PUBLICATION

PROPOSAL Stage 3
Stage 2
QUESTION
Stage
1
How to identify a research idea

Define a research question

How to identify whether it has been

studied already using the literature

Refine a research question

 A research proposal is intended to convince others
that you have:
 A worthwhile research project
 The capability and the work-plan to complete it
 Allows problems to be defined and managed before
start

 Provides guidance while the research in process

 Provides documentary evidence of planned analysis

Ask a FINER Question

Critically Review What is Known

Write a Hypothesis/Aims:

Choose a Study Design:

Write a proposal
 Feasibility  Interesting

1. Adequate number of 1. Something to be

subjects passionate about
2. Adequate technical 2. Something to be an
expertise expert in
3. Affordable in time 3. Something that
and money makes a difference
4. Manageable in scope in the world
 Novelty  Ethical

1. Confirms or refutes 1. Respect for persons

previous findings (Informed consent)
2. Extends previous 2. Beneficence
findings (Risk/Benefit
3. Provides new Analysis)
findings 3. Justice (Selection of
subjects).
 Relevance

1. To scientific knowledge
2. To clinic, public health or health policy
3. To future research directions
1. Cover page (Title)
2. Table of Contents
3. Proposal Summary
4. Introduction
5. Literature Review
6. Material and Methods
7. Data Analysis
 An effective title not only pricks the reviewer's
interest, but also predisposes him/her favorably
towards the proposal.

 It should be concise and descriptive.

 It should clearly indicate the independent and

dependent variables.
 Table of contents
1. Cover page (Title) 1
2. Table of Contents 2
3. Proposal Summary
4. Introduction
5. Literature Review
6. Material and Methods
7. Data Analysis
 It is a brief concise summary of the WHOLE project.
 It is the first impression a reviewer gets of an
application worth!
 It should include :
 unique and creative idea
 research question
 rationale for the study
 hypothesis (if any)
 methods
 Tips:
 Do not include unnecessary detail
 make each phrase count.
 Write and rewrite and refine the abstract to maximize
clarity.
 Give it to lots of peers to read
 The main purpose is to provide the necessary
background or context for your research
problem.
 It should generally covers the following
elements:
A) What has already been accomplished in the field?
B) What is the rationale behind the study? Why is it worth
doing?
C) Brief description of the proposed study.
D) What gaps would the study fill in the area of
investigation?
E) What relevant work has been done by the investigators (or
others) to indicate the expected productivity of the proposal?
F) Provide preliminary data, if any.
G) The expected benefits and adverse effects to patients, if
applicable.
 This section justifies and builds the case for the project.
 This section puts the project into context by providing
essential background information for the content area,
showing how the proposed project builds on previous
work, and identifying gaps in previous knowledge.
 For each background area presented, it is important to
show exactly how the background directly links with
the proposed project.
 This section should naturally progress from the
description of the current state of knowledge to the gap
that the proposed research will fill.
 Is the significance/importance of the work evident? Is
the work innovative?
 Does it contribute substantially to previous work in
the field?
 Is the need for the study (or all aspects of the study)
well-justified?
 Is the significance overstated?
 Is there extraneous information?
 Does the study address an important problem?
 This section should summarize the principal
investigator’s
(or co-investigators’) previous work related to the
proposed project.
 This important section warrants space and detail.
 This section allows the investigator to convince the
reviewers about the research team’s the expertise and
experience to carry out this work and suitable
groundwork has been done.
 Reviewers are particularly interested in detailed
description of preliminary or pilot work that is directly
linked to the proposed study.
 This is the most important section of the grant.
 They should explore the issues that you intend to
consider, and how they will impact on the purpose of
the research as a whole.
 They must :
 be stated as clearly and as specifically as possible.
 clearly articulated the hypotheses.
 appear balanced.
 not overly ambitious or unrealistic?

 Tip: Having one very important question presented

as one clear hypothesis is the best.
Primary:
1. To compare recurrence-free survival in patients with
cancer Y on drug X compared to standard treatment.
2. To estimate the sensitivity of a new minimally
invasive approach for detecting cancer.
3. To investigate whether presence of genetic variant X
is associated with Parkinson’s disease.
4. To investigate whether a new type of TKA surgery
leads to shorter operating times
Secondary:
1. 1. To compare drug X to standard treatment. Quality
of Life as measured by the Short-Form 36 at 3m
after start of treatment.
2. 2. To compare the proportions of patients
experiencing at least one of the following side
effects.
 The literature review serves several important
functions:
 Demonstrates your knowledge of the research problem.
 Shows your ability to critically evaluate relevant
literature information.
 Ensures that you are not "reinventing the wheel".
 Gives credits to those who have laid the groundwork for
your research.
 Convinces your reader that your proposed research will
make a significant and substantial contribution to the
literature (i.e., resolving an important theoretical issue
or filling a major gap in the literature).
8.Research Project Design and Methodology

