1. 1 Writing a research proposal Jan Illing, Jan Illing, Gill Morrow and Charlotte Kergon Gill Morrow and Charlotte Kergon

2. What is a research proposal? A document that focuses on: What the research is about What the research is about A plan of how the research is to be done A plan of how the research is to be done Forms basis of a contract between Forms basis of a contract between researcher and supervisor/funding body researcher and supervisor/funding body

3. Why do we need it? Requirement for funders to assess the Requirement for funders to assess the quality of the planned research quality of the planned research Requirement for research undertaken at Requirement for research undertaken at Universities Universities Required by ethics committees Required by ethics committees Helps clarify thoughts Helps clarify thoughts

4. The stages of getting a proposal together Identify the problem/concept and potential impact What are you trying to find out? What are you trying to find out? What is the research question? What is the research question? Is there a hypothesis? Is there a hypothesis? Needs to hold your interest and be Needs to hold your interest and be something you have energy for something you have energy for

5. Identify a good research question Look at the literature Look at the literature Talk it over with colleagues/supervisor Talk it over with colleagues/supervisor A good research question needs to: be feasible (time, resources, expertise) be feasible (time, resources, expertise) provide focus provide focus set boundaries set boundaries check assumptions, define any terms/variables check assumptions, define any terms/variables be answerable! be answerable!

6. The literature review Provides the research background Provides the research background Tells a story about what has been done Tells a story about what has been done already/what is known already/what is known What are the gaps? What are the gaps? Your study should be the obvious next Your study should be the obvious next thing to do! thing to do!

7. How to do a literature review Search relevant databases (Medline, Search relevant databases (Medline, Embase etc., view journals, books, policy documents, conference abstracts) Embase etc., view journals, books, policy documents, conference abstracts) Summarise main findings – only provide Summarise main findings – only provide detail if very relevant e.g. if findings are detail if very relevant e.g. if findings are controversial or very few studies controversial or very few studies Write lit review up chronologically (if Write lit review up chronologically (if meaningful) or in themes meaningful) or in themes Keep it succinct and relevant! Keep it succinct and relevant!

8. Systematic literature review A systematic literature review is different – A systematic literature review is different – literature is not part of the study but is the literature is not part of the study but is the study! study! The search terms, criteria for including and The search terms, criteria for including and excluding studies need to guide the study. excluding studies need to guide the study. Need to set up coding frame to code the Need to set up coding frame to code the studies into studies into Look at systematic reviews e.g. BEME, Cockrane Look at systematic reviews e.g. BEME, Cockrane Needs to be reproducible! Needs to be reproducible!

9. Methods Sample – who/what? and how will you recruit Sample – who/what? and how will you recruit them/get data? them/get data? Research question should point to type of Research question should point to type of methods (e.g. Is it about deeper understanding methods (e.g. Is it about deeper understanding of issues or size of problem? Or both?) of issues or size of problem? Or both?) Understand the method, talk to experts, read Understand the method, talk to experts, read up on methods, what are the pitfalls? up on methods, what are the pitfalls? Look at relevant papers – how did others Look at relevant papers – how did others approach the method? approach the method?

10. Method – details, details, details! Weak proposals lack details! But keep succinct! Weak proposals lack details! But keep succinct! Justify choice of methods Justify choice of methods Can you walk me through the whole Can you walk me through the whole study, day by day, minute by minute what study, day by day, minute by minute what will happen next? how will it happen? will happen next? how will it happen? Anticipate problems – how can you increase recruitment? improve on response rate? avoid large study drop out? improve on questions asked/questionnaire quality? Anticipate problems – how can you increase recruitment? improve on response rate? avoid large study drop out? improve on questions asked/questionnaire quality?

11. Think about quality Robust methods Robust methods Sample size –power calculation Sample size –power calculation Response rates Response rates Testing data collection tools Testing data collection tools Issues of validity and reliability Issues of validity and reliability Trustworthiness and dependability Trustworthiness and dependability Triangulation Triangulation

12. Analysis of data The proposal should show that you have already thought about the data you will collect and how you propose to analyse it E.g. Qualitative approach eg Grounded theory Qualitative approach eg Grounded theory Statistical tests Statistical tests Get advice! Get advice!

13. Ethical questions? Do you need to submit an application to Do you need to submit an application to NRES or your University ethics committee? NRES or your University ethics committee? Impact on publication Impact on publication State if study will/will not require ethical State if study will/will not require ethical review (if yes, build in extra time needed) review (if yes, build in extra time needed) Need to do ethical research Anticipate what could go wrong!

14. Important issues to consider Informed consent – participants need to Informed consent – participants need to be informed about the study, to volunteer be informed about the study, to volunteer Confidentiality –protecting identity of Confidentiality –protecting identity of participants and reporting data that does participants and reporting data that does not identify individuals not identify individuals Anonymity – avoids collecting names etc Anonymity – avoids collecting names etc Increases potential for more critical Increases potential for more critical comment comment

15. Plans for dissemination List plans for dissemination e.g. conference presentations journal publications Also any planned activities such as hosting a meeting and presentations to funding body/peer group/study participants etc

16. Study management Good support/advice increases study quality Reduces risk of: failure to complete failure to complete producing poor quality data producing poor quality data Who will support the study? Supervisor, subject experts, research experts, relevant others

17. Costing the study Produce Gantt chart of activities Produce Gantt chart of activities Identify work streams – time, intensity Identify work streams – time, intensity and level of expertise required (seek and level of expertise required (seek advice if need to cost research time?) advice if need to cost research time?)

18. Costings - also list any time provided free StaffingRA grade 7 25 days2000 RA grade 7 25 days2000 Non staff Catering 100 Transcribing2000 Travel 200 Total costs6300

19. Gantt chart of activities and time Include time to gain ethics approvable if appropriate JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNov Lit review Recruitment Focus groups Data analysis Write report Disseminate

20. Appendices Questionnaires/tools Questionnaires/tools Topic guide Topic guide Letters (for ethics only) Letters (for ethics only) Letters of support e.g. From Letters of support e.g. From collaborators, Trusts collaborators, Trusts May need to supply names of referees May need to supply names of referees

21. Track record – CV, statement about strengths Have you got the expertise? Or are you working with (collaborate) or supported by those who do? Subject expertise Subject expertise Previous grants Previous grants Publications Publications Presentations Presentations Research training Research training

22. Finally! Proof read Proof read Ask a lay person to read it Ask a lay person to read it Does it make sense? Does it make sense? Double check guidance from funding Double check guidance from funding body/Uni body/Uni Is everything included? Is everything included?

23. Thank you! j.c.illing@dur.ac.uk

24. Question and Answer session (10 mins) Workshop activities (30 mins ) Facilitators Jan Illing Gill Morrow and Charlotte Kergon