Writing a Research

Proposal
Dr Heidi Probst
Aims of this presentation
 What is a research proposal?
 Why do you write research proposals?
 Who are the likely audiences for your research
proposals?
 How will different audiences influence the
presentation of the proposal?
 What features make a good and bad research
proposal?
 How can you optimise the impact of your
proposal?
By the end of this presentation
you will...
 Have an understanding of the format of a research
proposal
 Be aware of the attributes that make a good quality
research proposal
 Be aware of the different requirements for different
audiences of research proposals
 Have considered the factors that will increase the
quality of your own final proposal and its ability to
gain favourable approval at various committees who
will need to look at and approve your proposal.
Guidance Notes
 Audit is a project which seeks to measure
existing practice against evidence based
standards.
 A Project is service evaluation if it seeks to
establish existing practice or the views of users
and staff, where the findings may not be
universally applicable.
 A project is research if it seeks to establish
new knowledge and its findings may be
generalised.
Guidance Notes
 A research project requires ethical approval if it takes
place on NHS property or uses NHS facilities or
involves;
 Patients, users, relatives or carers
 Data of past or present patients
 Organs or other bodily materials of past and present
pts
 Foetal material and IVF
 The recently dead
 NHS staff recruited by virtue of their professional
role.
About research proposals...
 Why write one?
 Who are the likely audiences?
Why write a research
proposal?
 To act as a ‘map’ to guide your research
 To ensure that you have a researchable question and
appropriate methodology to address that question
 A statement of the purpose and plan of the research
project
 Details how the study is to be carried out
 Incorporates any practical and ethical issues which
need to be addressed
 To ensure that you have taken account of the resource
requirements to undertake your research
 Accountability… funding… governance…
 To inform other stakeholders of your intentions
The Types of Proposal
 A proposal for a quantitative or
qualitative or mixed methods
investigation
 A proposal for an extended review of
the literature or systematic review.
The headings used will be dependent
on the type of proposal that is
undertaken.
Who is your audience?
 You
 Your supervisor
 Funding bodies
 Research committees What are they looking for?
 Research governance
committees including ISR
(what is this? click here to find out)
 Managers
The ‘researched’ (ie your
Independent Scientific Review

 • If a project requires NHS ethics approval it is usually a

requirement that the proposal has been assessed
independently by two reviewers.
• If your project is part of an educational qualification your
University will usually have systems in place to

‘subjects’)
undertake this for you.
• If you are applying for research funding often the funding
process will require reports from at least 2 reviewers.
• Your local R+D Department maybe able to arrange for
an independent scientific review for you, alternatively
through the NHS ethics review process the ethics
committee will send out your proposal for ISR.
 ISR- What are they looking for
from my proposal?
 Primarily they are reviewing the scientific quality of the work.
1. Has an area/problem/issue been identified?
2. Is it significant?
3. Is there a gap in current literature? Is the review
extensive/informative/clear?
4. What is the aim of the project? Does the research question
follow? Is it clear, doable?
5. Has the project been well planned? Is the design appropriate?
Has reliability/validity/trustworthiness been considered?
6. Has researcher bias been considered?
7. Is the timescale well considered and practical?
8. Has the funding for the project be adequately considered.Etc…
ISR- What are they looking for
from my proposal?
9. Does the researcher or project team have
the appropriate qualifications to undertake
the work?
10. Does the researcher have the appropriate
access to subjects?
11. Are the information sheet/consent forms
appropriate?
12. Has data analysis been adequately
considered?
What are the Ethics
Committee Looking for?
 How are participants to be recruited?
 How will safety of participants be assured?
 Is the design culturally sensitive?
 Are there opportunities for equality in recruitment?
 Confidentiality, anonymity
 Data protection
 User Involvement? This is crucial and it is worth
considering user perspectives in the design stage as
well as having user representation on the project
team.
Funders- what do they look
for?
 Value for money- can your project produce results
efficiently.
 Is the research topical and relevant within the
current NHS/social care environment- political
context? Does it fit with national research priorities?
Mention the research priorities that fit with your
project.
 Is it designed well? Scientific quality.
 Potential for follow on projects?
 What impact will the research have? Does it have the
potential to change practice? Improve outcomes?
Funders- what do they look for?
contd

