importance of identifying a research gap

• Privacy Policy

Home » Research Gap – Types, Examples and How to Identify

Research Gap – Types, Examples and How to Identify

Table of Contents

Research Gap

Definition:

Research gap refers to an area or topic within a field of study that has not yet been extensively researched or is yet to be explored. It is a question, problem or issue that has not been addressed or resolved by previous research.

How to Identify Research Gap

Identifying a research gap is an essential step in conducting research that adds value and contributes to the existing body of knowledge. Research gap requires critical thinking, creativity, and a thorough understanding of the existing literature . It is an iterative process that may require revisiting and refining your research questions and ideas multiple times.

Here are some steps that can help you identify a research gap:

• Review existing literature: Conduct a thorough review of the existing literature in your research area. This will help you identify what has already been studied and what gaps still exist.
• Identify a research problem: Identify a specific research problem or question that you want to address.
• Analyze existing research: Analyze the existing research related to your research problem. This will help you identify areas that have not been studied, inconsistencies in the findings, or limitations of the previous research.
• Brainstorm potential research ideas : Based on your analysis, brainstorm potential research ideas that address the identified gaps.
• Consult with experts: Consult with experts in your research area to get their opinions on potential research ideas and to identify any additional gaps that you may have missed.
• Refine research questions: Refine your research questions and hypotheses based on the identified gaps and potential research ideas.
• Develop a research proposal: Develop a research proposal that outlines your research questions, objectives, and methods to address the identified research gap.

Types of Research Gap

There are different types of research gaps that can be identified, and each type is associated with a specific situation or problem. Here are the main types of research gaps and their explanations:

Theoretical Gap

This type of research gap refers to a lack of theoretical understanding or knowledge in a particular area. It can occur when there is a discrepancy between existing theories and empirical evidence or when there is no theory that can explain a particular phenomenon. Identifying theoretical gaps can lead to the development of new theories or the refinement of existing ones.

Empirical Gap

An empirical gap occurs when there is a lack of empirical evidence or data in a particular area. It can happen when there is a lack of research on a specific topic or when existing research is inadequate or inconclusive. Identifying empirical gaps can lead to the development of new research studies to collect data or the refinement of existing research methods to improve the quality of data collected.

Methodological Gap

This type of research gap refers to a lack of appropriate research methods or techniques to answer a research question. It can occur when existing methods are inadequate, outdated, or inappropriate for the research question. Identifying methodological gaps can lead to the development of new research methods or the modification of existing ones to better address the research question.

Practical Gap

A practical gap occurs when there is a lack of practical applications or implementation of research findings. It can occur when research findings are not implemented due to financial, political, or social constraints. Identifying practical gaps can lead to the development of strategies for the effective implementation of research findings in practice.

Knowledge Gap

This type of research gap occurs when there is a lack of knowledge or information on a particular topic. It can happen when a new area of research is emerging, or when research is conducted in a different context or population. Identifying knowledge gaps can lead to the development of new research studies or the extension of existing research to fill the gap.

Examples of Research Gap

Here are some examples of research gaps that researchers might identify:

• Theoretical Gap Example : In the field of psychology, there might be a theoretical gap related to the lack of understanding of the relationship between social media use and mental health. Although there is existing research on the topic, there might be a lack of consensus on the mechanisms that link social media use to mental health outcomes.
• Empirical Gap Example : In the field of environmental science, there might be an empirical gap related to the lack of data on the long-term effects of climate change on biodiversity in specific regions. Although there might be some studies on the topic, there might be a lack of data on the long-term effects of climate change on specific species or ecosystems.
• Methodological Gap Example : In the field of education, there might be a methodological gap related to the lack of appropriate research methods to assess the impact of online learning on student outcomes. Although there might be some studies on the topic, existing research methods might not be appropriate to assess the complex relationships between online learning and student outcomes.
• Practical Gap Example: In the field of healthcare, there might be a practical gap related to the lack of effective strategies to implement evidence-based practices in clinical settings. Although there might be existing research on the effectiveness of certain practices, they might not be implemented in practice due to various barriers, such as financial constraints or lack of resources.
• Knowledge Gap Example: In the field of anthropology, there might be a knowledge gap related to the lack of understanding of the cultural practices of indigenous communities in certain regions. Although there might be some research on the topic, there might be a lack of knowledge about specific cultural practices or beliefs that are unique to those communities.

Examples of Research Gap In Literature Review, Thesis, and Research Paper might be:

• Literature review : A literature review on the topic of machine learning and healthcare might identify a research gap in the lack of studies that investigate the use of machine learning for early detection of rare diseases.
• Thesis : A thesis on the topic of cybersecurity might identify a research gap in the lack of studies that investigate the effectiveness of artificial intelligence in detecting and preventing cyber attacks.
• Research paper : A research paper on the topic of natural language processing might identify a research gap in the lack of studies that investigate the use of natural language processing techniques for sentiment analysis in non-English languages.

How to Write Research Gap

By following these steps, you can effectively write about research gaps in your paper and clearly articulate the contribution that your study will make to the existing body of knowledge.

Here are some steps to follow when writing about research gaps in your paper:

• Identify the research question : Before writing about research gaps, you need to identify your research question or problem. This will help you to understand the scope of your research and identify areas where additional research is needed.
• Review the literature: Conduct a thorough review of the literature related to your research question. This will help you to identify the current state of knowledge in the field and the gaps that exist.
• Identify the research gap: Based on your review of the literature, identify the specific research gap that your study will address. This could be a theoretical, empirical, methodological, practical, or knowledge gap.
• Provide evidence: Provide evidence to support your claim that the research gap exists. This could include a summary of the existing literature, a discussion of the limitations of previous studies, or an analysis of the current state of knowledge in the field.
• Explain the importance: Explain why it is important to fill the research gap. This could include a discussion of the potential implications of filling the gap, the significance of the research for the field, or the potential benefits to society.
• State your research objectives: State your research objectives, which should be aligned with the research gap you have identified. This will help you to clearly articulate the purpose of your study and how it will address the research gap.

Importance of Research Gap

The importance of research gaps can be summarized as follows:

• Advancing knowledge: Identifying research gaps is crucial for advancing knowledge in a particular field. By identifying areas where additional research is needed, researchers can fill gaps in the existing body of knowledge and contribute to the development of new theories and practices.
• Guiding research: Research gaps can guide researchers in designing studies that fill those gaps. By identifying research gaps, researchers can develop research questions and objectives that are aligned with the needs of the field and contribute to the development of new knowledge.
• Enhancing research quality: By identifying research gaps, researchers can avoid duplicating previous research and instead focus on developing innovative research that fills gaps in the existing body of knowledge. This can lead to more impactful research and higher-quality research outputs.
• Informing policy and practice: Research gaps can inform policy and practice by highlighting areas where additional research is needed to inform decision-making. By filling research gaps, researchers can provide evidence-based recommendations that have the potential to improve policy and practice in a particular field.

Applications of Research Gap

Here are some potential applications of research gap:

• Informing research priorities: Research gaps can help guide research funding agencies and researchers to prioritize research areas that require more attention and resources.
• Identifying practical implications: Identifying gaps in knowledge can help identify practical applications of research that are still unexplored or underdeveloped.
• Stimulating innovation: Research gaps can encourage innovation and the development of new approaches or methodologies to address unexplored areas.
• Improving policy-making: Research gaps can inform policy-making decisions by highlighting areas where more research is needed to make informed policy decisions.
• Enhancing academic discourse: Research gaps can lead to new and constructive debates and discussions within academic communities, leading to more robust and comprehensive research.

Advantages of Research Gap

Here are some of the advantages of research gap:

• Identifies new research opportunities: Identifying research gaps can help researchers identify areas that require further exploration, which can lead to new research opportunities.
• Improves the quality of research: By identifying gaps in current research, researchers can focus their efforts on addressing unanswered questions, which can improve the overall quality of research.
• Enhances the relevance of research: Research that addresses existing gaps can have significant implications for the development of theories, policies, and practices, and can therefore increase the relevance and impact of research.
• Helps avoid duplication of effort: Identifying existing research can help researchers avoid duplicating efforts, saving time and resources.
• Helps to refine research questions: Research gaps can help researchers refine their research questions, making them more focused and relevant to the needs of the field.
• Promotes collaboration: By identifying areas of research that require further investigation, researchers can collaborate with others to conduct research that addresses these gaps, which can lead to more comprehensive and impactful research outcomes.

Disadvantages of Research Gap

While research gaps can be advantageous, there are also some potential disadvantages that should be considered:

• Difficulty in identifying gaps: Identifying gaps in existing research can be challenging, particularly in fields where there is a large volume of research or where research findings are scattered across different disciplines.
• Lack of funding: Addressing research gaps may require significant resources, and researchers may struggle to secure funding for their work if it is perceived as too risky or uncertain.
• Time-consuming: Conducting research to address gaps can be time-consuming, particularly if the research involves collecting new data or developing new methods.
• Risk of oversimplification: Addressing research gaps may require researchers to simplify complex problems, which can lead to oversimplification and a failure to capture the complexity of the issues.
• Bias : Identifying research gaps can be influenced by researchers’ personal biases or perspectives, which can lead to a skewed understanding of the field.
• Potential for disagreement: Identifying research gaps can be subjective, and different researchers may have different views on what constitutes a gap in the field, leading to disagreements and debate.

About the author

Muhammad Hassan

Researcher, Academic Writer, Web developer

You may also like

Data Collection – Methods Types and Examples

Delimitations in Research – Types, Examples and...

Research Process – Steps, Examples and Tips

Research Design – Types, Methods and Examples

Institutional Review Board – Application Sample...

Evaluating Research – Process, Examples and...

Identifying Research Gaps to Pursue Innovative Research

This article is an excerpt from a lecture given by my Ph.D. guide, a researcher in public health. She advised us on how to identify research gaps to pursue innovative research in our fields.

What is a Research Gap?

