Show that you understand the current state of research on your topic.
The length of a research proposal can vary quite a bit. A bachelor’s or master’s thesis proposal can be just a few pages, while proposals for PhD dissertations or research funding are usually much longer and more detailed. Your supervisor can help you determine the best length for your work.
One trick to get started is to think of your proposal’s structure as a shorter version of your thesis or dissertation , only without the results , conclusion and discussion sections.
Download our research proposal template
Writing a research proposal can be quite challenging, but a good starting point could be to look at some examples. We’ve included a few for you below.
Like your dissertation or thesis, the proposal will usually have a title page that includes:
The first part of your proposal is the initial pitch for your project. Make sure it succinctly explains what you want to do and why.
Your introduction should:
To guide your introduction , include information about:
Discover proofreading & editing
As you get started, it’s important to demonstrate that you’re familiar with the most important research on your topic. A strong literature review shows your reader that your project has a solid foundation in existing knowledge or theory. It also shows that you’re not simply repeating what other people have already done or said, but rather using existing research as a jumping-off point for your own.
In this section, share exactly how your project will contribute to ongoing conversations in the field by:
Following the literature review, restate your main objectives . This brings the focus back to your own project. Next, your research design or methodology section will describe your overall approach, and the practical steps you will take to answer your research questions.
? or ? , , or research design? | |
, )? ? | |
, , , )? | |
? |
To finish your proposal on a strong note, explore the potential implications of your research for your field. Emphasize again what you aim to contribute and why it matters.
For example, your results might have implications for:
Last but not least, your research proposal must include correct citations for every source you have used, compiled in a reference list . To create citations quickly and easily, you can use our free APA citation generator .
Some institutions or funders require a detailed timeline of the project, asking you to forecast what you will do at each stage and how long it may take. While not always required, be sure to check the requirements of your project.
Here’s an example schedule to help you get started. You can also download a template at the button below.
Download our research schedule template
Research phase | Objectives | Deadline |
---|---|---|
1. Background research and literature review | 20th January | |
2. Research design planning | and data analysis methods | 13th February |
3. Data collection and preparation | with selected participants and code interviews | 24th March |
4. Data analysis | of interview transcripts | 22nd April |
5. Writing | 17th June | |
6. Revision | final work | 28th July |
If you are applying for research funding, chances are you will have to include a detailed budget. This shows your estimates of how much each part of your project will cost.
Make sure to check what type of costs the funding body will agree to cover. For each item, include:
To determine your budget, think about:
If you want to know more about the research process , methodology , research bias , or statistics , make sure to check out some of our other articles with explanations and examples.
Methodology
Statistics
Research bias
Once you’ve decided on your research objectives , you need to explain them in your paper, at the end of your problem statement .
Keep your research objectives clear and concise, and use appropriate verbs to accurately convey the work that you will carry out for each one.
I will compare …
A research aim is a broad statement indicating the general purpose of your research project. It should appear in your introduction at the end of your problem statement , before your research objectives.
Research objectives are more specific than your research aim. They indicate the specific ways you’ll address the overarching aim.
A PhD, which is short for philosophiae doctor (doctor of philosophy in Latin), is the highest university degree that can be obtained. In a PhD, students spend 3–5 years writing a dissertation , which aims to make a significant, original contribution to current knowledge.
A PhD is intended to prepare students for a career as a researcher, whether that be in academia, the public sector, or the private sector.
A master’s is a 1- or 2-year graduate degree that can prepare you for a variety of careers.
All master’s involve graduate-level coursework. Some are research-intensive and intend to prepare students for further study in a PhD; these usually require their students to write a master’s thesis . Others focus on professional training for a specific career.
Critical thinking refers to the ability to evaluate information and to be aware of biases or assumptions, including your own.
Like information literacy , it involves evaluating arguments, identifying and solving problems in an objective and systematic way, and clearly communicating your ideas.
The best way to remember the difference between a research plan and a research proposal is that they have fundamentally different audiences. A research plan helps you, the researcher, organize your thoughts. On the other hand, a dissertation proposal or research proposal aims to convince others (e.g., a supervisor, a funding body, or a dissertation committee) that your research topic is relevant and worthy of being conducted.
If you want to cite this source, you can copy and paste the citation or click the “Cite this Scribbr article” button to automatically add the citation to our free Citation Generator.
McCombes, S. & George, T. (2023, November 21). How to Write a Research Proposal | Examples & Templates. Scribbr. Retrieved August 24, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/research-process/research-proposal/
Other students also liked, how to write a problem statement | guide & examples, writing strong research questions | criteria & examples, how to write a literature review | guide, examples, & templates, get unlimited documents corrected.
✔ Free APA citation check included ✔ Unlimited document corrections ✔ Specialized in correcting academic texts
Rachel andel rn, bsn.
Nursing research proposal topics can vary greatly, depending on the type of research you’re looking to conduct.
Whether you are interested in studying public health issues or improving patient care through innovative research methods, something on this list likely appeals to you.
Here’s a guide on writing a nursing research proposal and nursing research proposal topics , DNP research proposal topics, current nursing research proposal topics, and nursing research examples.
Working on a Nursing Research Proposal?
Get original papers written according to your instructions and save time for what matters most.
A nursing research proposal serves as a blueprint for conducting studies that address important clinical questions, explore innovative interventions, and contribute to the overall body of nursing knowledge.
To create a strong nursing research proposal, there are several key considerations that nursing students must take into account, which include;
When creating a nursing research proposal, including all the components contributing to a comprehensive and well-structured document is crucial.
Understanding these components will ensure that your proposal is clear and organized and addresses the necessary aspects of your research endeavor.
Introduction | An overview of the research topic and its significance |
Literature Review | Summary of existing literature and theoretical frameworks |
Research Question | A clear formulation of the main research question |
Study Design | Explanation of the chosen qualitative research methods and their appropriateness |
Data Collection | Details of how data will be collected, such as interviews or observations |
Data Analysis | Description of the thematic analysis process and data interpretation |
Ethical Considerations | Discussion of ethical principles to be followed in the research |
Limitations | Acknowledgement of potential limitations and how they will be addressed |
Conclusion | Summary of the study’s potential impact and future directions |
Some additional potential nursing research proposal topics include:
There are countless nursing research proposal topics that could be explored in a doctoral or post-doctoral program. Below is a list of some DNP Research proposal topics consider:
Check out the additional DNP Research proposal topics as suggested by a Nursing Instructor
The list of DNP Research proposal topics above should guide you in creating a Research proposal.
Nursing research proposal topics can vary greatly, depending on the type of research you’re looking to conduct. Some common topics include:
Nursing research proposal topics can vary greatly, so it’s important to select a topic that is of interest to you and that will help you to improve patient care .
When preparing your nursing research proposal, it’s important to keep the following tips in mind:
Planning and organizing your data will make your research proposal more concise and easier to read. Start by identifying the specific question you want to answer, and then list all the relevant sources that you consulted in order to reach your conclusions. Use headings and subheadings to help organize your information, and be sure to include detailed citations for all sources used.
To produce a well-written research proposal, use effective writing techniques such as strong thesis statements , clear language, and well-organized data. You should also make use of persuasive arguments, vivid descriptions, and concrete examples in order to make your case for the proposed study .
In order for your nursing research proposal to be accepted, it must include references from reliable sources that support your findings. Always cite the source where you obtained the data presented in your proposal, as well as any other sourcesthat you used in order to support your arguments.
Your nursing research proposal should be properly formatted and error-free in order to be accepted for review. Always use the correct style and grammar when writing, and make sure all data is properly referenced. avoid using excessive jargon or acronyms, and try to keep your presentation as concise as possible.
The sooner you submit your proposal, the better chance you have of being accepted for review. Make sure to follow the submission guidelines outlined by the journal you are submitting to, as well as the submission system specific to that journal .
In this article, we will provide you with some ideas for nursing research proposal topics that can be used in any discipline. Whether you are interested in studying public health issues or improving patient care through innovative research methods, there is likely something on this list that appeals to you. So get started on your Nursing Research Proposal now by placing an order with us.
Nursingstudy.org has the top and most qualified writers to help with any of your assignments. All you need to do is place an order with us
A Page will cost you $12, however, this varies with your deadline.
