small scale research project example

Our systems are now restored following recent technical disruption, and we’re working hard to catch up on publishing. We apologise for the inconvenience caused. Find out more: https://www.cambridge.org/universitypress/about-us/news-and-blogs/cambridge-university-press-publishing-update-following-technical-disruption

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings .

Login Alert

• > Writing Essays in English Language and Linguistics
• > Writing up small-scale research projects or dissertations

Book contents

• Frontmatter
• Acknowledgements
• Introduction
• A guide to the book's icons: what do they mean?
• Part 1 The basics
• Part 2 Getting down to writing
• Chapter 3 Analysing and answering the question
• Chapter 4 The writing process
• Chapter 5 Writing an introduction
• Chapter 6 Writing the body of your essay
• Chapter 7 Writing summaries and conclusions
• Chapter 8 Referencing and quotations
• Chapter 9 Stylistic issues
• Chapter 10 Writing up small-scale research projects or dissertations
• Frequently asked questions
• Linguistics glossary

Chapter 10 - Writing up small-scale research projects or dissertations

from Part 2 - Getting down to writing

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 June 2012

‘I've never done a research project before so I just don't know where to start. How big does it need to be? How original? Where do I get a good idea from? I haven't got a clue.’

What's expected of me as an undergraduate student with no previous research experience?

It's quite likely that, as part of your degree programme, you'll be required to successfully conduct and write up a small-scale research project of some kind. Typically, this will be in the form of a dissertation that you work on in your final year of study and which is normally expected to be around 10,000 words in length, although this can vary quite a bit depending on the department and university. The subject of your dissertation is, in most cases, completely open and you're free to decide your own focus according to your particular interests. In some cases, however, the dissertation project may be allied to a particular course you've taken and, as such, will need to have a focus that reflects this. Small-scale research projects tend to be a common feature of degree programmes in English language and/or linguistics and, while these may not necessarily take the form of a fully fledged dissertation, they'll still need to be carefully thought through, conducted (in the case of an empirical study) and written up. This final chapter is designed to help you in this task by providing you with some general principles that will help ensure that your particular project is brought to a successful conclusion and meets with the approval of your tutors and examiners.

The idea of having to conduct research can be quite intimidating, particularly if you have no previous experience. Often feelings of anxiety are the result of uncertainty about what exactly is expected of you and the standards you're required to meet, as well as the sense that you are ‘out on your own’ and having to undertake and keep control of an activity with which you are unfamiliar but which is important to your success as an undergraduate. Such feelings are perfectly natural and as such you can be sure not only that most of your peers are experiencing them to some degree but also that your lecturers are aware of this and have in place mechanisms to help guide you through the process of bringing your project to fruition.

Access options

Save book to kindle.

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle .

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service .

• Writing up small-scale research projects or dissertations
• Neil Murray , University of South Australia
• Book: Writing Essays in English Language and Linguistics
• Online publication: 05 June 2012
• Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139035347.014

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox .

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive .

• Find My Rep

You are here

Small-Scale Research Pragmatic Inquiry in Social Science and the Caring Professions

• Peter T Knight - Lancaster University, UK
• Description

Timely, assured and written with the needs of students uppermost, Small-Scale Research is a direct, comprehensive guide for students doing theses, dissertations, papers and projects. It systematically works through the central methods of inquiry and demonstrates the strengths and weaknesses of different approaches. The advice on when and how to use small-scale methods is pragmatic, recognizing that small-scale researchers are usually short on time and resources. Yet behind this pragmatism is the principle that research is, above all, about thinking. Whatever needs to be done in a research project has to be for the purpose of providing research audiences with the best possible answers, in the circumstances, to the research questions. The book argues that it is not enough to apply research methods. Sense-making and claims-making are central to good research practice.   Starting with Writing   Research as Claimsmaking   Face-to-Face Inquiry Methods   Research at a Distance   Research Design Bringing It All Together

Helpful as supplemental reading

A good book for our student health visitors as they engage in a literature review.

Whilst this book focuses on the Caring professions it provides useful and relevant information for any student undertaking small scale research. The examples provide can be transferred to most social science reports.

A useful additional book at L2 to introduce students into social researchl L3 styudents can use if for critiquing research in the areas covered

Preview this book

For instructors.

Please select a format:

Select a Purchasing Option

• Electronic Order Options VitalSource Amazon Kindle Google Play eBooks.com

Related Products

SAGE Research Methods is a research methods tool created to help researchers, faculty and students with their research projects. SAGE Research Methods links over 175,000 pages of SAGE’s renowned book, journal and reference content with truly advanced search and discovery tools. Researchers can explore methods concepts to help them design research projects, understand particular methods or identify a new method, conduct their research, and write up their findings. Since SAGE Research Methods focuses on methodology rather than disciplines, it can be used across the social sciences, health sciences, and more.

With SAGE Research Methods, researchers can explore their chosen method across the depth and breadth of content, expanding or refining their search as needed; read online, print, or email full-text content; utilize suggested related methods and links to related authors from SAGE Research Methods' robust library and unique features; and even share their own collections of content through Methods Lists. SAGE Research Methods contains content from over 720 books, dictionaries, encyclopedias, and handbooks, the entire “Little Green Book,” and "Little Blue Book” series, two Major Works collating a selection of journal articles, and specially commissioned videos.

• View all courses
• Taught postgraduate study
• Postgraduate taught degree courses
• Postgraduate taught tuition fees
• Pre-masters for international students
• Funding your postgraduate taught studies
• How to apply for a postgraduate taught degree
• Postgraduate offer holders - prepare for your studies
• Pre-sessional English courses
• PhDs and research degrees
• Create your own research project
• Find a PhD project
• Funding your research degree
• How to apply for a PhD or research degree
• How to make a PhD enquiry
• Support while studying your PhD or research degree
• Exchanges and studying abroad
• Undergraduate study
• Undergraduate degree courses
• Foundation year programmes
• Undergraduate tuition fees
• Customise your degree
• Funding undergraduate studies
• How to apply
• Tuition fees and funding
• Short courses
• Lunchtime evening and weekend courses
• Summer schools
• Get a prospectus
• Student life
• Accommodation
• Choose your halls of residence
• Apply for accommodation
• Guaranteed accommodation
• Your accommodation options
• Accommodation for those with additional requirements
• International and pre-sessional students
• Postgraduate accommodation
• Couples and students with children
• Renting privately
• Our accommodation areas
• Privacy notice
• Terms and conditions
• Fees and contracts
• Southampton
• Sports and gyms
• Sports facilities
• Sports clubs
• Watersports centres
• Our campuses
• Avenue Campus
• Boldrewood Innovation Campus
• City Centre Campus
• Highfield Campus
• University Hospital Southampton
• Waterfront Campus
• Winchester Campus
• Join our student community
• What's on
• Clubs and societies
• Sports teams
• SUSU places
• Representing you
• SUSU support and advice
• Support and money
• Living costs
• Academic and mental health support
• Support for disabled students
• Part-time work
• Health services
• Research projects
• Research areas
• Research facilities
• Collaborate with us
• Institutes, centres and groups
• Support for researchers
• Faculties, schools and departments
• Research jobs
• Find people and expertise
• Why work with us?
• Collaboration
• Consultancy
• Commercialisation
• Use our facilities
• Connect with our students
• How we operate
• Make a business enquiry
• International students
• International Office
• Partnerships and initiatives
• Visiting delegations
• Visiting fellowships
• University of Southampton Delhi

Small Scale Research Projects (SSRP)

Module overview.

This unit aims to offer students the opportunity to conduct a practically relevant, real-world small scale research project. Through small group supervision meetings trainees design a research project, and gain approval for their project from the University of Southampton Ethics and Research Governance Office and any Local Authority ethics committee as required. Following ethical approval, trainees then gain valuable experience conducting research, collecting and analysing data, and writing up the findings in an academic style at doctoral level. Trainees are encouraged to develop a research question and implement a project that generates new knowledge in a specific area in the field of educational psychology and serves to extend the discipline. Publication in academic or practice journals is encouraged and well supported by research staff (See PSYC8039 Dissemination and User Engagement Module). There is a focus in this module, where possible, on research with underrepresented groups and active engagement of service users.

Linked modules

Pre-requisites: RESM6012 and RESM6009 and RESM6011 and RESM6010

Aims and Objectives

Learning outcomes.

Having successfully completed this module you will be able to:

• Ability to work increasingly independently to: (1) identify relevant research questions and generate testable hypotheses (for quantitative methods); (2) support research questions with a relevant empirical literature and embed hypotheses in a clear theoretical framework; (3) think through and implement appropriate methods of data collection to achieve specific research objectives; (4) analyse data using appropriate statistical techniques including use of appropriate methods of data presentation (graphs, tables); (5) write up a research project to disseminate the results to specialised and non-specialised audiences and (6) demonstrate an understanding of the relevance of the project for educational psychology in practice.

This module consists of a small number of group and individual supervisory and problem solving meetings that aim to support students at all stages in the development of their SSRP. Initial meetings focus on the identification of a research question that is theoretically and empirically justifiable and that is sufficiently specific to allow the generation of one or more testable hypotheses. As the project develops trainees are expected to take initiative and responsibility in moving the project forwards (to identify participants and appropriate measures, to think through the project at a procedural level, to generate data and analyse it appropriately and to understand the educational implications of the project).

Learning and Teaching

Teaching and learning methods.

This is a 35 CATS (17.5 ECTS) module, which translates into a total study time of 350 hours. These 350 hours are split into 10 teaching/supervision hours and 340 hours of independent study. The 10 teaching hours will consist of two taught sessions, each lasting two hours and the remaining 6 hours will consist of group/individual research supervision. Sessions are organised to introduce the module, problem solve, and deal with specifics of writing up empirical research.

You will be spending most of your time for this module on independent study, reading and interpreting empirical and theoretical research, developing your research question and hypotheses, choosing and implementing appropriate methods, analysing and interpreting your data, and writing this work up in an academic style. You will have support from the SSRP module coordinator for all aspects of this course. Individual supervision sessions are by appointment.

