Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
6/22/2016
1
Constructing Research Proposals, Abstracts, and Publishable Papers:
Nuts and Bolts…..
Nancy S. Redeker, PhD, RN, FAHA, FAAN
Beatrice Renfield Term Professor of Nursing
Editor, Heart & Lung, the Journal of Acute & Critical Care
Objectives
At the conclusion of this presentation, participants will:
• Describe effective strategies for preparing abstracts, publications and research proposals
• Explain common pitfalls and how to address them
Personal Resources Needed to be Successful
• Perseverance******************
• Sense of humor
• Openness to new ideas
• Tolerance for criticism
• Willingness to negotiate
• Ethical principle
• Organization
• Knowledge/education
• Work ethic
• Commitment to team work, interdependence
6/22/2016
2
“Writing is easy. All you have to do is stare at a blank sheet of paper until drops of
blood form on your forehead."— Gene Fowler (1890-1960)
General Guidelines: Abstracts, Papers, Research Proposals..
• Follow directions
• Clear, concise writing
• Good organization – use outlines!
• Professional writing style
– Avoid colloquialism, informal language, jargon
– Use active voice whenever possible
• Appropriate fit with the focus of the journal, funder, etc.
• Adhere to ethical principles PAPERS
6/22/2016
3
Choose the Focus of the Paper
• Original research
• Review
– Systematic reviews: Various types
• Clinical topic
• Policy
• Theoretical/concept
• Editorial/opinion
• BE CLEAR ABOUT THE PURPOSE
Journal Selection
• Disciplinary/interdisciplinary perspective – audience?
• Promotion/tenure criteria
• Peer reviewed vs. non peer reviewed
• Impact factor
• Format, style, length
• Focus: research/clinical/policy
• Online vs. print/online
• Audience
• Open access vs. traditional
Strategies for success
• Good match with journal
– Topic
– Style
– Expertise level
• Set aside consistent time for writing
• Be organized
• Seek & accommodate feedback
• Volunteer to be a journal reviewer
• Use a bibliographic database (e.g., Endnote/RefWorks)
• Write the results first
• Use an editor
6/22/2016
4
Traditional and Open-Access Publishing
• Federal requirement: PMCID numbers for open access
• Traditional Model
– Payment: Subscriptions (library/individuals)
– Criticism: One has to pay for the information
– Papers only freely available after a year or more
• Open-Access
– Payment: Author pays up to $6000
– Paper immediately available to the public
– Variable peer review quality
– Predatory publishing emerginghttp://scholarlyoa.com/2015/01/02/bealls-list-of-predatory-publishers-2015/
Publishing Ethics
• Plagiarism
• Authorship
• Duplicate Publication
• “Salami” publication
• Competing financial Interests
• Conflict of interest
• Clinical Trial Registration
• International Council of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE)
http://www.icmje.org
Common Mistakes
• Lack of time
• Procrastination
• Lack of organization
• Poorly developed writing skills
• Lack of well developed idea
• Poor organization
• Poor fit with journal content and focus
• Failure to edit
• Lack of collaborators’ input
6/22/2016
5
Addressing Critiques
• Manage your emotional response
• Reconcile divergent reviews
• Edit carefully
• Systematically address the comments
• Defend your ideas when it is justified
• Write a cogent letter
• Persevere!
How to be a good journal reviewer
• Critical thinking, thoughtful
• Knowledgeable
• Clinical issue
• Content
• Methods
• Good writing skills
• Editing skills Nancy S. Redeker, PhD, RN, FAHA, FAAN
Editor
http://www.heartandlung.org
6/22/2016
6
RESEARCH PROPOSALS
Research proposals
• Plan/outline for the study
• Presents the case – “sells” the project
– Funders
– Human subjects committees
– Academic advisors
– Community of patients and/or providers
Research Proposal Components
• Abstract
• Aims
• Research Plan
• Budget
• Biosketches of Investigators
• Available Facilities and Resources
• Human subjects considerations
• NIH:
– Innovation
– Inclusion of minorities, children, women
– Public health relevance
6/22/2016
7
Successful Proposals
• Significant problem
• Innovative idea – approach, conceptualization of problem
• Fit with funders’ interests
• Rigorous research plan
• Access to appropriate resources
– Personnel with expertise
– Institutional commitment
– Budget
– Other resources: Facilities, Programs
– Human subjects
• Realistic and feasible approach
Strategies for Success
• Budget your time
– “Proposal writing is like a sponge” (M.Grey)
• Carefully follow the guidelines
• Make connections with the funder
• Have others review
• Edit, edit, edit
• Develop partnerships
– Expertise
– Mentorship
• Access to resources
Team Building
• Good research is not a solo enterprise
• Develop and nurture a strong team
– Other scientists
– Clinicians
– Mentors
– Patients
– Families
6/22/2016
8
Purpose
• What is the goal of your study?
