Report Writing Lecture 2024 PDF
Document Details
2024
Ottilie Katali
Tags
Related
- Academic Writing Considerations Lecture 3 PDF
- Academic Writing Workshop - Biomedicina Integrada
- Soran University Faculty of Science 2024-2025 Petroleum Geosciences Lecture Notes PDF
- Unit 3. Basic Structure and Types of Scientific Paper PDF
- Writing a Research Report PDF
- Writing Thesis - BMT 475 -241 1 PDF
Summary
This document is a lecture on report writing. It covers topics such as research proposal vs. report, components of research reports, structure of research reports, and examples of structured and unstructured abstracts. The content is geared towards undergraduate students.
Full Transcript
Report writing Ottilie Katali What is a Research Report? Research Proposal:Plan/schedule Data Collection: Action/Activity Research Report/Thesis: Report findings A Research Report/Thesis A well crafted write up outlining the findings of the study, methods used, discussion, con...
Report writing Ottilie Katali What is a Research Report? Research Proposal:Plan/schedule Data Collection: Action/Activity Research Report/Thesis: Report findings A Research Report/Thesis A well crafted write up outlining the findings of the study, methods used, discussion, conclusions etc Supervised work at an institution Consists of the students own findings Critically analyzed with scientific information from other sources Follows a defined style (Guideline) (Standard format) Purpose of the Research Report To communicate the findings of your study to other researchers To argue to readers of what the research has found To allow critique of your work – share, publish, present (The 6th principal of scientific inquiry) Research Proposal vs Report Audience Future vs past Components of a Research Report Title, Author, Abstract, Declarations Introduction Why Methods How Results What Why was the study done? Discussions How was the study done? So What What was learned? What does it mean? References Structure of a Research Report Cover Page Abstract Declarations Table of Contents List of Figures, Tables, Abreviations (If applicable) Introduction Literature Review Methodology Results Discussion Conclusion and Recommendations Acknowledgements References Appendices Cover Page Title of the study (Avoid abbreviations) Student’s details (as recorded in the institution) Supervisor’s details Institution name Month and Year Submission Abstract Typically 200 to 300 words Summary of the study Highlights the points of the introduction, technique/methods, main findings and conclusion Includes key words: to define the scope of the study Structured vs unstructured abstract Examples of Structured Abstracts Examples of Unstructured Abstracts Declarations of: Authorship Purpose Originality Authorization of property rights Declarations Dedication (optional) This research report/thesis is dedicated to … for… Table of Contents List of Figures List of Tables List of Abbreviations 1. Introduction Orientation of the of the proposed study (Background of the study) Problem Statement Significance/Justification of the Study Objective of the study/Research questions Hypothesis of the study (Where applicable) 2. Definition of terms (Where applicable) 3. Methodology Sections: Research design and setting Study population Sample size and sampling method Data collection tools (must be cross referenced with appendices) Data collection Method Data analysis Dissemination of Results Ethical Considerations Past tense !!! 4. Results Section What are results? Descriptive Clear, concise, simple Results should answer the main hypothesis or research question or research objectives Can be combined into one section or organized into separate sections (As an example, how do you organise the results of a KAP study?). What was your response rate, for survey studies? Can contain tables and figures Is enough detail presented to allow the reader to determine whether the effect of the experimental treatment (vs. chance alone, not bias or sloppy technique) produced the significant statistical value? What are results? Do not state any differences were present between groups unless a significant P value is attached. State "Cardiac output was less in the beans-and-franks group (P =.03). See Table 2. NOT - There was a significance between the beans-and-franks (B&F) group and the corn dog group. See Table 2. Don't comment on results. Don't attach equal importance (or even bother to include) the entire statistical output. You select those descriptive and inferential statistics you wish to use and place them in the order that seems reasonable to you. How to choose your graph To compare proportions and relative amounts (How big?) - use a pie chart, a horizontal bar chart, or a table To show trends (How do things change over time?) - use a column chart or line graph To show what's typical vs. exceptional (particularly how two groups compare in some dimension or variable) - use a histogram, a cumulative percentage chart, or a box plot. To show correlations (how well does one thing predict another?) - use a scatterplot or multiplot chart. Presentation: Tables and Graphs Tables and graphs must stand alone (Can a member of your department unfamiliar with the study pick up your graph and explain its meaning to you?) Text should highlight the importance or meaning of the figures and tables, not repeat the data contained within them. Tables and figures