We have a team of expert nursing writers ready to help with your nursing assignments. They will save you time, and improve your grades.
Whatever your goals are, expect plagiarism-free works, on-time delivery, and 24/7 support from us.
Here is your 15% off to get started. Simply:
All the Best,
Have a subject expert finish your paper for you, edit my paper for me, have an expert write your dissertation's chapter, what you'll learn.
Knowledge base.
Nursingstudy.org helps students cope with college assignments and write papers on various topics. We deal with academic writing, creative writing, and non-word assignments.
All the materials from our website should be used with proper references. All the work should be used per the appropriate policies and applicable laws.
Our samples and other types of content are meant for research and reference purposes only. We are strongly against plagiarism and academic dishonesty.
Phone: +1 628 261 0844
Mail: [email protected]
We Accept:
@2015-2024, Nursingstudy.org
Any questions related to How to Write a Nursing Research Proposal Topics | Guide & Examples [Updated]?
WhatsApp Us
WhatsApp us, We Reply
Research degrees
How to write your research proposal, with examples of good proposals.
Your research proposal is a key part of your application. It tells us about the question you want to answer through your research. It is a chance for you to show your knowledge of the subject area and tell us about the methods you want to use.
We use your research proposal to match you with a supervisor or team of supervisors.
In your proposal, please tell us if you have an interest in the work of a specific academic at York St John. You can get in touch with this academic to discuss your proposal. You can also speak to one of our Research Leads. There is a list of our Research Leads on the Apply page.
When you write your proposal you need to:
York St John University
Lord Mayor’s Walk
01904 624 624
York St John London Campus
6th Floor Export Building
1 Clove Crescent
01904 876 944
© York St John University 2024
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Dui id ornare arcu odio.
Felis bibendum ut tristique et egestas quis ipsum. Et netus et malesuada fames ac turpis egestas. Faucibus pulvinar elementum integer enim neque volutpat ac. Hac habitasse platea dictumst vestibulum rhoncus.
Nec ullamcorper sit amet risus nullam eget felis eget. Eget felis eget nunc lobortis mattis aliquam faucibus purus.
Advertisement
The research proposal, insights into the reviewer's perspective, conclusions, writing successful research proposals for medical science .
(Schwinn) Professor of Anesthesiology and Surgery; Associate Professor of Pharmacology/Cancer Biology, Duke University Medical Center; Senior Fellow, Duke Pepper Aging Center.
(DeLong) Associate Professor, Division of Biometry and Medical Informatics, Duke University Medical Center.
(Shafer) Staff Anesthesiologist, Palo Alto VA Health Care System; Associate Professor of Anesthesia, Stanford University.
Debra A. Schwinn , Elizabeth R. DeLong , Steven L. Shafer; Writing Successful Research Proposals for Medical Science . Anesthesiology 1998; 88:1660–1666 doi: https://doi.org/10.1097/00000542-199806000-00031
Download citation file:
HIGH-QUALITY research proposals are required to obtain funds for the basic and clinical sciences. In this era of diminishing revenues, the ability to compete successfully for peer-reviewed research money is essential to create and maintain scientific programs. Ideally, the essentials of “grantsmanship” are learned through observation and participation in grant preparation, but the training environment experienced by most physicians typically focuses on clinical skills. Most physicians are never exposed to a research environment and therefore do not learn how to write grants. The result is that many clinical studies, even when designed by skilled clinicians and those that address important clinical questions, often do not compete successfully with proposals written by basic scientists. This creates a perception that clinical studies are not favorably viewed by research review committees. The opposite is probably closer to the truth; research review committees are very keen to fund excellent clinical research. Although greater numbers of researchers with Ph.D. degrees have applied for National Institutes of Health (NIH) grants compared with researchers with M.D. degrees over the last 10 yr, funding rates (percent applications funded) have remained approximately the same for these investigators ( Figure 1 ; 1995 success rates: all degrees, 6,759 [26.8%]; M.D. - Ph.D., 370 [23.1%]; M.D., 1,518 [28.1%]; Ph.D., 4,746 [26.8%]; other degree, 125 [23.1%]).[section]
Figure 1. Overall success rates for NIH funding of scientific applications, 1986 - 1995. No difference in funding rate is observed between applicants holding M.D. versus Ph.D. degrees. As the success rate for first-time applications was 11.3% in 1993, it is apparent that resubmission of a revised application significantly increases the overall chance of having research proposal ultimately funded.[section]
Capable medical researchers ultimately write research proposals for funding by the NIH. Standards of excellence for NIH grants are high (only the top [almost equal to] 20% of grants are funded). Research questions posed must be hypothesis driven; the investigator must be qualified to perform the study; and preliminary evidence should be presented demonstrating that the research is feasible and will answer the questions posed. The goal of this article is to review important elements of successful research proposals, with emphasis on funding sources available to the anesthesiology community. Two important anesthesia-specific organizations exist to support anesthesia research - The Foundation for Anesthesia Education and Research (FAER, an organization under the auspices of the American Society of Anesthesiologists) and the International Anesthesiology Research Society (IARS).
Successful applications for research support from FAER and IARS have many of the characteristics of grants funded by the NIH and other peer-reviewed funding sources. These characteristics include (1) a highly qualified investigator(s);(2) for junior investigators, a mentor with a successful track record in scientific investigation, peer-reviewed funding, and mentorship of fellows and faculty;(3) a supportive academic environment; and (4) a scientifically sound proposal. Each of these characteristics is discussed in the subsequent sections.
One of the most important components of a successful research proposal is a well-trained investigator. Training in clinical anesthesia is not training in research methodology or scientific thinking; it does not prepare an individual for a career in investigation. Although obvious for basic science research, clinical research also requires commitment of a minimum of 1 yr of dedicated training with a good mentor, and more typically 2 - 3 yr in the field of the proposed research. The applicant also needs to demonstrate commitment to a career in investigation. Several years of scientific training is the first demonstration of such commitment. Research proposals must document institutional support for nonclinical time, and the investigator must provide evidence that this time has been used wisely and will continue to be dedicated to the proposed research.
The research proposal must document a track record of productivity by the investigator. This expectation increases as the training and career of the investigator progresses. Fellowship awards do not have an expectation of prior research training, so publications from prior research are not expected. At the fellowship level, outstanding letters of recommendation, undergraduate and medical school performance, and related accomplishments are most important. Because previous training is not required of the fellowship applicant, prior success of the mentor (publications and track record with previous trainees) weighs heavily in the fellowship review. For junior faculty, peer-reviewed publications are expected from the fellowship period. Young Investigator Annoucements (from FAER) and several new IARS awards require several years as a successful junior faculty member, so expectations of demonstrated research success are further increased. The investigator must demonstrate (1) rigorous training, (2) commitment to research, (3) an appropriate career path, and (4) a track record of productive work. None of these are trivial issues, and none can be easily accomplished without making a commitment to research early in the academic career.
The quality of the mentor is another important aspect of awards granted to fellows and junior faculty. Identification of a mentor is explicitly required for FAER and certain junior level NIH grant applications. First and foremost, the mentor must be a successful investigator. Criteria for this include a track record of publication in the area of the proposed research, continued peer-reviewed funding, and a history of successfully training young investigators. Although mentorship is not considered heavily in more senior grant applications, input from a more experienced investigator often remains beneficial throughout one's career (as we can personally attest to). In addition to the mentor, high-quality coinvestigators, collaborators, and consultants also play important roles in strengthening a research proposal.
Good research is best accomplished in a supportive, cooperative environment. Because of the changing climate of clinical medicine, researchers (both clinical and basic science) face increasing pressure to minimize research time. It is not possible to become a successful investigator in one's spare time. Documentation of adequate nonclinical time for research (not for committee meetings or other unrelated tasks) is essential. Receiving funding at a junior level often enables the department to match funds or to guarantee nonclinical time to the budding investigator. In general, the more non-clinical time available to an investigator, the more competitive the application.
