OFFICIAL

AX1 Research Proposal: Essay Assignment

Last updated 31st September 2024
There are 100 marks available for this assessment. 90 marks are outlined below, and 10
additional marks available for the presentation, language, and clarity of your submission.
The total word count of your submission (excluding references and question headings)
should not exceed 3,500 words. All assignments will be marked strictly according to the
published marking grid, and you are advised to adhere to this closely. Referencing should
adhere to university guidelines.

Structure your research proposal using each of the questions and sub-questions
as headings. Make sure you answer every sub-question, paying close attention to
the advice in italics, and the marking grid. Use tables to present answers to specific
questions where appropriate.

Part A: Developing a proposal

You are working in a public health department, and you are responsible for advising
health service and charitable sector colleagues on their research ideas.

A.1 Literature and context (15 marks)

You are approached by a local hospital manager to advise them on how to design a work-
based programme to prevent obesity in health-care staff in a high-income setting. Advise
the board on what is known about ‘what works’ and ‘what doesn’t work’ in this area. As
part of your advice to the hospital manager, please summarise:

i. Your literature search strategy. You should include your search terms, the
database(s) used, your inclusion / exclusion criteria, and the initial number
of papers you found through this search strategy. (5 marks)

ii. What is known on this subject from one or more systematic reviews. You
should summarise at least three interventions that have been tested, and
whether they have been shown to be effective or ineffective, providing
quantitative estimates where these are available. (5 marks)

iii. At least two priority areas for further research, based on what is not yet known
on this topic but would be useful to understand better through further research.
You should make reference to the specific systematic review(s) that highlight the
research gaps you refer to and justify why you would prioritise these areas. (5
marks)

Provide clear references throughout (you will be marked on this).

OFFICIAL

A.2 Research question and hypothesis development (10 marks)

Your Director of Public Health now asks you to lead on developing a different research
project – on ‘mental health impacts of COVID-19’. This should build on what is
already known, rather than duplicating existing research.

Find and read: Xiong J, Lipsitz O, Nasri F, Lui LMW, Gill H, Phan L, Chen-Li D, Iacobucci M,
Ho R, Majeed A, McIntyre RS. Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on mental health in the general
population: A systematic review. J Affect Disord. 2020 Dec 1;277:55-64. doi:
10.1016/j.jad.2020.08.001. Epub 2020 Aug 8. PMID: 32799105; PMCID: PMC7413844.

On the basis of this paper, suggest:

i. A plausible and pertinent research question that can be answered

quantitatively. This should reflect a research gap that still exists following this
systematic review. (4 marks)

ii. One quantifiable testable hypothesis for this research question, providing:

a. A statement of the null hypothesis. (2 marks)

b. A statement of the alternative hypothesis. (2 marks)
c. A statement of whether this is a one-tailed test or a two-tailed test, and
a justification of your choice. (2 marks)

A.3 Study design

For the hypothesis proposed in A.2.ii:

i. Propose an appropriate quantitative study design to test this hypothesis. You

should describe in detail what the independent and dependent variables are and
whether the study is observational or interventional. (2 marks)

ii. Justify why you have chosen this study design in preference to other
study designs. (2 marks)

iii. Describe how you would structure the timeline of the study, taking into account the
key steps in going from completing the study proposal to submitting the completed
research paper for publication. You should include details of how participants will be
enrolled into the study and whether randomisation will be used
– and if so the approach to randomisation. You do not need to include a specific
number of days or weeks for each step, but you should include the overall
duration of data collection. You may wish to use a table to present this answer. (3
marks)

iv. State all of the variables you will collect data on and for each variable state the
data sources or instruments you will use to collect / generate these data. You
may wish to use a table to present this answer. (3 marks)
OFFICIAL

A.4 Statistical approach (10 marks)

