⊕⊕⊕⊕
⊕⊕⊕◯
⊕⊕◯◯
⊕◯◯◯
We now describe in more detail the five reasons (or domains) for downgrading the certainty of a body of evidence for a specific outcome. In each case, if no reason is found for downgrading the evidence, it should be classified as 'no limitation or not serious' (not important enough to warrant downgrading). If a reason is found for downgrading the evidence, it should be classified as 'serious' (downgrading the certainty rating by one level) or 'very serious' (downgrading the certainty grade by two levels). For non-randomized studies assessed with ROBINS-I, rating down by three levels should be classified as 'extremely' serious.
(1) Risk of bias or limitations in the detailed design and implementation
Our confidence in an estimate of effect decreases if studies suffer from major limitations that are likely to result in a biased assessment of the intervention effect. For randomized trials, these methodological limitations include failure to generate a random sequence, lack of allocation sequence concealment, lack of blinding (particularly with subjective outcomes that are highly susceptible to biased assessment), a large loss to follow-up or selective reporting of outcomes. Chapter 8 provides a discussion of study-level assessments of risk of bias in the context of a Cochrane Review, and proposes an approach to assessing the risk of bias for an outcome across studies as ‘Low’ risk of bias, ‘Some concerns’ and ‘High’ risk of bias for randomized trials. Levels of ‘Low’. ‘Moderate’, ‘Serious’ and ‘Critical’ risk of bias arise for non-randomized studies assessed with ROBINS-I ( Chapter 25 ). These assessments should feed directly into this GRADE domain. In particular, ‘Low’ risk of bias would indicate ‘no limitation’; ‘Some concerns’ would indicate either ‘no limitation’ or ‘serious limitation’; and ‘High’ risk of bias would indicate either ‘serious limitation’ or ‘very serious limitation’. ‘Critical’ risk of bias on ROBINS-I would indicate extremely serious limitations in GRADE. Review authors should use their judgement to decide between alternative categories, depending on the likely magnitude of the potential biases.
Every study addressing a particular outcome will differ, to some degree, in the risk of bias. Review authors should make an overall judgement on whether the certainty of evidence for an outcome warrants downgrading on the basis of study limitations. The assessment of study limitations should apply to the studies contributing to the results in the ‘Summary of findings’ table, rather than to all studies that could potentially be included in the analysis. We have argued in Chapter 7, Section 7.6.2 , that the primary analysis should be restricted to studies at low (or low and unclear) risk of bias where possible.
Table 14.2.a presents the judgements that must be made in going from assessments of the risk of bias to judgements about study limitations for each outcome included in a ‘Summary of findings’ table. A rating of high certainty evidence can be achieved only when most evidence comes from studies that met the criteria for low risk of bias. For example, of the 22 studies addressing the impact of beta-blockers on mortality in patients with heart failure, most probably or certainly used concealed allocation of the sequence, all blinded at least some key groups and follow-up of randomized patients was almost complete (Brophy et al 2001). The certainty of evidence might be downgraded by one level when most of the evidence comes from individual studies either with a crucial limitation for one item, or with some limitations for multiple items. An example of very serious limitations, warranting downgrading by two levels, is provided by evidence on surgery versus conservative treatment in the management of patients with lumbar disc prolapse (Gibson and Waddell 2007). We are uncertain of the benefit of surgery in reducing symptoms after one year or longer, because the one study included in the analysis had inadequate concealment of the allocation sequence and the outcome was assessed using a crude rating by the surgeon without blinding.
(2) Unexplained heterogeneity or inconsistency of results
When studies yield widely differing estimates of effect (heterogeneity or variability in results), investigators should look for robust explanations for that heterogeneity. For instance, drugs may have larger relative effects in sicker populations or when given in larger doses. A detailed discussion of heterogeneity and its investigation is provided in Chapter 10, Section 10.10 and Section 10.11 . If an important modifier exists, with good evidence that important outcomes are different in different subgroups (which would ideally be pre-specified), then a separate ‘Summary of findings’ table may be considered for a separate population. For instance, a separate ‘Summary of findings’ table would be used for carotid endarterectomy in symptomatic patients with high grade stenosis (70% to 99%) in which the intervention is, in the hands of the right surgeons, beneficial, and another (if review authors considered it relevant) for asymptomatic patients with low grade stenosis (less than 30%) in which surgery appears harmful (Orrapin and Rerkasem 2017). When heterogeneity exists and affects the interpretation of results, but review authors are unable to identify a plausible explanation with the data available, the certainty of the evidence decreases.
(3) Indirectness of evidence
Two types of indirectness are relevant. First, a review comparing the effectiveness of alternative interventions (say A and B) may find that randomized trials are available, but they have compared A with placebo and B with placebo. Thus, the evidence is restricted to indirect comparisons between A and B. Where indirect comparisons are undertaken within a network meta-analysis context, GRADE for network meta-analysis should be used (see Chapter 11, Section 11.5 ).
Second, a review may find randomized trials that meet eligibility criteria but address a restricted version of the main review question in terms of population, intervention, comparator or outcomes. For example, suppose that in a review addressing an intervention for secondary prevention of coronary heart disease, most identified studies happened to be in people who also had diabetes. Then the evidence may be regarded as indirect in relation to the broader question of interest because the population is primarily related to people with diabetes. The opposite scenario can equally apply: a review addressing the effect of a preventive strategy for coronary heart disease in people with diabetes may consider studies in people without diabetes to provide relevant, albeit indirect, evidence. This would be particularly likely if investigators had conducted few if any randomized trials in the target population (e.g. people with diabetes). Other sources of indirectness may arise from interventions studied (e.g. if in all included studies a technical intervention was implemented by expert, highly trained specialists in specialist centres, then evidence on the effects of the intervention outside these centres may be indirect), comparators used (e.g. if the comparator groups received an intervention that is less effective than standard treatment in most settings) and outcomes assessed (e.g. indirectness due to surrogate outcomes when data on patient-important outcomes are not available, or when investigators seek data on quality of life but only symptoms are reported). Review authors should make judgements transparent when they believe downgrading is justified, based on differences in anticipated effects in the group of primary interest. Review authors may be aided and increase transparency of their judgements about indirectness if they use Table 14.2.b available in the GRADEpro GDT software (Schünemann et al 2013).
(4) Imprecision of results
When studies include few participants or few events, and thus have wide confidence intervals, review authors can lower their rating of the certainty of the evidence. The confidence intervals included in the ‘Summary of findings’ table will provide readers with information that allows them to make, to some extent, their own rating of precision. Review authors can use a calculation of the optimal information size (OIS) or review information size (RIS), similar to sample size calculations, to make judgements about imprecision (Guyatt et al 2011b, Schünemann 2016). The OIS or RIS is calculated on the basis of the number of participants required for an adequately powered individual study. If the 95% confidence interval excludes a risk ratio (RR) of 1.0, and the total number of events or patients exceeds the OIS criterion, precision is adequate. If the 95% CI includes appreciable benefit or harm (an RR of under 0.75 or over 1.25 is often suggested as a very rough guide) downgrading for imprecision may be appropriate even if OIS criteria are met (Guyatt et al 2011b, Schünemann 2016).
(5) High probability of publication bias
The certainty of evidence level may be downgraded if investigators fail to report studies on the basis of results (typically those that show no effect: publication bias) or outcomes (typically those that may be harmful or for which no effect was observed: selective outcome non-reporting bias). Selective reporting of outcomes from among multiple outcomes measured is assessed at the study level as part of the assessment of risk of bias (see Chapter 8, Section 8.7 ), so for the studies contributing to the outcome in the ‘Summary of findings’ table this is addressed by domain 1 above (limitations in the design and implementation). If a large number of studies included in the review do not contribute to an outcome, or if there is evidence of publication bias, the certainty of the evidence may be downgraded. Chapter 13 provides a detailed discussion of reporting biases, including publication bias, and how it may be tackled in a Cochrane Review. A prototypical situation that may elicit suspicion of publication bias is when published evidence includes a number of small studies, all of which are industry-funded (Bhandari et al 2004). For example, 14 studies of flavanoids in patients with haemorrhoids have shown apparent large benefits, but enrolled a total of only 1432 patients (i.e. each study enrolled relatively few patients) (Alonso-Coello et al 2006). The heavy involvement of sponsors in most of these studies raises questions of whether unpublished studies that suggest no benefit exist (publication bias).
A particular body of evidence can suffer from problems associated with more than one of the five factors listed here, and the greater the problems, the lower the certainty of evidence rating that should result. One could imagine a situation in which randomized trials were available, but all or virtually all of these limitations would be present, and in serious form. A very low certainty of evidence rating would result.
Table 14.2.a Further guidelines for domain 1 (of 5) in a GRADE assessment: going from assessments of risk of bias in studies to judgements about study limitations for main outcomes across studies
|
|
|
|
|
Low risk of bias | Most information is from results at low risk of bias. | Plausible bias unlikely to seriously alter the results. | No apparent limitations. | No serious limitations, do not downgrade. |
Some concerns | Most information is from results at low risk of bias or with some concerns. | Plausible bias that raises some doubt about the results. | Potential limitations are unlikely to lower confidence in the estimate of effect. | No serious limitations, do not downgrade. |
Potential limitations are likely to lower confidence in the estimate of effect. | Serious limitations, downgrade one level. | |||
High risk of bias | The proportion of information from results at high risk of bias is sufficient to affect the interpretation of results. | Plausible bias that seriously weakens confidence in the results. | Crucial limitation for one criterion, or some limitations for multiple criteria, sufficient to lower confidence in the estimate of effect. | Serious limitations, downgrade one level. |
Crucial limitation for one or more criteria sufficient to substantially lower confidence in the estimate of effect. | Very serious limitations, downgrade two levels. |
Table 14.2.b Judgements about indirectness by outcome (available in GRADEpro GDT)
| |||||
|
|
| |||
| Probably yes | Probably no | No | ||
|
|
|
|
Intervention:
Yes | Probably yes | Probably no | No |
|
|
|
|
Comparator:
Direct comparison:
Final judgement about indirectness across domains:
|
|
|
Although NRSI and downgraded randomized trials will generally yield a low rating for certainty of evidence, there will be unusual circumstances in which review authors could ‘upgrade’ such evidence to moderate or even high certainty ( Table 14.3.a ).
Review authors should report the grading of the certainty of evidence in the Results section for each outcome for which this has been performed, providing the rationale for downgrading or upgrading the evidence, and referring to the ‘Summary of findings’ table where applicable.
Table 14.3.a provides a framework and examples for how review authors can justify their judgements about the certainty of evidence in each domain. These justifications should also be included in explanatory notes to the ‘Summary of Findings’ table (see Section 14.1.6.10 ).
Chapter 15, Section 15.6 , describes in more detail how the overall GRADE assessment across all domains can be used to draw conclusions about the effects of the intervention, as well as providing implications for future research.
Table 14.3.a Framework for describing the certainty of evidence and justifying downgrading or upgrading
|
|
|
| Describe the risk of bias based on the criteria used in the risk-of-bias table. | Downgraded because of 10 randomized trials, five did not blind patients and caretakers. |
| Describe the degree of inconsistency by outcome using one or more indicators (e.g. I and P value), confidence interval overlap, difference in point estimate, between-study variance. | Not downgraded because the proportion of the variability in effect estimates that is due to true heterogeneity rather than chance is not important (I = 0%). |
| Describe if the majority of studies address the PICO – were they similar to the question posed? | Downgraded because the included studies were restricted to patients with advanced cancer. |
| Describe the number of events, and width of the confidence intervals. | The confidence intervals for the effect on mortality are consistent with both an appreciable benefit and appreciable harm and we lowered the certainty. |
| Describe the possible degree of publication bias. | 1. The funnel plot of 14 randomized trials indicated that there were several small studies that showed a small positive effect, but small studies that showed no effect or harm may have been unpublished. The certainty of the evidence was lowered. 2. There are only three small positive studies, it appears that studies showing no effect or harm have not been published. There also is for-profit interest in the intervention. The certainty of the evidence was lowered. |
| Describe the magnitude of the effect and the widths of the associate confidence intervals. | Upgraded because the RR is large: 0.3 (95% CI 0.2 to 0.4), with a sufficient number of events to be precise. |
| The studies show a clear relation with increases in the outcome of an outcome (e.g. lung cancer) with higher exposure levels. | Upgraded because the dose-response relation shows a relative risk increase of 10% in never smokers, 15% in smokers of 10 pack years and 20% in smokers of 15 pack years. |
| Describe which opposing plausible biases and confounders may have not been considered. | The estimate of effect is not controlled for the following possible confounders: smoking, degree of education, but the distribution of these factors in the studies is likely to lead to an under-estimate of the true effect. The certainty of the evidence was increased. |
Authors: Holger J Schünemann, Julian PT Higgins, Gunn E Vist, Paul Glasziou, Elie A Akl, Nicole Skoetz, Gordon H Guyatt; on behalf of the Cochrane GRADEing Methods Group (formerly Applicability and Recommendations Methods Group) and the Cochrane Statistical Methods Group
Acknowledgements: Andrew D Oxman contributed to earlier versions. Professor Penny Hawe contributed to the text on adverse effects in earlier versions. Jon Deeks provided helpful contributions on an earlier version of this chapter. For details of previous authors and editors of the Handbook , please refer to the Preface.
