Irrespective of the fact that multiple research studies in different humanitarian, technical and social sciences are conducted annually in the international and domestic scientific arenas, the area of research itself as a scholarly phenomenon remains conceptually impoverished. In other words, currently, there are no unified guidelines and regulations on the way a research study should be practically implemented. Hereby, every research-based institution follows its own research patterns, techniques and approaches. However, contemporary practice of scholars and those who are actively engaged in analytical processes and social research in particular has developed specific fundamental elements of research. In legal parlance these postulates are considered to be customer practice which is not unified in a single instrument. Nevertheless they are obligatory for the production of legitimate and academically sound research outcomes.
Therefore, the objective of this interview essay is twofold.
- The first part of the paper examines elements which are considered to be of fundamental practical and theoretical importance for evidence-based research studies.
- The second part of the paper speculates over the practical experience in content by one of the most recognized international health activists, a doctor of medicine, associate professor of several universities and dean of the New York City Hospital, Prof. Alex Spiegel.
The Pillars of Contemporary Evidence-Based Research
Academically, research is defined as a set of creative actions undertaken by research participants on the systematic basis with the ultimate objective to accumulate empirical data and theoretical findings with the objective to solidify the particular area of science, devise new scientific strategies and construct applications that can be utilized for the needs of the humanity (Cohen & Arieli, 2011). Currently, three main research fields, namely scientific research, humanitarian research, also known as research in humanities, and artistic research primarily utilized to satisfy aesthetic needs of human beings. In order to address the objectives of this essay, the postulates of scientific evidence-based research are analyzed and respective conclusions are inferred.
Conventionally, evidence-based research study follows the following pattern. Firstly, the existing problem which is proposed to be subjected to the analysis and evaluation is identified. In this regard it should be particularly highlighted that the problem must be formulated as clearly as possible in order to avoid ambiguities and irrelevant detailing procedures.
The second task in the process of research study composition is the formulation of respective research questions which nature and extent is based on the elicited research problem. At the same time, hypothetical answers on these research problems are formulated, generally known as that the hypothesis of the study. At this stage particular scrutiny and attention of the analysts is to be exercised (Cohen & Arieli, 2011). The most commonly perpetrated mistake is the formulation of research questions which are not linked to the research problem. If this error is done, irrelevant time-consuming and resourceful research activity is conducted, while the practical relevance and importance of this activity is of no value for the humanity.
One of the most important procedural steps in the research study is the outline of research methods utilized in the discussion section. The most popular scientific research methods are quantative and qualitive research methods, while that research designs are classically classified into cross-sectional and longitudinal studies. The main difference of these studies is based on the resources needed to implement them and their legitimacy as well as soundness of gained research outcomes. Research methods are highly recommended to be supplemented with their review of the existing literature examining the subject. The technique considerably succors to validate results and gaps of the particular research initiative.
The culminating elements of evidence-based research study are the discussion and conclusive sections. The first element outlines the currently available critical opinion on the particular research field, as well as it interprets the findings of experimental studies conducted in the course of the particular research. The limitations and the necessary considerations are also discussed in this section. The conclusion paragraph of the study is usually designed to encapsulate the major inferences of the research process and discourse on how they can be practically used in order to benefit the global community in resolving a particular research problem.
The Interview with Professor Allen Spiegel
The dean of the analyzed medical facility is considered to be among the most internationally recognized medical examiners in fields of tuberculosis and cancer treatment. His academic accomplishments have been recognized by the International Health Organization, and his contribution to the enhancement of the international healthcare paradigm is one of the most fundamental ones.
The structure of the interview was the following. First and foremost, the interviewee was asked about the changes he faced while the particular research study was conducted. Secondly, that strength of the research problem was discussed and its significance was debated (Spiegel & Libbuti, 2010). Then, practical elements of the research have been questioned, namely it has been asked whether the findings have been rejected or supported by the subsequent experimental studies. Lastly, he was asked about the concerns identified within the process of the research in question.
The most predominant change that has faced the team of researchers was about the composition of “future diagnosis of the trends in endocrine cancer”. Although preliminary literature review has been carried out, no findings of practical significance for the needs of that research study have been elicited due to the fact that this research area remained experimentally and theoretically impoverished. Therefore, analysts had to utilize predominantly experimental methods. While the research process was under way, the research team was constantly speculating over the prospective viability of the projected outcomes since no realistic opportunity to consult the works of the colleagues was available.
With regards to the research relevance of the problem question, it is necessary to stress that the strength of that study was of particular intensity. It was hypothetically stated that with the advent of modern technologies it would be substantially simplified to diagnose the first stages of endocrine cancer with the use of laser penetration methods, which are consider to be more effective than the conventionally utilized ones.
Analyzing the findings of the research team, it should be stressed that the subsequent experimental works as well as that obligatory government attesting procedures clearly manifested that corroborated hypotheses of the research team is valid and cannot be academically refuted. Moreover, the practical significance of the analyzed research has been recognized by the United States Department of Health which elaborated specific guidelines on the way endocrine cancer should be diagnosed by medical community practicing, which, in their turn, are predominantly based on the research results of professor Spiegel.
To summarize, it is relevant to highlight the fact that although traditional research structure has been deflected by the team of professor Spiegel and his associates, legitimate and practical relevant outcomes have been gained. The particular research study clearly illustrates that the postulates of conventional scientific research are not necessarily applicable to the contemporary realities since identified problems require modernized research solutions and techniques. Thus, this rule is applicable to the area of medical research, while it is reasonable to assume that scientific sectors can be covered by this finding as well.