– Be explicit
• Include measureable specific aims
• Hypotheses or research questions
• Example….
Cognitive Behavioral Therapy forInsomnia in Stable Heart Failure (NR011387)
Redeker NS, Andrews L, Cline J, Mohsenin V, Jacoby, D, Anderson G
• Evaluate the feasibility and preliminary efficacy of CBT-I for patients with stable HF
– Develop and manualize treatment and attention-control conditions
– Conduct pilot 2 group RCT: Group-based 8 week intervention (4 meetings, 4 telephone calls)
• CBT-I
• Attention-control: Heart failure education
– Evaluate preliminary efficacy: insomnia, sleep, daytime symptoms, functional performance
Significance
• Why is the study important?
• How many people have the problem to be addressed?
– Epidemiology?
• How will your study change science, practice, or patient outcomes?****
• If you are successful, what will be different?
• How does the study fit with the funder’s priorities?
• Use direct and bold language
• Make the case… “sell” the study
6/22/2016
9
Background
• What has previously been done?
– Focus on last 5 years
– Use primary evidence-based references
• What gaps will your study address?
• Be focused
• Be critical
• Synthesize the literature
Organizing framework
• Usually graphical + narrative
• Roadmap
• Based on theory, concept and/or empirical data
• Helps the reviewer to visualize the study and its concepts
• Example….
Functional Performance
6 Min walk Test
Daily activity (Actigraph)
SF-36 Physical Function
Fatigue
Excessive
Daytime
sleepiness
Mood
Disturbance
Demographic
Variables
Age
Gender
Clinical Covariates
Ejection fraction
NYHA Functional
Class
Atrial fibrillation
Co-morbidity
Medications
Sleep Disorder Variables
Apnea/Hypopnea Index
Central Apnea/AHI Index
Time @ O2 Sat < 90%
Periodic Limb Movement
Index
Sleep Disturbance
Continuity
Duration
Quality
Insomnia Sx
Nocturnal Symptoms
Parox Noct Dyspnea
Nocturia
Orthopnea
R01 NR 008022
6/22/2016
10
Self Management of Sleep
DisturbancePredisposing/Precipitating/
Perpetuating Factors
Genetics/Biology
Primary sleep disorders
Age, Gender
Medical/Psychiatric
Comorbidity/Injury
Medications
Cognitions/Beliefs/Perceptions
Behavior/stress
Outcomes
Self-Management
Daytime Function
Daytime
sleepiness/Symptoms
Morbidity – injury, illness
Mortality
Quality of Life
Health Care
Utilization/Costs
Sleep Disturbance
Preliminary Studies
• Your own and your collaborator’s work
• Make the case for
– The approach to the problem
– The team’s experience
– Pilot datas
• Use tables for clarification.
• Include collaborators who complement your experience
CBT-I (N = 25) Attention-Control (N = 19) P-value
Pre Post Pre Post
Fatigue 28.16 (12.74) 19.94 (10.33) 23.41 (11.21) 24.38 (9.94)
Pre/post (paired t-test) p = .0268 p = .9003 .1365
Sleepiness 7.16 (5.16) 6.56 (4.15) 7.65 (4.65) 6.84 (4.48) .6549
Pre/post (paired t-test) p = .4466 p = .3612
Depression 13.72 (9.24) 12.33 (11.20) 16.76 (10.47) 15.00 (8.17) .6192
Pre/post (paired t-test) p = .4466 p = .3612
Anxiety (STAI) 36.27 (12.01) 34.82 (14.41) 37.91 (13.80) 37.13 (10.47) .7510
Pre/post (paired t-test) p = .4170 p = .7190
Physical Funct Comp (SF-36) 26.86 (2.02) 27.46 (1.96) 27.11 (2.24) 27.11 (2.19) .3517
Pre/post (paired t-test) p = .0106 p = .9167
* Analyses controlled for age and comorbidity
Effects of CBT-I on Symptoms and Daytime Functional Performance
6/22/2016
11
Methods: Key components
• Design
• Setting
• Sample
• Procedures
• Variables and measures – reliability/validity
• Data Analysis
– Qualitative or Quantitative
• Realistically discuss problems and strategies you will use to address them
Setting
• Describe characteristics of patient population and providers as relevant
– Number
– Demographics
• Evidence of support for access
– Letters if grant allows
– Be specific
Sample
• Inclusion criteria
• Exclusion criteria
• How will participants be identified and recruited?
