research question in journal article

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, generate accurate citations for free.

• Knowledge Base
• Starting the research process
• 10 Research Question Examples to Guide Your Research Project

10 Research Question Examples to Guide your Research Project

Published on October 30, 2022 by Shona McCombes . Revised on October 19, 2023.

The research question is one of the most important parts of your research paper , thesis or dissertation . It’s important to spend some time assessing and refining your question before you get started.

The exact form of your question will depend on a few things, such as the length of your project, the type of research you’re conducting, the topic , and the research problem . However, all research questions should be focused, specific, and relevant to a timely social or scholarly issue.

Once you’ve read our guide on how to write a research question , you can use these examples to craft your own.

Note that the design of your research question can depend on what method you are pursuing. Here are a few options for qualitative, quantitative, and statistical research questions.

Other interesting articles

If you want to know more about the research process , methodology , research bias , or statistics , make sure to check out some of our other articles with explanations and examples.

Methodology

• Sampling methods
• Simple random sampling
• Stratified sampling
• Cluster sampling
• Likert scales
• Reproducibility

 Statistics

• Null hypothesis
• Statistical power
• Probability distribution
• Effect size
• Poisson distribution

Research bias

• Optimism bias
• Cognitive bias
• Implicit bias
• Hawthorne effect
• Anchoring bias
• Explicit bias

Cite this Scribbr article

If you want to cite this source, you can copy and paste the citation or click the “Cite this Scribbr article” button to automatically add the citation to our free Citation Generator.

McCombes, S. (2023, October 19). 10 Research Question Examples to Guide your Research Project. Scribbr. Retrieved August 23, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/research-process/research-question-examples/

Is this article helpful?

Shona McCombes

Other students also liked, writing strong research questions | criteria & examples, how to choose a dissertation topic | 8 steps to follow, evaluating sources | methods & examples, what is your plagiarism score.

• SpringerLink shop

Identifying your research question

Making informed decisions about what to study, and defining your research question, even within a predetermined field, is critical to a successful research career, and can be one of the hardest challenges for a scientist.

Being knowledgeable about the state of your field and up-to-date with recent developments can help you:

• Make decisions about  what to study within niche research areas
• Identify  top researchers  in your field whose work you can follow and potentially collaborate with
• Find  important journals to read regularly and publish in
• Explain to others  why your work is important by being able to recount the bigger picture

How can you identify a research question?

Reading regularly is the most common way of identifying a good research question. This enables you to keep up to date with recent advancements and identify certain issues or unsolved problems that keep appearing.

Begin by searching for and reading literature in your field. Start with  general interest  journals, but don’t limit yourself to journal publications only; you can also look for clues in the news or on research blogs. Once you have identified a few interesting topics, you should be reading the table of contents of journals and the abstracts of most articles in that subject area. Papers that are directly related to your research you should read in their entirety.

TIP Keep an eye out for  Review papers and special issues in your chosen subject area as they are very helpful in discovering new areas and hot topics.

TIP: you can sign up to receive table of contents or notifications when articles are published in your field from most journals or publishers.

TIP: Joining a journal club is a great way to read and dissect published papers in and around your subject area. Usually consisting of 5-10 people from the same research group or institute they meet to evaluate the good and bad points of the research presented in the paper. This not only helps you keep up to date with the field but helps you become familiar with what is necessary for a good paper which can help when you come to write your own.

If possible, communicate with some of the authors of these manuscripts via email or in person. Going to conferences if possible is a great way to meet some of these authors. Often,  talking with the author  of an important work in your research area will give you more ideas than just reading the manuscript would.

Back │ Next

Educational resources and simple solutions for your research journey

How to Craft a Strong Research Question (With Research Question Examples)

A sound and effective research question is a key element that must be identified and pinned down before researchers can even begin their research study or work. A strong research question lays the foundation for your entire study, guiding your investigation and shaping your findings. Hence, it is critical that researchers spend considerable time assessing and refining the research question based on in-depth reading and comprehensive literature review. In this article, we will discuss how to write a strong research question and provide you with some good examples of research questions across various disciplines.

Table of Contents

The importance of a research question

A research question plays a crucial role in driving scientific inquiry, setting the direction and purpose of your study, and guiding your entire research process. By formulating a clear and focused research question, you lay the foundation for your investigation, ensuring that your research remains on track and aligned with your objectives so you can make meaningful contribution to the existing body of knowledge. A well-crafted research question also helps you define the scope of your study and identify the appropriate methodologies and data collection techniques to employ.