The module assumes basic prior knowledge of research methods equivalent to that provided during the masters year of your doctorate.

General Resources

A variety of resources will be available on Blackboard. These will include any lecture slides and related materials, reading lists, key papers, and links to useful websites..

Software requirements. You will require access to statistical packages (e.g., SPSS or NVivo) which are available on the University’s computer workstations and can be downloaded to your own computer for use during your studies. This is available through iSolutions: https://www.software.soton.ac.uk/

Denscombe, M. (2014). The Good research Guide: For Small Scale Social Research Projects . Maidenhead: Oxford University Press.

Assessment strategy

Trainees work in small groups with a Local authority Partner and the module lead to think through the research design, methods, apply for ethics if appropriate, collect data and conduct analysis. The assessment requires trainees to write a 5000-word project of which the method and results sections are collaborative group work. The introduction, and discussion section should be written independently.

This is how we’ll formally assess what you have learned in this module.

This is how we’ll assess you if you don’t meet the criteria to pass this module.

Repeat Information

Repeat type: Internal & External

• Course modules
• Acoustical engineering
• Biomedical and medical engineering
• Civil engineering
• Every day I’m completely immersed in an environment that’s creative in all aspects
• Everything I learn feels so relevant, even If it’s a subject rooted in the past
• Maritime engineering
• Photonics and optoelectronics
• Social statistics and demography
• A missing link between continental shelves and the deep sea: Have we underestimated the importance of land-detached canyons?
• A seismic study of the continent-ocean transition southwest of the UK
• A study of rolling contact fatigue in electric vehicles (EVs)
• Acoustic monitoring of forest exploitation to establish community perspectives of sustainable hunting
• Acoustic sensing and characterisation of soil organic matter
• Advancing intersectional geographies of diaspora-led development in times of multiple crises
• Aero engine fan wake turbulence – Simulation and wind tunnel experiments
• Against Climate Change (DACC): improving the estimates of forest fire smoke emissions
• All-in-one Mars in-situ resource utilisation (ISRU) system and life-supporting using non-thermal plasma
• An electromagnetic study of the continent-ocean transition southwest of the UK
• An investigation of the relationship between health, home and law in the context of poor and precarious housing, and complex and advanced illness
• Antibiotic resistance genes in chalk streams
• Being autistic in care: Understanding differences in care experiences including breakdowns in placements for autistic and non-autistic children
• Biogeochemical cycling in the critical coastal zone: Developing novel methods to make reliable measurements of geochemical fluxes in permeable sediments
• Bloom and bust: seasonal cycles of phytoplankton and carbon flux
• British Black Lives Matter: The emergence of a modern civil rights movement
• Building physics for low carbon comfort using artificial intelligence
• Building-resolved large-eddy simulations of wind and dispersion over a city scale urban area
• Business studies and management: accounting
• Business studies and management: banking and finance
• Business studies and management: decision analytics and risk
• Business studies and management: digital and data driven marketing
• Business studies and management: human resources (HR) management and organisational behaviour
• Business studies and management: strategy, innovation and entrepreneurship
• Carbon storage in reactive rock systems: determining the coupling of geo-chemo-mechanical processes in reactive transport
• Cascading hazards from the largest volcanic eruption in over a century: What happened when Hunga Tonga-Hunga Ha’apai erupted in January 2022?
• Characterisation of cast austenitic stainless steels using ultrasonic backscatter and artificial intelligence
• Climate Change effects on the developmental physiology of the small-spotted catshark
• Climate at the time of the Human settlement of the Eastern Pacific
• Collaborative privacy in data marketplaces
• Compatibility of climate and biodiversity targets under future land use change
• Cost of living in modern and fossil animals
• Creative clusters in rural, coastal and post-industrial towns
• Deep oceanic convection: the outsized role of small-scale processes
• Defect categories and their realisation in supersymmetric gauge theory
• Defining the Marine Fisheries-Energy-Environment Nexus: Learning from shocks to enhance natural resource resilience
• Design and fabrication of next generation optical fibres
• Developing a practical application of unmanned aerial vehicle technologies for conservation research and monitoring of endangered wildlife
• Development and evolution of animal biomineral skeletons
• Development of all-in-one in-situ resource utilisation system for crewed Mars exploration missions
• Ecological role of offshore artificial structures
• Effect of embankment and subgrade weathering on railway track performance
• Efficient ‘whole-life’ anchoring systems for offshore floating renewables
• Electrochemical sensing of the sea surface microlayer
• Engagement with nature among children from minority ethnic backgrounds
• Enhancing UAV manoeuvres and control using distributed sensor arrays
• Ensuring the Safety and Security of Autonomous Cyber-Physical Systems
• Environmental and genetic determinants of Brassica crop damage by the agricultural pest Diamondback moth
• Estimating marine mammal abundance and distribution from passive acoustic and biotelemetry data
• Evolution of symbiosis in a warmer world
• Examining evolutionary loss of calcification in coccolithophores
• Explainable AI (XAI) for health
• Explaining process, pattern and dynamics of marine predator hotspots in the Southern Ocean
• Exploring dynamics of natural capital in coastal barrier systems
• Exploring the mechanisms of microplastics incorporation and their influence on the functioning of coral holobionts
• Exploring the potential electrical activity of gut for healthcare and wellbeing
• Exploring the trans-local nature of cultural scene
• Facilitating forest restoration sustainability of tropical swidden agriculture
• Faulting, fluids and geohazards within subduction zone forearcs
• Faulting, magmatism and fluid flow during volcanic rifting in East Africa
• Fingerprinting environmental releases from nuclear facilities
• Flexible hybrid thermoelectric materials for wearable energy harvesting
• Floating hydrokinetic power converter
• Glacial sedimentology associated subglacial hydrology
• Green and sustainable Internet of Things
• How do antimicrobial peptides alter T cell cytokine production?
• How do calcifying marine organisms grow? Determining the role of non-classical precipitation processes in biogenic marine calcite formation
• How do neutrophils alter T cell metabolism?
• How well can we predict future changes in biodiversity using machine learning?
• Hydrant dynamics for acoustic leak detection in water pipes
• If ‘Black Lives Matter’, do ‘Asian Lives Matter’ too? Impact trajectories of organisation activism on wellbeing of ethnic minority communities
• Illuminating luciferin bioluminescence in dinoflagellates
• Imaging quantum materials with an XFEL
• Impact of neuromodulating drugs on gut microbiome homeostasis
• Impact of pharmaceuticals in the marine environment in a changing world
• Impacts of environmental change on coastal habitat restoration
• Improving subsea navigation using environment observations for long term autonomy
• Information theoretic methods for sensor management
• Installation effect on the noise of small high speed fans
• Integrated earth observation mapping change land sea
• Interconnections of past greenhouse climates
• Investigating IgG cell depletion mechanisms
• Is ocean mixing upside down? How mixing processes drive upwelling in a deep-ocean basin
• Landing gear aerodynamics and aeroacoustics
• Lightweight gas storage: real-world strategies for the hydrogen economy
• Long-term change in the benthos – creating robust data from varying camera systems
• Machine learning for multi-robot perception
• Marine ecosystem responses to past climate change and its oceanographic impacts
• Mechanical effects in the surf zone - in situ electrochemical sensing
• Microfluidic cell isolation systems for sepsis
• Migrant entrepreneurship, gender and generation: context and family dynamics in small town Britain
• Miniaturisation in fishes: evolutionary and ecological perspectives
• Modelling high-power fibre laser and amplifier stability
• Modelling soil dewatering and recharge for cost-effective and climate resilient infrastructure
• Modelling the evolution of adaptive responses to climate change across spatial landscapes
• Nanomaterials sensors for biomedicine and/or the environment
• New high-resolution observations of ocean surface current and winds from innovative airborne and satellite measurements
• New perspectives on ocean photosynthesis
• Novel methods of detecting carbon cycling pathways in lakes and their impact on ecosystem change
• Novel technologies for cyber-physical security
• Novel transparent conducting films with unusual optoelectronic properties
• Novel wavelength fibre lasers for industrial applications
• Ocean circulation and the Southern Ocean carbon sink
• Ocean influence on recent climate extremes
• Ocean methane sensing using novel surface plasmon resonance technology
• Ocean physics and ecology: can robots disentangle the mix?
• Ocean-based Carbon Dioxide Removal: Assessing the utility of coastal enhanced weathering
• Offshore renewable energy (ORE) foundations on rock seabeds: advancing design through analogue testing and modelling
• Optical fibre sensing for acoustic leak detection in buried pipelines
• Optimal energy transfer in nonlinear systems
• Optimizing machine learning for embedded systems
• Oxidation of fossil organic matter as a source of atmospheric CO2
• Partnership dissolution and re-formation in later life among individuals from minority ethnic communities in the UK
• Personalized multimodal human-robot interactions
• Preventing disease by enhancing the cleaning power of domestic water taps using sound
• Quantifying riparian vegetation dynamics and flow interactions for Nature Based Solutions using novel environmental sensing techniques
• Quantifying the response and sensitivity of tropical forest carbon sinks to various drivers
• Quantifying variability in phytoplankton electron requirements for carbon fixation
• Resilient and sustainable steel-framed building structures
• Resolving Antarctic meltwater events in Southern Ocean marine sediments and exploring their significance using climate models
• Robust acoustic leak detection in water pipes using contact sound guides
• Silicon synapses for artificial intelligence hardware
• Smart photon delivery via reconfigurable optical fibres
• The Gulf Stream control of the North Atlantic carbon sink
• The Mayflower Studentship: a prestigious fully funded PhD studentship in bioscience
• The calming effect of group living in social fishes
• The duration of ridge flank hydrothermal exchange and its role in global biogeochemical cycles
• The evolution of symmetry in echinoderms
• The impact of early life stress on neuronal enhancer function
• The oceanic fingerprints on changing monsoons over South and Southeast Asia
• The role of iron in nitrogen fixation and photosynthesis in changing polar oceans
• The role of singlet oxygen signaling in plant responses to heat and drought stress
• Time variability on turbulent mixing of heat around melting ice in the West Antarctic
• Triggers and Feedbacks of Climate Tipping Points
• Uncovering the drivers of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease progression using patient derived organoids
• Understanding recent land-use change in Snowdonia to plan a sustainable future for uplands: integrating palaeoecology and conservation practice
• Understanding the role of cell motility in resource acquisition by marine phytoplankton
• Understanding the structure and engagement of personal networks that support older people with complex care needs in marginalised communities and their ability to adapt to increasingly ‘digitalised’ health and social care
• Unpicking the Anthropocene in the Hawaiian Archipelago
• Unraveling oceanic multi-element cycles using single cell ionomics
• Unravelling southwest Indian Ocean biological productivity and physics: a machine learning approach
• Using acoustics to monitor how small cracks develop into bursts in pipelines
• Using machine learning to improve predictions of ocean carbon storage by marine life
• Vulnerability of low-lying coastal transportation networks to natural hazards
• Wideband fibre optical parametric amplifiers for Space Division Multiplexing technology
• Will it stick? Exploring the role of turbulence and biological glues on ocean carbon storage
• X-ray imaging and property characterisation of porous materials
• Postgraduate Taught Diversity Scholarship (Environmental and Life Sciences)
• Southampton Business School Postgraduate UK Scholarship
• Southampton Genomics Talent Scholarship
• Southampton History Patricia Mather and Helen Patterson Scholarship
• Southampton MA Holocaust scholarships
• Southampton Philosophy David Humphris-Norman Scholarship
• Southampton UK Alumni Music Scholarship
• The National Institute for Health and care Research South Central INSIGHT Programme
• Winchester School of Art Progression Scholarship
• Southampton Physics and Astronomy Achievement Scholarship
• GREAT Scholarships 2024 – Greece
• Engineering Excellence Scholarship
• Winchester School of Art Postgraduate Global Talent Scholarship
• Engineering Global Talent Scholarship
• Southampton University Corporate Civil Engineering Scholarship Scheme
• Merit scholarships for international postgraduates
• Merit scholarships for international undergraduates
• Scholarships, awards and funding opportunities
• Becas Chile Scholarship
• Chevening Scholarships
• China Scholarship Council Scholarships
• COLFUTURO Scholarships
• Commonwealth Distance Learning Scholarships
• Commonwealth Master's Scholarships
• Commonwealth PhD Scholarships
• Commonwealth PhD Scholarships for high income countries
• Commonwealth Shared Scholarships
• Commonwealth Split-Site Scholarships
• FIDERH Scholarships
• Fulbright Awards
• FUNED Scholarships
• Great Scholarships 2024 – India
• Great Scholarships 2024 – Bangladesh
• Great Scholarships 2024 – Mexico
• Great Scholarships 2024 – Nigeria
• Marshall Scholarship
• Saïd Foundation Scholarships
• British Council Scholarships for Women in STEM
• Xiamen University PhD Scholarships
• GREAT scholarships for justice and law 2024 – Indonesia
• Scholarship terms and conditions
• Southampton Education Civic Scholarship
• Southampton Ageing and Gerontology Talent Scholarship
• Southampton Canadian Prestige Scholarship for Law
• Southampton Presidential International Scholarship
• Continuing professional development
• Archers Road
• City Gateway
• Erasmus Park
• Highfield Hall
• Orion Point
• Wessex Lane
• Cancer Sciences Protein Facility
• Geotechnical Centrifuge
• Maritime Robotics and Instrumentation Laboratory (MRIL)
• Active Living
• Advanced Fibre Applications
• Advanced Laser Laboratory
• Advanced Project Management Research Centre
• Antibody and Vaccine Group
• Astronomy Group
• Autism Community Research Network @ Southampton (ACoRNS)
• Bioarchaeology and Osteoarchaeology at Southampton (BOS)
• Bladder and Bowel Management
• Cell and Developmental Biology
• Centre for Defence and Security Research
• Centre for Developmental Origins of Health and Disease
• Centre for Digital Finance
• Centre for Eastern European and Eurasian Studies (CEEES)
• Centre for Empirical Research in Finance and Banking (CERFIB)
• Centre for Geometry, Topology, and Applications
• Centre for Global Englishes
• Centre for Global Health and Policy (GHaP)
• Centre for Health Technologies
• Centre for Healthcare Analytics
• Centre for Human Development, Stem Cells and Regeneration
• Centre for Imperial and Postcolonial Studies
• Centre for Inclusive and Sustainable Entrepreneurship and Innovation (CISEI)
• Centre for International Film Research (CIFR)
• Centre for International Law and Globalisation
• Centre for Internet of Things and Pervasive Systems
• Centre for Justice Studies
• Centre for Linguistics, Language Education and Acquisition Research
• Centre for Machine Intelligence
• Centre for Maritime Archaeology
• Centre for Medieval and Renaissance Culture (CMRC)
• Centre for Modern and Contemporary Writing (CMCW)
• Centre for Music Education and Social Justice
• Centre for Political Ethnography (CPE)
• Centre for Research in Accounting, Accountability and Governance
• Centre for Research on Work and Organisations
• Centre for Resilient Socio-Technical Systems
• Centre for Transnational Studies
• Child and Adolescent Research Group
• Clinical Ethics, Law and Society (CELS)
• Computational Nonlinear Optics
• Cyber Security Academy
• Data Science Group
• Digital Oceans
• EPSRC and MOD Centre for Doctoral Training in Complex Integrated Systems for Defence and Security
• Economic Theory and Experimental Economics
• Economy, Society and Governance
• Electrical Power Engineering
• Environmental Hydraulics
• Gas Photonics in Hollow Core Fibres 
• Geochemistry
• Global Health (Demography)
• Global Health Community of Practice
• Gravity group
• Healthy Oceans
• High Power Fibre Lasers
• Hollow Core Fibre
• Human Genetics and Genomic Medicine
• Infrastructure Group
• Institute of Developmental Sciences
• Institute of Maritime Law (IML)
• Integrated Photonic Devices
• Integrative Molecular Phenotyping Centre
• Interdisciplinary Musculoskeletal Health
• International Centre for Ecohydraulics Research (ICER)
• Language Assessment and Testing Unit (LATU)
• Laser-Direct-Write (LDW) Technologies for Biomedical Applications
• Law and Technology Centre
• Long Term Conditions
• Magnetic Resonance
• Mathematical Modelling
• Medicines Management
• Molecular and Precision Biosciences
• Multiwavelength Accretion and Astronomical Transients
• National Biofilms Innovation Centre (NBIC)
• National Centre for Research Methods
• National Infrastructure Laboratory
• Nature-Based Ocean Solutions
• Nonlinear Semiconductor Photonics
• Ocean Perception Group
• Operational Research
• Optical Engineering and Quantum Photonics Group
• Paediatrics and Child Health - Clinical and Experimental Sciences
• People, Property, Community
• Photonic Systems, Circuits and Sensors Group
• Physical Optics
• Primary Care Research Centre
• Product Returns Research Group (PRRG)
• Quantum, Light and Matter Group
• Silica Fibre Fabrication
• Silicon Photonics
• Skin Sensing Research Group
• Southampton Centre for Nineteenth-Century Research
• Southampton Ethics Centre
• Southampton Health Technology Assessments Centre (SHTAC)
• Southampton High Energy Physics group
• Southampton Imaging
• Southampton Theory Astrophysics and Gravity (STAG) Research Centre
• Stefan Cross Centre for Women, Equality and Law
• String theory and holography
• The India Centre for Inclusive Growth and Sustainable Development
• The Parkes Institute
• Tony Davies High Voltage Laboratory
• Ultrafast X-ray Group
• Vision Science
• WSA Exchange
• Work Futures Research Centre (WFRC)
• Departments

