Advertisement

On Framing the Research Question and Choosing the Appropriate Research Design

  • Patrick Parfrey
  • Pietro Ravani
Protocol
Part of the Methods in Molecular Biology™ book series (MIMB, volume 473)

Abstract

Clinical epidemiology is the science of human disease investigation with a focus on diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment. The generation of a reasonable question requires the definition of patients, interventions, controls, and outcomes. The goal of research design is to minimize error, ensure adequate samples, measure input and output variables appropriately, consider external and internal validities, limit bias, and address clinical as well as statistical relevance. The hierarchy of evidence for clinical decision making places randomized controlled trials (RCT) or systematic review of good quality RCTs at the top of the evidence pyramid. Prognostic and etiologic questions are best addressed with longitudinal cohort studies.

Key words

Clinical epidemiology methodology research design evidence-based medicine randomized controlled trials longitudinal studies 

References

  1. 1.
    1. Chertow, G. M., Moe S. M. (2005) Calcification or classification? J Am Soc Nephrol 16, 293–295.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    2. Daugirdas, J. T., Depner, T. A., Gotch, F. A., et al. (1997) Comparison of methods to predict equilibrated Kt/V in the HEMO pilot study. Kidney Int 52, 1395–1405.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    3. Wright, J. T., Jr., Kusek, J. W., Toto, R. D., et al. (1996) Design and baseline characteristics of participants in the African American Study of Kidney Disease and Hypertension (AASK) Pilot Study. Control Clin Trials 17, 3S–16S.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    4. Thorpe, L. E., Gwynn, R. C., Mandel-Ricci, J., et al. (2006) Study design and participation rates of the New York City Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. Prev Chronic Dis 3, A94.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    5. Robbins, J. M., Vaccarino, V., Zhang, H., Kasl, S. V. (2000) Excess type 2 diabetes in African-American women and men aged 40–74 and socioeconomic status: Evidence from the Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. J Epidemiol Community Health 54, 839–845.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    6. Julious, S. A. (2004) Sample sizes for clinical trials with normal data. Stat Med 23, 1921–1986.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    7. Eknoyan, G., Hostetter, T., Bakris, G. L., et al. (2003) Proteinuria and other markers of chronic kidney disease: A position statement of the National Kidney Foundation (NKF) and the National Institute Of Diabetes And Digestive And Kidney Diseases (NIDDK). Am J Kidney Dis 42, 617–622.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    8. Manns, B., Owen, W. F., Jr., Winkelmayer, W. C., Devereaux, P. J., Tonelli, M., (2006) Surrogate markers in clinical studies: Problems solved or created? Am J Kidney Dis 48, 159–166.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    9. Viera, A. J., Bangdiwala, S. I. (2007) Eliminating bias in randomized controlled trials: Importance of allocation concealment and masking. Fam Med 39, 132–137.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    www.cebm.net/levels_of_evidence.asp, last accessed March 23, 2007.
  11. 11.
    11. Sibbald, B., Roberts, C. (1998) Understanding controlled trials: Crossover trials. BMJ 316,1719.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    12. Antman, E. M., Grudzien, C., Sacks, D. B. (1995) Evaluation of a rapid bedside assay for detection of serum cardiac troponin T. JAMA 273, 1279–1282.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    13. Sackett, D. L., Haynes, R. B., Guyatt, G. H., Tugwell, P. (1991) The interpretation of diagnostic data, in (Sackett, D. L., Haynes, R. B., Guyatt, G. H., Tugwell, P., eds.) Clinical Epidemiology, a Basic Science for Clinical Medicine. Little, Brown and Company, Toronto, Canada, pp. 117–119.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    14. Alp, N. J., Bell, J. A., Shahi, M. (2001) A rapid troponin-I-based protocol for assessing acute chest pain. Q J Med 94, 687–694.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    15. Moher, D., Schulz, K. F., Altman, D. G., for the CONSORT Group. (2001) The CONSORT statement: Revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomized trials. Lancet 357, 1191–1194.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    www.strobe-statement.org, last accessed March 23, 2007.
  17. 17.
    www.consort-statement.org/stardstatement.htm, last accessed March 23, 2007.
  18. 18.
    18. Moher, D., Cook, D. J., Eastwood, S., Olkin, I., Rennie, D., Stroup, D. F., for the QUOROM Group. (1999) Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials: The QUOROM statement. Lancet 354, 1896–900.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Ravani, P., Parfrey, P. S., Curtis, B., Barrett, B.J. (2007) Clinical research of kidney diseases, I: Researchable questions and valid answers. Nephrol Dial Transpl 22, 3681–3690.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ravani, P., Parfrey, P. S., Dicks, E., Barrett, B.J. (2007) Clinical research of kidney diseases, II: Problems of research design. Nephrol Dial Transpl 22, 2785–2794.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Humana Press, a part of Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Health Sciences CentreNewfoundlandCanada
  2. 2. Staff Nephrologist , Divisione di NeprologiaAzienda InstitutiCremonaItaly

Personalised recommendations