Accident and Emergency Nursing (2008) 16, 211–214

www.elsevierhealth.com/journals/aaen

Accident andEmergency

Nursing

Clinical research 6: Writing and research q

Ruth Endacott RN, DipN(Lond), MA, PhD (Professor of Clinical Nursing) *

University of Plymouth, Faculty of Health and Social Work, Earl Richards Road North, Exeter EX2 6AS,United KingdomLa Trobe University, PO Box 199, Bendigo, Victoria 3552, Australia

KEYWORDSResearch proposal;Grant writing;Publication;Research funding

0965-2302/$ - see front matter �c 2doi:10.1016/j.aaen.2006.12.005

q This article was originally publishCare Nursing 2005 21(4) 258–261. Thpermission from Intensive and Critic* Tel.: +44 01392 475155; fax: +44E-mail address: ruth.endacott@p

Summary This six-part research series is aimed at clinicians who wish to developresearch skills, or who have a particular clinical problem that they think could beaddressed through research. The series aims to provide insight into the decisionsthat researchers make in the course of their work, and to also provide a foundationfor decisions that nurses may make in applying the findings of a study to practice intheir own Unit or Department. The series emphasises the practical issues encoun-tered when undertaking research in critical care settings; readers are encouragedto source research methodology textbooks for more detailed guidance on specificaspects of the research process.

�c 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Introduction

This paper provides an overview of four types ofwriting associated with research:

1. Proposal2. Funding submission3. Research report or thesis4. Academic publication

008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights res

ed in Intensive and Criticale article is republished withal Care Nursing.01392 475151.lymouth.ac.uk.

Particular emphasis is placed on funding submis-sions as this is oftenunchartedterritory forclinicians.

Central to all four of these is critical presenta-tion of other sources of evidence. A well-con-structed literature review meets two criteria:first, the literature is used to build an argument(see Fig. 1) and second, it achieves an appropriatelevel of critique (see Fig. 2).

The literature review should provide a criticalreview of all variables to be investigated in thestudy and distinguishes what has been done fromwhat needs to be done.

Writing a proposal

The headings used for a research proposal varyaccording to purpose, for example, ethics commit-

erved.

Figure 3 Standard headings for a proposal/protocol.

Figure 1 Building an argument through the literaturereview.

212 R. Endacott

tees or funding bodies may provide a proforma thatmust be followed. In all cases, the focus of aproposal is to convince others that the work is nec-essary, soundly constructed and expects to gener-ate outcomes worthy of pursuing. Sampleheadings are provided at Fig. 3.

The following issues should be addressed when aproposal is constructed for ethics committee re-view: autonomy, informed consent, anonymityand confidentiality, use of results, harm and risk,possible conflicts. Further discussion regarding eth-ical issues to be considered is found in an earlierpaper in this series (Endacott, 2004).

If considering undertaking a Ph.D., Universitiescommonly expect a proposal as part of the applica-tion process. This serves two purposes: to establishthe academic standard of the applicant and tomatch the proposed study to appropriatesupervisors.

Seeking funding

A submission for funding would include an indica-tion of the track record of the applicant(s). The de-tail required depends on the level of funding,however, track record should include evidence of:

Figure 2 Typical language used in

� previous management of studies at the samefunding level;� previous work with co-applicants (grants orpublications);� previous work by the applicants in the samefield;� outcomes from previous studies (publications);� indicators of esteem/international reputation(e.g., journal editorship, invited speaker at aninternational conference).

This latter criterion is essential for national com-petitive grant schemes where track record of theapplicants is a key component in the rankingprocess.

Four levels of funding are available: ‘in kind’funding, internal grants, small external grants andlarger external grants. The researcher’s employermay provide ‘in kind’ funding for early work(funded time, travel or consumables). Preliminarywork is often funded at this level and can be usedto develop larger studies through: providing datafor sample size calculations; identifying researchquestions or developing the research intervention.Scholarships can also be useful for this stage of re-search development.

critical presentation of literature.

Clinical research 6: Writing and research 213

Internal grants are often awarded for researchthat will have direct benefit for the organisationand your own workplace. Small external grants areoften targeted to specific priority areas and largerexternal grants are linked to government health pri-orities or identified ‘problems’ in the health caresystem. These larger grants place particular empha-sis on the feasibility of the study and the level of‘risk’ to be taken by the funding body. At this levelof funding, evidence available from preliminarywork undertaken by the applicants is crucial. Thisprovides evidence of: credibility in this field of re-search and the ability to manage, and publish from,funded research. Decisions about funding at this le-vel are usually dependent on: the profile and trackrecord of the chief investigator, the research to-pic/significance and the feasibility of the study.