Pilot Study in Research: Definition & Examples

Julia Simkus

Editor at Simply Psychology

BA (Hons) Psychology, Princeton University

Julia Simkus is a graduate of Princeton University with a Bachelor of Arts in Psychology. She is currently studying for a Master's Degree in Counseling for Mental Health and Wellness in September 2023. Julia's research has been published in peer reviewed journals.

Learn about our Editorial Process

Saul McLeod, PhD

Editor-in-Chief for Simply Psychology

BSc (Hons) Psychology, MRes, PhD, University of Manchester

Saul McLeod, PhD., is a qualified psychology teacher with over 18 years of experience in further and higher education. He has been published in peer-reviewed journals, including the Journal of Clinical Psychology.

Olivia Guy-Evans, MSc

Associate Editor for Simply Psychology

BSc (Hons) Psychology, MSc Psychology of Education

Olivia Guy-Evans is a writer and associate editor for Simply Psychology. She has previously worked in healthcare and educational sectors.

On This Page:

A pilot study, also known as a feasibility study, is a small-scale preliminary study conducted before the main research to check the feasibility or improve the research design.

Pilot studies can be very important before conducting a full-scale research project, helping design the research methods and protocol.

How Does it Work?

Pilot studies are a fundamental stage of the research process. They can help identify design issues and evaluate a study’s feasibility, practicality, resources, time, and cost before the main research is conducted.

It involves selecting a few people and trying out the study on them. It is possible to save time and, in some cases, money by identifying any flaws in the procedures designed by the researcher.

A pilot study can help the researcher spot any ambiguities (i.e., unusual things), confusion in the information given to participants, or problems with the task devised.

Sometimes the task is too hard, and the researcher may get a floor effect because none of the participants can score at all or can complete the task – all performances are low.

The opposite effect is a ceiling effect, when the task is so easy that all achieve virtually full marks or top performances and are “hitting the ceiling.”

This enables researchers to predict an appropriate sample size, budget accordingly, and improve the study design before performing a full-scale project.

Pilot studies also provide researchers with preliminary data to gain insight into the potential results of their proposed experiment.

However, pilot studies should not be used to test hypotheses since the appropriate power and sample size are not calculated. Rather, pilot studies should be used to assess the feasibility of participant recruitment or study design.