Funding: This work was in part supported by funding from the Michael G DeGroote Cochrane Canada Centre and the Ontario Ministry of Health.
Alonso-Coello P, Zhou Q, Martinez-Zapata MJ, Mills E, Heels-Ansdell D, Johanson JF, Guyatt G. Meta-analysis of flavonoids for the treatment of haemorrhoids. British Journal of Surgery 2006; 93 : 909-920.
Atkins D, Best D, Briss PA, Eccles M, Falck-Ytter Y, Flottorp S, Guyatt GH, Harbour RT, Haugh MC, Henry D, Hill S, Jaeschke R, Leng G, Liberati A, Magrini N, Mason J, Middleton P, Mrukowicz J, O'Connell D, Oxman AD, Phillips B, Schünemann HJ, Edejer TT, Varonen H, Vist GE, Williams JW, Jr., Zaza S. Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ 2004; 328 : 1490.
Balshem H, Helfand M, Schünemann HJ, Oxman AD, Kunz R, Brozek J, Vist GE, Falck-Ytter Y, Meerpohl J, Norris S, Guyatt GH. GRADE guidelines: 3. Rating the quality of evidence. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2011; 64 : 401-406.
Bhandari M, Busse JW, Jackowski D, Montori VM, Schünemann H, Sprague S, Mears D, Schemitsch EH, Heels-Ansdell D, Devereaux PJ. Association between industry funding and statistically significant pro-industry findings in medical and surgical randomized trials. Canadian Medical Association Journal 2004; 170 : 477-480.
Brophy JM, Joseph L, Rouleau JL. Beta-blockers in congestive heart failure. A Bayesian meta-analysis. Annals of Internal Medicine 2001; 134 : 550-560.
Carrasco-Labra A, Brignardello-Petersen R, Santesso N, Neumann I, Mustafa RA, Mbuagbaw L, Etxeandia Ikobaltzeta I, De Stio C, McCullagh LJ, Alonso-Coello P, Meerpohl JJ, Vandvik PO, Brozek JL, Akl EA, Bossuyt P, Churchill R, Glenton C, Rosenbaum S, Tugwell P, Welch V, Garner P, Guyatt G, Schünemann HJ. Improving GRADE evidence tables part 1: a randomized trial shows improved understanding of content in summary of findings tables with a new format. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2016; 74 : 7-18.
Deeks JJ, Altman DG. Effect measures for meta-analysis of trials with binary outcomes. In: Egger M, Davey Smith G, Altman DG, editors. Systematic Reviews in Health Care: Meta-analysis in Context . 2nd ed. London (UK): BMJ Publication Group; 2001. p. 313-335.
Devereaux PJ, Choi PT, Lacchetti C, Weaver B, Schünemann HJ, Haines T, Lavis JN, Grant BJ, Haslam DR, Bhandari M, Sullivan T, Cook DJ, Walter SD, Meade M, Khan H, Bhatnagar N, Guyatt GH. A systematic review and meta-analysis of studies comparing mortality rates of private for-profit and private not-for-profit hospitals. Canadian Medical Association Journal 2002; 166 : 1399-1406.
Engels EA, Schmid CH, Terrin N, Olkin I, Lau J. Heterogeneity and statistical significance in meta-analysis: an empirical study of 125 meta-analyses. Statistics in Medicine 2000; 19 : 1707-1728.
Furukawa TA, Guyatt GH, Griffith LE. Can we individualize the 'number needed to treat'? An empirical study of summary effect measures in meta-analyses. International Journal of Epidemiology 2002; 31 : 72-76.
Gibson JN, Waddell G. Surgical interventions for lumbar disc prolapse: updated Cochrane Review. Spine 2007; 32 : 1735-1747.
Guyatt G, Oxman A, Vist G, Kunz R, Falck-Ytter Y, Alonso-Coello P, Schünemann H. GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ 2008; 336 : 3.
Guyatt G, Oxman AD, Akl EA, Kunz R, Vist G, Brozek J, Norris S, Falck-Ytter Y, Glasziou P, DeBeer H, Jaeschke R, Rind D, Meerpohl J, Dahm P, Schünemann HJ. GRADE guidelines: 1. Introduction-GRADE evidence profiles and summary of findings tables. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2011a; 64 : 383-394.
Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Kunz R, Brozek J, Alonso-Coello P, Rind D, Devereaux PJ, Montori VM, Freyschuss B, Vist G, Jaeschke R, Williams JW, Jr., Murad MH, Sinclair D, Falck-Ytter Y, Meerpohl J, Whittington C, Thorlund K, Andrews J, Schünemann HJ. GRADE guidelines 6. Rating the quality of evidence--imprecision. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2011b; 64 : 1283-1293.
Iorio A, Spencer FA, Falavigna M, Alba C, Lang E, Burnand B, McGinn T, Hayden J, Williams K, Shea B, Wolff R, Kujpers T, Perel P, Vandvik PO, Glasziou P, Schünemann H, Guyatt G. Use of GRADE for assessment of evidence about prognosis: rating confidence in estimates of event rates in broad categories of patients. BMJ 2015; 350 : h870.
Langendam M, Carrasco-Labra A, Santesso N, Mustafa RA, Brignardello-Petersen R, Ventresca M, Heus P, Lasserson T, Moustgaard R, Brozek J, Schünemann HJ. Improving GRADE evidence tables part 2: a systematic survey of explanatory notes shows more guidance is needed. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2016; 74 : 19-27.
Levine MN, Raskob G, Landefeld S, Kearon C, Schulman S. Hemorrhagic complications of anticoagulant treatment: the Seventh ACCP Conference on Antithrombotic and Thrombolytic Therapy. Chest 2004; 126 : 287S-310S.
Orrapin S, Rerkasem K. Carotid endarterectomy for symptomatic carotid stenosis. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2017; 6 : CD001081.
Salpeter S, Greyber E, Pasternak G, Salpeter E. Risk of fatal and nonfatal lactic acidosis with metformin use in type 2 diabetes mellitus. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2007; 4 : CD002967.
Santesso N, Carrasco-Labra A, Langendam M, Brignardello-Petersen R, Mustafa RA, Heus P, Lasserson T, Opiyo N, Kunnamo I, Sinclair D, Garner P, Treweek S, Tovey D, Akl EA, Tugwell P, Brozek JL, Guyatt G, Schünemann HJ. Improving GRADE evidence tables part 3: detailed guidance for explanatory footnotes supports creating and understanding GRADE certainty in the evidence judgments. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2016; 74 : 28-39.
Schünemann HJ, Best D, Vist G, Oxman AD, Group GW. Letters, numbers, symbols and words: how to communicate grades of evidence and recommendations. Canadian Medical Association Journal 2003; 169 : 677-680.
Schünemann HJ, Jaeschke R, Cook DJ, Bria WF, El-Solh AA, Ernst A, Fahy BF, Gould MK, Horan KL, Krishnan JA, Manthous CA, Maurer JR, McNicholas WT, Oxman AD, Rubenfeld G, Turino GM, Guyatt G. An official ATS statement: grading the quality of evidence and strength of recommendations in ATS guidelines and recommendations. American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine 2006; 174 : 605-614.
Schünemann HJ, Oxman AD, Brozek J, Glasziou P, Jaeschke R, Vist GE, Williams JW, Jr., Kunz R, Craig J, Montori VM, Bossuyt P, Guyatt GH. Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations for diagnostic tests and strategies. BMJ 2008a; 336 : 1106-1110.
Schünemann HJ, Oxman AD, Brozek J, Glasziou P, Bossuyt P, Chang S, Muti P, Jaeschke R, Guyatt GH. GRADE: assessing the quality of evidence for diagnostic recommendations. ACP Journal Club 2008b; 149 : 2.
Schünemann HJ, Mustafa R, Brozek J. [Diagnostic accuracy and linked evidence--testing the chain]. Zeitschrift für Evidenz, Fortbildung und Qualität im Gesundheitswesen 2012; 106 : 153-160.
Schünemann HJ, Tugwell P, Reeves BC, Akl EA, Santesso N, Spencer FA, Shea B, Wells G, Helfand M. Non-randomized studies as a source of complementary, sequential or replacement evidence for randomized controlled trials in systematic reviews on the effects of interventions. Research Synthesis Methods 2013; 4 : 49-62.
Schünemann HJ. Interpreting GRADE's levels of certainty or quality of the evidence: GRADE for statisticians, considering review information size or less emphasis on imprecision? Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2016; 75 : 6-15.
Schünemann HJ, Cuello C, Akl EA, Mustafa RA, Meerpohl JJ, Thayer K, Morgan RL, Gartlehner G, Kunz R, Katikireddi SV, Sterne J, Higgins JPT, Guyatt G, Group GW. GRADE guidelines: 18. How ROBINS-I and other tools to assess risk of bias in nonrandomized studies should be used to rate the certainty of a body of evidence. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2018.
Spencer-Bonilla G, Quinones AR, Montori VM, International Minimally Disruptive Medicine W. Assessing the Burden of Treatment. Journal of General Internal Medicine 2017; 32 : 1141-1145.
Spencer FA, Iorio A, You J, Murad MH, Schünemann HJ, Vandvik PO, Crowther MA, Pottie K, Lang ES, Meerpohl JJ, Falck-Ytter Y, Alonso-Coello P, Guyatt GH. Uncertainties in baseline risk estimates and confidence in treatment effects. BMJ 2012; 345 : e7401.
Sterne JAC, Hernán MA, Reeves BC, Savović J, Berkman ND, Viswanathan M, Henry D, Altman DG, Ansari MT, Boutron I, Carpenter JR, Chan AW, Churchill R, Deeks JJ, Hróbjartsson A, Kirkham J, Jüni P, Loke YK, Pigott TD, Ramsay CR, Regidor D, Rothstein HR, Sandhu L, Santaguida PL, Schünemann HJ, Shea B, Shrier I, Tugwell P, Turner L, Valentine JC, Waddington H, Waters E, Wells GA, Whiting PF, Higgins JPT. ROBINS-I: a tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions. BMJ 2016; 355 : i4919.
Thompson DC, Rivara FP, Thompson R. Helmets for preventing head and facial injuries in bicyclists. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2000; 2 : CD001855.
Tierney JF, Stewart LA, Ghersi D, Burdett S, Sydes MR. Practical methods for incorporating summary time-to-event data into meta-analysis. Trials 2007; 8 .
van Dalen EC, Tierney JF, Kremer LCM. Tips and tricks for understanding and using SR results. No. 7: time‐to‐event data. Evidence-Based Child Health 2007; 2 : 1089-1090.
For permission to re-use material from the Handbook (either academic or commercial), please see here for full details.
It’s a common perception that writing a research summary is a quick and easy task. After all, how hard can jotting down 300 words be? But when you consider the weight those 300 words carry, writing a research summary as a part of your dissertation, essay or compelling draft for your paper instantly becomes daunting task.
A research summary requires you to synthesize a complex research paper into an informative, self-explanatory snapshot. It needs to portray what your article contains. Thus, writing it often comes at the end of the task list.
Regardless of when you’re planning to write, it is no less of a challenge, particularly if you’re doing it for the first time. This blog will take you through everything you need to know about research summary so that you have an easier time with it.
A research summary is the part of your research paper that describes its findings to the audience in a brief yet concise manner. A well-curated research summary represents you and your knowledge about the information written in the research paper.
While writing a quality research summary, you need to discover and identify the significant points in the research and condense it in a more straightforward form. A research summary is like a doorway that provides access to the structure of a research paper's sections.
Since the purpose of a summary is to give an overview of the topic, methodology, and conclusions employed in a paper, it requires an objective approach. No analysis or criticism.
They’re both brief, concise, and give an overview of an aspect of the research paper. So, it’s easy to understand why many new researchers get the two confused. However, a research summary and abstract are two very different things with individual purpose. To start with, a research summary is written at the end while the abstract comes at the beginning of a research paper.
A research summary captures the essence of the paper at the end of your document. It focuses on your topic, methods, and findings. More like a TL;DR, if you will. An abstract, on the other hand, is a description of what your research paper is about. It tells your reader what your topic or hypothesis is, and sets a context around why you have embarked on your research.
Before you start writing, you need to get insights into your research’s content, style, and organization. There are three fundamental areas of a research summary that you should focus on.
The research summary is nothing but a concise form of the entire research paper. Therefore, the structure of a summary stays the same as the paper. So, include all the section titles and write a little about them. The structural elements that a research summary must consist of are:
It represents the topic of the research. Try to phrase it so that it includes the key findings or conclusion of the task.
The abstract gives a context of the research paper. Unlike the abstract at the beginning of a paper, the abstract here, should be very short since you’ll be working with a limited word count.
This is the most crucial section of a research summary as it helps readers get familiarized with the topic. You should include the definition of your topic, the current state of the investigation, and practical relevance in this part. Additionally, you should present the problem statement, investigative measures, and any hypothesis in this section.
This section provides details about the methodology and the methods adopted to conduct the study. You should write a brief description of the surveys, sampling, type of experiments, statistical analysis, and the rationality behind choosing those particular methods.