For the hypothesis proposed in A.2.ii and the study design outlined in A.3:

i. For each variable you identified in A.3.iv, state whether it is a dependent or

independent variable. You may wish to present the answers to A.4.i to A.4.ii in
a table. (1 mark)

ii. For each variable you identified in A.3.iv, categorise the variable as quantitative
or categorical, and as continuous, discrete, ordinal or nominal accordingly. You
may wish to present the answers to A.4.i to A.4.ii in a table. (2 marks)

iii. Select an appropriate statistical test to test the null hypothesis you have
proposed in A.2.ii. (2 marks)

iv. Justify your choice of statistical test. (2 marks)

v. Describe what the ‘test statistic’ (the result of your statistical test) will be and how
to interpret this output to decide whether the intervention or exposure has had an
effect. You do not need to perform the calculations for the statistical test you
have chosen, but you should make reference to any threshold values that you
will use to interpret the output. NB: do not jump straight to p-values – there is an
important stage before this. (3 marks)

A.5 Ethical practice (5 marks)

For the epidemiological approach outlined in A.3, please identify at least two ethical issues
you would have to consider from the start of your study and how you will manage each of
these in order to gain ethical approval for your study. (5 marks)
OFFICIAL

Part B: Methodological advice

You are responsible for advising clinical and public health colleagues on the strengths and
weaknesses of their research ideas and which instruments or tools to use in their practice.

B.1 Instruments (10 marks)

A local general practice wants to understand different ways of screening women

for alcohol consumption during pregnancy

Provide an outline of different instruments for screening women for alcohol consumption
during pregnancy in primary care, following the sub-headings below. You may wish to
present your answer to this question in a table.

i. List the approaches included in your review (a minimum of three approaches).

(1 mark)

ii. State the strengths of each approach in this situation. (3 marks)

iii. State the limitations of each approach in this situation. (3 marks)

iv. Provide a final recommendation to the general practice on which instrument to

use, outlining how you arrived at your conclusion based on your answers to
B.1.i-iii. (3 marks)

Provide clear references throughout (you will be marked on this).

B.2 Statistical power and sample size (10 marks)

A researcher wishes to test a new treatment for patients hospitalised with COVID-19, to
prevent progression of the disease to the point where the patient needs to be admitted
to intensive care. She wishes to recruit 2000 patients and randomise 1000 to existing
therapy and 1000 to the new therapy. A potential side effect of this type of drug is heart
palpitations (sensation of your heart pounding or racing), which should happen in no
more than 1% of patients.

With reference to the scenario above:

i. Explain in your own words what statistical power means and its
relationship with sample size. (2 marks)

ii. State an appropriate dependent variable for the primary outcome measure
and the unit of measurement. (2 marks)

iii. Outline what factors will determine statistical power in this scenario. You will
not receive any marks for stating factors that determine statistical power unless
you relate each factor to the specific scenario described above. (4 marks)

iv. Suggest an appropriate dependent variable for the primary safety outcome
measure and an appropriate statistical test that may be used to check for this.
Spend a little bit of time thinking about what the patient safety issue is in this
scenario, how it will be recorded, and therefore what statistical test is needed.
(2 marks)
OFFICIAL

B.3 Chance, bias, and confounding (20 marks)

A researcher approaches you asking for advice with testing the association between
COVID-19 and dementia, measured through a cognitive assessment tool. Participants
must be over 75 years of age for inclusion in the study.

With reference to the scenario above:

i. Explain how you can reduce the likelihood of chance affecting the results in this
study. (2 marks)

ii. Describe three types of bias that may arise in this study, depending on how it
is conducted. You will not receive any marks for stating types of bias unless you
clearly relate each type of bias to the specific scenario described above. (6
marks)

iii. Describe three potential confounding factors that should be taken into account in
this study. You will not receive any marks for stating confounding factors unless
you clearly relate each source of confounding to the specific scenario described
above. (6 marks)

iv. With reference to the confounding factors described in B.iii, explain how
confounding can be mitigated in this study at the study design / data
collection stage. You will not receive any marks for describing how to
mitigate confounding unless you clearly relate your answer to the specific
scenario described above. (3 marks)

v. With reference to the confounding factors described in B.iii, explain how

confounding can be mitigated in this study at the statistical analysis stage.
You will not receive any marks for describing how to mitigate confounding unless
you clearly relate your answer to the specific scenario described above. (3
marks)