Today we are talking about the research gap: what is it, how to identify it, and how to make use of it so that you can pursue innovative research. Now, how many of you have ever felt you had discovered a new and exciting research question , only to find that it had already been written about? I have experienced this more times than I can count. Graduate studies come with pressure to add new knowledge to the field. We can contribute to the progress and knowledge of humanity. To do this, we need to first learn to identify research gaps in the existing literature.

A research gap is, simply, a topic or area for which missing or insufficient information limits the ability to reach a conclusion for a question. It should not be confused with a research question, however. For example, if we ask the research question of what the healthiest diet for humans is, we would find many studies and possible answers to this question. On the other hand, if we were to ask the research question of what are the effects of antidepressants on pregnant women, we would not find much-existing data. This is a research gap. When we identify a research gap, we identify a direction for potentially new and exciting research.

How to Identify Research Gap?

Considering the volume of existing research, identifying research gaps can seem overwhelming or even impossible. I don’t have time to read every paper published on public health. Similarly, you guys don’t have time to read every paper. So how can you identify a research gap?

There are different techniques in various disciplines, but we can reduce most of them down to a few steps, which are:

• Identify your key motivating issue/question
• Identify key terms associated with this issue
• Review the literature, searching for these key terms and identifying relevant publications
• Review the literature cited by the key publications which you located in the above step
• Identify issues not addressed by  the literature relating to your critical  motivating issue

It is the last step which we all find the most challenging. It can be difficult to figure out what an article is  not  saying. I like to keep a list of notes of biased or inconsistent information. You could also track what authors write as “directions for future research,” which often can point us towards the existing gaps.

Different Types of Research Gaps

Identifying research gaps is an essential step in conducting research, as it helps researchers to refine their research questions and to focus their research efforts on areas where there is a need for more knowledge or understanding.

1. Knowledge gaps

These are gaps in knowledge or understanding of a subject, where more research is needed to fill the gaps. For example, there may be a lack of understanding of the mechanisms behind a particular disease or how a specific technology works.

2. Conceptual gaps

These are gaps in the conceptual framework or theoretical understanding of a subject. For example, there may be a need for more research to understand the relationship between two concepts or to refine a theoretical framework.

3. Methodological gaps

These are gaps in the methods used to study a particular subject. For example, there may be a need for more research to develop new research methods or to refine existing methods to address specific research questions.

4. Data gaps

These are gaps in the data available on a particular subject. For example, there may be a need for more research to collect data on a specific population or to develop new measures to collect data on a particular construct.

5. Practical gaps

These are gaps in the application of research findings to practical situations. For example, there may be a need for more research to understand how to implement evidence-based practices in real-world settings or to identify barriers to implementing such practices.

Examples of Research Gap

Limited understanding of the underlying mechanisms of a disease:.

Despite significant research on a particular disease, there may be a lack of understanding of the underlying mechanisms of the disease. For example, although much research has been done on Alzheimer’s disease, the exact mechanisms that lead to the disease are not yet fully understood.

Inconsistencies in the findings of previous research:

When previous research on a particular topic has inconsistent findings, there may be a need for further research to clarify or resolve these inconsistencies. For example, previous research on the effectiveness of a particular treatment for a medical condition may have produced inconsistent findings, indicating a need for further research to determine the true effectiveness of the treatment.

Limited research on emerging technologies:

As new technologies emerge, there may be limited research on their applications, benefits, and potential drawbacks. For example, with the increasing use of artificial intelligence in various industries, there is a need for further research on the ethical, legal, and social implications of AI.

How to Deal with Literature Gap?

Once you have identified the literature gaps, it is critical to prioritize. You may find many questions which remain to be answered in the literature. Often one question must be answered before the next can be addressed. In prioritizing the gaps, you have identified, you should consider your funding agency or stakeholders, the needs of the field, and the relevance of your questions to what is currently being studied. Also, consider your own resources and ability to conduct the research you’re considering. Once you have done this, you can narrow your search down to an appropriate question.

Tools to Help Your Search

There are thousands of new articles published every day, and staying up to date on the literature can be overwhelming. You should take advantage of the technology that is available. Some services include  PubCrawler ,  Feedly ,  Google Scholar , and PubMed updates. Stay up to date on social media forums where scholars share new discoveries, such as Twitter. Reference managers such as  Mendeley  can help you keep your references well-organized. I personally have had success using Google Scholar and PubMed to stay current on new developments and track which gaps remain in my personal areas of interest.

The most important thing I want to impress upon you today is that you will struggle to  choose a research topic  that is innovative and exciting if you don’t know the existing literature well. This is why identifying research gaps starts with an extensive and thorough  literature review . But give yourself some boundaries.  You don’t need to read every paper that has ever been written on a topic. You may find yourself thinking you’re on the right track and then suddenly coming across a paper that you had intended to write! It happens to everyone- it happens to me quite often. Don’t give up- keep reading and you’ll find what you’re looking for.

Class dismissed!

How do you identify research gaps? Share your thoughts in the comments section below.

Frequently Asked Questions

A research gap can be identified by looking for a topic or area with missing or insufficient information that limits the ability to reach a conclusion for a question.

Identifying a research gap is important as it provides a direction for potentially new research or helps bridge the gap in existing literature.

Gap in research is a topic or area with missing or insufficient information. A research gap limits the ability to reach a conclusion for a question.

Thank u for your suggestion.

Very useful tips specially for a beginner

Thank you. This is helpful. I find that I’m overwhelmed with literatures. As I read on a particular topic, and in a particular direction I find that other conflicting issues, topic a and ideas keep popping up, making me more confused.

I am very grateful for your advice. It’s just on point.

The clearest, exhaustive, and brief explanation I have ever read.

Thanks for sharing

Thank you very much.The work is brief and understandable

Thank you it is very informative

Thanks for sharing this educative article

Thank you for such informative explanation.

Great job smart guy! Really outdid yourself!

Nice one! I thank you for this as it is just what I was looking for!😃🤟

Thank you so much for this. Much appreciated

Thank you so much.

Thankyou for ur briefing…its so helpful

Thank you so much .I’ved learn a lot from this.❤️

Rate this article Cancel Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Enago Academy's Most Popular Articles

• Reporting Research

Choosing the Right Analytical Approach: Thematic analysis vs. content analysis for data interpretation

In research, choosing the right approach to understand data is crucial for deriving meaningful insights.…

Comparing Cross Sectional and Longitudinal Studies: 5 steps for choosing the right approach

The process of choosing the right research design can put ourselves at the crossroads of…

• Career Corner

Unlocking the Power of Networking in Academic Conferences

Embarking on your first academic conference experience? Fear not, we got you covered! Academic conferences…

Research Recommendations – Guiding policy-makers for evidence-based decision making

Research recommendations play a crucial role in guiding scholars and researchers toward fruitful avenues of…

• AI in Academia

Disclosing the Use of Generative AI: Best practices for authors in manuscript preparation

The rapid proliferation of generative and other AI-based tools in research writing has ignited an…

Intersectionality in Academia: Dealing with diverse perspectives

Meritocracy and Diversity in Science: Increasing inclusivity in STEM education

Avoiding the AI Trap: Pitfalls of relying on ChatGPT for PhD applications

Sign-up to read more

Subscribe for free to get unrestricted access to all our resources on research writing and academic publishing including:

• 2000+ blog articles
• 50+ Webinars
• 10+ Expert podcasts
• 50+ Infographics
• 10+ Checklists
• Research Guides

We hate spam too. We promise to protect your privacy and never spam you.

I am looking for Editing/ Proofreading services for my manuscript Tentative date of next journal submission:

As a researcher, what do you consider most when choosing an image manipulation detector?

How To Find A Research Gap, Quickly

A step-by-step guide for new researchers

By: Derek Jansen (MBA) | Reviewer: Eunice Rautenbach (DTech) | April 2023

If you’ve got a dissertation, thesis or research project coming up, one of the first (and most important) things you’ll need to do is find a suitable research gap . In this post, we’ll share a straightforward process to help you uncover high-quality, original research gaps in a very time-efficient manner.

Overview: Finding Research Gaps

• What exactly is a research gap?
• Research gap vs research topic
• How to find potential research gaps
• How to evaluate research gaps (and topics)
• Key takeaways

What is a research gap?

As a starting point, it’s useful to first define what we mean by research gap, to ensure we’re all on the same page. The term “research gap” gets thrown around quite loosely by students and academics alike, so let’s clear that up.

Simply put, a research gap is any space where there’s a lack of solid, agreed-upon research regarding a specific topic, issue or phenomenon. In other words, there’s a lack of established knowledge and, consequently, a need for further research.

Let’s look at a hypothetical example to illustrate a research gap.

Within the existing research regarding factors affect job satisfaction , there may be a wealth of established and agreed-upon empirical work within a US and UK context , but very little research within Eastern nations such as Japan or Korea . Given that these nations have distinctly different national cultures and workforce compositions compared to the West, it’s plausible that the factors that contribute toward job satisfaction may also be different. Therefore, a research gap emerges for studies that explore this matter.

This example is purely hypothetical (and there’s probably plenty of research covering this already), but it illustrates the core point that a research gap reflects a lack of firmly established knowledge regarding a specific matter . Given this lack, an opportunity exists for researchers (like you) to go on and fill the gap.

So, it’s the same as a research topic?

Not quite – but they are connected. A research gap refers to an area where there’s a lack of settled research , whereas a research topic outlines the focus of a specific study . Despite being different things, these two are related because research gaps are the birthplace of research topics. In other words, by identifying a clear research gap, you have a foundation from which you can build a research topic for your specific study. Your study is unlikely to resolve the entire research gap on it’s own, but it will contribute towards it .

If you’d like to learn more, we’ve got a comprehensive post that covers research gaps (including the different types of research gaps), as well as an explainer video below.

