Research
Help - Getting Started

Dave Brown, Principal Lecturer at the School
of Pharmacy and Biomedical Sciences, University of Portsmouth helps
to get you started.
Introduction
Why Do Research?
Getting Ideas!
Things to Think About Early!
Aims, Objectives and Hypotheses
The Research Process and Planning
The Research Protocol
Writing a Funding Proposal
Bibliography
Introduction

'Nobody's
perfect' - we could all improve our practice 'somewhere, somehow,
somewhen'. How often have you wondered:
what
would happen if
?
why did that occur
.?
how could I change this
?
when would be the most effective time to
..?
As
MI pharmacists, we are already attuned to the huge amount of published
research available at our fingertips. We often participate, sometimes
unwittingly, in other people's research projects by providing information
from literature searches on for example, clinical trial outcomes,
drug interactions, adverse events or pharmacoeconomics. Most of
us can also evaluate and present the results of other people's research
in an unbiased, clear and helpful way.
Pharmacy
practice research seeks to understand pharmacy and the way it is
practised to ensure that the pharmacist's knowledge and skills are
being used to best effect in solving NHS problems and addressing
the health needs of patients.
It
is applied research, often multidisciplinary in nature, and draws
on the social, psychological and economic sciences; both quantitative
and qualitative techniques are employed.
It
seeks to provide useful solutions to practical problems: the best
research is always useful to somebody!
Remember
that the results from your research might be used to instigate changes
in practice that might have a profound effect on patient care and
its cost.
Therefore
it is vital that the research is based on sound methodology and
carried out competently. It should be based on the cornerstones
of consistency, honesty, diligence and patience - what professors
of pharmacy practice might call 'academic rigour'!
Sooner
or later we are likely to get involved more deeply in a research
project, perhaps as a collaborator with other healthcare colleagues
or in generating an evidence base on which to develop our own practice.
Many of us have already had some experience of research design,
either at undergraduate and possibly postgraduate level. Some of
us may be involved with a research project at this very moment.
Whatever
your level of research experience - whether you support the research
of others, are an active researcher or would like to become one
- there a few basic concepts that are common to all good research.
These are discussed in the following pages.
Why
Do Research? 
The
diagram below shows some common factors that may give birth to a
project. These can range from personal reasons - achieving something
out of the ordinary or gaining recognition in the form of a higher
qualification - to a need to work out a way of doing something faster,
better or cheaper that will be of benefit to patients and staff.
Often, many of these reasons will apply to the same project and
hopefully, as experience grows, you will end up doing research because
it is fun and exciting.

One
thing to remember:
practice
research is not simply an academic exercise; the best research produces
believable answers to real questions.
Getting
Ideas! 
Most
good research starts with a good idea.
A
few moments' quiet reflection about your own department (Who works
there? What it does. How it functions. Where would people be without
it?) is a good place to start when looking for ideas if you are
stuck for a research topic.
More
often than not however, questions will arise (sometimes leaping
out as if fitted with springs) during everyday practice, during
informal meetings with colleagues or at formal meetings such as
departmental or divisional review, staff appraisals, drug and therapeutics
committee meetings or other professional get-togethers.
Below
is a list of likely sources for research topic ideas.
You!:
draw from your personal experience as a practising pharmacist.
Your
customers: healthcare
professionals, managers, patients - what are the beliefs, expectations,
needs and required outcomes of the MI service for these people?
Your
department: are you happy (and, more to the point, is everybody
else happy) with its structure, organisation, functions, responsibilities
and performance? Are any changes to the department imminent? If
so, could you research the effects of change systematically?
Medicines
management issues: what impact does (could) the MI department
have on the development, supply and distribution, use and follow-up
of therapy? Could it have a direct input to patient education?
Government
initiatives: check health circulars and monitor press reports
for the latest developments.
The
literature: let's face it, no one is in a better position to
read research reviews and comb the data for potential new research
opportunities than the MI pharmacist. Reading around a topic can
often highlight significant gaps in knowledge, areas that are ripe
for development or where a different research approach might be
useful. The existing literature on research in MI is discussed in
more detail elsewhere.
