Before you start searching, it's important to think about the scope of your question. A question that is too broad will produce way too many results, many of which won't be relevant to you. A question that is too narrow may not produce any results at all!
Finding a "right-sized" question to research will make the rest of this process much easier to navigate. How do you know when a question is right-sized, though?
Something called "concept mapping" can help!
A helpful way to determine the scope of your question is to break up your question into concepts. From there, you can determine which concepts to prioritize in your search strategy. This process will naturally help you create a well-formulated search strategy.
First, we'll examine possible research topics and practice breaking them up into concepts. Then, on the next page (Acquiring Evidence), we'll use our concepts to effectively search for evidence in relevant databases.
Below is a list of possible research topics that a student in Robbins College may be interested in:
In the health sciences, we often think about our research in terms of our population, exposure or intervention, and outcome. This concept modeling approach is often referred to as PEO. Please note, however, that PEO is one of many approaches used in the field. Other common frameworks are listed below and should be used when appropriate.
Let's use question 3 was an example:
Population: Adults with type 2 diabetes
Exposure: HIIT exercise program
Outcome: Cardiovascular fitness, blood sugar levels (A1C; Fasting blood glucose)
Determine which concepts are most important for your search.
For question 3, the exposure and population are important to search, but the outcome is not. As we look through results in the databases, the outcome we're looking for will likely show up without adding it to our search strategy. Often, we don't search for the outcome concept of our question, but it's important to have your outcome mapped out so that you can select the most relevant articles out of the search. For example, we might expect that outcomes will be measured by tracking study participants' blood glucose levels, and we can look out for this terminology when we comb through our results.
Take one of the other research questions (2, 4 , or 5) and try mapping out the concepts on your own. Then, determine which concepts are most important for your search.
Framework - An established structure that helps define the research question. Can address different disciplines and question types.
For example: PICO is the most common and well-known standard framework for medical and health systematic reviews.
Framework |
Discipline/Question Type |
|---|---|
| PICO (Richardson et al. 1995) Patient, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome |
Clinical medicine |
| BeHEMoTh (Booth and Carroll 2015) Behavior of interest, Health context (service/policy/ intervention), Exclusions, Models or Theories |
Questions about theories |
| CHIP (Shaw 2010) Context How Issues Population |
Psychology, qualitative |
|
CoCoPop (Munn 2015) |
Medicine, epidemiology |
| COPES (Gibbs 2003) Client-Oriented, Practical, Evidence, Search |
Social work, health care, nursing |
| ECLIPSE (Wildridge and Bell 2002) Expectation, Client, Location, Impact, Professionals, SErvice, |
Management, services, policy, social care |
| PEO (Kahn et al. 2003) Population, Exposure, Outcome |
Qualitative |
| PECODR (Dawes et al. 2007) Patient/population/problem, Exposure, Comparison, Outcome, Duration, Results |
Medicine |
| PESICO (Schlosser and O’Neil-Pirozzi 2007) Person Environments Stakeholders Intervention Comparison Outcome |
Augmentative and alternative communication |
| PICO specific to diagnostic tests (Kim et al. 2015) Patients/participants/population, Index tests, Comparator/reference tests, Outcome |
Clinical medicine |
| PICO+ (Bennett and Bennett 2000) Patient, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome, +context, patient values, and preferences |
Occupational therapy |
| PICOC (Petticrew & Roberts, 2006) Patient, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome, Context |
Social sciences |
| PICOS (Moher et al. 2009) Patient, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome, Study type |
Medicine |
| PICOT (Richardson et al. 1995) Patient, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome, Time |
Education, health care |
| PIPOH (ADAPTE Collaboration 2009) Population, Intervention, Professionals, Outcomes, Health care setting/context |
Diagnostic questions |
| ProPheT (Booth et al. 2016) Problem, Phenomenon of interest, Time |
Screening |
| WWH Who What How |
Health, qualitative research |
Adapted from Foster, M. J., & Jewell, S. T. (Eds.). (2017). Assembling the pieces of a systematic review : A guide for librarians.
Copyright © Baylor® University. All rights reserved.
Report It | Title IX | Mental Health Resources | Anonymous Reporting | Legal Disclosures