Research Links Mission, Goals, and Objectives Statements Administration & Faculty Conceiving A Good Research Question Departmental Publications Research Policy Guide Book Clinical Forms

Conceiving A Good Research Question
NOTE: The following links will open in a new window. Please close the window to return to this page.

There is no shortage of research questions. Practicing chiropractors, practitioner—scientists, scientists, students, and other groups all have uncertainties about something in the population that they would like resolved by making measurements on study subjects. The challenge, therefore, is not the shortage of potential questions that can be asked, but rather, finding an important question that can be transformed into a feasible and valid research plan⁽¹⁾.

Principal Investigator
The principal investigator guides and directs a research plan, and is responsible, ultimately, for its successful completion and publication of the results of the study in a scientific journal. Examples of peer-reviewed scientific journals that regularly publish articles from members of the chiropractic profession include the Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics, SPINE, Journal of Vertebral Subluxation Research, and the Chiropractic Research Journal. The qualities needed to conduct high quality research include judgment, tenacity, and creativity⁽¹⁾; a combination of perspiration and inspiration.

Mentors
The choice of a suitable mentor is the single most important decision a new investigator makes. This mentor will need to have sufficient time and interest to work regularly with the new scientist and guide her or him through the research process. Developing the research question is an iterative process that includes consultations with the mentor, advisors, or friends; a growing familiarity with the scientific literature; and potential pilot studies for testing measurement approaches and recruitment techniques.

Research Plan
The research plan is the document created by the principal investigator (PI) to carry out the study. The PI is essentially the director and the plan is the script. The plan needs to be of sufficient detail to carry out the specifics of the project. The research plan is generally a large component of a grant application, should external funding be needed to complete a particular study. The grant application form that is used by LCCW, the National Institutes of Health, the National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine, the Foundation for Chiropractic Education and Research, and others is the PHS-398 which can be accessed at the National Institutes of Health’s web site.

Cummings et. al.⁽¹⁾ have used the mnemonic FINER to describe the elements of a good research question.

Feasibility: adequate number of subjects; adequate technical expertise; affordable in time and money; manageable in scope

Interesting: interesting to the investigator

Novel: confirms or refutes previous findings; extends previous findings; provides new findings

Ethical: are there unacceptable physical risks or invasion of privacy?; the role of the Institutional Review Board is of paramount importance regarding this element of the research question

Relevant: to scientific knowledge; to clinical and health policy; to future research questions

Cummings et. al.⁽¹⁾ have also detailed problems with a research question and/or plan and their potential solutions:

Potential Problem:

1. Vague or inappropriate question or plan. The solution is to write the research question at an early stage; get specific in the 1-2 page study plan about how the subjects will be sampled and how the variables will be measured; think about ways to make the subjects more representative of the population, and make the measurements more representative of the phenomena of interest;
   
2. Not feasible or too broad question and/or plan. The investigator can resolve this problem by specifying a smaller set of variables or narrowing the question;
   
3. Not enough subjects are available for the question and/or plan. Solutions include expanding the inclusion criteria; eliminating exclusion criteria; adding other sources of subjects; lengthen the time frame for entry into the study; use more efficient variables or designs;
   
   Caveat: the recruitment section of a research plan is usually the least developed, and most overly optimistic aspect of a proposed study; this section is the single most important factor that will determine the ultimate success of a given project and must be carefully crafted, with multiple recruitment strategies/arms.
   
4. The methods for the question/plan are inadequate or beyond the skills of the investigator. Here the investigator should consult experts and review the literature for alternative methods; the investigator can learn new skills or collaborate with colleagues who have the skills;
   
5. The question or plan is too costly. The investigator will need to seek out additional sources of financial support or consider less costly study designs and measurement methods;
   
6. The question or plan is not relevant, novel, or is unsuitable due to ethical concerns. The PI can modify the research question, consult the Institutional Review Board for LCCW, or otherwise modify the proposal to avoid unethical elements.

References

1. Cummings SR, Browner WS, Hulley SB. Conceiving the research question. In: Hulley SB, Cummings SR, eds. Designing clinical research. An epidemiologic approach. Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins, 1988:12-17.