Key components of a strong research question

A good research question possesses several key components that contribute to the quality and impact of your study. Apart from providing a clear framework to generate meaningful results, a well-defined research question allows other researchers to understand the purpose and significance of your work. So, when working on your research question, incorporate the following elements:

• Specificity : A strong research question should be specific about the main focus of your study, enabling you to gather precise data and draw accurate conclusions. It clearly defines the variables, participants, and context involved, leaving no room for ambiguity.
• Clarity : A good research question is clear and easily understood, so articulate the purpose and intent of your study concisely without being generic or vague. Ensuring clarity in your research question helps both you and your readers grasp the research objective.
• Feasibility : While crafting a research question, consider the practicality of conducting the research and availability of necessary data or access to participants. Think whether your study is realistic and achievable within the constraints of time, resources, and ethical considerations.

How to craft a well-defined research question

A first step that will help save time and effort is knowing what your aims are and thinking about a few problem statements on the area or aspect one wants to study or do research on. Contemplating these statements as one undertakes more progressive reading can help the researcher in reassessing and fine-tuning the research question. This can be done over time as they read and learn more about the research topic, along with a broad literature review and parallel discussions with peer researchers and supervisors. In some cases, a researcher can have more than one research question if the research being undertaken is a PhD thesis or dissertation, but try not to cover multiple concerns on a topic.

A strong research question must be researchable, original, complex, and relevant. Here are five simple steps that can make the entire process easier.

• Identify a broad topic from your areas of interest, something that is relevant, and you are passionate about since you’ll be spending a lot of time conducting your research.
• Do a thorough literature review to weed out potential gaps in research and stay updated on what’s currently being done in your chosen topic and subject area.
• Shortlist possible research questions based on the research gaps or see how you can build on or refute previously published ideas and concepts.
• Assess your chosen research question using the FINER criteria that helps you evaluate whether the research is Feasible, Interesting, Novel, Ethical, and Relevant. 1
• Formulate the final research question, while ensuring it is clear, well-written, and addresses all the key elements of a strong research question.

Examples of research questions

Remember to adapt your research question to suit your purpose, whether it’s exploratory, descriptive, comparative, experimental, qualitative, or quantitative. Embrace the iterative nature of the research process, continually evaluating and refining your question as you progress. Here are some good examples of research questions across various disciplines.

Exploratory research question examples

• How does social media impact interpersonal relationships among teenagers?
• What are the potential benefits of incorporating mindfulness practices in the workplace?

Descriptive research question examples

• What factors influence customer loyalty in the e-commerce industry?
• Is there a relationship between socioeconomic status and academic performance among elementary school students?

Comparative research question examples

• How does the effectiveness of traditional teaching methods compare to online learning platforms in mathematics education?
• What is the impact of different healthcare policies on patient outcomes in various countries?

Experimental research question examples

• What are the effects of a new drug on reducing symptoms of a specific medical condition?
• Does a dietary intervention have an impact on weight loss among individuals with obesity?

Qualitative research question examples

• What are the lived experiences of immigrants adapting to a new culture?
• What factors influence job satisfaction among healthcare professionals?

Quantitative research question examples

• Is there a relationship between sleep duration and academic performance among college students?
• How effective is a specific intervention in reducing anxiety levels among individuals with phobias?

With these simple guidelines and inspiring examples of research questions, you are equipped to embark on your research journey with confidence and purpose. Here’s wishing you all the best for your future endeavors!

References:

• How to write a research question: Steps and examples. Indeed Career Guide. Available online at https://www.indeed.com/career-advice/career-development/how-to-write-research-questions

R Discovery is a literature search and research reading platform that accelerates your research discovery journey by keeping you updated on the latest, most relevant scholarly content. With 250M+ research articles sourced from trusted aggregators like CrossRef, Unpaywall, PubMed, PubMed Central, Open Alex and top publishing houses like Springer Nature, JAMA, IOP, Taylor & Francis, NEJM, BMJ, Karger, SAGE, Emerald Publishing and more, R Discovery puts a world of research at your fingertips.  

Try R Discovery Prime FREE for 1 week or upgrade at just US$72 a year to access premium features that let you listen to research on the go, read in your language, collaborate with peers, auto sync with reference managers, and much more. Choose a simpler, smarter way to find and read research – Download the app and start your free 7-day trial today !  

Related Posts

What are Experimental Groups in Research

What is a Review Article? How to Write it?