 Think about mentioning professional

research priorities the SCoR have a list
of current research priorities look at
these and identify how your study fits
with those listed.
 Also consider DoH research priorities,
how does your proposed study fit with
these national priorities.
What makes a good research
proposal?
 Sticking to the ‘rules’ eg guidelines for presentation etc
 Importance of the research / justification
 Demonstrated ability to do the work
 Robustness of the research methods
 Quality of presentation – typos / formatting etc
 Innovation
 Well organised proposal that is simple, and logical
 Research team have evidence of a good track record
 The budget is reasonable, believable and justified, with
rational arguments for including consumables, equipment
and other items
Be creative

 Think of a good idea

 Make the reader think "why didn't I
think of that"
 Good proposals are often simple
proposals!
WRITE.... NOW...
 Proposals take time
 Writing organises your thoughts
 Assume your audience know nothing of your
field
 Know where your audience are coming from
 Avoid writing with 'attitude‘
 Avoid writing in the first person
 Remember you are proposing an idea- it
shouldn’t come across as though you have
already completed the work.
What are the common sections of
a Proposal?
 Title
 Summary
 Aims
 Research Questions
 End Points
 Significance of the research
Background
Method Sub sections
 •
•
Study design
Inclusion/exclusion criteria

 Method (clear here for sub sections)

• Sampling and recruitment strategy
• Reliability and Validity or Trustworthiness
and Authenticity.
• Data Analysis

 Timeline (Gantt Chart)

 Project Management
 Dissemination strategy
 Ethics and Research Governance
 Costs
 References
Title
 A simple statement which describes the
study, should be confined to one
sentence, try to include the aim of the
study and the outcomes.
 Hint – Leave the title till last, it will be
easier to formulate a concise statement
when you have written your aims.
1.0 Summary
This study examines job turnover (Intentions to Leave) in the radiation therapy
Summary
workforce. High vacancy rates and an unsatisfied workforce significantly limit
the access of cancer patients to appropriate care that has deleterious effects on
health outcomes through delays in treatment. This study will address this
significant problem through a longitudinal prospective investigation of the
 This is a bit like an abstract for an
impact of workload, task complexity and unmet career expectations on
Intentionsarticle
to Leave. and
The studyhelps to summarise
will initially for the
draw on the model proposed by
Janssen et al [1], that job turnover intention is highly correlated with emotional
exhaustionreader
and unmetthecareerpurpose
expectations. of the study
In addition and
the study will the
extend the
possible outcomes.
knowledge base on workforce planning in this profession through the
development of a rigorous workload measurement instrument that can be
utilised The next slide gives an example of a
The next slide gives an example of a
internationally.

summary
The study aims to develop a tool for measuring radiation therapists’ activity,
based on a validated method for measuring Linear Accelerator productivity
(Basic Treatment Equivalent, BTE). This tool will be used to investigate the
impact of task complexity and work overload on therapists’ intention to leave.
What is the purpose of the
background section?
 Who will benefit?
 What is the context of the investigation?
Service/political
 Why do you want to investigate it?
 What is the value of the investigation?
 What has already been published?
 Critical review of the published literature
 How will your study build on published
literature? And why are you best placed to
undertake the work.
Example Aims

Aims
1.      To identify the factors that influence Radiation
Therapists intention to leave their current post or leave
theprofession,
Need to investigating the factors
be clear, doable, behind the
specific.
differences in vacancy levels between 2 NHS regions
Move on
(identified tothe
from theDoH
next slide tostatistics[2]
2002/2003 see an as one
of theexample of of
best and one some project
the worst aims.
regions in terms of
vacancy rates).
2.      To determine the characteristics of the work
environment and conditions of service that can be
changed to enhance therapists work satisfaction, and
reduce turnover.
The Research Question
 Probably the most difficult part of the
research design.
 You have to conceptualise the area
under study and formalise into words
the exact question under study.
 For each aim you have identified there
should be 1 or 2 research questions
that are clearly linked.
Example Research Questions
 What aspects of a radiation therapist’s work are the most
influential in causing a person to leave their job?
 What aspects of radiation therapy contribute to therapists work
motivation?

