parts of an introduction research paper

Get science-backed answers as you write with Paperpal's Research feature

How to Write a Research Paper Introduction (with Examples)

The research paper introduction section, along with the Title and Abstract, can be considered the face of any research paper. The following article is intended to guide you in organizing and writing the research paper introduction for a quality academic article or dissertation.

The research paper introduction aims to present the topic to the reader. A study will only be accepted for publishing if you can ascertain that the available literature cannot answer your research question. So it is important to ensure that you have read important studies on that particular topic, especially those within the last five to ten years, and that they are properly referenced in this section. 1 What should be included in the research paper introduction is decided by what you want to tell readers about the reason behind the research and how you plan to fill the knowledge gap. The best research paper introduction provides a systemic review of existing work and demonstrates additional work that needs to be done. It needs to be brief, captivating, and well-referenced; a well-drafted research paper introduction will help the researcher win half the battle.

The introduction for a research paper is where you set up your topic and approach for the reader. It has several key goals:

• Present your research topic
• Capture reader interest
• Summarize existing research
• Position your own approach
• Define your specific research problem and problem statement
• Highlight the novelty and contributions of the study
• Give an overview of the paper’s structure

The research paper introduction can vary in size and structure depending on whether your paper presents the results of original empirical research or is a review paper. Some research paper introduction examples are only half a page while others are a few pages long. In many cases, the introduction will be shorter than all of the other sections of your paper; its length depends on the size of your paper as a whole.

• Break through writer’s block. Write your research paper introduction with Paperpal Copilot

Table of Contents

What is the introduction for a research paper, why is the introduction important in a research paper, craft a compelling introduction section with paperpal. try now, 1. introduce the research topic:, 2. determine a research niche:, 3. place your research within the research niche:, craft accurate research paper introductions with paperpal. start writing now, frequently asked questions on research paper introduction, key points to remember.

The introduction in a research paper is placed at the beginning to guide the reader from a broad subject area to the specific topic that your research addresses. They present the following information to the reader

• Scope: The topic covered in the research paper
• Context: Background of your topic
• Importance: Why your research matters in that particular area of research and the industry problem that can be targeted

The research paper introduction conveys a lot of information and can be considered an essential roadmap for the rest of your paper. A good introduction for a research paper is important for the following reasons:

• It stimulates your reader’s interest: A good introduction section can make your readers want to read your paper by capturing their interest. It informs the reader what they are going to learn and helps determine if the topic is of interest to them.
• It helps the reader understand the research background: Without a clear introduction, your readers may feel confused and even struggle when reading your paper. A good research paper introduction will prepare them for the in-depth research to come. It provides you the opportunity to engage with the readers and demonstrate your knowledge and authority on the specific topic.
• It explains why your research paper is worth reading: Your introduction can convey a lot of information to your readers. It introduces the topic, why the topic is important, and how you plan to proceed with your research.
• It helps guide the reader through the rest of the paper: The research paper introduction gives the reader a sense of the nature of the information that will support your arguments and the general organization of the paragraphs that will follow. It offers an overview of what to expect when reading the main body of your paper.

What are the parts of introduction in the research?

A good research paper introduction section should comprise three main elements: 2

• What is known: This sets the stage for your research. It informs the readers of what is known on the subject.
• What is lacking: This is aimed at justifying the reason for carrying out your research. This could involve investigating a new concept or method or building upon previous research.
• What you aim to do: This part briefly states the objectives of your research and its major contributions. Your detailed hypothesis will also form a part of this section.

How to write a research paper introduction?

The first step in writing the research paper introduction is to inform the reader what your topic is and why it’s interesting or important. This is generally accomplished with a strong opening statement. The second step involves establishing the kinds of research that have been done and ending with limitations or gaps in the research that you intend to address. Finally, the research paper introduction clarifies how your own research fits in and what problem it addresses. If your research involved testing hypotheses, these should be stated along with your research question. The hypothesis should be presented in the past tense since it will have been tested by the time you are writing the research paper introduction.

The following key points, with examples, can guide you when writing the research paper introduction section:

• Highlight the importance of the research field or topic
• Describe the background of the topic
• Present an overview of current research on the topic

Example: The inclusion of experiential and competency-based learning has benefitted electronics engineering education. Industry partnerships provide an excellent alternative for students wanting to engage in solving real-world challenges. Industry-academia participation has grown in recent years due to the need for skilled engineers with practical training and specialized expertise. However, from the educational perspective, many activities are needed to incorporate sustainable development goals into the university curricula and consolidate learning innovation in universities.

• Reveal a gap in existing research or oppose an existing assumption
• Formulate the research question

Example: There have been plausible efforts to integrate educational activities in higher education electronics engineering programs. However, very few studies have considered using educational research methods for performance evaluation of competency-based higher engineering education, with a focus on technical and or transversal skills. To remedy the current need for evaluating competencies in STEM fields and providing sustainable development goals in engineering education, in this study, a comparison was drawn between study groups without and with industry partners.

• State the purpose of your study
• Highlight the key characteristics of your study
• Describe important results
• Highlight the novelty of the study.
• Offer a brief overview of the structure of the paper.

Example: The study evaluates the main competency needed in the applied electronics course, which is a fundamental core subject for many electronics engineering undergraduate programs. We compared two groups, without and with an industrial partner, that offered real-world projects to solve during the semester. This comparison can help determine significant differences in both groups in terms of developing subject competency and achieving sustainable development goals.

Write a Research Paper Introduction in Minutes with Paperpal

Paperpal Copilot is a generative AI-powered academic writing assistant. It’s trained on millions of published scholarly articles and over 20 years of STM experience. Paperpal Copilot helps authors write better and faster with:

• Real-time writing suggestions
• In-depth checks for language and grammar correction
• Paraphrasing to add variety, ensure academic tone, and trim text to meet journal limits

With Paperpal Copilot, create a research paper introduction effortlessly. In this step-by-step guide, we’ll walk you through how Paperpal transforms your initial ideas into a polished and publication-ready introduction.

How to use Paperpal to write the Introduction section

Step 1: Sign up on Paperpal and click on the Copilot feature, under this choose Outlines > Research Article > Introduction

Step 2: Add your unstructured notes or initial draft, whether in English or another language, to Paperpal, which is to be used as the base for your content.

Step 3: Fill in the specifics, such as your field of study, brief description or details you want to include, which will help the AI generate the outline for your Introduction.

Step 4: Use this outline and sentence suggestions to develop your content, adding citations where needed and modifying it to align with your specific research focus.

Step 5: Turn to Paperpal’s granular language checks to refine your content, tailor it to reflect your personal writing style, and ensure it effectively conveys your message.

You can use the same process to develop each section of your article, and finally your research paper in half the time and without any of the stress.

The purpose of the research paper introduction is to introduce the reader to the problem definition, justify the need for the study, and describe the main theme of the study. The aim is to gain the reader’s attention by providing them with necessary background information and establishing the main purpose and direction of the research.

The length of the research paper introduction can vary across journals and disciplines. While there are no strict word limits for writing the research paper introduction, an ideal length would be one page, with a maximum of 400 words over 1-4 paragraphs. Generally, it is one of the shorter sections of the paper as the reader is assumed to have at least a reasonable knowledge about the topic. 2 For example, for a study evaluating the role of building design in ensuring fire safety, there is no need to discuss definitions and nature of fire in the introduction; you could start by commenting upon the existing practices for fire safety and how your study will add to the existing knowledge and practice.

When deciding what to include in the research paper introduction, the rest of the paper should also be considered. The aim is to introduce the reader smoothly to the topic and facilitate an easy read without much dependency on external sources. 3 Below is a list of elements you can include to prepare a research paper introduction outline and follow it when you are writing the research paper introduction. Topic introduction: This can include key definitions and a brief history of the topic. Research context and background: Offer the readers some general information and then narrow it down to specific aspects. Details of the research you conducted: A brief literature review can be included to support your arguments or line of thought. Rationale for the study: This establishes the relevance of your study and establishes its importance. Importance of your research: The main contributions are highlighted to help establish the novelty of your study Research hypothesis: Introduce your research question and propose an expected outcome. Organization of the paper: Include a short paragraph of 3-4 sentences that highlights your plan for the entire paper

Cite only works that are most relevant to your topic; as a general rule, you can include one to three. Note that readers want to see evidence of original thinking. So it is better to avoid using too many references as it does not leave much room for your personal standpoint to shine through. Citations in your research paper introduction support the key points, and the number of citations depend on the subject matter and the point discussed. If the research paper introduction is too long or overflowing with citations, it is better to cite a few review articles rather than the individual articles summarized in the review. A good point to remember when citing research papers in the introduction section is to include at least one-third of the references in the introduction.

The literature review plays a significant role in the research paper introduction section. A good literature review accomplishes the following: Introduces the topic – Establishes the study’s significance – Provides an overview of the relevant literature – Provides context for the study using literature – Identifies knowledge gaps However, remember to avoid making the following mistakes when writing a research paper introduction: Do not use studies from the literature review to aggressively support your research Avoid direct quoting Do not allow literature review to be the focus of this section. Instead, the literature review should only aid in setting a foundation for the manuscript.

Remember the following key points for writing a good research paper introduction: 4

• Avoid stuffing too much general information: Avoid including what an average reader would know and include only that information related to the problem being addressed in the research paper introduction. For example, when describing a comparative study of non-traditional methods for mechanical design optimization, information related to the traditional methods and differences between traditional and non-traditional methods would not be relevant. In this case, the introduction for the research paper should begin with the state-of-the-art non-traditional methods and methods to evaluate the efficiency of newly developed algorithms.
• Avoid packing too many references: Cite only the required works in your research paper introduction. The other works can be included in the discussion section to strengthen your findings.
• Avoid extensive criticism of previous studies: Avoid being overly critical of earlier studies while setting the rationale for your study. A better place for this would be the Discussion section, where you can highlight the advantages of your method.
• Avoid describing conclusions of the study: When writing a research paper introduction remember not to include the findings of your study. The aim is to let the readers know what question is being answered. The actual answer should only be given in the Results and Discussion section.

To summarize, the research paper introduction section should be brief yet informative. It should convince the reader the need to conduct the study and motivate him to read further. If you’re feeling stuck or unsure, choose trusted AI academic writing assistants like Paperpal to effortlessly craft your research paper introduction and other sections of your research article.

1. Jawaid, S. A., & Jawaid, M. (2019). How to write introduction and discussion. Saudi Journal of Anaesthesia, 13(Suppl 1), S18.

2. Dewan, P., & Gupta, P. (2016). Writing the title, abstract and introduction: Looks matter!. Indian pediatrics, 53, 235-241.

3. Cetin, S., & Hackam, D. J. (2005). An approach to the writing of a scientific Manuscript1. Journal of Surgical Research, 128(2), 165-167.

4. Bavdekar, S. B. (2015). Writing introduction: Laying the foundations of a research paper. Journal of the Association of Physicians of India, 63(7), 44-6.

Paperpal is a comprehensive AI writing toolkit that helps students and researchers achieve 2x the writing in half the time. It leverages 21+ years of STM experience and insights from millions of research articles to provide in-depth academic writing, language editing, and submission readiness support to help you write better, faster.  

Get accurate academic translations, rewriting support, grammar checks, vocabulary suggestions, and generative AI assistance that delivers human precision at machine speed. Try for free or upgrade to Paperpal Prime starting at US$19 a month to access premium features, including consistency, plagiarism, and 30+ submission readiness checks to help you succeed.  

Experience the future of academic writing – Sign up to Paperpal and start writing for free!  

Related Reads:

• Scientific Writing Style Guides Explained
• 5 Reasons for Rejection After Peer Review
• Ethical Research Practices For Research with Human Subjects
• 8 Most Effective Ways to Increase Motivation for Thesis Writing 

Practice vs. Practise: Learn the Difference

Academic paraphrasing: why paperpal’s rewrite should be your first choice , you may also like, measuring academic success: definition & strategies for excellence, phd qualifying exam: tips for success , ai in education: it’s time to change the..., is it ethical to use ai-generated abstracts without..., what are journal guidelines on using generative ai..., quillbot review: features, pricing, and free alternatives, what is an academic paper types and elements , should you use ai tools like chatgpt for..., 9 steps to publish a research paper, what are the different types of research papers.

The 5 Parts of an Introduction: A Comprehensive Guide

• by Richard Edwards
• October 8, 2023

Welcome to our blog post on the five essential parts of an introduction! Whether you’re writing an essay, a research paper, or even a thesis, the introduction sets the stage for your reader and provides a roadmap for what’s to come.

In this guide, we’ll explore the key components that make up a strong introduction, answering questions such as how to write a compelling opening, how many sentences should be in an introduction, and what should be included in the first chapter of a research paper. We’ll also touch upon attention-getters and the crucial role they play in engaging your audience right from the start.

So, if you’re ready to master the art of introductions and captivate your readers from the get-go, let’s dive in and discover the five vital parts that will make your writing shine. Remember, a well-crafted introduction can make all the difference in hooking your readers’ attention and setting the stage for a successful piece of writing.

Keywords: How do you write a 5 paragraph essay outline?, How many sentences are in an introduction?, What are the 5 parts of chapter 1 in research?, What are the 5 parts of a paragraph?, What is an introduction and example?, What are the 5 types of attention getters?, What are the four or five components of an introduction quizlet?, What is the most important part of an introduction?, What are the 5 chapters of a thesis?, What 4 things should an introduction do?, What are the 5 parts of research?, What are the parts of an introduction?, What is important in a good introduction?, How do you write a good introduction?, What is the content of introduction in a thesis?, What are the parts of the introduction in research?, How do you write a 5-page essay?, How do you write a thesis introduction?, What are the sections of a thesis?, What is included in an introduction paragraph?, What are the parts of a thesis?, What are the 6 basics of proper introduction?

What are the 5 Parts of an Introduction?

The hook: start with a bang.

When it comes to writing introductions, you need to grab your reader’s attention right from the start. Think of it as a fishing hook—your goal is to reel them in! So, ditch the boring cliches and instead, surprise them with an unexpected fact or a captivating anecdote. For example, did you know that in 2023, people are more likely to read a blog post if it has a touch of humor? True story!

Background Information: Set the Stage

After hooking your readers, it’s time to provide them with some context. Give them a brief overview of the topic you’re about to dive into. But hold on, don’t go all Wikipedia on them! Keep it concise and focus on the essential details. Imagine you’re explaining it to a friend who has zero background knowledge but possesses a sense of humor as sharp as a New York City cab driver’s wit.

Thesis Statement: Make Your Point

Now that your readers are intrigued and have a basic understanding of the topic, it’s time to unveil your main argument. This is your chance to shine! Craft a clear and concise thesis statement that encapsulates the purpose of your blog post. Think of it as the trailer that makes people want to watch the movie. Make it so compelling that readers can’t help but continue reading to see how you’ll support your point.

Scope and Outline: Map it Out

Before diving into the meaty paragraphs, briefly outline what you’ll cover in your blog post. It’s like performing a magic trick, but instead of a rabbit, you’re pulling out the promise of valuable information. Break down your subtopics into logical sections and give your readers a sneak peek into what they can expect. This way, they’ll know they’re in good hands and won’t click away in search of a more organized read.

Transition: Smooth Sailing Ahead

You’ve now set the stage, reeled them in with your hook, provided some background information , stated your thesis, and outlined what’s to come. It’s time to wrap up the introduction with a smooth transition that seamlessly guides your readers into the main body of your blog post. Think of it as passing the baton in a relay race. You want your readers to move forward effortlessly, eager to explore the depths of your captivating content.

And there you have it, the 5 parts of an introduction. Now, buckle up because we’re about to dive into the heart of this blog post. Prepare yourself for a rollercoaster ride of knowledge, humor, and maybe even a sprinkle of GIFs. Let’s get started!

Frequently Asked Questions about the Five Parts of an Introduction

How do you write a 5 paragraph essay outline.

Writing a 5-paragraph essay outline is not as intimidating as it may seem. Here is a step-by-step guide to help you out:

Step 1: Introduction

Begin with an attention-grabbing hook that captivates your readers. Then provide some background information about your topic, leading up to your thesis statement.

Step 2: Body Paragraphs

Devote one paragraph to each supporting point that you mentioned in your thesis statement. Start each paragraph with a topic sentence, followed by relevant evidence and examples to support your claim.

Step 3: Conclusion

In this final paragraph, summarize your main points and restate your thesis statement. Leave your readers with a thought-provoking statement or call-to-action.

How many sentences are in an introduction

The number of sentences in an introduction can vary depending on the complexity of the topic and the length of your essay. Typically, it is recommended to have around 3-5 sentences in an introduction. However, keep in mind that the focus should be on conveying the necessary information effectively rather than obsessing over the exact number of sentences.

What are the five parts of Chapter 1 in research

When conducting research, Chapter 1 often sets the stage for the entire study. It typically consists of the following five parts:

1. Introduction

This part provides an overview of the research topic, its significance, and the purpose of the study.

2. Theoretical Framework

Here, the researcher explains the theories, concepts, or frameworks that form the foundation of the study.

3. Research Problem or Research Questions

This section highlights the specific problem or questions that the study aims to address, presenting the rationale behind them.

4. Research Methodology

In this part, the researcher outlines the approach, methods, and techniques used to gather and analyze data.

5. Significance of the Study

Finally, the researcher explains the potential impact and contribution of the study to the field, emphasizing its relevance.

What are the five parts of a paragraph

A well-structured paragraph typically consists of the following five parts:

1. Topic Sentence

The topic sentence introduces the main idea or the central focus of the paragraph.

2. Supporting Sentences

These sentences provide evidence, examples, or explanations to strengthen the topic sentence and develop the main idea.

3. Transitional Sentence

A transitional sentence smoothly connects the current paragraph to the next one, ensuring a logical flow of ideas.

4. Concluding Sentence

The concluding sentence wraps up the paragraph, summarizing the main points or leaving the reader with a thought to ponder.

5. Unity and Coherence

To ensure the paragraph flows smoothly, it should have unity (all sentences should relate to the main idea) and coherence (ideas should be organized in a logical manner).

What is an introduction and example

An introduction, as the word suggests, introduces the topic and provides readers with an overview of what to expect in the rest of the content. Let’s consider an example to illustrate this:

Suppose you’re writing a blog post about the benefits of yoga. In the introduction, you might start with a captivating hook like, “Picture yourself on a serene beach, feeling the gentle breeze as your body becomes one with the harmonious practice of yoga.” After establishing the setting and engaging the reader’s imagination, you can proceed to provide a brief overview of yoga’s origins, health benefits, and its positive impact on mental well-being. This introduction sets the stage for the rest of the content, enticing readers to continue exploring the topic.

What are the five types of attention getters

In writing, attention getters are techniques used to capture readers’ interest. Here are five types of attention getters you can employ:

1. Anecdotes

Engage your audience by sharing a short, relevant anecdote or story that relates to your topic.

Introduce your topic with a compelling quote from a renowned individual or a thought-provoking statement.

3. Shocking Facts or Statistics

Present surprising data or statistics that highlight the significance of your topic.

4. Rhetorical Questions

Pose a thought-provoking question that sparks curiosity and encourages readers to continue reading for the answer.

Injecting a touch of humor can instantly grab readers’ attention and set a lighthearted tone for your content.

What are the four or five components of an introduction

An introduction typically consists of four or five components, depending on the complexity and length of the content. These components include:

1. Hook or Attention Grabber

The hook is the opening statement designed to capture the reader’s attention and entice them to continue reading.

2. Background Information

Provide relevant context or background information to give readers a clear understanding of the topic.

3. Thesis Statement

The thesis statement states the main argument or central idea of the content, guiding the focus of the entire piece.

4. Scope and Outline

Briefly outline the main points or subtopics that will be covered in the body of the content, giving readers an overview of what’s to come.

5. Transition

In longer pieces, a transition sentence or paragraph may be included to smoothly lead readers from the introduction to the main body.

What is the most important part of an introduction

The most important part of an introduction is the thesis statement. The thesis statement clarifies the purpose and direction of the content, serving as the backbone of the entire piece. It should be concise, specific, and thought-provoking, providing readers with a clear idea of what to expect and enticing them to continue reading.

What are the five chapters of a thesis

A typical thesis consists of five chapters, each serving a specific purpose:

This chapter provides an overview of the research topic, highlights its significance, and introduces the study’s objectives.

2. Literature Review

Here, the researcher critically examines existing studies, theories, and publications related to the research topic.

3. Methodology

The methodology chapter outlines the research design, methods, and procedures employed to collect and analyze data.

In this chapter, the researcher presents and discusses the findings obtained through the research methods.

5. Conclusion

The final chapter summarizes the main findings, discusses their implications, and suggests areas for future research.

What four things should an introduction do

An introduction should accomplish four key things:

1. Captivate the Reader

Ensure your introduction has a compelling hook that grabs the reader’s attention and entices them to continue reading.

2. Provide Background Information

Offer relevant context and background information to establish the foundation and set the stage for the topic.

3. Present the Thesis Statement

Clearly state the main argument or central idea of the content, guiding the reader’s understanding and expectations.

4. Engage and Motivate

Create a sense of curiosity and engagement, motivating readers to explore the rest of the content and delve deeper into the subject matter.

What are the five parts of research

A research study generally consists of five essential parts:

The introduction provides an overview of the research topic, its significance, and the research’s purpose and objectives.

This section involves an in-depth analysis of existing studies and research related to the topic to establish a broader context.

In this part, the researcher outlines the research design, data collection methods, and any other procedures used in the study.

The results section presents the findings obtained from the research, often including statistical analysis and data representation.

Finally, the conclusion summarizes the key findings, discusses their implications, and provides recommendations for future research or action.

What are the parts of an introduction

An introduction typically consists of the following parts:

The hook grabs the reader’s attention and sparks interest in the topic.

Provide relevant context and background information to give readers a foundation to understand the topic.

The thesis statement succinctly states the main argument or central idea of the content.

Offer a brief overview of the main points or sections that will be addressed in the body of the content.

5. Transition (in longer pieces)

In longer pieces, a transition sentence or paragraph may be included to smoothly guide readers from the introduction to the main body.

What is important in a good introduction

A good introduction sets the tone and foundation for the rest of the content. It should accomplish the following:

• Capture readers’ attention with an engaging hook.
• Provide relevant background information to establish context.
• Clearly state the thesis statement to guide readers’ understanding.
• Give readers an overview of what to expect in the content.
• Establish a smooth transition into the main body of the piece.

How do you write a good introduction

Writing a good introduction is essential to engage readers and set the stage for the rest of the content. Here are some tips:

• Start with an attention-grabbing hook or intriguing statement to captivate readers.
• Provide relevant background information or context to give readers a clear understanding of the topic.
• Craft a concise and impactful thesis statement that clearly states the main argument or central idea.
• Give a brief overview of the main points or sections that will be covered in the body of the content.
• Ensure a smooth transition from the introduction to the main body by using transitional words or sentences.

What is the content of an introduction in a thesis

In a thesis, the introduction aims to establish the context, set the objectives, and present the main argument. The key components of an introduction in a thesis include:

• Background information about the research topic.
• Explanation of the problem or rationale behind the study.
• Scope and limitations of the research.
• Research objectives or questions.
• Significance and potential impact of the research.
• Brief overview of the research methodology.

What are the parts of an introduction in research

In a research paper, the introduction typically includes the following parts:

1. Background Information

Provide relevant context and background information to establish the foundation for the research.

2. Research Problem or Question

Clearly state the specific problem or research question that the study aims to address, explaining its significance.

3. Objective and Scope

Present the research objectives or the scope of the study, outlining what will be covered and what will be excluded.

4. Rationale or Justification

Discuss the reasons behind choosing the research topic and explain its relevance or potential impact.

5. Methodology (briefly)

Provide a brief overview of the research methodology, explaining the approach or methods used.

How do you write a 5-page essay

Writing a 5-page essay may seem like a daunting task, but with the right approach, it becomes manageable. Here’s a step-by-step guide:

Plan your essay: Outline the main points or arguments you want to cover in each paragraph.

Introduction (approximately half a page): Start with a catchy hook, provide background information, and end with a thesis statement.

Body paragraphs (about three pages): Dedicate one paragraph to each main point or argument. Start with a topic sentence, provide supporting evidence, and explain how it relates to your thesis.

Counterargument/refutation (half a page): Address potential counterarguments and refute them with evidence.

Conclusion (half a page): Summarize the main points, restate the thesis, and leave the reader with a compelling closing thought.

Proofread and revise: Review your essay for clarity, coherence, and errors in grammar and punctuation.

How do you write a thesis introduction

Writing a thesis introduction involves the following components and steps:

Start with a hook or attention-grabbing statement to capture the reader’s interest.

Provide background information that establishes the context and relevance of your research.

Clearly state the research problem or question your thesis aims to address.

Present the objectives and scope of your research, specifying its significance and potential contributions.

Provide an overview of the research methodology and explain why it is appropriate for your study.

Establish the organization and structure of your thesis, briefly outlining each chapter or section.

Remember to keep your introduction concise, engaging, and focused on setting the stage for your thesis.

What are the sections of a thesis

A thesis typically includes the following sections:

1. Title Page

This page provides the title of your thesis, your name, the degree you are pursuing, the institution’s name, and the year of submission.

2. Abstract

The abstract offers a concise summary of the thesis, highlighting the research question, methodology, and main findings.

3. Table of Contents

The table of contents lists all the main sections and subsections of your thesis, including page numbers.

4. Introduction

The introduction establishes the background, objectives, scope, and significance of your research.

5. Literature Review

This section critically analyzes relevant studies, theories, and literature related to your research topic.

6. Methodology

The methodology section describes the research design, data collection methods, and analysis techniques employed.

Here, you present and discuss the findings obtained from your research, often including tables, graphs, or charts.

8. Discussion

The discussion section interprets the results, compares them to previous studies, and explains their implications.

9. Conclusion

The conclusion summarizes the main findings, discusses their broader implications, and suggests areas for future research.

10. References

This section lists all the sources cited or consulted during your research, following the appropriate citation style.

11. Appendices

Appendices include any additional information or supporting documents that are too extensive to include in the main body.

What is included in an introduction paragraph

An introduction paragraph usually includes the following elements:

• Hook or attention-grabbing statement.
• Background information or context about the topic.
• Thesis statement or main argument.
• Brief overview of the main points or sections that will be covered in the body.

These elements work together to engage the reader, provide necessary information, and set the stage for the rest of the content.

What are the parts of a thesis

• background information
• brief overview
• entire study
• essential parts
• introduction
• research paper
• topic sentence

Richard Edwards

Unraveling the mystery: the enigmatic tenseigan eye, unraveling the secrets of ctrl alt f6 shortcut, you may also like, do we really blink 4 million times a day.

• by Brandon Thompson
• November 4, 2023

The Fascinating World of Slugs: Do They Really Have a Brain?

• by Brian Thomas
• November 1, 2023

Potato Chips for Nausea: The Surprising Snack That Soothes Your Stomach

• by Donna Gonzalez
• October 23, 2023

Does FuboTV Have HBO? A Comprehensive Guide to Streaming HBO on FuboTV

• by Laura Rodriguez
• October 22, 2023

Which Electronics Have the Most Gold?

• by Travis Heath
• October 10, 2023

How to Reset Your CVT Transmission: A Comprehensive Guide for 2023

• Privacy Policy

Home » Research Paper Introduction – Writing Guide and Examples

Research Paper Introduction – Writing Guide and Examples

Table of Contents

Research Paper Introduction

Research paper introduction is the first section of a research paper that provides an overview of the study, its purpose, and the research question (s) or hypothesis (es) being investigated. It typically includes background information about the topic, a review of previous research in the field, and a statement of the research objectives. The introduction is intended to provide the reader with a clear understanding of the research problem, why it is important, and how the study will contribute to existing knowledge in the field. It also sets the tone for the rest of the paper and helps to establish the author’s credibility and expertise on the subject.