Create a list of evidence obtained from the various experiments with a primary analysis, conclusions, and interpretations made upon that. In the paper research paper, you will find the results section as the most detailed and lengthy part. Therefore, you must pick up the key elements and wisely decide which elements are worth including and which are worth skipping.
This is where you present the interpretation of results in the context of their application. Discussion usually covers results, inferences, and theoretical models explaining the obtained values, key strengths, and limitations. All of these are vital elements that you must include in the summary.
Most research papers merge conclusion with discussions. However, depending upon the instructions, you may have to prepare this as a separate section in your research summary. Usually, conclusion revisits the hypothesis and provides the details about the validation or denial about the arguments made in the research paper, based upon how convincing the results were obtained.
The structure of a research summary closely resembles the anatomy of a scholarly article . Additionally, you should keep your research and references limited to authentic and scholarly sources only.
The core concept behind undertaking a research summary is to present a simple and clear understanding of your research paper to the reader. The biggest hurdle while doing that is the number of words you have at your disposal. So, follow the steps below to write a research summary that sticks.
You should go through the research paper thoroughly multiple times to ensure that you have a complete understanding of its contents. A 3-stage reading process helps.
a. Scan: In the first read, go through it to get an understanding of its basic concept and methodologies.
b. Read: For the second step, read the article attentively by going through each section, highlighting the key elements, and subsequently listing the topics that you will include in your research summary.
c. Skim: Flip through the article a few more times to study the interpretation of various experimental results, statistical analysis, and application in different contexts.
Sincerely go through different headings and subheadings as it will allow you to understand the underlying concept of each section. You can try reading the introduction and conclusion simultaneously to understand the motive of the task and how obtained results stay fit to the expected outcome.
While exploring different sections of an article, you can try finding answers to simple what, why, and how. Below are a few pointers to give you an idea:
Now that you’ve listed the key points that the paper tries to demonstrate, you can start writing the summary following the standard structure of a research summary. Just make sure you’re not writing statements from the parent research paper verbatim.
Instead, try writing down each section in your own words. This will not only help in avoiding plagiarism but will also show your complete understanding of the subject. Alternatively, you can use a summarizing tool (AI-based summary generators) to shorten the content or summarize the content without disrupting the actual meaning of the article.
SciSpace Copilot is one such helpful feature! You can easily upload your research paper and ask Copilot to summarize it. You will get an AI-generated, condensed research summary. SciSpace Copilot also enables you to highlight text, clip math and tables, and ask any question relevant to the research paper; it will give you instant answers with deeper context of the article..
One of the best ways to summarize and consolidate a research paper is to provide visuals like graphs, charts, pie diagrams, etc.. Visuals make getting across the facts, the past trends, and the probabilistic figures around a concept much more engaging.
It can be very tempting to copy-paste a few statements or the entire paragraphs depending upon the clarity of those sections. But it’s best to stay away from the practice. Even paraphrasing should be done with utmost care and attention.
Also: QuillBot vs SciSpace: Choose the best AI-paraphrasing tool
You need to have strict control while writing different sections of a research summary. In many cases, it has been observed that the research summary and the parent research paper become the same length. If that happens, it can lead to discrediting of your efforts and research summary itself. Whatever the standard word limit has been imposed, you must observe that carefully.
The process of writing the research summary can be exhausting and tiring. However, you shouldn’t allow this to become a reason to skip checking your academic writing several times for mistakes like misspellings, grammar, wordiness, and formatting issues. Proofread and edit until you think your research summary can stand out from the others, provided it is drafted perfectly on both technicality and comprehension parameters. You can also seek assistance from editing and proofreading services , and other free tools that help you keep these annoying grammatical errors at bay.
Keep a keen observation of your writing style. You should use the words very precisely, and in any situation, it should not represent your personal opinions on the topic. You should write the entire research summary in utmost impersonal, precise, factually correct, and evidence-based writing.
Once you are done with the final copy of your research summary, you must ask a friend or colleague to read it. You must test whether your friend or colleague could grasp everything without referring to the parent paper. This will help you in ensuring the clarity of the article.
Once you become familiar with the research paper summary concept and understand how to apply the tips discussed above in your current task, summarizing a research summary won’t be that challenging. While traversing the different stages of your academic career, you will face different scenarios where you may have to create several research summaries.
In such cases, you just need to look for answers to simple questions like “Why this study is necessary,” “what were the methods,” “who were the participants,” “what conclusions were drawn from the research,” and “how it is relevant to the wider world.” Once you find out the answers to these questions, you can easily create a good research summary following the standard structure and a precise writing style.
Home » Research Findings – Types Examples and Writing Guide
Table of Contents
Definition:
Research findings refer to the results obtained from a study or investigation conducted through a systematic and scientific approach. These findings are the outcomes of the data analysis, interpretation, and evaluation carried out during the research process.
There are two main types of research findings:
Qualitative research is an exploratory research method used to understand the complexities of human behavior and experiences. Qualitative findings are non-numerical and descriptive data that describe the meaning and interpretation of the data collected. Examples of qualitative findings include quotes from participants, themes that emerge from the data, and descriptions of experiences and phenomena.
Quantitative research is a research method that uses numerical data and statistical analysis to measure and quantify a phenomenon or behavior. Quantitative findings include numerical data such as mean, median, and mode, as well as statistical analyses such as t-tests, ANOVA, and regression analysis. These findings are often presented in tables, graphs, or charts.
Both qualitative and quantitative findings are important in research and can provide different insights into a research question or problem. Combining both types of findings can provide a more comprehensive understanding of a phenomenon and improve the validity and reliability of research results.
Research findings typically consist of several parts, including:
Writing research findings requires careful planning and attention to detail. Here are some general steps to follow when writing research findings:
Following is a Research Findings Example sample for students:
Title: The Effects of Exercise on Mental Health
Sample : 500 participants, both men and women, between the ages of 18-45.
Methodology : Participants were divided into two groups. The first group engaged in 30 minutes of moderate intensity exercise five times a week for eight weeks. The second group did not exercise during the study period. Participants in both groups completed a questionnaire that assessed their mental health before and after the study period.
Findings : The group that engaged in regular exercise reported a significant improvement in mental health compared to the control group. Specifically, they reported lower levels of anxiety and depression, improved mood, and increased self-esteem.
Conclusion : Regular exercise can have a positive impact on mental health and may be an effective intervention for individuals experiencing symptoms of anxiety or depression.
Research findings can be applied in various fields to improve processes, products, services, and outcomes. Here are some examples:
Research findings can be used in a variety of situations, depending on the context and the purpose. Here are some examples of when research findings may be useful:
The purpose of research findings is to contribute to the knowledge and understanding of a particular topic or issue. Research findings are the result of a systematic and rigorous investigation of a research question or hypothesis, using appropriate research methods and techniques.
The main purposes of research findings are:
Research findings have several key characteristics that distinguish them from other types of information or knowledge. Here are some of the main characteristics of research findings:
Research findings have many advantages, which make them valuable sources of knowledge and information. Here are some of the main advantages of research findings:
While research findings have many advantages, they also have some limitations. Here are some of the main limitations of research findings:
Researcher, Academic Writer, Web developer
When you choose to publish with PLOS, your research makes an impact. Make your work accessible to all, without restrictions, and accelerate scientific discovery with options like preprints and published peer review that make your work more Open.
The discussion section contains the results and outcomes of a study. An effective discussion informs readers what can be learned from your experiment and provides context for the results.
When you’re ready to write your discussion, you’ve already introduced the purpose of your study and provided an in-depth description of the methodology. The discussion informs readers about the larger implications of your study based on the results. Highlighting these implications while not overstating the findings can be challenging, especially when you’re submitting to a journal that selects articles based on novelty or potential impact. Regardless of what journal you are submitting to, the discussion section always serves the same purpose: concluding what your study results actually mean.
A successful discussion section puts your findings in context. It should include:
Tip: Not all journals share the same naming conventions.
You can apply the advice in this article to the conclusion, results or discussion sections of your manuscript.
Our Early Career Researcher community tells us that the conclusion is often considered the most difficult aspect of a manuscript to write. To help, this guide provides questions to ask yourself, a basic structure to model your discussion off of and examples from published manuscripts.
Questions to ask yourself:
Trying to fit a complete discussion into a single paragraph can add unnecessary stress to the writing process. If possible, you’ll want to give yourself two or three paragraphs to give the reader a comprehensive understanding of your study as a whole. Here’s one way to structure an effective discussion:
While the above sections can help you brainstorm and structure your discussion, there are many common mistakes that writers revert to when having difficulties with their paper. Writing a discussion can be a delicate balance between summarizing your results, providing proper context for your research and avoiding introducing new information. Remember that your paper should be both confident and honest about the results!
Snippets of Effective Discussions:
Consumer-based actions to reduce plastic pollution in rivers: A multi-criteria decision analysis approach
Identifying reliable indicators of fitness in polar bears
The contents of the Peer Review Center are also available as a live, interactive training session, complete with slides, talking points, and activities. …
The contents of the Writing Center are also available as a live, interactive training session, complete with slides, talking points, and activities. …
There’s a lot to consider when deciding where to submit your work. Learn how to choose a journal that will help your study reach its audience, while reflecting your values as a researcher…
Home Surveys Academic Research
The Research Summary is used to report facts about a study clearly. You will almost certainly be required to prepare a research summary during your academic research or while on a research project for your organization.
If it is the first time you have to write one, the writing requirements may confuse you. The instructors generally assign someone to write a summary of the research work. Research summaries require the writer to have a thorough understanding of the issue.
This article will discuss the definition of a research summary and how to write one.
A research summary is a piece of writing that summarizes your research on a specific topic. Its primary goal is to offer the reader a detailed overview of the study with the key findings. A research summary generally contains the article’s structure in which it is written.
You must know the goal of your analysis before you launch a project. A research overview summarizes the detailed response and highlights particular issues raised in it. Writing it might be somewhat troublesome. To write a good overview, you want to start with a structure in mind. Read on for our guide.
Your summary or analysis is going to tell readers everything about your research project. This is the critical piece that your stakeholders will read to identify your findings and valuable insights. Having a good and concise research summary that presents facts and comes with no research biases is the critical deliverable of any research project.
We’ve put together a cheat sheet to help you write a good research summary below.
LEARN ABOUT: Action Research
If you’re doing any research, you will write a summary, which will be the most viewed and more important part of the project. So keep a guideline in mind before you start. Focus on the content first and then worry about the length. Use the cheat sheet/checklist in this article to organize your summary, and that’s all you need to write a great research summary!
But once your summary is ready, where is it stored? Most teams have multiple documents in their google drives, and it’s a nightmare to find projects that were done in the past. Your research data should be democratized and easy to use.
We at QuestionPro launched a research repository for research teams, and our clients love it. All your data is in one place, and everything is searchable, including your research summaries!
Authors: Prachi, Anas
Jun 25, 2024
Jun 21, 2024
Jun 18, 2024
Other categories.
A research summary is a requirement during academic research and sometimes you might need to prepare a research summary during a research project for an organization.
Most people find a research summary a daunting task as you are required to condense complex research material into an informative, easy-to-understand article most times with a minimum of 300-500 words.
In this post, we will guide you through all the steps required to make writing your research summary an easier task.
A research summary is a piece of writing that summarizes the research of a specific topic into bite-size easy-to-read and comprehend articles. The primary goal is to give the reader a detailed outline of the key findings of a research.
It is an unavoidable requirement in colleges and universities. To write a good research summary, you must understand the goal of your research, as this would help make the process easier.
A research summary preserves the structure and sections of the article it is derived from.
The Research Summary and Abstract are similar, especially as they are both brief, straight to the point, and provide an overview of the entire research paper. However, there are very clear differences.
To begin with, a Research summary is written at the end of a research activity, while the Abstract is written at the beginning of a research paper.
A Research Summary captures the main points of a study, with an emphasis on the topic, method , and discoveries, an Abstract is a description of what your research paper would talk about and the reason for your research or the hypothesis you are trying to validate.
Let us take a deeper look at the difference between both terms.
An abstract is a short version of a research paper. It is written to convey the findings of the research to the reader. It provides the reader with information that would help them understand the research, by giving them a clear idea about the subject matter of a research paper. It is usually submitted before the presentation of a research paper.
A summary is a short form of an essay, a research paper, or a chapter in a book. A research summary is a narration of a research study, condensing the focal points of research to a shorter form, usually aligned with the same structure of the research study, from which the summary is derived.
An abstract communicates the main points of a research paper, it includes the questions, major findings, the importance of the findings, etc.
An abstract reflects the perceptions of the author about a topic, while a research summary reflects the ideology of the research study that is being summarized.
Before commencing a research summary, there is a need to understand the style and organization of the content you plan to summarize. There are three fundamental areas of the research that should be the focal point:
Once you have satisfied the requirements of the fundamentals for starting your research summary, you can now begin to write using the following format:
Below are some defining elements of a sample research summary.
Title – “The probability of an unexpected volcanic eruption in Greenwich”
Introduction – this section would list the catastrophic consequences that occurred in the country and the importance of analyzing this event.
