Judging clinical research questions

What criteria are used?

H. J. Sutherland, E. M. Meslin, R. da Cunha, J. E. Till

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

10 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The research question is a crucial aspect of every study. Criteria for the evaluation of the merit of the study question or hypothesis have received surprisingly little attention. A set of non-methodological criteria derived from interviews with 40 researchers (clinical investigators and laboratory scientists) is presented. For both types of researcher, the terms that best described the nature of the criteria included potential impact, justification, feasibility, track record, innovation, intuitive response, aesthetics and politics. The latter three criteria are notably subjective; however all the criteria have an element of non-objectivity. There may well be a reluctance to openly acknowledge that crucial choices about what scientific questions should be explored involve criteria which are themselves not 'objective', and indeed, not even 'scientific'.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1427-1430
Number of pages4
JournalSocial Science and Medicine
Volume37
Issue number12
DOIs
StatePublished - 1993
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

esthetics
politics
innovation
Research Personnel
Research
Medical Laboratory Personnel
Politics
Esthetics
Interviews
evaluation
laboratory
Clinical research
Clinical Research
aesthetics
interview

Keywords

  • clinical trials
  • peer review
  • research ethics
  • research questions

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Economics and Econometrics
  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
  • Social Psychology
  • Development
  • Health(social science)

Cite this

Sutherland, H. J., Meslin, E. M., da Cunha, R., & Till, J. E. (1993). Judging clinical research questions: What criteria are used? Social Science and Medicine, 37(12), 1427-1430. https://doi.org/10.1016/0277-9536(93)90176-5

Judging clinical research questions : What criteria are used? / Sutherland, H. J.; Meslin, E. M.; da Cunha, R.; Till, J. E.

In: Social Science and Medicine, Vol. 37, No. 12, 1993, p. 1427-1430.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Sutherland, HJ, Meslin, EM, da Cunha, R & Till, JE 1993, 'Judging clinical research questions: What criteria are used?', Social Science and Medicine, vol. 37, no. 12, pp. 1427-1430. https://doi.org/10.1016/0277-9536(93)90176-5
Sutherland, H. J. ; Meslin, E. M. ; da Cunha, R. ; Till, J. E. / Judging clinical research questions : What criteria are used?. In: Social Science and Medicine. 1993 ; Vol. 37, No. 12. pp. 1427-1430.
@article{4ebe8c1423714f85b2611ea9609c69e4,
title = "Judging clinical research questions: What criteria are used?",
abstract = "The research question is a crucial aspect of every study. Criteria for the evaluation of the merit of the study question or hypothesis have received surprisingly little attention. A set of non-methodological criteria derived from interviews with 40 researchers (clinical investigators and laboratory scientists) is presented. For both types of researcher, the terms that best described the nature of the criteria included potential impact, justification, feasibility, track record, innovation, intuitive response, aesthetics and politics. The latter three criteria are notably subjective; however all the criteria have an element of non-objectivity. There may well be a reluctance to openly acknowledge that crucial choices about what scientific questions should be explored involve criteria which are themselves not 'objective', and indeed, not even 'scientific'.",
keywords = "clinical trials, peer review, research ethics, research questions",
author = "Sutherland, {H. J.} and Meslin, {E. M.} and {da Cunha}, R. and Till, {J. E.}",
year = "1993",
doi = "10.1016/0277-9536(93)90176-5",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "37",
pages = "1427--1430",
journal = "Social Science and Medicine",
issn = "0277-9536",
publisher = "Elsevier Limited",
number = "12",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Judging clinical research questions

T2 - What criteria are used?

AU - Sutherland, H. J.

AU - Meslin, E. M.

AU - da Cunha, R.

AU - Till, J. E.

PY - 1993

Y1 - 1993

N2 - The research question is a crucial aspect of every study. Criteria for the evaluation of the merit of the study question or hypothesis have received surprisingly little attention. A set of non-methodological criteria derived from interviews with 40 researchers (clinical investigators and laboratory scientists) is presented. For both types of researcher, the terms that best described the nature of the criteria included potential impact, justification, feasibility, track record, innovation, intuitive response, aesthetics and politics. The latter three criteria are notably subjective; however all the criteria have an element of non-objectivity. There may well be a reluctance to openly acknowledge that crucial choices about what scientific questions should be explored involve criteria which are themselves not 'objective', and indeed, not even 'scientific'.

AB - The research question is a crucial aspect of every study. Criteria for the evaluation of the merit of the study question or hypothesis have received surprisingly little attention. A set of non-methodological criteria derived from interviews with 40 researchers (clinical investigators and laboratory scientists) is presented. For both types of researcher, the terms that best described the nature of the criteria included potential impact, justification, feasibility, track record, innovation, intuitive response, aesthetics and politics. The latter three criteria are notably subjective; however all the criteria have an element of non-objectivity. There may well be a reluctance to openly acknowledge that crucial choices about what scientific questions should be explored involve criteria which are themselves not 'objective', and indeed, not even 'scientific'.

KW - clinical trials

KW - peer review

KW - research ethics

KW - research questions

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0027365427&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0027365427&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/0277-9536(93)90176-5

DO - 10.1016/0277-9536(93)90176-5

M3 - Article

VL - 37

SP - 1427

EP - 1430

JO - Social Science and Medicine

JF - Social Science and Medicine

SN - 0277-9536

IS - 12

ER -