BioMd Lab is looking for students, proactive, capable of working autonomous and self-sufficient, inquisitive, willing to work in interdisciplinary teams/areas, strong ethics and decided to improve health care and quality of life.

In general, candidates are expected to have a Bachelor’s and Master in Mechanical Engineering, Biomedical Engineering, Mechatronics Engineering, Applied Physics or related fields.

Candidates interested to pursue PhD in the area of Medical Devices Design, Biomedical Engineering, Biomechanics or Bio Design, should follow this 3-steps:

Discuss with Dr Lorenzo Garcia a research topic.

Prepare and provide 2-3 pages of Research Proposal including the following sections:

Working Title
The current proposed title of the research.

Research Question(s)
Clearly state the research question(s). The research question should be clear and focused and summarises the issue you will investigate.

Abstract/Summary: (100 words or fewer)
A brief summary of the research to be undertaken, written in non-technical language so that a non-specialist in the discipline will know what the proposal involves.

Literature/Past Research Review (up to 1 page)
A brief account of how the proposed project relates to existing knowledge and literature within the appropriate field.

Design/Plan of the Study:
Provide a brief outline of the potential methodology and methods/research technique(s) to be employed in the study.

Note: The Research Proposal must reflect and include:

- What prior research has been done?
- Justification of the research:
  - Why is it important to research in the selected topic?
  - What is the novelty of the research proposal?
- What are the research questions to be answered during the PhD journey?

3. Send the Research Proposal with his/her CV to Dr Lorenzo Garcia (lorenzo.garcia@aut.ac.nz)

* Guidelines to elaborate your research proposal (before enrolling at AUT)

Faryadi Q (2012), How to Write Your PhD Proposal: A Step-By-Step Guide

Kivunja C (2016), How to Write An Effective Research Proposal For Higher Degree
Research in Higher Education: Lessons From Practice

Samuels P (2017), How to Write a PhD Proposal

Verhoef M J et al. (2004), Writing an effective research proposal

Databases:

* Notes for PhD candidates after enrolment *

* Guidelines to refine your research questions during your PGR9 (after enrolling at AUT)

Rojos et al. (2012), Formulating a convincing rationale for a research study

Performing a Literature review

A systematic review is commonly characterised by:

A well-defined research question
Transparent search terms and database selection
Exclusion/inclusion criteria with evaluation of search findings
A research project structure with elements such as Introduction, Method, Result, Discussion

The purpose of systematic review is different from that of a traditional literature review.

Traditional (narrative) literature review	Systematic review
Reviews past research to identify gaps or discrepancies and establish need for new research Provides a foundation that the researcher uses to position their own new research	Uses best available evidence in a body of literature to arrive at a conclusion Provides a foundation from which the researcher(s) can make recommendations

In a traditional literature review, the researcher:

selects and examines studies related to the research topic.
does not have to make visible the search and selection process and criteria.

Comparison Table of Traditional and Systematic Reviews:

Feature

Traditional (narrative) literature review

Systematic review

Purpose

· Reviews past research to identify gaps or discrepancies and establish need for new research.

· Provides a foundation that the researcher uses to position their own new research.

· Uses best available evidence in a body of literature to arrive at a conclusion related to a specific problem or issue.

· Provides a foundation from which the researcher(s) can make recommendations (for practice).

Question

· May have one or more research questions, which can be broad or specific.

· Often has a single and specific research question with well- defined parameters.

Search and selection process

· Does not have to be specified and made visible.

· Does not explicitly control for selection bias.

· Must generally be specified, clearly outlined and recorded, using a review tool (e.g., PRISMA).

· Uses clear inclusion and exclusion criteria before examining the literature.

· May require peer evaluation of search and selection results.

· Aims to minimise selection bias.

Writing about the selected literature

· Involves an analysis, synthesis and critique of past studies.

· May include theoretical frameworks.

· Is commonly organised around research concepts and issues.

· Involves an analysis and synthesis of selected studies.

· May include an overall critique.

· Commonly includes qualitative analysis involving ‘coding’ to search for ‘themes’ or ‘constructs’ across studies.

· Statistical procedures for data analysis may be used.

