This is the first part of a Guide to Reading Research Articles.
Research articles can be very difficult to read. Reading research is a skill that takes quite some time to be proficient at. This is why many people will read the abstract or conclusions of a study apply them with a broad brush, which is inherently invalid.
When attempting to read and understand an article, remember to read the article as a whole. Also, the authors have written it with the audience being scholars and colleagues. Therefore, a certain level of basic knowledge is assumed. Try not to become frustrated when an article to too complicated. You will learn, in time and with much practice, to extract the important aspects of an article without getting lost in the jargon.
What is Research?
Research is defined as a systematic inquiry or investigation into a subject in order to discover or revise facts, theories, applications, etc (dictionary.com). The systematic aspect of research refers to how it is designed, which is very important. This is what separates research from other forms of evidence. Commonly, these other forms of evidence will be used to market a product (e.g. WBV machines). These may include (with descriptions):
Abstract
This is a summary of research but not an entire research article. Many times it is part of a research article published in a peer-reviewed, academic journal.; however, much care must be taken so that only the abstract is not solely relied upon as evidence.
Poster
This is usually a beefed-up summary that is presented at a conference by the researcher(s) as a poster. It may or may not be reviewed for quality prior to being accepted for presentation at that conference.
Presentation
This is similar to a poster but is presented in an oral format via software (e.g. Powerpoint). Again, it may or may not be reviewed for quality.
Case Study(ies)
These can be in the form of a single-person case study or a multiple-person case study (small number of people). These are typically not research because they are not systematically designed to answer a question, nor can results from one or a few individuals answer questions related to the general population.
While these are important first steps in the research process, they are no substitute for a research article. Also, these may be published in peer-review, academic journals; however, they are specific to the individual studied and should not be over-generalized.
Testimonial
Of course the most common of these come from celebrities. They are subjective interpretations of personal experiences and are not valid in a context outside of that individual. While they are very important to that individual, it may be that not all people like them will experience the same outcome.
Why do marketers use these? Because they work and help to sell the marketers product. Be the weariest of these forms of evidence.
Remember that these forms of evidence never can be substituted for a full research article in a peer-reviewed, academic journal.
Also, be aware that true research articles may be presented or listed; however, many times these are only loosely related to the product.
For example, a study performed on a different WBV machine than the one being marketed should be questioned. This is especially true when comparing lineal and pivotal studies.
Many marketers also present studies that use direct muscle vibration (very different than WBV) or industrial WBV to increase the number of studies listed under their research sections. These are only loosely related to WBV and the reader should be aware that these types of studies are not direct evidence of the treatments effectiveness.
Be leery of these marketing practices to pass these studies off as proof that something is safe or effective since quantity is never a substitute for quality.
Next Part: Understanding the Different Sections of a Research Article.
Please provide feedback to my article. I know it isn’t as controversial as it is educational but all feedback, positive and/or constructive, is welcome.
Also, let me know if there are any other research topics you would like to see written about. If you do not want to post, send ideas to bazetthound@juno.com.
Beginning this month, I will be providing a monthly research digest to summarize the research that has come out in the 1-2 months. I hope to provide 4-5 summaries, and if it is a slow month, I will pull up some older studies and do them as well.
David,
I thought your article was excellent but then I’m trained in science and “enjoy” reading and synthesizing research. I think this is a “great idea” -you doing a monthly research digest etc.
David,
I already mentioned I think the article is excellent. I noticed a small error. I believe, under the Testimonials section, you use the word “weariness” instead of “wariness.” As you know, wariness means to be “on-guard” while “weariness” means tired etc. Great job with the article though!
Research in strength and conditioning in general has “helped” some but actually “followed” what was known in the trenches anecdotally. It’s helped sort out what from the trenches is true and what isn’t. Science moves too slow and there’s very little grant money or interaction at univeristies in the US at least as far as athletic training etc. So, how do we remedy this with vibration and vibration research David? Are you going to tell me that the work of Dr. Alex Mikheev of the former USSR (lives in Belarus)on vibration (done on athletes) doesn’t mean anything because it wasn’t published in an English-speaking peer-reviewed research journal? Heck, the Soviets – as I’ve mentioned already on another post – were looking at vibration as far back as the 70′s. Where were/are you guys?????
Many times research only backs up (follows) that which is known in the field. Research does move slowly but it is necessary. Thinking that as long as people “work” to prove their ideas is short sighted. Here is how I see it: Researchers and practitioners need to work together to find out what works best. It must be an equal relationship and neither group is more important than the other. If we want WBV to be able to help many people, then we need research. The reason is that many people cannot afford to be healthy (e.g. go to a WBV studio at 10 bucks a pop, eat good foods) because it is expensive. If research shows that WBV works as an intervention for obesity, osteoporosis, or other diseases, then insurance (government or private) will pay for it. Until then, those people will have to pay out of pocket. Is that helping all or just those who can afford it? As I have said before, WBV is not the panacea for every ailment in the world marketers must be careful how they present it. Otherwise, we are going to have more people like Sal talking about the Soloflex as if it is the standard WBV machine (which is obvious to us but not the general public). My research is not going to be everything that WBV needs. We must team up and work together, even those companies in competition because if WBV is not supported, all companies are going to lose, not to mention the countless individual that it could help.
Note: Athletic training is not the same as personal training or strength training athletes.
Definition of an Athletic Trainer who performs athletic training (called Athletic Therapy is some countries): Allied health care professional who specializes in the prevention, assessment, treatment and
rehabilitation of injuries and illnesses.
And all research is valid, if I could read Russian, I would be all over those articles. Anyone have English translations?
David,
Yes, athletic training is not the same as strength and conditioning but where does this leave us with vibration and vibration research in the athletic “setting” which was the point of my question? And yes, I do have an English translation of Dr. Mikheev’s work for one of his PhDs – he has two Phds – this is his most recent.
The “pay as you go” makes a lot of sense to me too.
Just a note on Scott H. and my questions on the performance section of the forum on the vibration training thread at http://www.coreperformance.com. My last post was a recap of questions for Scott to answer. So far, no answers. And Scott said in one of his posts “any questions.” I then posted the questions starting with the amplitude question. I have sent messages to the site administrator at coreperformance.com the last two days asking when Scott was going to get around to answering these questions. So far I have not had any response at all from the site administrator. Really makes me wonder?????