By conducting a pilot study, researchers will be better prepared to face the challenges that might arise in the larger study. They will be more confident with the instruments they will use for data collection.

Multiple pilot studies may be needed in some studies, and qualitative and/or quantitative methods may be used.

To avoid bias, pilot studies are usually carried out on individuals who are as similar as possible to the target population but not on those who will be a part of the final sample.

Feedback from participants in the pilot study can be used to improve the experience for participants in the main study. This might include reducing the burden on participants, improving instructions, or identifying potential ethical issues.

Experiment Pilot Study

In a pilot study with an experimental design , you would want to ensure that your measures of these variables are reliable and valid.

You would also want to check that you can effectively manipulate your independent variables and that you can control for potential confounding variables.

A pilot study allows the research team to gain experience and training, which can be particularly beneficial if new experimental techniques or procedures are used.

Questionnaire Pilot Study

It is important to conduct a questionnaire pilot study for the following reasons:

• Check that respondents understand the terminology used in the questionnaire.
• Check that emotive questions are not used, as they make people defensive and could invalidate their answers.
• Check that leading questions have not been used as they could bias the respondent’s answer.
• Ensure that the questionnaire can be completed in a reasonable amount of time. If it’s too long, respondents may lose interest or not have enough time to complete it, which could affect the response rate and the data quality.

By identifying and addressing issues in the pilot study, researchers can reduce errors and risks in the main study. This increases the reliability and validity of the main study’s results.

Assessing the practicality and feasibility of the main study

Testing the efficacy of research instruments

Identifying and addressing any weaknesses or logistical problems

Collecting preliminary data

Estimating the time and costs required for the project

Determining what resources are needed for the study

Identifying the necessity to modify procedures that do not elicit useful data

Adding credibility and dependability to the study

Pretesting the interview format

Enabling researchers to develop consistent practices and familiarize themselves with the procedures in the protocol

Addressing safety issues and management problems

Limitations

Require extra costs, time, and resources.

Do not guarantee the success of the main study.

Contamination (ie: if data from the pilot study or pilot participants are included in the main study results).

Funding bodies may be reluctant to fund a further study if the pilot study results are published.

Do not have the power to assess treatment effects due to small sample size.

• Viscocanalostomy: A Pilot Study (Carassa, Bettin, Fiori, & Brancato, 1998)
• WHO International Pilot Study of Schizophrenia (Sartorius, Shapiro, Kimura, & Barrett, 1972)
• Stephen LaBerge of Stanford University ran a series of experiments in the 80s that investigated lucid dreaming. In 1985, he performed a pilot study that demonstrated that time perception is the same as during wakefulness. Specifically, he had participants go into a state of lucid dreaming and count out ten seconds, signaling the start and end with pre-determined eye movements measured with the EOG.
• Negative Word-of-Mouth by Dissatisfied Consumers: A Pilot Study (Richins, 1983)
• A pilot study and randomized controlled trial of the mindful self‐compassion program (Neff & Germer, 2013)
• Pilot study of secondary prevention of posttraumatic stress disorder with propranolol (Pitman et al., 2002)
• In unstructured observations, the researcher records all relevant behavior without a system. There may be too much to record, and the behaviors recorded may not necessarily be the most important, so the approach is usually used as a pilot study to see what type of behaviors would be recorded.
• Perspectives of the use of smartphones in travel behavior studies: Findings from a literature review and a pilot study (Gadziński, 2018)

Further Information

• Lancaster, G. A., Dodd, S., & Williamson, P. R. (2004). Design and analysis of pilot studies: recommendations for good practice. Journal of evaluation in clinical practice, 10 (2), 307-312.
• Thabane, L., Ma, J., Chu, R., Cheng, J., Ismaila, A., Rios, L. P., … & Goldsmith, C. H. (2010). A tutorial on pilot studies: the what, why and how. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 10 (1), 1-10.
• Moore, C. G., Carter, R. E., Nietert, P. J., & Stewart, P. W. (2011). Recommendations for planning pilot studies in clinical and translational research. Clinical and translational science, 4 (5), 332-337.

Carassa, R. G., Bettin, P., Fiori, M., & Brancato, R. (1998). Viscocanalostomy: a pilot study. European journal of ophthalmology, 8 (2), 57-61.

Gadziński, J. (2018). Perspectives of the use of smartphones in travel behaviour studies: Findings from a literature review and a pilot study. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, 88 , 74-86.

In J. (2017). Introduction of a pilot study. Korean Journal of Anesthesiology, 70 (6), 601–605. https://doi.org/10.4097/kjae.2017.70.6.601

LaBerge, S., LaMarca, K., & Baird, B. (2018). Pre-sleep treatment with galantamine stimulates lucid dreaming: A double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover study. PLoS One, 13 (8), e0201246.

Leon, A. C., Davis, L. L., & Kraemer, H. C. (2011). The role and interpretation of pilot studies in clinical research. Journal of psychiatric research, 45 (5), 626–629. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpsychires.2010.10.008

Malmqvist, J., Hellberg, K., Möllås, G., Rose, R., & Shevlin, M. (2019). Conducting the Pilot Study: A Neglected Part of the Research Process? Methodological Findings Supporting the Importance of Piloting in Qualitative Research Studies. International Journal of Qualitative Methods. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406919878341

Neff, K. D., & Germer, C. K. (2013). A pilot study and randomized controlled trial of the mindful self‐compassion program. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 69 (1), 28-44.

Pitman, R. K., Sanders, K. M., Zusman, R. M., Healy, A. R., Cheema, F., Lasko, N. B., … & Orr, S. P. (2002). Pilot study of secondary prevention of posttraumatic stress disorder with propranolol. Biological psychiatry, 51 (2), 189-192.

Richins, M. L. (1983). Negative word-of-mouth by dissatisfied consumers: A pilot study. Journal of Marketing, 47 (1), 68-78.

Sartorius, N., Shapiro, R., Kimura, M., & Barrett, K. (1972). WHO International Pilot Study of Schizophrenia1. Psychological medicine, 2 (4), 422-425.

Teijlingen, E. R; V. Hundley (2001). The importance of pilot studies, Social research UPDATE, (35)

• Open access
• Published: 21 June 2018

Small-scale implementation with pragmatic process evaluation: a model developed in primary health care

• Kirsti Malterud   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-9556-616X 1 , 2 , 3 ,
• Aase Aamland 1 &
• Kristina Riis Iden 1  

BMC Family Practice volume  19 , Article number:  93 ( 2018 ) Cite this article

4607 Accesses

10 Citations

21 Altmetric

Metrics details

Research often fails to impose substantial shifts in clinical practice. Evidence-based health care requires implementation of documented interventions, with implementation research as a science-informed strategy to identify core experiences from the process and share preconditions for achievement. Evidence developed in hospital contexts is often neither relevant nor feasible for primary care. Different evidence types may constitute a point of departure, stretching and testing the transferability of the intervention by piloting it in primary care. Comprehensive descriptions of aims, context and procedures can be a more useful outcome than traditional effect studies.

We present a model for small-scale implementation of relevant research evidence, monitored by pragmatic evaluation. The model, which is applicable in primary care, is supported by Weiner’s theory about organizational readiness for change and consists of four steps: 1) recognize the problem – identify a workable intervention, 2) assess the context – prepare for inception, 3) pilot the intervention on site, and 4) upscale and accomplish the intervention. The process is evaluated by exploring selected relevant aspects of experiences and outcomes from the first to the last step. Process evaluation is a logical precondition for outcome evaluation – attempting to assess either the efficacy or the effectiveness of a “black box” intervention makes no sense. We argue why evidence beyond effect studies and evaluation beyond randomized controlled trials may be adequate for science-informed evaluation of a small-scale implementation project such as is often conducted by primary health care practitioners. The model is illustrated by an ongoing project, in which a strategy for upgrading the management of depression in nursing homes in Norway is currently being implemented.

Conclusions

A flexible and manageable approach is suggested, in which the inevitable unpredictability of clinical practice is incorporated. Finding the appropriate middle ground between rigour and flexibility, some compromises must be made. Our model recognizes the skills of practical knowing as something other than traditional medical research, while maintaining academic values such as systematic and transparent reflection, using adequate tools. Considering the purpose and context of our model, we argue that these priorities, emphasizing relevance and feasibility, are strengths, not limitations.

Peer Review reports

Medical research is conducted to make an impact on health and disease, and health care services are increasingly adopting evidence-based health care (EBHC) [ 1 ] . Still, a substantial proportion of research evidence finds its way into scientific journals and languishes there without ever leading to substantial shifts in clinical practice [ 2 ]. Pathirana et al. describe how different drivers cause over-diagnosis, such as the promotion of increasingly sensitive tests, leading to the detection of minor “abnormalities”, which may be of uncertain clinical significance [ 3 ]. While there is evidence for substantial over-diagnosis of thyroid cancer (for women in the Nordic countries it is estimated at 50%; [ 4 ]), diagnostic procedures remain unchanged.

Implementation is a process in which we transform what we know to what we do, monitored by implementation research to evaluate conditions influencing these processes [ 5 , 6 ]. Implementation research offers tools with which to explore and reflect upon what is likely to work in this situation for these people in this organization with these constraints [ 1 ]. Thus, the description and analysis of experiences from an intervention process in a specific context may offer inspiration and wisdom for transformation to analogous real-life environments.

The primary care context presents specific challenges to EBHC. A large proportion of knowledge and skills from this medical domain is not yet or will never be substantiated by research evidence, simply because it is fluid, flexible and individualized [ 2 , 7 , 8 ]. Moreover, evidence developed in a top-down hospital context may be neither relevant nor feasible for primary care, owing to the different prevalence, distribution and nature of the health problems that occur at these different levels. Critical conditions related to structural framework, legal regulations, resources, professional procedures and social interaction also often differ between primary care and hospital care [ 9 ].