Hypothesis – An eruption of the Greenwich supervolcano would be preceded by intense preliminary activity manifesting in advance, before the eruption.
Results – these could contain a report of statistical data from various volcanic eruptions happening globally while looking critically at the activity that occurred before these events.
Discussion and conclusion – Given that Greenwich is now consistently monitored by scientists and that signs of an eruption are usually detected before the volcanic eruption, this confirms the hypothesis. Hence creating an emergency plan outlining other intervention measures and ultimately evacuation is essential.
Below is another sample sketch.
Title – “The frequency of extreme weather events in the UK in 2000-2008 as compared to the ‘60s”
Introduction – Weather events bring intense material damage and cause pain to the victims affected.
Hypothesis – Extreme weather events are more frequent in recent times compared to the ‘50s
Results – The frequency of several categories of extreme events now and then are listed here, such as droughts, fires, massive rainfall/snowfalls, floods, hurricanes, tornadoes, etc.
Discussion and conclusion – Several types of extreme events have become more commonplace in recent times, confirming the hypothesis. This rise in extreme weather events can be traced to rising CO2 levels and increasing temperatures and global warming explain the rising frequency of these disasters. Addressing the rising CO2 levels and paying attention to climate change is the only to combat this phenomenon.
A research summary is the short form of a research paper, analyzing the important aspect of the study. Everyone who reads a research summary has a full grasp of the main idea being discussed in the original research paper. Conducting any research means you will write a summary, which is an important part of your project and would be the most read part of your project.
Having a guideline before you start helps, this would form your checklist which would guide your actions as you write your research summary. It is important to note that a Research Summary is different from an Abstract paper written at the beginning of a research paper, describing the idea behind a research paper.
Connect to Formplus, Get Started Now - It's Free!
You may also like:
A comprehensive guide on the definition of research questions, types, importance, good and bad research question examples
In this article, we will share some tips for writing an effective abstract, plus samples you can learn from.
Introduction Action research is an evidence-based approach that has been used for years in the field of education and social sciences....
Introduction The McNamara Fallacy is a common problem in research. It happens when researchers take a single piece of data as evidence...
Collect data the right way with a versatile data collection tool. try formplus and transform your work productivity today..
Get science-backed answers as you write with Paperpal's Research feature
One of the most important skills you can imbibe as an academician is to know how to summarize a research paper. During your academic journey, you may need to write a summary of findings in research quite often and for varied reasons – be it to write an introduction for a peer-reviewed publication , to submit a critical review, or to simply create a useful database for future referencing.
It can be quite challenging to effectively write a research paper summary for often complex work, which is where a pre-determined workflow can help you optimize the process. Investing time in developing this skill can also help you improve your scientific acumen, increasing your efficiency and productivity at work. This article illustrates some useful advice on how to write a research summary effectively. But, what is research summary in the first place?
A research paper summary is a crisp, comprehensive overview of a research paper, which encapsulates the purpose, findings, methods, conclusions, and relevance of a study. A well-written research paper summary is an indicator of how well you have understood the author’s work.
Draft a research paper summary in minutes with paperpal. click here to start writing.
Frequently asked questions (faq), how to write a research paper summary.
Writing a good research paper summary comes with practice and skill. Here is some useful advice on how to write a research paper summary effectively.
Before you begin to write a summary of research papers, determine the aim of your research paper summary. This will give you more clarity on how to summarize a research paper, including what to highlight and where to find the information you need, which accelerates the entire process. If you are aiming for the summary to be a supporting document or a proof of principle for your current research findings, then you can look for elements that are relevant to your work.
On the other hand, if your research summary is intended to be a critical review of the research article, you may need to use a completely different lens while reading the paper and conduct your own research regarding the accuracy of the data presented. Then again, if the research summary is intended to be a source of information for future referencing, you will likely have a different approach. This makes determining the focus of your summary a key step in the process of writing an effective research paper summary.
In order to author an effective research paper summary, you need to dive into the topic of the research article. Begin by doing a quick scan for relevant information under each section of the paper. The abstract is a great starting point as it helps you to quickly identify the top highlights of the research article, speeding up the process of understanding the key findings in the paper. Be sure to do a careful read of the research paper, preparing notes that describe each section in your own words to put together a summary of research example or a first draft. This will save your time and energy in revisiting the paper to confirm relevant details and ease the entire process of writing a research paper summary.
When reading papers, be sure to acknowledge and ignore any pre-conceived notions that you might have regarding the research topic. This will not only help you understand the topic better but will also help you develop a more balanced perspective, ensuring that your research paper summary is devoid of any personal opinions or biases.
A research paper summary is usually intended to highlight and explain the key points of any study, saving the time required to read through the entire article. Thus, your primary goal while compiling the summary should be to keep it as brief, crisp and readable as possible. Usually, a short introduction followed by 1-2 paragraphs is adequate for an effective research article summary. Avoid going into too much technical detail while describing the main results and conclusions of the study. Rather focus on connecting the main findings of the study to the hypothesis , which can make the summary more engaging. For example, instead of simply reporting an original finding – “the graph showed a decrease in the mortality rates…”, you can say, “there was a decline in the number of deaths, as predicted by the authors while beginning the study…” or “there was a decline in the number of deaths, which came as a surprise to the authors as this was completely unexpected…”.
Unless you are writing a critical review of the research article, the language used in your research paper summaries should revolve around reporting the findings, not assessing them. On the other hand, if you intend to submit your summary as a critical review, make sure to provide sufficient external evidence to support your final analysis. Invest sufficient time in editing and proofreading your research paper summary thoroughly to ensure you’ve captured the findings accurately. You can also get an external opinion on the preliminary draft of the research paper summary from colleagues or peers who have not worked on the research topic.
Now that you’ve understood how to summarize a research paper, watch out for these red flags while writing your summary.
We hope the recommendations listed above will help answer the question of how to summarize a research paper and enable you to tackle the process effectively.
Paperpal, an AI academic writing assistant, is designed to support academics at every step of the academic writing process. Built on over two decades of experience helping researchers get published and trained on millions of published research articles, Paperpal offers human precision at machine speed. Paperpal Copilot, with advanced generative AI features, can help academics achieve 2x the writing in half the time, while transforming how they research and write.
To generate your research paper summary, simply login to the platform and use the Paperpal Copilot Summary feature to create a flawless summary of your work. Here’s a step-by-step process to help you craft a summary in minutes:
The abstract and research paper summary serve similar purposes but differ in scope, length, and placement. The abstract is a concise yet detailed overview of the research, placed at the beginning of a paper, with the aim of providing readers with a quick understanding of the paper’s content and to help them decide whether to read the full article. Usually limited to a few hundred words, it highlights the main objectives, methods, results, and conclusions of the study. On the other hand, a research paper summary provides a crisp account of the entire research paper. Its purpose is to provide a brief recap for readers who may want to quickly grasp the main points of the research without reading the entire paper in detail.
The structure of a research summary can vary depending on the specific requirements or guidelines provided by the target publication or institution. A typical research summary includes the following key sections: introduction (including the research question or objective), methodology (briefly describing the research design and methods), results (summarizing the key findings), discussion (highlighting the implications and significance of the findings), and conclusion (providing a summary of the main points and potential future directions).
The summary of a research paper is important because it provides a condensed overview of the study’s purpose, methods, results, and conclusions. It allows you to quickly grasp the main points and relevance of the research without having to read the entire paper. Research summaries can also be an invaluable way to communicate research findings to a broader audience, such as policymakers or the general public.
When writing a research paper summary, it is crucial to avoid plagiarism by properly attributing the original authors’ work. To learn how to summarize a research paper while avoiding plagiarism, follow these critical guidelines: (1) Read the paper thoroughly to understand the main points and key findings. (2) Use your own words and sentence structures to restate the information, ensuring that the research paper summary reflects your understanding of the paper. (3) Clearly indicate when you are paraphrasing or quoting directly from the original paper by using appropriate citation styles. (4) Cite the original source for any specific ideas, concepts, or data that you include in your summary. (5) Review your summary to ensure it accurately represents the research paper while giving credit to the original authors.
Paperpal is a comprehensive AI writing toolkit that helps students and researchers achieve 2x the writing in half the time. It leverages 21+ years of STM experience and insights from millions of research articles to provide in-depth academic writing, language editing, and submission readiness support to help you write better, faster.
Get accurate academic translations, rewriting support, grammar checks, vocabulary suggestions, and generative AI assistance that delivers human precision at machine speed. Try for free or upgrade to Paperpal Prime starting at US$19 a month to access premium features, including consistency, plagiarism, and 30+ submission readiness checks to help you succeed.
Experience the future of academic writing – Sign up to Paperpal and start writing for free!
How ai can improve the academic writing experience, you may also like, how to write a high-quality conference paper, measuring academic success: definition & strategies for excellence, is it ethical to use ai-generated abstracts without..., what are journal guidelines on using generative ai..., should you use ai tools like chatgpt for..., 9 steps to publish a research paper, how to make translating academic papers less challenging, self-plagiarism in research: what it is and how..., 6 tips for post-doc researchers to take their..., presenting research data effectively through tables and figures.
We can all agree - condensing complex scientific research into an accurate, engaging summary is tricky.
But with the right approach, you can craft summaries that effectively convey key details and implications to various audiences.
In this post, you'll uncover best practices for summarizing scientific journal articles. You'll learn how to identify core findings, summarize methodologies precisely, convey results properly, and synthesize everything into a cohesive narrative. An example APA-formatted summary is also provided to see these tips in action.
Summarizing scientific journal articles is an important skill for researchers and students. It allows you to concisely communicate the key objectives, methods, findings, and conclusions of a study to various audiences.
When summarizing scientific research, it is essential to identify and highlight the core elements that capture the essence of the study. This involves analyzing complex details and data to extract the most critical information. Key steps include:
Clearly articulating the central research question or objective
Condensing the methods into a simple overview
Highlighting key results and statistics
Summarizing the conclusions and implications
Skills like active reading, critical thinking, and concise writing help distill multidimensional research into accessible summaries.
Scientific article summaries should be adapted based on the intended reader. For example:
Emphasize key learning points
Define discipline-specific terminology
Focus on practical applications
Academic Peers
Use precise disciplinary language
Include technical details on methodology
Highlight novel contributions to the field
Here is an example summary of a microbiology study tailored specifically for a student reader:
A 2022 study on antimicrobial peptides (AMPs) found that a synthetic AMP named “peptoid-1” effectively killed methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) in lab tests. The peptoid-1 molecule disrupted the bacterial cell membranes of MRSA, including difficult-to-treat biofilms. The research demonstrates the potential of synthetic AMPs as a promising new class of antibiotics to combat drug-resistant superbugs like MRSA. This has important implications for developing urgently needed antibiotics to address the growing global threat of antimicrobial resistance.
This summary briefly explains the key learning points of the study in straightforward language appropriate for students. Technical details are avoided, and emphasis is placed on articulating the essential findings, applications, and implications.
A well-written summary of a scientific journal article should cover three main points:
The first section of your summary should provide background information and context about why the research was conducted. This includes:
The research goals, questions, or hypotheses being investigated
Gaps in existing knowledge the study aims to address
The overall importance of the research topic
For example:
This study investigates the effects of climate change on crop yields in sub-Saharan Africa. Prior research has not examined how higher temperatures may impact staple crops in this region specifically. Understanding climate change effects on agriculture is critical for food security policymaking across developing nations.
The second section should explain the methodology and highlight key findings from the study's experiments, data analysis, or other research activities. Use concise language to describe:
The study sample, materials, and procedures
Statistical analysis techniques
Major results that relate to the research questions
For instance:
Researchers compiled 30 years of temperature data and crop production records from six countries. Using regression analysis, they found higher temperatures significantly reduced wheat and maize yields by an average of 15% and 12%, respectively.
Finally, summarize the researchers' conclusions, implications, and recommendations based on their results. Mention any limitations noted and future research suggested.
The authors conclude rising temperatures from climate change could seriously impact food security in sub-Saharan Africa. They call for policies to help farmers adapt through heat-tolerant crop varieties and improved irrigation access. Additional research is needed to develop effective adaptation strategies.
Following this basic structure will help you efficiently summarize the essential information in a scientific journal article.
A journal article summary concisely overviews the main points and key takeaways from a scientific paper published in an academic journal. It allows readers to quickly understand the core findings and arguments of the original article without having to read the full text.
An effective summary should:
Identify the main objective or research question the authors aimed to address
Highlight the key methods, data sources, and analytical approaches used
Summarize the major results and main conclusions
Note any limitations or unanswered questions for future research
For example, a summary of a psychology paper might overview the hypothesis tested, experiment methodology, participant demographics, statistical analyses conducted, and whether the findings supported or rejected the original hypothesis.
Summaries are a useful way for scientists to stay current with latest developments across broad fields of research. They also help readers determine if they should invest time reading the full article based on whether the topic and findings are relevant to their own work. As such, summaries should provide enough detail and context to evaluate the scope and implications of the research.