Journal Article References

This page contains reference examples for journal articles, including the following:

• Journal article
• Journal article with an article number
• Journal article with missing information
• Retracted journal article
• Retraction notice for a journal article
• Abstract of a journal article from an abstract indexing database
• Monograph as part of a journal issue
• Online-only supplemental material to a journal article

1. Journal article

Grady, J. S., Her, M., Moreno, G., Perez, C., & Yelinek, J. (2019). Emotions in storybooks: A comparison of storybooks that represent ethnic and racial groups in the United States. Psychology of Popular Media Culture , 8 (3), 207–217. https://doi.org/10.1037/ppm0000185

• Parenthetical citation : (Grady et al., 2019)
• Narrative citation : Grady et al. (2019)
• If a journal article has a DOI, include the DOI in the reference.
• Always include the issue number for a journal article.
• If the journal article does not have a DOI and is from an academic research database, end the reference after the page range (for an explanation of why, see the database information page ). The reference in this case is the same as for a print journal article.
• Do not include database information in the reference unless the journal article comes from a database that publishes works of limited circulation or original, proprietary content, such as UpToDate .
• If the journal article does not have a DOI but does have a URL that will resolve for readers (e.g., it is from an online journal that is not part of a database), include the URL of the article at the end of the reference.

2. Journal article with an article number

Jerrentrup, A., Mueller, T., Glowalla, U., Herder, M., Henrichs, N., Neubauer, A., & Schaefer, J. R. (2018). Teaching medicine with the help of “Dr. House.” PLoS ONE , 13 (3), Article e0193972. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0193972

• Parenthetical citation : (Jerrentrup et al., 2018)
• Narrative citation : Jerrentrup et al. (2018)
• If the journal article has an article number instead of a page range, include the word “Article” and then the article number instead of the page range.

3. Journal article with missing information

Missing volume number.

Lipscomb, A. Y. (2021, Winter). Addressing trauma in the college essay writing process. The Journal of College Admission , (249), 30–33. https://www.catholiccollegesonline.org/pdf/national_ccaa_in_the_news_-_nacac_journal_of_college_admission_winter_2021.pdf

Missing issue number

Sanchiz, M., Chevalier, A., & Amadieu, F. (2017). How do older and young adults start searching for information? Impact of age, domain knowledge and problem complexity on the different steps of information searching. Computers in Human Behavior , 72 , 67–78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.02.038

Missing page or article number

Butler, J. (2017). Where access meets multimodality: The case of ASL music videos. Kairos: A Journal of Rhetoric, Technology, and Pedagogy , 21 (1). http://technorhetoric.net/21.1/topoi/butler/index.html

• Parenthetical citations : (Butler, 2017; Lipscomb, 2021; Sanchiz et al., 2017)
• Narrative citations : Butler (2017), Lipscomb (2021), and Sanchiz et al. (2017)
• If the journal does not use volume, issue, and/or article or page numbers, omit the missing element(s) from the reference.
• If the journal is published quarterly and the month or season (Fall, Winter, Spring, Summer) is noted, include that with the date element; see the Lipscomb example.
• If the volume, issue, and/or article or page numbers have simply not yet been assigned, use the format for an advance online publication (see Example 7 in the Publication Manual ) or an in-press article (see Example 8 in the Publication Manual ).

4. Retracted journal article

Joly, J. F., Stapel, D. A., & Lindenberg, S. M. (2008). Silence and table manners: When environments activate norms. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin , 34 (8), 1047–1056. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167208318401 (Retraction published 2012, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 38 [10], 1378)

• Parenthetical citation : (Joly et al., 2008)
• Narrative citation : Joly et al. (2008)
• Use this format to cite the retracted article itself, for example, to discuss the contents of the retracted article.
• First provide publication details of the original article. Then provide information about the retraction in parentheses, including its year, journal, volume, issue, and page number(s).

5. Retraction notice for a journal article

de la Fuente, R., Bernad, A., Garcia-Castro, J., Martin, M. C., & Cigudosa, J. C. (2010). Retraction: Spontaneous human adult stem cell transformation. Cancer Research , 70 (16), 6682. https://doi.org/10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-10-2451

The Editors of the Lancet. (2010). Retraction—Ileal-lymphoid-nodular hyperplasia, non-specific colitis, and pervasive developmental disorder in children. The Lancet , 375 (9713), 445. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(10)60175-4

• Parenthetical citations : (de la Fuente et al., 2010; The Editors of the Lancet, 2010)
• Narrative citations : de la Fuente et al. (2010) and The Editors of the Lancet (2010)
• Use this format to cite a retraction notice rather than a retracted article, for example, to provide information on why an article was retracted.
• The author of the retraction notice may be an editor, editorial board, or some or all authors of the article. Examine the retraction notice to determine who to credit as the author.
• Reproduce the title of the retraction notice as shown on the work. Note that the title may include the words “retraction,” “retraction notice,” or “retraction note” as well as the title of the original article.