How to find a research gap

Now that we’ve defined what a research gap is, it’s time to get down to the process of finding potential research gaps that you can use as a basis for potential research topics. Importantly, it’s worth noting that this is just one way (of many) to find a research gap (and consequently a topic). We’re not proposing that it’s the only way or best way, but it’s certainly a relatively quick way to identify opportunities.

Step 1: Identify your broad area of interest

The very first step to finding a research gap is to decide on your general area of interest . For example, if you were undertaking a dissertation as part of an MBA degree, you may decide that you’re interested in corporate reputation, HR strategy, or leadership styles. As you can see, these are broad categories – there’s no need to get super specific just yet. Of course, if there is something very specific that you’re interested in, that’s great – but don’t feel pressured to narrow it down too much right now.

Equally important is to make sure that this area of interest is allowed by your university or whichever institution you’ll be proposing your research to. This might sound dead obvious, but you’ll be surprised how many times we’ve seen students run down a path with great excitement, only to later learn that their university wants a very specific area of focus in terms of topic (and their area of interest doesn’t qualify).

Step 2: Do an initial literature scan

Once you’ve pinned down your broad area (or areas) of interest, the next step is to head over to Google Scholar to undertake an initial literature scan . If you’re not familiar with this tool, Google Scholar is a great starting point for finding academic literature on pretty much any topic, as it uses Google’s powerful search capabilities to hunt down relevant academic literature. It’s certainly not the be-all and end-all of literature search tools, but it’s a useful starting point .

Within Google Scholar, you’ll want to do a few searches using keywords that are relevant to your area of interest. Sticking with our earlier example, we could use the key phrase “job satisfaction”, or we may want to get a little more specific – perhaps “job satisfaction for millennials” or “job satisfaction in Japan”.

It’s always a good idea to play around with as many keywords/phrases as you can think up.  Take an iterative approach here and see which keywords yield the most relevant results for you. Keep each search open in a new tab, as this will help keep things organised for the next steps.

Once you’ve searched for a few different keywords/phrases, you’ll need to do some refining for each of the searches you undertook. Specifically, you’ll need to filter the results down to the most recent papers . You can do this by selecting the time period in the top left corner (see the example below).

Filtering to the current year is typically a good choice (especially for fast-moving research areas), but in some cases, you may need to filter to the last two years . If you’re undertaking this task in January or February, for example, you’ll likely need to select a two-year period.

Need a helping hand?

Step 3: Review and shortlist articles that interest you

Once you’ve run a few searches using different keywords and phrases, you’ll need to scan through the results to see what looks most relevant and interesting to you. At this stage, you can just look at the titles and abstracts (the description provided by Google Scholar) – don’t worry about reading the actual article just yet.

Next, select 5 – 10 articles that interest you and open them up. Here, we’re making the assumption that your university has provided you with access to a decent range of academic databases. In some cases, Google Scholar will link you directly to a PDF of the article, but in most cases, you’ll need paid access. If you don’t have this (for example, if you’re still applying to a university), you can look at two options:

Open-access articles – these are free articles which you can access without any journal subscription. A quick Google search (the regular Google) will help you find open-access journals in your area of interest, but you can also have a look at DOAJ and Elsevier Open Access.

DeepDyve – this is a monthly subscription service that allows you to get access to a broad range of journals. At the time of shooting this video, their monthly subscription is around $50 and they do offer a free trial, which may be sufficient for your project.

Step 4: Skim-read your article shortlist

Now, it’s time to dig into your article shortlist and do some reading. But don’t worry, you don’t need to read the articles from start to finish – you just need to focus on a few key sections.

Specifically, you’ll need to pay attention to the following:

• The abstract (which you’ve probably already read a portion of in Google Scholar)
• The introduction – this will give you a bit more detail about the context and background of the study, as well as what the researchers were trying to achieve (their research aims)
• The discussion or conclusion – this will tell you what the researchers found

By skimming through these three sections for each journal article on your shortlist, you’ll gain a reasonable idea of what each study was about, without having to dig into the painful details. Generally, these sections are usually quite short, so it shouldn’t take you too long.

Step 5: Go “FRIN hunting”

This is where the magic happens. Within each of the articles on your shortlist, you’ll want to search for a few very specific phrases , namely:

• Future research
• Further research
• Research opportunities
• Research directions

All of these terms are commonly found in what we call the “FRIN” section . FRIN stands for “further research is needed”. The FRIN is where the researchers explain what other researchers could do to build on their study, or just on the research area in general. In other words, the FRIN section is where you can find fresh opportunities for novel research . Most empirical studies will either have a dedicated FRIN section or paragraph, or they’ll allude to the FRIN toward the very end of the article. You’ll need to do a little scanning, but it’s usually pretty easy to spot.

It’s worth mentioning that naturally, the FRIN doesn’t hand you a list of research gaps on a platter. It’s not a silver bullet for finding research gaps – but it’s the closest thing to it. Realistically, the FRIN section helps you shortcut the gap-hunting process  by highlighting novel research avenues that are worth exploring.

This probably sounds a little conceptual, so let’s have a look at a few examples:

The impact of overeducation on job outcomes: Evidence from Saudi Arabia (Alzubaidi, 2020)

If you scroll down to the bottom of this article, you’ll see there’s a dedicated section called “Limitations and directions for future research”. Here they talk about the limitations of the study and provide suggestions about how future researchers could improve upon their work and overcome the limitations.

Perceived organizational support and job satisfaction: a moderated mediation model of proactive personality and psychological empowerment (Maan et al, 2020)

In this article, within the limitations section, they provide a wonderfully systematic structure where they discuss each limitation, followed by a proposal as to how future studies can overcome the respective limitation. In doing so, they are providing very specific research opportunities for other researchers.

Medical professionals’ job satisfaction and telemedicine readiness during the COVID-19 pandemic: solutions to improve medical practice in Egypt (El-Mazahy et al, 2023)

In this article, they don’t have a dedicated section discussing the FRIN, but we can deduct it based on the limitations section. For example, they state that an evaluation of the knowledge about telemedicine and technology-related skills would have enabled studying their independent effect on the perception of telemedicine.

Follow this FRIN-seeking process for the articles you shortlisted and map out any potentially interesting research gaps . You may find that you need to look at a larger number of articles to find something interesting, or you might find that your area of interest shifts as you engage in the reading – this is perfectly natural. Take as much time as you need to develop a shortlist of potential research gaps that interest you.

Importantly, once you’ve developed a shortlist of potential research gaps, you need to return to Google Scholar to double-check that there aren’t fresh studies that have already addressed the gap. Remember, if you’re looking at papers from two years ago in a fast-moving field, someone else may have jumped on it . Nevertheless, there could still very well be a unique angle you could take – perhaps a contextual gap (e.g. a specific country, industry, etc.).

Ultimately, the need for originality will depend on your specific university’s requirements and the level of study. For example, if you’re doing an undergraduate research project, the originality requirements likely won’t be as gruelling as say a Masters or PhD project. So, make sure you have a clear understanding of what your university’s expectations are. A good way to do this is to look at past dissertations and theses for your specific programme. You can usually find these in the university library or by asking the faculty.

How to evaluate potential research gaps

Once you’ve developed a shortlist of potential research gaps (and resultant potential research topics) that interest you, you’ll need to systematically evaluate  them  to choose a winner. There are many factors to consider here, but some important ones include the following:

• Originality and value – is the topic sufficiently novel and will addressing it create value?
• Data access – will you be able to get access to the sample of interest?
• Costs – will there be additional costs involved for data collection and/or analysis?
• Timeframes – will you be able to collect and analyse the data within the timeframe required by your university?
• Supervisor support – is there a suitable supervisor available to support your project from start to finish?

To help you evaluate your options systematically, we’ve got a topic evaluation worksheet that allows you to score each potential topic against a comprehensive set of criteria. You can access the worksheet completely free of charge here .

Recap: Key Takeaways

We’ve covered quite a lot of ground in this post. Here are the key takeaways:

• A research gap is any space where there’s a lack of solid, agreed-upon research regarding a specific topic/issue/phenomenon.
• Unique research topics emerge from research gaps , so it’s essential to first identify high-quality research gaps before you attempt to define a topic.
• To find potential research gaps, start by seeking out recent journal articles on Google Scholar and pay particular attention to the FRIN section to identify novel opportunities.
• Once you have a shortlist of prospective research gaps and resultant topic ideas, evaluate them systematically using a comprehensive set of criteria.

If you’d like to get hands-on help finding a research gap and research topic, be sure to check out our private coaching service , where we hold your hand through the research journey, step by step.

Psst... there’s more!

This post was based on one of our popular Research Bootcamps . If you're working on a research project, you'll definitely want to check this out ...

You Might Also Like:

Very useful for me, but i am still confusing review of literature review, how to find out topic related previous research.

Powerful notes! Thanks a lot.

This is helpful. Thanks a lot.

Thank you very much for this. It is really a great opportunity for me to learn the research journey.

Very Useful

It nice job

You have sharpened my articulations of these components to the core. Thanks so much.

Submit a Comment Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

• Print Friendly

• Link to facebook
• Link to linkedin
• Link to twitter
• Link to youtube
• Writing Tips

How to Identify a Research Gap

• 5-minute read
• 10th January 2024

If you’ve been tasked with producing a thesis or dissertation, one of your first steps will be identifying a research gap. Although finding a research gap may sound daunting, don’t fret! In this post, we will define a research gap, discuss its importance, and offer a step-by-step guide that will provide you with the essential know-how to complete this critical step and move on to the rest of your research project.

What Is a Research Gap?

Simply put, a research gap is an area that hasn’t been explored in the existing literature. This could be an unexplored population, an untested method, or a condition that hasn’t been investigated yet. 

Why Is Identifying a Research Gap Important?

Identifying a research gap is a foundational step in the research process. It ensures that your research is significant and has the ability to advance knowledge within a specific area. It also helps you align your work with the current needs and challenges of your field. Identifying a research gap has many potential benefits.