When writing a journal article summary, the exact formatting can vary depending on the target publication or audience needs. However, some key elements tend to be consistent:
Citation: Include a full citation of the original paper using the required scholarly style
Background: 1-2 sentences placing the research in context of current knowledge state
Objective: 1 sentence stating the purpose/focus of the study
Methods: 1-2 sentences summarizing the experiment, data, analyses performed
Results: 2-3 sentences describing the major findings
Conclusion: 1-2 sentences covering implications and future directions
The full summary is typically 150-250 words or 8-15 sentences. Brevity and precision are key when condensing a complex study into such a compact overview.
Summarizing a scientific journal article requires capturing the key details while maintaining brevity. Here are some best practices:
Like an abstract, organize your summary by:
Introduction - Cover the background, purpose, and hypothesis.
Methods - Briefly describe the experimental design.
Results - Highlight the main findings without going into excessive detail.
Discussion - Summarize the author's interpretation and conclusions.
Identify and extract only the most critical details:
Research goals
Sample characteristics
Variables examined
Statistical analyses performed
Major results obtained
Conclusions reached
Present the findings in a neutral tone without inserting your own opinions or judgments.
Summarize points in your own words instead of relying heavily on direct quotes. However, scientifically precise terminology should be retained.
Adhere to style formatting per journal or publisher requirements. Most scientific summaries require American Psychological Association (APA) citations.
Keeping summaries clear, accurate, and concise requires practice. But following these research article summary guidelines will help ensure quality. With wisio.app 's tools for discovering papers and translating terminology, scientists can efficiently produce summaries to advance their work.
When summarizing a journal article in APA style, it is important to follow some key guidelines:
Read through the full article and highlight the key points
Write the summary using your own words while staying true to the original meaning
Avoid directly quoting chunks of text from the original
Identify the critical elements like purpose, methods, findings, conclusions
Summarize only details directly relevant to the core focus of the article
Keep contextual details brief or exclude if non-essential
Clearly indicate in the summary which ideas are yours versus the author's
Do not interject your own analysis, evaluation, or interpretation
Keep the summary objective and descriptive in nature
Include a citation to the original article
Apply proper in-text citations for any verbatim short quotes
Format the summary using standard APA guidelines for font, spacing, etc.
Strive to keep the summary less than 10-15% of the original length
Tighten long summaries by removing non-vital details
Aim for brevity while preserving meaning and scientific accuracy
Following these basic tips will help produce an APA-style summary that accurately conveys the essence of the journal article in a clear and concise manner.
Delve into the typical structure of scientific journal articles to understand the framework from which summaries are derived.
The IMRaD (Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion) format is a standard structure used in scientific writing. Understanding this structure is key when summarizing journal articles.
The Introduction presents background context, defines key terms, and states the research objective and hypothesis. When summarizing, capture the main research goals and questions driving the study.
The Methods section provides details on the experimental design, materials, data collection procedures, and statistical analysis. Identify the overall methodology without delving into granular specifics.
The Results present objective findings from the data analysis. Highlight key quantitative outcomes and discoveries in your summary.
The Discussion section interprets the results, explores their significance, compares them to other studies, acknowledges limitations, and suggests future work. Summarize the main conclusions, implications, and next steps discussed.
Article abstracts concisely overview the purpose, methods, findings, and implications covered in the full text. Leverage abstracts when first assessing articles for relevance.
Conclusions summarize the key points and provide final thoughts. Use them to validate your understanding of the central themes.
Both provide a helpful frame of reference when synthesizing summaries.
Carefully analyze each section and subsection
Annotate and highlight meaningful passages
Identify connections between key ideas
Focus on what findings reveal about the research problem
Capture enough detail to convey original intent
Synthesize using clear, concise language
Thoughtful critical reading builds comprehension essential for quality summarization.
Summarizing a research article requires identifying the core findings and contributions, accurately capturing the methodologies, conveying the key results and implications, and crafting a cohesive narrative. Here is a step-by-step guide:
When summarizing a research article, it is essential to pinpoint the most significant findings and contributions of the study. Key steps include:
Read the abstract and conclusion to understand the major findings.
Highlight unique discoveries, breakthroughs, or advances made.
Note the implications and importance communicated by the authors.
Identify knowledge gaps filled or new frameworks proposed.
Focusing on these elements will help determine the core essence to convey in your summary.
While summarizing the methodologies, avoid oversimplifying complex research processes. Key tips include:
Use concise yet precise language to describe methods applied.
Specify instruments or tools leveraged in the research.
Provide sample sizes and measures captured if relevant.
Note statistical or analytical techniques utilized.
Maintaining key methodological details demonstrates analytical rigor when sharing the research with others.
An effective summary should clearly communicate the study's results and why they matter. To accomplish this:
Report quantitative findings or qualitative discoveries made.
Contextualize results using benchmarks, comparisons, or real-world impacts.
Connect results back to the research aims and knowledge gaps identified.
Discuss limitations along with future research needed.
This enables readers to grasp the meaningfulness of the results.
Finally, structure the various summary elements into a cohesive overview:
Organize content using section headers around aims, methods, results, and conclusions.
Use transition words (e.g. “additionally,” “in contrast,” “as a result”) to improve flow.
Focus on information that supports the core findings and contributions of the work.
Avoid excessive details and maintain brevity.
Following these steps will produce a concise yet insightful summary showcasing the relevance of the research.
Adhering to proper formatting guidelines is critical when summarizing scientific journal articles, especially for academic purposes. The American Psychological Association (APA) style provides clear standards that enable precise, uniform communication across scientific disciplines.
Following APA style lends credibility and ensures readers can easily reference sources. Key elements include:
Properly formatting in-text citations and references
Using headings and subheadings to organize content
Applying title case capitalization
Using active voice and clear language
Formatting title page with running head, page numbers, and other elements
Adhering to these conventions helps establish summaries as reputable academic works worthy of consideration.
Here is an example of a properly formatted APA summary:
Smith, J. (2021). The impact of climate change on coral reef ecosystems. Marine Biology , 166 (3), 201–215. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00227-021-03876-8
This study examined the effects of rising ocean temperatures and acidification on coral reef health over 5 years. The author tracked changes in coral cover and biodiversity across 12 reef sites in the Caribbean Sea. On average, coral cover declined by 18.7% and species richness decreased by 22.4% on reefs exposed to prolonged marine heatwaves. The declines were attributed to mass coral bleaching triggered by unusually warm water temperatures. The findings suggest climate change may severely degrade coral reef ecosystems within decades. Further research into mitigation strategies is warranted to preserve these valuable marine habitats.
Key elements like the citation, use of third-person perspective, headings, and formal academic language adhere to APA conventions.
When writing APA-style summaries, writers should avoid:
Neglecting to include a full citation for the original work
Using first-person pronouns like “I” or “we”
Inserting opinions or commentary from the summarizer
Failing to use headings to organize content
Including direct quotes from the original text
Avoiding these pitfalls will ensure an APA-compliant summary format.
Language and terminology: clarity above all.
When summarizing scientific research, it is crucial to use clear, precise language and terminology. Avoid vague or ambiguous phrasing, and opt for specificity whenever possible. Define key terms, acronyms, or concepts that may be unfamiliar to readers. Simplify complex statistical analysis or scientific jargon for general audiences without losing integrity. Stick to plain language with straightforward syntax to ensure readers grasp the key findings.
Balancing brevity and completeness presents a challenge when summarizing scientific papers. Focus on highlighting the central objective, methodology, results, and conclusions. Resist dwelling on intricate experimental details or tangential discussions. However, take care not to oversimplify complex research. Seek to distill the essence without omitting information that substantively impacts the interpretation or reproducibility of the study. Adhere to word limits when required but avoid excluding key facts, figures, or takeaways in the quest for brevity.
When writing scientific summaries, it is vital to represent the original piece fairly and avoid misconstruing the author's intent. Exercise caution when paraphrasing specialized statistical analysis or scientific terminology. Cite sources properly, and refrain from plagiarizing significant portions of the original text. Also, recognize the limitations of summarization; for complete details, readers should consult the primary literature. By maintaining high ethical standards, scientific summarizers uphold the integrity of research communication.
Summarizing scientific journal articles effectively requires adhering to several key best practices. By focusing on the article's key findings, methodology, and conclusions, skilled summarizers can efficiently communicate the essential information to readers.
When summarizing a scientific article, it's important to:
Highlight the important methods, data, and analyses used in the study
Note the study's core findings and conclusions
Maintain the authors' original meaning and intent
Follow applicable formatting guidelines (e.g. APA style)
Adhering to these principles helps preserve the accuracy and integrity of the research while making the information more readily digestible.
Here is an example summary incorporating the best practices covered in this article:
Smith et al. (2021) set out to understand the effects of climate change on crop yields. The authors analyzed 30 years of temperature, rainfall, and corn production data across major farming regions of the U.S. Midwest. They found that increased temperatures and shifting rainfall patterns have already caused measurable declines in corn yields over the past decade. Based on predictive climate models, the authors expect these negative impacts on crop productivity to accelerate in the coming years if mitigation measures are not adopted. This clearly structured summary concisely conveys the objective, methods, key results, and conclusions of the article while maintaining authorial intent and voice. The formatting adheres to APA guidelines.
In this way, skillful summarization enables efficient scientific communication while upholding standards of accuracy and integrity.
Antonio Carlos Filho @acfilho_dev
The discussion section of a research paper analyzes and interprets the findings, provides context, compares them with previous studies, identifies limitations, and suggests future research directions.
Updated on September 15, 2023
Structure your discussion section right, and you’ll be cited more often while doing a greater service to the scientific community. So, what actually goes into the discussion section? And how do you write it?
The discussion section of your research paper is where you let the reader know how your study is positioned in the literature, what to take away from your paper, and how your work helps them. It can also include your conclusions and suggestions for future studies.
First, we’ll define all the parts of your discussion paper, and then look into how to write a strong, effective discussion section for your paper or manuscript.
The discussion section comes later in your paper, following the introduction, methods, and results. The discussion sets up your study’s conclusions. Its main goals are to present, interpret, and provide a context for your results.
The discussion section provides an analysis and interpretation of the findings, compares them with previous studies, identifies limitations, and suggests future directions for research.
This section combines information from the preceding parts of your paper into a coherent story. By this point, the reader already knows why you did your study (introduction), how you did it (methods), and what happened (results). In the discussion, you’ll help the reader connect the ideas from these sections.
The discussion provides context and interpretations for the results. It also answers the questions posed in the introduction. While the results section describes your findings, the discussion explains what they say. This is also where you can describe the impact or implications of your research.
Most research studies aim to answer a question, replicate a finding, or address limitations in the literature. These goals are first described in the introduction. However, in the discussion section, the author can refer back to them to explain how the study's objective was achieved.
The discussion can also describe the effect of your findings on research or practice. How are your results significant for readers, other researchers, or policymakers?
A complete and effective discussion section should at least touch on the points described below.
The discussion should begin with a brief factual summary of the results. Concisely overview the main results you obtained.
Your results section described a list of findings, but what message do they send when you look at them all together?
Your findings were detailed in the results section, so there’s no need to repeat them here, but do provide at least a few highlights. This will help refresh the reader’s memory and help them focus on the big picture.
Read the first paragraph of the discussion section in this article (PDF) for an example of how to start this part of your paper. Notice how the authors break down their results and follow each description sentence with an explanation of why each finding is relevant.
Following a clear and direct writing style is especially important in the discussion section. After all, this is where you will make some of the most impactful points in your paper. While the results section often contains technical vocabulary, such as statistical terms, the discussion section lets you describe your findings more clearly.
Once you’ve given your reader an overview of your results, you need to interpret those results. In other words, what do your results mean? Discuss the findings’ implications and significance in relation to your research question or hypothesis.
Look into your findings and explore what’s behind them or what may have caused them. If your introduction cited theories or studies that could explain your findings, use these sources as a basis to discuss your results.
For example, look at the second paragraph in the discussion section of this article on waggling honey bees. Here, the authors explore their results based on information from the literature.
Sometimes, your findings are not what you expect. Here’s where you describe this and try to find a reason for it. Could it be because of the method you used? Does it have something to do with the variables analyzed? Comparing your methods with those of other similar studies can help with this task.
Refer to related studies to place your research in a larger context and the literature. Compare and contrast your findings with existing literature, highlighting similarities, differences, and/or contradictions.
Studies with similar findings to yours can be cited to show the strength of your findings. Information from these studies can also be used to help explain your results. Differences between your findings and others in the literature can also be discussed here.
If you have more than one objective in your study or many key findings, you can dedicate a separate section to each of these. Here’s an example of this approach. You can see that the discussion section is divided into topics and even has a separate heading for each of them.
Many journals require you to include the limitations of your study in the discussion. Even if they don’t, there are good reasons to mention these in your paper.
A study’s limitations are points to be improved upon in future research. While some of these may be flaws in your method, many may be due to factors you couldn’t predict.
Examples include time constraints or small sample sizes. Pointing this out will help future researchers avoid or address these issues. This part of the discussion can also include any attempts you have made to reduce the impact of these limitations, as in this study .
Pointing out the limitations of your study demonstrates transparency. It also shows that you know your methods well and can conduct a critical assessment of them.
The final paragraph of the discussion section should contain the take-home messages for your study. It can also cite the “strong points” of your study, to contrast with the limitations section.
Remind the reader what your hypothesis was before you conducted the study.