6. Abstract of a journal article from an abstract indexing database

Hare, L. R., & O'Neill, K. (2000). Effectiveness and efficiency in small academic peer groups: A case study (Accession No. 200010185) [Abstract from Sociological Abstracts]. Small Group Research , 31 (1), 24–53. https://doi.org/10.1177/104649640003100102

• Parenthetical citation : (Hare & O’Neill, 2000)
• Narrative citation : Hare and O’Neill (2000)
• Although it is preferable to cite the whole article, the abstract can be cited if that is your only available source.
• The foundation of the reference is the same as for a journal article.
• If the abstract has a database accession number, place it in parentheses after the title.
• Note that you retrieved only the abstract by putting the words “Abstract from” and then the name of the abstract indexing database in square brackets. Place this bracketed description after the title and any accession number.
• Accession numbers are sometimes referred to as unique identifiers or as publication numbers (e.g., as PubMed IDs); use the term provided by the database in your reference.

7. Monograph as part of a journal issue

Ganster, D. C., Schaubroeck, J., Sime, W. E., & Mayes, B. T. (1991). The nomological validity of the Type A personality among employed adults [Monograph]. Journal of Applied Psychology , 76 (1), 143–168. http://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.76.1.143

• Parenthetical citation : (Ganster et al., 1991)
• Narrative citation : Ganster et al. (1991)
• For a monograph with an issue (or whole) number, include the issue number in parentheses followed by the serial number, for example, 58 (1, Serial No. 231).
• For a monograph bound separately as a supplement to a journal, give the issue number and supplement or part number in parentheses after the volume number, for example, 80 (3, Pt. 2).

8. Online-only supplemental material to a journal article

Freeberg, T. M. (2019). From simple rules of individual proximity, complex and coordinated collective movement [Supplemental material]. Journal of Comparative Psychology , 133 (2), 141–142. https://doi.org/10.1037/com0000181

• Parenthetical citation : (Freeberg, 2019)
• Narrative citation : Freeberg (2019)
• Include the description “[Supplemental material]” in square brackets after the article title.
• If you cite both the main article and the supplemental material, provide only a reference for the article.

Journal article references are covered in the seventh edition APA Style manuals in the Publication Manual Section 10.1 and the Concise Guide Section 10.1

• Get new issue alerts Get alerts
• Submit a Manuscript

Secondary Logo

Journal logo.

Colleague's E-mail is Invalid

Your message has been successfully sent to your colleague.

Save my selection

Formulating a good research question

Pearls and pitfalls.

Fandino, Wilson

Guys' and St Thomas' Hospital National Health Service Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom

Address for correspondence: Dr. Wilson Fandino, Anaesthesia Department, St Thomas' Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Westminster Bridge Road, Lambeth, London SE1 7EH, United Kingdom. E-mail: [email protected]

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.

INTRODUCTION

What is your research question? This is very often one of the first queries made by statisticians, when researchers come up with an interesting idea. In fact, the findings of a study may only acquire relevance if they provide an accurate and unbiased answer to a specific question,[ 1 2 ] and it has been suggested that up to one-third of the time spent in the whole process—from the conception of an idea to the publication of the manuscript—could be invested in finding the right primary study question.[ 3 ] Furthermore, selecting a good research question can be a time-consuming and challenging task: in one retrospective study, Mayo et al . reported that 3 out of 10 articles published would have needed a major rewording of the question.[ 1 ] This paper explores some recommendations to consider before starting any research project, and outlines the main difficulties faced by young and experienced clinicians, when it comes time to turn an exciting idea into a valuable and feasible research question.

OPTIMISATION OF TIME AND RESOURCES

Focusing on the primary research question.

The process of developing a new idea usually stems from a dilemma inherent to the clinical practice.[ 2 3 4 ] However, once the problem has been identified, it is tempting to formulate multiple research questions. Conducting a clinical trial with more than one primary study question would not be feasible. First, because each question may require a different research design, and second, because the necessary statistical power of the study would demand unaffordable sample sizes. It is the duty of editors and reviewers to make sure that authors clearly identify the primary research question, and as a consequence, studies approaching more than one primary research question may not be suitable for publication.

Working in the right environment

Teamwork is essential to find the appropriate research question. Working in the right environment will enable the investigator to interact with colleagues with different backgrounds, and create opportunities to exchange experiences in a collaborative way between clinicians and researchers. Likewise, it is of paramount importance to get involved colleagues with expertise in the field (lead clinicians, education supervisors, research mentors, department chairs, epidemiologists, biostatisticians, and ethical consultants, among others), and ask for their guidance.[ 5 6 7 8 ]