1. Avoid Redundancy in Your Research

Understanding the existing literature helps researchers avoid duplication. This means you can steer clear of topics that have already been extensively studied. This ensures your work is novel and contributes something new to the field.

2. Guide the Research Design

Identifying a research gap helps shape your research design and questions. You can tailor your studies to specifically address the identified gap. This ensures that your work directly contributes to filling the void in knowledge.

3. Practical Applications

Research that addresses a gap is more likely to have practical applications and contributions. Whether in academia, industry, or policymaking, research that fills a gap in knowledge is often more applicable and can inform decision-making and practices in real-world contexts.

4. Field Advancements

Addressing a research gap can lead to advancements in the field . It may result in the development of new theories, methodologies, or technologies that push the boundaries of current understanding.

5. Strategic Research Planning

Identifying a research gap is crucial for strategic planning . It helps researchers and institutions prioritize areas that need attention so they can allocate resources effectively. This ensures that efforts are directed toward the most critical gaps in knowledge.

6. Academic and Professional Recognition

Researchers who successfully address significant research gaps often receive peer recognition within their academic and professional communities. This recognition can lead to opportunities for collaboration, funding, and career advancement.

How Do I Identify a Research Gap?

1. clearly define your research topic .

Begin by clearly defining your research topic. A well-scoped topic serves as the foundation for your studies. Make sure it’s not too broad or too narrow; striking the right balance will make it easier to identify gaps in existing literature.

Find this useful?

Subscribe to our newsletter and get writing tips from our editors straight to your inbox.

2. Conduct a Thorough Literature Review

A comprehensive literature review is a vital step in any research. Dive deep into the existing research related to your topic. Look for patterns, recurring themes, and consensus among scholars. Pay attention to areas where conflicting opinions or gaps in understanding emerge.

3. Evaluate Existing Studies

Critically evaluate the studies you encounter during your literature review. Assess the paradigms , methodologies, findings, and limitations of each. Note any discrepancies, unanswered questions, or areas where further investigation is warranted. These are potential indicators of research gaps.

4. Identify Unexplored Perspectives

Consider the perspectives presented in the existing literature. Are there alternative viewpoints or marginalized voices that haven’t been adequately explored? Identifying and incorporating diverse perspectives can often lead to uncharted territory and help you pinpoint a unique research gap.

Additional Tips

Stay up to date with emerging trends.

The field of research is dynamic, with new developments and emerging trends constantly shaping the landscape. Stay up to date with the latest publications, conferences, and discussions in your field and make sure to regularly check relevant academic search engines . Often, identifying a research gap involves being at the forefront of current debates and discussions.

Seek Guidance From Experts

Don’t hesitate to reach out to experts in your field for guidance. Attend conferences, workshops, or seminars where you can interact with seasoned researchers. Their insights and experience can provide valuable perspectives on potential research gaps that you may have overlooked. You can also seek advice from your academic advisor .

Use Research Tools and Analytics

Leverage tech tools to analyze patterns and trends in the existing literature. Tools like citation analysis, keyword mapping, and data visualization can help you identify gaps and areas with limited exploration.

Identifying a research gap is a skill that evolves with experience and dedication. By defining your research topic, meticulously navigating the existing literature, critically evaluating studies, and recognizing unexplored perspectives, you’ll be on your way to identifying a research gap that will serve as the foundation for your paper, thesis, or dissertation topic .

If you need any help with proofreading your research paper , we can help with our research paper editing services . You can even try a sample of our services for free . Good luck with all your research!

Share this article:

Post A New Comment

Got content that needs a quick turnaround? Let us polish your work. Explore our editorial business services.

9-minute read

How to Use Infographics to Boost Your Presentation

Is your content getting noticed? Capturing and maintaining an audience’s attention is a challenge when...

8-minute read

Why Interactive PDFs Are Better for Engagement

Are you looking to enhance engagement and captivate your audience through your professional documents? Interactive...

7-minute read

Seven Key Strategies for Voice Search Optimization

Voice search optimization is rapidly shaping the digital landscape, requiring content professionals to adapt their...

4-minute read

Five Creative Ways to Showcase Your Digital Portfolio

Are you a creative freelancer looking to make a lasting impression on potential clients or...

How to Ace Slack Messaging for Contractors and Freelancers

Effective professional communication is an important skill for contractors and freelancers navigating remote work environments....

3-minute read

How to Insert a Text Box in a Google Doc

Google Docs is a powerful collaborative tool, and mastering its features can significantly enhance your...

Make sure your writing is the best it can be with our expert English proofreading and editing.

How to identify research gaps

Anthony Newman

About this video

Researching is an ongoing task, as it requires you to think of something nobody else has thought of before. This is where the research gap comes into play.

We will explain what a research gap is, provide you with steps on how to identify these research gaps, as well as provide you several tools that can help you identify them.

About the presenter

Senior Publisher, Life Sciences, Elsevier

Anthony Newman is a Senior Publisher with Elsevier and is based in Amsterdam. Each year he presents numerous Author Workshops and other similar trainings worldwide. He is currently responsible for fifteen biochemistry and laboratory medicine journals, he joined Elsevier over thirty years ago and has been Publisher for more than twenty of those years. Before then he was the marketing communications manager for the biochemistry journals of Elsevier.  By training he is a polymer chemist and was active in the surface coating industry before leaving London and moving to Amsterdam in 1987 to join Elsevier.

How to locate key publications

How to find relevant and authoritative research

How to integrate sex, gender, and intersectional analysis into research

How to enhance your chances of serendipitous research discovery

Data Repositories to store your data

Researcher Academy on Twitter

Educational resources and simple solutions for your research journey

How to Identify Gaps in Research: Tips to Speed Up the Process

If you have ever wondered how to identify research gaps, well, you’re not alone. All researchers looking to make a solid contribution to their field need to start by identifying a topic or issue that hasn’t been tackled before and coming up with possible solutions for it. This is where learning what is a research gap, knowing about some research gap examples, and knowing how to identify research gaps becomes important. Through this article, we will try answering these questions for you.

Table of Contents

What is a research gap ?  

Research gaps are areas requiring more studies or research. 1  They can be:   

• an unsolved question or problem within your field.   
• a case where inconclusive or contradictive results exist.   
• a new concept or idea that hasn’t been studied.   
• a new/updated research to replace the outdated existing research.   
• a specific demographic or location that has not been well studied.   

Why is it important to identify research gaps ?  

Identifying and prioritizing research gaps  is an essential part of any research for the following reasons. 2  This can help you:  

• ensure the rapid generation of subsequent research that is informed by input from previous research studies.    
• understand areas of uncertainty within the research problem.   
• establish the research problem and scope of the study.   
• determine the scope of funding opportunities.   

Identifying research gaps : A challenge for early researchers  

Coming up with original, innovative ideas in your chosen area of research can be tricky, especially if you are an early career researcher, for the following reasons: 3,4

• Enormous information available : The introduction, discussion, and future research sections in published research articles provide information about gaps in the research field. It is easy to get overwhelmed and feel confused about which one to address. Using digital tools can help you seek out popular topics or the most cited research papers.   
• Difficulty in organizing the data : One can quickly lose ideas if not appropriately noted. Mapping the question to the resource and maintaining a record can help narrow research gap s.  
• Fear of challenging the existing knowledge : Beginner researchers may not feel confident to question established norms in their field. A good plan of action would be discussing such ideas with your advisor and proceeding according to their feedback or suggestions.   
• Lack of direction and motivation : Early researchers have reported negative emotions regarding academic research, including feeling directionless or frustrated with the effort required in identifying research topics. Again a good advisor can help you stay focused. Mentors can help novice researchers avoid cases with a high risk of failure, from misunderstanding the literature, weak design, or too many unknowns. Talking with other fellow researchers can also help overcome some of the anxiety.

How to identify research gaps  in the literature  

More than 7 million papers get published annually. 5  Considering the volume of existing research, identifying research gaps  from existing literature may seem a daunting task. While there are no hard rules for identifying research gaps, the literature has provided some guidelines for identifying problems worth investigating.   

1. Observe : Personal interests and experiences can provide insight into possible research problems. For example, a researcher interested in teaching may start with a simple observation of students’ classroom behavior and observe the link with learning theories. Developing the habit of reading literature using smart apps like  R Discovery   can keep you updated with the latest trends and developments in the field.   

2. Search : Exploring existing literature will help to identify if the observed problem is documented. One approach is identifying the independent variables used to solve the researcher’s topic of interest (i.e., the dependent variable). Databases such as Emerald, ProQuest, EbscoHost, PubMed, and ScienceDirect can help potential researchers explore existing research gaps. The following steps can help with optimizing the search process once you decide on the key research question based on your interests.

-Identify key terms.

-Identify relevant articles based on the keywords.

-Review selected articles to identify gaps in the literature.  

3. Map : This involves mapping key issues or aspects across the literature. The map should be updated whenever a researcher comes across an article of interest.   

4. Synthesize : Synthesis involves integrating the insights of multiple but related studies. A research gap is identified by combining results and findings across several interrelated studies. 6

5. Consult:  Seeking expert feedback will help you understand if the  research gaps identified are adequate and feasible or if improvements are required.  

6. Prioritize : It is possible that you have identified multiple questions requiring answers. Prioritize the question that can be addressed first, considering their relevance, resource availability, and your research strengths.  

7. Enroll : Research Skills Development Programs, including workshops and discussion groups within or outside the research institution, can help develop research skills, such as framing the research problem. Networking and corroborating in such events with colleagues and experts might help you know more about current issues and problems in your research domain.   

While there is no well-defined process to identify gaps in knowledge, curiosity, judgment, and creativity can help you in identifying these research gaps . Regardless of whether the  research gaps identified are large or small, the study design must be sufficient to contribute toward advancing your field of research.    