Before applying for funding, it is essential toidentify what type of research has been previouslyfunded and submission guidelines. These vary enor-mously in the level of detail required, and not nec-essarily in relation to the size of the grant.Reviewers will often be lay people with no back-ground in health care, particularly for the smallerphilanthropic trusts. It is also important to identifythe expectations of the funding body for outcomes(results) and outputs (for example, a clinical guide-line or protocol for implementation in other areas).

Research report or thesis

Findings of research are often written in the formof a formal report for the funding body. The ex-pected format may not be advised by the fundingbody, however, it is important to clarify whetherthe researchers are required to make recommenda-tions (this is not required by some governmentbodies). Regardless of format it is good practiceto provide an executive summary–this should makesense on its own. Also be aware that your reportmay be put onto the website of the funding body.

Those writing a thesis will no doubt be aware ofthe many texts available (for example, Rudestamand Newton, 2000; Phillips and Pugh, 2000) and willhave the advantage of guidance from an academicsupervisor. A useful overview of the characteristicsof academic writing can be found at Higgs et al.(2005).

Writing for publication

There are many papers and whole textbooks de-voted to this topic. Underlying principles are to:

identify what your message is and who you needto communicate it to; select an appropriate jour-nal; carefully review the guidelines for authorsand previous papers submitted to the journal.Some research studies can justifiably result in morethan one publication, for example, a paper regard-ing theory, a methodology paper (if you’ve success-fully adapted a method to suit a particularsituation) and a results paper. However, it is impor-tant to avoid the ‘salami slicing’ sometimes seen inacademic journals.

Collaborative writing with other authors is themost common approach; research is rarely under-taken by a person alone, even for academic stud-ies. Conventions about supervisors co-authoringpapers vary from institution to institution. In gen-eral, this is a more common expectation in Austra-lia than in the UK. Writing as a team inevitablytakes longer and needs agreement between theauthors at the outset. Excellent advice regardingwriting papers is found in Street and Higgs (2005)and also on the Journal of Advanced Nursing web-site, much of this advice applies regardless of thejournal to which you will submit.

Much advice regarding conference posters ech-oes that of any publication (for example, followthe author guidelines, write in an appropriate stylefor the audience). In addition, presentation aspectsneed to be considered: the poster should be legiblefrom six feet away, in a typeface that it easilyread, organisation is crucial–is it clear in which or-der the information is to be read? Contents shouldbe absorbed in 5 min and the main message shouldbe obvious. More detailed advice regarding posterdesign is provided by Gray (1995) and Hay and Sef-ton (2005). Conferences increasingly include a pos-ter presentation session; consider how you canmost effectively use a 5-min oral presentation.

Other types of writing encountered in researchinclude media releases—either when the grant isawarded or on completion of the study. It is wiseto seek approval from the funding body prior toany media activity.

Each of the above writing adventures requiresclear and concise use of the English language. Auseful website with resources for those writing inEnglish as a second language can be found athttp://owl.english.purdue.edu/handouts/esl (ac-cessed on 20 April 2005).

Conclusions

The most ground-breaking research can falter atthe writing stage, resulting in funding being

214 R. Endacott

denied, prolonged discussion with ethics commit-tees and rejected publications. These can (anddo!) happen to the most experienced researchers,however, the advice contained in this paper mayhelp you get started. Remember also that you havean ethical obligation to disseminate research re-sults via publication or conference presentation.

References

Endacott, R., 2004. Clinical research 2: legal and ethical issuesin research. Intens. Crit. Care Nurs. 20 (5), 313–315.

Gray, M., 1995. Giving a poster presentation; a personal view.Nurse Res. 3 (1), 74–81.

Hay, I., Sefton, A., 2005. Preparing posters. In: Higgs, J.,Sefton, A., Street, A., McAllister, L., Hay, I. (Eds.), Commu-nicating in the Health and Social Sciences. Oxford UniversityPress, Melbourne.

Higgs, J., McAllister, L., Rosenthal, J., 2005. Learning academicwriting. In: Higgs, J., Sefton, A., Street, A., McAllister, L.,Hay, I. (Eds.), Communicating in the Health and SocialSciences. Oxford University Press, Melbourne.

Phillips, E.M., Pugh, D.S., 2000. How to Get a Ph.D.: A Handbookfor Students and Their Supervisors, third ed. OUP,Buckingham.

Rudestam, K.E., Newton, R.R., 2000. Surviving your Disserta-tion: A Guide to Content and Process, second ed. Sage,California.

Street, A., Higgs, J., 2005. Writing journal papers. In: Higgs, J.,Sefton, A., Street, A., McAllister, L., Hay, I. (Eds.), Commu-nicating in the Health and Social Sciences. Oxford UniversityPress, Melbourne.