How to Write Research Paper Introduction

Writing an introduction for a research paper can be challenging because it sets the tone for the entire paper. Here are some steps to follow to help you write an effective research paper introduction:

• Start with a hook : Begin your introduction with an attention-grabbing statement, a question, or a surprising fact that will make the reader interested in reading further.
• Provide background information: After the hook, provide background information on the topic. This information should give the reader a general idea of what the topic is about and why it is important.
• State the research problem: Clearly state the research problem or question that the paper addresses. This should be done in a concise and straightforward manner.
• State the research objectives: After stating the research problem, clearly state the research objectives. This will give the reader an idea of what the paper aims to achieve.
• Provide a brief overview of the paper: At the end of the introduction, provide a brief overview of the paper. This should include a summary of the main points that will be discussed in the paper.
• Revise and refine: Finally, revise and refine your introduction to ensure that it is clear, concise, and engaging.

Structure of Research Paper Introduction

The following is a typical structure for a research paper introduction:

• Background Information: This section provides an overview of the topic of the research paper, including relevant background information and any previous research that has been done on the topic. It helps to give the reader a sense of the context for the study.
• Problem Statement: This section identifies the specific problem or issue that the research paper is addressing. It should be clear and concise, and it should articulate the gap in knowledge that the study aims to fill.
• Research Question/Hypothesis : This section states the research question or hypothesis that the study aims to answer. It should be specific and focused, and it should clearly connect to the problem statement.
• Significance of the Study: This section explains why the research is important and what the potential implications of the study are. It should highlight the contribution that the research makes to the field.
• Methodology: This section describes the research methods that were used to conduct the study. It should be detailed enough to allow the reader to understand how the study was conducted and to evaluate the validity of the results.
• Organization of the Paper : This section provides a brief overview of the structure of the research paper. It should give the reader a sense of what to expect in each section of the paper.

Research Paper Introduction Examples

Research Paper Introduction Examples could be:

Example 1: In recent years, the use of artificial intelligence (AI) has become increasingly prevalent in various industries, including healthcare. AI algorithms are being developed to assist with medical diagnoses, treatment recommendations, and patient monitoring. However, as the use of AI in healthcare grows, ethical concerns regarding privacy, bias, and accountability have emerged. This paper aims to explore the ethical implications of AI in healthcare and propose recommendations for addressing these concerns.

Example 2: Climate change is one of the most pressing issues facing our planet today. The increasing concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere has resulted in rising temperatures, changing weather patterns, and other environmental impacts. In this paper, we will review the scientific evidence on climate change, discuss the potential consequences of inaction, and propose solutions for mitigating its effects.

Example 3: The rise of social media has transformed the way we communicate and interact with each other. While social media platforms offer many benefits, including increased connectivity and access to information, they also present numerous challenges. In this paper, we will examine the impact of social media on mental health, privacy, and democracy, and propose solutions for addressing these issues.

Example 4: The use of renewable energy sources has become increasingly important in the face of climate change and environmental degradation. While renewable energy technologies offer many benefits, including reduced greenhouse gas emissions and energy independence, they also present numerous challenges. In this paper, we will assess the current state of renewable energy technology, discuss the economic and political barriers to its adoption, and propose solutions for promoting the widespread use of renewable energy.

Purpose of Research Paper Introduction

The introduction section of a research paper serves several important purposes, including:

• Providing context: The introduction should give readers a general understanding of the topic, including its background, significance, and relevance to the field.
• Presenting the research question or problem: The introduction should clearly state the research question or problem that the paper aims to address. This helps readers understand the purpose of the study and what the author hopes to accomplish.
• Reviewing the literature: The introduction should summarize the current state of knowledge on the topic, highlighting the gaps and limitations in existing research. This shows readers why the study is important and necessary.
• Outlining the scope and objectives of the study: The introduction should describe the scope and objectives of the study, including what aspects of the topic will be covered, what data will be collected, and what methods will be used.
• Previewing the main findings and conclusions : The introduction should provide a brief overview of the main findings and conclusions that the study will present. This helps readers anticipate what they can expect to learn from the paper.

When to Write Research Paper Introduction

The introduction of a research paper is typically written after the research has been conducted and the data has been analyzed. This is because the introduction should provide an overview of the research problem, the purpose of the study, and the research questions or hypotheses that will be investigated.

Once you have a clear understanding of the research problem and the questions that you want to explore, you can begin to write the introduction. It’s important to keep in mind that the introduction should be written in a way that engages the reader and provides a clear rationale for the study. It should also provide context for the research by reviewing relevant literature and explaining how the study fits into the larger field of research.

Advantages of Research Paper Introduction

The introduction of a research paper has several advantages, including:

• Establishing the purpose of the research: The introduction provides an overview of the research problem, question, or hypothesis, and the objectives of the study. This helps to clarify the purpose of the research and provide a roadmap for the reader to follow.
• Providing background information: The introduction also provides background information on the topic, including a review of relevant literature and research. This helps the reader understand the context of the study and how it fits into the broader field of research.
• Demonstrating the significance of the research: The introduction also explains why the research is important and relevant. This helps the reader understand the value of the study and why it is worth reading.
• Setting expectations: The introduction sets the tone for the rest of the paper and prepares the reader for what is to come. This helps the reader understand what to expect and how to approach the paper.
• Grabbing the reader’s attention: A well-written introduction can grab the reader’s attention and make them interested in reading further. This is important because it can help to keep the reader engaged and motivated to read the rest of the paper.
• Creating a strong first impression: The introduction is the first part of the research paper that the reader will see, and it can create a strong first impression. A well-written introduction can make the reader more likely to take the research seriously and view it as credible.
• Establishing the author’s credibility: The introduction can also establish the author’s credibility as a researcher. By providing a clear and thorough overview of the research problem and relevant literature, the author can demonstrate their expertise and knowledge in the field.
• Providing a structure for the paper: The introduction can also provide a structure for the rest of the paper. By outlining the main sections and sub-sections of the paper, the introduction can help the reader navigate the paper and find the information they are looking for.

About the author

Muhammad Hassan

Researcher, Academic Writer, Web developer

You may also like

How to Cite Research Paper – All Formats and...

Delimitations in Research – Types, Examples and...

Research Paper Format – Types, Examples and...

Research Design – Types, Methods and Examples

Research Paper Title – Writing Guide and Example

Research Paper Conclusion – Writing Guide and...

How to Write a Research Paper: Parts of the Paper

• Choosing Your Topic
• Citation & Style Guides This link opens in a new window
• Critical Thinking
• Evaluating Information
• Parts of the Paper
• Writing Tips from UNC-Chapel Hill
• Librarian Contact

Parts of the Research Paper Papers should have a beginning, a middle, and an end. Your introductory paragraph should grab the reader's attention, state your main idea, and indicate how you will support it. The body of the paper should expand on what you have stated in the introduction. Finally, the conclusion restates the paper's thesis and should explain what you have learned, giving a wrap up of your main ideas.

1. The Title The title should be specific and indicate the theme of the research and what ideas it addresses. Use keywords that help explain your paper's topic to the reader. Try to avoid abbreviations and jargon. Think about keywords that people would use to search for your paper and include them in your title.

2. The Abstract The abstract is used by readers to get a quick overview of your paper. Typically, they are about 200 words in length (120 words minimum to  250 words maximum). The abstract should introduce the topic and thesis, and should provide a general statement about what you have found in your research. The abstract allows you to mention each major aspect of your topic and helps readers decide whether they want to read the rest of the paper. Because it is a summary of the entire research paper, it is often written last. 

3. The Introduction The introduction should be designed to attract the reader's attention and explain the focus of the research. You will introduce your overview of the topic,  your main points of information, and why this subject is important. You can introduce the current understanding and background information about the topic. Toward the end of the introduction, you add your thesis statement, and explain how you will provide information to support your research questions. This provides the purpose and focus for the rest of the paper.

4. Thesis Statement Most papers will have a thesis statement or main idea and supporting facts/ideas/arguments. State your main idea (something of interest or something to be proven or argued for or against) as your thesis statement, and then provide your supporting facts and arguments. A thesis statement is a declarative sentence that asserts the position a paper will be taking. It also points toward the paper's development. This statement should be both specific and arguable. Generally, the thesis statement will be placed at the end of the first paragraph of your paper. The remainder of your paper will support this thesis.

Students often learn to write a thesis as a first step in the writing process, but often, after research, a writer's viewpoint may change. Therefore a thesis statement may be one of the final steps in writing. 

Examples of Thesis Statements from Purdue OWL

5. The Literature Review The purpose of the literature review is to describe past important research and how it specifically relates to the research thesis. It should be a synthesis of the previous literature and the new idea being researched. The review should examine the major theories related to the topic to date and their contributors. It should include all relevant findings from credible sources, such as academic books and peer-reviewed journal articles. You will want  to:

• Explain how the literature helps the researcher understand the topic.
• Try to show connections and any disparities between the literature.
• Identify new ways to interpret prior research.
• Reveal any gaps that exist in the literature.

More about writing a literature review. . .

6. The Discussion ​The purpose of the discussion is to interpret and describe what you have learned from your research. Make the reader understand why your topic is important. The discussion should always demonstrate what you have learned from your readings (and viewings) and how that learning has made the topic evolve, especially from the short description of main points in the introduction.Explain any new understanding or insights you have had after reading your articles and/or books. Paragraphs should use transitioning sentences to develop how one paragraph idea leads to the next. The discussion will always connect to the introduction, your thesis statement, and the literature you reviewed, but it does not simply repeat or rearrange the introduction. You want to: 

• Demonstrate critical thinking, not just reporting back facts that you gathered.
• If possible, tell how the topic has evolved over the past and give it's implications for the future.
• Fully explain your main ideas with supporting information.
• Explain why your thesis is correct giving arguments to counter points.

7. The Conclusion A concluding paragraph is a brief summary of your main ideas and restates the paper's main thesis, giving the reader the sense that the stated goal of the paper has been accomplished. What have you learned by doing this research that you didn't know before? What conclusions have you drawn? You may also want to suggest further areas of study, improvement of research possibilities, etc. to demonstrate your critical thinking regarding your research.

• << Previous: Evaluating Information
• Next: Research >>
• Last Updated: Feb 13, 2024 8:35 AM
• URL: https://libguides.ucc.edu/research_paper

• USC Libraries
• Research Guides

Organizing Your Social Sciences Research Paper

• 4. The Introduction
• Purpose of Guide
• Design Flaws to Avoid
• Independent and Dependent Variables
• Glossary of Research Terms
• Reading Research Effectively
• Narrowing a Topic Idea
• Broadening a Topic Idea
• Extending the Timeliness of a Topic Idea
• Academic Writing Style
• Applying Critical Thinking
• Choosing a Title
• Making an Outline
• Paragraph Development
• Research Process Video Series
• Executive Summary
• The C.A.R.S. Model
• Background Information
• The Research Problem/Question
• Theoretical Framework
• Citation Tracking
• Content Alert Services
• Evaluating Sources
• Primary Sources
• Secondary Sources
• Tiertiary Sources
• Scholarly vs. Popular Publications
• Qualitative Methods
• Quantitative Methods
• Insiderness
• Using Non-Textual Elements
• Limitations of the Study
• Common Grammar Mistakes
• Writing Concisely
• Avoiding Plagiarism
• Footnotes or Endnotes?
• Further Readings
• Generative AI and Writing
• USC Libraries Tutorials and Other Guides
• Bibliography

The introduction leads the reader from a general subject area to a particular topic of inquiry. It establishes the scope, context, and significance of the research being conducted by summarizing current understanding and background information about the topic, stating the purpose of the work in the form of the research problem supported by a hypothesis or a set of questions, explaining briefly the methodological approach used to examine the research problem, highlighting the potential outcomes your study can reveal, and outlining the remaining structure and organization of the paper.

Key Elements of the Research Proposal. Prepared under the direction of the Superintendent and by the 2010 Curriculum Design and Writing Team. Baltimore County Public Schools.

Importance of a Good Introduction

Think of the introduction as a mental road map that must answer for the reader these four questions:

• What was I studying?
• Why was this topic important to investigate?
• What did we know about this topic before I did this study?
• How will this study advance new knowledge or new ways of understanding?

According to Reyes, there are three overarching goals of a good introduction: 1) ensure that you summarize prior studies about the topic in a manner that lays a foundation for understanding the research problem; 2) explain how your study specifically addresses gaps in the literature, insufficient consideration of the topic, or other deficiency in the literature; and, 3) note the broader theoretical, empirical, and/or policy contributions and implications of your research.

A well-written introduction is important because, quite simply, you never get a second chance to make a good first impression. The opening paragraphs of your paper will provide your readers with their initial impressions about the logic of your argument, your writing style, the overall quality of your research, and, ultimately, the validity of your findings and conclusions. A vague, disorganized, or error-filled introduction will create a negative impression, whereas, a concise, engaging, and well-written introduction will lead your readers to think highly of your analytical skills, your writing style, and your research approach. All introductions should conclude with a brief paragraph that describes the organization of the rest of the paper.

Hirano, Eliana. “Research Article Introductions in English for Specific Purposes: A Comparison between Brazilian, Portuguese, and English.” English for Specific Purposes 28 (October 2009): 240-250; Samraj, B. “Introductions in Research Articles: Variations Across Disciplines.” English for Specific Purposes 21 (2002): 1–17; Introductions. The Writing Center. University of North Carolina; “Writing Introductions.” In Good Essay Writing: A Social Sciences Guide. Peter Redman. 4th edition. (London: Sage, 2011), pp. 63-70; Reyes, Victoria. Demystifying the Journal Article. Inside Higher Education.

Structure and Writing Style

I.  Structure and Approach

The introduction is the broad beginning of the paper that answers three important questions for the reader:

• What is this?
• Why should I read it?
• What do you want me to think about / consider doing / react to?

Think of the structure of the introduction as an inverted triangle of information that lays a foundation for understanding the research problem. Organize the information so as to present the more general aspects of the topic early in the introduction, then narrow your analysis to more specific topical information that provides context, finally arriving at your research problem and the rationale for studying it [often written as a series of key questions to be addressed or framed as a hypothesis or set of assumptions to be tested] and, whenever possible, a description of the potential outcomes your study can reveal.

These are general phases associated with writing an introduction: 1.  Establish an area to research by:

• Highlighting the importance of the topic, and/or
• Making general statements about the topic, and/or
• Presenting an overview on current research on the subject.

2.  Identify a research niche by:

• Opposing an existing assumption, and/or
• Revealing a gap in existing research, and/or
• Formulating a research question or problem, and/or
• Continuing a disciplinary tradition.

3.  Place your research within the research niche by:

• Stating the intent of your study,
• Outlining the key characteristics of your study,
• Describing important results, and
• Giving a brief overview of the structure of the paper.

NOTE:   It is often useful to review the introduction late in the writing process. This is appropriate because outcomes are unknown until you've completed the study. After you complete writing the body of the paper, go back and review introductory descriptions of the structure of the paper, the method of data gathering, the reporting and analysis of results, and the conclusion. Reviewing and, if necessary, rewriting the introduction ensures that it correctly matches the overall structure of your final paper.

II.  Delimitations of the Study

Delimitations refer to those characteristics that limit the scope and define the conceptual boundaries of your research . This is determined by the conscious exclusionary and inclusionary decisions you make about how to investigate the research problem. In other words, not only should you tell the reader what it is you are studying and why, but you must also acknowledge why you rejected alternative approaches that could have been used to examine the topic.

Obviously, the first limiting step was the choice of research problem itself. However, implicit are other, related problems that could have been chosen but were rejected. These should be noted in the conclusion of your introduction. For example, a delimitating statement could read, "Although many factors can be understood to impact the likelihood young people will vote, this study will focus on socioeconomic factors related to the need to work full-time while in school." The point is not to document every possible delimiting factor, but to highlight why previously researched issues related to the topic were not addressed.

Examples of delimitating choices would be:

• The key aims and objectives of your study,
• The research questions that you address,
• The variables of interest [i.e., the various factors and features of the phenomenon being studied],
• The method(s) of investigation,
• The time period your study covers, and
• Any relevant alternative theoretical frameworks that could have been adopted.

Review each of these decisions. Not only do you clearly establish what you intend to accomplish in your research, but you should also include a declaration of what the study does not intend to cover. In the latter case, your exclusionary decisions should be based upon criteria understood as, "not interesting"; "not directly relevant"; “too problematic because..."; "not feasible," and the like. Make this reasoning explicit!

NOTE:   Delimitations refer to the initial choices made about the broader, overall design of your study and should not be confused with documenting the limitations of your study discovered after the research has been completed.

ANOTHER NOTE : Do not view delimitating statements as admitting to an inherent failing or shortcoming in your research. They are an accepted element of academic writing intended to keep the reader focused on the research problem by explicitly defining the conceptual boundaries and scope of your study. It addresses any critical questions in the reader's mind of, "Why the hell didn't the author examine this?"

III.  The Narrative Flow

Issues to keep in mind that will help the narrative flow in your introduction :

• Your introduction should clearly identify the subject area of interest . A simple strategy to follow is to use key words from your title in the first few sentences of the introduction. This will help focus the introduction on the topic at the appropriate level and ensures that you get to the subject matter quickly without losing focus, or discussing information that is too general.
• Establish context by providing a brief and balanced review of the pertinent published literature that is available on the subject. The key is to summarize for the reader what is known about the specific research problem before you did your analysis. This part of your introduction should not represent a comprehensive literature review--that comes next. It consists of a general review of the important, foundational research literature [with citations] that establishes a foundation for understanding key elements of the research problem. See the drop-down menu under this tab for " Background Information " regarding types of contexts.
• Clearly state the hypothesis that you investigated . When you are first learning to write in this format it is okay, and actually preferable, to use a past statement like, "The purpose of this study was to...." or "We investigated three possible mechanisms to explain the...."
• Why did you choose this kind of research study or design? Provide a clear statement of the rationale for your approach to the problem studied. This will usually follow your statement of purpose in the last paragraph of the introduction.

IV.  Engaging the Reader

A research problem in the social sciences can come across as dry and uninteresting to anyone unfamiliar with the topic . Therefore, one of the goals of your introduction is to make readers want to read your paper. Here are several strategies you can use to grab the reader's attention:

• Open with a compelling story . Almost all research problems in the social sciences, no matter how obscure or esoteric , are really about the lives of people. Telling a story that humanizes an issue can help illuminate the significance of the problem and help the reader empathize with those affected by the condition being studied.
• Include a strong quotation or a vivid, perhaps unexpected, anecdote . During your review of the literature, make note of any quotes or anecdotes that grab your attention because they can used in your introduction to highlight the research problem in a captivating way.
• Pose a provocative or thought-provoking question . Your research problem should be framed by a set of questions to be addressed or hypotheses to be tested. However, a provocative question can be presented in the beginning of your introduction that challenges an existing assumption or compels the reader to consider an alternative viewpoint that helps establish the significance of your study. 
• Describe a puzzling scenario or incongruity . This involves highlighting an interesting quandary concerning the research problem or describing contradictory findings from prior studies about a topic. Posing what is essentially an unresolved intellectual riddle about the problem can engage the reader's interest in the study.
• Cite a stirring example or case study that illustrates why the research problem is important . Draw upon the findings of others to demonstrate the significance of the problem and to describe how your study builds upon or offers alternatives ways of investigating this prior research.

NOTE:   It is important that you choose only one of the suggested strategies for engaging your readers. This avoids giving an impression that your paper is more flash than substance and does not distract from the substance of your study.

Freedman, Leora  and Jerry Plotnick. Introductions and Conclusions. University College Writing Centre. University of Toronto; Introduction. The Structure, Format, Content, and Style of a Journal-Style Scientific Paper. Department of Biology. Bates College; Introductions. The Writing Center. University of North Carolina; Introductions. The Writer’s Handbook. Writing Center. University of Wisconsin, Madison; Introductions, Body Paragraphs, and Conclusions for an Argument Paper. The Writing Lab and The OWL. Purdue University; “Writing Introductions.” In Good Essay Writing: A Social Sciences Guide . Peter Redman. 4th edition. (London: Sage, 2011), pp. 63-70; Resources for Writers: Introduction Strategies. Program in Writing and Humanistic Studies. Massachusetts Institute of Technology; Sharpling, Gerald. Writing an Introduction. Centre for Applied Linguistics, University of Warwick; Samraj, B. “Introductions in Research Articles: Variations Across Disciplines.” English for Specific Purposes 21 (2002): 1–17; Swales, John and Christine B. Feak. Academic Writing for Graduate Students: Essential Skills and Tasks . 2nd edition. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press, 2004 ; Writing Your Introduction. Department of English Writing Guide. George Mason University.

Writing Tip

Avoid the "Dictionary" Introduction

Giving the dictionary definition of words related to the research problem may appear appropriate because it is important to define specific terminology that readers may be unfamiliar with. However, anyone can look a word up in the dictionary and a general dictionary is not a particularly authoritative source because it doesn't take into account the context of your topic and doesn't offer particularly detailed information. Also, placed in the context of a particular discipline, a term or concept may have a different meaning than what is found in a general dictionary. If you feel that you must seek out an authoritative definition, use a subject specific dictionary or encyclopedia [e.g., if you are a sociology student, search for dictionaries of sociology]. A good database for obtaining definitive definitions of concepts or terms is Credo Reference .

Saba, Robert. The College Research Paper. Florida International University; Introductions. The Writing Center. University of North Carolina.

Another Writing Tip

When Do I Begin?

A common question asked at the start of any paper is, "Where should I begin?" An equally important question to ask yourself is, "When do I begin?" Research problems in the social sciences rarely rest in isolation from history. Therefore, it is important to lay a foundation for understanding the historical context underpinning the research problem. However, this information should be brief and succinct and begin at a point in time that illustrates the study's overall importance. For example, a study that investigates coffee cultivation and export in West Africa as a key stimulus for local economic growth needs to describe the beginning of exporting coffee in the region and establishing why economic growth is important. You do not need to give a long historical explanation about coffee exports in Africa. If a research problem requires a substantial exploration of the historical context, do this in the literature review section. In your introduction, make note of this as part of the "roadmap" [see below] that you use to describe the organization of your paper.

Introductions. The Writing Center. University of North Carolina; “Writing Introductions.” In Good Essay Writing: A Social Sciences Guide . Peter Redman. 4th edition. (London: Sage, 2011), pp. 63-70.

Yet Another Writing Tip

Always End with a Roadmap

The final paragraph or sentences of your introduction should forecast your main arguments and conclusions and provide a brief description of the rest of the paper [the "roadmap"] that let's the reader know where you are going and what to expect. A roadmap is important because it helps the reader place the research problem within the context of their own perspectives about the topic. In addition, concluding your introduction with an explicit roadmap tells the reader that you have a clear understanding of the structural purpose of your paper. In this way, the roadmap acts as a type of promise to yourself and to your readers that you will follow a consistent and coherent approach to addressing the topic of inquiry. Refer to it often to help keep your writing focused and organized.

Cassuto, Leonard. “On the Dissertation: How to Write the Introduction.” The Chronicle of Higher Education , May 28, 2018; Radich, Michael. A Student's Guide to Writing in East Asian Studies . (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Writing n. d.), pp. 35-37.

• << Previous: Executive Summary
• Next: The C.A.R.S. Model >>
• Last Updated: May 7, 2024 9:40 AM
• URL: https://libguides.usc.edu/writingguide

• If you are writing in a new discipline, you should always make sure to ask about conventions and expectations for introductions, just as you would for any other aspect of the essay. For example, while it may be acceptable to write a two-paragraph (or longer) introduction for your papers in some courses, instructors in other disciplines, such as those in some Government courses, may expect a shorter introduction that includes a preview of the argument that will follow.  
• In some disciplines (Government, Economics, and others), it’s common to offer an overview in the introduction of what points you will make in your essay. In other disciplines, you will not be expected to provide this overview in your introduction.  
• Avoid writing a very general opening sentence. While it may be true that “Since the dawn of time, people have been telling love stories,” it won’t help you explain what’s interesting about your topic.  
• Avoid writing a “funnel” introduction in which you begin with a very broad statement about a topic and move to a narrow statement about that topic. Broad generalizations about a topic will not add to your readers’ understanding of your specific essay topic.  
• Avoid beginning with a dictionary definition of a term or concept you will be writing about. If the concept is complicated or unfamiliar to your readers, you will need to define it in detail later in your essay. If it’s not complicated, you can assume your readers already know the definition.  
• Avoid offering too much detail in your introduction that a reader could better understand later in the paper.
• picture_as_pdf Introductions

• Resources Home 🏠
• Try SciSpace Copilot
• Search research papers
• Add Copilot Extension
• Try AI Detector
• Try Paraphraser
• Try Citation Generator
• April Papers
• June Papers
• July Papers

How to Write an Introduction for a Research Paper

Table of Contents

Writing an introduction for a research paper is a critical element of your paper, but it can seem challenging to encapsulate enormous amount of information into a concise form. The introduction of your research paper sets the tone for your research and provides the context for your study. In this article, we will guide you through the process of writing an effective introduction that grabs the reader's attention and captures the essence of your research paper.

Understanding the Purpose of a Research Paper Introduction

The introduction acts as a road map for your research paper, guiding the reader through the main ideas and arguments. The purpose of the introduction is to present your research topic to the readers and provide a rationale for why your study is relevant. It helps the reader locate your research and its relevance in the broader field of related scientific explorations. Additionally, the introduction should inform the reader about the objectives and scope of your study, giving them an overview of what to expect in the paper. By including a comprehensive introduction, you establish your credibility as an author and convince the reader that your research is worth their time and attention.

Key Elements to Include in Your Introduction

When writing your research paper introduction, there are several key elements you should include to ensure it is comprehensive and informative.

• A hook or attention-grabbing statement to capture the reader's interest.  It can be a thought-provoking question, a surprising statistic, or a compelling anecdote that relates to your research topic.
• A brief overview of the research topic and its significance. By highlighting the gap in existing knowledge or the problem your research aims to address, you create a compelling case for the relevance of your study.
• A clear research question or problem statement. This serves as the foundation of your research and guides the reader in understanding the unique focus of your study. It should be concise, specific, and clearly articulated.
• An outline of the paper's structure and main arguments, to help the readers navigate through the paper with ease.

Preparing to Write Your Introduction

Before diving into writing your introduction, it is essential to prepare adequately. This involves 3 important steps:

• Conducting Preliminary Research: Immerse yourself in the existing literature to develop a clear research question and position your study within the academic discourse.
• Identifying Your Thesis Statement: Define a specific, focused, and debatable thesis statement, serving as a roadmap for your paper.
• Considering Broader Context: Reflect on the significance of your research within your field, understanding its potential impact and contribution.

By engaging in these preparatory steps, you can ensure that your introduction is well-informed, focused, and sets the stage for a compelling research paper.

Structuring Your Introduction

Now that you have prepared yourself to tackle the introduction, it's time to structure it effectively. A well-structured introduction will engage the reader from the beginning and provide a logical flow to your research paper.

Starting with a Hook

Begin your introduction with an attention-grabbing hook that captivates the reader's interest. This hook serves as a way to make your introduction more engaging and compelling. For example, if you are writing a research paper on the impact of climate change on biodiversity, you could start your introduction with a statistic about the number of species that have gone extinct due to climate change. This will immediately grab the reader's attention and make them realize the urgency and importance of the topic.

Introducing Your Topic

Provide a brief overview, which should give the reader a general understanding of the subject matter and its significance. Explain the importance of the topic and its relevance to the field. This will help the reader understand why your research is significant and why they should continue reading. Continuing with the example of climate change and biodiversity, you could explain how climate change is one of the greatest threats to global biodiversity, how it affects ecosystems, and the potential consequences for both wildlife and human populations. By providing this context, you are setting the stage for the rest of your research paper and helping the reader understand the importance of your study.