Other important elements of the environment include people, space, and institutional resources. People include mentors, consultants who can help with specific methodologies, statistical support, helpful colleagues, experienced technicians, a clinical research team, and a dedicated chairperson. There must be adequate space for performing the proposed studies, office space for research personnel, and storage space for equipment and supplies. Institutional resources include related departmental and interdepartmental seminar series, a critical mass of investigators in a related area, instrument development and repair shops, and necessary laboratory space and common facilities.
Criteria for a sound research proposal are the same whether the proposal is submitted to NIH, FAER, IARS, or other funding sources. In crafting a proposal, it is essential to consider the perspective of the reviewer; therefore, items of interest to the reviewer are listed after general definition of the grant proposal.
Review committees receive dozens of grants. NIH study sections may review as many as 150 proposals during one session. Typically, only two or three reviewers are assigned to read each grant in detail, but everyone is expected to read each abstract. Hence, the abstract is often one of the most important parts of the research proposal. The abstract should address the significance of the question and the overall topic, state the hypothesis, and point out key preliminary data. Additionally, the abstract should provide a synopsis of methodologies planned. In the end, the reviewer must be convinced that the applicant is uniquely (or ideally) suited to undertake this important study by the end of this concise paragraph.
Specific Aims. The specific aims section is critically important in a scientific proposal. It is here that the investigator crystallizes the overall goal of the research and states specific hypotheses.
Beginning with the specific aims, the proposal must be well written and logically organized. A poorly organized grant application is difficult to review, even if the science is otherwise excellent. Typically, the specific aims begin with a short introduction (one paragraph), followed by a formally stated hypothesis. The hypothesis must be answerable by the research methods proposed. Generally, two or three specific aims are outlined with subheadings where appropriate. Organization of the specific aims is often temporal, starting with a proposed mechanism or the first set of studies in a clinical project. In general, the specific aims section should be no longer than one page.
Background and Significance. The background section provides an opportunity to bring reviewers up to date on current research in the area of the proposal. This section should summarize succinctly studies from the literature and related work published by the investigator. The most crucial aspect of the background is to build a case for significance of the proposed research regarding the ultimate clinical application or mechanistic understanding. Ideally, the background section should demonstrate that the current proposal is a logical extension of previous studies in the field and will provide new information and novel insights. In general, the background section should be about one fourth of the length of the grant proposal.
Preliminary Data. Preliminary data provide the opportunity for the investigator to demonstrate his or her ability to perform the proposed research. The goal in presenting preliminary data is to convince the reviewer that the investigator is capable of performing the proposed studies and that the mechanisms proposed are plausible. Good preliminary data support novel (or even unlikely) hypotheses. Each experimental method proposed should be accompanied by preliminary data demonstrating facility and expertise with related preparations. For example, if the investigator proposes using a specific electrophysiologic technique to study an ion channel, evidence demonstrating that this technique has been used by the investigator with other ion channels and a Figure showingresults from pilot experiments on the channel of interest would suffice. In clinical studies, demonstration of a working investigative team and the ability to enroll a given number of patients per week is helpful. Figures or tables help to convey the message in a succinct manner. They also conserve space in the proposal and create a more impressive effect. Although it is best if the applicant has generated his or her own preliminary data, for training awards, preliminary data from the mentor's laboratory is entirely appropriate. An effective way to organize preliminary data is to present it in the same order as the specific aims (e.g., C.1 preliminary data corresponds to A.1 specific aims, C.2 preliminary data corresponds to A.2 specific aims, etc.). Presentation of preliminary data usually takes about one fourth to one third of the length of the grant application.
Methods. The methods are the guts of the research proposal. Unfortunately, many investigators run out of steam by the time they reach the methods, leaving reviewers unconvinced by the proposed methodology. Ideally, the model being investigated should be broken down into simple, logical components, each accompanied by a description of specific experiments/interventions to be performed. The investigator should assume that at least one reviewer is an expert in each method presented. Therefore, enough detail should be provided to convince an expert that the experiment or technique is being performed properly. Methods presented as a list of recipes, requiring the reviewer to guess which method applies to each study, are recipes for disaster. Individual experimental techniques should be state of the art. In addition, approaching a problem from several angles is often helpful. “Lingo” of the field should be avoided; it is very annoying to reviewers to have to look up unexplained abbreviations or to have models alluded to rather than described. For training grants, methods should involve techniques currently being performed in the laboratory of the mentor. An effective way to organize the methods section is to follow the same order as the preliminary data and specific aims sections (e.g., D.1 methods corresponds to C.1 preliminary data and A.1 specific aims, etc.).
The methods sections should include a description of the design, conduct, and analysis of each study being proposed. Common errors in design include lack of specification of primary outcome, lack of randomization or blinding in clinical trials, inadequate justification of sample size, failure to adjust the total study number for expected dropouts/failed experiments or patient refusal, and use of single drug doses or concentrations rather than development of dose - response or concentration - response relations. Common errors in conducting research include lack of confirmation of drug concentrations, inadequate reproducibility of final results, lack of standardization of procedures, inadequate follow-up, incomplete data recording, and overall lack of organization.
Inadequate or inappropriate statistical methods can be a major weakness of a grant proposal. Many investigators feel confident with all aspects of their methods except the statistical section. Because statistical issues underlie the design and analysis strategy for every study, the input of a biostatistician is essential in planning the research and writing the grant application. Statistical considerations include specification of the primary end points that drive power calculations. Common statistical errors in research proposals include lack of sample size/power calculations, treating continuous variables as dichotomous, repeated t tests when a more comprehensive modeling approach should be taken, application of statistical tests that assume normality without verifying assumptions, failure to consider covariate effects, and failure to distinguish between interindividual and intraindividual variability. The investigator should be familiar with the concept of statistical power and be prepared to estimate some of the quantities needed to formulate an alternative hypothesis appropriately. The statistical analysis should be clearly outlined with specific methodology directed toward the hypotheses of the study. A statistical reviewer is unlikely to be convinced by a statement that “appropriate statistical methodology will be used” or by a barrage of nonspecific statistical jargon. At least one full paragraph (and sometimes an entire page) of the research proposal should be devoted to statistical analysis. Often several smaller statistics sections are appropriately included after each method is presented.
Even the best methods have potential problems and weaknesses. It is critical that the methods section discuss potential problems that may be encountered during the study and state how the investigator proposes to deal with these problems creatively. Reviewers tend to be impressed when the investigator presents potential problems that never occurred to them, because it suggests that the investigator is an expert in this area of research. A time line and organizational plan (who will be responsible for what) should also be included in the methods section so the reviewers can determine whether the investigator is being realistic in his or her approach. The methods section is typically one third to one half of the length of the entire grant proposal.
Introduction to Revised Application. Because so few grant applications are funded on their first submission (11.5% in 1993), the new investigator should not be unduly alarmed if his or her application is not funded. When a grant application has been unsuccessful, an investigator should revise the application and reapply, even if the original score was “noncompetitive”(meaning the grant was in the lower 50% of applications). Often the reviewers suggest key changes that will improve the application significantly. When submitting a revised application, an introduction (placed before the specific aims section) is used to discuss how criticisms of the original grant have been addressed in the revised proposal. Because the reviewer's comments are intended to be helpful, it is important to address each concern carefully in the revised proposal (changed text should be highlighted in the revised application by italic, bold, or identifying lines in the margin), with changes outlined in the introduction section. Angry responses to reviewers do not facilitate funding of the revised application. Remember that reviewers usually have a copy of the prior review, and they expect corrections or, when appropriate, an explanation of why you have chosen not to incorporate some suggestions from a prior review. Time taken to revise an application is well spent; as Figure 1 demonstrates, investigators who persist in revising and resubmitting their applications have an increased chance ([almost equal to] 20% with no previous NIH support, [almost equal to] 35% if previously funded) of ultimately being funded.[section]
In writing a research grant, it is helpful to consider the reviewer's perspective. Key features considered by reviewers include significance, approach, and feasibility. It is wise for the investigator to reread his or her application before submission with these features in mind. The NIH recently has published two documents on-line that discuss review criteria; examination of these documents before submission of a research proposal may prove helpful. These include the Report of the Committee on Rating Grant Applications[double vertical bar] and Review Criteria for Rating Unsolicited Research Grants.#
First and foremost, is the investigator asking an important question? There are two general ways research studies can be significant. The first is to demonstrate clinical significance. The litmus test for clinical significance is whether the proposed research will improve patient care. The second is elucidation of fundamental mechanisms underlying disease or biologic processes. The ideal research question succeeds in being significant in both areas.
