Advertisement

Choosing a Suitable Research Area and Supervisor

  • Prashant Joshi
Chapter

Abstract

  • Most research topics are selected with ease using a lot of common sense.

  • Meticulously selected research topics are easy to work on and more likely to finish in the given time frame.

  • It is vital to know the time frame and resources available right from the start to accomplish the research project.

  • A good mentor can not only facilitate the research project but also, eventually, help in getting published.

  • The research topics are everywhere. From within one’s own thoughts to the existing status of healthcare there are infinite possibilities of useful research topics that could advance the field of medical science.

  • Finding a suitable mentor, with expertise and interest in the selected research topic is as important as selecting the research topic itself.

  • Some research projects need more than one mentor.

  • Mentorship is a learned skill.

  • Both the mentor as well as the mentee works together with compassion, dedication and develop/evolve the new idea. Both are ‘involved’ in the new concept and make the concept ‘evolve’.

  • For publishing the research, the study design needs to be optimised. Narrowing the topic improves the focus and makes the conclusion more accurate.

  • To succeed in the publication of a research project both mentor and mentee have to play their roles while molding their characters to fit in with their responsibilities.

References

  1. 1.
    Russel B. Problems of philosophy. Radford: Wilder Publications; 2008.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Howell E, Kravet S, Wright SM. An innovative approach to supporting hospital physicians towards academic success. J Hops Med. 2008;3:314–8.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hussey-Jones J, Berstein L, Higgins S, Malebranche D, Paranjape A, Geano I, et al. Repaving the road to academic success: the IMeREG approach to peer mentoring. Acad Med. 2006;81:674–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Sambunjak D, Straus SE, Marusik A. Mentoring in academic medicine: a systematic review. JAMA. 2006;296:1103–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Keyser DJ, Lakosi JM, Lara-Cinisomo S, Schultz DJ, Williams VL, Zellers DF, et al. Advancing institutional efforts to support research mentorship: a conceptual framework and self assessment tool. Acad Med. 2008;83:217–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cohen MS, Jacobs JP, Quintessenza JA, Chai PJ, Lindberg HL, Dickey J, et al. Mentorship, learning curves, and balance. Cardiol Young. 2007;17:164–74.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Zukerman H. Scientific elite: nobel laureates in the United States. New York: Free Press; 1977.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bettmann M. Choosing a research project and a research mentor. Circulation. 2009;119:1832–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Wright DE, Titus SL, Cornelison JB. Mentoring and research misconduct: an analysis of research mentoring in closed ORI cases. Sci Eng Ethics. 2008;14:323–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Prashant Joshi
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Cardiothoracic SurgeryMonash HealthMelbourneAustralia

Personalised recommendations