Evaluating the pertinence of the study

The researcher should wonder if, on the basis of the research question formulated, there is a need for a study to address the problem, as clinical research usually entails a large investment of resources and workforce involvement. Thus, if the answer to the posed clinical question seems to be evident before starting the study, investing in research to address the problem would become superfluous. For example, in a clinical trial, Herzog-Niescery et al . compared laryngeal masks with cuffed and uncuffed tracheal tubes, in the context of surgeons' exposure to sevoflurane, in infants undergoing adenoidectomy. However, it appears obvious that cuffed tracheal tubes are preferred to minimise surgeons' exposure to volatile gases, as authors concluded after recruiting 60 patients.[ 9 ]

Conducting a thorough literature review

Any research project requires the identification of at least one of three problems: the evidence is scarce, the existing literature yields conflicting results, or the results could be improved. Hence, a comprehensive review of the topic is imperative, as it allows the researcher to identify this gap in the literature, formulate a hypothesis and develop a research question.[ 2 ] To this end, it is crucial to be attentive to new ideas, keep the imagination roaming with reflective attitude, and remain sceptical to the new-gained information.[ 4 7 ]

Narrowing the research question

A broad research question may encompass an unaffordable extensive topic. For instance, do supraglottic devices provide similar conditions for the visualization of the glottis aperture in a German hospital? Such a general research question usually needs to be narrowed, not only by cutting away unnecessary components (a German hospital is irrelevant in this context), but also by defining a target population, a specific intervention, an alternative treatment or procedure to be compared with the intervention, a measurable primary outcome, and a time frame of the study. In contrast, an example of a good research question would be: among children younger than 1 year of age undergoing elective minor procedures, to what extent the insertion times are different, comparing the Supreme™ laryngeal mask airway (LMA) to Proseal™ LMA, when placed after reaching a BIS index <60?[ 10 ] In this example, the core ingredients of the research question can be easily identified as: children <1 year of age undergoing minor elective procedures, Supreme™ LMA, Proseal™ LMA and insertion times at anaesthetic induction when reaching a BIS index <60. These components are usually gathered in the literature under the acronym of PICOT (population, intervention, comparator, outcome and time frame, respectively).[ 1 3 5 ]

PICOT FRAMEWORK

Table 1 summarises the foremost questions likely to be addressed when working on PICOT frame.[ 1 6 8 ] These components are also applicable to observational studies, where the exposure takes place of the intervention.[ 1 11 ] Remarkably, if after browsing the title and the abstract of a paper, the reader is not able to clearly identify the PICOT parameters, and elucidate the question posed by the authors, there should be reasonable scepticism regarding the scientific rigor of the work.[ 12 13 ] All these elements are crucial in the design and methodology of a clinical trial, as they can affect the feasibility and reliability of results. Having formulated the primary study question in the context of the PICOT framework [ Table 1 ],[ 1 6 8 ] the researcher should be able to elucidate which design is most suitable for their work, determine what type of data needs to be collected, and write a structured introduction tailored to what they want to know, explicitly mentioning the primary study hypothesis, which should lead to formulate the main research question.[ 1 2 6 8 ]

Occasionally, the intended population of the study needs to be modified, in order to overcome any potential ethical issues, and/or for the sake of convenience and feasibility of the project. Yet, the researcher must be aware that the external validity of the results may be compromised. As an illustration, in a randomised clinical trial, authors compared the ease of tracheal tube insertion between C-MAC video laryngoscope and direct laryngoscopy, in patients presenting to the emergency department with an indication of rapid sequence intubation. However, owing to the existence of ethical concerns, a substantial amount of patients requiring emergency tracheal intubation, including patients with major maxillofacial trauma and ongoing cardiopulmonary resuscitation, had to be excluded from the trial.[ 14 ] In fact, the design of prospective studies to explore this subset of patients can be challenging, not only because of ethical considerations, but because of the low incidence of these cases. In another study, Metterlein et al . compared the glottis visualisation among five different supraglottic airway devices, using fibreroptic-guided tracheal intubation in an adult population. Despite that the study was aimed to explore the ease of intubation in patients with anticipated difficult airway (thus requiring fibreoptic tracheal intubation), authors decided to enrol patients undergoing elective laser treatment for genital condylomas, as a strategy to hasten the recruitment process and optimise resources.[ 15 ]

Intervention

Anaesthetic interventions can be classified into pharmacological (experimental treatment) and nonpharmacological. Among nonpharmacological interventions, the most common include anaesthetic techniques, monitoring instruments and airway devices. For example, it would be appropriate to examine the ease of insertion of Supreme™ LMA, when compared with ProSeal™ LMA. Notwithstanding, a common mistake is the tendency to be focused on the data aimed to be collected (the “stated” objective), rather than the question that needs to be answered (the “latent” objective).[ 1 4 ] In one clinical trial, authors stated: “we compared the Supreme™ and ProSeal™ LMAs in infants by measuring their performance characteristics, including insertion features, ventilation parameters, induced changes in haemodynamics, and rates of postoperative complications”.[ 10 ] Here, the research question has been centered on the measurements (insertion characteristics, haemodynamic variables, LMA insertion characteristics, ventilation parameters) rather than the clinical problem that needs to be addressed (is Supreme™ LMA easier to insert than ProSeal™ LMA?).

