Name of Department : NURSING (ENGLISH)

Course Code and Name : BEY149E-LITERATURE REVIEW I

Course Week : Week 4
Course Day and Time : WEDNESDAY 09:00-11:50
Course Credit/ACTS
Information : 3
Examination Type and
Gradings : Midterm 50 % and Final exam 50 %
Instructor’s Name &
Surname : [Link]. GLORIA NNADWA ALHASSAN
E-mail & Phone: : gnalhassan@[Link]
Instructor’s Room : B-Block Third floor
Office Hours : 12:00
GBS Link : [Link]
ALMS Link : [Link]
AVESIS Link : [Link]
| 14 WEEKS’S COURSE CONTENTS |
 | WEEKLY LEARNING OUTCOMES |

By the end of this week, students will be able to:

1. Define a research problem.

2. State the characteristics of a good research problem.
3. List the sources from which research problems can be
identified.
4. Formulate a clear and concise problem statement.
5. Apply criteria such as relevance, feasibility, and clarity to
evaluate a research problem.
| ABOUT THE PREVIOUS COURSE |

Types of Literature Research

 | DAILY FLOW |

09.00-09.50/ 1st Hour

10.00-10.50/ 2nd Hour
11.00-11:50/3rd Hour
Defining the research problem

Financial Data Analysis

1. What is a research problem?

• A research problem, in general, refers to some difficulty which a

researcher experiences in the context of either a theoretical or
practical situation and wants to obtain a solution for the same.
A research problem, in general, refers to some
difficulty which a researcher experiences in the
context of either a theoretical or practical situation
and wants to obtain a solution for the same.
(i) There must be an individual or a group which has some difficulty or the
problem.

(ii) There must be some objective(s) to be attained at. If one wants nothing, one
cannot have a problem.

(iii) There must be alternative means (or the courses of action) for obtaining the
objective(s) one wishes to attain. This means that there must be at least two
means available to a researcher for if he has no choice of means, he cannot have a
problem.

(iv) There must remain some doubt in the mind of a researcher with regard to the
selection of alternatives. This means that research must answer the question
concerning the relative efficiency of the possible alternatives.

(v) There must be some environment(s) to which the difficulty pertains.

 Selecting the problem
the following points may be observed by a researcher in selecting a research
problem or a subject for research:

(i) Subject which is overdone should not be normally chosen, for it will be a
difficult task to throw any new light in such a case.

(ii) Controversial subject should not become the choice of an average

researcher.

(iii) Too narrow or too vague problems should be avoided.

(iv) The subject selected for research should be familiar and feasible so that
the related research material or sources of research are within one’s reach.
(v) The importance of the subject, the qualifications and the
training of a researcher, the costs involved, the time factor are few
other criteria that must also be considered in selecting a problem.

(vi) The selection of a problem must be preceded by a preliminary

study. This may not be necessary when the problem requires the
conduct of a research closely similar to one that has already been
done. But when the field of inquiry is relatively new and does not
have available a set of well developed techniques, a brief feasibility
study must always be undertaken.
 Necessity of defining the problem
• Quite often we all hear that a problem clearly stated is a problem half solved. This statement

signifies the need for defining a research problem.

• The problem to be investigated must be defined unambiguously for that will help to

discriminate relevant data from the irrelevant ones. A proper definition of research problem

will enable the researcher to be on the track whereas an ill-defined problem may create

hurdles.

• Questions like:

What data are to be collected?

What characteristics of data are relevant and need to be studied? What relations are to be

explored.