References  

• Dissanayake, D. M. N. S. W. (2013). Research, research gap and the research problem.  
• Nyanchoka, L., Tudur-Smith, C., Porcher, R., & Hren, D. Key stakeholders’ perspectives and experiences with defining, identifying and displaying gaps in health research: a qualitative study.  BMJ open ,  10 (11), e039932 (2020).  
• Müller-Bloch, C., & Kranz, J. (2015). A framework for rigorously identifying research gaps in qualitative literature reviews.  
• Creswell, J. W., & Clark, V. L. P. (2017).  Designing and conducting mixed methods research . Sage publications.  
• Fire, M., & Guestrin, C. Over-optimization of academic publishing metrics: observing Goodhart’s Law in action.  GigaScience ,  8 (6), giz053 (2019).  
• Ellis, T. J., & Levy, Y. Framework of problem-based research: A guide for novice researchers on the development of a research-worthy problem.  Informing Science: the International Journal of an Emerging Transdiscipline Volume 11, 2008 ). 

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

Question: How can research gaps be addressed?

Research gaps can be addressed by conducting further studies, experiments, or investigations that specifically target the areas where knowledge is lacking or incomplete. This involves conducting a thorough literature review to identify existing gaps, designing research methodologies to address these gaps, and collecting new data or analyzing existing data to fill the void. Collaboration among researchers, interdisciplinary approaches, and innovative research designs can also help bridge research gaps and contribute to the advancement of knowledge in a particular field.

Question: Can research gaps change over time?

Yes, research gaps can change over time. As new studies are conducted, technologies advance, and societal needs evolve, gaps in knowledge may be identified or existing gaps may become more pronounced. Research gaps are dynamic and subject to shifts as new discoveries are made, new questions arise, and priorities change. It is crucial for researchers to continuously assess and update their understanding of the field to identify emerging research gaps and adapt their research efforts accordingly.

Question: Are research gaps specific to a particular discipline or field?

Research gaps can exist within any discipline or field. Each discipline has its own unique body of knowledge and areas where understanding may be limited. Research gaps can arise from unanswered questions, unexplored phenomena, conflicting findings, practical challenges, or new frontiers of knowledge. They are not limited to a specific discipline or field, as gaps can exist in natural sciences, social sciences, humanities, engineering, or any other area of study.

Question: How can research gaps contribute to the research proposal?

Research gaps play a significant role in the development of research proposals. They help researchers identify a clear rationale and justification for their study. By addressing identified gaps in knowledge, researchers can demonstrate the significance and relevance of their proposed research. Research proposals often include a literature review section that highlights existing gaps and positions the proposed study as a contribution to the field. By explicitly addressing research gaps, researchers can strengthen the credibility and importance of their research proposal, as well as its potential impact on advancing knowledge and addressing critical questions or challenges.

R Discovery is a literature search and research reading platform that accelerates your research discovery journey by keeping you updated on the latest, most relevant scholarly content. With 250M+ research articles sourced from trusted aggregators like CrossRef, Unpaywall, PubMed, PubMed Central, Open Alex and top publishing houses like Springer Nature, JAMA, IOP, Taylor & Francis, NEJM, BMJ, Karger, SAGE, Emerald Publishing and more, R Discovery puts a world of research at your fingertips.  

Try R Discovery Prime FREE for 1 week or upgrade at just US$72 a year to access premium features that let you listen to research on the go, read in your language, collaborate with peers, auto sync with reference managers, and much more. Choose a simpler, smarter way to find and read research – Download the app and start your free 7-day trial today !  

Related Posts

How to Define a Research Problem?

Does Journal Impact Define Research Impact?

Log in using your username and password

• Search More Search for this keyword Advanced search
• Latest content
• Current issue
• BMJ Journals More You are viewing from: Google Indexer

You are here

• Volume 23, Issue Suppl 1
• 34 Methods for identifying and displaying research gaps
• Article Text
• Article info
• Citation Tools
• Rapid Responses
• Article metrics

• Linda Nyanchoka 1 ,
• Catrin Tudur-Smith 2 ,
• Van Thu Nguyen 1 ,
• Raphaël Porcher Porcher 1
• 1 Centre de Recherche Épidémiologie et Statistique Sorbonne Paris Cité (CRESS-UMR1153) Inserm/Université Paris Descartes, Paris, France
• 2 University of Liverpool, Institute of Translational Medicine, Liverpool, UK

Objectives The current body of research is growing, with over 1 million clinical research papers published from clinical trials alone. This volume of health research demonstrates the importance of conducting knowledge syntheses in providing the evidence base and identifying gaps, which can inform further research, policy-making, and practice. This study aims to describe methods for identifying and displaying research gaps.

Method A scoping review using the Arksey and O’Malley methodological framework was conducted. We searched Medline, Pub Med, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Scopus, Web of Science, PROSPERO register, TRIP, Google Scholar and Google. The following combination of terms were used: ‘identifying gaps in research’, ‘research gaps’,’evidence gaps’, ‘research uncertainties’, ‘research gaps identification’,’research gaps prioritisation’ and ‘methods’. The searches were limited to English, conducted in humans and published in the last 10 years for databases searches and unrestricted for hand and expert suggestion articles.

Results The literature search retrieved 1938 references, of which 139 were included for data synthesis. Of the 139 studies, 91 (65%) aimed to identify gaps, 22 (16%) determine research priorities and 26 (19%) on both identifying gaps and determining research priorities. A total of 13 different definitions of research gaps were identified. The methods for identifying gaps included different study designs, examples included primary research methods (quantitative surveys, interview, and focus groups), secondary research methods (systematic reviews, overview of reviews, scoping reviews, evidence mapping and bibliometric analysis), primary and secondary research methods (James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnerships (JLA PSP) and Global Evidence Mapping (GEM). Some of the examples of methods to determine research priorities included delphi survey, needs assessment, consensus meeting and Interviews.The methods for displaying gaps and determine research priorities mainly varied according to the number of variables being presented.

Conclusions This study provides an overview of different methods used to and/or reported on identifying gaps, determining research priorities and displaying both gaps and research priorities. These study findings can be adapted to inform the development of methodological guidance on ways to advance methods to identify, prioritise and display gaps to inform research and evidence-based decision-making.

https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjebm-2018-111024.34

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request permissions.

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

Read the full text or download the PDF:

• Research Process

What is a Research Gap

• 3 minute read
• 285.9K views

Table of Contents

If you are a young researcher, or even still finishing your studies, you’ll probably notice that your academic environment revolves around certain research topics, probably linked to your department or to the interest of your mentor and direct colleagues. For example, if your department is currently doing research in nanotechnology applied to medicine, it is only natural that you feel compelled to follow this line of research. Hopefully, it’s something you feel familiar with and interested in – although you might take your own twists and turns along your career.

Many scientists end up continuing their academic legacy during their professional careers, writing about their own practical experiences in the field and adapting classic methodologies to a present context. However, each and every researcher dreams about being a pioneer in a subject one day, by discovering a topic that hasn’t been approached before by any other scientist. This is a research gap.

Research gaps are particularly useful for the advance of science, in general. Finding a research gap and having the means to develop a complete and sustained study on it can be very rewarding for the scientist (or team of scientists), not to mention how its new findings can positively impact our whole society.

How to Find a Gap in Research

How many times have you felt that you have finally formulated THAT new and exciting question, only to find out later that it had been addressed before? Probably more times than you can count.

There are some steps you can take to help identify research gaps, since it is impossible to go through all the information and research available nowadays:

• Select a topic or question that motivates you: Research can take a long time and surely a large amount of physical, intellectual and emotional effort, therefore choose a topic that can keep you motivated throughout the process.
• Find keywords and related terms to your selected topic: Besides synthesizing the topic to its essential core, this will help you in the next step.
• Use the identified keywords to search literature: From your findings in the above step, identify relevant publications and cited literature in those publications.
• Look for topics or issues that are missing or not addressed within (or related to) your main topic.
• Read systematic reviews: These documents plunge deeply into scholarly literature and identify trends and paradigm shifts in fields of study. Sometimes they reveal areas or topics that need more attention from researchers and scientists.

Keeping track of all the new literature being published every day is an impossible mission. Remember that there is technology to make your daily tasks easier, and reviewing literature can be one of them. Some online databases offer up-to-date publication lists with quite effective search features:

• Elsevier’s Scope
• Google Scholar

Of course, these tools may be more or less effective depending on knowledge fields. There might be even better ones for your specific topic of research; you can learn about them from more experienced colleagues or mentors.

Find out how FINER research framework can help you formulate your research question.

Literature Gap

The expression “literature gap” is used with the same intention as “research gap.” When there is a gap in the research itself, there will also naturally be a gap in the literature. Nevertheless, it is important to stress out the importance of language or text formulations that can help identify a research/literature gap or, on the other hand, making clear that a research gap is being addressed.

When looking for research gaps across publications you may have noticed sentences like:

…has/have not been… (studied/reported/elucidated) …is required/needed… …the key question is/remains… …it is important to address…

These expressions often indicate gaps; issues or topics related to the main question that still hasn’t been subject to a scientific study. Therefore, it is important to take notice of them: who knows if one of these sentences is hiding your way to fame.

Language Editing Services by Elsevier Author Services:

• Manuscript Review

Systematic Review VS Meta-Analysis

Literature Review in Research Writing

You may also like.

Descriptive Research Design and Its Myriad Uses

Five Common Mistakes to Avoid When Writing a Biomedical Research Paper

Making Technical Writing in Environmental Engineering Accessible

To Err is Not Human: The Dangers of AI-assisted Academic Writing

When Data Speak, Listen: Importance of Data Collection and Analysis Methods

Choosing the Right Research Methodology: A Guide for Researchers

Why is data validation important in research?

Writing a good review article

Input your search keywords and press Enter.

• Literature Search

Q: Why it is important to identify gaps that exists in literature?

I want to know WHY it is important to identifying gaps that exists in literature

Asked by Zinhle Mpinge on 22 Aug, 2021

A research gap refers to unexplored or underexplored areas with scope for further research. When you read papers on topics of interest, you may realize there are some areas that have significant scope for more research but have not been studied by other researchers.