Comparators in clinical research can also be pharmacological (e.g., gold standard or placebo) or nonpharmacological. Typically, not more than two comparator groups are included in a clinical trial. Multiple comparisons should be generally avoided, unless there is enough statistical power to address the end points of interest, and statistical analyses have been adjusted for multiple testing. For instance, in the aforementioned study of Metterlein et al .,[ 15 ] authors compared five supraglottic airway devices by recruiting only 10--12 participants per group. In spite of the authors' recommendation of using two supraglottic devices based on the results of the study, there was no mention of statistical adjustments for multiple comparisons, and given the small sample size, larger clinical trials will undoubtedly be needed to confirm or refute these findings.[ 15 ]

A clear formulation of the primary outcome results of vital importance in clinical research, as the primary statistical analyses, including the sample size calculation (and therefore, the estimation of the effect size and statistical power), will be derived from the main outcome of interest. While it is clear that using more than one primary outcome would not be appropriate, it would be equally inadequate to include multiple point measurements of the same variable as the primary outcome (e.g., visual analogue scale for pain at 1, 2, 6, and 12 h postoperatively).

Composite outcomes, in which multiple primary endpoints are combined, may make it difficult to draw any conclusions based on the study findings. For example, in a clinical trial, 200 children undergoing ophthalmic surgery were recruited to explore the incidence of respiratory adverse events, when comparing desflurane with sevoflurane, following the removal of flexible LMA during the emergence of the anaesthesia. The primary outcome was the number of respiratory events, including breath holding, coughing, secretions requiring suction, laryngospasm, bronchospasm, and mild desaturation.[ 16 ] Should authors had claimed a significant difference between these anaesthetic volatiles, it would have been important to elucidate whether those differences were due to serious adverse events, like laryngospasm or bronchospasm, or the results were explained by any of the other events (e.g., secretions requiring suction). While it is true that clinical trials evaluating the occurrence of adverse events like laryngospasm/bronchospasm,[ 16 17 ] or life-threating complications following a tracheal intubation (e.g., inadvertent oesophageal placement, dental damage or injury of the larynx/pharynx)[ 14 ] are almost invariably underpowered, because the incidence of such events is expected to be low, subjective outcomes like coughing or secretions requiring suction should be avoided, as they are highly dependent on the examiner's criteria.[ 16 ]

Secondary outcomes are useful to document potential side effects (e.g., gastric insufflation after placing a supraglottic device), and evaluate the adherence (say, airway leak pressure) and safety of the intervention (for instance, occurrence, or laryngospasm/bronchospasm).[ 17 ] Nevertheless, the problem of addressing multiple secondary outcomes without the adequate statistical power is habitual in medical literature. A good illustration of this issue can be found in a study evaluating the performance of two supraglottic devices in 50 anaesthetised infants and neonates, whereby authors could not draw any conclusions in regard to potential differences in the occurrence of complications, because the sample size calculated made the study underpowered to explore those differences.[ 17 ]

Among PICOT components, the time frame is the most likely to be omitted or inappropriate.[ 1 12 ] There are two key aspects of the time component that need to be clearly specified in the research question: the time of measuring the outcome variables (e.g. visual analogue scale for pain at 1, 2, 6, and 12 h postoperatively), and the duration of each measurement (when indicated). The omission of these details in the study protocol might lead to substantial differences in the methodology used. For instance, if a study is designed to compare the insertion times of three different supraglottic devices, and researchers do not specify the exact moment of LMA insertion in the clinical trial protocol (i.e., at the anaesthetic induction after reaching a BIS index < 60), placing an LMA with insufficient depth of anaesthesia would have compromised the internal validity of the results, because inserting a supraglottic device in those patients would have resulted in failed attempts and longer insertion times.[ 10 ]

FINER CRITERIA

A well-elaborated research question may not necessarily be a good question. The proposed study also requires being achievable from both ethical and realistic perspectives, interesting and useful to the clinical practice, and capable to formulate new hypotheses, that may contribute to the generation of knowledge. Researchers have developed an effective way to convey the message of how to build a good research question, that is usually recalled under the acronym of FINER (feasible, interesting, novel, ethical and relevant).[ 5 6 7 ] Table 2 highlights the main characteristics of FINER criteria.[ 7 ]