both carry a necessary part of the message- use both Do the numbers add up? Presentation: Tables and Graphs Are baseline values for the groups similar? Is the degree of variability reported (and whether it is an SD or SEM identified)? Are tables and graphs clearly labelled and appropriately scaled? Table’s heading is always on top and that of the graph is at the bottom Are the results of statistical analysis presented? Can one determine what statistical test produced the result? Label the X and Y axis 5. Discussion section The meaning of my findings? Why should anyone care about my findings? I carried out my study, so what? Discussion section Summarize your key findings. Reiterate your aim/research problem What are the major findings of your work? Have a clear statement of the overall result that directly answers your main research question The common problem is differentiating between the results and the discussion section. Discussion section Compare with previous studies Acknowledge the limitations of your work Provide arguments and speculation Components of the Discussion section Look back Answer whether the results make sense in terms of your expectation as expressed in the hypothesis? what you read before beginning (texts & research articles)? clinical practice? theoretical considerations? If your results agree with previous work, fine. If they do not, explain why not, or you may leave it unresolved "We cannot account for the difference seen in..." Were there limitations (sample size of course but what else)? Were there any problems with carrying out the method as originally planned? Not enough men in the study? Unanticipated amounts of side effects or pain? Low response rate? Failure to look at a crucial time interval? Any unsettled points in results? Look forward Implications for patient care, or for theory Suggestions for future research ("If I had to do it over I would..."). Be specific. Conclusion Beware inappropriate conclusions (beyond the range of the data, beyond the design of the study) Step 2: Give your interpretations The meaning of your results may seem obvious to you, but it’s important to spell out their significance for your reader, showing exactly how they answer your research question. The form of your interpretations will depend on the type of research, but some typical approaches to interpreting the data include: Identifying correlations, patterns, and relationships among the data Discussing whether the results met your expectations or supported your hypotheses Contextualizing your findings within previous research and theory Explaining unexpected results and evaluating their significance Considering possible alternative explanations and making an argument for your position You can organize your discussion around key themes, hypotheses, or research questions, following the same structure as your results section. Alternatively, you can also begin by highlighting the most significant or unexpected results. Step 3: Discuss the implications As well as giving your own interpretations, make sure to relate your results back to the scholarly work that you surveyed in the literature review. The discussion should show how your findings fit with existing knowledge, what new insights they contribute, and what consequences they have for theory or practice. Ask yourself these questions: Do your results support or challenge existing theories? If they support existing theories, what new information do they contribute? If they challenge existing theories, why do you think that is? Are there any practical implications? Your overall aim is to show the reader exactly what your research has contributed, and why they should care. Step 4: Acknowledge the limitations Even the best research has its limitations. Acknowledging these is important to demonstrate your credibility. Limitations aren’t about listing your errors, but about providing an accurate picture of what can and cannot be concluded from your study. Limitations might be due to your overall research design, specific methodological choices, or unanticipated obstacles that emerged during your research process. Here are a few common possibilities: If your sample size was small or limited to a specific group of people, explain how generalizability is limited. If you encountered problems when gathering or analyzing data, explain how these influenced the results. If there are potential confounding variables that you were unable to control, acknowledge the effect these may have had. After noting the limitations, you can reiterate why the results are nonetheless valid for the purpose of answering your research question. 6. Conclusions and recommendations The main statement based on the strongest evidence Do not include other studies here, focus on highlighting yours Based on the discussion of your results, you can make recommendations for practical implementation or further research. Sometimes, the recommendations are saved for the conclusion. Suggestions for further research can lead directly from the limitations. Don’t just state that more studies should be done—give concrete ideas for how future work can build on areas that your own research was unable to address. 7. Acknowledgements Thank those who contributed to the work but do not meet authorship criteria Acknowledgments with a description of their contribution 8. Reference list/Bibliography 9. Appendices/Annexure Others?