Clinical guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and prevention are the most common format for the implementation of EBHC. Although general practitioners (GPs) seem to approve guidelines in general, several barriers obstruct their application in the real world [ 10 , 11 , 12 ]. Flottorp et al., for example, tried to implement guidelines for the management of two common disorders in general practice, but even tailored interventions targeting identified barriers failed to change practice [ 13 ].

It is neither advisable nor realistic to regulate any clinical procedure with guidelines. Still, numerous demands for quality improvement remain unmet and significant emerging, potentially relevant evidence is never translated into practice [ 5 ]. Greenhalgh draws attention to the huge gap between evidence and its implementation, pointing out that these issues are complex and not easily explained [ 1 ].

How, then, can this state of affairs be rectified [ 2 ]? In this article, we aim to promote reflection and motivation for change by presenting a model for the small-scale implementation of relevant research evidence applicable in primary care, monitored by implementation research conducted as pragmatic evaluation.

Theoretical framework and basic concepts

Plenty of relevant theories are available that attempt to explain how and why people and organizations may take up innovations and change their behaviour [ 1 ]. We have chosen Weiner’s theory about Organizational Readiness for Change (ORC) [ 14 ] to support our model, because it is simple while still including a few crucial concepts emphasizing the organizational framework to which participating individuals belong. Translation of knowledge into practice entails ORC, determined by two dimensions: 1) whether organizational members value the intended change and think that it is worthwhile and important ( change commitment ), and 2) how organizational members appraise the demands of the particular task, resource availability, requirements for the task and situational factors ( change efficacy ). The appraisal of selected and relevant ORC aspects is indispensable to planning and implementation. These aspects are also important targets for the evaluation of an implementation process.

We argue that implementation of EBHC should always be accompanied by implementation research, to identify core experiences from the process and share preconditions for achievement with colleagues. For analytical purposes, the two different but mutually interacting levels of doing and the study of what is being done must be recognized. Greenhalgh stresses that implementing EBHC involves complex practices that require skills and situational judgment and are not just a matter of following procedural steps [ 1 ]. Furthermore, she argues that “implementation science” is neither science nor art, but a science-informed practice . Greenhalgh points out that traditional health care research is oriented towards producing statistical generalizations based on a sample from one population to predict what will happen in a comparable population, leading to one single interpretation of the findings. In contrast, she says, implementation science is at least partly about using unique case examples as a window opening onto wider truths, through the enrichment of understanding, with multiple possible interpretations of a case. Both doing and the study of what is being done therefore require conscientious modification to be feasible and relevant in the actual context [ 6 ].

Implementation of research evidence into practice is a complex process, calling for methodological skills as well as practical wisdom. Using the EBHC concept, we draw on a base of existing research knowledge to support the intervention we intend to implement. Evidence informing the intervention is acquired from qualitative, quantitative or mixed-method studies, depending on the nature of the problem to be solved, the type of intervention to be implemented, the implementation context and available time and resources. Evidence supports the aim, nature and content of the intervention, often also its efficacy (outcome under ideal conditions). Complex interventions need to be tailored to local circumstances, rather than being firmly standardized [ 1 , 15 ]. Feasibility is supported by simplicity and pragmatic priorities, as well as close interaction with the people and the context involved [ 16 ]. Bottom-up strategies and implementation anchored in contextual skills and experience are crucial to increase the likely success of the implementation.

Implementation research offers tools and concepts for the evaluation of preconditions for the successful implementation of strategies, programmes, interventions or individual practices. Monitoring, assessing and sharing the experiences of facilitators and barriers to the implementation of a certain intervention in a particular context are helpful for colleagues who want to do something similar [ 16 ]. Implementation research is a composite realm with a variety of roots [ 1 ], for example quality improvement [ 17 ], evidence-based medicine (EBM) [ 18 ], organizational psychology [ 19 ] and evaluation research [ 20 ].

Pragmatic process evaluation – focus and priorities

Pragmatic evaluation is a specific and flexible strategy among several available options, and the concept is not synonymous with implementation research. It is impossible to evaluate every tiny piece of the entire process. A starting point for a relevant and feasible evaluation strategy is to realize that knowledge is always partial, intermediate and dependent on the situated view of the researcher [ 21 ]. Choices and priorities must therefore be made about what knowledge will be most helpful for others, given the available resources. Relevance to the purpose and context is the overarching yardstick determining which features to select for review in the evaluation plan [ 20 ].

At an early stage, you will have to decide upon a primary scope and recipient of your implementation research. Do you want to share your experiences with colleagues who plan to take up similar interventions, are you talking to public health authorities to convince them of the need for and shape of a national plan, or are you speaking to the assessment committee of your Ph.D., who are obliged to maintain academic methodological standards? The format and focus of the report will be different depending on whom it addresses, but all recipients deserve proper, high-quality contributions. An implementation research project can be published as an article in a scientific journal if you follow accepted principles for qualitative or quantitative research and present original, relevant and credible knowledge. Mixed-methods designs may also be useful [ 22 ]. The report of a small-scale primary care implementation project may sometimes be more useful for potential recipients if it is not forced into the restricted format of a peer-reviewed article or subjected to traditional expectations of generalizability.

Process evaluation (often called formative evaluation ) aims to improve a policy or programme as it is being implemented, while outcome evaluation (often called summative evaluation ) is conducted to determine if a policy or programme works [ 23 ]. Process evaluation asks what happens along the road and explores the nature and impact of determinants for ORC, including facilitators as well as barriers [ 14 , 17 , 19 ]. This involves studying how the implementation was performed and received, including adaptations needed to put the intervention into action, reception among stakeholders and participants, preconditions crucial for change commitment and change efficacy and the nature and strength of resistance. Process evaluation can be conducted as pragmatic evaluation, or with more rigorous methodologies.

With regard to feasibility, evaluation should also check whether and to what degree the implementation was accomplished, such as recruitment, participation, adoption, intervention fidelity and sustainability over time. The evaluation of implementation quality may be supported by concepts such as implementation coverage (what proportion of the target group accomplished the intervention, and why?) and implementation fidelity (was the intervention, adapted by piloting, implemented according to the manuals, and how?). Confusingly, such issues are often called implementation outcomes [ 24 ] . It may be helpful to think of them as related to the implementation process itself, which is supposedly supported by already existing evidence. Client outcomes are also relevant endpoints for evaluation. The primary focus of a pragmatic process evaluation is still the implementation process itself, not necessarily including the endpoint service outcomes of the intervention [ 24 ].

In this sense, implementation research is very different from an intervention research study with standardized circumstances [ 1 ]. Pragmatic evaluation may nevertheless be science-informed practice, when relevant tools and standards from research with systematic and transparent reflexivity are employed. In designing the evaluation plan, we take on the role of interaction-oriented pragmatics rather than significance-oriented epidemiologists [ 6 ].

Below we present our model for small-scale implementation with pragmatic process evaluation, incorporating, summarizing and exemplifying these preconditions. A strategy for upgrading the management of depression in nursing homes in south-western Norway currently being implemented by the last author (KRI) illustrates our presentation. Applying this case before implementation and evaluation have been completed allows us to imagine and suggest more options than the finalized project will ever be able to exemplify. Hence, this is first and foremost a methodological article, not a report on an empirical study.

The model was designed for application in primary health care and includes implementation as well as implementation research. It consists of the following steps: 1) recognize the problem and identify a workable intervention, 2) assess the context and prepare for inception, 3) pilot the intervention on site, 4) upscale and accomplish the intervention (Fig.  1 ). The process is monitored by studying selected relevant aspects of experiences and outcomes from the first to the last step. In the real world, these elements are closely interwoven. To enhance understanding we present them sequentially. The model is supported by theoretical perspectives about organizational readiness for change (ORC), presented in more detail above [ 14 ].

A model for implementation and implementation research

1. Recognize the problem - identify a workable intervention

A practitioner or a group of colleagues notices a problem related to procedures (or lack of such) for the diagnosis, treatment or prevention of a certain health problem in a specific practice context. A process of potential change is initiated by exploring and characterizing the problem at hand. Defining the nature of the problem is the starting point for developing a workable, evidence-informed intervention as a research question and potential solution. Although our model relates to a small-scale implementation, we aim for utilization beyond local problems, which may be solved by everyday practical efforts. We therefore draw attention to reflections on the extent of the problem, as well as the transferability of the chosen intervention, guided by research evidence.

In this case, the last author (KRI), a GP serving as a nursing home doctor, noticed that the use of antidepressant medication among the residents may not be optimal. Her observations were substantiated by evidence that nursing home patients use a large amount of medication in general, especially antidepressants [ 25 , 26 ]. Antidepressants in the elderly are associated with serious side-effects, and the quality of treatment is crucial [ 27 , 28 , 29 ]. In a previous study, KRI demonstrated that doctors seldom participate in the diagnostic workup and evaluation of antidepressant treatment in the nursing home context [ 30 , 31 ]. Hence, her hypothesis about haphazard management of depression in nursing homes was more than just a hunch.

When the problem has been outlined, the implementation of different interventions may present as a potential solution. In our model, only interventions informed by research evidence are eligible. The nature of the problem and the context of implementation determine what kind of evidence needs to be adduced. Interventions aiming for broad impact should not be implemented unless we know that they are working. Before the implementation of national guidelines for drug treatment of type 2 diabetes, we would, for example, require convincing evidence of the effect and safety of the actual drugs [ 32 ], while, for small-scale interventions, other types of evidence may be more relevant. For example, in relation to interaction strategies in primary care consultations, we might request evidence about the specific nature of the intervention and documentation about how it is accomplished. In such cases, such as implementation of home notes for patients with a long-standing illness without clinical findings, a comprehensive description of aim, context and procedures might be more useful evidence than effect studies [ 33 ].

