The NIH is launching a series of initiatives in — to enhance the accountability and transparency of clinical research. These initiatives target key points along the entire clinical trial lifecycle, from concept to results reporting. The Research Methods Resources website provides investigators with important research methods resources to help them satisfy these new requirements.
While the website currently only addresses methodological issues inherent in trials that randomize groups or deliver interventions to groups, new methods-related topics and resources will be added in the future.
For a guided tour of this website, please refer to a recent Mind the Gap webinar , which presents additional information about its relevance to the new NIH requirements for clinical trials applications, a summary of the methodological issues inherent in nested study designs, and a demonstration of how to use the Group-Randomized Trials GRT Sample Size Calculator. Experiments, including clinical trials, differ considerably in the methods used to assign participants to study conditions or study arms and to deliver interventions to those participants.
This website provides information related to the design and analysis of experiments in which 1 participants are assigned in groups or clusters OR participants are assigned individually but receive at least some of their intervention with other participants or through a change agent shared with other participants, and 2 individual observations are analyzed to evaluate the effect of the intervention. These studies may differ in their units of assignment groups or clusters vs individuals , but they face the same expectation of positive correlation among observations taken on members who receive their intervention together, whether in pre-existing groups or in groups created by the investigator, and whether in person or through a common change agent.
The material is relevant for both human and animal studies and for both basic and applied research. And while it is important for investigators to become familiar with the issues presented on this website, it is even more important that they collaborate with a methodologist who is familiar with these issues.
The t-test also called the Student's T-Test is one of many statistical significance tests, which compares two supposedly equal sets of data to see if they really are alike or not. The t-test helps the researcher conclude whether a hypothesis is supported or not. Drawing a conclusion is based on several factors of the research process, not just because the researcher got the expected result. It has to be based on the validity and reliability of the measurement, how good the measurement was to reflect the real world and what more could have affected the results.
Anyone should be able to check the observation and logic, to see if they also reach the same conclusions. Errors of the observations may stem from measurement-problems, misinterpretations, unlikely random events etc. A common error is to think that correlation implies a causal relationship.
This is not necessarily true. Generalization is to which extent the research and the conclusions of the research apply to the real world. It is not always so that good research will reflect the real world, since we can only measure a small portion of the population at a time. Validity refers to what degree the research reflects the given research problem, while Reliability refers to how consistent a set of measurements are.
A definition of reliability may be "Yielding the same or compatible results in different clinical experiments or statistical trials" the free dictionary. Research methodology lacking reliability cannot be trusted. Replication studies are a way to test reliability. Both validity and reliability are important aspects of the research methodology to get better explanations of the world.
Logically, there are two types of errors when drawing conclusions in research:. Type 1 error is when we accept the research hypothesis when the null hypothesis is in fact correct. Type 2 error is when we reject the research hypothesis even if the null hypothesis is wrong.
Check out our quiz-page with tests about:. Oskar Blakstad Mar 10, Retrieved Sep 14, from Explorable. The text in this article is licensed under the Creative Commons-License Attribution 4.
You can use it freely with some kind of link , and we're also okay with people reprinting in publications like books, blogs, newsletters, course-material, papers, wikipedia and presentations with clear attribution. Want the full version to study at home, take to school or just scribble on?
Whether you are an academic novice, or you simply want to brush up your skills, this book will take your academic writing skills to the next level. Don't have time for it all now? No problem, save it as a course and come back to it later. Activism Argument Argumentum ad populum Attitude change Censorship Charisma Circular reporting Cognitive dissonance Critical thinking Crowd manipulation Cultural dissonance Deprogramming Echo chamber Education religious , values Euphemism Excommunication Fearmongering Historical revisionism Ideological repression Indoctrination Media manipulation Media regulation Mind control Missionaries Moral entrepreneurship Persuasion Polite fiction Political engineering Propaganda Propaganda model Proselytism Psychological manipulation Psychological warfare Religious conversion forced Religious persecution Religious uniformity Revolutions Rhetoric Self-censorship Social change Social control Social engineering Social influence Social progress Suppression of dissent Systemic bias Woozle effect.
Axioms tacit assumptions Conceptual framework Epistemology outline Evidence anecdotal , scientific Explanations Faith fideism Gnosis Intuition Meaning-making Memory Metaknowledge Methodology Observation Observational learning Perception Reasoning fallacious , logic Revelation Testimony Tradition folklore Truth consensus theory , criteria.
In my fifth writer’s toolkit post I set out a plan for writing an introduction for a research report after initially developing my abstract to both guide and focus my writing. In my next post I’ll use the same SmartArt tool in Microsoft Word to think through the layout of my methodology and method section. [ Continue Reading ].
Observational research is a group of different research methods where researchers try to observe a phenomenon without interfering too much. Observational research methods, such as the case study, are probably the furthest removed from the established scientific method.
Difference Between Research Methods and Research Methodology - Research methods are the means of conducting a research. Research methodology is the science. The research methods are often confused with research methodology, which implies the scientific analysis of the research methods, so as to find a solution to the problem at goodfilemq.cf, it seems apt to clarify the differences between research method and research methodology at this juncture, have a .
Official website of the National Institutes of Health (NIH). NIH is one of the world's foremost medical research centers. An agency of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the NIH is the Federal focal point for health and medical research. The NIH website offers health information for the public, scientists, researchers, medical professionals, patients, educators, and students. Method is simply a research tool, a component of research – say for example, a qualitative method such as interviews. Methodology is the justification for using a particular research method. So if for example, like me, you want to understand the motivations and perceptions of a group of bloggers then you would most likely choose a qualitative.