Identify your main findings and describe how they relate to your hypothesis.
Were you able to answer your research question? Or address a gap in the literature?
Describe the impact that your results may have on the topic of study. Your results may show, for instance, that there are still limitations in the literature for future studies to address. There may be a need for studies that extend your findings in a specific way. You also may need additional research to corroborate your findings.
This fictitious example covers all the aspects discussed above. Your actual discussion section will probably be much longer, but you can read this to get an idea of everything your discussion should cover.
Our results showed that the presence of cats in a household is associated with higher levels of perceived happiness by its human occupants. These findings support our hypothesis and demonstrate the association between pet ownership and well-being.
The present findings align with those of Bao and Schreer (2016) and Hardie et al. (2023), who observed greater life satisfaction in pet owners relative to non-owners. Although the present study did not directly evaluate life satisfaction, this factor may explain the association between happiness and cat ownership observed in our sample.
Our findings must be interpreted in light of some limitations, such as the focus on cat ownership only rather than pets as a whole. This may limit the generalizability of our results.
Nevertheless, this study had several strengths. These include its strict exclusion criteria and use of a standardized assessment instrument to investigate the relationships between pets and owners. These attributes bolster the accuracy of our results and reduce the influence of confounding factors, increasing the strength of our conclusions. Future studies may examine the factors that mediate the association between pet ownership and happiness to better comprehend this phenomenon.
This brief discussion begins with a quick summary of the results and hypothesis. The next paragraph cites previous research and compares its findings to those of this study. Information from previous studies is also used to help interpret the findings. After discussing the results of the study, some limitations are pointed out. The paper also explains why these limitations may influence the interpretation of results. Then, final conclusions are drawn based on the study, and directions for future research are suggested.
If you find writing in scientific English challenging, the discussion and conclusions are often the hardest parts of the paper to write. That’s because you’re not just listing up studies, methods, and outcomes. You’re actually expressing your thoughts and interpretations in words.
Always give it your best, but sometimes a helping hand can, well, help. Getting a professional edit can help clarify your work’s importance while improving the English used to explain it. When readers know the value of your work, they’ll cite it. We’ll assign your study to an expert editor knowledgeable in your area of research. Their work will clarify your discussion, helping it to tell your story. Find out more about AJE Editing.
Adam Goulston, PsyD, MS, MBA, MISD, ELS
Science Marketing Consultant
See our "Privacy Policy"
Pair your Premium Editing with our add-on service Presubmission Review for an overall assessment of your manuscript.
Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, generate accurate citations for free.
Methodology
Published on January 2, 2023 by Shona McCombes . Revised on September 11, 2023.
What is a literature review? A literature review is a survey of scholarly sources on a specific topic. It provides an overview of current knowledge, allowing you to identify relevant theories, methods, and gaps in the existing research that you can later apply to your paper, thesis, or dissertation topic .
There are five key steps to writing a literature review:
A good literature review doesn’t just summarize sources—it analyzes, synthesizes , and critically evaluates to give a clear picture of the state of knowledge on the subject.
Upload your document to correct all your mistakes in minutes
What is the purpose of a literature review, examples of literature reviews, step 1 – search for relevant literature, step 2 – evaluate and select sources, step 3 – identify themes, debates, and gaps, step 4 – outline your literature review’s structure, step 5 – write your literature review, free lecture slides, other interesting articles, frequently asked questions, introduction.
When you write a thesis , dissertation , or research paper , you will likely have to conduct a literature review to situate your research within existing knowledge. The literature review gives you a chance to:
Writing literature reviews is a particularly important skill if you want to apply for graduate school or pursue a career in research. We’ve written a step-by-step guide that you can follow below.
The academic proofreading tool has been trained on 1000s of academic texts. Making it the most accurate and reliable proofreading tool for students. Free citation check included.
Try for free
Writing literature reviews can be quite challenging! A good starting point could be to look at some examples, depending on what kind of literature review you’d like to write.
You can also check out our templates with literature review examples and sample outlines at the links below.
Download Word doc Download Google doc
Before you begin searching for literature, you need a clearly defined topic .
If you are writing the literature review section of a dissertation or research paper, you will search for literature related to your research problem and questions .
Start by creating a list of keywords related to your research question. Include each of the key concepts or variables you’re interested in, and list any synonyms and related terms. You can add to this list as you discover new keywords in the process of your literature search.
Use your keywords to begin searching for sources. Some useful databases to search for journals and articles include:
You can also use boolean operators to help narrow down your search.
Make sure to read the abstract to find out whether an article is relevant to your question. When you find a useful book or article, you can check the bibliography to find other relevant sources.
You likely won’t be able to read absolutely everything that has been written on your topic, so it will be necessary to evaluate which sources are most relevant to your research question.
For each publication, ask yourself:
Make sure the sources you use are credible , and make sure you read any landmark studies and major theories in your field of research.
You can use our template to summarize and evaluate sources you’re thinking about using. Click on either button below to download.
As you read, you should also begin the writing process. Take notes that you can later incorporate into the text of your literature review.
It is important to keep track of your sources with citations to avoid plagiarism . It can be helpful to make an annotated bibliography , where you compile full citation information and write a paragraph of summary and analysis for each source. This helps you remember what you read and saves time later in the process.
To begin organizing your literature review’s argument and structure, be sure you understand the connections and relationships between the sources you’ve read. Based on your reading and notes, you can look for:
This step will help you work out the structure of your literature review and (if applicable) show how your own research will contribute to existing knowledge.
There are various approaches to organizing the body of a literature review. Depending on the length of your literature review, you can combine several of these strategies (for example, your overall structure might be thematic, but each theme is discussed chronologically).
The simplest approach is to trace the development of the topic over time. However, if you choose this strategy, be careful to avoid simply listing and summarizing sources in order.
Try to analyze patterns, turning points and key debates that have shaped the direction of the field. Give your interpretation of how and why certain developments occurred.
If you have found some recurring central themes, you can organize your literature review into subsections that address different aspects of the topic.
For example, if you are reviewing literature about inequalities in migrant health outcomes, key themes might include healthcare policy, language barriers, cultural attitudes, legal status, and economic access.
If you draw your sources from different disciplines or fields that use a variety of research methods , you might want to compare the results and conclusions that emerge from different approaches. For example:
A literature review is often the foundation for a theoretical framework . You can use it to discuss various theories, models, and definitions of key concepts.
You might argue for the relevance of a specific theoretical approach, or combine various theoretical concepts to create a framework for your research.
Like any other academic text , your literature review should have an introduction , a main body, and a conclusion . What you include in each depends on the objective of your literature review.
The introduction should clearly establish the focus and purpose of the literature review.
Depending on the length of your literature review, you might want to divide the body into subsections. You can use a subheading for each theme, time period, or methodological approach.
As you write, you can follow these tips:
In the conclusion, you should summarize the key findings you have taken from the literature and emphasize their significance.
When you’ve finished writing and revising your literature review, don’t forget to proofread thoroughly before submitting. Not a language expert? Check out Scribbr’s professional proofreading services !
This article has been adapted into lecture slides that you can use to teach your students about writing a literature review.
Scribbr slides are free to use, customize, and distribute for educational purposes.
Open Google Slides Download PowerPoint
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.
Statistics
Research bias
A literature review is a survey of scholarly sources (such as books, journal articles, and theses) related to a specific topic or research question .
It is often written as part of a thesis, dissertation , or research paper , in order to situate your work in relation to existing knowledge.
There are several reasons to conduct a literature review at the beginning of a research project:
Writing the literature review shows your reader how your work relates to existing research and what new insights it will contribute.
The literature review usually comes near the beginning of your thesis or dissertation . After the introduction , it grounds your research in a scholarly field and leads directly to your theoretical framework or methodology .
A literature review is a survey of credible sources on a topic, often used in dissertations , theses, and research papers . Literature reviews give an overview of knowledge on a subject, helping you identify relevant theories and methods, as well as gaps in existing research. Literature reviews are set up similarly to other academic texts , with an introduction , a main body, and a conclusion .
An annotated bibliography is a list of source references that has a short description (called an annotation ) for each of the sources. It is often assigned as part of the research process for a paper .
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, September 11). How to Write a Literature Review | Guide, Examples, & Templates. Scribbr. Retrieved June 24, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/dissertation/literature-review/
Other students also liked, what is a theoretical framework | guide to organizing, what is a research methodology | steps & tips, how to write a research proposal | examples & templates, get unlimited documents corrected.
✔ Free APA citation check included ✔ Unlimited document corrections ✔ Specialized in correcting academic texts
Chapter: chapter 5 summary, findings, and recommendations.
Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
CHAPIER 5 SI~MARY, FINDINGS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS SUGARY The primary objective of this research was to identify unproved methods for draining rainwater from the surface of multi-lane pavements and to develop guidelines for their use. The guidelines, along with details on the rationale for their development, are presented in a separate document' "Proposed Design Guidelines for Improving Pavement Surface Drainage" (2J. The guidelines support an interactive computer program, PAVDRN, that can be used by practicing engineers In the process of designing new pavements or rehabilitating old pavements' is outlined In figure 39. The intended audience for the guidelines is practicing highway design engineers that work for transportation agencies or consulting firms. Improved pavement surface drainage is needed for two reasons: (~) to minimize splash and spray and (2) to control the tendency for hydroplaning. Both issues are primary safety concerns. At the request of the advisory panel for the project, the main focus of this study was on ~mprov~g surface drainage to mammae the tendency for hydroplaning. In terms of reducing the tendency for hydroplaTuT g, the needed level of drainage is defined in terms of the thickness of the film of water on the pavement. Therefore, the guidelines were developed within the context of reducing the thickness of the water film on pavement surfaces to the extent that hydroplaning is unlikely at highway design speeds. Since hydroplaning is ~7
DESIGN CRITERIA Pavement Geometry Number of lanes Section type - Tangent - Horizontal curve - Transition - Vertical crest curve - Vertical sag curve Enviromnental oramaters Rainfall intensity ~ Temperature Pavement Tvpe Dense-graded asphalt Porous asphalt Portland cement concrete ~ Grooved Portland cement concrete Desion Soeed Allowable speed for onset of hydroplaning Recommend Desion Changes Alter geometry Alter pavement surface Add appurtenances Groove (Portland cement concrete) CALCULATIONS Lenoth of flow path Calculate on basis of pavement geometry IT Hydraulic Analvses . No? Water film thickness Equation No. 10 Equation No.'s. 16-19 1 Hvdroolanino Analvsis Hydroplaning speed Equation No.'s 21-24 Rainfall Intensity Equation No. 25 -A I / Meet Design ~ \ Cntena? / \<es? Accent Desinn | Figure 39. Flow diagram representing PAVI)RN design process In "Proposed Guidelines for Improving Pavement Surface DrmT~age" (2). 118
controlled primarily by the thickness of the water film on the pavement surface, the design guidelines focus on the prediction and control of ache depth of water flowing across the pavement surface as a result of rainfall, often referred to as sheet flow. Water film thickness on highway pavements can be controlled In three fundamental ways, by: I. Minimizing the length of the longest flow path of the water over We pavement and thereby the distance over which the flow can develop; 2. Increasing the texture of the pavement surface; and 3. Removing water from the pavement's surface. In the process of using PAVDRN to implement the design guidelines, the designer is guided to (~) minimize the longest drainage path length of the section under design by altering the pavement geometry and (2) reduce the resultant water film thickness that will develop along that drainage path length by increasing the mean texture depth, choosing a surface that maximizes texture, or using permeable pavements, grooving, and appurtenances to remove water from the surface. Through the course of a typical design project, four key areas need to be considered in order to analyze and eventually reduce the potential for hydroplaning. These areas are: ~9
I. Environmental conditions: 2. Geometry of the roadway surface; 3. Pavement surface (texture) properties; and 4. Appurtenances. Each of these areas and their influence on the resulting hydroplaning speed of the designed section are discussed In detail In the guidelines (21. The environmental conditions considered are rainfall ~ntensibr and water temperature, which determines the kinematic viscosity of the water. The designer has no real control over these environmental factors but needs to select appropriate values when analyzing the effect of flow over the pavement surface and hydroplaning potential. Five section types, one for each of the basic geometric configurations used In highway design, are examined. These section are: 1. TaIlgent; 2. Superelevated curve; 3. Transition; 4. Vertical crest curve; and 5. Vertical sag curve. 120