Academia:
there has been much fruitful collaboration between academic and
practice-based pharmacists in the past, because of the applied nature
of pharmacy practice research. Lecturers and readers at your local
school of pharmacy, academic pharmacy practice unit or postgraduate
school may be in a good position to furnish or refine a research
idea of common interest. They may also be able to provide help with
study design, data analysis (all those awkward statistical tests!)
and publication of the results. Remember that they too are often
looking for useful, applied research to get their teeth into.
Funding
bodies: find out what they are looking for and are therefore
prepared to fund; you may be able to turn that twinkle of an idea
you had about extending your MI service to rest homes into a grant-winning
proposal! Writing a proposal for funding is discussed in a later
section.
Previous
small studies: perhaps carried out as undergraduate or pre-registration
student projects or as snapshots or mini-audits in your department.
Things
to Think About Early! 
Important
questions that you should ask yourself before adopting a specific
idea include the following:
Is
the idea feasible or can I make it so?
Giving
everybody in MI a radiophone headset for hands-free, on-line enquiry
answering may not be very practical (or desirable), but providing
at least one person with such a device and investigating its use
may well be feasible.
Has
this been done before?
Often
quite practical ideas are rejected because the research has already
been done, the results have been published and the jury has given
its verdict. This is a pity. In the author's experience, MI departments
vary considerably in their staffing levels, available resources
and MI query profile to the extent that generalisation of research,
even on an inter-Trust basis, is difficult. More often than not,
the same methodology could be applied to your department providing
valid, original and hopefully useful results. Furthermore, any good
research report will identify areas where the researchers see room
for improvement in their methodology or suggest ways of broadening
its application that you can adopt in your own research. This is
not plagiarism - this is sound scientific method.
Do
I have the expertise?
Obviously,
the research needs to be carried out by those competent in its conduct
and analysis and interpretation of the results. Most MI projects
have a multidisciplinary flavour and are the better for it. Academics
and statisticians are often valuable team members. Going it alone
is seldom an option and key players should be identified and 'won
over' early in the life of a research idea.
If you are a novice, try and get a more experienced colleague to
act as a tutor or mentor.
How
long will it take?
Research
projects have a start date and a finish date. These should be realistic.
They are frequently determined by things like patient accrual rates,
required sample size, and research methodologies e.g., using postal
questionnaires or face-to-face interviews. Timetabling the project
is discussed further under project planning.
How
much will it cost?
Clearly,
an initial costing of the project, to get a ball-park figure, will
indicate whether the project is within existing means, funding will
have to be sought, or the price is so astronomical that the idea
is a non-starter.
What
use will the results be?
As
indicated above, if the idea is a good one (and the subsequent methods
you use are sound and conducted efficiently) then the results will
be of some use to someone. But if you can identify a definite use
and user in advance this will be a useful spur to your efforts.
Can
we publish this?
The
endpoint of good research should be its wider dissemination, perhaps
in the form of a report for internal consumption or publication
in a professional journal.
Aims,
Objectives and Hypotheses 
While
these can be refined as the thought process matures, it is worth
jotting down the aim of the
research: this is the question or questions you hope to answer by
doing the study. Don't be over-ambitious; limit the aims to a maximum
of two and make them as clear and uncomplicated as possible.
Sometimes,
but not always, it is possible to express the aim as a testable
research hypothesis. Hypotheses
should be phrased in such a way that they lend themselves to statistical
testing.
The
objectives of the project should
then be listed. These are simply the steps by which the aims are
going to be achieved. It is very useful to split the work up into
practical, bite-size chunks that you can tick off as they are completed.
If nothing else, achieving each objective demonstrates command and
control of the project and helps the project stay on course.
Note
that objectives only contain the framework of what you will do.
They do not contain things like: 'prepare programme of events',
'send questionnaire for printing' 'stick stamps on questionnaire
envelopes'; these are taken as read. Eight or nine objectives are
probably enough to keep you on course.