Presenting Your Thesis Statement

The thesis statement should directly address your research question and provide a preview of the main arguments or findings discussed in your paper. Make sure your thesis statement is clear, concise, and well-supported by the evidence you will present in your research paper. By presenting a strong and focused thesis statement, you are providing the reader with the information they could anticipate in your research paper. This will help them understand the purpose and scope of your study and will make them more inclined to continue reading.

Writing Techniques for an Effective Introduction

When crafting an introduction, it is crucial to pay attention to the finer details that can elevate your writing to the next level. By utilizing specific writing techniques, you can captivate your readers and draw them into your research journey.

Using Clear and Concise Language

One of the most important writing techniques to employ in your introduction is the use of clear and concise language. By choosing your words carefully, you can effectively convey your ideas to the reader. It is essential to avoid using jargon or complex terminology that may confuse or alienate your audience. Instead, focus on communicating your research in a straightforward manner to ensure that your introduction is accessible to both experts in your field and those who may be new to the topic. This approach allows you to engage a broader audience and make your research more inclusive.

Establishing the Relevance of Your Research

One way to establish the relevance of your research is by highlighting how it fills a gap in the existing literature. Explain how your study addresses a significant research question that has not been adequately explored. By doing this, you demonstrate that your research is not only unique but also contributes to the broader knowledge in your field. Furthermore, it is important to emphasize the potential impact of your research. Whether it is advancing scientific understanding, informing policy decisions, or improving practical applications, make it clear to the reader how your study can make a difference.

By employing these two writing techniques in your introduction, you can effectively engage your readers. Take your time to craft an introduction that is both informative and captivating, leaving your readers eager to delve deeper into your research.

Revising and Polishing Your Introduction

Once you have written your introduction, it is crucial to revise and polish it to ensure that it effectively sets the stage for your research paper.

Self-Editing Techniques

Review your introduction for clarity, coherence, and logical flow. Ensure each paragraph introduces a new idea or argument with smooth transitions.

Check for grammatical errors, spelling mistakes, and awkward sentence structures.

Ensure that your introduction aligns with the overall tone and style of your research paper.

Seeking Feedback for Improvement

Consider seeking feedback from peers, colleagues, or your instructor. They can provide valuable insights and suggestions for improving your introduction. Be open to constructive criticism and use it to refine your introduction and make it more compelling for the reader.

Writing an introduction for a research paper requires careful thought and planning. By understanding the purpose of the introduction, preparing adequately, structuring effectively, and employing writing techniques, you can create an engaging and informative introduction for your research. Remember to revise and polish your introduction to ensure that it accurately represents the main ideas and arguments in your research paper. With a well-crafted introduction, you will capture the reader's attention and keep them inclined to your paper.

Suggested Reads

ResearchGPT: A Custom GPT for Researchers and Scientists Best Academic Search Engines [2023] How To Humanize AI Text In Scientific Articles Elevate Your Writing Game With AI Grammar Checker Tools

You might also like

The Impact of Visual Abstracts on Boosting Citations

Introducing SciSpace’s Citation Booster To Increase Research Visibility

AI for Meta-Analysis — A Comprehensive Guide

BibGuru Blog

Be more productive in school

• Citation Styles

How to write an introduction for a research paper

Writing an introduction for a research paper can be one of the hardest parts of the writing process. How do you get started? In this post, we discuss the components of an introduction and explore strategies for writing one successfully.

What is an introduction?

The introduction to a research paper provides background information or context on the topic. It also includes the thesis statement and signposts that let the reader know what you will cover in the rest of the paper.

Depending on the type of research paper that you’re writing, you may also include a brief state of the field in your introduction. You might also put that in a separate section, called a literature review. Before you tackle writing your introduction, be sure to consult the assignment guidelines for your paper.

How to write an introduction

An introduction provides an overview of your topic and any background information that your readers need to know in order to understand the context. It generally concludes with an explicit statement of your position on the topic, which is known as your thesis statement.

The opening section

Many papers begin with a hook: a short anecdote or scenario that draws the reader in and gives a hint of what the paper will cover. A hook allows you to capture your reader’s attention and provides an anchor for the context that you will provide in the bulk of the introduction.

Most of your introduction should be taken up with background information, but this doesn’t mean that you should fill your opening section with overly general statements. Instead, provide key pieces of information (like statistics) that a reader would need to know in order to understand your main argument.

The thesis statement

Towards the end of the introduction, you should state your thesis, preferably in the form of "I argue that..." or "This paper argues that..." or a similar phrase. Although it’s called a “thesis statement,” your thesis can be more than one sentence.

Finally, an introduction contains a brief outline or "signposts" of what the rest of the article will cover (also known as forecasting statements). You can use language like, “in what follows,” or “in the rest of the paper,” to signal that you are describing what you’ll do in the remainder of the paper.

Tips for writing an introduction

1. don’t rely on generalizations.

An introduction is not simply filler. It has a very specific function in a research paper: to provide context that leads up to a thesis statement.

You may be tempted to start your paper with generalizations like, “many people believe that...” or, “in our society...,” or a general dictionary definition, because you’re not sure what kind of context to provide. Instead, use specific facts like statistics or historical anecdotes to open your paper.

2. State your thesis directly

Once you’ve provided the appropriate, and specific, background information on your topic, you can move on to stating your thesis. As a rule of thumb, state your thesis as directly as possible. Use phrases like “I argue that..” to indicate that you are laying out your main argument.

3. Include signposts

A strong introduction includes clear signposts that outline what you will cover in the rest of the paper. You can signal this by using words like, “in what follows,” and by describing the steps that you will take to build your argument.

4. Situate your argument within the scholarly conversation

Some types of research papers require a separate literature review in which you explore what others have written about your topic.

Even if you’re not required to have a formal literature review, you should still include at least a paragraph in which you engage with the scholarly debate on your chosen subject. Be sure to include direct quotes from your sources . You can use BibGuru’s citation generator to create accurate in-text citations for your quotes.

This section can come directly before your thesis statement or directly after it. In the former case, your state of the field will function as additional context for your thesis.

Frequently Asked Questions about how to write an introduction for a research paper

A good introduction provides specific background information on your topic, sets up your thesis statement, and includes signposts for what you’ll cover in the rest of the paper.

An introduction should include context, a thesis statement, and signposts.

Do not include generalizations, apologies for not being an expert, or dictionary definitions in your introduction.

The length of your introduction depends on the overall length of your paper. For instance, an introduction for an 8-10 page paper will likely be anywhere from 1-3 pages.

You can choose to start an introduction with a hook, an important statistic, an historical anecdote, or another specific piece of background information.

Make your life easier with our productivity and writing resources.

For students and teachers.

How to write an effective introduction for your research paper

Last updated

20 January 2024

Reviewed by

However, the introduction is a vital element of your research paper. It helps the reader decide whether your paper is worth their time. As such, it's worth taking your time to get it right.

In this article, we'll tell you everything you need to know about writing an effective introduction for your research paper.

• The importance of an introduction in research papers

The primary purpose of an introduction is to provide an overview of your paper. This lets readers gauge whether they want to continue reading or not. The introduction should provide a meaningful roadmap of your research to help them make this decision. It should let readers know whether the information they're interested in is likely to be found in the pages that follow.

Aside from providing readers with information about the content of your paper, the introduction also sets the tone. It shows readers the style of language they can expect, which can further help them to decide how far to read.

When you take into account both of these roles that an introduction plays, it becomes clear that crafting an engaging introduction is the best way to get your paper read more widely. First impressions count, and the introduction provides that impression to readers.

• The optimum length for a research paper introduction

While there's no magic formula to determine exactly how long a research paper introduction should be, there are a few guidelines. Some variables that impact the ideal introduction length include:

Field of study

Complexity of the topic

Specific requirements of the course or publication

A commonly recommended length of a research paper introduction is around 10% of the total paper’s length. So, a ten-page paper has a one-page introduction. If the topic is complex, it may require more background to craft a compelling intro. Humanities papers tend to have longer introductions than those of the hard sciences.

The best way to craft an introduction of the right length is to focus on clarity and conciseness. Tell the reader only what is necessary to set up your research. An introduction edited down with this goal in mind should end up at an acceptable length.

• Evaluating successful research paper introductions

A good way to gauge how to create a great introduction is by looking at examples from across your field. The most influential and well-regarded papers should provide some insights into what makes a good introduction.

Dissecting examples: what works and why

We can make some general assumptions by looking at common elements of a good introduction, regardless of the field of research.

A common structure is to start with a broad context, and then narrow that down to specific research questions or hypotheses. This creates a funnel that establishes the scope and relevance.

The most effective introductions are careful about the assumptions they make regarding reader knowledge. By clearly defining key terms and concepts instead of assuming the reader is familiar with them, these introductions set a more solid foundation for understanding.

To pull in the reader and make that all-important good first impression, excellent research paper introductions will often incorporate a compelling narrative or some striking fact that grabs the reader's attention.

Finally, good introductions provide clear citations from past research to back up the claims they're making. In the case of argumentative papers or essays (those that take a stance on a topic or issue), a strong thesis statement compels the reader to continue reading.

Common pitfalls to avoid in research paper introductions

You can also learn what not to do by looking at other research papers. Many authors have made mistakes you can learn from.

We've talked about the need to be clear and concise. Many introductions fail at this; they're verbose, vague, or otherwise fail to convey the research problem or hypothesis efficiently. This often comes in the form of an overemphasis on background information, which obscures the main research focus.

Ensure your introduction provides the proper emphasis and excitement around your research and its significance. Otherwise, fewer people will want to read more about it.

• Crafting a compelling introduction for a research paper

Let’s take a look at the steps required to craft an introduction that pulls readers in and compels them to learn more about your research.

Step 1: Capturing interest and setting the scene

To capture the reader's interest immediately, begin your introduction with a compelling question, a surprising fact, a provocative quote, or some other mechanism that will hook readers and pull them further into the paper.

As they continue reading, the introduction should contextualize your research within the current field, showing readers its relevance and importance. Clarify any essential terms that will help them better understand what you're saying. This keeps the fundamentals of your research accessible to all readers from all backgrounds.

Step 2: Building a solid foundation with background information

Including background information in your introduction serves two major purposes:

It helps to clarify the topic for the reader

It establishes the depth of your research

The approach you take when conveying this information depends on the type of paper.

For argumentative papers, you'll want to develop engaging background narratives. These should provide context for the argument you'll be presenting.

For empirical papers, highlighting past research is the key. Often, there will be some questions that weren't answered in those past papers. If your paper is focused on those areas, those papers make ideal candidates for you to discuss and critique in your introduction.

Step 3: Pinpointing the research challenge

To capture the attention of the reader, you need to explain what research challenges you'll be discussing.

For argumentative papers, this involves articulating why the argument you'll be making is important. What is its relevance to current discussions or problems? What is the potential impact of people accepting or rejecting your argument?

For empirical papers, explain how your research is addressing a gap in existing knowledge. What new insights or contributions will your research bring to your field?

Step 4: Clarifying your research aims and objectives

We mentioned earlier that the introduction to a research paper can serve as a roadmap for what's within. We've also frequently discussed the need for clarity. This step addresses both of these.

When writing an argumentative paper, craft a thesis statement with impact. Clearly articulate what your position is and the main points you intend to present. This will map out for the reader exactly what they'll get from reading the rest.

For empirical papers, focus on formulating precise research questions and hypotheses. Directly link them to the gaps or issues you've identified in existing research to show the reader the precise direction your research paper will take.

Step 5: Sketching the blueprint of your study

Continue building a roadmap for your readers by designing a structured outline for the paper. Guide the reader through your research journey, explaining what the different sections will contain and their relationship to one another.

This outline should flow seamlessly as you move from section to section. Creating this outline early can also help guide the creation of the paper itself, resulting in a final product that's better organized. In doing so, you'll craft a paper where each section flows intuitively from the next.

Step 6: Integrating your research question

To avoid letting your research question get lost in background information or clarifications, craft your introduction in such a way that the research question resonates throughout. The research question should clearly address a gap in existing knowledge or offer a new perspective on an existing problem.

Tell users your research question explicitly but also remember to frequently come back to it. When providing context or clarification, point out how it relates to the research question. This keeps your focus where it needs to be and prevents the topic of the paper from becoming under-emphasized.

Step 7: Establishing the scope and limitations

So far, we've talked mostly about what's in the paper and how to convey that information to readers. The opposite is also important. Information that's outside the scope of your paper should be made clear to the reader in the introduction so their expectations for what is to follow are set appropriately.

Similarly, be honest and upfront about the limitations of the study. Any constraints in methodology, data, or how far your findings can be generalized should be fully communicated in the introduction.

Step 8: Concluding the introduction with a promise

The final few lines of the introduction are your last chance to convince people to continue reading the rest of the paper. Here is where you should make it very clear what benefit they'll get from doing so. What topics will be covered? What questions will be answered? Make it clear what they will get for continuing.

By providing a quick recap of the key points contained in the introduction in its final lines and properly setting the stage for what follows in the rest of the paper, you refocus the reader's attention on the topic of your research and guide them to read more.

• Research paper introduction best practices

Following the steps above will give you a compelling introduction that hits on all the key points an introduction should have. Some more tips and tricks can make an introduction even more polished.

As you follow the steps above, keep the following tips in mind.

Set the right tone and style

Like every piece of writing, a research paper should be written for the audience. That is to say, it should match the tone and style that your academic discipline and target audience expect. This is typically a formal and academic tone, though the degree of formality varies by field.

Kno w the audience

The perfect introduction balances clarity with conciseness. The amount of clarification required for a given topic depends greatly on the target audience. Knowing who will be reading your paper will guide you in determining how much background information is required.

Adopt the CARS (create a research space) model

The CARS model is a helpful tool for structuring introductions. This structure has three parts. The beginning of the introduction establishes the general research area. Next, relevant literature is reviewed and critiqued. The final section outlines the purpose of your study as it relates to the previous parts.

Master the art of funneling

The CARS method is one example of a well-funneled introduction. These start broadly and then slowly narrow down to your specific research problem. It provides a nice narrative flow that provides the right information at the right time. If you stray from the CARS model, try to retain this same type of funneling.

Incorporate narrative element

People read research papers largely to be informed. But to inform the reader, you have to hold their attention. A narrative style, particularly in the introduction, is a great way to do that. This can be a compelling story, an intriguing question, or a description of a real-world problem.

Write the introduction last

By writing the introduction after the rest of the paper, you'll have a better idea of what your research entails and how the paper is structured. This prevents the common problem of writing something in the introduction and then forgetting to include it in the paper. It also means anything particularly exciting in the paper isn’t neglected in the intro.

Editor’s picks

Last updated: 11 January 2024

Last updated: 15 January 2024

Last updated: 25 November 2023

Last updated: 12 May 2023

Last updated: 30 April 2024

Last updated: 18 May 2023

Last updated: 10 April 2023

Latest articles

Related topics, .css-je19u9{-webkit-align-items:flex-end;-webkit-box-align:flex-end;-ms-flex-align:flex-end;align-items:flex-end;display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-flex-direction:row;-ms-flex-direction:row;flex-direction:row;-webkit-box-flex-wrap:wrap;-webkit-flex-wrap:wrap;-ms-flex-wrap:wrap;flex-wrap:wrap;-webkit-box-pack:center;-ms-flex-pack:center;-webkit-justify-content:center;justify-content:center;row-gap:0;text-align:center;max-width:671px;}@media (max-width: 1079px){.css-je19u9{max-width:400px;}.css-je19u9>span{white-space:pre;}}@media (max-width: 799px){.css-je19u9{max-width:400px;}.css-je19u9>span{white-space:pre;}} decide what to .css-1kiodld{max-height:56px;display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-align-items:center;-webkit-box-align:center;-ms-flex-align:center;align-items:center;}@media (max-width: 1079px){.css-1kiodld{display:none;}} build next, decide what to build next.

Users report unexpectedly high data usage, especially during streaming sessions.

Users find it hard to navigate from the home page to relevant playlists in the app.

It would be great to have a sleep timer feature, especially for bedtime listening.

I need better filters to find the songs or artists I’m looking for.

Log in or sign up

Get started for free

• PRO Courses Guides New Tech Help Pro Expert Videos About wikiHow Pro Upgrade Sign In
• EDIT Edit this Article
• EXPLORE Tech Help Pro About Us Random Article Quizzes Request a New Article Community Dashboard This Or That Game Popular Categories Arts and Entertainment Artwork Books Movies Computers and Electronics Computers Phone Skills Technology Hacks Health Men's Health Mental Health Women's Health Relationships Dating Love Relationship Issues Hobbies and Crafts Crafts Drawing Games Education & Communication Communication Skills Personal Development Studying Personal Care and Style Fashion Hair Care Personal Hygiene Youth Personal Care School Stuff Dating All Categories Arts and Entertainment Finance and Business Home and Garden Relationship Quizzes Cars & Other Vehicles Food and Entertaining Personal Care and Style Sports and Fitness Computers and Electronics Health Pets and Animals Travel Education & Communication Hobbies and Crafts Philosophy and Religion Work World Family Life Holidays and Traditions Relationships Youth
• Browse Articles
• Learn Something New
• Quizzes Hot
• This Or That Game
• Train Your Brain
• Explore More
• Support wikiHow
• About wikiHow
• Log in / Sign up
• Education and Communications
• College University and Postgraduate
• Academic Writing
• Research Papers

How to Write a Research Introduction

Last Updated: December 6, 2023 Fact Checked

This article was co-authored by Megan Morgan, PhD . Megan Morgan is a Graduate Program Academic Advisor in the School of Public & International Affairs at the University of Georgia. She earned her PhD in English from the University of Georgia in 2015. There are 7 references cited in this article, which can be found at the bottom of the page. This article has been fact-checked, ensuring the accuracy of any cited facts and confirming the authority of its sources. This article has been viewed 2,652,761 times.

The introduction to a research paper can be the most challenging part of the paper to write. The length of the introduction will vary depending on the type of research paper you are writing. An introduction should announce your topic, provide context and a rationale for your work, before stating your research questions and hypothesis. Well-written introductions set the tone for the paper, catch the reader's interest, and communicate the hypothesis or thesis statement.

Introducing the Topic of the Paper

• In scientific papers this is sometimes known as an "inverted triangle", where you start with the broadest material at the start, before zooming in on the specifics. [2] X Research source
• The sentence "Throughout the 20th century, our views of life on other planets have drastically changed" introduces a topic, but does so in broad terms.
• It provides the reader with an indication of the content of the essay and encourages them to read on.

• For example, if you were writing a paper about the behaviour of mice when exposed to a particular substance, you would include the word "mice", and the scientific name of the relevant compound in the first sentences.
• If you were writing a history paper about the impact of the First World War on gender relations in Britain, you should mention those key words in your first few lines.

• This is especially important if you are attempting to develop a new conceptualization that uses language and terminology your readers may be unfamiliar with.

• If you use an anecdote ensure that is short and highly relevant for your research. It has to function in the same way as an alternative opening, namely to announce the topic of your research paper to your reader.
• For example, if you were writing a sociology paper about re-offending rates among young offenders, you could include a brief story of one person whose story reflects and introduces your topic.
• This kind of approach is generally not appropriate for the introduction to a natural or physical sciences research paper where the writing conventions are different.

Establishing the Context for Your Paper

• It is important to be concise in the introduction, so provide an overview on recent developments in the primary research rather than a lengthy discussion.
• You can follow the "inverted triangle" principle to focus in from the broader themes to those to which you are making a direct contribution with your paper.
• A strong literature review presents important background information to your own research and indicates the importance of the field.

• By making clear reference to existing work you can demonstrate explicitly the specific contribution you are making to move the field forward.
• You can identify a gap in the existing scholarship and explain how you are addressing it and moving understanding forward.

• For example, if you are writing a scientific paper you could stress the merits of the experimental approach or models you have used.
• Stress what is novel in your research and the significance of your new approach, but don't give too much detail in the introduction.
• A stated rationale could be something like: "the study evaluates the previously unknown anti-inflammatory effects of a topical compound in order to evaluate its potential clinical uses".

Specifying Your Research Questions and Hypothesis

• The research question or questions generally come towards the end of the introduction, and should be concise and closely focused.
• The research question might recall some of the key words established in the first few sentences and the title of your paper.
• An example of a research question could be "what were the consequences of the North American Free Trade Agreement on the Mexican export economy?"
• This could be honed further to be specific by referring to a particular element of the Free Trade Agreement and the impact on a particular industry in Mexico, such as clothing manufacture.
• A good research question should shape a problem into a testable hypothesis.

• If possible try to avoid using the word "hypothesis" and rather make this implicit in your writing. This can make your writing appear less formulaic.
• In a scientific paper, giving a clear one-sentence overview of your results and their relation to your hypothesis makes the information clear and accessible. [10] X Trustworthy Source PubMed Central Journal archive from the U.S. National Institutes of Health Go to source
• An example of a hypothesis could be "mice deprived of food for the duration of the study were expected to become more lethargic than those fed normally".

• This is not always necessary and you should pay attention to the writing conventions in your discipline.
• In a natural sciences paper, for example, there is a fairly rigid structure which you will be following.
• A humanities or social science paper will most likely present more opportunities to deviate in how you structure your paper.

Research Introduction Help

Community Q&A

• Use your research papers' outline to help you decide what information to include when writing an introduction. Thanks Helpful 0 Not Helpful 1
• Consider drafting your introduction after you have already completed the rest of your research paper. Writing introductions last can help ensure that you don't leave out any major points. Thanks Helpful 0 Not Helpful 0

• Avoid emotional or sensational introductions; these can create distrust in the reader. Thanks Helpful 50 Not Helpful 12
• Generally avoid using personal pronouns in your introduction, such as "I," "me," "we," "us," "my," "mine," or "our." Thanks Helpful 31 Not Helpful 7
• Don't overwhelm the reader with an over-abundance of information. Keep the introduction as concise as possible by saving specific details for the body of your paper. Thanks Helpful 24 Not Helpful 14

You Might Also Like

• ↑ https://library.sacredheart.edu/c.php?g=29803&p=185916
• ↑ https://www.aresearchguide.com/inverted-pyramid-structure-in-writing.html
• ↑ https://libguides.usc.edu/writingguide/introduction
• ↑ https://writing.wisc.edu/Handbook/PlanResearchPaper.html
• ↑ https://dept.writing.wisc.edu/wac/writing-an-introduction-for-a-scientific-paper/
• ↑ https://writing.wisc.edu/handbook/assignments/planresearchpaper/
• ↑ http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3178846/

About This Article

To introduce your research paper, use the first 1-2 sentences to describe your general topic, such as “women in World War I.” Include and define keywords, such as “gender relations,” to show your reader where you’re going. Mention previous research into the topic with a phrase like, “Others have studied…”, then transition into what your contribution will be and why it’s necessary. Finally, state the questions that your paper will address and propose your “answer” to them as your thesis statement. For more information from our English Ph.D. co-author about how to craft a strong hypothesis and thesis, keep reading! Did this summary help you? Yes No

• Send fan mail to authors

Reader Success Stories

Abdulrahman Omar

Oct 5, 2018

Did this article help you?

May 9, 2021

Lavanya Gopakumar

Oct 1, 2016

Dengkai Zhang

May 14, 2018

Leslie Mae Cansana

Sep 22, 2016

Featured Articles

Trending Articles

Watch Articles

• Terms of Use
• Privacy Policy
• Do Not Sell or Share My Info
• Not Selling Info

wikiHow Tech Help Pro:

Level up your tech skills and stay ahead of the curve

• The Scientist University

How to Write a Good Introduction Section

A strong narrative is as integral a part of science writing as it is for any other form of communication..

Nathan Ni holds a PhD from Queens University. He is a science editor for The Scientist’s Creative Services Team who strives to better understand and communicate the relationships between health and disease.

View full profile.

Learn about our editorial policies.

First impressions are important. Scientists need to make their work stand out among a sea of others. However, many mistakenly believe that first impressions are formed based only on titles and abstracts. In actuality, the introduction section is critical to making a real impression on the audience. The introduction is where authors outline their research topic and describe their study. It is where they provide background information and showcase their writing and argumentation styles. For these reasons, the introduction engages the audience in a deeper way than the formalities and rigidities of the title and abstract can afford. To use a fishing analogy: if the title and the abstract serve as the hook and the bait, then the introduction is the process of actually reeling the fish into the boat.

Good Introductions Are Important Guides

In contrast to the constraints placed on the title and abstract, the introduction is the first real opportunity for the scientist to engage with their audience and showcase and convey their passions and motivations for the study in question. This opportunity is somewhat of a double-edged sword. Study authors inevitably have a treasure trove of knowledge and expertise when it comes to their projects and their fields. However, they must remember that the audience does not necessarily have this background information—and that they are only engaging with their audience for a finite amount of time. Despite the urge to excitedly write about all of the different aspects and intricacies of the project, it is very important that authors keep their introductions simple and well organized. 

Therefore, the introduction should move from broad scopes to narrow focuses as the audience reads further. The author should direct the reader along this journey, focusing on topics with direct relevance to what was investigated in the study. A broad fact introduced early on should be linked or paired with a more specific fact along the same lines of thought, eventually culminating in how this information led to the motivation behind the study itself. It is vital to not go off on tangents or talk about things that are too esoteric. A confused audience is an audience that tends not to read further.

Applying Common Principles Across Well-Known and Niche Subjects

Writers can apply these principles in more specialized manuscripts focusing on a single entity rather than a well-known pathology. Consider the following example from a manuscript by cell biologist Luis R. Cruz-Vera’s research team from the University of Alabama in Huntsville, published in the Journal of Biological Chemistry. 1

Here, they divide the opening paragraph of their introduction into four distinct sections. First, they explain what ribosome arresting peptides (RAPs) are and what they do.

Ribosome arresting peptides (RAPs) are nascent polypeptides that act in cis on the translating ribosome to control the expression of genes by inducing ribosome arrest during translation elongation or termination. RAPs commonly sense external forces or low molecular weight compounds in the environment that spatially and temporally contribute to the expression of genes. 

Then they introduce the two different types of RAPs.

RAPs such as SecM that sense external forces on the ribosome are typically large, because these nascent peptides have a domain that functions outside of the ribosome. In contrast, those that sense small molecules inside of the ribosome, such as TnaC are smaller. 

They describe how each type works via a different mechanism.

Typically, larger RAPs interact with cellular factors that can control their capacity for arresting ribosomes. Because of their size and proximity to ribosomal components, large RAPs clearly show two structural domains, a sensor domain and an arresting domain. At the moment of the arrest for the large RAPs, the sensor domain is located outside the ribosome exit tunnel, whereas the arresting domain remains inside the tunnel. The short RAPs currently characterized interact with the compounds that they sense by using the ribosome exit tunnel as a binding surface. For these short RAPs, it has been determined that conserved amino acid residues are necessary to induce arrest by either directly binding the effector molecule or by acting at the peptidyl-transferase center (PTC) during ribosome arrest. 

And finally, they conclude by highlighting a knowledge gap in how small RAPs operate versus what is already known about large RAPs.

However, because the size of short RAPs ranges from only a few to a couple of dozen amino acids, as in the case of TnaC, it has remained unclear whether short RAPs are constituted by the two independent sensor and stalling domains, as it has been observed with larger RAPs.

In this way, the authors make a natural progression from “why this topic is important” to “what is known about this topic,” setting the stage for “what is unknown about this topic and why it should be studied.” 

Gradually Moving from Broad to Narrow

These principles can be further transferred towards the introductory section as a whole. The first paragraph should serve as an introduction to the field and the topic. The middle paragraph(s) provide exposition and detail regarding what is known and unknown, and what has already been done and still remains to do, and the final paragraph outlines the study and its principle findings, providing a transition into either the materials and methods or the results section. 