The Cornell Scale for Depression in Dementia (CSDD) [ 34 ] is a scale for depression screening in patients with or without cognitive reduction. Five groups of depression symptoms are scored by a nurse or a relative in dialogue with the patient. The CSDD has been translated into Norwegian and is validated for use in Norwegian nursing homes [ 35 ]. KRI found CSDD to be an adequate and feasible tool for routinized depression assessment in nursing homes, as a basis for high-quality depression management and the eventual prescription of antidepressants. Based on her own experiences as a GP and a nursing home doctor, she estimated the potential for sufficient change commitment and efficacy in the actual context as reasonably good. She decided to bring her ideas into effect in real life as a small-scale implementation project, applicable in primary care and monitored by pragmatic process evaluation, to record, reflect upon and share relevant experiences.

2. Assess the context - prepare for inception

Before interventions, developed in enthusiastic and experimental research settings, are turnkey and ready for utilization in a small-scale practice context, numerous steps of probing, negotiation, teaching and promotion must be performed. Greenhalgh stresses that people are far from passive recipients of innovations [ 36 ], and there is an extensive knowledge base of different theories about how human behaviour can be changed [ 1 ]. All through the process, attention must be paid to contextual circumstances. Our model encourages attention to barriers and facilitators for ORC among potential participants [ 14 ] when preparing for the implementation of an intervention in a particular health care context.

In our case, KRI first considered distributing a questionnaire to potential participants, asking about their willingness and ability to implement the intervention. However, she then decided to invite four experienced nursing home doctors [ 16 ] to a focus group-inspired discussion [ 37 ], to learn about attitudes and preconditions among potential participants in a more open-minded manner. She explored their change commitment [ 14 ], probing whether they agreed that the management of depression is an area in need of change, and whether they considered the planned intervention was beneficial and worthwhile. Furthermore, she assessed their change efficacy, by exploring their capacity to execute the planned intervention [ 14 ]. She found them sufficiently ready to “pursue the courses of action involved in change implementation”, as put by Weiner. The participants indicated that, if the implementation were to be accomplished, the management (chief nurse and medical officer) must not only support the implementation but explicitly promote it. They seemed reluctant to screen all patients with the CSDD, warning against overtreatment and time-consuming procedures. Still, they would approve routinized use of CSDD on more selected occasions. With only four participants, the data were limited but yielded substantial information, even in the absence of formal analysis.

This kind of assessment of the practice environment, first for piloting and later for scaling, is essential for planning and initial promotion. Strategic negotiations with stakeholders and collaborators, as well as the appraisal and procurement of human, social and financial resources, are also necessary. Finally, approvals regarding research ethics, confidentiality and permission to use tools and time must be secured. A project protocol can now be carefully elaborated. The protocol includes substantiation of the problem, a workable and evidence-informed intervention to be implemented, the aim of the implementation, suggestions about the real-life context for piloting and scaling and strategies for implementation and evaluation. Finally, resources, the time schedule, collaboration and publication plans should be briefly presented. The final version need not be laid out until the process has been under way for a while, utilizing input from experiences and interaction.

KRI assembled transcripts from the group discussion and field notes from the negotiations, constituting data for planning and an initial version of the protocol. The protocol staged the problem of antidepressant medication, motivated the evidence-based intervention with CSDD, indicated plans for piloting, scaling and evaluation and presented a time schedule. The utility of the protocol was confirmed by a successful process of permissions, funding and dialogues with the municipal health administration.

3. Pilot the intervention on site

The intervention to be implemented has usually been developed in a research setting, protected from the unpredictable noise of everyday practice. We must therefore consider the evidence as a starting point, stretching and testing the transferability of the intervention by piloting it in a friendly but more normal setting. Adaptation includes sustainable simplification, with subsequent description and instruction, custom-made for the situation and the organization members involved in the intervention. The researchers need to be familiar with the research literature, including any potential critique of the intervention or its foundations.

Then it is time to negotiate with potential participants how the intervention should best be formatted to comply with their change efficacy [ 14 ], for example regarding training, practical challenges or other concerns. Establishing such a balance requires professional skills, field proficiency and research competence. However, within EBHC, the evidence is considered a binding reference, in which all core content must be preserved [ 1 ]. Furnished with the responses and adaptations on site, we elaborate the format of the intervention and summarize the vital points in a manual referring to the overall aim, context and target group and distinct specification of the intervention and how it is carried out.

By now it may also be relevant to explore expectations regarding the feasibility of later steps by studying the degree of coverage, for example by means of simple quantitative measures demonstrating the percentage of actual versus desirable or accessible participation or events. Evaluation data regarding participants’ specific experiences may be collected in different ways, for example as field notes from observation and more or less formal communication with the professionals involved, or as focus group discussions during or after the pilot period. Systematizing written documents, such as plans, proposals, budget papers or field notes from observation, may provide indications of challenges that must be considered when planning the future scaling step. The evaluator should gather potentially relevant documents, review and organize these, and – if useful – conduct a formal analysis. More often than not, such papers will offer informal but important bits and pieces of information. Knowing them, reflecting upon them and referring to them will often be more useful than qualitative analysis.

In this case, KRI established a dialogue with two nursing homes, obtaining their agreement to piloting the intervention in a total of five wards. The nursing home managements became involved and encouraged the project. Information meetings about CSDD were held, not for teaching purposes but to reinforce the involvement of the nursing home administrations [ 38 ]. CSDD would be performed by the ward nurse 1) on a routinized basis some months after patients’ admission, 2) when there were changes in functional level of the patient, or 3) when psychotropic medication was adjusted. Results would be stored in the patients’ medical record. On ward rounds, the doctor requested the results and interpreted them, together with the nurse. KRI visited the pilot sites and developed field notes about intervention experiences among the professionals involved, such as how CSDD was actually used (interval, time spent, intervention loyalty, perceived relevance, storage and utilization of results) and the impact of these issues for change commitment and change efficacy in the participating wards [ 14 , 39 ]. She observed that an adequately staffed ward with a dedicated doctor who collaborates closely with the nurses and finds CSDD helpful constitutes the most advantageous environment for implementation. KRI was also exploring the preconditions for and likelihood of the sustainability of the intervention beyond the pilot period. Alongside practicalities, she reflected on which aspects of the process to prioritize regarding evaluation and data collection during the scaling step.

4. Upscale and organize the intervention

After piloting, the modified intervention is ready for upscaling , which means implementation to a broader context. This step requires social and organizational skills, because the intervention will not be taken on board by participants and end users until they are sufficiently informed, motivated, trained and ready for change [ 6 , 14 ]. Grol et al. emphasize that systematic approaches and thorough planning, assessment of the intervention as a useful product, preparedness in the target group and a diagnostic analysis of target group, context and feasibility are required for successful implementation, preferably within already existing structures [ 17 ]. They also draw attention to the involvement of the target group in planning, development and adjustment, as well as a continuous evaluation of process and outcome [ 17 ]. Based on a thorough literature review, Greenhalgh recommends systematic assessment of whether a specific innovation is right for the organization, judicious attention to project management, valuing and supporting organizational sense-making, and studying organizational routines and the interaction between them, as well as the systematic encouragement of links beyond the organization [ 1 ].

Strategies for recruitment regarding locations and number of sites are also important considerations for upscaling. We should include not only the very enthusiastic, but also those who are somewhat reluctant. Moreover, careful assessment of available resources is especially important in a small-scale implementation project. The project can always be expanded later, if the initial efforts appear to be successful. Implementation is of no use if the intervention is forgotten a year later. Do not forget to invest in strategies that enhance sustainability.

Priorities must also be set regarding strategies for process evaluation during the upscaling step. Simple measures for coverage proportion (see above) can offer important clues for assessment of the implementation process. Focus group interviews or participant observation can complement numerical data, providing further insights into facilitators or barriers with an impact on achievement. The latter approaches can also be used to learn more about organizational processes, interactions and experiences. Intervention loyalty may be studied by qualitative or quantitative methods, depending on the intended level of standardization of the intervention. In a small-scale implementation project, the number of aspects to be included in the evaluation plan should not be excessive. It is advisable to try to explore a few selected indicators leading to information of special relevance for colleagues, to whom you hope to spread the good idea. Then you conduct an adequate collection and analysis of relevant data for this purpose.

In this case, KRI planned upscaling of the intervention, starting with strategies for recruitment. After obtaining permits and support from relevant authorities, she arranged meetings for nursing home doctors in neighbouring municipalities with lectures about the management of depression, presenting CSDD as a workable tool to support diagnostic routines in the nursing homes. She enlisted five wards from three nursing homes. One of the wards from the pilot sites also volunteered to join the next step of implementation. At this point of the process, KRI observed that implementation of CSDD was achievable. Several participants found CSDD helpful, verifying or adjusting their clinical assessment, especially with previous scores available for comparison. Some of them also mentioned positive side-effects of the new routines, such as increased attention to various depressive symptoms or to the impact of environmental support. KRI also wanted to take advantage of experiences from the scaling step to learn more about preconditions for coverage, maintenance and sustainability beyond individual commitment. She planned another round of participant observation, in which particular preconditions for intervention coverage and loyalty could be explored on site [ 39 ]. She also considered a mixed-methods project about the clinical consequences of the intervention [ 40 ], based on selected data from patients’ medical records and interviews with participating staff.

It turned out, however, that such a plan would require more resources than were available within the time available. Instead, she planned to complement the fieldwork with a purposive sample of three focus groups, highlighting contextual facilitators and barriers regarding organizational readiness for change during the process and in the future. In this way, the future sustainability of the intervention could be assessed and encouraged.

Finally, KRI considered the possibilities of including relevant outcome measures in the evaluation plan, such as clinical effectiveness (better depression management) after the intervention. She concluded, however, that such an ambition would require a pre-planned randomized controlled trial design with many more participating sites than she would be able to handle at this point. KRI reported this idea to the research unit with which she is connected, hoping for a future Ph.D. student to team up with her. An evaluation of service users’ satisfaction related to the intervention could also be included in her plan. KRI concluded that her evaluation plan still captured the most important issues regarding process and context for further implementation efforts.

Advocating EBHC in the primary care context, we developed a model for small-scale implementation accompanied by pragmatic process evaluation, in which relevance and feasibility were prioritized elements. This methodological article presents the principles and practical application of conduct and evaluation, setting out the four steps of the model, illustrated by a real-life example. Below, we discuss the impact of this model, including its strengths and weaknesses.