Setting
aims and objectives will help both your research team and readers
of the final work to decide if you have succeeded in what you set
out to do.
If
this is your first sail in research waters, it is wise to keep the
research aims and objectives as simple as possible. If you have
a couple of reefs in your research sail to start with, the risks
of a capsize are minimised; you can always let them out as you gain
more experience.
Examples
of the aims, hypotheses and objectives associated with two projects
are given below.
Examples
of Setting Aims and Objectives and Phrasing Hypotheses.
Project
1:
Aim:
To assess the impact of supplying information to queries on adverse
events on subsequent patient care.
Objectives:
1. Review the literature.
2. Prepare protocol.
3. Research MI log to identify relevant queries.
4. Design / pilot questionnaire for mailing.
5. Mail questionnaire to target correspondents.
6. Follow-up of non-responders with repeat mailing.
7. Data collection and analysis.
8. Report on findings and disseminate internally.
9. Publish.
Steps
3 and 4 might be modified to include in-depth interviews with correspondents
rather than a postal questionnaire (If you would like to know more
about the results of this particular project, then check out the
following reference: Stubbington C., Bowey J., Hands D. and Brown
D. (1998) Drug information replies to queries involving adverse
events: impact on clinical practice. Hospital Pharmacist 5: 81-84.).
Hypotheses:
Ho (or null hypothesis): the
information provided by MI has no impact on subsequent patient care.
H1 (or alternative hypothesis):
the information has an effect (in this case, either a favourable
or an unfavourable one).
Project
2.
Aim:
To investigate the effect of promoting MI to nurses on their use
of the service.
Objectives:
1. Conduct literature search.
2. Write protocol.
3. Conduct review of nurse-generated enquiries from MI log.
4. Carry out promotion activities (e.g. meetings, leaflets, posters).
5. Conduct repeat review of MI log.
6. Compare and contrast 3 and 5 above.
7. Prepare report and disseminate.
8. Publish.
Hypotheses:
Ho: promotion of the MI service has no effect on its subsequent
use by nurses.
H1: promotion has an effect (in this case, either an increase or
a decrease in use).
The
Research Process and Planning 
The
diagram below shows how the various steps of a research project
fit together.

From
previous pages we hope that you have gained the impression that
your research project should be:
- Useful
- Achievable
- Original
(to your situation)
- Well
planned
- Well
managed
- Stimulating
All
of these things are more likely to apply if they are underpinned
by sound planning. Time spent doing this properly is never wasted.
Poor planning may mean that the results are so meaningless that
the you are unable to come close to answering the original research
question. No amount of data massage will alter the fact that you
forgot to exclude certain patients, made no allowance for confounding
variables such as fluctuations in service demand, omitted key questions
from that all important questionnaire or recruited a lamentably
small number of subjects with the wrong disease.
Read
Around Your Topic
Find
out what is known and what research has been done already. What
obstacles did the investigators encounter? How were these overcome?
What were subject accrual rates like? MI pharmacists should already
have skills relating to retrieving, assimilating and interpreting
published work and will be in a good position to identify gaps in
knowledge.
Look
at previous reports of research symposia and conferences such as
those organised by UKCPA, RPSGB, AIOPI and UKMI (don't forget the
poster sessions).
Select
a research strategy
Your
strategy will depend on the research question you want to answer.
Some questions will suggest a clear strategy: e.g. determining a
large number of correspondents' views on the current MI service
is probably best carried out by using a mailed questionnaire. However,
examining ways in which interaction between pharmaceutical company
representative and MI staff could be optimised might involve in-depth
interviews with MI staff, brainstorming sessions, critical incident
analysis or even a focus group (or all of these!). There is always
more than one way of conducting the same piece of research. Use
your own experience, the literature and the views of colleagues
with research experience and your assessment of what is practical
to guide you in your choice.
If
you want to measure a particular attitude or parameter (e.g. quality
of life), it is worth consulting the literature to see if there
are validated instruments or successful questionnaires already available
'off the shelf'. This is preferable to spending a vast amount of
time developing your own instrument and demonstrating its quality
before using it in the actual project.