-Where?
By whom?
Methods?
• Sample size
– Power analysis
– Effect size, power, alpha level
– Rationale even if qualitative study
6/22/2016
12
Inclusion/Exclusion Criteria: Example
• Stable NYHA Class II-IV HF
– No hospital admissions within 4 weeks of enrollment
– No unstable medical or psychiatric disorders
• Insomnia severity index > 7
• No more than mild sleep disordered breathing or adherent to CPAP (at least 6 hours/night > nights/week)
• Exclusions: renal failure, cognitive impairment, seizure disorder
Procedures
• Describe in detail so others could replicate
• If an intervention:
– Describe it in detail
– Describe control group or usual care in detail
• Should be replicable by others
Recruitmentvisit
(Clinic)
Assessment visit
(Clinic)
Home (3 days)
Conclusion of Actigraph
Assessment
Physician /NP screen and referralExplain studyConsentRe-screening
Health and sleep historyMedical record review6 Minute WalkQuestionnaires
Actigraph –3 daysDiaries – 3 days
NPSG – unattended in home environment
Protocol
6/22/2016
13
Variables Measures
Self-report sleep quality, duration, latency, efficiency
Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI
Insomnia Severity Insomnia Severity Index (ISI)
Sleep duration, latency efficiency Wrist actigraphy (Respironics Minimitter Actiwatch) – 2 weeks
Depression Centers for the Epidemiology of Depression Scale (CESD)
Fatigue Global Fatigue Scale
Anxiety Spielberger State Anxiety Scale
Excessive Daytime Sleepiness Epworth Sleepiness Scale
Functional Performance MOS SF-36
Data Analysis
• Quantitative
– Address in order of the study aims/hypotheses
– Use a statistician!
• Qualitative
– Methods to assure rigor and trustworthiness of data collection and analysis
6/22/2016
14
Timeline
• Provide sufficient detail so that reviewers can understand the progression
• Be realistic
• Don’t over commit
Timeline: Example
Activity Quarters of Year 1
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4
Hire research assistant X
Recruit subjects X
Collect Data X X
Analyze Data X
Present/publish findings X
Writing style
• Use active voice
• Avoid anthroporphisms, e.g., “the study will…”
• Never assume that reviewers are familiar with the field, but don’t talk down to them.
• Use short clear sentences
• Use topic sentences and summaries
• Avoid jargon and abbreviations as much as possible
• Use plenty of white space
• Avoid excessive underlining or bolding
• Use recommended type face, spacing, margins
6/22/2016
15
Common pitfalls
• Lack of clear purpose, aims, hypotheses
• Lack of significant problem (or insufficient explanation that it is significant)
• Lack of innovation
• Under-powered sample
• Poorly chosen or unreliable measures
• Unsophisticated or inappropriate statistical methods
• Inconsistency between scope of work and available resources
Things that make reviewers mad
• Unclear or cluttered writing
• Lack of clear ideas
• Lack of familiarity with literature or other work in the field.
• Typos
• Lack of organization
• Having to look for things
• Over-com
Submitting the Grant
• Make connections with program staff
• Submit with a clear cover letter
– NIH: institute, study section
• Be on time
• Edit, edit, edit
6/22/2016
16
After submission
• Take a (short) break
• Keep working on other things
• Revise and resubmit
– Be comprehensive in response
– If disagree with reviewers, say so, but justify
SCIENTIFIC ABSTRACTS
Abstract Formats
• Follow directions!
• Explicit purpose
• Brief methods
• Key results
• Conclusions link with results
6/22/2016
17
