Open AccessFormulating a good research question: Pearls and pitfalls
Author(s) -
Wilson Fandino
Publication year - 2019
Publication title -
indian journal of anaesthesia/indian journal of anaesthesia
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.645
H-Index - 30
eISSN - 0976-2817
pISSN - 0019-5049
DOI - 10.4103/ija.ija_198_19
Subject(s) - medicine , dilemma , frame (networking) , protocol (science) , outcome (game theory) , intervention (counseling) , process (computing) , engineering ethics , management science , research proposal , population , alternative medicine , computer science , nursing , pathology , epistemology , social science , engineering , philosophy , mathematics , mathematical economics , operating system , environmental health , sociology , telecommunications
The process of formulating a good research question can be challenging and frustrating. While a comprehensive literature review is compulsory, the researcher usually encounters methodological difficulties in the conduct of the study, particularly if the primary study question has not been adequately selected in accordance with the clinical dilemma that needs to be addressed. Therefore, optimising time and resources before embarking in the design of a clinical protocol can make an impact on the final results of the research project. Researchers have developed effective ways to convey the message of how to build a good research question that can be easily recalled under the acronyms of PICOT (population, intervention, comparator, outcome, and time frame) and FINER (feasible, interesting, novel, ethical, and relevant). In line with these concepts, this article highlights the main issues faced by clinicians, when developing a research question.