A number
of excellent publications, full of advice on choosing research methods
are available (see Bibliography).
Discuss
your proposal with peers
At
this stage, it is an excellent idea to discuss your proposed project
with colleagues, especially if they are to be involved in the research.
If the project is to be run by a multidisciplinary team, then all
team members should be involved from the start and made to feel
that their contributions to project design are valued. What you
decide can then be embodied in the protocol that is written before
the research starts and states formally everything that you propose
to do.
If
you project is of a less grand nature, it is still worth getting
the opinion of colleagues with some expertise in the area of practice
you intend to investigate. You may wish to involve your academic
colleagues at this stage to comment on the proposed methodology
and statistical aspects. In this way busy colleagues may 'buy into'
the project and donate their time and skills.
Anticipating
things that could go wrong
Think
about possible pitfalls associated with you objectives, write them
down and prepare contingency plans for if they happen.
Decide
on a time scale
A
stated earlier, every project should have a time scale for its satisfactory
completion. Think about how long it is going to take to achieve
each of the objectives and consider the following potential thieves
of time in particular:
Thieves
of time:
- Literature
searching (this should be on-going throughout the study).
- Obtaining
approval for your study, e.g. research ethics committee approval.
- Obtaining
data, particularly things like patients' notes
- Obtaining
subjects: this will be dependent on, e.g. your exclusion/ inclusion
criteria, natural variation in disease pattern, refusal to participate,
migration away from the study area (typically patients and junior
doctors!)
- Writing
up.
- Staff
absences (illness, and more predictably, holidays)
- Preparing
the research report.
You
could prepare a calendar grid on a side of A4, listing the activities
that will take place during the project period, and who is to carry
them out down the left hand side and the time (in weeks or days)
across the top. Shade in the boxes of the grid relating to the time(s)
where the activities are due to take place. This could then be placed
in your protocol. Drift from the original project timetable often
occurs; but at least you started out with an instrument to measure
that drift and to see what effect drift in one step might have on
all the other activities that are still to be completed.
Decide
on what you are going to do with the results
Are
you going to prepare a report for in-house consumption? Or, if all
goes well, are you going to prepare a poster, abstract for conference
presentation or submit the results as a paper for journal publication?
Produce
a protocol
This
is covered in the next section.
Research
Ethics
Depending
on who you intend to involve in your research, and particularly
if you intend to involve patient's views or data, you will need
to gain approval from the local research ethics committee. This
may be in the form of verbal or written consent, depending on the
extent of the project. If you are in any doubt, then it is worth
consulting with colleagues who have had previous experience of ethics
committees or have conducted research that required approval. Identify
the chairperson of your local Research Ethics Committee and approach
them informally for an opinion on whether Committee approval is
required.
If
a submission is required, then have your protocol ready in good
time for the next meeting (which can be some time down the line)
and complete the necessary proposal forms These are usually straightforward,
but can be rather bulky. Multiple copies are usually required, so
allow time to make them.
Research
Ethics Committee perusal has the added value of providing comments
on the research methodology you propose to use; so in this respect
you are getting feedback on your ideas from another, and often well
qualified, group of peers!
More
details on the composition and operation of research ethics committees,
and advice on making an application can be found on a separate page.
(LINK)
The
Research Protocol 
The
protocol is:
- The
end result of the planning process;
- Written
before the research begins!
- A
plan or statement of intent;
- A
guide to all those involved with the project, hopefully keeping
them on the straight and narrow and preventing project 'drift';
- A
benchmark against which to measure progress;
- A
vital part of any submission to a research ethics committee or
a funding application;
- May
be included in the final project report with a list of deviations
from protocol (hopefully with reasons).
The
protocol should be concise and all members of your research team
should contribute to (or at least approve of) the final version.
Reading and re-reading drafts of your protocol as it develops should
stimulate fresh ideas and highlight possible 'nightmare scenarios'
that you can then plan for and incorporate in the final draft.