What techniques are to be used for the purpose?

and similar other questions crop up in the mind of the researcher who can well plan his strategy

and find answers to all such questions only when the research problem has been well defined.
 Criteria of a Good Research Problem

• the research problem should be defined in a systematic manner,

giving due weightage to all relating points. The technique for the
purpose involves the undertaking of the following steps generally one
after the other:
• (i) statement of the problem in a general way;
• (ii) understanding the nature of the problem;
• (iii) surveying the available literature
• (iv) developing the ideas through discussions; and (v) rephrasing the
research problem into a working proposition.
 Criteria of a Good Research Problem

Feasible : A good research problem must be

practical and achievable within the available
resources, time frame, and expertise. It should
consider limitations such as access to data,
equipment, and funding to ensure the study can be
successfully completed.
 Criteria of a Good Research Problem

Interesting : The problem should capture the

curiosity and enthusiasm of the researcher and the
audience. An interesting research problem motivates
sustained effort and engagement, making the
investigation more meaningful and impactful.
 Criteria of a Good Research Problem

Novel: Novelty means the research problem

addresses a gap in existing knowledge or offers a
fresh perspective. It should contribute new insights,
theories, or solutions that advance the field and
avoid redundancy.
 Criteria of a Good Research Problem

Ethical: Ethical considerations are crucial; the

research must respect the rights and well-being of
participants, avoid harm, and comply with ethical
standards and guidelines. This ensures integrity and
social responsibility in the research process.
 Criteria of a Good Research Problem

Relevant: The problem should have significance to

the field of study, society, or specific stakeholders.
Relevance ensures that the research outcomes have
practical applications or theoretical importance,
making the effort worthwhile.
 Rephrasing the research problem:

Finally, the researcher must sit to rephrase the research problem

into a working proposition. Once the nature of the problem has
been clearly understood, the environment (within which the
problem has got to be studied) has been defined, discussions over
the problem have taken place and the available literature has been
surveyed and examined, rephrasing the problem into analytical or
operational terms is not a difficult task.
Through rephrasing, the researcher puts the research problem in as
specific terms as possible so that it may become operationally
viable and may help in the development of working hypotheses.
A Practical Example: From Vague to Focused

STAGE 1: Initial Broad Problem (TOO GENERAL - NOT RESEARCHABLE)

The Original Problem Statement: Why do some patients have poor health
outcomes?

Why This Is Too Broad and Problematic:

This initial problem has multiple ambiguities and lacks specificity:

 This initial problem has multiple ambiguities and lacks specificity:

Ambiguity Questions Raised

All patients? Specific diseases? Age groups?

Which patients?
Gender? Socioeconomic status?
Mortality? Morbidity? Quality of life?
What health outcomes? Hospital readmission rates? Patient
satisfaction?
During hospitalization? After discharge?
What timeframe?
Short-term? Long-term?

Hospital? Clinic? Community? Nursing

Which setting?
home? Private vs. public facilities?

Medical factors? Nursing care? Patient

What factors?
behavior? Social factors? Healthcare access?
Turkey? Specific provinces? Urban vs. rural
In which country/region?
areas?
Clinical Example:
Imagine a nursing researcher observes that "patients don't
seem to recover well." This observation is too vague to study.

What does "don't recover well" mean? Recovery from what?

Better or worse compared to what?

At this stage, the problem is: ✗ Not researchable ✗ Too broad

✗ Unmeasurable ✗ No clear direction
STAGE 2: Further Refinement (MUCH BETTER - FOCUSED AND OPERATIONAL)Well-
Refined Problem Statement: What is the relationship between quality of nurse-
patient communication and blood glucose control in patients with Type 2 diabetes
during their first hospitalization at Istanbul Gelişim University Hospital? Which
specific communication strategies used by nurses are most associated with better
patient understanding of their condition and medication regimen?
Major Improvements:
• Population: ✓ Patients with Type 2 diabetes (not Type 1)
• Setting: ✓ Istanbul Gelişim University Hospital (specific facility)
• Timeframe: ✓ During first hospitalization (clear time boundary)
• Specific variable: ✓ Nurse-patient communication quality (measurable)
• Outcome: ✓ Blood glucose control and patient understanding (observable,
measurable)
• Focus: ✓ Communication strategies nurses use (within nursing scope)
STAGE 3: Most Refined Version (OPTIMAL - READY FOR RESEARCH DESIGN)

Final Operational Problem Statement:

Among hospitalized patients with Type 2 diabetes (age 40-65) admitted to

Istanbul Gelişim University Hospital, what is the relationship between the
quality of nurse-patient communication (assessed using the Nurse-Patient
Communication Scale) and glycemic control outcomes (measured by blood
glucose readings and HbA1c levels) during their first hospitalization?