Try to ensure your research questions reflect the complexity of the

topic area. For example, a question with a simple yes /no answer
in a qualitative study will not reflect the complex interplay of
issues that surround human behaviour or human interaction.
Method
 Things to consider
 What design will be adopted, you need to have a clear well
argued rationale for choosing this approach with reference to
relevant research texts or previous research.
 Will subjects be Randomised if not explain why or limitations
 If the study is a qualitative study what sampling approach is to
be used and why?
 Inclusion/exclusion criteria for subjects
 How will subjects be referred
 Non-conformance- how will you deal with cases that don’t
conform to the prescribed intervention or protocol.
 Where you can, support your approach with evidence from the
literature
Data Collection and Analysis
 Consider in detail how the data will be
collected, who is best placed to collect
data? Will they produce bias in
recording data? What if they are off?
Who will stand in?
 In what format should data be
recorded?
Data Analysis
 It is vital that you consider at the outset what type of
analysis you would like to undertake, failure to do so
could mean you record the data in an inappropriate
form.
 For qualitative studies describe the method of
analysis and make sure it fits with any philosophical
perspectives described earlier.
 Hint- try analysing some data in the expected form,
set up a data base so you are clear how you need
the data to be recorded, and try a statistical test,
have you got the right level of data?
Ethical considerations
 You need to consider two factors…
1. The ethical implications of your
research – ie how will it impact on
your participants?
2. The processes of research governance
and ethical approval that you need to
comply with – ie which committees do
you need to go through
Ethical Considerations
 What might be the ethical implications
of your study?
 How will you protect participant’s
confidentiality?
 Who will benefit from your study?
Ethical Considerations
 Any research involving patients,
questioning hospital staff, or use of
hospital property will require ethical
approval by the local research ethics
committee.
Risk Assessment
 Will any of your subjects suffer any detriment
as a result of inclusion or exclusion in your
study?
 Consider inequality between researcher and
participant, will potential participants perceive
pressure to participate?
 Consider unanticipated consequences of the
results, they may be politically sensitive.
Informed Consent
 Consider Informed Consent
 What is informed?
 Usually written consent form is required
 Usually contains a number of
statements for participants to agree to.
 Informed consent is a process that
involves good quality information
Time line
 Identify ALL time issues...
 Consider how time is to be
allocated, Example Gantt Chart

 Gantt charts click here Weeks

 Allow 2 – 3 months to prepare

and clear all ethics and
Click to next slide for codes

governance processes.
Research Personnel

 Who will do the work?

 When will they do the work?
 Other support – statistics,
administration
Other costs

 Transcribing
 Transport
 Administration
 Tapes
 Technology
 Software costs
Budget

 Should be a logical progression from

your time and resource input.
 Are there alternative forms of funding?
 Make sure your project will fit your
budget.
Identified target audiences:
•    TheBoard of the College of Radiographers (CoR) and the Council for the Society of
Dissemination of the results
Radiographers (SoR).
•   Council for Clinical Oncology at the Royal College of Radiologists (RCR).
•   Hospital Trust managers (including Human resources managers).
•   Clinical Oncologists.
 Who cares?
•   Radiation Therapists.

 How
•   Policy
will
makers within they ofknow
the Department Health. about the results.
•   Workforce confederations.
 orThink
• Users carers about the audiences that need to
know the results and the best way to
Dissemination

(includinginform them.
Publication of the studies findings within peer-reviewed National and International journals
Radiography and Health Service Research and Policy sources) will be an important facet
of the dissemination of findings to Clinical Oncologists, Radiographers, Health Service policy
makers and Radiation Therapists.
Meetings with the CoR/SoR Board and Council, Council for Clinical Oncology at the RCR, and
Workforce Confederations to present the findings should ensure relevant decision-makers are aware
of the research.
References
 Choose style according to the rules for
the relevant committee, funding bodies
may stipulate in their rules which
referencing type you should use.
 Accurate, up to date, relevant, don’t
miss any out of your reference list.
Formatting

 Comply with style requirements

 Be professional in your presentation
 Use a spell checker
 Get someone to look over your work
before you submit.
A Proposal for a Systematic
Review of the Literature
 How does this differ from a primary project
proposal?
Search Strategy
• Databas es
• Keywords
• Inclusion/Ex clusion crit eria
• Filtering Method

Headings are slightly different

• Assessment of study quality/v alidity

1.
• Method for logging reviewed articles.
• Limitations

2. Within the method need to identify a clear

search strategy.
3. Ethical considerations are about researcher
bias.
Final Reminder… What makes
proposals uncompetitive or weak?
 Project aims are unclear
 Poorly defined research question
 A lack of innovation
 The design is flawed
 The project is unlikely to lead to the stated outcomes
 The project has a ‘so what’ factor, for example it may
not lead to any changes or improvements in patient
care or there may be no societal benefit apparent
from the proposed outcomes.
 Timeframe and milestones are unachievable