The reviewer assesses whether the research plan can support or refute the stated hypothesis. In addition, the reviewer assesses whether the methodologies used provide adequate or, better yet, elegant approaches to the problem. Recently, the NIH has mandated an increasing emphasis on innovation in research. [1] **
Review committees generally are composed of individuals with expertise in many scientific areas. Additionally, study sections often retain outside reviewers with expertise in the proposed research area. The investigator should assume that his or her methods will be critiqued by at least one expert. Therefore, the investigator should not propose a method that would strike the world's expert in the field as being simplistic, inappropriate, or nonsensical, because the world's expert just might be one of the reviewers. Conversely, some reviewers do not have expertise in the proposed area of research. To ensure that the nonexpert is convinced of the validity and importance of proposed methodologies, the overall proposal should be written with a logical flow of ideas that build from basic to sophisticated concepts. Beginning each portion of the methods section with a short introduction for the nonexpert, followed by a more detailed description of the proposed methods, is an effective strategy to address the needs of both expert and nonexpert reviewers.
The investigator must convince reviewers that the chosen approach is feasible. Preliminary data provide the best demonstration of feasibility. Feasibility is often demonstrated by a track record of publications or peer-reviewed grant support for the applicant or mentor using the proposed experimental approach. Feasibility also can be demonstrated by appropriate statistical analysis of the proposal. For example, a power analysis and corresponding data on the number of patients with the required characteristics at the investigator's institution helps convince reviewers that a clinical study is feasible.
Funding for research performed by anesthesiologists is available from many sources. Because the discipline of anesthesiology overlaps many other fields, anesthesiologists have the opportunity to apply for research funds from agencies as diverse as the American Academy of Pediatrics, American Cancer Society, American Heart Association (national and local), American Thoracic Society, American Society for Regional Anesthesiology, critical care societies, Department of Veterans Affairs, National Science Foundation, Shriners, Society for Cardiovascular Anesthesiology, Society for Obstetrics and Perinatology, National Aeronautics and Space Aviation, NIH, and many other private foundations. Grants from FAER and IARS are available specifically to the anesthesiology community.
It is important that anesthesiologists continue to apply for NIH grants. For fiscal year 1996, the NIH awarded 149 research grants (including career development grants, R29, R01, and program project grants) to departments of anesthesiology, totaling $21 million in direct costs ([almost equal to]$31 million in total costs). Because of the diversity of research projects in anesthesiology, these grants were awarded by 14 different institutes, centers, and divisions within the NIH. In analyzing data for three recent review sessions (June 1996, October 1996, and February 1997) from the surgery, anesthesiology, and trauma study section, 26% of anesthesiology applications scored in the top 20th percentile, and 31% scored in the top 25th percentile; clearly no bias exists against anesthesiology in this predominantly surgical study section, at least in this limited sample (Alison Cole, anesthesiology representative for the National Institute of General Medicine Science at the NIH, personal communication, December, 1997). Table 1
Table 1. Number of Recipients of NIH Research Project Annoucements
A brief list of funding opportunities available to anesthesiologists early in their career is shown in Table 2 . Several sites are available on the World Wide Web ( Table 3 ) to facilitate access to grant/training resources for anesthesiologists. We have created an additional website ( http://pkpd.icon.palo-alto.med.va.gov/grants/grants.htm ), which provides access to more comprehensive lists of funding agencies and direct links to funding sources. This website also contains example grants designed to illustrate the grant writing principles discussed in this article.
Table 2. Potential Funding Sources
Table 3. Grant/Training Resources on the WWW
Successful grant applications require a well-trained investigator who carefully outlines a hypothesis-driven research proposal. Unique to FAER and IARS research committees is that the reviewers are mostly investigators and practicing anesthesiologists. These reviewers fully appreciate the importance of clinical research and enthusiastically support high-quality clinical studies. Although descriptive clinical studies are interesting to practicing clinicians, from a scientific perspective, clinical research must be driven by testable hypotheses. Without a testable hypothesis, clinical research cannot pass the test of adequate significance required for funding.
It is our hope that by demystifying the grant writing and review process that more anesthesiologists will be encouraged to submit proposals for research funding. As part of this effort, we strongly encourage residents and fellows interested in research careers to obtain adequate research training and to apply for appropriate fellowship/junior faculty awards early in their careers.
[section] NIH Extramural Data and Trends, Fiscal Years 1986 - 1995. Bethesda, Office of Reports and Analysis (component of the Office of Extramural Research), National Institutes of Health. (Published on-line and periodically updated. http://www.nih.gov/grants/award/award.htm ).
[double vertical bar] Report of the Committee on Rating Grant Applications. Revised 5/17/96. Bethesda, National Institutes of Health. (Published on-line. http://www.nih.gov/grants/peer/rga.pdf ).
# Review Criteria for Rating Unsolicited Research Grants. NIH Guide, Vol. 26, No. 22, 6/27/97. Bethesda, National Institutes of Health. (Published on-line. http://www.nih.gov/grants/guide/1997/97.06.27/notice-review-criter9.html ).
** Brown KS: A winning strategy for grant application: Focus on impact. The Scientist 1997; April 8:13–4
Most viewed, email alerts, related articles, social media, affiliations.
Sign In or Create an Account
Analysis of a Scientific or Medical Problem | Community Service & Leadership | Medical Education | Scientific Research | Focused Clinical Multidisciplinary |
|
|
You must have Adobe Acrobat Reader to view or print these PDF files. Click the button below to download a free copy:
Section 'Sub' Navigation:
Page 'Breadcrumb' Navigation:
Site 'Main' Navigation:
Official Web Site of the University of California, San Diego. Copyright © 2024 Regents of the University of California. All rights reserved. Webmaster
An official website of the United States government
The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.
The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.
Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .
Department of Anaesthesiology, Bangalore Medical College and Research Institute, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India
Writing the proposal of a research work in the present era is a challenging task due to the constantly evolving trends in the qualitative research design and the need to incorporate medical advances into the methodology. The proposal is a detailed plan or ‘blueprint’ for the intended study, and once it is completed, the research project should flow smoothly. Even today, many of the proposals at post-graduate evaluation committees and application proposals for funding are substandard. A search was conducted with keywords such as research proposal, writing proposal and qualitative using search engines, namely, PubMed and Google Scholar, and an attempt has been made to provide broad guidelines for writing a scientifically appropriate research proposal.
A clean, well-thought-out proposal forms the backbone for the research itself and hence becomes the most important step in the process of conduct of research.[ 1 ] The objective of preparing a research proposal would be to obtain approvals from various committees including ethics committee [details under ‘Research methodology II’ section [ Table 1 ] in this issue of IJA) and to request for grants. However, there are very few universally accepted guidelines for preparation of a good quality research proposal. A search was performed with keywords such as research proposal, funding, qualitative and writing proposals using search engines, namely, PubMed, Google Scholar and Scopus.
Five ‘C’s while writing a literature review
A proposal needs to show how your work fits into what is already known about the topic and what new paradigm will it add to the literature, while specifying the question that the research will answer, establishing its significance, and the implications of the answer.[ 2 ] The proposal must be capable of convincing the evaluation committee about the credibility, achievability, practicality and reproducibility (repeatability) of the research design.[ 3 ] Four categories of audience with different expectations may be present in the evaluation committees, namely academic colleagues, policy-makers, practitioners and lay audiences who evaluate the research proposal. Tips for preparation of a good research proposal include; ‘be practical, be persuasive, make broader links, aim for crystal clarity and plan before you write’. A researcher must be balanced, with a realistic understanding of what can be achieved. Being persuasive implies that researcher must be able to convince other researchers, research funding agencies, educational institutions and supervisors that the research is worth getting approval. The aim of the researcher should be clearly stated in simple language that describes the research in a way that non-specialists can comprehend, without use of jargons. The proposal must not only demonstrate that it is based on an intelligent understanding of the existing literature but also show that the writer has thought about the time needed to conduct each stage of the research.[ 4 , 5 ]
The contents or formats of a research proposal vary depending on the requirements of evaluation committee and are generally provided by the evaluation committee or the institution.