What is known from before? – what does this model add?

The model presented here was developed by GPs with clinical experiences from comparably small primary care organizations. Compared with the dimensions and structure of a hospital setting, primary care is more homogeneous and transparent, with fewer levels than specialist care organizations. Furthermore, we were not strangers from professional implementation companies but colleagues who were familiar with the context and working conditions of the place in which the intervention was to be implemented. Peer-driven implementation and evaluation are probably more common in primary care, because practitioners themselves realize specific needs for quality improvement and are often in charge of devising bottom-up strategies for change. Limited funding may inspire creative strategies and designs suited for everyday practice, emphasizing relevance and flexibility corresponding to Peters’ recommendations [ 6 ]. Under such conditions, organizational readiness for change may be better accessible than in a large and complex organization, where assessment and the influence of change commitment and change efficacy require more professional investment. Nevertheless, our model can also be considered generic and thus applicable in small-scale settings beyond primary care.

We are not the first to suggest that patient care can be improved by the implementation of evidence-based interventions [ 6 , 17 , 19 , 41 ]. There is already a vast amount of literature available about theories and strategies for behavioural change among individual professionals and their organizational contexts [ 1 ]. Furthermore, implementation research has in the last decades become a sub-discipline within health care systems research, offering and expecting ambitious and advanced methodological tools for the planning, monitoring and evaluation of implementation projects [ 16 , 19 , 42 ]. Among our colleagues, we have noticed that these trends seem to discourage innovative practitioners from initiating noteworthy ideas for implementation.

Greenhalgh and Wieringa suggest that research should leave behind the focus on a ‘know–do gap’ in order to create space for practical wisdom, tacit knowing, the complexities of the relationship between knowledge and power and enhance collaboration between research, policy decisions and clinical practice [ 43 ]. Implementation research is embedded in reality, and practitioners (rather than researchers) may articulate the problem and ask relevant questions as a starting point for new thinking [ 6 ].

In small-scale projects, implementation as well as implementation research are conducted by the same person, often an innovative enthusiast with a strong belief in the intervention. Methodological skills are therefore essential, especially the ability to establish an analytic distance from the field of action [ 44 ]. A pragmatic evaluation is not a casual and haphazard process but a science-informed strategy, in which transparency and systematic, critical reflection are supported by methodological skills. An important difference from a traditional research project is the meticulous priorities identified to assign resources for description and discussion of the processes according to contextual relevance.

Endorsing the idea that implementation research is science-informed practice [ 1 ], our model incorporates several distinctive features intended to encourage small-scale implementation projects in real life. First, the model – referring to EBHC – implies that research evidence about the intervention already exists: we do not start from scratch. In our example, KRI did not create the intervention, because it had already been designed, validated and published. Second, we do not confine our concept of evidence to effect. The relevance aspect of different kinds of available evidence, given the ambitions and the context of the project, is more important than choosing a specific design. In our example, CSDD was chosen because this tool was appropriate and simple. Third, we prioritize elaboration and adaptation of the intervention to match the context, rather than using a standardized version from a research setting. In our example, the manual for practical application of CSDD was elaborated in the pilot step. Fourth, we aim for evaluation methods with a capacity for systematic and transparent reflection, prioritizing selected issues relevant for sharing experiences from the process. In our example, a few low-key approaches for the collection and analysis of relevant data were matched by the limited resources available to the project, although they still provided useful information about ORC [ 14 ] to be used and shared.

Does the intervention work?

Cost-benefit logic implies that resources should not be wasted on interventions that do not work. The default image of a randomized controlled trial (RCT) readily comes to the mind of health care professionals when discussing intervention projects. There are, however, important differences between projects testing the effect of an intervention within the standardized context of an RCT and projects putting evidence from previously documented research into action within a complex real-life situation. In health care services research, the question of whether something works or not cannot be answered with a simple yes or no. The framing of the answer depends on the aim, context, outcome measures and other vital preconditions.

Referring to Cochrane [ 45 ], Rothwell asks the crucial question about the external validity of RCTs: “To whom do the results of this trial apply?” [ 46 ]. Consequently, conceptual accuracy is needed to evaluate the outcome of an intervention, distinguishing between efficacy (whether an intervention produces the expected result under ideal circumstances) and effectiveness (the degree of beneficial effect in “real-world” clinical settings) [ 47 ].

Still, our model does not include a mandatory element of effectiveness evaluation. Process evaluation is emphasized and given priority in the model, aiming for clear descriptions of the adapted intervention and experiences from putting it into action. This is because process evaluation is a logical precondition for outcome evaluation: it makes no sense to attempt to assess the efficacy or the effectiveness of a “black box” intervention [ 48 ] whose content is not distinctly indicated. For the evaluation of a small-scale intervention, knowledge about the nature and content of the intervention under real-life conditions, and how it was taken from knowledge to action, must come first. Was the intended intervention actually implemented, and in what format?

Our model conveys certain preferences that were specifically elaborated for a small-scale primary care context – a distinctive trait of the context our model is intended to serve. This prioritization does not imply that we consider outcome evaluation to be of no great concern. It is of course interesting and useful to find out to what degree outcome measures from the research context can be obtained in a real-life context. A small-scale implementation project might therefore grow to medium or large format, in which such evaluation is included, for example in the design of a pragmatic RCT [ 49 ].

Implementation research deserves a model consistent with the specific characteristics of the actual health care context. The inevitable uncertainty and unpredictability of primary health care have here been incorporated into a flexible and manageable approach, in which context and limited resources are considered. In finding an appropriate middle ground between rigour and flexibility, some compromises must be made and some ambitions must be balanced. Presenting this model specifically designed for small-scale implementation research, we remain grounded as practitioners. The model recognizes the skills of practical knowing as something other than traditional medical research, while also maintaining academic values such as systematic and transparent reflection, with adequate tools. Considering the purpose and the context of our model, we argue that these methodological priorities, emphasizing relevance and feasibility, are strengths, and not limitations.

Abbreviations

The Cornell Scale for Depression in Dementia

Evidence-based health care

Evidence-based medicine

General practitioner

Kristina Riis Iden (the last author)

Organizational Readiness for Change

Philosophiae Doctor

Randomized controlled trial

Greenhalgh T. How to implement evidence-based healthcare. Oxford: Wiley Blackwell; 2018.

Google Scholar  

Ioannidis JP. Why most clinical research is not useful. PLoS Med. 2016;13(6):e1002049.

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Pathirana T, Clark J, Moynihan R. Mapping the drivers of overdiagnosis to potential solutions. BMJ. 2017;358:j3879.

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Vaccarella S, Franceschi S, Bray F, Wild CP, Plummer M, Dal Maso L. Worldwide thyroid-cancer epidemic? The increasing impact of overdiagnosis. N Engl J Med. 2016;375(7):614–7.

Grol R, Baker R, Moss F. Quality improvement research: the science of change in health care. In: Grol R, Baker R, Moss F, editors. Quality improvement research: understanding the science of change in health care. London, BMJ Books; 2004. p. 1–5.

Peters DH, Tran NT, Adam T: Implementation research in health: A practical guide. In. Geneva: Alliance for Health Policy and Systems Research, World Health Organization; 2013. http://who.int/alliance-hpsr/alliancehpsr_irpguide.pdf ( Accessed 23.Sept.2015).

Malterud K. The legitimacy of clinical knowledge: towards a medical epistemology embracing the art of medicine. Theor Med. 1995;16(2):183–98.

Article   PubMed   CAS   Google Scholar  

Malterud K. The art and science of clinical knowledge: evidence beyond measures and numbers. Lancet. 2001;358(9279):397–400.

De Maeseneer JM, van Driel ML, Green LA, van Weel C. The need for research in primary care. Lancet. 2003;362(9392):1314–9.

Carlsen B, Glenton C, Pope C. Thou shalt versus thou shalt not: a meta-synthesis of GPs’ attitudes to clinical practice guidelines. Br J Gen Pract. 2007;57(545):971–8.

Lugtenberg M, Zegers-van Schaick JM, Westert GP, Burgers JS. Why don't physicians adhere to guideline recommendations in practice? An analysis of barriers among Dutch general practitioners. Implement Sci. 2009;4:54.

Austad B, Hetlevik I, Mjolstad BP, Helvik AS. Applying clinical guidelines in general practice: a qualitative study of potential complications. BMC Fam Pract. 2016;17:92.

Flottorp S, Oxman AD, Håvelsrud K, Treweek S, Herrin J. Cluster randomised controlled trial of tailored interventions to improve the management of urinary tract infections in women and sore throat. BMJ. 2002;325(7360):367.

Weiner BJ. A theory of organizational readiness for change. Implement Sci. 2009;4:67.

Craig P, Dieppe P, Macintyre S, Michie S, Nazareth I, Petticrew M. Developing and evaluating complex interventions: the new Medical Research Council guidance. BMJ. 2008;337:a1655.

Peters DH, Adam T, Alonge O, Agyepong IA, Tran N. Implementation research: what it is and how to do it. BMJ. 2013;347:f6753.

Grol R, Wensing M, Eccles M. Improving patient care. The implementation of change in clinical practice. Hoboken: Wiley; 2005.

Graham R, Mancher M, Wolman DM, Greenfield S, Steinberg E: Clinical practice guidelines we can trust Washington: Institute of medicine, The National Academies Press; 2011.

Fixsen DL, Naaom SF, Blase KA, Friedman RM, Wallace F. Implementation research: a synthesis of the literature. Tampa, FA: University of South Florida; 2005.

Patton MQ. Utilization-focused evaluation. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications; 2008.

Haraway D. Situated knowledges; the science question in feminism and the privilege of partial perspective. In: Haraway D, editor. Simians, cyborgs, and women The reinvention of nature. New York: Routledge; 1991. p. 183–201.

Östlund U, Kidd L, Wengström Y, Rowa-Dewar N. Combining qualitative and quantitative research within mixed method research designs: a methodological review. Int J Nurs Stud. 2011;48(3):369–83.