Pavement properties that affect the water fihn thickness mclude surface characteristics, such as mean texture depth and grooving of Portland cement concrete surfaces, are considered In the process of applying PAVDRN. Porous asphalt pavement surfaces can also reduce He water film thickness and thereby contribute to the reduction of hydroplaning tendency and their presence can also be accounted for when using PAVDRN. Finally, PAVDRN also allows the design engineer to consider the effect of drainage appurtenances, such as slotted drain inlets. A complete description of the various elements that are considered In the PAVDRN program is illustrated In figure 40. A more complete description of the design process, the parameters used in the design process, and typical values for the parameters is presented In the "Proposed Design Guidelines for Improving Pavement Surface Drainage" (2) alla in Appendix A. fIN1)INGS The following findings are based on the research accomplished during the project, a survey of the literature, and a state-of-the-art survey of current practice. I. Model. The one~unensional mode} is adequate as a design tool. The simplicity and stability of the one~imensional mode} offsets any increased accuracy afforded by a two-d~mensional model. The one~mensional model as a predictor of water fiDn thickness and How path length was verified by using data from a previous study (11). 121
No. of Planes Length of Plane Grade Step Increment Wdth of Plane Cross Slope Section T,rne 1) Tangent 2) Honzontal Curare 3) Transition 4) Vertical Crest 5) Vertical Sag U=tS 1)U.S. 2) S. I. Rainfall Intenstity ~ , \ |Kinematic Viscosity |Design Speed Note: PC = Point of Curvature PI. = Point of Tangency PCC = Portland cement concrete WAC = Dense graded asphalt concrete 0GAC = 0pcn~raded asphalt concrete where OGAC includes all types of intentally draining asphalt surfaces GPCC = Grooved Ponland cement concrete Taneent Pavement Type Mean Texture Depth 1) PCC 2) DGAC 3) OGAC 4) GPCC Horizontal Cun~c Grade Cross Slope Radius of Cunran~re Wdth Pavement Type _ 2) DGAC 3) OGAC 4) GPCC Mean Texture Depth Step Increment _ Transition Length of Plane Super Elevation Tangent Cross Slope Tangent Grade width of Curve Transition Width Pavement Type_ 1) PCC 3) OGAC 4) GPCC Mean Texture Depth Step Increment Horizontal Length Cross slope width PC Grade PI' Grade Elevation: Pr-PC Vertical Crest Flow Direction Step Increment Pavement Type 1) PC Side I 2) PI. Side | 1)PCC 2) DGAC 3) OGAC 4) GPCC Mean Tex~rc Depth _ _ ~ Figure 40. Factors considered in PAVDRN program. 122 ~1 r - . , Vertical Sad | Horizontal Length | Cross slope Wldth PC Grade PI Grade Elevation: PIE Flow Direction Step Increment / Stored :_ ~ cats ~ 1) PC Side | 2) PI Side | . Pavement Typed 1) PCC 3) OGAC 14) GPCC Mean Texture Depth I I
~ Stored data V ~ 3 L IN1T For use with a second nut using data from the first run.) , 1 EPRINT (Echos input to output ) 1 CONVERT (Converts units to and from SI and English.) ~ , ADVP (Advances Page of output.) KINW (Calculates Minning's n, Water Film Thickness (WEIR), and Hydroplaning Speed UPS).) , EDGE (Determines if flow has reached the edge of the pavement.) out roar Figure 40. Factors considered in PAVDRN program (continued). 123
2. Occurrence of Hydropl~r g. In general, based on the PAVDRN mode! and the assumptions inherent in its development, hydroplaning can be expected at speeds below roadway design speeds if the length of the flow path exceeds two lane widths. 3. Water Film Thickness. Hydroplaning is initiated primarily by the depth of the water film thickness. Therefore, the primary design objective when controlling hydroplaning must be to limit the depth of the water film. 4. Reducing Water Film Thickness. There are no simple means for controlling water John thickness, but a number of methods can effectively reduce water film thickness and consequently hydroplaning potential. These include: Optimizing pavement geometry, especially cross-slope. Providing some means of additional drainage, such as use of grooved surfaces (PCC) or porous mixtures (HMA). Including slotted drains within the roadway. 5. Tests Needed for Design. The design guidelines require an estimate of the surface texture (MTD) and the coefficient of permeability Porous asphalt only). The sand patch is an acceptable test method for measuring surface texture, except for the more open (20-percent air voids) porous asphalt mixes. In these cases, an estimate of the surface texture, based on tabulated data, is sufficient. As an alternative, 124
sand patch measurements can be made on cast replicas of the surface. For the open mixes, the glass beads flow into the voids within the mixture, giving an inaccurate measure of surface texture. Based on the measurements obtained In the laboratory, the coefficient of permeability for the open-graded asphalt concrete does not exhibit a wide range of values, and values of k may be selected for design purposes from tabulated design data (k versus air voids). Given the uncertainty of this property resulting from compaction under traffic and clogging from contaminants and anti-skid material, a direct measurement (e.g., drainage lag permeameter) of k is not warranted. Based on the previous discussion, no new test procedures are needed to adopt the design guidelines developed during this project. 6. Grooving. Grooving of PCC pavements provides a reservoir for surface water and can facilitate the removal of water if the grooves are placed parallel to the flow oath. Parallel orientation is generally not practical because the flow on highway pavements is typically not transverse to the pavement. Thus, the primary contribution offered by grooving is to provide a surface reservoir unless the grooves comlect with drainage at the edge of the pavement. Once the grooves are filled with water, the tops of the grooves are the datum for the Why and do not contribute to the reduction in the hydroplaning potential. 125
7. Porous Pavements. These mixtures can enhance the water removal and Hereby reduce water film tHch~ess. They merit more consideration by highway agencies In the United States, but they are not a panacea for eliminating hydroplaning. As with grooved PCC pavements, the internal voids do not contribute to the reduction of hydroplaning; based on the field tests done In this study. hv~ronImiina can be if, , , ~ expected on these mixtures given sufficient water fiLn thickness. Other than their ability to conduct water through internal flow, the large MTD offered by porous asphalt is the main contribution offered by the mixtures to the reduction of hydroplaning potential. The high-void ~ > 20 percent), modified binder mixes used In Europe merit further evaluation in the United States. They should be used In areas where damage from freezing water and the problems of black ice are not likely. 8. Slotted Drains. These fixtures, when installed between travel lanes, offer perhaps the most effective means of controlling water film thickness from a hydraulics standpoint. They have not been used extensively In the traveled lanes and questions remain unanswered with respect to their installation (especially in rehabilitation situations) and maintenance. The ability to support traffic loads and still maintain surface smoothness has not been demonstrated and they may be susceptible to clogging from roadway debris, ice, or snow. 126
RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS The following recommendations are offered based on the work accomplished during this project and on the conclusions given previously: I. Implementation. The PAVDRN program and associated guidelines need to be field tested and revised as needed. The program and the guidelines are sufficiently complete so that they can be used in a design office. Some of the parameters and algorithms will I~ely need to be modified as experience is gained with the program. 2. Database of Material Properties. A database of material properties should be gathered to supplement the information contained in PAVDRN. This information should Include typical values for the permeability of porous asphalt and topical values for the surface texture (MTD) for different pavement surfaces to include toned Portland cement concrete surfaces. A series of photographs of typical pavement sections and their associated texture depths should be considered as an addition to the design guide (21. 3. Pavement Geometry. The AASHTO design guidelines (~) should be re-evaluated In terms of current design criteria to determine if they can be modified to enhance drainage without adversely affecting vehicle handling or safety. ~27
4. Use of appurtenances. Slotted drams should be evaluated In the field to determine if they are practical when Installed In the traveled way. Manufacturers should reconsider the design of slotted drains and their Installation recommendations currently In force to maximize them for use In multi-lane pavements and to determine if slotted drains are suitable for installations In the traveled right of way. 5. Porous Asphalt Mixtures. More use should be made of these mixtures, especially the modified high a~r-void mixtures as used In France. Field trials should be conducted to monitor HPS and the long-term effectiveness of these mixtures and to validate the MPS and WDT predicted by PAVDRN. 6. Two-D~mensional Model. Further work should be done with two~mensional models to determine if they improve accuracy of PAVDRN and to determine if they are practical from a computational standpoint. ADDITIONAL STUDIES On the basis of the work done during this study, a number of additional items warrant furler study. These Include: 1. Full-scale skid resistance studies to validate PAVDRN in general and the relationship between water film thickness and hydroplaning potential in particular are needed in light of the unexpectedly low hvdronlanin~ speeds predicted during 128 , . ~. , ~
this study. The effect of water infiltration into pavement cracks and loss of water by splash and spray need to be accounted for In the prediction of water fihn Sickness. Surface Irregularities, especially rutting, need to be considered in the prediction models. 2. Field trials are needed to confirm the effectiveness of alternative asphalt and Portland cement concrete surfaces. These include porous Portland cement concrete surfaces, porous asphalt concrete, and various asphalt m~cro-surfaces. 3. The permeability of porous surface mixtures needs to be confirmed with samples removed from the field, and the practicality of a simplified method for measuring in-situ permeability must be investigated and compared to alternative measurements, such as the outflow meter. 4. For measuring pavement texture, alternatives to the sand patch method should be investigated, especially for use with porous asphalt mixtures. 129
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
READ FREE ONLINE
You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.
Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?
Show this book's table of contents , where you can jump to any chapter by name.
...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.
Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.
To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter .
Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.
View our suggested citation for this chapter.
Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.
Do you enjoy reading reports from the Academies online for free ? Sign up for email notifications and we'll let you know about new publications in your areas of interest when they're released.
Newly Launched - AI Presentation Maker
Researched by Consultants from Top-Tier Management Companies
Powerpoint Templates
Icon Bundle
Kpi Dashboard
Professional
Business Plans
Swot Analysis
Gantt Chart
Business Proposal
Marketing Plan
Project Management
Business Case
Business Model
Cyber Security
Business PPT
Digital Marketing
Digital Transformation
Human Resources
Product Management
Artificial Intelligence
Company Profile
Acknowledgement PPT
PPT Presentation
Reports Brochures
One Page Pitch
Interview PPT
All Categories
Imagine rifling through hundreds of pages of data and reports and still missing out on major red flags that it might be raising for major stakeholders. In this sea of information, a summary of findings emerges as a lifeboat, ensuring that researchers and decision-makers don’t drown without even a second-chance or the rescue mission reaching them.
The central idea of compiling a summary of findings is to ensure that pivotal insights are not lost in irrelevant details. The importance of a well-crafted summary lies in its ability to distill the essence of extensive research. Such a PPT Template provides the roadmap to key discoveries and implications, saving time, and enabling informed decision-making.
A summary is a concise and clear overview of the main points, findings, or recommendations of a longer document, such as a report, proposal, or research paper. A summary helps your readers understand the purpose, scope, and value of your work, without having to read the whole document. However, writing a summary that highlights key findings can be challenging, especially if you have a lot of information to condense and organize.
Before you start writing your summary, you need to identify the purpose and audience of your document. The purpose is the reason why you are writing the summary, such as to inform, persuade, or update your readers. The audience is the group of people who will read your summary, such as your manager, client, or colleague. Knowing your purpose and audience will help you decide what information to include, what tone to use, and how much detail to provide in your summary.
Next, you need to review the original document and extract the findings that you want to highlight in your summary. Key findings are the most important or relevant results, conclusions, or recommendations that support your purpose and address your audience's needs or interests. To find the key findings, you can look for the main ideas, arguments, or evidence in each section of the document, as well as the executive summary, introduction, and conclusion.
After you have identified the key findings, you need to organize these in a logical and coherent way in your summary.
The methods in vogue to do this are chronological order, problem-solution structure, or thematic analysis. The method you choose should depend on the type, length, and complexity of the original document, as well as your purpose and audience. This is where SlideTeam’s Summary of Findings Templates enter, to help you organize these findings in charts, tables, and graphs.
These templates are 100% editable, customizable and content-ready; provide you with a structure to build your summary report highlighting key findings. With the desired flexibility to edit, they can be tailored to your original document type.
Let's explore the templates!
The PPT Deck has over five templates to sort and structure your data. The first layout has a priority table to categorize tasks based on their recommendation and location. There are infographics like odometers to depict real-time data such as customer recognition, enhanced sales, and competitive edge. Use the columns to present highlighted information like annual sales, forecasted expenditure, and warning or detected red flags. To explore more, download now!
Download Now
Use this concise and effective summary template to present crucial information and data. The below given template features three primary columns. The first one comprises any relevant statements or assumptions. The second column records evidence in the form of the data concerned and statistics. Use the last column to note the impact and consideration for other executives, with reference to the initial statement or assumption. Download Now!
Internal team audits are crucial for ensuring organizational effectiveness, identifying operational inefficiencies, and fostering continuous improvement by evaluating and enhancing the performance of internal processes and teams. Use this template to ensure a systematic review. List the areas that need to be reviewed in the vertical left column and rate their performance in the column alongside. Keep a track of total recommendations received in the term for each of the departments. The last column will enable you to segregate the addressed and incomplete recommendations. Download now
The internal audit teams ensure systematic reviews that enhance operational efficiency, risk management, and regulatory compliance, fostering transparency and accountability. With this tool they can summarize their findings and highlight the severity of the action plan. Users can design a priority list of tasks and make this template ultra-useful. Rate the issues in the range of extreme, high, medium, to low. Get ready to act, download now!
Use this Template to highlight issues that require actions to be taken care of. Write in category the issue and record the related findings and recommendation. This Summary PPT Template has a matrix that plots the severity of the issue against the effort to implement the contingency plan. This will enable you to plan out actions and budgets for the upcoming term, while ensuring company sustainability. Download Now!
A summary of the findings template presents key information about the most important outcomes of a project or operation, including the best effect estimate and the certainty of the evidence for each outcome. An interactive summary of findings presentation enables users to view more or fewer outcomes and more or less information about each outcome as per requirement. Compile summaries in your preferred format with these hands-on templates that offer practical, actionable and implementable information.