Specifically, which evidence-based communication techniques employed by

nurses (education delivery, clarification checks, active listening, and goal-
setting conversations) are most strongly associated with improved patient
knowledge of their condition and medication adherence?
 Operational Details Now Clear:
Element Details
Hospitalized patients with Type 2 diabetes,
Population
age 40-65
Istanbul Gelişim University Hospital (ICUs and
Setting
medical wards)
During first hospitalization (admission to
Time Period
discharge)
Quality of nurse-patient communication
Independent Variable
(measured by validated scale)
1) Glycemic control (blood glucose, HbA1c) 2)
Dependent Variables
Patient knowledge 3) Medication adherence
Education delivery, clarification checks, active
Specific Techniques
listening, goal-setting
Research Method Observational or quasi-experimental design
Now possible (can calculate based on effect
Sample Size Estimation
size)
Validated communication scale, glucose
Data Collection Tools
monitors, knowledge tests
Can estimate recruitment and data collection
Timeline
period
At This Stage 3, You Can Now:
✓ Design a specific research study
✓ Create data collection instruments
✓ Identify and recruit appropriate participants
✓ Determine sample size needed
✓ Select appropriate statistical analyses
✓ Write a focused research proposal
✓ Conduct a targeted literature review
✓ Develop a realistic budget and timeline
 Comparison Table: Problem Refinement Journey

Stage 2: Further
Aspect Stage 1: Initial Stage 3: Optimal
Refinement
Very clear &
Clarity Very vague Clear
specific
Type 2 diabetic Type 2 diabetics,
Population All patients
patients age 40-65
One main variable 3 specific
Variables Undefined
+ outcomes measured variables
Measurability Not measurable Mostly measurable Fully measurable
Yes, but
Researchability No Yes, definitely
challenging
Feasibility Impossible Possible Clearly feasible
Estimated at 6-12 Can be specified: 8-
Time Estimate Unknown
months 10 months
Rough estimate Can calculate
Cost Estimate Unknown
possible specifically
Ready for
No Possibly Yes
Research?
 | WHAT TO TAKE HOME? |
• A research problem is the foundation of every study—it defines what needs to be
investigated.

• A good research problem should be:

✔ Clear and specific – precisely defines what is being studied.
✔ Feasible – can be researched within available time and resources.
✔ Significant – adds value to knowledge or solves a real-world issue.
✔ Ethical – respects human and social considerations.

• Sources of research problems include:

• Literature reviews

• Professional experience

• Current issues or trends

• Theories and conceptual gaps

 | QUESTIONS AND SUGGESTIONS |

1. What are the Steps to identify a research problem ?

2. A good research problem should include ?
| RECOMMENDED DAILY STUDIES |
 | REFERENCES |
1. Van Lange Paul, A. M., Wim BG Liebrand, and Wilke Henk AM.
"Introduction and literature review." Social dilemmas (2015): 3-28.

[Link], J. W. (2006). Doing a literature review. PS: Political Science &

Politics, 39(1), 127-132.

[Link], A. (2009). A guide to systematic literature

reviews. Surgery (Oxford), 27(9), 381-384.

[Link], N. F., & Afandi, N. K. (2021). Literature review is a part of

research. Sulawesi Tenggara Educational Journal, 1(3), 64-71.

[Link], B., Brereton, O. P., Budgen, D., Turner, M., Bailey, J., &
Linkman, S. (2009). Systematic literature reviews in software
engineering–a systematic literature review. Information and software
technology, 51(1), 7-15.
| ABOUT THE NEXT WEEK |
“Victory is for those who can say "Victory is mine".
Success is for those who can begin saying "I will
succeed" and say "I have succeeded" in the end.”
― Mustafa Kemal Atatürk