For example, this work by radiation oncologist Eric Deutsch’s group at Université Paris-Saclay, published in PLoS One , 2 opens by succinctly explaining a scientific problem: “ the threat of extensive dispersion of radioactive isotopes within populated areas that would have an unfortunate effect on human health has increased drastically .” It then offers the call to action necessitated by this problem: “ the development of a decorporating agent capable of effectively mitigating the effects of a wide range of isotopes is critical .”

In the next two paragraphs, the study authors provide information on how and why dispersion of radioactive isotopes are a problem—“ the FDA has approved only three compounds (only one of which is used as a preventative therapy) for the treatment of exposure to specific radioactive elements ”—and highlights the strengths and weaknesses of what is currently available. They then introduce the focal point of their own work, chitosan@DOTAGA, within this context, explaining its potential as a solution to the problem they previously introduced: “ After oral administration to rodents over several days, no signs of acute or chronic toxicity were observed, and DOTAGA did not enter the blood stream and was fully eliminated from the gastrointestinal tract within 24 hours of administration. ”

Finally, the introduction concludes by listing the study objective—“ explore the potential of this polymer for use in the decorporation of a wide range of radioactive isotopes ”—and the motivations and rationale behind the study objective—“ there are no suitable countermeasures available for uranium poisoning. […] This innovative approach aims to directly chelate the radioactive cations, specifically uranium, within the gastrointestinal tract prior to their systemic absorption, which ensures their prompt elimination and mitigation of the associated toxicities. ”

The Introduction Engages with the Reader

The introduction section is often overlooked in favor of the title and the abstract, but it serves two important functions. First, it gives the audience all of the information that it needs to contextualize the yet-to-be-presented data within the context of the problem that needs to be solved or the scientific question that needs to be addressed. Second, and more importantly, it justifies the importance of the study, of its initiative, rationale, and purpose. The introduction is the author’s best—and arguably only real—opportunity to convince the audience that their study is worth reading.  

Looking for more information on scientific writing? Check out  The Scientist’s   TS SciComm  section. Looking for some help putting together a manuscript, a figure, a poster, or anything else?    The Scientist’s   Scientific Services  may have the professional help that you need.

• Judd HNG, et al. Functional domains of a ribosome arresting peptide are affected by surrounding nonconserved residues . J Biol Chem . 2024;300(3):105780.
• Durand A, et al. Enhancing radioprotection: A chitosan-based chelating polymer is a versatile radioprotective agent for prophylactic and therapeutic interventions against radionuclide contamination . PLoS One . 2024;19(4):e0292414.

Related community Research Resources

Building a Scientific Narrative

Where Books Meet Bacteria

The Fundamentals of Academic Science Writing

Organizing Academic Research Papers: 4. The Introduction

• Purpose of Guide
• Design Flaws to Avoid
• Glossary of Research Terms
• Narrowing a Topic Idea
• Broadening a Topic Idea
• Extending the Timeliness of a Topic Idea
• Academic Writing Style
• Choosing a Title
• Making an Outline
• Paragraph Development
• Executive Summary
• Background Information
• The Research Problem/Question
• Theoretical Framework
• Citation Tracking
• Content Alert Services
• Evaluating Sources
• Primary Sources
• Secondary Sources
• Tertiary Sources
• What Is Scholarly vs. Popular?
• Qualitative Methods
• Quantitative Methods
• Using Non-Textual Elements
• Limitations of the Study
• Common Grammar Mistakes
• Avoiding Plagiarism
• Footnotes or Endnotes?
• Further Readings
• Annotated Bibliography
• Dealing with Nervousness
• Using Visual Aids
• Grading Someone Else's Paper
• How to Manage Group Projects
• Multiple Book Review Essay
• Reviewing Collected Essays
• About Informed Consent
• Writing Field Notes
• Writing a Policy Memo
• Writing a Research Proposal
• Acknowledgements

The introduction serves the purpose of leading the reader from a general subject area to a particular field of research. It establishes the context of the research being conducted by summarizing current understanding and background information about the topic, stating the purpose of the work in the form of the hypothesis, question, or research problem, briefly explaining your rationale, methodological approach, highlighting the potential outcomes your study can reveal, and describing the remaining structure of the paper.

Key Elements of the Research Proposal. Prepared under the direction of the Superintendent and by the 2010 Curriculum Design and Writing Team. Baltimore County Public Schools.

Importance of a Good Introduction

Think of the introduction as a mental road map that must answer for the reader these four questions:

• What was I studying?
• Why was this topic important to investigate?
• What did we know about this topic before I did this study?
• How will this study advance our knowledge?

A well-written introduction is important because, quite simply, you never get a second chance to make a good first impression. The opening paragraph of your paper will provide your readers with their initial impressions about the logic of your argument, your writing style, the overall quality of your research, and, ultimately, the validity of your findings and conclusions. A vague, disorganized, or error-filled introduction will create a negative impression, whereas, a concise, engaging, and well-written introduction will start your readers off thinking highly of your analytical skills, your writing style, and your research approach.

Introductions . The Writing Center. University of North Carolina.

Structure and Writing Style

I. Structure and Approach

The introduction is the broad beginning of the paper that answers three important questions for the reader:

• What is this?
• Why am I reading it?
• What do you want me to think about / consider doing / react to?

Think of the structure of the introduction as an inverted triangle of information. Organize the information so as to present the more general aspects of the topic early in the introduction, then narrow toward the more specific topical information that provides context, finally arriving at your statement of purpose and rationale and, whenever possible, the potential outcomes your study can reveal.

These are general phases associated with writing an introduction:

• Highlighting the importance of the topic, and/or
• Making general statements about the topic, and/or
• Presenting an overview on current research on the subject.
• Opposing an existing assumption, and/or
• Revealing a gap in existing research, and/or
• Formulating a research question or problem, and/or
• Continuing a disciplinary tradition.
• Stating the intent of your study,
• Outlining the key characteristics of your study,
• Describing important results, and
• Giving a brief overview of the structure of the paper.

NOTE: Even though the introduction is the first main section of a research paper, it is often useful to finish the introduction very late in the writing process because the structure of the paper, the reporting and analysis of results, and the conclusion will have been completed and it ensures that your introduction matches the overall structure of your paper.

II.  Delimitations of the Study

Delimitations refer to those characteristics that limit the scope and define the conceptual boundaries of your study . This is determined by the conscious exclusionary and inclusionary decisions you make about how to investigate the research problem. In other words, not only should you tell the reader what it is you are studying and why, but you must also acknowledge why you rejected alternative approaches that could have been used to examine the research problem.

Obviously, the first limiting step was the choice of research problem itself. However, implicit are other, related problems that could have been chosen but were rejected. These should be noted in the conclusion of your introduction.

Examples of delimitating choices would be:

• The key aims and objectives of your study,
• The research questions that you address,
• The variables of interest [i.e., the various factors and features of the phenomenon being studied],
• The method(s) of investigation, and
• Any relevant alternative theoretical frameworks that could have been adopted.

Review each of these decisions. You need to not only clearly establish what you intend to accomplish, but to also include a declaration of what the study does not intend to cover. In the latter case, your exclusionary decisions should be based upon criteria stated as, "not interesting"; "not directly relevant"; “too problematic because..."; "not feasible," and the like. Make this reasoning explicit!

NOTE: Delimitations refer to the initial choices made about the broader, overall design of your study and should not be confused with documenting the limitations of your study discovered after the research has been completed.

III. The Narrative Flow

Issues to keep in mind that will help the narrative flow in your introduction :

• Your introduction should clearly identify the subject area of interest . A simple strategy to follow is to use key words from your title in the first few sentences of the introduction. This will help focus the introduction on the topic at the appropriate level and ensures that you get to the primary subject matter quickly without losing focus, or discussing information that is too general.
• Establish context by providing a brief and balanced review of the pertinent published literature that is available on the subject. The key is to summarize for the reader what is known about the specific research problem before you did your analysis. This part of your introduction should not represent a comprehensive literature review but consists of a general review of the important, foundational research literature (with citations) that lays a foundation for understanding key elements of the research problem. See the drop-down tab for "Background Information" for types of contexts.
• Clearly state the hypothesis that you investigated . When you are first learning to write in this format it is okay, and actually preferable, to use a past statement like, "The purpose of this study was to...." or "We investigated three possible mechanisms to explain the...."
• Why did you choose this kind of research study or design? Provide a clear statement of the rationale for your approach to the problem studied. This will usually follow your statement of purpose in the last paragraph of the introduction.

IV. Engaging the Reader

The overarching goal of your introduction is to make your readers want to read your paper. The introduction should grab your reader's attention. Strategies for doing this can be to:

• Open with a compelling story,
• Include a strong quotation or a vivid, perhaps unexpected anecdote,
• Pose a provocative or thought-provoking question,
• Describe a puzzling scenario or incongruity, or
• Cite a stirring example or case study that illustrates why the research problem is important.

NOTE:   Only choose one strategy for engaging your readers; avoid giving an impression that your paper is more flash than substance.

Freedman, Leora  and Jerry Plotnick. Introductions and Conclusions . University College Writing Centre. University of Toronto; Introduction . The Structure, Format, Content, and Style of a Journal-Style Scientific Paper. Department of Biology. Bates College; Introductions . The Writing Center. University of North Carolina; Introductions . The Writer’s Handbook. Writing Center. University of Wisconsin, Madison; Introductions, Body Paragraphs, and Conclusions for an Argument Paper. The Writing Lab and The OWL. Purdue University; Resources for Writers: Introduction Strategies . Program in Writing and Humanistic Studies. Massachusetts Institute of Technology; Sharpling, Gerald. Writing an Introduction . Centre for Applied Linguistics, University of Warwick; Writing Your Introduction. Department of English Writing Guide. George Mason University.

Writing Tip

Avoid the "Dictionary" Introduction

Giving the dictionary definition of words related to the research problem may appear appropriate because it is important to define specific words or phrases with which readers may be unfamiliar. However, anyone can look a word up in the dictionary and a general dictionary is not a particularly authoritative source. It doesn't take into account the context of your topic and doesn't offer particularly detailed information. Also, placed in the context of a particular discipline, a term may have a different meaning than what is found in a general dictionary. If you feel that you must seek out an authoritative definition, try to find one that is from subject specific dictionaries or encyclopedias [e.g., if you are a sociology student, search for dictionaries of sociology].

Saba, Robert. The College Research Paper . Florida International University; Introductions . The Writing Center. University of North Carolina.

Another Writing Tip

When Do I Begin?

A common question asked at the start of any paper is, "where should I begin?" An equally important question to ask yourself is, "When do I begin?" Research problems in the social sciences rarely rest in isolation from the history of the issue being investigated. It is, therefore, important to lay a foundation for understanding the historical context underpinning the research problem. However, this information should be brief and succinct and begin at a point in time that best informs the reader of study's overall importance. For example, a study about coffee cultivation and export in West Africa as a key stimulus for local economic growth needs to describe the beginning of exporting coffee in the region and establishing why economic growth is important. You do not need to give a long historical explanation about coffee exportation in Africa. If a research problem demands a substantial exploration of historical context, do this in the literature review section; note in the introduction as part of your "roadmap" [see below] that you covering this in the literature review.

Yet Another Writing Tip

Always End with a Roadmap

The final paragraph or sentences of your introduction should forecast your main arguments and conclusions and provide a description of the rest of the paper [a "roadmap"] that let's the reader know where you are going and what to expect.

• << Previous: Executive Summary
• Next: Background Information >>
• Last Updated: Jul 18, 2023 11:58 AM
• URL: https://library.sacredheart.edu/c.php?g=29803
• QuickSearch
• Library Catalog
• Databases A-Z
• Publication Finder
• Course Reserves
• Citation Linker
• Digital Commons
• Our Website

Research Support

• Ask a Librarian
• Appointments
• Interlibrary Loan (ILL)
• Research Guides
• Databases by Subject
• Citation Help

Using the Library

• Reserve a Group Study Room
• Renew Books
• Honors Study Rooms
• Off-Campus Access
• Library Policies
• Library Technology

User Information

• Grad Students
• Online Students
• COVID-19 Updates
• Staff Directory
• News & Announcements
• Library Newsletter

My Accounts

• Interlibrary Loan
• Staff Site Login

FIND US ON  

How to write an introduction for a research paper

Learn how to write a strong and efficient research paper introduction by following the suitable structure and avoiding typical errors.

An introduction to any type of paper is sometimes misunderstood as the beginning; yet, an introduction is actually intended to present your chosen subject to the audience in a way that makes it more appealing and leaves your readers thirsty for more information. After the title and abstract, your audience will read the introduction, thus it’s critical to get off to a solid start.  

This article includes instructions on how to write an introduction for a research paper that engages the reader in your research. You can produce a strong opening for your research paper if you stick to the format and a few basic principles.

What is an introduction to a research paper?

An introduction is the opening section of a research paper and the section that a reader is likely to read first, in which the objective and goals of the subsequent writing are stated. 

The introduction serves numerous purposes. It provides context for your research, explains your topic and objectives, and provides an outline of the work. A solid introduction will establish the tone for the remainder of your paper, enticing readers to continue reading through the methodology, findings, and discussion. 

Even though introductions are generally presented at the beginning of a document, we must distinguish an introduction from the beginning of your research. An introduction, as the name implies, is supposed to introduce your subject without extending it. All relevant information and facts should be placed in the body and conclusion, not the introduction.

Structure of an introduction

Before explaining how to write an introduction for a research paper , it’s necessary to comprehend a structure that will make your introduction stronger and more straightforward.

A good hook

A hook is one of the most effective research introduction openers. A hook’s objective is to stimulate the reader’s interest to read the research paper.  There are various approaches you may take to generate a strong hook:  startling facts, a question, a brief overview, or even a quotation. 

Broad overview

Following an excellent hook, you should present a wide overview of your major issue and some background information on your research. If you’re unsure about how to begin an essay introduction, the best approach is to offer a basic explanation of your topic before delving into specific issues. Simply said, you should begin with general information and then narrow it down to your relevant topics.

After offering some background information regarding your research’s main topic, go on to give readers a better understanding of what you’ll be covering throughout your research. In this section of your introduction, you should swiftly clarify your important topics in the sequence in which they will be addressed later, gradually introducing your thesis statement. You can use some  The following are some critical questions to address in this section of your introduction: Who? What? Where? When? How? And why is that?

Thesis statement

The thesis statement, which must be stated in the beginning clause of your research since your entire research revolves around it, is the most important component of your research.

A thesis statement presents your audience with a quick overview of the research’s main assertion. In the body section of your work, your key argument is what you will expose or debate about it. An excellent thesis statement is usually very succinct, accurate, explicit, clear, and focused. Typically, your thesis should be at the conclusion of your introductory paragraph/section.

Tips for writing a strong introduction

Aside from the good structure, here are a few tips to make your introduction strong and accurate:

• Keep in mind the aim of your research and make sure your introduction supports it.
• Use an appealing and relevant hook that catches the reader’s attention right away.
• Make it obvious to your readers what your stance is.
• Demonstrate your knowledge of your subject.
• Provide your reader with a road map to help them understand what you will address throughout the research.
• Be succinct – it is advised that your opening introduction consists of around 8-9 percent of the overall amount of words in your article (for example, 160 words for a 2000 words essay). 
• Make a strong and unambiguous thesis statement.
• Explain why the article is significant in 1-2 sentences.
• Remember to keep it interesting.

Mistakes to avoid in your introduction

Check out what not to do and what to avoid now that you know the structure and how to write an introduction for a research paper .

• Lacking a feeling of direction or purpose.
• Giving out too much.
• Creating lengthy paragraphs.
• Excessive or insufficient background, literature, and theory.
• Including material that should be placed in the body and conclusion.
• Not writing enough or writing excessively.
• Using too many quotes.

Unleash the Power of Infographics with Mind the Graph

Do you believe your research is not efficient in communicating precisely or is not aesthetically appealingly? Use the Mind The Graph tool to create great infographics and add more value to your research.

Subscribe to our newsletter

Exclusive high quality content about effective visual communication in science.

Unlock Your Creativity

Create infographics, presentations and other scientifically-accurate designs without hassle — absolutely free for 7 days!

About Jessica Abbadia

Jessica Abbadia is a lawyer that has been working in Digital Marketing since 2020, improving organic performance for apps and websites in various regions through ASO and SEO. Currently developing scientific and intellectual knowledge for the community's benefit. Jessica is an animal rights activist who enjoys reading and drinking strong coffee.

Content tags

How to Write a Research Paper Introduction

Learn how to write a research paper introduction with expert guidance.

Last updated on Mar 13th, 2024

When you click on affiliate links on QuillMuse.com and make a purchase, you won’t pay a penny more, but we’ll get a small commission—this helps us keep up with publishing valuable content on QuillMuse.  Read More .

Table of Contents

We write different types of papers for academic and professional reasons. Research paper is one of the most important papers and it is different from other papers. There are different types of rules for writing a research paper , the first part is the introduction. Through this article, we will try to tell you how to write an introduction for a research paper beautifully.

Introduction

Before starting to write any papers, especially research papers one should know how to write a research paper introduction. The introduction is intended to guide the reader from a general subject to a specific area of study. It establishes the context of the research being conducted by summarizing current understanding and background information on the topic, stating the purpose of the work in the form of a thesis, question, or research problem, Briefly explaining your rationale, your methodological approach, highlight the potential findings your research may reveal, and describe the remaining structure of the paper.

A well-written introduction is imperative since, essentially, you never get a second chance to form a great first impression. The opening passage of your paper will give your audience their introductory impression, almost the rationale of your contention, your composing style, the general quality of your investigation, and, eventually, the legitimacy of your discoveries and conclusions. A vague, disorganized, or error-filled introduction will create a negative impression on the readers. While a brief, engaging, and well-written introduction will begin your readers off considering profoundly your expository abilities, your writing style, and your research approach. 

Tips for Writng an Introduction in Research Paper

Introduce your topic

This is a significant part of how to write an introduction for a research paper. The first task of the introduction is to tell the reader what your topic is and why it is interesting or important. This is usually done with a strong opening hook.

A hook is a strong opening sentence that conveys relevance to your topic. Think of an interesting fact or statistic, a powerful statement, a question, or a brief anecdote that will make readers wonder about your topic.

Describe the context

This introduction varies depending on your approach to your writing. In a more argumentative article, you will explore the general context here. In a more empirical paper, this is a great place to review previous research and determine how your research fits together.

Start briefly, and narrow down

The first thing of a research paper introduction is, to briefly describe your broad parts of research, then narrow in on your specific focus. This will help position your research topic within a broader field, making the work accessible to a wider audience than just experts in your field.

A common mistake when writing a research paper introduction is trying to fit everything in at once. Instead, pace yourself and present each piece of information in the most logical order the reader can understand. Typically, this means starting with the big picture and then gradually getting more specific with the details.

For your research paper introduction, you should first present an overview of the topic and then focus on your specific paper. This “funnel” structure naturally includes all the necessary parts of what should be included in a research paper introduction, from context to appropriate or research gaps and finally to relevance.

State Objective and Importance

Papers abandoned because they “do not demonstrate the importance of the topic” or “lack a clear motivation” often miss this point. Say what you want to achieve and why your readers should want to know whether you achieved it or not.

Quote generously

Once you have focused on the specific topic of your research, you should detail the latest and most relevant literature related to your research. Your literature review should be comprehensive but not too long. Remember, you are not writing a review. If you find your introduction is too long or has too many citations, a possible solution is to cite journal articles, rather than cite all of the individual articles that have been summarised in the journal.

Do not Keep it broad

Try to avoid lengthy introductions. A good target is between 500 and 1,000 words, although checking the magazine’s guidelines and back issues will provide the clearest guidance.

The introduction is not lengthy or detailed; rather, they are initiating actions. Introductions are best when they get to the point: save the details in the body of the document, where they belong.

The most important point of a research paper introduction is that they are clear and easy to understand. Writing at length can be distracting and even make your point harder to understand, so cut out unnecessary words and try to express things in simple terms that everyone understands. understandable.

Check journal condition

Many journals have specific assertions in their author instructions. For example, a maximum of one word may be stated, or instructions may require specific content, such as a supposition statement or a summary of your key findings.

Write the introduction to your research paper at the last moment

Your introduction may appear first in a research paper, but the general advice is to wait to write it until everything else has been written. This makes it easier for you to summarize your article because at this point you know everything you’re going to say. This also eliminates the urge to include everything in the introduction because you don’t want to forget anything.

Additionally, it is especially helpful to write an introduction after your research paper is finished. The introduction and conclusion of a research paper have similar topics and often reflect the structure of each topic. Writing the conclusion is also generally easier thanks to the pace created by writing the rest of the paper, and the conclusion can guide you in writing the introduction.

Make your introduction narrative style

Although not always appropriate for formal writing, using a narrative style in the introduction of your research paper can do a lot to engage readers and engage them emotionally. A 2016 study found that in some articles, using narrative strategies improved how often they were cited in other articles. Narrative style involves making the paper more personal to appeal to the reader’s emotions.

• Use first-person pronouns (I, we, my, our) to show that you are the narrator expressing emotions and feelings in the text setting up the scene. 
• Describe the times and locations of important events to help readers visualize them. 
• Appeal to the reader’s morality, sympathy, or urgency as a persuasive tactic. Again, this style will not be appropriate for all research paper introductions, especially those devoted to scientific research. 

However, for more informal research papers and especially essays, this style can make your writing more interesting or at least interesting, perfect for making readers excited right from the beginning of the article.

Use the CARS model

British scientist John Swales developed a method called the CARS model to “generate a search space” in the introduction. Although intended for scientific papers, this simple three-step structure can be used to outline the introduction to any research paper.

Explain the background of your topic, including previous research. Explain that information is lacking in your topic area or that current research is incomplete.

Explain how your research “fills in” missing information about your topic. 

the research findings and providing an overview of the structure of the rest of the paper, although this does not apply to all research papers, especially those Unofficial documents.

Six Essential Elements of How to Write a Research Paper Introduction

1. topic overview.

Start with a general overview of your topic. Refine your outline until you address the specific topic of your article. Next, mention any questions or concerns you have about the case. Note that you will address these in the article.

2. Previous research

Your introduction is the perfect place to review other findings about your topic. Includes both old and modern scholars. This general information shows that you are aware of previous research. It also presents previous findings to those who may not have that expertise.

3. A justification for your article

Explain why your topic needs to be discussed now. If possible, connect it to current issues. Additionally, you can point out problems with old theories or reveal gaps in current research. No matter how you do it, a good reason will keep readers interested and demonstrate why they should read the rest of your article.

4. Describe the method you used

Tell about your processes to make your writing more trustworthy. Identify your goals and the questions you will answer. Reveal how you conducted the research and describe how you measured the results. Also, explain why you made the important choices.

5. A thesis statement

Your main introduction should end with a thesis statement. This statement summarises the ideas that will run throughout your entire research paper. It must be simple and clear.

6. An outline

It is an adequate idea of how to write an introduction for a research paper. 

The introduction usually ends with an overview. Your layout should quickly present what you plan to cover in the following sections. Think of it as a road map, guiding readers to the end of your article.

What is the purpose of the introduction in a research paper, and why is it considered crucial?

The purpose of the introduction in a research paper is to guide the reader from a general subject to a specific area of study. It establishes the context of the research by summarizing current understanding, stating the purpose of the work, explaining the rationale and methodological approach, highlighting potential findings, and describing the paper’s structure. It’s considered crucial because it forms the reader’s first impression and sets the tone for the rest of the paper.

How can I effectively use a hook to engage readers in my research paper introduction?

Using a hook, such as an interesting fact, a powerful statement, a question, or a brief anecdote, can effectively engage readers in your research paper introduction. A hook captures the reader’s attention and makes them curious about your topic, encouraging them to continue reading.

How long the introduction should be in a research paper?

While there’s no strict word count, a good target for a research paper introduction is between 500 and 1,000 words, although you should check the specific guidelines provided by the journal you’re submitting to. It’s recommended to write the introduction after the rest of the paper has been completed. This way, you have a comprehensive understanding of your research, making it easier to summarize and guide your readers effectively.

Conclusion 

These are the important tips and tricks on how to write an introduction for a research paper properly. If you maintain these rules we believe that you will be able to write an excellent introduction in your research paper. 

How we've reviewed this article

Our content is thoroughly researched and fact-checked using reputable sources. While we aim for precision, we encourage independent verification for complete confidence.

We keep our articles up-to-date regularly to ensure accuracy and relevance as new information becomes available.

• Current Version
• Mar 13th, 2024
• Oct 14th, 2023

Share this article

Leave a Comment Login Please login to comment 0 Comments Inline Feedbacks View all comments

How to Write a Research Paper Conclusion With Example 

The conclusion is the last part of every research paper or document. Without a conclusion, your research paper will not be complete. A few days ago, I got some comments on our website about how to write a research paper conclusion. Some are interested in knowing about research paper conclusion

How to Write a Research Paper

A research paper is a kind of paper that is different from other papers. Especially a research paper needed for academic life. The main purpose of the research paper is to deliver new knowledge from researchers’ critical thinking.  To learn how to write a research paper, you need to know

We write different types of papers for academic and professional reasons. Research paper is one of the most important papers and it is different from other papers. There are different types of rules for writing a research paper, the first part is the introduction. Through this article, we will try

Report this article

Let us know if you notice any incorrect information about this article or if it was copied from others. We will take action against this article ASAP.

• Profile Page
• Edit Profile
• Add New Post

Read our Content Writing Guide .

Microsoft 365 Life Hacks > Writing > How to write an introduction for a research paper

How to write an introduction for a research paper

Beginnings are hard. Beginning a research paper is no exception. Many students—and pros—struggle with how to write an introduction for a research paper.

This short guide will describe the purpose of a research paper introduction and how to create a good one.

What is an introduction for a research paper?

Introductions to research papers do a lot of work.

It may seem obvious, but introductions are always placed at the beginning of a paper. They guide your reader from a general subject area to the narrow topic that your paper covers. They also explain your paper’s:

• Scope: The topic you’ll be covering
• Context: The background of your topic
• Importance: Why your research matters in the context of an industry or the world

Your introduction will cover a lot of ground. However, it will only be half of a page to a few pages long. The length depends on the size of your paper as a whole. In many cases, the introduction will be shorter than all of the other sections of your paper.

Write with Confidence using Editor

Elevate your writing with real-time, intelligent assistance

Why is an introduction vital to a research paper?

The introduction to your research paper isn’t just important. It’s critical.

Your readers don’t know what your research paper is about from the title. That’s where your introduction comes in. A good introduction will:

• Help your reader understand your topic’s background
• Explain why your research paper is worth reading
• Offer a guide for navigating the rest of the piece
• Pique your reader’s interest

Without a clear introduction, your readers will struggle. They may feel confused when they start reading your paper. They might even give up entirely. Your introduction will ground them and prepare them for the in-depth research to come.

What should you include in an introduction for a research paper?

Research paper introductions are always unique. After all, research is original by definition. However, they often contain six essential items. These are:

• An overview of the topic. Start with a general overview of your topic. Narrow the overview until you address your paper’s specific subject. Then, mention questions or concerns you had about the case. Note that you will address them in the publication.
• Prior research. Your introduction is the place to review other conclusions on your topic. Include both older scholars and modern scholars. This background information shows that you are aware of prior research. It also introduces past findings to those who might not have that expertise.
• A rationale for your paper. Explain why your topic needs to be addressed right now. If applicable, connect it to current issues. Additionally, you can show a problem with former theories or reveal a gap in current research. No matter how you do it, a good rationale will interest your readers and demonstrate why they must read the rest of your paper.
• Describe the methodology you used. Recount your processes to make your paper more credible. Lay out your goal and the questions you will address. Reveal how you conducted research and describe how you measured results. Moreover, explain why you made key choices.
• A thesis statement. Your main introduction should end with a thesis statement. This statement summarizes the ideas that will run through your entire research article. It should be straightforward and clear.
• An outline. Introductions often conclude with an outline. Your layout should quickly review what you intend to cover in the following sections. Think of it as a roadmap, guiding your reader to the end of your paper.