In general, a cover page should contain the (i) title of the proposal, (ii) name and affiliation of the researcher (principal investigator) and co-investigators, (iii) institutional affiliation (degree of the investigator and the name of institution where the study will be performed), details of contact such as phone numbers, E-mail id's and lines for signatures of investigators.
The main contents of the proposal may be presented under the following headings: (i) introduction, (ii) review of literature, (iii) aims and objectives, (iv) research design and methods, (v) ethical considerations, (vi) budget, (vii) appendices and (viii) citations.[ 4 ]
It is also sometimes termed as ‘need for study’ or ‘abstract’. Introduction is an initial pitch of an idea; it sets the scene and puts the research in context.[ 6 ] The introduction should be designed to create interest in the reader about the topic and proposal. It should convey to the reader, what you want to do, what necessitates the study and your passion for the topic.[ 7 ] Some questions that can be used to assess the significance of the study are: (i) Who has an interest in the domain of inquiry? (ii) What do we already know about the topic? (iii) What has not been answered adequately in previous research and practice? (iv) How will this research add to knowledge, practice and policy in this area? Some of the evaluation committees, expect the last two questions, elaborated under a separate heading of ‘background and significance’.[ 8 ] Introduction should also contain the hypothesis behind the research design. If hypothesis cannot be constructed, the line of inquiry to be used in the research must be indicated.
It refers to all sources of scientific evidence pertaining to the topic in interest. In the present era of digitalisation and easy accessibility, there is an enormous amount of relevant data available, making it a challenge for the researcher to include all of it in his/her review.[ 9 ] It is crucial to structure this section intelligently so that the reader can grasp the argument related to your study in relation to that of other researchers, while still demonstrating to your readers that your work is original and innovative. It is preferable to summarise each article in a paragraph, highlighting the details pertinent to the topic of interest. The progression of review can move from the more general to the more focused studies, or a historical progression can be used to develop the story, without making it exhaustive.[ 1 ] Literature should include supporting data, disagreements and controversies. Five ‘C's may be kept in mind while writing a literature review[ 10 ] [ Table 1 ].
The research purpose (or goal or aim) gives a broad indication of what the researcher wishes to achieve in the research. The hypothesis to be tested can be the aim of the study. The objectives related to parameters or tools used to achieve the aim are generally categorised as primary and secondary objectives.
The objective here is to convince the reader that the overall research design and methods of analysis will correctly address the research problem and to impress upon the reader that the methodology/sources chosen are appropriate for the specific topic. It should be unmistakably tied to the specific aims of your study.
In this section, the methods and sources used to conduct the research must be discussed, including specific references to sites, databases, key texts or authors that will be indispensable to the project. There should be specific mention about the methodological approaches to be undertaken to gather information, about the techniques to be used to analyse it and about the tests of external validity to which researcher is committed.[ 10 , 11 ]
The components of this section include the following:[ 4 ]
Population refers to all the elements (individuals, objects or substances) that meet certain criteria for inclusion in a given universe,[ 12 ] and sample refers to subset of population which meets the inclusion criteria for enrolment into the study. The inclusion and exclusion criteria should be clearly defined. The details pertaining to sample size are discussed in the article “Sample size calculation: Basic priniciples” published in this issue of IJA.
The researcher is expected to give a detailed account of the methodology adopted for collection of data, which include the time frame required for the research. The methodology should be tested for its validity and ensure that, in pursuit of achieving the results, the participant's life is not jeopardised. The author should anticipate and acknowledge any potential barrier and pitfall in carrying out the research design and explain plans to address them, thereby avoiding lacunae due to incomplete data collection. If the researcher is planning to acquire data through interviews or questionnaires, copy of the questions used for the same should be attached as an annexure with the proposal.
This addresses the strength of the research with respect to its neutrality, consistency and applicability. Rigor must be reflected throughout the proposal.
It refers to the robustness of a research method against bias. The author should convey the measures taken to avoid bias, viz. blinding and randomisation, in an elaborate way, thus ensuring that the result obtained from the adopted method is purely as chance and not influenced by other confounding variables.
Consistency considers whether the findings will be consistent if the inquiry was replicated with the same participants and in a similar context. This can be achieved by adopting standard and universally accepted methods and scales.
Applicability refers to the degree to which the findings can be applied to different contexts and groups.[ 13 ]
This section deals with the reduction and reconstruction of data and its analysis including sample size calculation. The researcher is expected to explain the steps adopted for coding and sorting the data obtained. Various tests to be used to analyse the data for its robustness, significance should be clearly stated. Author should also mention the names of statistician and suitable software which will be used in due course of data analysis and their contribution to data analysis and sample calculation.[ 9 ]
Medical research introduces special moral and ethical problems that are not usually encountered by other researchers during data collection, and hence, the researcher should take special care in ensuring that ethical standards are met. Ethical considerations refer to the protection of the participants' rights (right to self-determination, right to privacy, right to autonomy and confidentiality, right to fair treatment and right to protection from discomfort and harm), obtaining informed consent and the institutional review process (ethical approval). The researcher needs to provide adequate information on each of these aspects.
Informed consent needs to be obtained from the participants (details discussed in further chapters), as well as the research site and the relevant authorities.
When the researcher prepares a research budget, he/she should predict and cost all aspects of the research and then add an additional allowance for unpredictable disasters, delays and rising costs. All items in the budget should be justified.
Appendices are documents that support the proposal and application. The appendices will be specific for each proposal but documents that are usually required include informed consent form, supporting documents, questionnaires, measurement tools and patient information of the study in layman's language.
As with any scholarly research paper, you must cite the sources you used in composing your proposal. Although the words ‘references and bibliography’ are different, they are used interchangeably. It refers to all references cited in the research proposal.
Successful, qualitative research proposals should communicate the researcher's knowledge of the field and method and convey the emergent nature of the qualitative design. The proposal should follow a discernible logic from the introduction to presentation of the appendices.
Conflicts of interest.
There are no conflicts of interest.
The format of a research proposal varies depending on what or who it is required by. They can vary in length, ie. be very concise or quite long and detailed. Also the headings for the different sections can vary. Therefore, this guide deals with the research proposal in its most generic form, which should be easily modifiable to fit the criteria for any research body.
The ultimate aim of any research proposal is to convince people that your research is important, has not been done before, is worthwhile and is feasible. Hence you have to make a strong argument for your research. The language used should be clear and easy to understand, as often non-experts will assess it. Some funders may, and the Research Ethics Committee application form will, want a ‘lay’ summary in addition to your basic proposal document. It is usually only in the background and methodology sections that writers tend to assume that the intended audience has a particular knowledge of their research area.
Additionally, it is crucial that different sections of your research proposal should link or follow on from each other, eg. the research question should link with the methodology. This may sound obvious, but revisions of one section can lead to mis-matches. Check this before submitting your proposal!
1. The purpose of a research proposal is:
2. Some strategies before you start:
3. Identifying your research question:
Any research proposal needs to have a clear research question for it to succeed. Without a clear question research will become confused and lack direction. Subsequent analysis will be difficult because the research question is key to forming your hypothesis or aims, and later analysis.
Do start by writing a question, not a statement. This will help clarify exactly what the issue is that you are trying to find a solution to. Hypotheses, aims etc can then follow from this.
Your research question should:
It should be obvious from your question alone what the project will aim to do, and on who.
4. Project title:
The title should be brief but informative. It is important that it is clear and easy to understand, and describes what your proposed research is. As previously stated, this is often the research question.
5. Abstract or summary:
This is a very important section which bears a disproportionate share of responsibility for success or failure of a proposal, as it may act as the initial ‘hook’.
It needs to be written for a wider audience, so technical vocabulary has to be limited. The abstract also needs to come quickly to the proposed research. Abstracts for grant proposals usually begin with the objective or purpose of the study, move on to methodology (procedures and design), and close with a modest but precise statement of the projects’ significance.
The significance should:
Although you present this first in the document, write it last so that its content accurately reflects the whole proposal.