 Project Design  Data collection

 Methodology  Ethical Considerations
 Population  Variables to be
 Case identification measured
 Inclusion criteria  Outcome measures
 Exclusion Criteria  Statistical Analysis
 Appendix
 This part shows the plan to tackle the research problem.
 It should provide the work plan and describe the
activities necessary for the completion of your project.
 The method section typically consists of the following
sections:
 Design
– Is it a questionnaire study or a laboratory experiment? What kind
of design do you choose?
 Subjects or participants
– Who will take part in the study ? What kind of sampling
procedure do you use?
 Instruments
– What kind of measuring instruments or questionnaires do you use?
Why do you choose them? Are they valid and reliable?
 Procedures
– How do you plan to carry out your study? What activities are
involved? How long does it take?
 This section represents the heart of the grant.
 Describe the setting or settings in enough detail so
that reviewers can understand how this setting would
compare or extrapolate to other study settings.
 Inclusions and exclusions criteria need to be well
justified.
 We advise addressing any potential biases and
assuring that these will not invalidate the study
results.
 Provide data and assurance that adequate numbers of
patients will be available for the study in the proposed
setting.
 Data collection/procedures

 Are procedures well-described? Are there quality

assurance measures for data collectors?
 Is there adequate description of study
instruments/measures? Are standardized, validated
measures used?
 Are there concerns about validity or reliability of data
collection methods?
 Are all important study variables described and
collected? Are there extraneous variables that are
never used in subsequent analyses?
 Data Analysis

 Are there sample size or power calculations?

 Are attrition rates/losses provided? Do they appear

realistic/justified? Do anticipated losses threaten the
validity of the study?

 How will missing data and no responses be handled

in analyses?
 9.Work Plan (Time schedule)

 Clearly,
schedule is needed to see
time limit feasibility
 10. References

 A numbered list of complete references, in order of

appearance, should be included here.
 11.References
1. Oh J.M., Park M., Kim S.T., Jung J.Y., Kang Y.G., Choy J.H. Efficient
delivery of anticancer drug MTX through MTX-LDH nanohybrid system. J Phys
Chem Solids. 2006; 67(5):1024–1027.
2. Kong X, Jin L, Wei M, Duan X. Antioxidant drugs intercalated into layered
double hydroxide: structure and vitro release. Appl Clay
Sci. 2010;49(3):324–329.
3. Yang QZ, Yang J, Zhang CK. Synthesis and properties of cordycepin
intercalates of Mg-Al-nitrate layered double hydroxides. Int J
Pharm. 2006;326(1–2):148–152. [PubMed]
4. Burzlaff A, Brethauer S, Kasper C, Jackisch BO, Scheper T. Flow cytom-
etry: interesting tool for studying binding behavior of DNA on inorganic
layered double hydroxide (LDH) Cytometry A.2004;62(1):65–69. [PubMed]
5. Peterson CL, Perry DL, Masood H, et al. Characterization of antacid
compounds containing both aluminum and magnesium. I. Crystalline
powders. Pharm Res. 1993;10(7):998–1004. [PubMed] 11. Choi SJ, Oh JM,
Choy JH. Biocompatible nanoparticles intercalated with anticancer drug for
target delivery: pharmacokinetic and biodis-tribution study. J Nanosci
Nanotechnol. 2010;10(4):2913–2916.[PubMed] dye intercalated into layered
double hydroxides and its controllable luminescence properties. Chem Eng
J. 2010;161(1–2):293–300.
6. Xu Z P, Zeng QH, Lu GQ, Yu AB. Inorganic nanoparticles as
carriers for efficient cellular delivery.Chem Eng
Sci. 2006;61(3):1027–1040.
7. Choi SJ, Oh JM, Choy JH. Human-related application and nanotoxi-
cology of inorganic particles: complementary aspects. J Mater
Chem. 2008;18(6):615–620.
8. Evans DG, Duan X. Preparation of layered double hydroxides and
their applications as additives in polymers, as precursors to magnetic
materials and in biology and medicine. Chemical
Communications.2006;5:485–496. [PubMed]
9. Desigaux L, Belkacem MB, Richard P, et al. Self-assembly and
char-acterization of layered double hydroxide/DNA hybrids. Nano
Lett. 2006;6(2):199–204. [PubMed]
10. Choy JH, Jung JS, Oh JM, et al. Layered double hydroxide as an
efficient drug reservoir for folate
derivatives. Biomaterials. 2004;25(15):3059–3064. [PubMed]
 12.Utilization of Expected Results

 Will your findings form the basis for future health

benefits?

 Will the health of many people improve based on

your findings?

 How will scientific knowledge be advanced?