These six items are emphasized more or less, depending on your field. For example, a physics research paper might emphasize methodology. An English journal article might highlight the overview.

Three tips for writing your introduction

We don’t just want you to learn how to write an introduction for a research paper. We want you to learn how to make it shine.

There are three things you can do that will make it easier to write a great introduction. You can:

• Write your introduction last. An introduction summarizes all of the things you’ve learned from your research. While it can feel good to get your preface done quickly, you should write the rest of your paper first. Then, you’ll find it easy to create a clear overview.
• Include a strong quotation or story upfront. You want your paper to be full of substance. But that doesn’t mean it should feel boring or flat. Add a relevant quotation or surprising anecdote to the beginning of your introduction. This technique will pique the interest of your reader and leave them wanting more.
• Be concise. Research papers cover complex topics. To help your readers, try to write as clearly as possible. Use concise sentences. Check for confusing grammar or syntax . Read your introduction out loud to catch awkward phrases. Before you finish your paper, be sure to proofread, too. Mistakes can seem unprofessional.

Get started with Microsoft 365

It’s the Office you know, plus the tools to help you work better together, so you can get more done—anytime, anywhere.

Topics in this article

More articles like this one.

What is independent publishing?

Avoid the hassle of shopping your book around to publishing houses. Publish your book independently and understand the benefits it provides for your as an author.

What are literary tropes?

Engage your audience with literary tropes. Learn about different types of literary tropes, like metaphors and oxymorons, to elevate your writing.

What are genre tropes?

Your favorite genres are filled with unifying tropes that can define them or are meant to be subverted.

What is literary fiction?

Define literary fiction and learn what sets it apart from genre fiction.

Everything you need to achieve more in less time

Get powerful productivity and security apps with Microsoft 365

Explore Other Categories

• Search This Site All UCSD Sites Faculty/Staff Search Term
• Contact & Directions
• Climate Statement
• Cognitive Behavioral Neuroscience
• Cognitive Psychology
• Developmental Psychology
• Social Psychology
• Adjunct Faculty
• Non-Senate Instructors
• Researchers
• Psychology Grads
• Affiliated Grads
• New and Prospective Students
• Honors Program
• Experiential Learning
• Programs & Events
• Psi Chi / Psychology Club
• Prospective PhD Students
• Current PhD Students
• Area Brown Bags
• Colloquium Series
• Anderson Distinguished Lecture Series
• Speaker Videos
• Undergraduate Program
• Academic and Writing Resources

Writing Research Papers

• Research Paper Structure

Whether you are writing a B.S. Degree Research Paper or completing a research report for a Psychology course, it is highly likely that you will need to organize your research paper in accordance with American Psychological Association (APA) guidelines.  Here we discuss the structure of research papers according to APA style.

Major Sections of a Research Paper in APA Style

A complete research paper in APA style that is reporting on experimental research will typically contain a Title page, Abstract, Introduction, Methods, Results, Discussion, and References sections. 1  Many will also contain Figures and Tables and some will have an Appendix or Appendices.  These sections are detailed as follows (for a more in-depth guide, please refer to " How to Write a Research Paper in APA Style ”, a comprehensive guide developed by Prof. Emma Geller). 2

What is this paper called and who wrote it? – the first page of the paper; this includes the name of the paper, a “running head”, authors, and institutional affiliation of the authors.  The institutional affiliation is usually listed in an Author Note that is placed towards the bottom of the title page.  In some cases, the Author Note also contains an acknowledgment of any funding support and of any individuals that assisted with the research project.

One-paragraph summary of the entire study – typically no more than 250 words in length (and in many cases it is well shorter than that), the Abstract provides an overview of the study.

Introduction

What is the topic and why is it worth studying? – the first major section of text in the paper, the Introduction commonly describes the topic under investigation, summarizes or discusses relevant prior research (for related details, please see the Writing Literature Reviews section of this website), identifies unresolved issues that the current research will address, and provides an overview of the research that is to be described in greater detail in the sections to follow.

What did you do? – a section which details how the research was performed.  It typically features a description of the participants/subjects that were involved, the study design, the materials that were used, and the study procedure.  If there were multiple experiments, then each experiment may require a separate Methods section.  A rule of thumb is that the Methods section should be sufficiently detailed for another researcher to duplicate your research.

What did you find? – a section which describes the data that was collected and the results of any statistical tests that were performed.  It may also be prefaced by a description of the analysis procedure that was used. If there were multiple experiments, then each experiment may require a separate Results section.

What is the significance of your results? – the final major section of text in the paper.  The Discussion commonly features a summary of the results that were obtained in the study, describes how those results address the topic under investigation and/or the issues that the research was designed to address, and may expand upon the implications of those findings.  Limitations and directions for future research are also commonly addressed.

List of articles and any books cited – an alphabetized list of the sources that are cited in the paper (by last name of the first author of each source).  Each reference should follow specific APA guidelines regarding author names, dates, article titles, journal titles, journal volume numbers, page numbers, book publishers, publisher locations, websites, and so on (for more information, please see the Citing References in APA Style page of this website).

Tables and Figures

Graphs and data (optional in some cases) – depending on the type of research being performed, there may be Tables and/or Figures (however, in some cases, there may be neither).  In APA style, each Table and each Figure is placed on a separate page and all Tables and Figures are included after the References.   Tables are included first, followed by Figures.   However, for some journals and undergraduate research papers (such as the B.S. Research Paper or Honors Thesis), Tables and Figures may be embedded in the text (depending on the instructor’s or editor’s policies; for more details, see "Deviations from APA Style" below).

Supplementary information (optional) – in some cases, additional information that is not critical to understanding the research paper, such as a list of experiment stimuli, details of a secondary analysis, or programming code, is provided.  This is often placed in an Appendix.

Variations of Research Papers in APA Style

Although the major sections described above are common to most research papers written in APA style, there are variations on that pattern.  These variations include: 

• Literature reviews – when a paper is reviewing prior published research and not presenting new empirical research itself (such as in a review article, and particularly a qualitative review), then the authors may forgo any Methods and Results sections. Instead, there is a different structure such as an Introduction section followed by sections for each of the different aspects of the body of research being reviewed, and then perhaps a Discussion section. 
• Multi-experiment papers – when there are multiple experiments, it is common to follow the Introduction with an Experiment 1 section, itself containing Methods, Results, and Discussion subsections. Then there is an Experiment 2 section with a similar structure, an Experiment 3 section with a similar structure, and so on until all experiments are covered.  Towards the end of the paper there is a General Discussion section followed by References.  Additionally, in multi-experiment papers, it is common for the Results and Discussion subsections for individual experiments to be combined into single “Results and Discussion” sections.

Departures from APA Style

In some cases, official APA style might not be followed (however, be sure to check with your editor, instructor, or other sources before deviating from standards of the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association).  Such deviations may include:

• Placement of Tables and Figures  – in some cases, to make reading through the paper easier, Tables and/or Figures are embedded in the text (for example, having a bar graph placed in the relevant Results section). The embedding of Tables and/or Figures in the text is one of the most common deviations from APA style (and is commonly allowed in B.S. Degree Research Papers and Honors Theses; however you should check with your instructor, supervisor, or editor first). 
• Incomplete research – sometimes a B.S. Degree Research Paper in this department is written about research that is currently being planned or is in progress. In those circumstances, sometimes only an Introduction and Methods section, followed by References, is included (that is, in cases where the research itself has not formally begun).  In other cases, preliminary results are presented and noted as such in the Results section (such as in cases where the study is underway but not complete), and the Discussion section includes caveats about the in-progress nature of the research.  Again, you should check with your instructor, supervisor, or editor first.
• Class assignments – in some classes in this department, an assignment must be written in APA style but is not exactly a traditional research paper (for instance, a student asked to write about an article that they read, and to write that report in APA style). In that case, the structure of the paper might approximate the typical sections of a research paper in APA style, but not entirely.  You should check with your instructor for further guidelines.

Workshops and Downloadable Resources

• For in-person discussion of the process of writing research papers, please consider attending this department’s “Writing Research Papers” workshop (for dates and times, please check the undergraduate workshops calendar).

Downloadable Resources

• How to Write APA Style Research Papers (a comprehensive guide) [ PDF ]
• Tips for Writing APA Style Research Papers (a brief summary) [ PDF ]
• Example APA Style Research Paper (for B.S. Degree – empirical research) [ PDF ]
• Example APA Style Research Paper (for B.S. Degree – literature review) [ PDF ]

Further Resources

How-To Videos     

• Writing Research Paper Videos

APA Journal Article Reporting Guidelines

• Appelbaum, M., Cooper, H., Kline, R. B., Mayo-Wilson, E., Nezu, A. M., & Rao, S. M. (2018). Journal article reporting standards for quantitative research in psychology: The APA Publications and Communications Board task force report . American Psychologist , 73 (1), 3.
• Levitt, H. M., Bamberg, M., Creswell, J. W., Frost, D. M., Josselson, R., & Suárez-Orozco, C. (2018). Journal article reporting standards for qualitative primary, qualitative meta-analytic, and mixed methods research in psychology: The APA Publications and Communications Board task force report . American Psychologist , 73 (1), 26.  

External Resources

• Formatting APA Style Papers in Microsoft Word
• How to Write an APA Style Research Paper from Hamilton University
• WikiHow Guide to Writing APA Research Papers
• Sample APA Formatted Paper with Comments
• Sample APA Formatted Paper
• Tips for Writing a Paper in APA Style

1 VandenBos, G. R. (Ed). (2010). Publication manual of the American Psychological Association (6th ed.) (pp. 41-60).  Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

2 geller, e. (2018).  how to write an apa-style research report . [instructional materials]. , prepared by s. c. pan for ucsd psychology.

Back to top  

• Formatting Research Papers
• Using Databases and Finding References
• What Types of References Are Appropriate?
• Evaluating References and Taking Notes
• Citing References
• Writing a Literature Review
• Writing Process and Revising
• Improving Scientific Writing
• Academic Integrity and Avoiding Plagiarism
• Writing Research Papers Videos

Apr 26, 2024

Everything You Need to Know about the Parts of a Research Paper

Not sure where to start with your research paper or how all the parts fit together? Don't worry! From crafting a compelling title page to compiling your references, we'll demystify each section of a research paper.

Learn how to write an attention-grabbing abstract, construct a powerful introduction, and confidently present your results and discussion. With this guide, you'll gain the tools to assemble a polished and impactful piece of work.

What Are Research Papers?

A research paper is a piece of academic writing that presents an original argument or analysis based on independent, in-depth investigation into a specific topic.

Key Characteristics:

Evidence-Driven: Research papers rely on data, analysis, and interpretation of credible sources.

Focused Argument: They develop a clear thesis that is defended with logical reasoning and evidence.

Structured: Research papers follow specific organizational formats and citation styles.

Contribution to Knowledge: They aim to add something new to the existing body of knowledge within a field.

Types of Research Papers

Research papers come in various forms across academic disciplines:

Argumentative Papers : Present a compelling claim and utilize evidence to persuade readers.

Analytical Papers : Break down complex subjects, ideas, or texts, examining their components and implications.

Empirical Studies: Involve collecting and analyzing original data (through experiments, surveys, etc.) to answer specific research questions.

Literature Reviews: Synthesize existing research on a topic, highlighting key findings, debates, and areas for future exploration.

And More! Depending on the field, you may encounter case studies, reports, theoretical proposals, etc.

Defining Research Papers

Here's how research papers stand apart from other forms of writing:

Originality vs. Summary: While essays might recap existing knowledge, research papers offer new insights, arguments, or data.

Depth of Inquiry: Research papers delve deeper, going beyond basic definitions or summaries into a systematic investigation.

Scholarly Audience: Research papers are often written with a specialized academic audience in mind, employing discipline-specific language and conventions.

Important Note: The specific requirements of research papers can vary depending on the subject area, level of study (undergraduate vs. graduate), and the instructor's instructions.

Importance of Research Paper Structure

Think of structure as the backbone of your research paper. Here's why it matters for academic success:

Clarity for the Reader: A logical structure guides the reader through your research journey. They understand your thought process, easily follow your arguments, and grasp the significance of your findings.

Author's Roadmap: Structure serves as your blueprint. It helps you maintain focus, ensures you address all essential elements, and prevents you from veering off-topic.

Enhanced Persuasion: A well-structured paper builds a convincing case. Your ideas flow logically, evidence supports your claims, and your conclusion feels grounded and impactful.

Demonstration of Competence: A clear structure signals to your instructor or peers that you have a thorough understanding of research practices and scholarly writing conventions.

Is a Structured Approach Critical for the Success of Research Papers?

Yes! It's difficult to overstate the importance of structure. Here's why:

Lost in Chaos: Rambling or disorganized papers leave the reader confused and frustrated. Even the most insightful findings risk being overlooked if presented poorly.

Missed Components: Without structure, you might forget to include critical aspects, like a clear methodology section or a thorough literature review, weakening your research.

Hindered Peer Review: Reviewers rely on a standard structure to quickly assess the research's merits. A deviation can make their job harder and might negatively affect how your work is evaluated.

Benefits of a Clear Structure

Enhanced Understanding: Readers can easily follow your chain of reasoning, grasp the connection between your evidence and claims, and critically evaluate your findings.

Efficient Peer Review: A standard structure makes peer review more efficient and focused. Reviewers can easily identify strong points, areas for improvement, and contributions to the field.

Streamlined Writing: Having a structure offers clarity and direction, preventing you from getting stuck mid-flow or overlooking important elements.

Variations of Research Papers

Here's a breakdown of some common types of research papers:

Analytical Papers

Focus: Dissect a complex subject, text, or phenomenon to understand its parts, implications, or underlying meanings.

Structure: Emphasizes a clear thesis statement, systematic analysis, and in-depth exploration of different perspectives.

Example: Examining the symbolism in a literary work or analyzing the economic impact of a policy change.

Argumentative Papers

Focus: Present and defend a specific claim using evidence and logical reasoning.

Structure: Emphasizes a well-defined thesis, persuasive examples, and the anticipation and refutation of counterarguments.

Example: Arguing for the superiority of a particular scientific theory or advocating for a specific social policy.

Experimental Studies (Empirical Research)

Focus: Collect and analyze original data through a designed experiment or methodology.

Structure: Follows scientific practices, including hypothesis, methods, results, discussion, and acknowledgment of limitations.

Example: Measuring the effects of a new drug or conducting psychological experiments on behavior patterns.

Survey-Based Research

Focus: Gather information from a sample population through surveys, questionnaires, or interviews.

Structure: Emphasizes sampling methods, data collection tools, statistical analysis, and cautious interpretation of results.

Example: Investigating public opinion on a political issue or studying consumer preferences for a product.

Do All Research Papers Fit Into Standard Categories?

No. Research is fluid and dynamic. Here's why categorization can get tricky:

Hybrids Exist: Many papers mix elements. An analytical paper might also incorporate arguments to strengthen its interpretation, or an experimental paper might include a review of existing literature to contextualize its findings.

Disciplinary Differences: Fields have specific conventions. A research paper in history differs vastly in style and structure from one in biology.

Innovation: Researchers sometimes develop new structures or methodologies best suited to their unique research questions.

Comparing Research Paper Types

Each type prioritizes different aspects of the research process:

An abstract is like a snapshot of your entire paper, providing a brief but informative overview of your research. It's often the first (and sometimes the only) section readers will engage with.

Key Functions: An effective abstract should:

Briefly state the research problem or topic

Outline your methods (briefly)

Summarize the main findings or results

Highlight the significance or implications of your work

Writing a Compelling Abstract

Here are some guidelines to make your abstract shine:

Concise and Clear: Aim for around 150-250 words. Use direct language and avoid unnecessary jargon.

Structured Approach: Even in its brevity, follow a logical flow (problem, methods, results, significance).

Keywords: Include keywords that accurately describe your research, aiding in discoverability within databases.

Self-Contained: The abstract should make sense on its own, without needing the reader to have read the full paper.

Engaging: While focused, pique the reader's interest and make them want to explore your research further.

Write it Last: Often, it's easiest to write your abstract once the rest of your paper is complete, as you can then distill the most essential elements.

Get Feedback: Ask a peer or instructor to read your abstract to ensure it's clear and accurately represents your research.

Introduction

Think of your introduction as the welcome mat for your research. Here's what it should accomplish:

Establish Context: Provide background information relevant to your specific research question. Orient the reader to the broader field or current debates surrounding the topic.

Define the Problem: Clearly outline the gap in knowledge, issue, or question your research aims to address.

State the Hypothesis: Concisely declare your research hypothesis or thesis statement – the central claim you aim to prove.

Significance: Briefly explain why your research matters. What potential contributions or implications does it hold?

Is the Introduction More Important Than Other Sections?

No. While the introduction plays a big role in initially capturing your reader's attention and setting the stage, it is just one piece of the puzzle. Here's why all sections matter:

Methodology Matters: A sound methodology section is essential for establishing the credibility of your findings. Readers need to trust your process.

Results are Key: The results section presents your hard-earned data. Without it, your research doesn't have a foundation to support your claims.

Discussion is Vital: Here's where you interpret your results, connect them back to your hypothesis, and explore the broader implications of your work.

Conclusion is the Culmination: Your conclusion reinforces your key findings, acknowledges limitations, and leaves the reader with a lasting understanding of your research contribution.

Engaging Your Audience Early

Here are some strategies to capture attention from the start:

Open with a Question: Pose a thought-provoking question directly related to your research.

Surprising Statistic: Share a relevant and eye-opening statistic that highlights the significance of your topic.

Brief anecdote: An illustrative anecdote or a vivid example can provide a compelling hook.

Challenge Assumptions: Question a common belief or assumption within your field to signal that your research offers fresh insights.

Tip: Your opening should be relevant and directly connected to your research topic. Avoid gimmicks that don't authentically lead into your core argument.

Literature Review

A literature review goes beyond simply listing past studies on a topic. It synthesizes existing knowledge, laying the foundation for your own research contribution.

Goals of a Strong Literature Review:

Demonstrate your understanding of the field and its key scholarly conversations.

Identify gaps in current knowledge that your research can address.

Position your research in relation to existing work, showing how it builds upon or challenges previous findings.

Provide theoretical context or support for your chosen methodological approach.

Synthesizing Relevant Studies

Don't just summarize – analyze! Here's how to engage with the literature critically:

Identify Trends: Look for patterns or themes across multiple studies. Are there consistent results or ongoing debates?

Note Inconsistencies: Highlight any contradictions or conflicting findings within the existing research.

Assess Methodology: Consider the strengths and limitations of different research methods used in prior studies. Can you improve upon them in your research?

Connections to Your Work: Show how each source directly relates to your research question. Explain how it supports, challenges, or informs your own study.

Tips for Effective Synthesis:

Organization is Key: Structure your literature review thematically or chronologically to present findings in a logical way.

Your Voice Matters: Avoid stringing together quotes. Analyze the literature and offer your own interpretation of the collective insights.

Cite Accurately: Follow the citation style required by your discipline to give credit and avoid plagiarism.

Methodology

Your methodology section details the step-by-step process of how you conducted your research. It allows others to understand and potentially replicate your study.

Components: A methodology section typically includes:

Research Design: The overall approach (experimental, survey-based, qualitative, etc.)

Data Collection: Description of the tools, procedures, and sources used (experiments, surveys, interviews, archival documents).

Sample Selection: Details on participants (if applicable) and how they were chosen.

Data Analysis: Methods used (statistical tests, qualitative analysis techniques).

Ethical considerations: Explain how you safeguarded participants or addressed any ethical concerns related to your research.

Designing a Robust Methodology

Here's how to make your methodology section shine:

Alignment with Research Question: Your methods should be directly chosen to answer your research question in the most effective and appropriate way.

Rigor: Demonstrate a meticulous approach, considering potential sources of bias or error and outlining steps taken to mitigate them.

Transparency: Provide enough detail for replication. Another researcher should be able to follow your method.

Justification: Explain why you chose specific methods. Connect them to established practices within your field or defend their suitability for your unique research.

Does Methodology Determine the Quality of Research Outcomes?

Absolutely! Here's why a robust methodology is important:

Reliability: A sound methodology ensures your results are consistent. If your study was repeated using your methods, similar results should be attainable.

Validity: Validity ensures you're measuring what you intend to. A strong methodology helps you draw accurate conclusions from your data that address your research question.

Credibility: Your paper will be evaluated based on the thoroughness of your procedures. A clear and rigorous methodology enhances trust in your findings.

Your results section is where you present the data collected from your research. This includes raw data, statistical analyses, summaries of observations, etc.

Key Considerations:

Clarity: Organize results logically. Use tables, graphs, or figures to enhance visual clarity when appropriate.

Objectivity: Present data without bias. Even if findings don't support your initial hypothesis, report them accurately.

Don't Interpret (Yet): Avoid discussing implications here. Focus on a clear presentation of your findings.

Interpreting Data Effectively

Your discussion or analysis section is where you make sense of your results. Here's how to ensure your interpretation is persuasive:

Connect Back to the Hypothesis: State whether your results support, refute, or partially support your hypothesis.

Use Evidence: Reference specific data points, statistics, or observations to back up your claims.

Explanatory Power: Don't merely describe what happened. Explain why you believe your data led to these results.

Context is Key: Relate your findings to the existing literature. Do they align with previous research, or do they raise new questions?

Be Transparent: Acknowledge any limitations of your data or unexpected findings, providing potential explanations.

Tips for Effective Data Discussion:

Visuals as Support: Continue using graphs or figures to illustrate trends or comparisons that reinforce your analysis.

Highlight What Matters: Don't over-discuss insignificant data points. Focus on the results that are most relevant to your research question and contribute to your overall argument.

Tell a Story: Data shouldn't feel disjointed. Weave it into a narrative that addresses your research problem and positions your findings within the broader field.

Your discussion section elevates your findings, moving from simply reporting what you discovered to exploring its significance and potential impact.

Interpret the results in relation to your research question and hypothesis.

Consider alternative explanations for unexpected findings and discuss limitations of the research.

Place your findings in the context of the broader field, connecting them to theories and the existing body of research.

Suggest implications for future research or practical applications.

Linking Results to Theory

Here's how to make your discussion section shine:

Return to the Literature Review: Did your results support a specific theory from your literature review? Challenge it? Offer a nuanced modification?

Contradictions Offer Insights: If your results contradict existing theories, don't dismiss them. Explain possible reasons for the discrepancies and how that pushes your field's understanding further.

Conceptual Contribution: How does your research add to the theoretical frameworks within your area of study?

Building Blocks: Frame your research as one piece of a larger puzzle. Explain how your work contributes to the ongoing scholarly conversation.

Tips for a Strong Discussion:

Avoid Overstating Significance: Maintain a scholarly tone and acknowledge the scope of your research. Don't claim your results revolutionize the field if it's not genuinely warranted.

Consider Future Directions: Responsible research isn't just about the past. Discuss what new questions arise based on your findings and offer avenues for potential future study.

Clarity Remains Key: Even when discussing complex ideas, use accessible language. Make your discussion meaningful to a wider audience within the field.

Conclusions

Your conclusion brings your research full circle. It's your chance to re-emphasize the most important takeaways of your work.

A Strong Conclusion Should:

Concisely restate the key research question or problem you sought to address.

Summarize your major findings and the most compelling evidence.

Briefly discuss the broader implications or contributions of your research.

Acknowledge limitations in the study (briefly).

Propose potential avenues for future research.

Can Conclusions Introduce New Research Questions?

Absolutely! Here's why this is valuable:

Sparking Curiosity: Ending with new questions emphasizes the ongoing nature of research and encourages further exploration beyond your own study.

Identifying Limitations: By highlighting where your work fell short, you guide future researchers toward filling those gaps.

Signaling Progress: Research is a continuous process of evolving knowledge. Your conclusion can be a springboard for others to expand upon your findings.

Crafting a Persuasive Conclusion

Here's how to make your conclusion impactful:

Reiterate, Don't Repeat: Remind the reader of your most significant findings, but avoid restating your thesis verbatim.

Confidence: Project a sense of conviction about the value of your work, without overstating its significance.

Clarity: Even in your conclusion, use direct language free of jargon. Leave the reader with a clear and lasting impression.

The Ripple Effect: Briefly highlight the broader relevance of your research. Why should readers beyond your niche field care?

Important: Your conclusion shouldn't introduce entirely new information or analyses. Rather, it should leave the reader pondering the implications of what you've already presented.

Giving Credit Where It's Due: Your references section lists the full details of every source you cited within your paper. This allows readers to locate those sources and acknowledges the intellectual work of others that you built upon.

Supporting Your Arguments: Credible references add weight to your claims, showing that your analysis is informed by established knowledge or reliable data.

Upholding Academic Standards: Accurate citations signal your commitment to scholarly practices and protect you from accusations of plagiarism.

Maintaining Citation Integrity

Here are the main practices to uphold:

Choose the Right Style: Follow the citation style mandated by your discipline (APA, MLA, Chicago, etc.). They have strict rules on formatting and which elements to include.

Consistency is Key: Use your chosen citation style uniformly throughout your paper. Mixed styles look sloppy and unprofessional.

Accuracy Matters: Double-check the details of each citation (authors, title, publication year, page numbers, etc.). Errors undermine your credibility.

Citation Tools: Use reliable resources like:

Online citation generators

Reference management software (Zotero, EndNote, etc..)

University library guides for your required style

Important Notes:

In-Text vs. References: In-text citations (within your writing) point the reader to the full citation in your references list. Both are needed.

Citation ≠ Bibliography: A bibliography may include sources you consulted but didn't directly cite, while the references list is specifically for cited works.

Writing Effective Research Papers: A Guide

Research papers aren't merely about having brilliant ideas – they're about effectively communicating those ideas. Strong writing allows you to showcase the value and rigor of your work.

Is Effective Writing Alone Sufficient for a Successful Research Paper?

No. Strong writing is vital but not a substitute for the core components of research. Consider this:

Even brilliant findings get lost in poor writing: Disorganized papers, unclear sentences, or misuse of discipline-specific terms hinder the reader from grasping your insights.

Writing is intertwined with research: The process of writing helps you clarify your own thinking, refine your arguments, and identify potential weaknesses in your logic.

Tips for Academic Writing

Here's how to elevate your research paper writing:

Define Your Terms: especially if using specialized jargon or complex concepts.

Favor Active Voice: Use strong verbs and keep the subject of your sentences clear. (Example: "The study demonstrates..." rather than "It is demonstrated...")

Avoid Ambiguity: Choose precise language to leave no room for misinterpretation.

Transitions Are Your Friend: Guide the reader smoothly between ideas and sections using signpost words and phrases.

Logical Structure: Your paper's organization (introduction, methods, etc.) should have an intuitive flow.

One Idea per Paragraph: Avoid overly dense paragraphs. Break down complex points for readability.

Strong Argumentation

Thesis as Roadmap: Your central thesis should be apparent throughout the paper. Each section should clearly connect back to it.

Strong Evidence: Use reliable data and examples to support your claims.

Anticipate Counterarguments: Show you've considered alternative viewpoints by respectfully addressing and refuting them.

Additional Tips

Read widely in your field: Analyze how successful papers are structured and how arguments are developed.

Revise relentlessly: Give yourself time to step away from your draft and return with fresh eyes.

Seek Feedback: Ask peers, instructors, or a writing center tutor to review your work for clarity and logic.

Conclusion: Integrating the Components of Research Papers for Academic Excellence

The journey of writing a research paper is truly transformative. By mastering each component, from a rigorously crafted hypothesis to a meticulously compiled reference list, you develop the essential skills of critical thinking, communication, and scholarly inquiry. It's important to remember that these components are not isolated; they form a powerful, synergistic whole.

Let the process of writing research papers empower you. Embrace the challenge of synthesizing information, developing strong arguments, and communicating your findings with clarity and precision. Celebrate your dedication to the pursuit of knowledge and the contributions you make to your academic community and your own intellectual growth.