We will now explain why it is important to identify gaps in literature: Assume that you have completed your research work and sent your paper for peer review only to find out that another researcher has already published something similar. It is therefore necessary to find out problems in your research field that have not been previously addressed before. Not only would you be investing your funds and resources in the right project but also increasing the chances of your research findings getting published.

To summarize, identifying the gap in literature will help you

• Clearly define the motivations behind your study
• Clearly define the problem being studied
• Clearly define why the problem is important

In fact, to make sure you stay updated about new research in your domain of expertise, it is recommended to make literature reading a habit. This will also prevent you from getting overwhelmed by the amount of articles you need to digest before you start working on a new research project. R Discovery is a perfect solution for this! It is a free research discovery app with relevant, curated literature from PubMed and PubMed Central, Microsoft Academic. It has a simple interface and very useful features like notifications on recently published papers in your field of study, personalization, convenient search filters, bookmarking and more.  Click here  to know more about R Discovery, or download the free app from  Google Play  or the  App Store .

Related reading:

• VIDEO: How literature reading will help you achieve long-term success
• Inadequate literature review makes an author's research redundant: A case study
• Don't know where to start? 6 Tips on identifying research gaps

Answered by Editage Insights on 27 Aug, 2021

• Upvote this Answer

This content belongs to the Conducting Research Stage

Confirm that you would also like to sign up for free personalized email coaching for this stage.

Trending Searches

• Statement of the problem
• Background of study
• Scope of the study
• Types of qualitative research
• Rationale of the study
• Concept paper
• Literature review
• Introduction in research
• Under "Editor Evaluation"
• Ethics in research

Recent Searches

• Review paper
• Responding to reviewer comments
• Predatory publishers
• Scope and delimitations
• Open access
• Plagiarism in research
• Journal selection tips
• Editor assigned
• Types of articles
• "Reject and Resubmit" status
• Decision in process
• Conflict of interest

Identifying Barriers and Facilitators to Accessing Care for Historically Marginalized Communities Affected by Parkinson Disease: A Qualitative Study

• Published: 08 May 2024

Cite this article

• Danielle Kipnis 1 ,
• Michele Lin 1 ,
• Alissa Pacheco 1 ,
• Nia Mensah 1 , 5 , 6 ,
• Chelsea E. Macpherson 1 ,
• Kelsey Kempner 1 ,
• Anita Parker 3 ,
• R. Bernard Coley 4 ,
• Denise Coley 4 ,
• Hiral Shah 2 &
• Lori Quinn   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-2982-923X 1  

54 Accesses

Explore all metrics

Introduction

Parkinson disease (PD) is the second most common neurodegenerative disease. Members of the Black Diaspora (MBD) and Hispanic/Latinx people are less likely to receive a timely diagnosis following the onset of symptoms and more likely to experience greater disease severity due to late diagnosis. Historically marginalized populations (i.e., MBD, Hispanic, and Latinx communities) are not accurately represented in research; this, along with many other barriers, compounds underreporting and lack of recognition of PD. It is important to understand barriers to early diagnosis and healthcare access for these historically marginalized populations from the community’s perspective.

Our team conducted two focus groups to identify barriers and facilitators to PD healthcare-seeking behavior. We sought to identify which barriers are modifiable to ultimately improve engagement in neurological care for MBD and Hispanic individuals affected by PD.

We enrolled 15 participants (13 female; African/African American/Black n  = 10, Hispanic/Puerto Rican n  = 3, other n  = 2) for two focus groups. Discussions revealed sources of barriers to healthcare-seeking behavior in three main domains: legacy of racism in the United States, ancestral cultural environment, and healthcare system access. These sources influenced individuals’ PD knowledge and familiarity. Additionally, participants expressed a desire to know more about PD and called for increased community-based programming for education and awareness.

This paper uses a community-based participatory research approach to describe the experiences of MBD, Hispanic, and Latinx people in Manhattan and the surrounding areas in relation to possible sources of healthcare disparities and delayed PD diagnosis. These sources have broad implications and should be addressed through collaborative community programming.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA) Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Transforming Parkinson's Care in Africa (TraPCAf): protocol for a multimethodology National Institute for Health and Care Research Global Health Research Group project

The lived experience of stigma and parkinson’s disease in Kenya: a public health challenge

Palliative care for persons with parkinson’s disease: a qualitative study on the experiences of health care professionals, data availability.

De-identified data is available upon request to the authors.

Code Availability

Not applicable.

This term was decided on with our community partners. It is defined as the collection of individuals without regard to actual ethnicity or country of origin who share in the US Black experience, treatment, or targeting which results in inequitable or disparate treatment from the perceived normal treatment or experience.

When referring to the specific participants in our study, we will use this term to best reflect that participants in our study identified as Hispanic and Puerto Rican. We will use the term Hispanic or Latinx when referring to the population generally or to prior research reporting on those ethnicities.

LaHue SC, Comella CL, Tanner CM. The best medicine? The influence of physical activity and inactivity on Parkinson’s disease. Mov Disord. 2016;31:1444–54. https://doi.org/10.1002/mds.26728 .

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Wright Willis A, Evanoff BA, Lian M, Criswell SR, Racette BA. Geographic and ethnic variation in Parkinson disease: a population-based study of US Medicare beneficiaries. Neuroepidemiology. 2010;34:143–51. https://doi.org/10.1159/000275491 .

Dahodwala N, Karlawish J, Siderowf A, Duda JE, Mandell DS. Delayed Parkinson’s disease diagnosis among African-Americans: the role of reporting of disability. Neuroepidemiology. 2011;36:150–4. https://doi.org/10.1159/000324935 .

Ben-Joseph A, Marshall CR, Lees AJ, Noyce AJ. Ethnic variation in the manifestation of Parkinson’s disease: a narrative review. JPD. 2020;10:31–45. https://doi.org/10.3233/JPD-191763 .

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Cheng EM, Siderowf AD, Swarztrauber K, Lee M, Vassar S, Jacob E, Eisa MS, Vickrey BG. Disparities of care in veterans with Parkinson’s disease. Parkinsonism Relat Disord. 2008;14:8–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.parkreldis.2007.05.001 .

Article   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Rhee TG, Marottoli RA, Van Ness PH, Levy BR. Impact of perceived racism on healthcare access among older minority adults. Am J Prev Med. 2019;56:580–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2018.10.010 .

Turner BE, Steinberg JR, Weeks BT, Rodriguez F, Cullen MR. Race/ethnicity reporting and representation in US clinical trials: a cohort study. Lancet Reg Health - Am. 2022;11:100252. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lana.2022.100252 .

Kipnis D, Pacheco A, Delfing D, Toomer-Mensah N, Macpherson CE, Rieger J, Parker A, Coley RB, Coley D, Shah H, Quinn L. Community-based participatory research approach to address healthcare disparities confronting members of the Black Diaspora with Parkinson’s disease. Parkinsonism Relat Disord. 2024;119:105936. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.parkreldis.2023.105936 .

Heffernan ME, Barrera L, Guzman ZR, Golbeck E, Jedraszko AM, Hays PT, Herzog KA, D’Aquila RT, Ison MG, McColley SA. Barriers and facilitators to recruitment of underrepresented research participants: perspectives of clinical research coordinators. J Clin Trans Sci. 2023;7:e193. https://doi.org/10.1017/cts.2023.611 .

Article   Google Scholar  

Nuytemans K, Manrique CP, Uhlenberg A, Scott WK, Cuccaro ML, Luca CC, Singer C, Vance JM. Motivations for participation in Parkinson disease genetic research among Hispanics versus non-Hispanics. Front Genet. 2019;10:658. https://doi.org/10.3389/fgene.2019.00658 .

Saadi A, Himmelstein DU, Woolhandler S, Mejia NI. Racial disparities in neurologic health care access and utilization in the United States. Neurology. 2017;88:2268–75. https://doi.org/10.1212/WNL.0000000000004025 .

Berkman ND, Sheridan SL, Donahue KE, Halpern DJ, Crotty K. Low health literacy and health outcomes: an updated systematic review. Ann Intern Med. 2011;155:97. https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-155-2-201107190-00005 .

Kim R, Kim H-J, Jeon B. The good, the bad, and the ugly of medical information on the Internet. Mov Disord. 2018;33:754–7. https://doi.org/10.1002/mds.27324 .

Fitzsimmons P, Michael B, Hulley J, Scott G. A readability assessment of online Parkinson’s disease information. JRCPE. 2010;40:292–6. https://doi.org/10.4997/JRCPE.2010.401 .

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Chapman EN, Kaatz A, Carnes M. Physicians and implicit bias: how doctors may unwittingly perpetuate health care disparities. J Gen Intern Med. 2013;28:1504–10. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-013-2441-1 .

Hall WJ, Chapman MV, Lee KM, Merino YM, Thomas TW, Payne BK, Eng E, Day SH, Coyne-Beasley T. Implicit racial/ethnic bias among health care professionals and its influence on health care outcomes: a systematic review. Am J Public Health. 2015;105:e60–76. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2015.302903 .

Dahodwala N, Xie M, Noll E, Siderowf A, Mandell DS. Treatment disparities in Parkinson’s disease. Ann Neurol. 2009;66:142–5. https://doi.org/10.1002/ana.21774 .

Pan S, Stutzbach J, Reichwein S, Lee BK, Dahodwala N. Knowledge and attitudes about Parkinson’s disease among a diverse group of older adults. J Cross Cult Gerontol. 2014;29:339–52. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10823-014-9233-x .

Xia R, Stone JR, Hoffman JE, Klappa SG. Promoting community health and eliminating health disparities through community-based participatory research. Phys Ther. 2016;96:410–7. https://doi.org/10.2522/ptj.20140529 .