This form is protected by reCAPTCHA - the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Masomo Msingi Desktop App
MASOMO MSINGI PUBLISHERS
KASNEB|KNEC|KISM
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
This chapter summarizes the whole research process. It first provides a brief summary of the whole study with particular reference to the research problem, research methodology, results, the main contributions of the research and recommendations for future work. It provides a summary of the main findings of the study, conclusions and recommendations. This chapter should be reasonably short.
The readers would want to know whether the objectives of the study were achieved, and whether the work has contributed to knowledge. Therefore, when compiling this chapter, a researcher should focus on answering these questions.
Any conclusions drawn should be those resulting from the study. A researcher should make relevant references to chapters that support the listed findings and may also refer to the work of others for comparison. However, one should not discuss the stu1y’s results here.
Summary of the Main Findings
In summarizing, a researcher should identify the findings of the study and discuss them briefly. In addition, the methodological problems encountered should be outlined so that future/other researchers may take the relevant precautions. The researcher should clearly pinpoint if the study objectives were achieved or not. An effective summary has the following qualities:
Recommendations
One way to present the summary is to use one paragraph for each idea. Alternatively, the researcher can use a point-by-point format.
The Conclusion section should be very brief, about half a page. It should indicate what the study results reaffirm. It should also briefly discuss some of the strategies highlighted by the respondents. In this section, the researcher should clearly state how the study has contributed to knowledge.
The recommendations section is important in research. This section often exposes further problems and introduces more questions. As a researcher, there is a time limit to the research project, so it is unlikely that the study would have solved all the problems associated with the area of study. The researcher is therefore expected to make suggestions about how his/her work can be improved, and also based on the study findings, point out whether there are areas that deserve further investigation. This section will indicate whether a researcher has a firm appreciation of his/her work, and whether he/ she has given sufficient thought to its implications, not only within the narrow confines of the research topic but to related fields. This section reflects the researcher’s foresightedness and creativity.
Research is a systematic investigation to establish facts and reach new conclusions. It involves collecting and analyzing data, often using a research questionnaire , and presenting findings to expand knowledge in a specific field. Key aspects include adhering to research ethics and exploring crisis communication research topics to manage and communicate effectively during crises.
Research is a systematic investigation and study of materials, sources, and data to establish facts and reach new conclusions. It involves gathering information, analyzing it critically, and presenting findings in a structured manner to increase knowledge in a specific field or address a particular problem. This process is fundamental in various disciplines, including science, humanities, and social sciences, and it helps to develop theories, inform policy, and contribute to the advancement of society.
Research is a systematic investigation aimed at discovering new information, understanding existing phenomena, and solving problems. There are several types of research, each with its own methodologies and purposes. Below are the main types of research with examples.
Basic research, also known as pure or fundamental research, is conducted to increase knowledge and understanding of fundamental principles. It is not aimed at solving immediate practical problems but rather at gaining a deeper insight into the subject. Example: A study investigating the molecular structure of proteins to understand how they function in the human body.
Applied research is designed to solve practical problems and improve the human condition. It uses the knowledge gained from basic research to develop new products, processes, or techniques. Example: Developing a new medication to treat Alzheimer’s disease based on findings from basic research on brain cell functions.
Quantitative research involves the systematic empirical investigation of observable phenomena via statistical, mathematical, or computational techniques. It seeks to quantify data and typically uses surveys, questionnaires, or experiments. Example: Conducting a survey to measure customer satisfaction levels among users of a new smartphone.
Qualitative research aims to understand human behavior and the reasons that govern such behavior. It involves collecting non-numerical data, such as interviews, observations, and open-ended surveys. Example: Interviewing patients to understand their experiences and feelings about a new healthcare program.
Descriptive research seeks to describe characteristics of a population or phenomenon being studied. It does not answer questions about how/when/why the characteristics occurred, but rather “what” is happening. Example: A study detailing the demographics of students in a particular school district.
Experimental research is used to establish cause-and-effect relationships among variables. It involves manipulating one variable to determine if changes in one variable cause changes in another variable. Example: Testing the effectiveness of a new drug by administering it to one group of patients and a placebo to another group.
Correlational research investigates the relationship between two or more variables without manipulating them. It identifies patterns, trends, and associations between variables. Example: Studying the correlation between hours of study and academic performance among high school students.
Exploratory research is conducted to explore a problem or a new area where little information exists. It is often the initial research conducted before more conclusive research. Example: Exploring the potential uses of a newly discovered plant with medicinal properties.
Longitudinal research involves repeated observations of the same variables over a period of time. It is useful for studying changes and developments over time. Example: Following a group of children from kindergarten through high school to study the impact of early education on later academic success.
Cross-sectional research analyzes data from a population, or a representative subset, at a specific point in time. It provides a snapshot of the variables of interest. Example: A survey assessing the health status of a community at a single point in time.
Case study research involves an in-depth, detailed examination of a single subject, group, or event. It provides a comprehensive understanding of the case being studied. Example: Analyzing the business strategies of a successful startup to understand the factors contributing to its success.
Action research is conducted to solve an immediate problem or improve p Example: Implementing and assessing a new teaching method in a classroom to improve student engagement and learning outcomes.
Research is crucial in various fields, offering numerous benefits and advancing knowledge in significant ways. Here are some key reasons why research is important:
Research pushes the boundaries of what is known and explores new areas of inquiry. It helps to uncover new facts, theories, and insights that contribute to the collective understanding of a subject.
Research provides reliable data and evidence that guide decisions in fields such as healthcare, business, education, and public policy. For example, medical research can lead to the development of new treatments and drugs.
Research identifies and analyzes problems, proposing effective solutions. For instance, environmental research can help address climate change by finding sustainable practices and technologies.
Research fosters innovation by developing new products, technologies, and processes. Technological advancements, such as smartphones and renewable energy sources, are direct results of extensive research.
Research drives economic development by creating new industries and improving existing ones. It leads to job creation, enhances productivity, and contributes to a nation’s economic stability.
Research enhances educational content and teaching methods. It provides a deeper understanding of subjects, helping educators develop better curricula and instructional strategies.
What is a hypothesis in research.
A hypothesis is a testable prediction about the relationship between two or more variables. It guides the research process.
Select a topic that interests you, fills a gap in existing literature, and is feasible in terms of resources and time.
A literature review is a comprehensive summary of previous research on a topic. It identifies trends, gaps, and key findings.
Primary data is collected firsthand by the researcher. Secondary data is gathered from existing sources like books, articles, and reports.
Research ethics involve principles like honesty, integrity, and respect for participants. Ethical guidelines ensure research is conducted responsibly.
A research design is a plan that outlines how to collect and analyze data. It includes methods, sampling, and procedures.
Sampling is selecting a subset of individuals from a population to represent the entire group. It can be random or non-random.
Data analysis involves processing and interpreting data to draw meaningful conclusions. Techniques vary based on the research type.
A research paper includes an introduction, literature review, methodology, results, discussion, and conclusion. Follow a clear and logical structure.
Peer review is a process where experts evaluate a researcher’s work for quality, accuracy, and validity before publication.
Text prompt
10 Examples of Public speaking
20 Examples of Gas lighting
IMAGES
VIDEO
COMMENTS
Research Summary. Definition: A research summary is a brief and concise overview of a research project or study that highlights its key findings, main points, and conclusions. It typically includes a description of the research problem, the research methods used, the results obtained, and the implications or significance of the findings.
5.3 Summary of Findings . ... The findings for Research Question 4 revealed ... A short presentation based on the first 2 Research Questions from my PhD thesis and examples of some of my findings.
Figure 14.1.a provides an example of a 'Summary of findings' table. Figure 15.1.b provides an alternative format that may further facilitate users' understanding and interpretation of the review's findings. Evidence evaluating different formats suggests that the 'Summary of findings' table should include a risk difference as a ...
A research article usually has seven major sections: Title, Abstract, Introduction, Method, Results, Discussion, and References. The first thing you should do is to decide why you need to summarize the article. If the purpose of the summary is to take notes to later remind yourself about the article you may want to write a longer summary ...
So, follow the steps below to write a research summary that sticks. 1. Read the parent paper thoroughly. You should go through the research paper thoroughly multiple times to ensure that you have a complete understanding of its contents. A 3-stage reading process helps.
Conclusion: This section provides a summary of the key findings and the main conclusions of the study. ... Following is a Research Findings Example sample for students: Title: The Effects of Exercise on Mental Health. Sample: 500 participants, both men and women, between the ages of 18-45.
A summary must be coherent and cogent and should make sense as a stand-alone piece of writing. It is typically 5% to 10% of the length of the original paper; however, the length depends on the length and complexity of the article and the purpose of the summary. Accordingly, a summary can be several paragraphs or pages, a single paragraph, or ...
Table of contents. When to write a summary. Step 1: Read the text. Step 2: Break the text down into sections. Step 3: Identify the key points in each section. Step 4: Write the summary. Step 5: Check the summary against the article. Other interesting articles. Frequently asked questions about summarizing.
Begin with a clear statement of the principal findings. This will reinforce the main take-away for the reader and set up the rest of the discussion. Explain why the outcomes of your study are important to the reader. Discuss the implications of your findings realistically based on previous literature, highlighting both the strengths and ...
A research summary is a piece of writing that summarizes your research on a specific topic. Its primary goal is to offer the reader a detailed overview of the study with the key findings. A research summary generally contains the article's structure in which it is written. You must know the goal of your analysis before you launch a project.
A research paper conclusion is not just a summary of your study, but a synthesis of the key findings that ties the research together and places it in a broader context. A research paper conclusion should be concise, typically around one paragraph in length.
Table of contents. Step 1: Restate the problem. Step 2: Sum up the paper. Step 3: Discuss the implications. Research paper conclusion examples. Frequently asked questions about research paper conclusions.
E. Research Methodology (Summary) In paragraph form, describe the basic elements of your research design. Use words that lay practitioners will understand. Word Limit: About 200 words for each separate experiment or study that is described (up to 500 words if three or more experiments or separate studies were conducted).
A research summary is a piece of writing that summarizes the research of a specific topic into bite-size easy-to-read and comprehend articles. The primary goal is to give the reader a detailed outline of the key findings of a research. It is an unavoidable requirement in colleges and universities. To write a good research summary, you must ...
A Summary of Findings (SoF) table provides a summary of the main results of a review together with an assessment of the quality or certainty1 of the evidence (assessed using the GRADE tool) upon which these results are based. Assessing the certainty of the evidence for each outcome using GRADE is now compulsory in all new and updated reviews.
A typical research summary includes the following key sections: introduction (including the research question or objective), methodology (briefly describing the research design and methods), results (summarizing the key findings), discussion (highlighting the implications and significance of the findings), and conclusion (providing a summary of ...
Focus on what findings reveal about the research problem. Capture enough detail to convey original intent. Synthesize using clear, concise language ... Summary of a Research Article Example. Here is an example summary incorporating the best practices covered in this article: Smith et al. (2021) set out to understand the effects of climate ...
More information on completing summary of findings tables and grading the certainty of the evidence can be found in Chapter 14 of The Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions . Cochrane Training has produced a micro-learning module on creating informative summary of findings tables to accompany this article ( https://links ...
The discussion section provides an analysis and interpretation of the findings, compares them with previous studies, identifies limitations, and suggests future directions for research. This section combines information from the preceding parts of your paper into a coherent story. By this point, the reader already knows why you did your study ...
Tip If you are writing the literature review as part of your dissertation or thesis, reiterate your central problem or research question and give a brief summary of the scholarly context. You can emphasize the timeliness of the topic ("many recent studies have focused on the problem of x") or highlight a gap in the literature ("while ...
A more complete description of the design process, the parameters used in the design process, and typical values for the parameters is presented In the "Proposed Design Guidelines for Improving Pavement Surface Drainage" (2) alla in Appendix A. fIN1)INGS The following findings are based on the research accomplished during the project, a survey ...
Template 1: Summary of Key Findings PPT Deck. The PPT Deck has over five templates to sort and structure your data. The first layout has a priority table to categorize tasks based on their recommendation and location. There are infographics like odometers to depict real-time data such as customer recognition, enhanced sales, and competitive edge.
Here's a few steps on how to make a first draft: First, state the research question in the introduction of your summary. This holds the ground as to the summary's direction. Provide an explanation why your research is interesting and how it can help your target recipients. Second, state the hypothesis you wish to prove.
An effective summary has the following qualities: It bases on results from the study. It is brief, all statements are concise, and pinpoint to the contributions that the researcher has made. Recommendations. All statements are factual. One way to present the summary is to use one paragraph for each idea. Alternatively, the researcher can use a ...
The presses publish research monographs, undergraduate texts, school textbooks, professional books, trade books, reference works and research journals. The main publishing categories are undergraduate textbooks and research monographs. Table 5.4 gives the summary of categories published by each press. 5. Are they actually sold, if so in what ...
Research is a systematic investigation to establish facts and reach new conclusions. It involves collecting and analyzing data, often using a research questionnaire, and presenting findings to expand knowledge in a specific field.Key aspects include adhering to research ethics and exploring crisis communication research topics to manage and communicate effectively during crises.