Your answers in PDF format must be submitted via StudyNet by 2359hrs on 13 th

of December 2024. Late submissions will incur penalties.
OFFICIAL

MARKING GRID
Marginal Clear Nothing of
Weight Outstanding Excellent Very Good Good / satisfactory
fail fail merit
80-100% 70-79% 60-69% 50-59% 40-49% 20-39% 0-19%
STRUCTURE AND PRESENTATION
0. Presentation 10% Structure and flow demonstrates clarity of thought; in Structure is mostly logical and progression is
Weak or no structure. Poor flow with multiple
adapted format, document would be written by a leader shown; language is clear but occasionally falls
in the field short. linguistic problems.
PART A. DEVELOPING A PROPOSAL
A.1 Literature and 15% Comprehensive and focused review of the key evidence Broad review encompassing the majority of Missing key pieces of information that would prevent
with clear critical understanding and interpretation. relevant evidence, but occasionally falling short
context a non-specialist scientist understanding
Identifies both the knowns and the known unknowns. in critical understanding. Referenced mostly
High quality spread and precision of referencing. appropriately. the context or background of the field of
research. Inappropriate or inconsistent
referencing.
A.2 Research 10% Clear and contextually justifiable research question that
Sufficiently clear and relevant research
question but may not immediately link to Does not pose research question or poses
question and relates to the research paper provided. Describes
hypotheses. Null / alternative hypotheses are inappropriate / incorrect research question.
related hypothesis precisely a testable hypothesis with appropriate
conceptually correct but may lack precision in Incorrect or unwieldy null / alternative hypotheses.
statement of the null and alternative hypotheses. language or nature.
A.3 10% Proposes a proportionate and appropriate study design, Proposes a broadly appropriate study design
Does not identify an appropriate study design, or
providing details of the study design and rationale. with some explanation of rationale. Provides
Epidemiological Provides details of a sensible and detailed details of a broadly appropriate implementation
chooses a sub-optimal approach and does not
justify choice, implementation plan, or approach to
approach implementation plan, with precise specification of the plan with some detail on the data to be
data collection.
data to be collected and the collation method. Precisely collected and the collation method.
A.4 Statistical 10% defines and describes the variables and selects a Correctly describes the variables and selects
Selects an inappropriate or unviable statistical test,
correct statistical test. Precise definition of the an appropriate statistical test. Provides a high-
approach statistical outputs and provides a narrative on effect level summary of study outputs, effect size,
showing insufficient grasp of the data, study
and significance. outputs, and statistical issues.
size and significance.
A.5 Ethical 5% Clearly identifies and explains two or more ethical issues Does not identify key ethical issues arising from the
Identifies ethical issues with some
proposed research, which would in practice result
practice from the study proposed. discussion over their relevance.
in ethical approval being withheld.

PART B. METHODOLOGICAL ADVICE

B.1 Instruments 10% Proposes evidence-based and context-relevant instruments with Identifies relevant study instruments with Identifies incorrect or inappropriate
appropriate references. Discusses the advantages and disadvantages of appropriate references. Discusses the study instruments, with little discussion
competing instruments in this context and makes a clear and sensible advantages and disadvantages of competing of competing advantages and
recommendation on the most appropriate instruments to use instruments in this context. disadvantages.
B.2 Statistical 10% Defines and contextualises statistical power and its relationship to Defines statistical power and its relationship to Fails to appropriately define statistical
sample size. Proposes and justifies dependent variable and unit of sample size. Proposes primary dependent
power and measurement. Discusses the drivers of power. Correctly identifies a variable. Discusses the drivers of power. Correctly
power, sample size, and outcomes –
whether primary or safety.
sample size primary safety outcome and accompanying statistical test. identifies a primary safety outcome.
Fails to identify chance, bias, or
B.3 Chance, bias, 20% Correctly identifies and proposes mitigation (where asked) for chance, Correctly identifies chance, bias, and confounding
confounding. May have taken a
and confounding bias, and confounding, with expansive and appropriate discussion and in the scenario provided, with broadly appropriate scattergun approach where the
justification. discussion and mitigation. challenges are incorrect or irrelevant.