Neubauer BE, Witkop CT, Varpio L. How phenomenology can help us learn from the experiences of others, Perspect. Med Educ. 2019;8:90–7. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40037-019-0509-2 .

Betancourt JR, Green AR, Carrillo JE, Ananeh-Firempong O. Defining cultural competence: a practical framework for addressing racial/ethnic disparities in health and health care. Public Health Rep. 2003;118:293–302. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0033-3549(04)50253-4 .

Yacoubian TA, Howard G, Kissela B, Sands CD, Standaert DG. Racial differences in Parkinson’s disease medication use in the reasons for geographic and racial differences in stroke cohort: a cross-sectional study. Neuroepidemiology. 2009;33:329–34. https://doi.org/10.1159/000254568 .

Social Determinants of Health - Healthy People 2030 health.gov. 2023. https://health.gov/healthypeople/priority-areas/social-determinants-health . Accessed 22 Jun 2023.

Canizares M, Gignac M, Hogg-Johnson S, Glazier RH, Badley EM. Do baby boomers use more healthcare services than other generations? Longitudinal trajectories of physician service use across five birth cohorts. BMJ Open. 2016;6:e013276. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2016-013276 .

Lopez De Coca T, Moreno L, Alacreu M, Sebastian-Morello M. Bridging the generational digital divide in the healthcare environment. JPM. 2022;12:1214. https://doi.org/10.3390/jpm12081214 .

Ferdinand KC. Novel interventions in addressing racial disparities in blood pressure control: potential utilization of barbershops in Black men. Circulation. 2018;138:339–41. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.118.034869 .

Campbell MK, Hudson MA, Resnicow K, Blakeney N, Paxton A, Baskin M. Church-based health promotion interventions: evidence and lessons learned. Annu Rev Public Health. 2007;28:213–34. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.publhealth.28.021406.144016 .

Bernard Coley R, Coley D. Utilizing a variation of the train the trainer model to create best practice guidelines and to build a culturally sensitive and community educated team of ambassadors to increase diverse enrollment in clinical trial research studies. Barcelona, Spain: World Parkinson Congress; 2023;.

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to acknowledge Ms. Norma Husband, RN, who was a partner in our community-based participatory research project from 2018 to 2021. We would also like to acknowledge Elizabeth Delaney, MSW, LCSW, and Dr. Glenn Stebbins [GS], PhD, for their consultation throughout this project and Ashrita Satchida, MA, for her contributions to the literature review.

This publication was supported by the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences, National Institutes of Health, through Grant Number UL1TR001873.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Biobehavioral Sciences, Teachers College, Columbia University, New York, USA

Danielle Kipnis, Michele Lin, Alissa Pacheco, Nia Mensah, Yu Gu, Chelsea E. Macpherson, Kelsey Kempner & Lori Quinn

Department of Neurology, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, USA

St. Luke A.M.E. Church, New York, USA

Anita Parker

SIG-Black Diaspora, Morgan Hill, CA, USA

R. Bernard Coley & Denise Coley

Long Island University, Brooklyn, NY, USA

Kusudi International, New York, USA

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

Research project: A. conception, B. organization, C. execution.

Statistical analysis: A. design, B. execution, C. review and critique

Manuscript preparation: A. writing of the first draft, B. review and critique

Danielle Kipnis: 1A, 1B, 1C, 2A, 2B, 2C, 3A, 3B

Michele Lin: 2A, 2B, 2C, 3A, 3B

Alissa Pacheco: 1A, 1B, 1C, 2C, 3B

Nia Mensah: 1A, 1B, 2C, 3B

Yu Gu: 1A, 1B, 1C, 2C, 3B

Chelsea Macpherson: 1A, 1B, 2C, 3B

Kelsey Kempner: 3A, 3B

Bernard Coley: 2C, 3B

Denise Coley: 2C, 3B

Anita Parker: 1A, 1B, 1C, 2C, 3B

Hiral Shah: 1A, 1B, 1C, 2A, 2C, 3B

Lori Quinn: 1A, 1B, 1C, 2A, 2C, 3B

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lori Quinn .

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval.

We obtained ethical approval to conduct research from the Teachers College and Columbia University Institutional Review Boards (IRB # 21–265 and IRB-AAAT5742).

Consent to Participate

Informed consent was obtained from all participants to participate in the study.

Consent for Publication

Consent for publication was obtained from all participants in the signed informed consent document.

Competing Interests

The authors declare no competing to disclose.

The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the NIH.

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Kipnis, D., Lin, M., Pacheco, A. et al. Identifying Barriers and Facilitators to Accessing Care for Historically Marginalized Communities Affected by Parkinson Disease: A Qualitative Study. J. Racial and Ethnic Health Disparities (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40615-024-02011-2

Download citation

Received : 18 October 2023

Revised : 07 April 2024

Accepted : 18 April 2024

Published : 08 May 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s40615-024-02011-2

Share this article

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

• Parkinson disease
• Healthcare disparities
• Community-based participatory research
• Members of the Black Diaspora
• Hispanic people
• Puerto Rican people
• Qualitative research
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

Insights on Private Capital

McKinsey Global Private Markets Review 2024: Private markets in a slower era

Bridging private equity’s value creation gap

How institutional investors can gain a performance edge

Perspectives on a slower era in private markets

Identifying value in family-owned businesses

Featured publication.

McKinsey on Investing

Featured video, how is a portfolio company ceo’s job unique an interview with claudy jules, want to learn more about how we help private capital clients, more insights.

Five paths to TSR outperformance

Applied AI: Six growth considerations for private markets

Performance edge: Investors hone their strategies for a new era

Where could $374 billion in dry powder go? Six themes to watch

Connect with our private capital practice.

Female labor force participation

Across the globe, women face inferior income opportunities compared with men. Women are less likely to work for income or actively seek work. The global labor force participation rate for women is just over 50% compared to 80% for men. Women are less likely to work in formal employment and have fewer opportunities for business expansion or career progression. When women do work, they earn less. Emerging evidence from recent household survey data suggests that these gender gaps are heightened due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Women’s work and GDP

Women’s work is posited to be related to development through the process of economic transformation.

Levels of female labor force participation are high for the poorest economies generally, where agriculture is the dominant sector and women often participate in small-holder agricultural work. Women’s participation in the workforce is lower in middle-income economies which have much smaller shares of agricultural activities. Finally, among high-income economies, female labor force participation is again higher, accompanied by a shift towards a service sector-based economy and higher education levels among women.

This describes the posited  U-shaped relationship  between development (proxied by GDP per capita) and female labor force participation where women’s work participation is high for the poorest economies, lower for middle income economies, and then rises again among high income economies.

This theory of the U-shape is observed globally across economies of different income levels. But this global picture may be misleading. As more recent studies have found, this pattern does not hold within regions or when looking within a specific economy over time as their income levels rise.

In no region do we observe a U-shape pattern in female participation and GDP per capita over the past three decades.

Structural transformation, declining fertility, and increasing female education in many parts of the world have not resulted in significant increases in women’s participation as was theorized. Rather, rigid historic, economic, and social structures and norms factor into stagnant female labor force participation.

Historical view of women’s participation and GDP

Taking a historical view of female participation and GDP, we ask another question: Do lower income economies today have levels of participation that mirror levels that high-income economies had decades earlier?

The answer is no.

This suggests that the relationship of female labor force participation to GDP for lower-income economies today is different than was the case decades past. This could be driven by numerous factors -- changing social norms, demographics, technology, urbanization, to name a few possible drivers.

Gendered patterns in type of employment

Gender equality is not just about equal access to jobs but also equal access for men and women to good jobs. The type of work that women do can be very different from the type of work that men do. Here we divide work into two broad categories: vulnerable work and wage work.

The Gender gap in vulnerable and wage work by GDP per capita

Vulnerable employment is closely related to GDP per capita. Economies with high rates of vulnerable employment are low-income contexts with a large agricultural sector. In these economies, women tend to make up the higher share of the vulnerably employed. As economy income levels rise, the gender gap also flips, with men being more likely to be in vulnerable work when they have a job than women.

From COVID-19 crisis to recovery

The COVID-19 crisis has exacerbated these gender gaps in employment. Although comprehensive official statistics from labor force surveys are not yet available for all economies,  emerging studies  have consistently documented that working women are taking a harder hit from the crisis. Different patterns by sector and vulnerable work do not explain this. That is, this result is not driven by the sectors in which women work or their higher rates of vulnerable work—within specific work categories, women fared worse than men in terms of COVID-19 impacts on jobs.

Among other explanations is that women have borne the brunt of the increase in the demand for care work (especially for children). A strong and inclusive recovery will require efforts which address this and other underlying drivers of gender gaps in employment opportunities.

• Research and Publications
• Projects and Operations
• Privacy Notice
• Site Accessibility
• Access to Information
• REPORT FRAUD OR CORRUPTION

Innovating Urban Mosquito Control: Introducing Human-Controlled Breeding Sites as a Component of Integrated Mosquito Management (IMM)

• Find this author on Google Scholar
• Find this author on PubMed
• Search for this author on this site
• ORCID record for Guillermo Antonio Baigorria
• For correspondence: [email protected]
• ORCID record for Consuelo Cecilia Romero
• Info/History
• Preview PDF

This study introduces a novel method for mosquito control tailored specifically for urban and suburban areas, addressing their unique challenges. The concept of Human-Controlled Breeding Sites (HCBS) is presented as an innovative approach to reducing mosquito populations by providing controlled oviposition sites within households. The paper is structured into three main components. The first details the meticulous development of the HCBS method, the second explores the intricate development of the HCBS device, crucial for effective implementation of the HCBS approach. Finally, the experiment validating the HCBS methodology is described, offering insights into its practical application and efficacy in mosquito population control. Our proposal emphasizes the importance of considering mosquito needs, behavior and preferences in designing effective mosquito control strategies. Gravid mosquitoes must find a suitable place for oviposition, and HCBS provides an easy-access controlled environment for them to do so within households. Contrary to the commonly current recommendation to destroy all possible locations where mosquitoes can lay their eggs, the HCBS methodology provides an opportunity for gravid mosquitoes to oviposit their eggs without being deterred by chemical odors or dead larvae or pupae. It involves waiting for a timespan before effectively collecting and destroying the individuals in one concerted effort with zero impact on the environment and at minimal cost. Successful deposition of eggs by gravid mosquitoes into HCBS devices, followed by their destruction within the designated timeframe, validates the system's efficacy in disrupting the mosquito life cycle. Moreover, our findings demonstrate the significant influence of color selection on HCBS effectiveness, with green HCBS devices attracting the highest number of gravid female mosquitoes for oviposition. These integrated components offer a comprehensive understanding of the HCBS approach, effectively bridging the gap between methodological development, device design, and practical application. The findings underscore HCBS as a valuable addition to mosquito control strategies, with potential applications in diverse environments. Further research is essential to delve into and model the long-term effectiveness of HCBS, aiming to optimize its design for maximum efficacy and scalability. This includes studying its performance over extended periods and refining the design parameters to enhance its functionality and widespread applicability including the use of disaster risk management systems.