6. Introduction:
The introduction is also written so that a more general audience can easily obtain a general idea of what the project is about, and the major concepts involved. It will also typically begin with the purpose of the proposed research. The introduction will typically be quite short, leaving the detail to the background and methodology sections.
7. Background:
It is only in the background and methodology sections that writers tend to assume that their intended audience is a specialist in their research area, and so use more technical language.
This section will include the literature review.
The purpose of a literature review is as follows:
Through the actual process of writing the literature review you, the researcher, can explore the relevant literature, formulate a problem, defend the value of the research, and compare the findings and ideas with your own. The literature review establishes a context and orientates the reader to your research topic.
The common structure of the literature review is likened to a “funnel effect”, which goes from general to more specific studies etc directly relating your intended project, ending with your research question, problem or objective.
In summary the stages of a literature review are as follows:
Your Trust librarians will be able to help with appropriate literature searching techniques if required.
8. Methodology:
The method or methodology section describes the steps you will follow in conducting your research. It is a very important section as assessors will scrutinise it to evaluate the feasibility and likelihood of successful completion of your proposed research.
Examine methodology sections of research articles in your research area. Arrange to discuss your research with a statistical and/or methodological specialist (Trust and other local research clinics / groups). Discuss with other researchers in your discipline the methodologies they have adopted. Consult methodology texts and statistical packages.
Overview of research:
Population/sample to be studied, including:
9. Timescale:
10. Budget:
11. Ethical considerations:
12. Dissemination strategy:
13. Bibliography and references:
Good luck with your project!
📕 Studying HQ
Rachel r.n..
As a college student pursuing a degree in healthcare or a related field, developing a well-crafted research proposal is a crucial step toward contributing to the advancement of knowledge and addressing pressing issues in the healthcare domain.
However, the process of identifying a compelling and feasible research topic can be daunting, especially with the vast array of potential areas to explore.
This guide aims to provide you with a comprehensive list of research proposal ideas in healthcare, along with tips and examples to help you navigate the journey from ideation to execution.
What You'll Learn
Before delving into specific research ideas, it’s essential to understand the criteria for selecting a suitable research topic. Here are some key factors to consider:
Public health.
Related Articles
How to Write a Research Proposal for Business Psychology
35+ Research Topics on Mental Health Nursing: Fostering Wellbeing in Psychiatric Care
Social & Public Health
250 Strong Health Research Topics for Students
Start by filling this short order form order.studyinghq.com
And then follow the progressive flow.
Having an issue, chat with us here
Cathy, CS.
Have a subject expert write for you now, have a subject expert finish your paper for you, edit my paper for me, have an expert write your dissertation's chapter.
Typically replies within minutes
Hey! 👋 Need help with an assignment?
🟢 Online | Privacy policy
WhatsApp us
Detailed Walkthrough + Free Proposal Template
If you’re getting started crafting your research proposal and are looking for a few examples of research proposals , you’ve come to the right place.
In this video, we walk you through two successful (approved) research proposals , one for a Master’s-level project, and one for a PhD-level dissertation. We also start off by unpacking our free research proposal template and discussing the four core sections of a research proposal, so that you have a clear understanding of the basics before diving into the actual proposals.
If you’re working on a research proposal for a dissertation or thesis, you may also find the following useful:
PS – If you’re working on a dissertation, be sure to also check out our collection of dissertation and thesis examples here .
Research proposal example: frequently asked questions, are the sample proposals real.
Yes. The proposals are real and were approved by the respective universities.
As we discuss in the video, every research proposal will be slightly different, depending on the university’s unique requirements, as well as the nature of the research itself. Therefore, you’ll need to tailor your research proposal to suit your specific context.
You can learn more about the basics of writing a research proposal here .
You can access our free proposal template here .
Yes. There is no cost for the proposal template and you are free to use it as a foundation for your research proposal.
For self-directed learners, our Research Proposal Bootcamp is a great starting point.
For students that want hands-on guidance, our private coaching service is recommended.
This post is an extract from our bestselling short course, Research Proposal Bootcamp . If you want to work smart, you don't want to miss this .
I am at the stage of writing my thesis proposal for a PhD in Management at Altantic International University. I checked on the coaching services, but it indicates that it’s not available in my area. I am in South Sudan. My proposed topic is: “Leadership Behavior in Local Government Governance Ecosystem and Service Delivery Effectiveness in Post Conflict Districts of Northern Uganda”. I will appreciate your guidance and support
GRADCOCH is very grateful motivated and helpful for all students etc. it is very accorporated and provide easy access way strongly agree from GRADCOCH.
Proposal research departemet management
I am at the stage of writing my thesis proposal for a masters in Analysis of w heat commercialisation by small holders householdrs at Hawassa International University. I will appreciate your guidance and support
please provide a attractive proposal about foreign universities .It would be your highness.
comparative constitutional law
Kindly guide me through writing a good proposal on the thesis topic; Impact of Artificial Intelligence on Financial Inclusion in Nigeria. Thank you
Kindly help me write a research proposal on the topic of impacts of artisanal gold panning on the environment
I am in the process of research proposal for my Master of Art with a topic : “factors influence on first-year students’s academic adjustment”. I am absorbing in GRADCOACH and interested in such proposal sample. However, it is great for me to learn and seeking for more new updated proposal framework from GRADCAOCH.
Kindly help me write a research proposal on the effectiveness of junior call on prevention of theft
kindly assist me in writing the proposal in psychology education
Please,Kindly assist my in my phd thesis writing on personal and socio cultural factors as determinate of family planning adoption
I’m interested to apply for a mhil program in crop production. Please need assistance in proposal format.
Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *
Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.
A guide to how to begin the writing process
When writing a proposal, you must be motivated and passionate about your idea. After you have narrowed your idea into a concise purpose, you can begin the writing process.
If you need help on turning an idea into a proposal, click here for writing prof Penny Hirsch's advice.
One step that should not be skipped is creating an outline to organize your thoughts. Check out this article on making outlines .
Here is the backbone for how your proposal should be structured.
Introduction: Define the issue or problem with a statement of purpose
1) What is the purpose of the study?
2) Why should this issue be addressed/researched?
3) How will you contribute as a researcher?
1) Who has been studying this area and what are their conclusions?
2) What gaps need to be filled in their research? Are you aiming to fill those gaps?
3) How have you prepared to tackle this project?
Methodology: Here you will define a hypothesis or research question
1) How are variables related to one another?
2) What is the procedure for collecting data?
3) What is the overall design of the study? What are the time estimates?
4) How will you analyze data? What techniques or measurements?
Results and Conclusions: Discuss the possible findings and conclusions that will be gathered
1) What are the probable conclusions of your research?
2) Is this topic related to other topics? Can this topic be generalized? What is the larger picture?
3) Are there any implications for your study?
4) What are the possible limitations?
5) How will this research help you in your personal pursuits/future goals?
You must also be aware of citation, style and sentence level concerns
Citation resources
Gender Sensitive Language
Passive voice
Should I use "I"?
For examples of winning Global Health proposals cli ck here .
Check out these other resources :
Check out the FAQS and Checklist (pdf).
Northwestern University Library | 1970 Campus Drive, Evanston, IL 60208-2300 | Phone: 847.491.7658 | Fax: 847.491.8306 | Email: [email protected]
1. relevant background of the proposed work:.
Patient care has gained immense importance in recent years due to the increased number of medical disorders and increasing awareness amongst people and patients. Increased demand in hospitals and healthcare centres to improve the patient’s health condition has become a formidable factor for all the health care professionals at every hierarchy level. Errors have become a part of the system, due to increase in the number of challenging issues that affect the deteriorating health condition of the patient. Improving the health condition by minimising system and human errors has become a crucial concern in the health industry. Health professionals have identified several causative factors for poor quality and implemented various measures to improve the quality of the situation. Unlike the old paradigm, the person approach, where the percentage of errors recorded was high, the system approach came into existence and is these days reducing the percentage of errors and increasing the complexity of the system (Warburton. 2005). In addition to the improvement of organisation, there are many other improvements underway, which include the public involvement in primary health research (Jonathan et al., 2010). According to the current situation, the health care team is also getting educated to reduce the risk of errors (Colin. 1995). Awareness of errors also created a significant impact on the safety of the patient and hence many resources were created and modified to reduce the risk (Warburton. 2005). These days, usage of health information technologies lead to improvement of the health. In the study by Connie and David (2010), through the innovative technology, the system can be advanced globally to reduce the socioeconomic barriers in various countries. Appropriate use of technology at the right time would cause miracles in the health sector (Connie et al., 2010). Many health care changes initiated in certain categories of patients decreased the risk of errors. Some of the measures included direct, personal supervision and decreased adverse reactions in case of paediatric and geriatric patients (Cambern. 2009). Another main implementation is an introduction of rapid assessment and initial patient treatment team (RAPT) in accident and emergency patients, reducing the risk to life (Cronin et al., 2005).
