- Email: [email protected]
Evaluating published research: Problem identification and statement of purpose
( RESEARCH FOR THE CLINICIAN
J
Evaluating Published Research: Problem Identification and Statement of Purpose
Q
uality clinical practice is dependent upon identification and implementation of efficacious techniques and methods. Careful and analytical perusal of medical literature validates traditional treatment methods and introduces new concepts. As consumers of medical literature, clinicians must be able to triage the voluminous amount of material with which they are besieged. Blindly assuming efficacy because a gadget is marketed, a technique is touted by a colleague, or an article is published is both naive and dangerous . It is through understanding the basic elements involved in designing, implementing, and reporting research endeavors that published works may be evaluated. As noted in the previous column, a literature review is a prelude to identification of the research problem and statement of purpose of a study. Although frequently confused and sometimes erroneously substituted for one another, the research problem and statement of purpose are two distinct, but interrelated, entities. A well-organized literature review leads the reader in a logical manner to the reason for inquiry. The problem or rationale for a study is brought into focus within a contextual framework, through analysiS of previously published works, including comparison of pertinent controversial issues, discussion of advantages and disadvantages, and identification of inconsistencies or omissions. While some published studies only imply what the research problem is, a less confusing, and therefore preferable, approach is to state the problem clearly and concisely . Identification of the research problem usually precedes the statement of purpose of the study and is often used to summarize the literature review. Research problems identified recently published articles in the Journal of Hand Therapy include
1 Jansen CW, Minerbo G: A comparison between early dynamically controlled mobilization and immobilization after flexor tendon repair in Zone 2 of the hand: Preliminary results. Hand Ther 3:20-25, 1990, p 20.
160
JOURNAL OF HAND THERAPY
lack of control of torque during passive range of motion measurement; development of secondary defects in intrinsic paralysis; lack of functional motion after tendon repair; cumbersome, time-consuming, and expensive monofilament kits; lack of common terminology for prehension patterns; and discrepancy between clinical experience and literature reports regarding sequence of recovery of repaired peripheral nerves. Emanating from identification of the research problem, and defining the parameters of the study, a statement of purpose is more specific and detailed than is a statement of the problem. Unfortunately, many articles reiterate the research problem or substitute it for a statement of purpose. An accurate statement of purpose should provide boundaries as well as direction and intent for the study. Jansen and Minerbo 1 provide a good example of the distinct differences between problem and purpose. They identify their research problem in this manner: "Flexor tendon injuries in Zone 2 . . . continue to pose a challenge ... as often a residual lack of function of the affected finger and hand remains." Their statement of purpose reflects the defined problem and also establishes very specific objectives: "to compare the effectiveness of a program of early dynamically controlled mobilization with a program of immobilization utilizing ... [a] modified Kleinert splint." The triad of literature review, identification of research problem, and statement of purpose introduces the reader to the study by providing background information, analyzing issues, and indicating objectives and parameters of the research endeavor. Confusion or omission of any of these three components may indicate a poorly conceived undertaking. If the authors themselves are unable to define their rationale and subsequent course of action accurately, we, as consumers of the resultant literature, must be cautious of their conclusions and recommendations. Elaine Ewing Fess, MS, OTR, FAOTA
J
Evaluating Published Research: Problem Identification and Statement of Purpose
Q
uality clinical practice is dependent upon identification and implementation of efficacious techniques and methods. Careful and analytical perusal of medical literature validates traditional treatment methods and introduces new concepts. As consumers of medical literature, clinicians must be able to triage the voluminous amount of material with which they are besieged. Blindly assuming efficacy because a gadget is marketed, a technique is touted by a colleague, or an article is published is both naive and dangerous . It is through understanding the basic elements involved in designing, implementing, and reporting research endeavors that published works may be evaluated. As noted in the previous column, a literature review is a prelude to identification of the research problem and statement of purpose of a study. Although frequently confused and sometimes erroneously substituted for one another, the research problem and statement of purpose are two distinct, but interrelated, entities. A well-organized literature review leads the reader in a logical manner to the reason for inquiry. The problem or rationale for a study is brought into focus within a contextual framework, through analysiS of previously published works, including comparison of pertinent controversial issues, discussion of advantages and disadvantages, and identification of inconsistencies or omissions. While some published studies only imply what the research problem is, a less confusing, and therefore preferable, approach is to state the problem clearly and concisely . Identification of the research problem usually precedes the statement of purpose of the study and is often used to summarize the literature review. Research problems identified recently published articles in the Journal of Hand Therapy include
1 Jansen CW, Minerbo G: A comparison between early dynamically controlled mobilization and immobilization after flexor tendon repair in Zone 2 of the hand: Preliminary results. Hand Ther 3:20-25, 1990, p 20.
160
JOURNAL OF HAND THERAPY
lack of control of torque during passive range of motion measurement; development of secondary defects in intrinsic paralysis; lack of functional motion after tendon repair; cumbersome, time-consuming, and expensive monofilament kits; lack of common terminology for prehension patterns; and discrepancy between clinical experience and literature reports regarding sequence of recovery of repaired peripheral nerves. Emanating from identification of the research problem, and defining the parameters of the study, a statement of purpose is more specific and detailed than is a statement of the problem. Unfortunately, many articles reiterate the research problem or substitute it for a statement of purpose. An accurate statement of purpose should provide boundaries as well as direction and intent for the study. Jansen and Minerbo 1 provide a good example of the distinct differences between problem and purpose. They identify their research problem in this manner: "Flexor tendon injuries in Zone 2 . . . continue to pose a challenge ... as often a residual lack of function of the affected finger and hand remains." Their statement of purpose reflects the defined problem and also establishes very specific objectives: "to compare the effectiveness of a program of early dynamically controlled mobilization with a program of immobilization utilizing ... [a] modified Kleinert splint." The triad of literature review, identification of research problem, and statement of purpose introduces the reader to the study by providing background information, analyzing issues, and indicating objectives and parameters of the research endeavor. Confusion or omission of any of these three components may indicate a poorly conceived undertaking. If the authors themselves are unable to define their rationale and subsequent course of action accurately, we, as consumers of the resultant literature, must be cautious of their conclusions and recommendations. Elaine Ewing Fess, MS, OTR, FAOTA