Novelty and relevance

Although it is clear that any research project should commence with an accurate literature interpretation, in many instances it represents the start and the end of the research: the reader will soon realise that the answer to several questions can be easily found in the published literature.[ 5 ] When the question overcomes the test of a thorough literature review, the project may become novel (there is a gap in the knowledge, and therefore, there is a need for new evidence on the topic) and relevant (the paper may contribute to change the clinical practice). In this context, it is important to distinguish the difference between statistical significance and clinical relevance: in the aforementioned study of Oba et al .,[ 10 ] despite the means of insertion times were reported as significant for the Supreme™ LMA, as compared with ProSeal™ LMA, the difference found in the insertion times (528 vs. 486 sec, respectively), although reported as significant, had little or no clinical relevance.[ 10 ] Conversely, a statistically significant difference of 12 sec might be of clinical relevance in neonates weighing <5 kg.[ 17 ] Thus, statistical tests must be interpreted in the context of a clinically meaningful effect size, which should be previously defined by the researcher.

Feasibility and ethical aspects

Among FINER criteria, there are two potential barriers that may prevent the successful conduct of the project and publication of the manuscript: feasibility and ethical aspects. These obstacles are usually related to the target population, as discussed above. Feasibility refers not only to the budget but also to the complexity of the design, recruitment strategy, blinding, adequacy of the sample size, measurement of the outcome, time of follow-up of participants, and commitment of clinicians, among others.[ 3 7 ] Funding, as a component of feasibility, may also be implicated in the ethical principles of clinical research, because the choice of the primary study question may be markedly influenced by the specific criteria demanded in the interest of potential funders.

Discussing ethical issues with local committees is compulsory, as rules applied might vary among countries.[ 18 ] Potential risks and benefits need to be carefully weighed, based upon the four principles of respect for autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence, and justice.[ 19 ] Although many of these issues may be related to the population target (e.g., conducting a clinical trial in patients with ongoing cardiopulmonary resuscitation would be inappropriate, as would be anaesthetising patients undergoing elective LASER treatment for condylomas, to examine the performance of supraglottic airway devices),[ 14 15 ] ethical conflicts may also arise from the intervention (particularly those involving the occurrence of side effects or complications, and their potential for reversibility), comparison (e.g., use of placebo or sham procedures),[ 19 ] outcome (surrogate outcomes should be considered in lieu of long term outcomes), or time frame (e.g., unnecessary longer exposition to an intervention). Thus, FINER criteria should not be conceived without a concomitant examination of the PICOT checklist, and consequently, PICOT framework and FINER criteria should not be seen as separated components, but rather complementary ingredients of a good research question.

Undoubtedly, no research project can be conducted if it is deemed unfeasible, and most institutional review boards would not be in a position to approve a work with major ethical problems. Nonetheless, whether or not the findings are interesting, is a subjective matter. Engaging the attention of readers also depends upon a number of factors, including the manner of presenting the problem, the background of the topic, the intended audience, and the reader's expectations. Furthermore, the interest is usually linked to the novelty and relevance of the topic, and it is worth nothing that editors and peer reviewers of high-impact medical journals are usually reluctant to accept any publication, if there is no novelty inherent to the research hypothesis, or there is a lack of relevance in the results.[ 11 ] Nevertheless, a considerable number of papers have been published without any novelty or relevance in the topic addressed. This is probably reflected in a recent survey, according to which only a third of respondents declared to have read thoroughly the most recent papers downloaded, and at least half of those manuscripts remained unread.[ 20 ] The same study reported that up to one-third of papers examined remained uncited after 5 years of publication, and only 20% of papers accounted for 80% of the citations.[ 20 ]

Formulating a good research question can be fascinating, albeit challenging, even for experienced investigators. While it is clear that clinical experience in combination with the accurate interpretation of literature and teamwork are essential to develop new ideas, the formulation of a clinical problem usually requires the compliance with PICOT framework in conjunction with FINER criteria, in order to translate a clinical dilemma into a researchable question. Working in the right environment with the adequate support of experienced researchers, will certainly make a difference in the generation of knowledge. By doing this, a lot of time will be saved in the search of the primary study question, and undoubtedly, there will be more chances to become a successful researcher.

Financial support and sponsorship

Conflicts of interest.

There are no conflicts of interest.

• Cited Here |
• PubMed | CrossRef
• View Full Text | PubMed | CrossRef

Clinical protocols; medical education; medical writing; research design

• + Favorites
• View in Gallery

Readers Of this Article Also Read

Spotting the artificial intelligence mask: detecting articles written by..., a well-formulated research question: the foundation stone of good research, impact on awareness and knowledge of resuscitation by structured training of..., sample size calculation: basic principles, literature search for research planning and identification of research problem.