Summarising all the developments, quality in health care can be achieved by the academic and technical knowledge of the physician along with the communication of the health care assistants and public. In addition, appropriate utilisation of resources and tools is also essential to achieve the improvement of patient’s health condition as a target (Michelle. 1996).
2. HYPOTHESIS: Objective of the current project is to demonstrate new techniques based on studies done in previous years and to improve the quality of patient care, which is a considerable challenge for the health sector.
The tasks to accomplish include:
3. SCOPE: The following tasks would be undertaken as a part of proposed research:
4. METHODOLOGY AND APPROACH:
1. Patient Safety Initiatives: Although lots of experiments were done in patient safety in recent decades, it still remains a challenge for health professionals. These days, hospitals are spending enormous resources to reduce errors, which are appreciated. However, implementing all the proposals is not easy (Warburton. 2005). It is cost involving and depends on manpower to a greater extent, which is difficult to control.
The safety improvements cannot be implemented and always be accurate as it changes according to the situation. Improper design and rapid enforcement of safety measures would only cause meagre improvement to patients (Warburton. 2005).
There are several approaches and studies for obtaining maximum benefit out of the available resources. They are:
Accordingly, evaluation would be based on the benefits and resources available for research. Later, detailed research would be completed according to Warburton (2005), by which alternative assumptions could be identified and compiled. Finally, an additional research network would be framed to fulfil the requirements in the best possible way to reduce critical gaps (Warburton. 2005). This loop is a variant of Technology assessment iterate loop, called TAIL (Tugwell et al., 1986; Tugwell et al., 1995).
By this EEL approach, critical gaps in the research area can be identified by discussions among the health professionals and these gaps, which are usually overlooked, would be considered to provide the best safety measures within the scope of resources.
Increasing research on safety implementation to patients often raises a question of how much safety is essential. Warburton (2005) describes that there is no upper bound for providing safety to patient as demands of improving safety measurements never drop. He explains this fact by the figure depicted in figure 2 of this paper.
The curve depicts total costs of errors to the society against the level of safeguards and clearly reveals that the safety measures are implemented based upon the cost effectiveness. When initial safety methods are employed it is initially cheap, and then with the increase of costs, negligible benefits are obtained due to less reduction of adverse effects when cost measures increases. This continues uphill, further reducing the benefits with increased cost (Warburton. 2005).
The curve depicts total costs of errors to the society against the level of safeguards and clearly reveals that the safety measures are implemented based upon the cost effectiveness. When initial safety methods are employed it is initially cheap, and then with increase of costs, negligible benefits are obtained due to a drop in the reduction of adverse effects when cost measures increases. This continues further reducing the benefits with increased cost (Warburton. 2005).
Figure 2: Cost to the society versus level of safeguards Figure adopted from Warburton (2005).
In my research project, EEL with regards to one of the patient safety will be studied in the clinical environment and conclusions would be compiled accordingly in the thesis work.
2. Patient and Public Involvement in Primary Research: Involvement of potential patients and the public is an import contribution to primary research.
According to Beresford’s argument, the research experiments tend to be more accurate when the distance between the potential patients and the investigator is minimal (Beresford. 2005).
Furthermore the public, the part owners for research as taxpayers, have an equal right to subscribe for the success of research, which would improve their lives directly (Boote et al., 2010).
Additionally, public involvement at all stages of research, especially the primary level, would reduce the initial value of resources by direct focus on potential treatment areas and thus contribute to the quality of care (Boote et al., 2002; Thompson et al., 2009).
One of the approaches by which quality of patient care would be enhanced is performing clinical trials in a particular diseased population. In these clinical trials, design of the study would be based on their relevant experiences. Questionnaires would be prepared accordingly to consider general experiences and needs in that category of patients. These questionnaires are then compiled together to establish a basic structure of description and would form the research theme. Initially consent forms would be taken from the patients, and research would be carried out by contacting them regularly for feedback. All the issues the public need to be addressed would be collected for better supervision and analysis would be carried on to ensure results favouring the potential patients. This attempt ensures that questions of the potential patients would be answered and treatment becomes patient friendly, reducing the stress on the investigator, and the patient.
In this project, clinical trial is closely observed on a class of patients. Later analysis would be done on how the involvement of public and potential patients influences quality of patient care.
3. Team Working Team working is essential for effective health care management, especially in critical conditions like chronic health disorders. To achieve quality team working amongst all the health care professionals, interaction among them in day-to-day service is necessary. To ensure team-working skills in hospitals and health care centres, educating the team would be required.
Education should be a dynamic process that is patient-centred (Coles et al., 1995). Education amongst the health professionals should be multidisciplinary rather than self-centred research.
Patients and their cares should get an education alongside to improve care and hygiene. Thus, quality in health care would be achieved by a patient-centred approach.
In addition, regular team meetings and interaction between the physicians, care takers and patients would improve the quality of patient care. Discussion among patients and physicians during the treatment would be useful to record the treatment procedure, which could be useful in future investigation of the same kind.
In this project, team-working skills within a selected hospital would be improved and quality of patient care would be compared.
4. Innovations in Delivering Patient Care Many advances have been introduced in the health sector in the recent years. Use of modern technology is one that simplified the administration of health sector. Health information technologies (HIT) include mobile phones, computers, self-administration equipment, health decision-making management devices, life style modification devices, monitoring chronic illness and patient education devices (Gustafson et al., 2002). Socioeconomic barriers cause slow penetration of HIT in developing countries (Connie et al., 2010).
Setting up an appropriate HIT within a health sector is a challenge for technologists as many factors would be taken into account while considering it, and to facilitate the system, a framework would be employed. By the use of this framework, approaches could be studied and the best HIT would be employed (Connie et al., 2010). Some factors that would be taken into consideration include situational factors like setting and clinical domain, technological factors and work force (Connie et al., 2010).
Other remarkable innovations include the establishment of RAPT, which is a rapid assessment and initial patient treatment team within accident and emergency, where the patient would be allocated 4 hr of comprehensive treatment in an emergency condition (Cronin et al., 2005).
Personal care within the department of paediatrics and geriatrics is one of the other innovations (Cambern et al., 2009). This would reduce the incidence of risk and errors causing adverse reactions in them.
My intention of study would be to try and implement some of the innovations in a hospital environment and examine the quality in terms of health care. 12/16/2010 Research Proposal.
5. FACILITIES TO BE USED: Many facilities would be used to perform the following objectives in accordance with available resources and these include:
6. PROGRAM SCHEDULE AND DELIVERABLES: (A basic gnat chart without dates, client should set up dates appropriately)
7. FUNDS AVAILABLE: Client has to decide according to available funding
8. REFERENCES: Warburton, R.N. (2005) Patient safety-how much is enough? Health policy,71, pp.223-232.
Perrow, C. (1984) Normal accidents: living with high risk technologies. New York Basic Books.
Leape, L. L., Forward, I.N (1999). Error reduction in health care: a systems approach to improving patient safety. Jossey-Bass.
Tugwell, P.,Bennett, K.,Feeny, D.,Guyatt, G.,Haynes, R.B. (1986) A frame work for the evaluation of technology. Institute in research and public policy, pp.41-56.
Tugwell, P.,Sitthi-Amorn, C.,O’Connor, A.,Hatcher-Roberts ,J.,Bergevin, Y.,Wolfson, M (1995)
Technology assessment. Old, new and needs-based. International Journal of Technology Assesment in Health care, 11(4), 650-662.
