta-analysis and systematic review
Jianhua Wei, Lingying He, Fengxia Weng, Fangfang Huang, Peng Teng
Antimicrobial Resistance & Infection Control. 2021; 10(1)
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
23 Association of Preexisting Asthma and Other Allergic Diseases With Mortality in COVID-19 Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Xianbo Wu, Yihua Xu, Lina Jin, Xiaoou Wang, Haiyan Zhu, Yiqiang Xie
Frontiers in Medicine. 2021; 8
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
24 Clonidine as an Additive to Local Anesthetics in Caudal Block for Postoperative Analgesia in Pediatric Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Ye Wang, Qianqian Guo, Qi An, Lin Zhao, Meng Wu, Zhenggang Guo, Changsheng Zhang
Frontiers in Medicine. 2021; 8
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
25 Whole-Body MRI vs. PET/CT for the Detection of Bone Metastases in Patients With Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Yuefu Zhan, Guangming Zhang, Mingliang Li, Xiaobo Zhou
Frontiers in Oncology. 2021; 11
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
26 Prognostic Value of Perineural Invasion in Oral Tongue Squamous Cell Carcinoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Jiajia Li, Shan Liu, Zhangao Li, Xinxin Han, Lin Que
Frontiers in Oncology. 2021; 11
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
27 Monoclonal Antibody Therapy in Neuromyelitis Optica Spectrum Disorders: a Meta-analysis of Randomized Control Trials
Fanxin Kong, Jianjun Wang, Haotao Zheng, Haobin Cai, Jun Hua, Liling Li
Frontiers in Pharmacology. 2021; 12
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
28 PARP Inhibitors in Combination with Radiotherapy: To Do or Not to Do?
Amelia Barcellini, Pierre Loap, Kazutoshi Murata, Riccardo Villa, Youlia Kirova, Noriyuki Okonogi, Ester Orlandi
Cancers. 2021; 13(21): 5380
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
29 The Effects of Martial Arts on Cancer-Related Fatigue and Quality of Life in Cancer Patients: An Up-to-Date Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Clinical Trials
Daniel Sur, Shanthi Sabarimurugan, Shailesh Advani
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2021; 18(11): 6116
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
30 Docetaxel for Breast Cancer Treatment-Side Effects on Ocular Surface, a Systematic Review
Elena Andreea Stoicescu, Marian Burcea, Raluca Claudia Iancu, Mirela Zivari, Alina Popa Cherecheanu, Inna Adriana Bujor, Cristina Rastoaca, George Iancu
Processes. 2021; 9(7): 1086
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
31 A systematic review of comprehensive sexuality education for South African adolescents
Ronel Koch, Welma Wehmeyer
The Journal for Transdisciplinary Research in Southern Africa. 2021; 17(1)
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
32 Environmental residues and contaminants
Nicolae Suvorov, Alina Stancu
Western Balkan Journal of Agricultural Economics and Rural Development. 2021; 3(1): 51
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
33 Designing and Conducting Randomized Controlled Trials: Basic Concepts for Educating Early Researchers in the Field of Clinical Nutrition
Charu Arora, Anita Malhotra, Piyush Ranjan, Akshay Kumar
Cureus. 2021;
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
34 GSTM1 and GSTT1 genetic polymorphisms and their association with antituberculosis drug-induced liver injury
Noppadol Chanhom, Wanvisa Udomsinprasert, Usa Chaikledkaew, Surakameth Mahasirimongkol, Sukanya Wattanapokayakit, Jiraphun Jittikoon
Biomedical Reports. 2020;
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
35 Better or Worse? The Independent Prognostic Role of HPV-16 or HPV-18 Positivity in Patients With Cervical Cancer: A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review
Xing Chen, Ping Zhang, Shanshan Chen, Hanxiao Zhu, Kai Wang, Liya Ye, Jun Wang, Junhui Yu, Shuangshuang Mei, Zhengrong Wang, Xiaodong Cheng
Frontiers in Oncology. 2020; 10
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
36 BioHackathon 2015: Semantics of data for life sciences and reproducible research
Rutger A. Vos, Toshiaki Katayama, Hiroyuki Mishima, Shin Kawano, Shuichi Kawashima, Jin-Dong Kim, Yuki Moriya, Toshiaki Tokimatsu, Atsuko Yamaguchi, Yasunori Yamamoto, Hongyan Wu, Peter Amstutz, Erick Antezana, Nobuyuki P. Aoki, Kazuharu Arakawa, Jerven T. Bolleman, Evan Bolton, Raoul J. P. Bonnal, Hidemasa Bono, Kees Burger, Hirokazu Chiba, Kevin B. Cohen, Eric W. Deutsch, Jesualdo T. Fernández-Breis, Gang Fu, Takatomo Fujisawa, Atsushi Fukushima, Alexander García, Naohisa Goto, Tudor Groza, Colin Hercus, Robert Hoehndorf, Kotone Itaya, Nick Juty, Takeshi Kawashima, Jee-Hyub Kim, Akira R. Kinjo, Masaaki Kotera, Kouji Kozaki, Sadahiro Kumagai, Tatsuya Kushida, Thomas Lütteke, Masaaki Matsubara, Joe Miyamoto, Attayeb Mohsen, Hiroshi Mori, Yuki Naito, Takeru Nakazato, Jeremy Nguyen-Xuan, Kozo Nishida, Naoki Nishida, Hiroyo Nishide, Soichi Ogishima, Tazro Ohta, Shujiro Okuda, Benedict Paten, Jean-Luc Perret, Philip Prathipati, Pjotr Prins, Núria Queralt-Rosinach, Daisuke Shinmachi, Shinya
F1000Research. 2020; 9: 136
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