Try Jenni for free today

Create your first piece of content with Jenni today and never look back

How to Write the Introduction to a Scientific Paper?

• Open Access
• First Online: 24 October 2021

Cite this chapter

You have full access to this open access chapter

• Samiran Nundy 4 ,
• Atul Kakar 5 &
• Zulfiqar A. Bhutta 6  

64k Accesses

143 Altmetric

An Introduction to a scientific paper familiarizes the reader with the background of the issue at hand. It must reflect why the issue is topical and its current importance in the vast sea of research being done globally. It lays the foundation of biomedical writing and is the first portion of an article according to the IMRAD pattern ( I ntroduction, M ethodology, R esults, a nd D iscussion) [1].

I once had a professor tell a class that he sifted through our pile of essays, glancing at the titles and introductions, looking for something that grabbed his attention. Everything else went to the bottom of the pile to be read last, when he was tired and probably grumpy from all the marking. Don’t get put at the bottom of the pile, he said. Anonymous

You have full access to this open access chapter,  Download chapter PDF

Similar content being viewed by others

The Introduction Section

Abstract and Keywords

Writing and publishing a scientific paper

1 what is the importance of an introduction.

An Introduction to a scientific paper familiarizes the reader with the background of the issue at hand. It must reflect why the issue is topical and its current importance in the vast sea of research being done globally. It lays the foundation of biomedical writing and is the first portion of an article according to the IMRAD pattern ( I ntroduction, M ethodology, R esults, a nd D iscussion) [ 1 ].

It provides the flavour of the article and many authors have used phrases to describe it for example—'like a gate of the city’ [ 2 ], ‘the beginning is half of the whole’ [ 3 ], ‘an introduction is not just wrestling with words to fit the facts, but it also strongly modulated by perception of the anticipated reactions of peer colleagues’, [ 4 ] and ‘an introduction is like the trailer to a movie’. A good introduction helps captivate the reader early.

2 What Are the Principles of Writing a Good Introduction?

A good introduction will ‘sell’ an article to a journal editor, reviewer, and finally to a reader [ 3 ]. It should contain the following information [ 5 , 6 ]:

The known—The background scientific data

The unknown—Gaps in the current knowledge

Research hypothesis or question

Methodologies used for the study

The known consist of citations from a review of the literature whereas the unknown is the new work to be undertaken. This part should address how your work is the required missing piece of the puzzle.

3 What Are the Models of Writing an Introduction?

The Problem-solving model

First described by Swales et al. in 1979, in this model the writer should identify the ‘problem’ in the research, address the ‘solution’ and also write about ‘the criteria for evaluating the problem’ [ 7 , 8 ].

The CARS model that stands for C reating A R esearch S pace [ 9 , 10 ].

The two important components of this model are:

Establishing a territory (situation)

Establishing a niche (problem)

Occupying a niche (the solution)

In this popular model, one can add a fourth point, i.e., a conclusion [ 10 ].

4 What Is Establishing a Territory?

This includes: [ 9 ]

Stating the general topic and providing some background about it.

Providing a brief and relevant review of the literature related to the topic.

Adding a paragraph on the scope of the topic including the need for your study.

5 What Is Establishing a Niche?

Establishing a niche includes:

Stating the importance of the problem.

Outlining the current situation regarding the problem citing both global and national data.

Evaluating the current situation (advantages/ disadvantages).

Identifying the gaps.

Emphasizing the importance of the proposed research and how the gaps will be addressed.

Stating the research problem/ questions.

Stating the hypotheses briefly.

Figure 17.1 depicts how the introduction needs to be written. A scientific paper should have an introduction in the form of an inverted pyramid. The writer should start with the general information about the topic and subsequently narrow it down to the specific topic-related introduction.

Flow of ideas from the general to the specific

6 What Does Occupying a Niche Mean?

This is the third portion of the introduction and defines the rationale of the research and states the research question. If this is missing the reviewers will not understand the logic for publication and is a common reason for rejection [ 11 , 12 ]. An example of this is given below:

Till date, no study has been done to see the effectiveness of a mesh alone or the effectiveness of double suturing along with a mesh in the closure of an umbilical hernia regarding the incidence of failure. So, the present study is aimed at comparing the effectiveness of a mesh alone versus the double suturing technique along with a mesh.

7 How Long Should the Introduction Be?

For a project protocol, the introduction should be about 1–2 pages long and for a thesis it should be 3–5 pages in a double-spaced typed setting. For a scientific paper it should be less than 10–15% of the total length of the manuscript [ 13 , 14 ].

8 How Many References Should an Introduction Have?

All sections in a scientific manuscript except the conclusion should contain references. It has been suggested that an introduction should have four or five or at the most one-third of the references in the whole paper [ 15 ].

9 What Are the Important Points Which Should be not Missed in an Introduction?

An introduction paves the way forward for the subsequent sections of the article. Frequently well-planned studies are rejected by journals during review because of the simple reason that the authors failed to clarify the data in this section to justify the study [ 16 , 17 ]. Thus, the existing gap in knowledge should be clearly brought out in this section (Fig. 17.2 ).

How should the abstract, introduction, and discussion look

The following points are important to consider:

The introduction should be written in simple sentences and in the present tense.

Many of the terms will be introduced in this section for the first time and these will require abbreviations to be used later.

The references in this section should be to papers published in quality journals (e.g., having a high impact factor).

The aims, problems, and hypotheses should be clearly mentioned.

Start with a generalization on the topic and go on to specific information relevant to your research.

10 Example of an Introduction

11 Conclusions

An Introduction is a brief account of what the study is about. It should be short, crisp, and complete.

It has to move from a general to a specific research topic and must include the need for the present study.

The Introduction should include data from a literature search, i.e., what is already known about this subject and progress to what we hope to add to this knowledge.

Moore A. What’s in a discussion section? Exploiting 2-dimensionality in the online world. Bioassays. 2016;38(12):1185.

Article   Google Scholar  

Annesley TM. The discussion section: your closing argument. Clin Chem. 2010;56(11):1671–4.

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Bavdekar SB. Writing the discussion section: describing the significance of the study findings. J Assoc Physicians India. 2015;63(11):40–2.

PubMed   Google Scholar  

Foote M. The proof of the pudding: how to report results and write a good discussion. Chest. 2009;135(3):866–8.

Kearney MH. The discussion section tells us where we are. Res Nurs Health. 2017;40(4):289–91.

Ghasemi A, Bahadoran Z, Mirmiran P, Hosseinpanah F, Shiva N, Zadeh-Vakili A. The principles of biomedical scientific writing: discussion. Int J Endocrinol Metab. 2019;17(3):e95415.

Swales JM, Feak CB. Academic writing for graduate students: essential tasks and skills. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press; 2004.

Google Scholar  

Colombo M, Bucher L, Sprenger J. Determinants of judgments of explanatory power: credibility, generality, and statistical relevance. Front Psychol. 2017;8:1430.

Mozayan MR, Allami H, Fazilatfar AM. Metadiscourse features in medical research articles: subdisciplinary and paradigmatic influences in English and Persian. Res Appl Ling. 2018;9(1):83–104.

Hyland K. Metadiscourse: mapping interactions in academic writing. Nordic J English Stud. 2010;9(2):125.

Hill AB. The environment and disease: association or causation? Proc Royal Soc Med. 2016;58(5):295–300.

Alpert JS. Practicing medicine in Plato’s cave. Am J Med. 2006;119(6):455–6.

Walsh K. Discussing discursive discussions. Med Educ. 2016;50(12):1269–70.

Polit DF, Beck CT. Generalization in quantitative and qualitative research: myths and strategies. Int J Nurs Stud. 2010;47(11):1451–8.

Jawaid SA, Jawaid M. How to write introduction and discussion. Saudi J Anaesth. 2019;13(Suppl 1):S18–9.

Jawaid SA, Baig M. How to write an original article. In: Jawaid SA, Jawaid M, editors. Scientific writing: a guide to the art of medical writing and scientific publishing. Karachi: Published by Med-Print Services; 2018. p. 135–50.

Hall GM, editor. How to write a paper. London: BMJ Books, BMJ Publishing Group; 2003. Structure of a scientific paper. p. 1–5.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Surgical Gastroenterology and Liver Transplantation, Sir Ganga Ram Hospital, New Delhi, India

Samiran Nundy

Department of Internal Medicine, Sir Ganga Ram Hospital, New Delhi, India

Institute for Global Health and Development, The Aga Khan University, South Central Asia, East Africa and United Kingdom, Karachi, Pakistan

Zulfiqar A. Bhutta

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Open Access This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ), which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as 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 images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the chapter's Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the chapter's Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder.

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Nundy, S., Kakar, A., Bhutta, Z.A. (2022). How to Write the Introduction to a Scientific Paper?. In: How to Practice Academic Medicine and Publish from Developing Countries?. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-5248-6_17

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-5248-6_17

Published : 24 October 2021

Publisher Name : Springer, Singapore

Print ISBN : 978-981-16-5247-9

Online ISBN : 978-981-16-5248-6

eBook Packages : Medicine Medicine (R0)

Share this chapter

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

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

• Open supplemental data
• Reference Manager
• Simple TEXT file

People also looked at

Original research article, a community health worker led approach to cardiovascular disease prevention in the uk—spices-sussex (scaling-up packages of interventions for cardiovascular disease prevention in selected sites in europe and sub-saharan africa): an implementation research project.

• 1 Department of Primary Care and Public Health, Brighton and Sussex Medical School, Brighton, United Kingdom
• 2 Department of Disease Control and Environmental Health, Makerere University, Kampala, Central Region, Uganda
• 3 Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium

Background: This paper describes a UK-based study, SPICES-Sussex, which aimed to co-produce and implement a community-based cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk assessment and reduction intervention to support under-served populations at moderate risk of CVD. The objectives were to enhance stakeholder engagement; to implement the intervention in four research sites and to evaluate the use of Voluntary and Community and Social Enterprises (VCSE) and Community Health Worker (CHW) partnerships in health interventions.

Methods: A type three hybrid implementation study design was used with mixed methods data. This paper represents the process evaluation of the implementation of the SPICES-Sussex Project. The evaluation was conducted using the RE-AIM framework.

Results: Reach: 381 individuals took part in the risk profiling questionnaire and forty-one women, and five men participated in the coaching intervention. Effectiveness: quantitative results from intervention participants showed significant improvements in CVD behavioural risk factors across several measures. Qualitative data indicated high acceptability, with the holistic, personalised, and person-centred approach being valued by participants. Adoption: 50% of VCSEs approached took part in the SPICES programme, The CHWs felt empowered to deliver high-quality and mutually beneficial coaching within a strong project infrastructure that made use of VCSE partnerships. Implementation: Co-design meetings resulted in local adaptations being made to the intervention. 29 (63%) of participants completed the intervention. Practical issues concerned how to embed CHWs in a health service context, how to keep engaging participants, and tensions between research integrity and the needs and expectations of those in the voluntary sector. Maintenance: Several VCSEs expressed an interest in continuing the intervention after the end of the SPICES programme.

Conclusion: Community-engagement approaches have the potential to have positively impact the health and wellbeing of certain groups. Furthermore, VCSEs and CHWs represent a significant untapped resource in the UK. However, more work needs to be done to understand how links between the sectors can be bridged to deliver evidence-based effective alternative preventative healthcare. Reaching vulnerable populations remains a challenge despite partnerships with VCSEs which are embedded in the community. By showing what went well and what did not, this project can guide future work in community engagement for health.

1 Introduction

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is among the most prevalent, costly to treat, and deadly medical issues in the world ( 1 ). As part of the continual effort to combat CVD, greater emphasis is being placed on prevention. This often takes the form of behavioural or lifestyle change, focusing on the reduction of risk factors (e.g., hypertension, poor diet, obesity). Reducing these risk factors using evidence-based interventions not only works to lower rates of CVD, but also impacts rates of a variety of other medical issues, including susceptibility to severe COVID-19 infection ( 2 ), many common Noncommunicable Diseases (NCDs) including Type 2 diabetes and a wide range of cancers ( 3 ). Furthermore these preventative interventions are less expensive than reactionary care and can lower the treatment burden on strained medical systems ( 4 ).

Community-Based Participatory Research (CBPR) and Community Engagement (CE) have grown increasingly popular as potential methods to engender sustainable, long-term change in communities—particularly those communities under-served by existing medical systems and/or those at heightened risk of CVD ( 5 ). One's behaviour is influenced by their environment and the community they live in, meaning that tapping into a community's resources can be effective in changing lifestyle behaviour as well as having impacts on the wider community ( 6 , 7 ). The use of community-based practices fits within the growing South-North collaboration that this project joins as part of an international collaboration known as “Scaling-up Packages of Interventions for Cardiovascular disease prevention in selected sites in Europe and Sub-Saharan Africa: An implementation research project” (SPICES). In the Low- and Middle-Income countries (LMIC) there is evidence for the successful implementation of evidence-based community-based interventions in increasing knowledge of, and changing behaviour related to, CVD ( 8 ) however their use in the Global North is less well tested or understood ( 9 ).

In the UK, the flagship intervention to address preventative health issues is the National Health Service's (NHS) Health Check initiative, which is free to individuals ages 40–76 and which assesses risk for long term health conditions including CVD ( 10 ). Following initial assessment by a health professional, patients are advised on a course of action which often includes some degree of preventative prescribing to address behavioural risk factors ( 11 ). Just under half of eligible individuals accepts a first health-checks appointment (44.2%)—it is associated with increased detection of CVD risk, but uptake is skewed by several demographic factors (principally, age, gender, and socio-demographics), and it has struggled to create change in underserved groups ( 12 , 13 ). Marginalised coastal communities in Sussex face overall below-average healthy-life expectancy ( 14 ). This, alongside heightening inequality and the impact of COVID-19, has left some communities in Sussex significantly deprived in terms of access and engagement with health services ( 15 ). People in these communities experience transgenerational poverty, precarity, and lifestyle behaviours ingrained into the communities that lead many to be at higher risk for CVD. CBPR and CE models have the potential to lead to improved health and health behaviours among disadvantaged populations if designed properly and implemented through effective community consultation and participation ( 16 ).

CBPR and CE offer the chance to bring lessons from effective programmes in the Global South and apply them to programmes in the Global North. Community-based strategies to promote evidence-based preventative health interventions using Community Health Workers (CHWs) are often more established in the Global South where more tightly knit communities and established community health programmes fulfil a range of public health needs ( 17 , 18 ). CHWs interventions are a form of “task-sharing” intervention in which responsibility and power is shared between professional health workers and communities which have been proposed to effectively manage non-communicable disease risk ( 19 ). Lay Community Health Workers are individuals who are trained to perform of health-related functions but lack a formal professional health education. They can provide links between local communities and health care institutions thereby building and on and developing the social capital that already exists in communities ( 20 ). Although there is plenty of evidence communicating the importance and usefulness of these methods (the “what”), there remains a lack of attention given to how to do it . This article joins the work and voices attempting to begin filling that lacuna.

Within the literature on CBPR and CE, a handful of common themes emerge. The first is a push for human-centred research design ( 21 , 22 ). Yardley et al. ( 23 ) focused on this idea in their “person-based” approach to digital health interventions, where they recommended a “focus on understanding and accommodating the perspectives of the people who will use the intervention” ( 24 ). Hopkins and Rippon's ( 25 ) “asset-based” approach to CE interventions recommends recognising and adapting to the need, wants, and strengths already present in the community. Particularly the strengths, or “assets” already present in the community provide an opportunity for projects to use those assets. Such an implementation approach requires flexibility and adaptability, as well as deep involvement with the community. The second theme builds on the first, with the idea that not only should project design be person-centred, but those participants and other stakeholders in the community should be involved at every level of project planning through co-design. Yardley et al. ( 23 ) included this as a key element of their paper, writing that people from the target population should be involved in project development as well as at every stage of the intervention. Similarly, Berrera et al. ( 26 ) emphasise the need to adapt all projects to the cultural context of the community. This insight speaks to the third theme, continuous evaluation ( 27 ). As the needs of the community will be ever-shifting, so must the project adapt to those needs continually. Instead of designated periods of evaluation, a shift to continual processes of qualitative evaluation is called for to identify and adjust to the needs of the community. These processes require elevated levels of trust and participation from the community, which has its own challenges. Trust especially takes significant time and resources to develop and is an under-studied area of community engagement ( 28 ).

The SPICES-Sussex project was carried out from January 2019 and aimed to answer the following overarching research question: How can Community Health Workers (CHW) CVD prevention interventions, that have been used in the Global South, be developed, and implemented in a Global North setting and what barriers and enablers exist to their implementation? The project began with a situational analysis which included an exploration of the views and experiences of the local community with regards to CVD health and Community Health Workers and early stakeholder mapping of the research sites which was carried out between 2019 and 2020 ( 29 , 30 ).

The primary aim of the current paper is to provide a comprehensive examination of the project's implementation including complementary mixed methods analyses according to the Reach Effectiveness-Adoption Implementation and Maintenance (RE-AIM) framework ( 31 ). The secondary aims of the project are to inform future CE projects what worked (and did not work) for our project and to tie insights from our project to broader discussions in the discipline. The project is based on a protocol published in 2020 prior to the onset of COVID and was conducted through the period of the COVID-19 pandemic ( 29 ). Subsequently, several aspects of the original protocol were adapted to make implementation feasible within the constraints of this period (see Supplementary Appendix 2 ).

2.1 Study design

The project uses a type 3 hybrid implementation design ( 29 ) meaning that the primary aim of the research was to determine utility of an implementation intervention/strategy whilst the secondary aim was to assess clinical outcomes associated with the implementation trial. This means that we focused on understanding what barriers and enablers existed for the project's implementation and the context within which it operated. Effectiveness of the intervention remained important, however we were primarily interested in how and why it did (or did not) work. The project was carried out at four geographic research sites within Sussex (see Section 2.3 ) and implementation was conducted on an iterative basis from research site to research site broadly following the Medical Research Council's (MRC) framework for the development and implementation of complex interventions ( 32 ). The research team developed and then began delivering the intervention at each site before moving onto the next. At each site the following stages were carried out: (1) Development: this included stakeholder mapping, formation of implementation partners, and codesign/local adaptation of the intervention [covered in the study's pre-implementation paper ( 30 )]; (2) Implementation: this included the delivery of the CHW intervention at the research sites and collection of mixed method data pertaining to effectiveness and stakeholder experiences, and (3) Evaluation: this included the analysis of the mixed method data in line with the MRC guidance on analysis complex interventions.

2.2 Research site and voluntary and community sector enterprise partner selection

Four study sites were selected across East Sussex by identifying Middle Layer Super Output Area (MSOA) postcodes with high levels of deprivation according to the Indices of Multiple Deprivation (IMD) ( 33 ). Selection of the research sites was based on the pre-implementation community mapping phase of the project ( 30 ). Following on from CBPR practices, VCSEs and Volunteer Coordinators (VCs) were recruited to co-design and deliver the implementation strategy at each of the research sites.

VCSEs organisations were recruited as partners at each research site. The intervention was primarily run through these organisations and a paid staff member was recruited at each organisation. Their responsibilities included, CHW management, and participant recruitment. They also had a role in local adaptation activities. VCSE organisations were eligible to take part in the organisations if they were based in the research site, if they had interests and existing activities that aligned with the project's goals (CVD risk reduction and community development), and if they had existing experience of volunteer recruitment and management.

2.3 Community health worker recruitment and training

The aim was for each site to recruit a pool of five to eight CHWs. As part of this each site was asked for input into local CHW recruitment flyers, which were shared on VCSE websites and social media pages and shared on social media via existing CHWs at the VCSEs. CHWs were recruited through intermediary organisation recruitment via the VCSE partner organisation. The project was also advertised at a Virtual Volunteer Fair. Local contacts and existing volunteer pools at the VCSEs meant that the target number of CHWs was rapidly recruited at each site. CHWs were eligible to take part in the intervention if they were over 18 years of age, if they lived within the research site (determined by postcode), and if they had some kind of pre-existing relationship with the VCSE partner organisation (i.e., as a volunteer).

Potential CHWs who expressed an interest in the project were invited to attend an induction to the project, and then the local adaptation co-design meeting. Those who decided they would like to become a CHW then went on to receive five online, group training sessions (each of which lasted for 2 h, 10 h in total): an introductory session, a session covering project policies, heart health and the structure of the intervention, and three sessions on behaviour change techniques. These training sessions were developed and delivered by an external organisation (National Centre for Behaviour Change) specifically for the project after a consultation and planning process with the research team. Before the onset of the intervention at each site CHWs made various recommendations in the local adaptation meetings on the design of the training programme. These included providing information on listening techniques, engaging, and managing resistance, providing simple health information, using accessible language, using different starting points depending on the CHW's background knowledge and experience, training on conducting coaching virtually, and providing a training handbook. A Volunteer coordinator (VC) was recruited at each site. This VC was a trained and experience health coach (KFS) and provided training support and guidance through monthly group training support sessions in addition to the initial 10 h training block the received prior to the intervention onset. These monthly training and support sessions were organised into specific themes and agendas that were set with the CHW participants.

2.4 Local adaptation

Elements of the evidence-based intervention were tailored to the individuals and their community in the stakeholder-mapping phase using qualitative interviews, workshops, and focus groups with a range of stakeholders across the study site ( 30 ). Further rounds of local adaptation were carried out with VCs and CHWs at each of the research sites to tailor to individuals and their community context through iterative co-design workshops ( 34 ). CHWs and VCSE also agreed on a “volunteer charter” during the co-design session. This was a list of principles, behaviours, and practices upon which guided interactions between research staff, CHWs, VCSE and participants. The charter was designed to ensure that the practices of the project aligned with the principles of the CHW and partner organisation.

2.5 Participant recruitment and screening questionnaire

Participants (who received coaching) were eligible to take part in the eligibility screening if they lived in, or adjacent to, the study site's postcode and if they were aged eighteen or older. Participant recruitment was also based on intermediary organisation recruitment, community outreach, paid social media advertisement (through Meta™), gatekeeper and snowball sampling. Gatekeeper recruitment was conducted when interacting with a relevant statutory or non-statutory service provider (i.e., a fitness/weight loss group leader) and involved asking them to recommend the intervention to their members or to recommend participants who may be interested in taking part. Snowball sampling involved asking participants who participated in the study to sending email invitations to their social group. A social media recruitment strategy was undertaken to recruit people from the local area to the risk profiling survey to supplement the community-based recruitment through the VCSE partners. Social media was conducted on Facebook via paid advertisement in four waves of recruitment which took place over 1–2 weeks at each site. The advert targeted people who were 35+ and over and to people with 5 km of each research site. Messages were changed regularly from a list of recruitment messages drafted with CHWs during co-design sessions. Additionally, CHWs and VCSE participants were asked to send recruitment emails to any social or professional networks they thought would be interested in taking part. We did not record where participants were recruited.

Screening and risk profiling for the CVD coaching was carried out using the validated non-laboratory based INTERHEART questionnaire, presented online, for all participants that expressed an interest in the study ( 35 ). This questionnaire assessed modifiable and non-modifiable CVD risk factors and categorised participants as either “Low,” “Moderate.” Or “High” risk. See the protocol paper for further information on the INTERHEART risk profiling; for more information on the screening questionnaire, see the study protocol paper ( 29 , 35 ). Questionnaire data were collected and managed using Research Electronic Data Capture (REDCap) electronic data capture tools hosted at the University of Antwerp ( 36 ). Participants were considered to be eligible for the intervention if they were aged eighteen or over, if they lived within the research site (determined by postcode), and if they were categorised as “Moderate” risk of CVD according to the INTERHEART questionnaire. High risk participants were not included as their needs were considered to be too high for a pilot study involving CHWs. Eligible participants were then emailed by the research team with an invitation to take part in the CVD coaching intervention. After recruitment for the intervention was closed for each site, an online questionnaire survey was sent to eligible participants to gather information the reasons for not accepting the invitation to the intervention. Open response questions were used which the research team later categorised into codes.

2.6 The CVD prevention coaching intervention

The coaching intervention was based on motivational interviewing techniques which are promoted by the European commission on cardiovascular disease prevention in clinical practice ( 37 ) and which include techniques such as Open questions, Affirmation, Reflective listening and Summary reflections (OARS) ( 38 , 39 ). The use of these Behaviour Change Techniques (BCTs) used during the intervention were based on five target behaviours highlighted by the World Health Organisation including: reduce/cease smoking, increase moderate physical activity, reduce the fat, salt, and sugar content of the diet, increase fibre, oily fish (or alternatives), fruit, and vegetable content of the diet, reduce sedentary hours. The intervention involved six, one-hour long coaching sessions between participants and CHWs which were delivered every two weeks. Participants were also considered to have completed the intervention if they only completed three sessions and then notified the team of their withdrawal from the intervention.

The study team included two participant co-ordinators (PCs) who managed the participant journey through the intervention, sending welcome emails, questionnaires, and invitations to post-intervention interviews, and co-ordination between participants and CHWs to book coaching sessions. Reminders of appointments were also sent to CHWs and participants one week and two days before the session. Participants and CHWs were matched, based on gender preference and availability, and supported throughout the coaching intervention the PCs. CHWs were provided with guidance, resources, and signposting information throughout the intervention but were also given the flexibility to deliver the coaching in a way that suited them and their participant(s). Initially, counselling and goalsetting were based on their individual item INTERHEART assessment scores. Participants and CHWs were then encouraged to create an action plan with appropriate goal setting for the behaviours they wanted to change (e.g., diet, exercise habits). The goals were set in relation to when, where, and how they would undertake the behaviour, e.g., when the physical activity will be performed, where it will be performed, how often it will be performed (i.e., in a group or using specific equipment). CHWs helped participants to analyse any factors which might influence their ability to achieve the goals and to generate strategies which could help them overcome these barriers using problem solving. Full details of the participant journey through the intervention are given in Supplementary Appendix 2 in the Supplementary Material . All coaching was conducted virtually using Zoom™ to host and monitor coaching sessions and Microsoft OneDrive to store, recruit, and communicate written and visual resources with CHWs and participants. Monitoring in Zoom calls was called out by the PCs who checked whether both the participant began and ended the coaching session. If either the participants or CHW did not join, the PC could join the call to help the attendee. Feedback was obtained from the participant about the coaching session through emails after the session and by inviting participants to a follow-up interview after the intervention (see qualitative evaluation).

2.7 Evaluation

The evaluation was underpinned by the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance (RE-AIM) framework ( 31 ) which allows for an understanding of the multifaceted and interactive effects of personal, social, and environmental factors that determine behaviour; and for identifying behavioural and organisational leverage points and intermediaries for health promotion within organisations and communities. RE-AIM has been used to evaluate programs and setting in public health and community settings and is thought to be particularly useful when evaluate interventions in “real-world” settings ( 40 , 41 ). It has also been used to evaluate public health interventions which make use of community health workers in community-based setting ( 42 – 44 ). Results are made up of quantitative measures from the participant questionnaires, qualitative interviews with the participants, the CHWs, VCSE partners, and the research team. Primary quantitative outcome measures included implementation measures such as uptake and engagement and the pre/post changes to the self-report CVD behavioural questions which included the following three questionnaires: (1) the INTERHEART CVD risk questionnaire collected during the screening process was used as the baseline and collected again after completion of the intervention. (2) Physical activity levels were measured using the International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ) ( 45 ). The IPAQ is an internationally validated instrument to capture information about weekly physical activity habits, behaviours, and routines. (3) Diet was assessed using a 20-item questionnaire based on a modified version of the UK Diet and Diabetes Questionnaire ( 46 ), a brief food frequency questionnaire designed to assess conformity to healthy eating guidelines, and to assist in the setting of dietary goals. It was used to estimate the number of portions eaten daily or weekly of fruit and vegetables, oily fish (or alternative), and foods high in fat, salt, and sugar, what proportion of the time wholegrain cereal products were chosen, weekly units of alcohol consumed and the frequency of binge drinking. Due to the small sample sizes and non-parametric data used in this study, Wilcoxon Sign test was used to evaluate for differences in continuous variables whilst McNemar's test was used for binary categorical data. The pre-intervention assessment of the primary outcome measures was sent to participants before they participated in the intervention (no participant could begin the intervention without completing the baseline measures). Post intervention primary outcome measures were collected after their participant in the intervention was completed.