Jonathan, B.,Wendy, B.,Claire.,B. (2010) Public involvement at the design stage of primary health research: A narrative review of case examples. Health policy, 95, pp.10-23.
Boote, J.,Telford, R., Cooper, C. (2002) Consumer involvement in health research: a review and research agenda. Health policy, 61(2), pp.213-236.
Beresford, P. (2005) Developing the theoretical basis for service user/survivor-led research and equal involvement in research. Epidemiologia e psichiatria Sociale, 14(1), pp.4-9.
Thompson, J.,Barber, R.,Ward, P.R.,Boote, J.D.,Cooper, C.L.,Armitage, C.J. (2009) Health Researchers’ attitudes towards public involvement in health research. Health expectations, 12(2), pp.209-220.
Coles, C. (1995) Educating the health care team. Patient Education and Counseling, 26, pp.239-244.
Connie, V.C.,David, R.K. (2010) A technology selection frame work for supporting delivery of patient-oriented health interventions in developing countries. Journal of Biomedical Informatics, 43, pp.300-306.
Cambern, K. (1952) A quality improvement program. Pediatrics and child health, pp.5172-5175.
Cronin, J.G.,Wright, J.RN. (2005) Rapid assessment and initial patient treatment team-a way forward for emergency care. Accident and Emergency Nursing, 13, pp.87-92.
Gustafson, D.H.,Hawkins, R.P.,Boberg, E.W.,Mc Tavish, F.,Owens, B.,Wise, M. (2003) 10 years of research and development in consumer health informatics for broad populations, including the underserved. Med inform, 65(3), pp.169-177.
GNATT (1994) Founded by Paul
Similar essay samples.
The free research proposal presentation template is designed to help researchers effectively communicate their project ideas to an audience, whether for academic review, funding applications, or collaborative partnerships. This research proposal presentation has 21 modern slides that are fully editable you can change fonts, color schemes, and bullet points to enhance readability and maintain the audience's interest. This presentation is compatible with PowerPoint, Google Slides & Canva. Download our free research proposal presentation template and make your research stand out and shine brightly in any academic or professional setting. Get it FREE!
Product Features:
If you have any questions or need support regarding this product, please feel free to contact us through our contact page! We'll gladly help you out!
Check out more Research Presentation Templates here .
COMMENTS
World Health Organization Website: WHO tobacco Treaty set to become law, making global public health history. WHO . 2005. 1-17-2005. 2. Cigarette smoking among adults--United States, 2001. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2003; 52(40):953-956. ... Sample Research Proposal Author:
steps. It begins with selecting a study topic, reviewing. the literature, setting goals, choosing a study design and. appropriate statistical tools, and formulating a research proposal. to obtain ...
Research Proposal Examples. Research proposals often extend anywhere between 2,000 and 15,000 words in length. The following snippets are samples designed to briefly demonstrate what might be discussed in each section. 1. Education Studies Research Proposals ... This can affect both mental health and test performance. This study explores the ...
Research proposal examples. Writing a research proposal can be quite challenging, but a good starting point could be to look at some examples. We've included a few for you below. Example research proposal #1: "A Conceptual Framework for Scheduling Constraint Management".
Current Nursing research proposal topics. Nursing research proposal topics can vary greatly, depending on the type of research you're looking to conduct. Some common topics include: The effects of sleep deprivation on nurses. The use of technology in nursing care. The effect of patient communication skills on nurses' outcomes.
It puts the proposal in context. 3. The introduction typically begins with a statement of the research problem in precise and clear terms. 1. The importance of the statement of the research problem 5: The statement of the problem is the essential basis for the construction of a research proposal (research objectives, hypotheses, methodology ...
The investigator specifies the maximum discrepancy between the sample and population proportion of ± 5%. To determine the sample size, the investigator would use the formula. n = (z/p)2π(1-π), n = the required sample size. p = the desired maximum discrepancy (i.e. ± 5%) π = the population proportion.
Finding and choosing a strong research topic is the critical first step when it comes to crafting a high-quality dissertation, thesis or research project. If you've landed on this post, chances are you're looking for a healthcare-related research topic, but aren't sure where to start. Here, we'll explore a variety of healthcare-related research ideas and topic thought-starters across a ...
INTRODUCTION Contd. Writing an academic project proposal requires that one demonstrates an understanding of a specific problem within ones discipline. A Clinical research is concerned with the study of health and illness in people. It helps us how learn how to prevent, diagnose and treat illness.
Introduction. Research is an activity aimed at obtaining new knowledge and applying it to solve problems or questions. Scientific research, in particular, uses the steps of scientific method to study a certain aspect of reality, either theoretically or experimentally. 1 The basis of the research process is the research proposal or protocol, a document that outlines in detail the organisation ...
Research proposals. Your research proposal is a key part of your application. It tells us about the question you want to answer through your research. It is a chance for you to show your knowledge of the subject area and tell us about the methods you want to use. We use your research proposal to match you with a supervisor or team of supervisors.
(Shafer) Staff Anesthesiologist, Palo Alto VA Health Care System; Associate Professor of Anesthesia, Stanford University. Anesthesiology June 1998, Vol. 88, 1660-1666. ... Common statistical errors in research proposals include lack of sample size/power calculations, treating continuous variables as dichotomous, repeated t tests when a more ...
ISP Proposal Samples. Analysis of a. Scientific or. Medical Problem. Community Service & Leadership. Medical Education. Scientific Research. Focused Clinical Multidisciplinary. SMP1 - [71 kb]
RESEARCH PROPOSAL TEMPLATE . Page . 1. of . 2. Please note that for biostatistical support we recognize that this may be a draft, and may change. This should be ... "The objective of this study is to determine the effect of an onsite mental health professional on GP's management of mental health clients in a regional centre in Queensland.
A proposal needs to show how your work fits into what is already known about the topic and what new paradigm will it add to the literature, while specifying the question that the research will answer, establishing its significance, and the implications of the answer. [ 2] The proposal must be capable of convincing the evaluation committee about ...
The format of a research proposal varies depending on what or who it is required by, this guide shows the research proposal in a generic form ... For health research these include: Overview of research: Population/sample to be studied, including: How you have arrived at the sample size.
Consult with faculty advisors or review program handbooks to understand the expectations and criteria for a successful research proposal. Research Proposal Ideas Public Health. Evaluating the effectiveness of public health campaigns: Example: Analyze the impact of a smoking cessation campaign targeted at young adults, assessing changes in ...
Research Proposal Example/Sample. Detailed Walkthrough + Free Proposal Template. If you're getting started crafting your research proposal and are looking for a few examples of research proposals, you've come to the right place. In this video, we walk you through two successful (approved) research proposals, one for a Master's-level ...
Ima Business Manager University Department 1234 Research Way, Room 789 City, State, 12345. [email protected]. 555-555-7890. List the name, institution, contact information, and role for anyone who will contribute to publications resulting from this project. Everyone listed must submit a C.V or resume.
Writing a Global Health Proposal. A guide to how to begin the writing process. When writing a proposal, you must be motivated and passionate about your idea. After you have narrowed your idea into a concise purpose, you can begin the writing process. If you need help on turning an idea into a proposal, click here for writing prof Penny Hirsch's ...
12/16/2010 Research Proposal; Team working within the health care sector and involvement of patients and public in primary research. Implementing innovations in patient care. 3. SCOPE: The following tasks would be undertaken as a part of proposed research: Task 1: To investigate the past studies on existing and improved health care system.
research design. For example, you may choose to consider agency in accessing healthcare, underpinned from the start by theories of self-efficacy; your later emerging theory may show that agency is affected by barriers to access that reduce self-efficacy. • Tie in your methodology to your research question and goals. Qualitative
This book and accompanying web resource will answer all your questions about healthcare research by introducing you to the concepts, theories and practicalities surrounding it. The aim of both the book and the web resource is to help you to write a good healthcare research proposal - which is the starting point for any would-be student ...
The free research proposal presentation template is designed to help researchers effectively communicate their project ideas to an audience, whether for academic review, funding applications, or collaborative partnerships. This research proposal presentation has 21 modern slides that are fully editable you can change fonts, color schemes, and ...