37 Association Between Sarcopenic Obesity and Metabolic Syndrome in Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Dima Khadra, Leila Itani, Yomna Chebaro, May Obeid, Miryam Jaber, Reham Ghanem, Agnes Ayton, Dima Kreidieh, Dana E. Masri, Akira Kimura, Hana Tannir, Marwan El Ghoch
Current Cardiology Reviews. 2020; 16(2): 153
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
38 Qualitative Evidence Synthesis on Self-Collection for Human Papillomavirus–Based Cervical Screening: Protocol for Systematic Review
Hawa Camara, Ye Zhang, Lise Lafferty, Andrew Vallely, Rebecca Guy, Angela Kelly-Hanku
JMIR Research Protocols. 2020; 9(10): e21093
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
39 Cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) during spaceflight - a guideline for CPR in microgravity from the German Society of Aerospace Medicine (DGLRM) and the European Society of Aerospace Medicine Space Medicine Group (ESAM-SMG)
Jochen Hinkelbein, Steffen Kerkhoff, Christoph Adler, Anton Ahlbäck, Stefan Braunecker, Daniel Burgard, Fabrizio Cirillo, Edoardo De Robertis, Eckard Glaser, Theresa K. Haidl, Pete Hodkinson, Ivan Zefiro Iovino, Stefanie Jansen, Kolaparambil Varghese Lydia Johnson, Saskia Jünger, Matthieu Komorowski, Marion Leary, Christina Mackaill, Alexander Nagrebetsky, Christopher Neuhaus, Lucas Rehnberg, Giovanni Marco Romano, Thais Russomano, Jan Schmitz, Oliver Spelten, Clément Starck, Seamus Thierry, Rochelle Velho, Tobias Warnecke
Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine. 2020; 28(1)
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
40 Protocol for a systematic review on the experience of informal caregivers for people with a moderate to advanced dementia within a domestic home setting
Charles James, Catherine Walshe, Katherine Froggatt
Systematic Reviews. 2020; 9(1)
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
41 Oral granular cell tumour: A multicentric study of 56 cases and a systematic review
Irene Lafuente Ibáńez de Mendoza, Karem López Ortega, Marília Trierveiler, Monica Ghislaine Oliveira Alves, Janete Dias Almeida, Pilar Gándara Vila, José Manuel Aguirre Urízar, Mario Pérez Sayans
Oral Diseases. 2020; 26(3): 573
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
42 Rehabilitation interventions in Rett syndrome: a scoping review
Jan Lim, Dayna Greenspoon, Anne Hunt, Laura McAdam
Developmental Medicine & Child Neurology. 2020; 62(8): 906
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
43 The role of the clinical nurse specialist multiple sclerosis, the patients’ and families’ and carers’ perspective: An integrative review
Michelle MEEHAN, Owen DOODY
Multiple Sclerosis and Related Disorders. 2020; 39: 101918
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
44 The integrative literature review as a research method: A demonstration review of research on neurodevelopmental supportive care in preterm infants
Welma Lubbe, Wilma ten Ham-Baloyi, Karlien Smit
Journal of Neonatal Nursing. 2020; 26(6): 308
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
45 A systematic map and in-depth review of European telehealth interventions efficacy for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease
Violeta Gaveikaite, Casandra Grundstrom, Stefan Winter, Ioanna Chouvarda, Nicos Maglaveras, Rita Priori
Respiratory Medicine. 2019; 158: 78
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
46 Evaluation of the NCCN guidelines using the RIGHT Statement and AGREE-II instrument: a cross-sectional review
Cole Wayant, Craig Cooper, D’Arcy Turner, Matt Vassar
BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine. 2019; 24(6): 219
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
47 Do disparities between populations in randomized controlled trials and the real world lead to differences in outcomes?
Emma Gray, Suzanne Norris, Susanne Schmitz, Aisling O'Leary
Journal of Comparative Effectiveness Research. 2017; 6(1): 65
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
48 LOFIR: Introducing a framework for building midwifery-type questions
Edwins, J.
British Journal of Midwifery. 2012; 20(3): 205-209
[Pubmed]
49 Matching research design to clinical research questions
Aslam, S., Georgiev, H., Mehta, K., Kumar, A.
Indian Journal of Sexually Transmitted Diseases. 2012; 33(1): 49-53
[Pubmed]
50 Selecting a research topic
Bhatti, J.A., Akhtar, U., Raza, S.A., Ejaz, K.
Journal of the Pakistan Medical Association. 2012; 62(2): 184-186
[Pubmed]



 

Top
Print this article  Email this article
Previous article Next article

    

 
  Search
 
   Next article
   Previous article 
   Table of Contents
  
 
    Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
    Article in PDF (711 KB)
    Citation Manager
    Access Statistics
    Reader Comments
    Email Alert *
    Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)  


    Abstract
    Introduction
    Formulating the ...
    Assessing the Re...
    Summary
    Acknowledgments
    References
    Article Tables

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed20266    
    Printed628    
    Emailed9    
    PDF Downloaded190    
    Comments [Add]    
    Cited by others 50    

Recommend this journal