Focus groups and one-to-one interviews were conducted with four groups of stakeholders: (1) VCSE partners; (2) CHWs; (3) members of the research team, (4) participants in the intervention. Individual interviews were conducted with VCs, members of the research team, and participants, while data from the CHWs was collected in focus groups. Discussion guides for VCs, CHWs and members of the research team all included questions on the respondents' role within the project, the process of community engagement, barriers, and facilitators the implementation process, recommendations for the future and sustainability. Discussion guides for participant interviews included questions on how and why participants became involved in the project, their experience of the health coaching, and their views on the impact and usefulness of the project. Interviews and focus groups were conducted online using Zoom or MS Teams. The analysis was conducted by TGJ, IR, and RD and using qualitative framework analysis based on the components of the RE-AIM framework. Following data collection interviews and focus groups were transcribed by a professional transcription service and TGJ, IR, and RD familiarised themselves with the full set of data. They then undertook line-by-line coding of the data in NVivo using descriptive primary codes which were then interlinked with secondary codes. These secondary codes were then organised under the five elements of the RE-AIM framework (Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, Maintenance). The analysis was interpreted, findings were synthesised with reference to the stakeholder group and theme descriptions were produced with supplementary illustrative quotes.

The Reach of the intervention was assessed through recruitment rates for the VCSE partners, CHWs and Intervention participants and qualitative data collected from the VCSE partners, and the research team was used to understand barriers and facilitators to recruitment. Effectiveness was assessed during the primary outcome measures and barriers and facilitators to effectiveness were assessed through qualitative interviews with the participants and CHWs. Adoption was at the setting level was determined through assessment of the retention of VCSE partners and qualitatively through interviews with VCSE partners and the research team. At the individual level, Adoption was assessed through CHW retention rates and qualitatively assessed through interviews with the research team and the CHWs. Implementation was assessed qualitatively through interviews with the intervention participants focusing on intervention fidelity. Maintenance was assessed at the setting level qualitatively through interviews with VCSE partners and the research team and through a report of the status of the intervention after 6 months. No individual level maintenance data is reported. A description of the data sources which contributed to each component of the RE-AIM framework is listed in Table 1 .

Table 1 . Description of data source used to evaluate the SPICES-Sussex intervention for each of the RE-AIM components.

Ethical approval for this research was obtained from Brighton and Sussex Medical School's Research Governance and Ethics Committee (R-GEC) (application reference: ER/DG241/17BSMS9E3G/1). This ethics review covered the methods described herein, key research materials, and recruitment and consent protocols for both intervention participants and staff/CHW interviews. Due to the changes imposed on the project by COVID-19 (see Supplementary Appendix 2 ) and because of minor adaptations from research site to research sites; several minor amendments were made (final application reference: ER/BSMS9E3G/6).

Informed consent was obtained in three ways from study participants depending on the nature of their participation. (1) Online screening questionnaire: these participants were presented with an approved information sheet on the first page of the online screening questionnaire, they were then provided with an Informed Consent Form (ICF) which they had to sign with a digital signature. (2) Intervention participants: just prior to participation and data collection participants met with a research staff member to review the information sheet and to sign the ICF if they agreed to participate, consent was sought again for those intervention participants who took part in a post-intervention interview. (3) CHW and research staff members: participants were sent the information sheet and consent form several days before their interview and were asked to sign and return the ICF prior to their interview appointment.

3.1 Participant characteristics

Risk profiling data was collected from 381 participants (Females: 310, Males: 71; mean (SD) age = 58 (12.39) years. Forty-Six participants began the intervention (39 Females, 7 Males; age = 58 (11.94) years. Sixteen participants took part in one-to-one interviews at the end of the intervention (thirteen females and two males, aged 32–67 years). Seven members of the research team (6 females, 1 male), and four VCSE partners (3 females and 1 male) took part in the research team interviews. Four focus groups with a total of thirteen participants (10 females and 3 males) were conducted with CHWs from each of the research sites. Thirteen participants (no gender data collected) took part in the post-intervention questionnaire for non-participants.

3.2 Analytical framework

The remainder of these findings are organised into RE-AIM dimensions with various quantitative and qualitative methods used to evidence each dimension, see Table 1 for a description of each of the data sources. Table 2 summarises concordance and discordance with expectations of the intervention [as described in the study protocol ( 29 )] in line with the RE-AIM framework. Supplementary Appendix 3 summarises changes to the study design from the published study protocol . Throughout this section participant codes are used to attribute quotations and references to specific terminology to a respondent. The codes identify the respondent as either a member of the Research team (RT), VCSE partners (VCSE), Community Health Worker (CHW) or Participants (PP). For VCSEs, CHWs and PPs references to their sites are also made (EB, HA, NH, HG). All codes refer to gender and (F/M), and their number within each respondent category.

Table 2 . Description of concordance/discordance with our pre-implementation expectations of the SPICES intervention for each of the RE-AIM components ( 29 ).

4.1 Recruitment of voluntary and community sector enterprise partners

A community-mapping exercise was carried out during the pre-implementation phase of the project ( 30 ) in which three partner organisations were identified across three research sites in East Sussex (Hastings, East Brighton, and Newhaven). All these organisations were volunteer based community organisations with a focus on local community development and improving health, with the Hastings organisations being focused on health and wellbeing. During the intervention set up phase, the East Brighton organisations dropped out of the study due to the impact of Covid-19 whilst the Hastings, and Newhaven organisations were carried forward to deliver the intervention. The East Brighton organisations helped the research team to develop links with a health and wellbeing organisation that was associated with a local General Practice (GP) clinic in East Brighton. Finally, a fourth research site was identified in West Hove and a final VCSE partner was identified. This organisation was a local community development organisation for the area. In total four VCSE organisations were partnered with across four research sites. In each site a VC was recruited from the partner organisation to deliver the intervention with the research team.

4.2 Community health worker recruitment

The research team and VCSE partners recruited 38 individuals who attended the introductory CHW meetings (Gender: 27 females and 11 males, NH n  = 7, EB n  = 13, HG n  = 10, HA n  = 8). Twenty-seven of these individuals completed the full training for CHWs (20 females and 7 males; NH n  = 5, EB n  = 9, HG n  = 7, HA n  = 6).

4.3 Participant recruitment

Social media recruitment had a wider reach to potential participants compared with gatekeeper recruitment, however, several participants did not complete the REDCap screening questions, had a poor understanding of the study, or were not part of the study's target population. VCSE gatekeepers yielded poor recruitment results apart from when a newsletter with a particularly large reach was used. Social media was the primary strategy for recruiting participants to the study. In total the messages reached 13,086 individuals across four waves of recruitment and of these 472 (3.6%) engaged with post by clicking on the survey link. Of those who clicked on the link 80% were female and 20% were male.

The INTERHEART screening data is shown in Figure 1 and Supplementary Appendix 1 for all those who completed the screening questionnaire ( N  = 381), participants who started the intervention and then withdrew ( N  = 17), and participants who completed the intervention and on whom we have full data ( n  = 27). Of the CVD risk factors measured by the INTERHEART screening tool, the two most prevalent were stress (reported by 61% of those screened, 56% of those who started the intervention, and 78% of those who went on to complete), and physical inactivity (reported by 55%, 81% and 64% respectively).

Figure 1 . Primary outcome measures for the “Reach” and “Effectiveness” components of the SPICES-Sussex intervention. ( A ) The proportion of “Low”, “Medium”, and “High” risk participants identified during the Interheart risk profiling questionnaire; ( B ) the mean Interheart score pre and post intervention for those who completed the intervention, p value from paired t -tests; ( C ) shows the % change regularly of dietary behaviours from pre/post intervention UKDDQ score, within-group t -tests; ( D ) the change in the % of intervention participants classified as having either low or medium/high activity levels pre and post intervention, p value from McNemar's test.

Forty-six participants took part in the CVD coaching intervention across the four research sites, all of whom completed the pre-intervention quantitative questionnaires. Sixty-three percent completed the full coaching intervention, and one participant withdrew from the project after three months. We had full data for twenty-seven of twenty-nine participants who completed the full 6-month coaching intervention (note: these participants have been removed from Supplementary Appendix 1 , n  = 2), Participants' characteristics are summarised in Table 3 . Several participants withdrew (37%), reasons given for withdrawing were: ill health/poor mental health/ill health in the family (13%); the intervention was considered a poor fit for the participant/did not meet their expectations/they did not need the intervention (9%); other commitments got in the way/they were too busy with their normal lives (7%); repeated non-attendance at planned coaching sessions from the CHW (4%); did not get on well with CHW (2%), language issues (2%).

Table 3 . Facilitators and barriers to reach and recruitment.

Due to low initial recruitment rates, the recruitment areas were expanded and included more affluent adjacent areas. The proportion of those completing the screening questionnaire and of those who went on to start the intervention who were in the target population (i.e., had an address with a postcode and IMD in the most deprived three deciles) was 30% in both cases. Despite recruitment being gender neutral and without gender/sex related parameters on social media our risk profiling questionnaire recruited far more women than men (77% female, 23% male, see Supplementary Appendix 1 ). This issue was carried forward to the main intervention in which only five of the forty-six who initially took part in the study were male.

4.4 Reasons for non-participation

Reasons given for not participating included missing or not receiving an invitation to take part ( n  = 4), lack of time due to responsibilities and commitments ( n  = 4), not feeling like the intervention was a good fit for them and their circumstances ( n  = 2), not being happy with the CHW allocated to them ( n  = 2), being reluctant to take part in online activities due to a lack of privacy at home ( n  = 1). When asked what would have made them more likely to participate the most common response was more clarity/detail on what was involved ( n  = 3).

4.5 Facilitators and barriers to reach

Intervention participants referred to several intervention components that functioned as facilitators or barriers to the reach of the intervention. These barriers and facilitators were organised into themes which include: (1) Experience of CHW recruitment; (2) The value of community partnerships; (3) The experience of the risk profiling questionnaire; (4) Impacts of COVID-19. These barriers and facilitators are described in more detail in Table 3 and illustrative quotes are provided.

5 Effectiveness

5.1 primary outcomes measures.

For those participants who completed the intervention, the before and after measures of cardiovascular risk, diet, physical activity, and readiness to change were compared (see Figure 1 and Supplementary Appendix 1 ). Mean INTERHEART score fell significantly from 11.7 to 9.9, taking the mean to within the low-risk range. There were also significant improvements in the self-reported dietary measures including: an increase in the proportion of time wholegrain foods were chosen, and the daily portions of fruit and vegetables eaten, and decreases in the consumption of fatty, salty, and sugary food. No changes were observed in the consumption of oily fish. Self-reported levels of physical inactivity also dropped over the course of the intervention with the proportion of those classified in the “low” physical activity category falling from 40% to 7%. Additionally, the self-reported levels of participants' “readiness to change” during the intervention increased from 3.6 to 4.5, which indicates increased levels of motivation as a result of the intervention.

5.2 Participant reported facilitators and barriers to the effectiveness

Intervention participants referred to several intervention components that functioned as facilitators or barriers to the effectiveness of the intervention. These barriers and facilitators were organised into themes which include: (1) accountability—the ways CHWs kept participants accountable about their health behaviours; (2) connection and community—the importance of making human connections with the CHWs and feelings of community togetherness; (3) judgement-free—the importance of a judgement-free intervention experience; (4) motivation and support—the coaching role that the intervention took in the lives of participants; (5) personalisation—the feeling that the intervention was adapted to their own needs and experiences; (6) reflection—the value of reflecting on experiences during the coaching intervention; (7) self-efficacy—the ways in which CHWs made participants feel in control of their health behaviours; (8) gradual or modest impact—the feeling that the intervention largely lead to modest impacts (9) generic or inappropriate advice—the feeling that the information provided during the coaching was too generic, obvious, or inappropriate to their needs. These barriers and facilitators are described in more detail in Table 4 and illustrative quotes are provided.

Table 4 . Facilitators and barriers to intervention effectiveness.

6.1 Retention of voluntary and community sector enterprise partnerships (setting level)

Of the six VCSE organisation engaged with during the pre-implementation phase of the project, four went on to be VCSE partner organisations during the implementation phase. Disruption and staff pressures resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic were a significant barrier to recruiting partner VCSEs, with two organisations who had been involved in initial discussions deciding not to proceed for this reason. Furthermore, interruptions to communication caused by COVID-19 and research team changes led to a loss of trust and engagement in some cases. One organisation which had a group of people ready to volunteer at the beginning of the project later withdrew as this group had fragmented due to COVID-19-related delays and substantial staffing changes that took place just prior to the implementation phase between 2019 and 2020. Other factors impacting on VCSE recruitment included the availability of funding, and issues with recruiting staff to the VC role. After one of the VCSE partners dropped out of the study just prior to the implementation phase, the same organisation linked the research team with another organisation who eventually functioned as VCSE partners for the implementation phase. The need to develop trust, and having the time to achieve this, was stated by several members of the research team as being key to recruiting partner VCSEs. Quality of communication was also felt to be especially important.

6.2 Facilitators of voluntary and community sector enterprise partnerships (setting level)

VCSES and research team members referred to several intervention components that functioned as facilitators or barriers to setting level adoption. These barriers and facilitators were organised into themes which include: (1) Trust—the importance of developing trust with community- partners; (2) Local Knowledge—the value of local knowledge and to delivering appropriate community care; (3) Local Skills—the value of the skills and experiences in local communities to delivering the intervention. These barriers and facilitators are described in more detail in Table 5 and illustrative quotes are provided.

Table 5 . Facilitators and barriers to intervention setting level adoption.

6.3 Retention of community health workers (individual level)

Of the twenty-seven CHWs who were recruited and trained to be a part of the intervention, twenty-one went on to deliver one or more session as an active CHW (Gender: 15 females and 6 males NH n  = 5, EB n  = 6 HG n  = 5, HA n  = 5). Each of these CHWs completed the intervention with at least one participant and the maximum number of participants who completed the intervention with one CHW was three.

6.4 Community health worker training needs feedback (individual level)

After training sessions in our first site, a short questionnaire was conducted with CHWs who attended the training in the formof one-to-one discussions with the training coordinator and the research team. Questions were asked about the anticipated barriers that CHWs thought they would face during the coaching as well as key training needs. Anticipated barriers and challenges during the project included: a sense of mistrust amongst participants, issues of poverty and deprivation, triggers, and sensitivities to the experiences of participants (i.e., trauma or addition triggers). The key training needs identified included: the sharing of personal stories to empower participants, how to set achievable health goals, preparing CHWs with tools to challenge the participant in a supportive way, improving CHW confidence, and advice on how to communicate CVD risk to participants in a straightforward way.

6.5 Community health worker facilitators and barriers to adoption (individual level)

CHWs referred to several intervention components that functioned as facilitators or barriers to the adoption of the intervention at the individual CHW level. These barriers and facilitators were organised into themes which include: (1) Local adaptation and Codesign Sessions; (2) CHW motivation for participating; (3) CHW experiences of the training; (4) CHW experience of the support provided to them. These barriers and facilitators are described in more detail in Table 6 and illustrative quotes are provided.

Table 6 . Facilitators and barriers to intervention individual level adoption.

7 Implementation

7.1 participant retention and fidelity.

Overall, 48% ( n  = 51) of those eligible ( n  = 106) to take part in the intervention agreed to do so and provided consent, of those 90% ( n  = 46) attended their first CHW coaching session and completed the baseline questionnaire. Of those who completed their first session 63% ( n  = 29) completed three sessions and 45% completed six sessions. For the 46 participants that began the intervention there were 276 planned program contacts of which 183 (66%) were completed. Retention and attendance data are summarised in Supplementary Appendix 2 . No data was collected on the amount of time each participant spent in their coaching session.

7.2 Participant facilitators and barriers to implementation

Intervention participants referred to several intervention components that functioned as facilitators or barriers to the implementation of the intervention. These barriers and facilitators were organised into themes which include: (1) expectations of the coaching intervention, (2) the virtual coaching sessions; (3) holistic and flexible, (4) length of the coaching session, (5) administrative support, (6) past experiences, (6) mental health. These barriers and facilitators are described in more detail in Table 7 and illustrative quotes are provided.

Table 7 . Facilitators and barriers to intervention implementation .

8 Maintenance

8.1 status of the intervention after six months.

Six months after the intervention's funding period ended the program was being continued at two of the sites. One of the sites continued it as volunteer opportunity and peer support program which was covered by their existing funding for peer support programs. A second site was awarded funding from the National Health Service to continue the intervention. The latter's findings will be reported as a program evaluation in the future.

8.2 Facilitators and barriers to maintenance

Interviewees referred to several intervention components that functioned as facilitators or barriers to the maintenance of the intervention at the setting level. These barriers and facilitators were organised into themes which include: (1) continuity of the intervention; (2) funding; (3) infrastructure These barriers and facilitators are described in more detail in Table 8 and illustrative quotes are provided.

Table 8 . Facilitators and barriers to maintenance.

9 Discussion

SPICES Sussex developed strategies to implement effective community-based CVD risk reduction interventions based on behaviour change coaching with CHWs by partnering with and leveraging the experience and influence of VCSE in four underserved communities in East Sussex, UK. Despite issues with recruitment and challenges associated with COVID-19 as well as other logistic, management, and research design challenges, the project showed clear markers of success. Participants experienced the interventions positively and many made gradual, and sometimes substantial, lifestyle changes. The quantitative results showed significant reduction in participants' CVD risk after taking part in the interventions. We think these successes were due to implementing our interventions in a flexible, personalised, and holistic way, which empowered CHWs to use their skills and experiences to aid participants. These results demonstrate how CHWs-led and community-based preventative CVD interventions could be implemented, such as those seen widely across the Global South ( 17 , 18 ). They also support a “person-based” and “asset-based” approach to community-based implementation design ( 23 , 25 ) in which the strengths and assets of communities and their members are used to promote health and wellbeing.

9.1 Intervention design

The SPICES-Sussex project used community-engagement and community health worker approaches to improve CVD health that are based on practices developed and tested in Kampala, Uganda ( 47 ). As part of the SPICES consortium these practices were adapted to several global north (UK, France, Belgium) and global south settings (South Africa). In the global south social public health approaches have long advocated for the decentralisation of healthcare to community partners and for a greater focus on prevention ( 48 ). Community-based public health practices such as task-sharing are often utilised in low-resource health systems in low-and middle income countries by recruiting and training community health workers to deliver low-intensity health intervention such as health coaching and signposting ( 49 ). In global south SPICES settings, there was greater buy-in to community-based interventions from governments and much of the trust building, and infrastructure for community health workers already exists ( 50 ). These settings, including the SPICES sites that influenced the Sussex site, often rely on voluntary or unpaid volunteers to conduct public health work in order to lower cost and to make use of existing social networks.

In resource-rich global north settings, healthcare is far more institutionalised and focused on secondary care and the infrastructure for community-based and participatory interventions is far less well developed. In the UK, most health interventions must adhere to the institutional demands of the National Health Service which presents a range of resource intensive training, recruitment, safeguarding, and management practices. There is much less history of CHWs in the UK; the role of these workers is not well understood or well defined outside of the third/voluntary sector despite recent calls for their use during the COVID-19 pandemic ( 51 ). This squeezed landscape for community-based intervention and the lack of familiarity with the role makes the development and implementation of these interventions challenging. In the global north there are increasing challenges to the volunteer nature of CHWs with researchers calling for compensation, capacity building, or payment of members of the public involved in intervention delivery of research and health interventions on moral and efficacy grounds ( 52 , 53 ). In our study, the decision not to pay CHW was made as a result of us following the SPICES approach developed in the Global South ( 17 ) and because the VCSE organisations we partnered with all had existing unpaid community volunteer programs. In our post-intervention qualitative evaluation interviews, participants and CHWs both discussed the value of paying CHWs. Furthermore, the drop in CHWs and the small number of participants they were able to take on implies that the lack of payment impacted the degree to which CHWs were able to engage with the project and therefore impacted the intervention's effectiveness and sustainability. In the UK, the NIHR now recommends that members of the public who are involved in research are properly reimbursed for their involvement and provide frequently updated guidelines on how to do so ( 54 ). In the future we argue that public health intervention that make use of CHWs should reimburse and pay them in some way for their involvement.

Community volunteers with low levels of training (10 h core training plus ongoing support), such as those used during this study, are not well-suited to complex cases or acute needs that required specialised support. In our findings, participants complained of generic, inappropriate, or obvious advice from the CHWs. Participants did not seem to prioritize the knowledge or expertise of the CHWs and instead valued the personalised, holistic, and supportive relationships that were offered by the CHWs. Participants in the intervention reported having good knowledge of what they needed to do to improve their health but struggled to do it in practice. Therefore, this kind of intervention may be well-suited to providing emotional and social support to people at risk of CVD who know what they “should” do but need a support and judgement free support mechanism to make changes.

Interviews with participants revealed a tension in the study linked to the use of an individualistic lifestyle change intervention situated within a community-based and participatory study. The study design did not address community-level, socio-economic, or environmental issues known to be vital when addressing CVD health ( 55 ). Tengland ( 56 ) argues that an individualistic lens of behavioural change can limit understandings of a person's CVD health. The result can be too narrow, as the “secondary” effects of their wider environmental conditions (i.e., powerlessness, lack of control, or lack of hope), are not considered. They further suggest that interventions should focus more on the attainment of instrumental goals, such as increased real opportunities in life. For community-based projects to grow further, they should seek to become multi-faceted by combining individualistic interventions with environment/community activities such as community education ( 57 ).

The frequency with which mental health issues were raised in discussions was notable. Those who took part in the screening reported high levels of stress and depression, and rates were even higher amongst participants taking part in the programme, furthermore, participants reported lower levels of stress and depression at the end. This may show that this type of intervention is particularly well suited to people with mental health concerns for whom talking to someone can make a real difference. This was also observed in the SPICES consortium partner sites including Brest (France) ( 58 ), and Antwerp (Belgium) ( 59 ). Most non-specialist or non-clinical people do not think of their health siloed into CVD, mental health, digestive health etc ( 60 ). Instead, one's health is perceived holistically, and mental health is often the most prominent barrier and facilitator to behaviour change.

9.2 Implementation strategy

We adopted a type 3 hybrid implementation study which focused primarily on implementation factors rather than evaluation, dropping the randomisation approach and embracing flexible more emergent iterative development and growth perspective, co-design, and contextual/place-based factors. A rigid evaluation linear approach as required for a type 1/2 design, which was initially planned, caused tensions with the community-based, participatory, and “emergent” aspects of the project and (2) the pressures imposed on our voluntary sector partners by the pandemic meant that adhering to a rigid randomisation approach was less realistic ( 7 ). The planned approach placed power in the hands of the research team which negatively affected our stakeholder relationships, and a rigid adherence to study protocols would have meant we could not effectively adapt strategies or interventions to context.

Instead we adopted a type 3 approach, which has been used to assess a wide range of preventative health and eHealth interventions which operate in communities based on participatory principles ( 61 ). In their systematic review of such strategies to implement interventions, Haldane et al. ( 62 ) highlight the importance of building mutually beneficial and trust-based relationships particularly with marginalised stakeholders, and stress the importance of developing strategies and interventions contextually whilst reporting and acting on lessons learnt throughout the project. Wildman et al. ( 63 ) argue that successful community-based projects require extensive community input, learning and adaptation captured from existing programmes to facilitate the replicability of programmes in other community contexts. With the more flexible type three approach we were able to make local adaptation to meet the need and priorities of the local community and local VCSE partner organisation thereby listening to the voices of those who are involved. This iterative approach to intervention design is similar to the “scaling-out” approach suggested by Aaron et al. ( 64 ) which advocates iterative roll-out and local adaptation in place of simply “copy and pasting” interventions across context. In reality, during SPICES-Sussex the local adaption became less flexible as the intervention became more well-developed as the internal factors became more institutionalised within the research team. However, the principle of meeting the needs and priorities of the local VCSE organisation were maintained from site to site and the team sought input from local organisations where possible.

We do not know whether the changes observed will be maintained due to the short follow up period, both at an individual level or a setting level ( 65 ), and the research lacks an economic appraisal. The short follow-up period was forced on the research team because of delays to the project caused by COVID-19 which meant our funding period was not long enough to conduct a follow up assessment. An economic appraisal was not considered appropriate because the development approach taken during the study meant that any economic appraisal was not likely to reflect real-world roll-out. In the future we would advocate for greater scaling-out to include a larger sample and an economic appraisal.

9.3 Recruitment and retention

The impacts of the restrictions placed on the people, organisations, and communities involved in this research due to COVID-19 were extensive and wide-ranging. The per-implementation phase of the research began in January of 2020 with the recruitment of an implementation team and participant recruitment was due to begin in April 2020. Following the outbreak of COVID-19 in the UK, recruitment was stopped from 16 March 2020 to 1 October 2020. By June 2020, a decision was made to fully move to remote delivery of the coaching intervention using video conferencing services.

Research recruitment and retention were near constant challenges, and all activities were significantly impacted by the Covid restrictions. We believe that the use of the INTERHEART tool, presented on the REDCap platform, acted as a barrier to recruitment as evidenced through the follow sources: (1) Over 650 participants attempted to begin the screening questionnaire and our records show those who did not complete it stopped towards the beginning or mid-way through the questions, particularly when they were asked to measure their waist/hip circumference, (2) of the 380 participants who completed the survey only approximately 100 were eligible for the intervention meaning we were selecting from a very limited pool of participants, (3) many of the participants in the per implementation interviews mentioned finding the screening tool to be “clunky” or “annoying” to use. Its overly “medical” focus, as a basis for lifestyle discussions may not have been engaging for the target audience.

Our initial recruitment strategy was to rely heavily on our VCSE partners to act as gatekeepers for recruitment, a practice commonly seen in participatory research methods ( 66 ). Whilst the VCSE partners were adept in the recruitment and management of CHWs and in the development of practices and policies, they did not seem to have the reach or access for the recruitment of large numbers of potential participants. Our experience aligns with that of Williams ( 67 ), who states that VCSE and end users' relationships are often smaller in number but deep, based on trust and protection, and covered by a range of risk related policies. Instead, we relied heavily on the use of paid for social media adverts for recruitment due to our ethics restrictions. Much like the experience of other researchers who used these tools, we found that they were low cost and reached large numbers of people but engagement with the screening and risk profiling and participant recruitment was low ( 68 ). In future studies, it may be more suitable to use social media as an adjunct to mixed recruitment strategies which make use of community outreach, primary care recruitment, and media outreach ( 69 , 70 ).

The study sample was heavily skewed towards middle-aged females and much of the sample was not considered to be from vulnerable or low socio-economic groups. Furthermore, males are under-represented in both the risk profiling and intervention samples which represents a divergence with our planned recruitment targets in which we aimed for a more representative sample. The difficulties in recruiting men and vulnerable and other “seldom heard” populations to life style interventions are well-recognised ( 71 , 72 ). Recommended strategies to improve male participation in community-based interventions include engaging with male-friendly spaces, workplace-based interventions, and incorporating activity-based programming, social-support, and group activities ( 73 , 74 ). Some of these elements were suggested during the planning phase of SPICES but were not feasible due to COVID restrictions ( 30 ).

9.4 Project infrastructure

We made the key decision to bring VCSE organisations into the research team with paid roles to foster stronger community/research partnerships as promoted by CBPR researchers ( 75 ) and the NHS's PPIE (Public and Patient Involvement and Engagement) initiatives ( 76 ). Our research shows that the VCSE sector is an untapped resource within primary and community care that has a great deal of expertise, compassion, and enthusiasm to offer health provision ( 77 ). To facilitate this community-based project, we focused on the concept of trust building throughout the intervention as described by Christopher et al. ( 78 ).