CRJU 202: Research Methods in Criminology and Criminal Justice

Questions to address in evaluating the resource.

• Finding Scholarly Articles
• Finding a Known Item

Rodda, J., & Beichner, D. (2017). Identifying programming needs of women detainees in a jail environment. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation , 56(6), 373–393. https://doi.org/10.1080/10509674.2017.1339161

Read through the information provided on the article's record page . Then, open the article by clicking the PDF Full Text link . Skim through it and respond to the following questions:

1. What are some keywords on the record page (in the article’s abstract, subject terms, or author supplied keywords) you might use to search for other articles on this topic. 

2. What leads you to believe that the journal & article are scholarly, if at all? Consider and respond to different characteristics such as authors; article format; references; etc. 

3. How did the authors gather their data -- what methodology did they use? 

• Next: Finding Scholarly Articles >>
• Last Updated: Aug 22, 2024 1:11 PM
• URL: https://guides.library.sc.edu/crju202

• Advanced search

Advanced Search

Reducing filamin A restores cortical synaptic connectivity and early social communication following cellular mosaicism in ASD pathways

• Find this author on Google Scholar
• Find this author on PubMed
• Search for this author on this site
• Info & Metrics

Communication in the form of non-verbal, social vocalization, or crying is evolutionary conserved in mammals and is impaired early in human infants that are later diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). Defects in infant vocalization have been proposed as an early sign of ASD that may exacerbate ASD development. However, the neural mechanisms associated with early communicative deficits in ASD are not known. Here, we expressed a constitutively active mutant of Rheb (Rheb S16H ), which is known to upregulate two ASD core pathways, mTOR complex 1 (mTORC1) and ERK1/2, in layer (L) 2/3 pyramidal neurons of the neocortex of mice of either sex. We found that cellular mosaic expression of Rheb S16H in L2/3 pyramidal neurons altered the production of isolation calls from neonatal mice. This was accompanied by an expected misplacement of neurons and dendrite overgrowth, along with an unexpected increase in spine density and length, which was associated with increased excitatory synaptic activity. This contrasted with the known decrease in spine density in Rheb S16H neurons of one-month-old mice. Reducing the levels of the actin crosslinking and adaptor protein filamin A (FLNA), known to be increased downstream of ERK1/2, attenuated dendrite overgrowth and fully restored spine properties, synaptic connectivity, and the production of pup isolation calls. These findings suggest that upper-layer cortical pyramidal neurons contribute to communicative deficits in a condition known to affect two core ASD pathways and that these mechanisms are regulated by FLNA.

Significance Statement An infant’s cry is a form of evolutionarily conserved social communication that is altered in ASD and has been proposed as an early sign of ASD. However, the neural substrate of early communicative deficits is not known. We show that cellular mosaic expression of a constitutively active Rheb, known to upregulate two core ASD pathways, selectively in upper-layer neocortical pyramidal neurons, alters the production of pup isolation calls and synaptic connectivity. These defects were prevented by reducing the expression of the adaptor protein FLNA. This underscores the importance of a specific neuronal substrate responsible for communicative deficits and its regulation by FLNA.

the authors have no conflict of interest.

This work was supported by DoD TS190074 TSC program and the Brain Research Foundation 2022 Scientific Innovations Award (Bordey) and NIH F32 NS123002 (Binder).

↵ * : co-corresponding authors

SfN exclusive license .

Member Log In

Log in using your username and password, purchase access.

Thank you for sharing this Journal of Neuroscience article.

NOTE: We request your email address only to inform the recipient that it was you who recommended this article, and that it is not junk mail. We do not retain these email addresses.

Citation Manager Formats

• EndNote (tagged)
• EndNote 8 (xml)
• RefWorks Tagged
• Ref Manager

• Tweet Widget
• Facebook Like
• Google Plus One

Jump to section

Responses to this article, jump to comment:, related articles, cited by..., more in this toc section, research articles.

• Musicianship and prominence of inter-hemispheric connectivity determine two different pathways to atypical language dominance
• Pupil-linked arousal modulates precision of stimulus representation in cortex
• Proper Frequency of Perinatal Retinal Waves is Essential for The Precise Wiring of Visual Axons in Non-Image Forming Nuclei

Neurobiology of Disease

• ELP1 , the gene mutated in familial dysautonomia, is required for normal enteric nervous system development and maintenance, and for gut epithelium homeostasis.
• Cerebral Gray Matter May Not Explain Sleep Slow-Wave Characteristics after Severe Brain Injury
• Synchronized photoactivation of T4K rhodopsin causes a chromophore-dependent retinal degeneration that is moderated by interaction with phototransduction cascade components.