Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39847774›Full record

ArticleJMIR medical education2025

Refining Established Practices for Research Question Definition to Foster Interdisciplinary Research Skills in a Digital Age: Consensus Study With Nominal Group Technique.

Jana Sedlakova, Mina Stanikić, Felix Gille, Jürgen Bernard, Andrea B Horn, Markus Wolf, Christina Haag, Joel Floris, Gabriela Morgenshtern, Gerold Schneider and 10 more

Abstract readConsensus Statement
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR medical education, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

20 authors.

Jana SedlakovaDigital Society Initiative, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-6887-5941
Mina StanikićDigital Society Initiative, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-6477-7164
Felix GilleDigital Society Initiative, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-2847-4633
Jürgen BernardDigital Society Initiative, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0001-8741-9709
Andrea B HornDigital Society Initiative, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0003-2729-7062
Markus WolfDigital Society Initiative, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-5660-6824
Christina HaagDigital Society Initiative, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-9662-5245
Joel FlorisDigital Society Initiative, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-8480-6495
Gabriela MorgenshternDigital Society Initiative, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0003-4762-8797
Gerold SchneiderDigital Society Initiative, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-1905-6237
Aleksandra Zumbrunn WojczyńskaDigital Society Initiative, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0003-3804-4781
Corine Mouton DoreyDigital Society Initiative, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0001-5513-1655
Dominik Alois EttlinDigital Society Initiative, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0001-7353-073X
Daniel GeroDigital Society Initiative, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0003-2941-9801
Thomas FriemelDigital Society Initiative, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0001-8088-0113
Ziyuan LuDigital Society Initiative, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.ORCID 0009-0009-6606-369X
Kimon PapadopoulosDigital Society Initiative, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-7623-4298
Sonja SchläpferDigital Society Initiative, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-0330-403X
Ning WangDigital Society Initiative, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-3342-4913
Viktor von WylDigital Society Initiative, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-8754-9797

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe increased use of digital data in health research demands interdisciplinary collaborations to address its methodological complexities and challenges. This often entails merging the linear deductive approach of health research with the explorative iterative approach of data science. However, there is a lack of structured teaching courses and guidance on how to effectively and constructively bridge different disciplines and research approaches.

objectiveThis study aimed to provide a set of tools and recommendations designed to facilitate interdisciplinary education and collaboration. Target groups are lecturers who can use these tools to design interdisciplinary courses, supervisors who guide PhD and master's students in their interdisciplinary projects, and principal investigators who design and organize workshops to initiate and guide interdisciplinary projects.

methodsOur study was conducted in 3 steps: (1) developing a common terminology, (2) identifying established workflows for research question formulation, and (3) examining adaptations of existing study workflows combining methods from health research and data science. We also formulated recommendations for a pragmatic implementation of our findings. We conducted a literature search and organized 3 interdisciplinary expert workshops with researchers at the University of Zurich. For the workshops and the subsequent manuscript writing process, we adopted a consensus study methodology.

resultsWe developed a set of tools to facilitate interdisciplinary education and collaboration. These tools focused on 2 key dimensions- content and curriculum and methods and teaching style-and can be applied in various educational and research settings. We developed a glossary to establish a shared understanding of common terminologies and concepts. We delineated the established study workflow for research question formulation, emphasizing the "what" and the "how," while summarizing the necessary tools to facilitate the process. We propose 3 clusters of contextual and methodological adaptations to this workflow to better integrate data science practices: (1) acknowledging real-life constraints and limitations in research scope; (2) allowing more iterative, data-driven approaches to research question formulation; and (3) strengthening research quality through reproducibility principles and adherence to the findable, accessible, interoperable, and reusable (FAIR) data principles.

conclusionsResearch question formulation remains a relevant and useful research step in projects using digital data. We recommend initiating new interdisciplinary collaborations by establishing terminologies as well as using the concepts of research tasks to foster a shared understanding. Our tools and recommendations can support academic educators in training health professionals and researchers for interdisciplinary digital health projects.

Indexed as

Interdisciplinary ResearchResearch DesignHumansdata sciencedigital datadigitalizationhealth researchinterdisciplinaryresearch question

Identifiers

PMID39847774
PMCPMC11803332

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.