VCSE partnerships brought knowledge and expertise of their local communities, policies/practices of volunteer management and, critically, perspectives of the motivations and drivers for CHWs and communities. CHWs were empowered to bring their own skills and abilities to the intervention through an asset based and flexible project development which included them in the co-design of the project ( 79 ). The strategies we used to implement the interventions were not prescriptive and did not force CHWs to follow a set of strict guidelines. This led to a highly personalised, flexible, and reflective experience for CHWs. However, our experience highlights potential problems with relying on unpaid volunteers to deliver complex interventions, including issues with volunteer commitment, attendance and drop out.

Our research highlights the importance of infrastructure when managing CHWs and partnering with VCSE sector organisations. We developed a bespoke behaviour change training course for CHWs, a range of CHW risk appraisal and mitigation policies with our VCSE partners, and a dedicated team of participant and CHW support and management coordinators. Clear protocols were developed and followed for the recruitment, onboarding, matching, and hosting of participant coaching sessions whilst CHWs were provided with multiple channels of regular communication and continuous training and feedback opportunities. We support calls for project managers, VCSEs, primary care providers, and community members to be more explicitly involved in the design and development of interventions which affect and include communities ( 80 ).

In this study, the research team also experienced issues of positionality throughout the project whereby the lines between implementor, community worker, and evaluator were blurred. Coulter et al. ( 81 ) have pointed out that research that includes CHWs in the design and delivery of interventions commonly experience a tension between fidelity of the intervention protocol and community expectations, needs, and norms. We also experienced differing goals between academic and community partners (including CHWs), where academic partners prioritized data collection and community partners prioritized funding, sustainability, and policy. This can be likened to the experience of Furman et al. ( 82 ) who discussed how community partners were hesitant to endorse their research due to conflicts with on-the-ground realities of the community members they served.

9.5 Recommendations

During this project the research team, VCSE partners, and CHWs constantly learnt lessons and were quick to make adaptations to their approach based on feedback from a range of stakeholders and capturing all of these in this paper would be an impossible task. However, several key insights can be drawn from our collective experience and evaluation of the project. They include:

1. Environmental issues are larger and more complex than any coaching intervention based on individualistic changes can hope to remedy.

2. The voluntary and community sector has a range of strengths and assets based on local experience and knowledge developed over significant periods of time that can be used for CVD prevention. However, the sector is highly under-resourced and spread thinly across a wide range of priorities. Individual VCSE partner organisations do not always have enough reach to facilitate recruitment.

3. Community engagement works best if it is built into a project early on through co-design and resources and time should be allocated to this activity.

4. CHWs bring significant advantages during the delivery of community-based interventions. They are trusted peers, they bring their own skills and experience, and they can benefit from the intervention alongside the participants.

5. Strategies to encourage the participation of men should be specifically considered during the planning phase.

6. Virtual coaching interventions are acceptable to participants, and in many cases preferable to participants, due to their flexibility and ease of use.

7. The issue of mental health must be addressed even when working with unrelated health public conditions.

8. A strong project infrastructure, made up of well-trained support/administrative staff, is essential when delivering community-based interventions.

9. CHWs should be paid or reimbursed for their involvement in research and public health interventions. Falling to do so is looked down on my stakeholders and has impacts on sustainability and effectiveness.

10. The Global North can look to innovations in the Global South for examples of success for community-based interventions, however, proper contextual or situational analyses must be conducted to understand the needs and priorities of target communities.

9.6 Conclusion

This study demonstrates the feasibility of a CHW-led preventative health interventions could be implemented with overseen and unheard communities in the UK. It highlights the wealth of untapped resources that exist with VCSE and CHWs and suggests how a beneficial community-based service could be set up to run alongside and support NHS Health Checks, to reduce the incidence of CVD. The aim was to empower CHWs to discuss health with people in their communities based on behaviour change principles. We have set out what worked well and what did not, to facilitate development of future community-based interventions in the Global North. We believe that the community-based approach need not be restricted to CVD risk reduction, and that it could easily be applied to low level mental health conditions, diabetes, or other preventable NCDs. If CHWs are confident, well supported, and well-trained, they will have the skills and ability to contribute to improving the health and wellbeing of people in their communities. The benefits do not only extend to patients but also to CHWs and to the VCSE partners involved. We believe our project shows how these interventions can become a supplementary tool that links primary care services with the VCSE sector.

Data availability statement

The datasets presented in this study can be found in the University of Sussex's data repository through the following link: https://sussex.figshare.com/ ; (doi: 10.25377/sussex.25569084).

Ethics statement

The studies involving humans were approved by Brighton and Sussex Medical School Research Governance and Ethics Committee (RGEC). The studies were conducted in accordance with the local legislation and institutional requirements. The participants provided their written informed consent to participate in this study.

Author contributions

First Author (First Authorship): Thomas Grice-Jackson Second Authors (Equal Contribution): Imogen Rogers, Elizabeth Ford, Robert Dickson Third Authors (Equal Contribution): Kat-Frere Smith, Katie Goddard, Linda Silver, Catherine Topham Fourth Author (Equal Contribution): Papreen Nahar, Geofrey Musinguzi, Hilde Bastiens. Senior Author (Senior Authorship): Harm Van Marwijk. All authors contributed to the article and approved the submitted version.

This project was funded as part of an EU Commission Horizon. CORDIS (The Community Research and Development Information Service (CORDIS) Grant agreement number: 733356.

Acknowledgments

We thank the following voluntary and community sector organisations for their partnerships whilst designing and delivering this project: Active Hastings, Wellsbourne Healthcare Community Interest Company, Sussex Community Development Association, the Crew Club, and the Hangleton and Knoll project. We thank the National Centre for Behaviour Change for their contribution to the development and delivery of the Community Health Workers training. We thank all members of the SPICES consortium and European Commission who provide consultation and advice throughout the project. Finally, we thank all our Community Health Workers for giving up their time for this project. They were central to every part of this work and their contribution is greatly appreciated. We would also like to thank the editorial and reviewer team assigned to this manuscript. Their contributions improved the quality of our manuscript presentation, structure, and discussion.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Publisher's note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Supplementary material

The Supplementary Material for this article can be found online at: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/frhs.2024.1152410/full#supplementary-material

1. World Health Organisation. Cardiovascular Diseases Fact Sheet. (2022) (cited Nov 7, 2022). Cardiovascular diseases Fact Sheet. Available online at: https://www.who.int/health-topics/cardiovascular-diseases#tab=tab_1

Google Scholar

2. Matsushita K, Ding N, Kou M, Hu X, Chen M, Gao Y, et al. The relationship of COVID-19 severity with cardiovascular disease and its traditional risk factors: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Glob Heart . (2020) 15(1). doi: 10.5334/gh.814

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

3. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Prevention of Cardiovascular disease (PH25)—Review Proposal (2014).

4. Marsh K, Phillips CJ, Fordham R, Bertranou E, Hale J. Estimating cost-effectiveness in public health: a summary of modelling and valuation methods. Health Econ Rev . (2012) 2(1):1–6. doi: 10.1186/2191-1991-2-17

5. Brush BL, Mentz G, Jensen M, Jacobs B, Saylor KM, Rowe Z, et al. Success in long-standing community-based participatory research (CBPR) partnerships: a scoping literature review. Health Educ Behav . (2020) 47(4):556–68. doi: 10.1177/1090198119882989

6. Bogart LM, Uyeda K. Community-based participatory research: partnering with communities for effective and sustainable behavioral health interventions. Health Psychol . (2009) 28(4):391–3. doi: 10.1037/a0016387

7. Thomas P. Collaborating for Health . London: Routledge (2017).

8. Hassen HY, Bowyer M, Gibson L, Abrams S, Bastiaens H. Level of cardiovascular disease knowledge, risk perception and intention towards healthy lifestyle and socioeconomic disparities among adults in vulnerable communities of Belgium and England. BMC Public Health . (2022) 22(1):1–9. doi: 10.1186/s12889-021-12274-7

9. Hassen HY, Ndejjo R, Musinguzi G, Van Geertruyden JP, Abrams S, Bastiaens H. Effectiveness of community-based cardiovascular disease prevention interventions to improve physical activity: a systematic review and meta-regression. Prev Med . (2021) 153:106797. doi: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2021.106797

10. Robson J, Dostal I, Sheikh A, Eldridge S, Madurasinghe V, Griffiths C, et al. The NHS health check in England: an evaluation of the first 4 years. BMJ Open . (2016) 6(1):e008840. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2015-008840

11. Office for Improvement and Disapities, UK Government. NHS Health Checks: Applying All Our Health. (2022). Available online at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/nhs-health-checks-applying-all-our-health/nhs-health-checks-applying-all-our-health (Accessed January 25, 2023).

12. Martin A, Saunders CL, Harte E, Griffin SJ, MacLure C, Mant J, et al. Delivery and impact of the NHS health check in the first 8 years: a systematic review. Br J Gen Pract . (2018) 68(672):e449–59. doi: 10.3399/bjgp18X697649

13. Tanner L, Kenny RPW, Still M, Ling J, Pearson F, Thompson K, et al. NHS health check programme: a rapid review update. BMJ Open . (2022) 12(2):e052832. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-052832

14. Agarwal S, Jakes S, Essex S, Page SJ, Mowforth M. Disadvantage in English seaside resorts: a typology of deprived neighbourhoods. Tour Manag . (2018) 69:440–59. doi: 10.1016/j.tourman.2018.06.012

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

15. UK Chief Medical Officer. Health in Coastal Communities. UK Chief Medical Officer; (2021). p. 259.

16. Cyril S, Smith BJ, Possamai-Inesedy A, Renzaho AM. Exploring the role of community engagement in improving the health of disadvantaged populations: a systematic review. Glob Health Action . (2015) 8(1):29842. doi: 10.3402/gha.v8.29842

17. Ndejjo R, Hassen HY, Wanyenze RK, Musoke D, Nuwaha F, Abrams S, et al. Community-based interventions for cardiovascular disease prevention in low-and middle-income countries: a systematic review. Public Health Rev . (2021) 42. doi: 10.3389/phrs.2021.1604018

18. Khetan AK, Purushothaman R, Chami T, Hejjaji V, Mohan SKM, Josephson RA, et al. The effectiveness of community health workers for CVD prevention in LMIC. Glob Heart . (2017) 12(3):233–243. 6. doi: 10.1016/j.gheart.2016.07.001

19. Joshi R, Peiris D. Task-sharing for the prevention and control of non-communicable diseases. Lancet Glob Health . (2019) 7(6):e686–7. doi: 10.1016/S2214-109X(19)30161-5

20. Adams C. Toward an institutional perspective on social capital health interventions: lay community health workers as social capital builders. Sociol Health Illn . (2020) 42(1):95–110. doi: 10.1111/1467-9566.12992

21. Van Velsen L, Illario M, Jansen-Kosterink S, Crola C, Di Somma C, Colao A, et al. A community-based, technology-supported health service for detecting and preventing frailty among older adults: a participatory design development process. J Aging Res . (2015) 2015:9–18. doi: 10.1155/2015/216084

22. Michie S, Abraham C, Whittington C, McAteer J, Gupta S. Effective techniques in healthy eating and physical activity interventions: a meta-regression. Health Psychol . (2009) 28(6):690. doi: 10.1037/a0016136

23. Yardley L, Morrison L, Bradbury K, Muller I. The person-based approach to intervention development: application to digital health-related behavior change interventions. J Med Internet Res . (2015) 17(1):e4055. doi: 10.2196/jmir.4055

24. Person-Based Approach. The Person-Based Approach For Developing Health Interventions. (2022). Available online at: https://www.personbasedapproach.org/#:∼:text=What%20is%20the%20Person%2DBased,and%20experiences%20of%20intervention%20users (Accessed January 25, 2023).

25. Hopkins T, Rippon S. Head, Hands and Heart: Asset-Based Approaches in Health Care . London: Health Foundations (2015).

26. Barrera M, Castro FG, Strycker LA, Toobert DJ. Cultural adaptations of behavioral health interventions: a progress report. J Consult Clin Psychol . (2013) 81(2):196–205. doi: 10.1037/a0027085

27. Moore GF, Audrey S, Barker M, Bond L, Bonell C, Hardeman W, et al.. process evaluation of complex interventions: medical research council guidance. Br Med J . (2015) 350. doi: 10.1136/bmj.h1258

28. Brown A, Ramsay N, Milo M, Moore M, Hossain R. How research-based theatre is a solution for community engagement and advocacy at regional medical campuses: the health and equity through advocacy, research, and theatre (HEART) program. Can Med Educ J . (2018) 9(1):e6. doi: 10.36834/cmej.42191

29. Nahar P, Van Marwijk H, Gibson L, Musinguzi G, Anthierens S, Ford E, et al. A protocol paper: community engagement interventions for cardiovascular disease prevention in socially disadvantaged populations in the UK: an implementation research study. Glob Health Res Policy . (2020) 5:1–9. doi: 10.1186/s41256-020-0131-1

30. Grice-Jackson T, Rogers I, Ford E, Van Marwijk H, Topham C, Musinguzi G, et al. The pre-implementation phase of a project seeking to deliver a community-based CVD prevention intervention (SPICES-Sussex): a qualitative study exploring views and experience relating to intervention development. Health Promot Pract . (2023):15248399231182139. doi: 10.1177/15248399231182139

31. Glasgow RE, McKay HG, Piette JD, Reynolds KD. The RE-AIM framework for evaluating interventions: what can it tell us about approaches to chronic illness management? Patient Educ Couns . (2001) 44(2):119–27. doi: 10.1016/S0738-3991(00)00186-5

32. Skivington K, Matthews L, Simpson SA, Craig P, Baird J, Blazeby JM, et al.. A new framework for developing and evaluating complex interventions: update of medical research council guidance. Br Med J . (2021) 374:1–11. doi: 10.1136/bmj.n2061

33. Ministry of Housing, Communities & Local Government UK Government. English Indices of Deprivation 2019. (2019) (cited Nov 7, 2022). Available online at: https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/english-indices-of-deprivation-2019

34. Palmer VJ. The participatory zeitgeist in health care: it is time for a science of participation. J Particip Med . (2020) 12(1):e15101. doi: 10.2196/15101

35. McGorrian C, Yusuf S, Islam S, Jung H, Rangarajan S, Avezum A, et al. Estimating modifiable coronary heart disease risk in multiple regions of the world: the INTERHEART modifiable risk score. Eur Heart J . (2011) 32(5):581–9. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehq448

36. Harris PA, Taylor R, Minor BL, Elliott V, Fernandez M, O’Neal L, et al. The REDCap consortium: building an international community of software platform partners. J Biomed Inform . (2019) 95:103208. doi: 10.1016/j.jbi.2019.103208

37. Piepoli MF, Hoes AW, Agewall S, Albus C, Brotons C, Catapano AL, et al. Guidelines: editor’s choice: 2016 European guidelines on cardiovascular disease prevention in clinical practice: the sixth joint task force of the European society of cardiology and other societies on cardiovascular disease prevention in clinical practice (constituted by representatives of 10 societies and by invited experts) developed with the special contribution of the European association for cardiovascular prevention & rehabilitation (EACPR). Eur Heart J . (2016) 37(29):2315. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehw106

38. Levounis P, Arnaout B, Marienfeld C. Motivational interviewing for clinical practice . Arlington: American Psychiatric Association Publishing (2017). p. 15–35.

39. Miller WR, Rollnick S. Motivational Interviewing: Helping People Change . New York: Guilford press (2012).

40. Harden SM, Smith ML, Ory MG, Smith-Ray RL, Estabrooks PA, Glasgow RE. RE-AIM in clinical, community, and corporate settings: perspectives, strategies, and recommendations to enhance public health impact. Front Public Health . (2018) 6:71. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2018.00071

41. Kwan BM, McGinnes HL, Ory MG, Estabrooks PA, Waxmonsky JA, Glasgow RE. RE-AIM in the real world: use of the RE-AIM framework for program planning and evaluation in clinical and community settings. Front Public Health . (2019) 7:345. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2019.00345

42. Glasgow RE, Askew S, Purcell P, Levine E, Warner ET, Stange KC, et al. Use of RE-AIM to address health inequities: application in a low-income community health center-based weight loss and hypertension self-management program. Transl Behav Med . (2013) 3(2):200–10. doi: 10.1007/s13142-013-0201-8

43. Onono M, Abdi M, Opondo I, Okung’u J, Asadhi E, Nyamai R, et al. Using the RE-AIM framework to evaluate the implementation of integrated community case management in Kenya. Acta Paediatr . (2018) 107:53–62. doi: 10.1111/apa.14662

44. Wippold GM, Garcia KA, Frary SG, Griffith DM. Community health worker interventions for men: a scoping review using the RE-AIM framework. Health Educ Behav . (2023) 51(1):10901981231179498. doi: 10.1177/1090198123117949

45. Hagströmer M, Oja P, Sjöström M. The international physical activity questionnaire (IPAQ): a study of concurrent and construct validity. Public Health Nutr . (2006) 9(6):755–62. doi: 10.1079/PHN2005898

46. England CY, Thompson JL, Jago R, Cooper AR, Andrews RC. Development of a brief, reliable and valid diet assessment tool for impaired glucose tolerance and diabetes: the UK diabetes and diet questionnaire. Public Health Nutr . (2017) 20(2):191–9. doi: 10.1017/S1368980016002275

47. Musinguzi LK, Turinawe EB, Rwemisisi JT, de Vries DH, Mafigiri DK, Muhangi D, et al. Linking communities to formal health care providers through village health teams in rural Uganda: lessons from linking social capital. Hum Resour Health . (2017) 15:1–16. doi: 10.1186/s12960-016-0177-9

48. Katz E, Chikwenhere Y, Essien E, Olirus Owilli A, Westerhaus M. Rethinking global health from south and north: a social medicine approach to global health education. Glob Public Health . (2023) 18(1):2191685. doi: 10.1080/17441692.2023.2191685

49. Anand TN, Joseph LM, Geetha AV, Chowdhury J, Prabhakaran D, Jeemon P. Task-sharing interventions for cardiovascular risk reduction and lipid outcomes in low-and middle-income countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Clin Lipidol . (2018) 12(3):626–42. doi: 10.1016/j.jacl.2018.02.008

50. Ndejjo R, Wanyenze RK, Nuwaha F, Bastiaens H, Musinguzi G. Barriers and facilitators of implementation of a community cardiovascular disease prevention programme in Mukono and Buikwe districts in Uganda using the consolidated framework for implementation research. Implement Sci . (2020) 15:1–17. doi: 10.1186/s13012-020-01065-0

51. Haines A, de Barros EF, Berlin A, Heymann DL, Harris MJ. National UK programme of community health workers for COVID-19 response. Lancet . (2020) 395(10231):1173–5. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30735-2

52. Ballard M, Odera M, Bhatt S, Geoffrey B, Westgate C, Johnson A. Payment of community health workers. Lancet Glob Health . (2022) 10(9):e1242. doi: 10.1016/S2214-109X(22)00311-4

53. Hanson K, Brikci N, Erlangga D, Alebachew A, De Allegri M, Balabanova D, et al. The lancet global health commission on financing primary health care: putting people at the centre. Lancet Glob Health . (2022) 10(5):e715–72. doi: 10.1016/S2214-109X(22)00005-5

54. NIHR. UK Standards for Public Involvement. (2024) (cited Jan 9, 2024). Available online at: https://sites.google.com/nihr.ac.uk/pi-standards/home

55. Schmid TL, Pratt M, Howze E. Policy as intervention: environmental and policy approaches to the prevention of cardiovascular disease. Am J Public Health . (1995) 85(9):1207–11. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.85.9.1207

56. Tengland PA. Behavior change or empowerment: on the ethics of health-promotion goals. Health Care Anal . (2016) 24(1):24–46. doi: 10.1007/s10728-013-0265-0

57. Pennant M, Davenport C, Bayliss S, Greenheld W, Marshall T, Hyde C. Community programs for the prevention of cardiovascular disease: a systematic review. Am J Epidemiol . (2010) 172(5):501–16. doi: 10.1093/aje/kwq171

58. Le Goff D, Barais M, Perraud G, Derriennic J, Aujoulat P, Guillou-Landreat M, et al. Innovative cardiovascular primary prevention population-based strategies: a 2-year hybrid type 1 implementation randomised control trial (RCT) which evaluates behavioural change conducted by community champions compared with brief advice only from the SPICES project (scaling-up packages of interventions for cardiovascular disease prevention in selected sites in Europe and sub-Saharan Africa). BMC Public Health . (2021) 21(1):1–9. doi: 10.1186/s12889-021-11443-y

59. Aerts N, Anthierens S, Van Bogaert P, Peremans L, Bastiaens H. Prevention of cardiovascular diseases in community settings and primary health care: a Pre-implementation contextual analysis using the consolidated framework for implementation research. Int J Environ Res Public Health . (2022) 19(14):8467. doi: 10.3390/ijerph19148467

60. Collyer TA, Smith KE. An atlas of health inequalities and health disparities research:“how is this all getting done in silos, and why?”. Soc Sci Med . (2020) 264:113330. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2020.113330

61. Van Velsen L, Wentzel J, Van Gemert-Pijnen JE. Designing eHealth that matters via a multidisciplinary requirements development approach. JMIR Res Protoc . (2013) 2(1):e2547. doi: 10.2196/resprot.2547

62. Haldane V, Chuah FL, Srivastava A, Singh SR, Koh GC, Seng CK, et al. Community participation in health services development, implementation, and evaluation: a systematic review of empowerment, health, community, and process outcomes. PLoS One . (2019) 14(5):e0216112. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0216112

63. Wildman JM, Valtorta N, Moffatt S, Hanratty B. ‘What works here doesn’t work there’: the significance of local context for a sustainable and replicable asset-based community intervention aimed at promoting social interaction in later life. Health Soc Care Community . (2019) 27(4):1102–10. doi: 10.1111/hsc.12735

64. Aarons GA, Sklar M, Mustanski B, Benbow N, Brown CH. “Scaling-out” evidence-based interventions to new populations or new health care delivery systems. Implement Sci . (2017) 12:1–13. doi: 10.1186/s13012-016-0533-0

65. Luten KA, Reijneveld SA, Dijkstra A, de Winter AF. Reach and effectiveness of an integrated community-based intervention on physical activity and healthy eating of older adults in a socioeconomically disadvantaged community. Health Educ Res . (2016) 31(1):98–106. doi: 10.1093/her/cyv064

66. Goodman A, Gatward R. Who are we missing? Area deprivation and survey participation. Eur J Epidemiol . (2008) 23(6):379–87. doi: 10.1007/s10654-008-9248-0

67. Williams P. “It all sounds very interesting, but we’re just too busy!”: exploring why “gatekeepers” decline access to potential research participants with learning disabilities. Eur J Spec Needs Educ . (2020) 35(1):1–14. doi: 10.1080/08856257.2019.1687563

68. McRobert CJ, Hill JC, Smale T, Hay EM, Van der Windt DA. A multi-modal recruitment strategy using social media and internet-mediated methods to recruit a multidisciplinary, international sample of clinicians to an online research study. PLoS One . (2018) 13(7):e0200184. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0200184

69. Khatri C, Chapman SJ, Glasbey J, Kelly M, Nepogodiev D, Bhangu A, et al. Social media and internet driven study recruitment: evaluating a new model for promoting collaborator engagement and participation. PloS one . (2015) 10(3):e0118899. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0118899

70. UyBico SJ, Pavel S, Gross CP. Recruiting vulnerable populations into research: a systematic review of recruitment interventions. J Gen Intern Med . (2007) 22(6):852–63. doi: 10.1007/s11606-007-0126-3

71. Shaghaghi A, Bhopal RS, Sheikh A. Approaches to recruiting “hard-to-reach”populations into research: a review of the literature. Health Promot Perspect . (2011) 1(2):86. doi: 10.5681/hpp.2011.009

72. Pagoto SL, Schneider KL, Bodenlos JS, Appelhans BM, Whited MC, Ma Y, et al. Association of post-traumatic stress disorder and obesity in a nationally representative sample. Obesity . (2012) 20(1):200–5. doi: 10.1038/oby.2011.318

73. Oliffe JL, Rossnagel E, Bottorff JL, Chambers SK, Caperchione C, Rice SM. Community-based men’s health promotion programs: eight lessons learnt and their caveats. Health Promot Int . (2020) 35(5):1230–40. doi: 10.1093/heapro/daz101

74. Bell OJ, Flynn D, Clifford T, West D, Stevenson E, Avery L. Identifying behavioural barriers and facilitators to engaging men in a community-based lifestyle intervention to improve physical and mental health and well-being. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act . (2023) 20(1):1–14. doi: 10.1186/s12966-022-01404-y

75. Springer MV, Skolarus LE. Community-based participatory research: partnering with communities. Stroke . (2019) 50(3):e48–50. doi: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.118.024241

76. Holmes L, Cresswell K, Williams S, Parsons S, Keane A, Wilson C, et al. Innovating public engagement and patient involvement through strategic collaboration and practice. Res Involvement Engagem . (2019) 5(1):1–12. doi: 10.1186/s40900-019-0160-4

77. Ragsdell G. Voluntary sector organisations: untapped sources of lessons for knowledge management. Proceedings of the International Conference on Intellectual Capital, Knowledge Management & Organizational Learning (2013). p. 349–55

78. Christopher S, Watts V, McCormick AKHG, Young S. Building and maintaining trust in a community-based participatory research partnership. Am J Public Health . (2008) 98(8):1398–406. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2007.125757

79. Bainbridge L, Lunt N. Place, strengths and assets: a case study of how local area coordination is supporting individuals and families under conditions of austerity. Br J Social Work . (2021) 51(4):1354–73. doi: 10.1093/bjsw/bcab041

80. Di Maddaloni F, Davis K. Project manager’s perception of the local communities’ stakeholder in megaprojects. An empirical investigation in the UK. Int J Proj Manag . (2018) 36(3):542–65. doi: 10.1016/j.ijproman.2017.11.003

81. Coulter K, Ingram M, McClelland DJ, Lohr A. Positionality of community health workers on health intervention research teams: a scoping review. Front Public Health . (2020) 8:208. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2020.00208

82. Furman L, Matthews L, Davis V, Killpack S, O’Riordan MA. Breast for success: a community–academic collaboration to increase breastfeeding among high-risk mothers in Cleveland. Prog Community Health Partnersh . (2016) 10(3):341–53. doi: 10.1353/cpr.2016.0041

Keywords: community based participatory research, implementation research, RE-AIM (reach, effectiveness, adoption, implementation and maintenance), cardiovascular disease, community health workers (CHW)

Citation: Grice-Jackson T, Rogers I, Ford E, Dickinson R, Frere-Smith K, Goddard K, Silver L, Topham C, Nahar P, Musinguzi G, Bastiaens H and Van Marwijk H (2024) A community health worker led approach to cardiovascular disease prevention in the UK—SPICES-Sussex (scaling-up packages of interventions for cardiovascular disease prevention in selected sites in Europe and Sub-saharan Africa): an implementation research project. Front. Health Serv. 4:1152410. doi: 10.3389/frhs.2024.1152410

Received: 27 January 2023; Accepted: 20 March 2024; Published: 7 May 2024.

Reviewed by:

© 2024 Grice-Jackson, Rogers, Ford, Dickinson, Frere-Smith, Goddard, Silver, Topham, Nahar, Musinguzi, Bastiaens and Van Marwijk. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) . The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

*Correspondence: Thomas Grice-Jackson [email protected]

This article is part of the Research Topic

Hybrid Effectiveness-Implementation Trial Designs: Critical Assessments, Innovative Applications, and Proposed Advancements