08. Write a research report and a decision-focused evidence brief
Lesson
LEARNING OBJECTIVES
Select design-appropriate reporting guidance, communicate findings to different audiences, and separate observed evidence, interpretation and proposed action.
PLAN TWO COMPLEMENTARY OUTPUTS
A scientific report should make the question, methods, participant flow, measurements, analysis and limitations transparent. A decision brief should help a defined audience understand what was found, how much confidence to place in it, what it may imply and what remains uncertain.
Use STROBE for relevant observational reporting, STARD for diagnostic reporting, COREQ for interviews/focus groups, PRISMA for systematic reviews or other suitable guidance through EQUATOR. Check current design-specific resources and relevant extensions. A reporting checklist is not a study-quality score or permission to make a causal claim.
STRUCTURE THE SCIENTIFIC ACCOUNT
Explain the evidence gap and objective; provide enough methodological detail for evaluation; report recruitment and analysis denominators; present estimates with units, time and uncertainty; and distinguish prespecified from exploratory findings. Describe missingness, important bias risks, funding, conflicts and deviations. Cite sources actually consulted and do not invent references or approval statements.
WORKED FICTIONAL COMMUNICATION
Observed teaching result: a survey found that 40 of 80 respondents answering a barrier question reported difficulty attending a visit; 20 of the original 100 respondents did not answer that item.
Overstatement: “Half of all district residents cannot access care.”
Defensible statement: “Half of the 80 respondents who answered this item reported the defined barrier. Item non-response and the survey's recruitment limits mean this result should not be generalized automatically to all district residents.”
Potential implication: review the reported barriers and assess whether better local information or a feasible service response is needed. The survey alone does not establish which intervention would work.
WRITE A ONE-PAGE DECISION BRIEF
Include audience and decision; question and context; key findings with denominators; study strengths and limitations; relevance to the local setting; options or next steps with trade-offs; and remaining evidence needs. Separate recommendations from results and explain the assumptions connecting them.
For community communication, use accessible language and a respectful format chosen through engagement. Avoid releasing small identifiable groups, quotations with revealing context or unreviewed individual results. Plan feedback channels rather than treating dissemination as a one-way announcement.
YOUR FINAL TASK
Use one appraisal and your fictional mixed-method display to prepare a scientific abstract and a one-page evidence brief. Add a reporting-checklist selection and a dissemination plan identifying audiences, format, responsibility, timing and privacy review.
Check every numerical statement against its source and denominator. Ask a peer to identify the main conclusion and limitation after one reading. Revise wording they misunderstand and keep a dated review log.
SELF-CHECK AND FEEDBACK
Does simpler language justify removing uncertainty? No. Does a significant result automatically justify a programme recommendation? No. Should negative, inconclusive or conflicting findings be omitted to make the story cleaner? No; report them in context.
PORTFOLIO OUTPUT
An evidence-linked abstract, a decision brief, a reporting-guideline rationale and dissemination plan. Keep a separate copy outside the browser. Course completion reflects practice and feedback, not accreditation or approval for real research.
FURTHER READING
EQUATOR reporting-guideline library.
https://www.equator-network.org/reporting-guidelines/
NIH OBSSR mixed-methods resources.
https://obssr.od.nih.gov/research-resources/mixed-methods-research
Select design-appropriate reporting guidance, communicate findings to different audiences, and separate observed evidence, interpretation and proposed action.
PLAN TWO COMPLEMENTARY OUTPUTS
A scientific report should make the question, methods, participant flow, measurements, analysis and limitations transparent. A decision brief should help a defined audience understand what was found, how much confidence to place in it, what it may imply and what remains uncertain.
Use STROBE for relevant observational reporting, STARD for diagnostic reporting, COREQ for interviews/focus groups, PRISMA for systematic reviews or other suitable guidance through EQUATOR. Check current design-specific resources and relevant extensions. A reporting checklist is not a study-quality score or permission to make a causal claim.
STRUCTURE THE SCIENTIFIC ACCOUNT
Explain the evidence gap and objective; provide enough methodological detail for evaluation; report recruitment and analysis denominators; present estimates with units, time and uncertainty; and distinguish prespecified from exploratory findings. Describe missingness, important bias risks, funding, conflicts and deviations. Cite sources actually consulted and do not invent references or approval statements.
WORKED FICTIONAL COMMUNICATION
Observed teaching result: a survey found that 40 of 80 respondents answering a barrier question reported difficulty attending a visit; 20 of the original 100 respondents did not answer that item.
Overstatement: “Half of all district residents cannot access care.”
Defensible statement: “Half of the 80 respondents who answered this item reported the defined barrier. Item non-response and the survey's recruitment limits mean this result should not be generalized automatically to all district residents.”
Potential implication: review the reported barriers and assess whether better local information or a feasible service response is needed. The survey alone does not establish which intervention would work.
WRITE A ONE-PAGE DECISION BRIEF
Include audience and decision; question and context; key findings with denominators; study strengths and limitations; relevance to the local setting; options or next steps with trade-offs; and remaining evidence needs. Separate recommendations from results and explain the assumptions connecting them.
For community communication, use accessible language and a respectful format chosen through engagement. Avoid releasing small identifiable groups, quotations with revealing context or unreviewed individual results. Plan feedback channels rather than treating dissemination as a one-way announcement.
YOUR FINAL TASK
Use one appraisal and your fictional mixed-method display to prepare a scientific abstract and a one-page evidence brief. Add a reporting-checklist selection and a dissemination plan identifying audiences, format, responsibility, timing and privacy review.
Check every numerical statement against its source and denominator. Ask a peer to identify the main conclusion and limitation after one reading. Revise wording they misunderstand and keep a dated review log.
SELF-CHECK AND FEEDBACK
Does simpler language justify removing uncertainty? No. Does a significant result automatically justify a programme recommendation? No. Should negative, inconclusive or conflicting findings be omitted to make the story cleaner? No; report them in context.
PORTFOLIO OUTPUT
An evidence-linked abstract, a decision brief, a reporting-guideline rationale and dissemination plan. Keep a separate copy outside the browser. Course completion reflects practice and feedback, not accreditation or approval for real research.
FURTHER READING
EQUATOR reporting-guideline library.
https://www.equator-network.org/reporting-guidelines/
NIH OBSSR mixed-methods resources.
https://obssr.od.nih.gov/research-resources/mixed-methods-research
My study notes
Stored only in this browser. Do not enter patient information.Saved in this browser. No account needed.