Protocol
Format
It
is wise to be systematic when constructing a protocol. The following
sections should be included:
1.
Background (a brief introduction to what is known about the project
area, including previous, relevant research, with references). The
background should also justify why the proposed research is important.
2.
The project aim(s), objectives and hypothesis.
3.
Methods - a concise description of what you plan to do. (e.g. exact
methods, inclusion / exclusion criteria, statistical analysis -
are you going to use a particular software package to collect and
analyse the data?)
4.
Timescale of events
5 References.
6.
Appendices (e.g. the data collection forms and questionnaires, posters
or information leaflets you will use in your study).
Writing
a Funding Proposal 
This
process can be broken down into a set of steps.
1.
Identify potential sponsors. A variety of sponsors may be available.
It is likely that with MI research, your Hospital Trust or Health
Authority are likely to be the major players in providing financial
assistance.
Sponsors
will be looking for value for money and value-added proposals. In
devising any bid, it is worth emphasising how results obtained at
a local level might be applied more widely to regional and even
national level (e.g. Health of the Nation, National Service Frameworks).
Remember that the pool of money available from any potential sponsor
is limited and that you may be competing for funds with other research
groups who will be trying to convince the sponsor that their project
should be top of the heap.
2. Note any maxima or minima on the sums available
3.
Obtain application forms and adhere strictly to requirements.
Include
all costs for the project.
Think
carefully about costs under the following headings:
Materials
and equipment
Paper, journals, software, hard ware, publication, photocopying,
postage
Manpower
Time lost to other duties, salary of research staff, salary of locum
staff to allow you to conduct the research
Overheads
Travel, subsistence, telephone
Expertise
For specialist skills, e.g. translation of foreign language material,
statistical advice and analysis, consultancy fees
Remember
that some establishments may require a 'cut' or 'top slice' of your
funding to pay for their overheads such as heat, light and hardware
use.
If
the project is an extended one, you might have to claim for more
than one financial year. If so, you should provide for inflation
over the life of the project.
Bibliography

See
also Research Links
Pharmacy
in Practice: Research Toolbox Series
Pharmacy
in Practice published a series of six very readable articles by
Dr Mary Tully at the School of Pharmacy in Manchester under the
title Research Toolbox. The articles were designed to help the reader
develop some of the skills needed to take a research project through
from conception to the final paper. A real-life example of a research
project (a survey of the use of complementary medicines by rheumatology
patients) is used throughout the series to illustrate the points
that are being made. This series provides an excellent starting
point for the budding practice researcher.
- Setting
up a research project. Pharmacy in Practice June 2000; 10(5):
169-171
- Basic
research designs in quantitative research. Pharmacy in Practice
July/August 2000; 10(6): 207-208
- Quantitative
data: sampling strategy and sample size. Pharmacy in Practice
September 2000; 10(7): 245-246
- Questionnaire
design and interviewing. Pharmacy in Practice October 2000; 10(8):
292-294
- Handling
and analysis of quantitative data. Pharmacy in Practice November/December
2000; 10(9): 314-316
- Dissemination
- writing a paper for publication. Pharmacy in Practice January/February
2001; 11(1): 19-20
Mead
M.G. (1989) How to carry out a simple research project. Update;
August: 309-313.
Bowling
A. Research methods in Health: investigating health and health services.
Buckingham, Open University Press, 1997.
Kane
E. Doing your own research. Marion Boyars, London, 1990.
Dixon
B.R., Bouma G.D. and Atkinson G.B. A handbook of social science
research: a comprehensive and practical guide for students. Oxford
University Press, Oxford, 1987.
Herbert
M. Planning a research project: a guide for practitioners and trainees
in the helping professions. Cassell, New York, 1990.
Smith
F. Health Services Research Methods in Pharmacy (Int J Pharm Prac)
- Introduction. 1997 5(1): 149-151
- Survey research:(1) Design, samples and response. 1997 5(1): 152-166
Robson
C. Real World Research, Blackwell, London, 1997
|