Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2020 May 21;8(5):e2848.
doi: 10.1097/GOX.0000000000002848. eCollection 2020 May.

Articulating the "So, What?" in Clinical Research: Insight from the M-CHOIR Group

You J Kim  1 , Shale J Mack  1 , Kevin C Chung  1
Affiliations

Articulating the "So, What?" in Clinical Research: Insight from the M-CHOIR Group

You J Kim et al. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. .

Abstract

With the academic culture of "publish or perish," authors must ensure that they are delivering high-quality data with a meaningful impact on clinical practice. Even for physician-scientists at the top of their fields, establishing the relevance of a study to clinical practice is a challenge. Thus, it is essential that research proposals ask questions that are clinically important, use appropriate methodologies, and examine outcomes that are relevant to both the physicians and the patients. The question of "so, what?" or in other words, "who cares?" is one that can make or break a study's impact on clinical practice. Researchers should use models such as PICOS (Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcomes, and Study design) and FINER (Feasible, Interesting, Novel, Ethical, Relevant) and ask why readers will care about their study's findings before the study is conducted. By doing so, researchers can ensure the successful execution of their study and a meaningful impact of their findings, in both academia and clinical practice. This Special Topic article aims to guide researchers in producing relevant, impactful conclusions of their studies by providing input and resources from the Michigan Center for Hand Outcomes and Innovation (M-CHOIR) group.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Disclosure: Dr. Chung receives funding from the National Institutes of Health and book royalties from Wolters Kluwer and Elsevier. He has received financial support from Axogen to attend conferences. The other authors have no financial interest to declare.

Figures

Fig. 1.
Fig. 1.
The breakdown of a failed research proposal.
Fig. 2.
Fig. 2.
The FINER model.
Fig. 3.
Fig. 3.
The PICOS model.
Fig. 4.
Fig. 4.
Example of research question emphasizing PICOS and clinical relevance. *Saito et al.
Fig. 5.
Fig. 5.
Steps to execute a successful research proposal.
Fig. 6.
Fig. 6.
Example of a “First Page.”
Fig. 7.
Fig. 7.
Questions to consider while writing the “First Page.”
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Healy MA, Mullard AJ, Campbell DA, Jr, et al. Hospital and payer costs associated with surgical complications. JAMA Surg. 2016;151:823–830. - PubMed
    1. Vonlanthen R, Slankamenac K, Breitenstein S, et al. The impact of complications on costs of major surgical procedures: a cost analysis of 1200 patients. Ann Surg. 2011;254:907–913. - PubMed
    1. Chalmers I, Glasziou P.Avoidable waste in the production and reporting of research evidence. Lancet. 2009;374:86–89. - PubMed
    1. Chung KC, Ram AN.Evidence-based medicine: the fourth revolution in American medicine? Plast Reconstr Surg. 2009;123:389–398. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Loonen MP, Hage JJ, Kon M.Publications of plastic surgery research 1972 through 2004: a longitudinal trend analysis of three international journals. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2007;60:934–945. - PubMed