Types of systematic reviews

There are four common types of reviews using systematic methods:

Systematic literature reviews
Rapid reviews
Scoping reviews
Integrative reviews

Systematic literature review	Rapid review	Scoping review	Integrative review
Uses best available evidence from a broad range of databases to arrive at a conclusion related to a specific problem or intervention Provides a foundation from which the researcher(s) can make recommendations for theory and practice	Uses best available evidence from a narrow span of data bases to establish what is known about a problem, policy or practice Presents evidence-based summaries to advise stakeholders	Commonly uses a wide range of sources to establish scope, nature and characteristics of a topic or emerging research field, not yet fully reviewed, or which is complex/varied in nature Often provides a preparative review of the nature and extent of research evidence and gaps in knowledge	Uses a variety of methodological, empirical and theoretical studies Provides a detailed understanding of an issue or phenomenon to indicate any gaps in knowledge, develop theory, and inform policy or pra

A common feature of these reviews is the goal of reducing bias in the search and selection of studies.

This bias mainly refers to:

Availability of resources
Researcher’s degree of objectivity
Degree of similarity in type and content of research

A common strategy for reducing bias:

Extended time to perform a thorough search in published and ‘yet to be published’ articles
Two or more reviewers following transparent processes of conducting searches and making selections
Homogeneity of selected research articles

Comparison of the Different Types of Systematic Reviews

Feature	Systematic review	Rapid review	Scoping review	Integrative review
Purpose	Uses best available evidence from a broad range of databases to arrive at a conclusion related to a specific problem or intervention.Provides a foundation from which the researcher(s) can make recommendations for theory and practice.	Uses best available evidence from a narrow span of data bases to establish what is known about a problem, policy or practice.Presents evidence-based summaries to advice stakeholders.	Commonly uses a wide range of sources to establish scope, nature and characteristics of a topic or emerging research field, not yet fully reviewed, or which is complex/varied in nature.Often provides a preparative review of the nature and extent of research evidence and gaps in knowledge.	Uses a variety of methodological, empirical and theoretical studies.Provides a detailed understanding of an issue or phenomenon to indicate any gaps in knowledge, develop theory, and inform policy or practice.
Research Question	Often has a single and specific research question with well- defined parameters, e.g., PICO(T).	Often has a single and specific research question with well- defined parameters, e.g., PICO(T).	Commonly starts with an aim or a broad research question, that can become more focussed during the research process.	Often is a problem formulation related to practice or policy; question can be broad or narrow.
Search and selection	Determines scope by stating the question in advance.Uses a clear and replicable search and selection procedure following standard/ reporting guidelines (e.g., PRISMA).Uses narrow inclusion/ exclusion criteria, widespread searching of a high number of databases and resources.Risk of selection bias is low.	Determines scope by stating the question in advance.Often uses a replicable search and selection procedure following standard/reporting guidelines (e.g., PRISMA-RR).Uses mostly narrow inclusion/exclusion criteria, thorough searching but of a limited number of databases due to time limits.Risk of selection bias varies.	Usually uses a broad and thorough search and selection of studies linked to aim or question.Can be replicable using standard/reporting guidelines (e.g., PRISMA-ScR).Uses flexible inclusion/ exclusion criteria due to iterative nature of a scoping review.Risk of selection bias varies.	Uses a wide-ranging but focussed search and selection based on problem investigated.Usually replicable using standard/ reporting guidelines (e.g. PRISMA) and appraisal form (CASP).Uses broad inclusion/ exclusion criteria.Risk of selection bias varies due to inclusion of diverse methodological, empirical and theoretical studies.

Analysis and synthesis

May use meta-analysis and statistical synthesis (for quantitative effectiveness) when studies are similar in populations, aims, intervention and method.Often uses descriptive analysis and meta-synthesis (experiential or expert view data) for qualitative and mixed-method studies.

Analyse findings and provides descriptive summary of the findings (e.g. study purpose, design/methods implications, limitations and possible biases).Synthesise findings and provides descriptive categorisation.

Provides summary of studies (descriptive analysis).Commonly uses narrative synthesis for generating themes from the review.

Provides a summary of the literature on a specific concept or content area around a particular problem or topic (descriptive analysis).Uses narrative synthesis to identify themes, patterns, major variables and relationships.