Patton MQ. Qualitative research & evaluation methods: integrating theory and practice. 4th ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE; 2015.

Proctor E, Silmere H, Raghavan R, Hovmand P, Aarons G, Bunger A, Griffey R, Hensley M. Outcomes for implementation research: conceptual distinctions, measurement challenges, and research agenda. Admin Pol Ment Health. 2011;38(2):65–76.

Article   Google Scholar  

Nygaard HA, Ruths S, Straand J, Naik M. Not less but different: psychotropic drug utilization trends in Norwegian nursing homes during a 12-year period. The Bergen District nursing home (BEDNURS) study. Aging Clin Exp Res. 2004;16(4):277–82.

Onder G, Liperoti R, Fialova D, Topinkova E, Tosato M, Danese P, Gallo PF, Carpenter I, Finne-Soveri H, Gindin J, et al. Polypharmacy in nursing home in Europe: results from the SHELTER study. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2012;67(6):698–704.

Coupland C, Dhiman P, Morriss R, Arthur A, Barton G, Hippisley-Cox J. Antidepressant use and risk of adverse outcomes in older people: population based cohort study. BMJ. 2011;343:d4551.

Bakken MS, Engeland A, Engesaeter LB, Ranhoff AH, Hunskaar S, Ruths S. Increased risk of hip fracture among older people using antidepressant drugs: data from the Norwegian prescription database and the Norwegian hip fracture registry. Age Ageing. 2013;42(4):514–20.

Banerjee S, Hellier J, Dewey M, Romeo R, Ballard C, Baldwin R, Bentham P, Fox C, Holmes C, Katona C, et al. Sertraline or mirtazapine for depression in dementia (HTA-SADD): a randomised, multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Lancet. 2011;378(9789):403–11.

Iden KR, Hjorleifsson S, Ruths S. Treatment decisions on antidepressants in nursing homes: a qualitative study. Scand J Prim Health Care. 2011;29(4):252–6.

Iden KR, Engedal K, Hjorleifsson S, Ruths S. Prevalence of depression among recently admitted long-term care patients in Norwegian nursing homes: associations with diagnostic workup and use of antidepressants. Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord. 2014;37(3–4):154–62.

Helsedirektoratet. Nasjonale faglige retningslinjer: Diabetes - Forebygging, diagnostikk og behandling. In: [National guidelines: Diabetes - prevention, diagnosis and treatment] 15/1674 (in Norwegian). https://helsedirektoratet.no/retningslinjer/diabetes . (Accessed 28 Aug 2016).

Stensland P, Malterud K. New gateways to dialogue in general practice. Development of an illness diary to expand communication. Scand J Prim Health Care. 1997;15(4):175–9.

Alexopoulos GS, Abrams RC, Young RC, Shamoian CA. Cornell scale for depression in dementia. Biol Psychiatry. 1988;23(3):271–84.

Barca ML, Engedal K, Selbaek G. A reliability and validity study of the Cornell scale among elderly inpatients, using various clinical criteria. Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord. 2010;29(5):438–47.

Greenhalgh T, Robert G, Macfarlane F, Bate P, Kyriakidou O. Diffusion of innovations in service organizations: systematic review and recommendations. Milbank Q. 2004;82(4):581–629.

Morgan D. Focus groups as qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE; 1997.

Book   Google Scholar  

Rosemond CA, Hanson LC, Ennett ST, Schenck AP, Weiner BJ. Implementing person-centered care in nursing homes. Health Care Manag Rev. 2012;37(3):257–66.

Van Manen M. Researching lived experience : human science for an action sensitive pedagogy. London: Ont: Althouse press; 1990.

Creswell JW, Clark VLP. Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Los Angeles, CA: SAGE; 2011.

Woolf SH. The meaning of translational research and why it matters. JAMA. 2008;299(2):211–3.

Eccles MP, Mittman BS: Welcome to implementation science. Implementation Science 2006, 1(1):1.

Greenhalgh T, Wieringa S. Is it time to drop the ‘knowledge translation’ metaphor? A critical literature review. J R Soc Med. 2011;104(12):501–9.

Finlay L. Introducing Reflexivity. In: Finlay L, Gough B, editors. Reflexivity - A practical guide for researchers in health and social sciences. Oxford: Wiley; 2008. p. 1–49.

Cochrane AL. Effectiveness and efficiency: random reflections on health services. London: Nuffield Provincial Hospitals Trust; 1972.

Rothwell PM. External validity of randomised controlled trials: “to whom do the results of this trial apply?”. Lancet. 2005;365(9453):82–93.

Gartlehner G, Hansen RA, Nissman D, Lohr KN, Carey TS. Criteria for distinguishing effectiveness from efficacy trials in systematic reviews. In: Technical Reviews, vol. 12; 2006. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK44024/ (Accessed 20.Nov.2017).

Glasziou P, Meats E, Heneghan C, Shepperd S. What is missing from descriptions of treatment in trials and reviews? Br Med J. 2008;336(7659):1472–4.

Harvey G, Wensing M. Methods for evaluation of small scale quality improvement projects. Quality & safety in health care. 2003;12(3):210–4.

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Download references

The ongoing implementation project (presented here briefly for illustration purposes) is funded by the Norwegian Medical Association (#16/2077). Conception and writing this article was not funded from this grant.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Research Unit for General Practice, Uni Research Health, Uni Research, Kalfarveien 31, N-5018, Bergen, Norway

Kirsti Malterud, Aase Aamland & Kristina Riis Iden

The Research Unit for General Practice and Section of General Practice, Department of Public Health, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark

Kirsti Malterud

Department of Global Public Health and Primary Care, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

KM conceived of the idea and the model and drafted the first manuscript. KRI contributed with specific information from an ongoing implementation project in which AA was also involved, used here for illustration purposes. All the authors (KM, AA and KRI) contributed to the development of the manuscript, reading and approving the final version.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kirsti Malterud .

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate.

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Malterud, K., Aamland, A. & Iden, K.R. Small-scale implementation with pragmatic process evaluation: a model developed in primary health care. BMC Fam Pract 19 , 93 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12875-018-0778-6

Download citation

Received : 27 November 2017

Accepted : 25 May 2018

Published : 21 June 2018

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s12875-018-0778-6

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Implementation model
• Process evaluation
• Primary health care
• Nursing home

BMC Primary Care

ISSN: 2731-4553

• General enquiries: [email protected]

Small-Scale Research

Author biography.

@TeacherToolkit

What research does the Department for Education conduct which is ‘off the radar’?

The analytical associate pool consists of more than 150 independent academics and researchers, who carry out small-scale data analysis, rapid literature reviews, primary research and peer review for  DfE . Much of the analysis summarised is too small-scale for publishing on its own.

I have provided a brief outline of the projects commissioned through the DfE analytical associate pool – last updated on 16th August 2017 – with some notable pieces of research that are of interest to me. There are over 19 projects in this paper, so it really is worth skimming through to find something that interests you.

30 Hour Childcare

This feasibility study was commissioned by the Department for Education (DfE) to review options for evaluating Early Implementation (EI) of delivering the 30 hour extended free entitlement for working families of 3 and 4 year olds from September 2016, one year ahead of the national rollout. The study was undertaken during January to April 2016. Read more on page 6.

School Inspection Grading

This is a stand-out piece of research for me – that the Department for Education is looking into ‘how we can improve school inspection grading’. There were 6 jurisdictions: Belgium (Flemish community), England, Hong Kong, Ireland, the Netherlands and New Zealand.

The purpose of this review was to draw together information and evidence on different models for grading the outcomes of school inspection, and the impact they might have on the behaviour of schools, and on other relevant stakeholders. The review provides a summary of the different approaches in operation across selected jurisdictions, with a focus on those regarded as having effective accountability systems, including England; and it reviews what is available in the research literature of the past 10 years on the effectiveness and impact of different approaches. Read more on page 22.

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

Unknown Land

… still much of the research is on the impact and effects of inspection in general, and on schools judged to be failing, rather than on the specific issue of grading models that was the object of this review … there remain areas which are largely terra incognita.

Mental Health

Alongside the review of school-based support available to parents , this project was commissioned to review the support available more widely for parents around children and young people’s mental health. Read more on page 23.

Transgender

The overall finding of this research is that transgender awareness is an area in need of development within the child and family social work profession, with the evidence clearly indicating a demand for additional training materials. Read more on page 30.

Much of the analysis undertaken through the Associate Pool is too small-scale to be published on its own, and this report summarises these smaller pieces of analysis.

Over 180 independent academics and researchers are in the pool, and they can be commissioned to carry out small-scale data analysis, rapid literature reviews, primary research and peer review. I’ve been inspired, so I’ve submitted my application to become a researcher.

Source : Department for Education .

• Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Pocket (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)

2 thoughts on “ Small-Scale Research ”

This is really informative. I’m glad we understand that there needs to be more transgender awareness in schools. Teaching students about social issues can only help society in the long-run, just like employee wellness programs . Keeping people informed and educated makes a better working system. Let’s keep looking into what students need to know more of.

Thanks for finally writing about > Small Scale Research < Loved it!

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Notify me of follow-up comments by email.

Notify me of new posts by email.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed .

Our partners

Privacy overview.

SENCO Research Posters

• 14 Dec 2020

Whole School SEND has sponsored a collaboration with nasen, Nottingham Trent University, and Nottingham Institute of Education, who have put together a booklet of SENCo research posters. The booklet includes examples from the ‘nasen live 2019’ display of the small-scale action research projects carried out by SENCOs and aspiring SENCOs for their National Award for SEN Co-ordination coursework. These are all aimed to improve the support they provided and increase attainment for students with SEND in their schools.

We hope that you enjoy reading about how small-scale research can make a real difference for young people with SEND and that these provide you with ideas of ways in which to collect evidence about the impact of interventions and further develop school practice.

Suitable for: SENCO

Full access to this resource is available for:

You must be logged in to to get access