Competing Interest Statement

The authors have declared no competing interest.

Funding Statement

This study did not receive any funding

Author Declarations

I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.

I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.

I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).

I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.

Data Availability

All data produced in the present work are contained in the manuscript

View the discussion thread.

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word about medRxiv.

NOTE: Your email address is requested solely to identify you as the sender of this article.

Citation Manager Formats

• EndNote (tagged)
• EndNote 8 (xml)
• RefWorks Tagged
• Ref Manager
• Tweet Widget
• Facebook Like
• Google Plus One
• Addiction Medicine (323)
• Allergy and Immunology (627)
• Anesthesia (163)
• Cardiovascular Medicine (2365)
• Dentistry and Oral Medicine (287)
• Dermatology (206)
• Emergency Medicine (378)
• Endocrinology (including Diabetes Mellitus and Metabolic Disease) (833)
• Epidemiology (11758)
• Forensic Medicine (10)
• Gastroenterology (702)
• Genetic and Genomic Medicine (3725)
• Geriatric Medicine (348)
• Health Economics (632)
• Health Informatics (2388)
• Health Policy (929)
• Health Systems and Quality Improvement (895)
• Hematology (340)
• HIV/AIDS (780)
• Infectious Diseases (except HIV/AIDS) (13300)
• Intensive Care and Critical Care Medicine (767)
• Medical Education (365)
• Medical Ethics (104)
• Nephrology (398)
• Neurology (3486)
• Nursing (198)
• Nutrition (523)
• Obstetrics and Gynecology (673)
• Occupational and Environmental Health (661)
• Oncology (1818)
• Ophthalmology (535)
• Orthopedics (218)
• Otolaryngology (286)
• Pain Medicine (232)
• Palliative Medicine (66)
• Pathology (445)
• Pediatrics (1031)
• Pharmacology and Therapeutics (426)
• Primary Care Research (420)
• Psychiatry and Clinical Psychology (3171)
• Public and Global Health (6133)
• Radiology and Imaging (1276)
• Rehabilitation Medicine and Physical Therapy (744)
• Respiratory Medicine (825)
• Rheumatology (379)
• Sexual and Reproductive Health (372)
• Sports Medicine (322)
• Surgery (400)
• Toxicology (50)
• Transplantation (172)
• Urology (145)

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• v.10(11); 2020

Original research

Key stakeholders’ perspectives and experiences with defining, identifying and displaying gaps in health research: a qualitative study, linda nyanchoka.

1 Universite de Paris, Paris, Île-de-France, France

2 Institute of Translational Medicine, University of Liverpool Institute of Translational Medicine, Liverpool, UK

3 Hôpital Hôtel-Dieu, Center for Clinical Epidemiology, Paris, France

Catrin Tudur-Smith

Raphaël porcher.

4 Assistance Publique—Hopitaux de Paris, Paris, Île-de-France, France

5 University of Split Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, Split, Croatia

Associated Data

bmjopen-2020-039932supp001.pdf

Introduction

Mapping the current body of evidence including what is missing helps provide a better understanding of what research is available, ongoing and needed and should be prioritised. Identifying research gaps can inform the design and conduct of health research by providing additional context information about the body of evidence in a given topic area. Despite the commonly used term ‘research gap’ in scientific literature, little is written on how to find a ‘research gap’ in the first place. Moreover, there is no clear methodological guidance to identify and display gaps.

This study aimed to explore how key stakeholders define research gaps and characterise methods/practices used to identify and display gaps in health research to further advance efforts in this area.

This was an exploratory qualitative study using semistructured in-depth interviews. The study sample included the following stakeholder groups: researchers, funders, healthcare providers, patients/public and policy-makers. Interview transcripts were subjected to thematic analysis.

Among the 20 interviews conducted (20 participants), a variety of research gap definitions were expressed (ie, five main themes, including gaps in information, knowledge/evidence gaps, uncertainties, quality and patient perspective). We identified three main themes for methods used to identify gaps (primary, secondary and both primary and secondary) and finally six main themes for the methods to display gaps (forest plots, diagrams/illustrations, evidence maps, mega maps, 3IE gap maps and info graphics).

This study provides insights into issues related to defining research gaps and methods used to identify and display gaps in health research from the perspectives of key stakeholders involved in the process. Findings will be used to inform methodological guidance on identifying research gaps.

Strengths and limitations of this study

• This study used qualitative methodology that provided an in-depth understanding of key stakeholders’ perspectives and experiences in identifying, describing and displaying gaps in health research.
• The study benefited from having a variety of different stakeholders participating in semistructured interviews, which provided a wider scope of perspectives and experiences in identifying, describing and displaying gaps in health research.
• This study could have benefited from involving patient/public perspectives to inform the design of the study to improve the importance and relevance of the findings for this population.

Identifying research gaps can help inform the design and conduct of health research, practice and policies by providing a better understanding of the current body of evidence. Healthcare decisions for individual patients, public health policies and clinical guidelines should be informed by the best available research while taking into account research gaps.

The identification of research gaps has no well-defined process, although research gaps serve as the basis in developing a new research question and informing future research, healthcare delivery and health policies. In addition, research gaps in healthcare do not necessarily align directly with research needs. Hence, research gaps are critical in that knowledge gaps substantially inhibit the decision-making ability of stakeholders such as patients, healthcare providers and policy-makers, thus creating a need to fill the knowledge gap. 1

Moreover, identifying and characterising research gaps often highlight multiple competing gaps that are worthwhile to be explored. 1 Initiatives such as the James Lind Alliance (JLA), UK Database of Uncertainties about the Effects of Treatments, Cochrane Agenda and Priority Setting Methods Group, and Evidence-based Research Network are some examples of existing efforts to identify and prioritise research gaps in health. 2

The term ‘research gap’ is not well defined, and its meaning can differ depending on the researcher and research context. A recent scoping review of methods used to identify, prioritise and display gaps in health research reported 12 different definitions related to gaps in health research, each describing research gaps differently. 2 This finding shows the ambiguity of the term ‘research gap’ and the different practices it may relate to.

As a basis for further exploring and understanding ‘research gaps’, we start from the definition given by the National Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools in Canada based on the work by Robinson et al , whereby a research gap is defined as a topic or area for which missing or insufficient information limits the ability to reach a conclusion for a question. 3 Given the different meanings and definitions of research gaps identified in the scoping review, 2 we considered it important to further explore key stakeholders’ perspectives to better understand the topic area. Clearly defining the type of research gap can help determine how to better identify, characterise, prioritise and address research gaps.

Different methods for identifying research gaps reported include scoping reviews and umbrella reviews for mapping and summarising evidence. These methods have an explicit aim of identifying research gaps in a broad area compared with systematic reviews, which focus on answering a specific research question. 4–8 Furthermore, investigating experiences with practices/methods used to identify research gaps can inform explicit methodological approaches in identifying and describing research gaps. This investigation can enhance practices of different stakeholder groups (ie, health professionals, health commissioners, researchers, patients/public and decision-makers) when addressing areas of uncertainty within the research problem and topic area. 9

The specific objectives of the study were to (1) investigate key stakeholders’ knowledge and perceptions of and experiences with defining research gaps and (2) characterise methods/practices used to identify and display gaps in health research.

Methods and analysis

Qualitative study design.

We conducted an exploratory qualitative study using semistructured interviews. This method was selected to provide an in-depth understanding of key stakeholders’ perspectives, experiences and practices in defining, identifying and displaying research gaps. This method also ensured that we explored key stakeholders’ understanding and practices related to identifying research gaps through a variety of lenses from different stakeholder groups. In turn, this process provided multiple facets of research gap definitions and methodological practices to identify and display gaps. 10

Study sample and recruitment

We used purposive sampling to ensure that the perspectives of all identified stakeholder groups were represented. Purposive sampling is widely used in qualitative research to identify and select information-rich cases. The study sample included the following stakeholder groups: researchers, funders, healthcare providers, patients/public and policy-makers. The stakeholder groups were determined according to the findings of a previously conducted scoping review 2 and organised into three main categories focusing on the use of evidence to inform health policy, health practice and health research ( table 1 ). A detailed description of participant categories was given in the previously published study protocol. 11 Study participants were recruited via contacts and organisations identified in the scoping review, relevant scientific publications, existing professional networks (eg, H2020 International Training Network ‘Methods in Research on Research’) and contacts from conference attendance (eg, Evidence Live and Cochrane Colloquium).

Participant characteristics (n=20)

The main inclusion criteria for the study were as follows:

• Adults aged ≥18 years (researchers, funders, healthcare providers, patients/public and policy-makers).
• Experience with the use of evidence to inform health decisions/choices, policy, practice or research.
• Ability to converse in English.
• Consent for research.

The sample size for qualitative studies usually depends on the point when data saturation is reached (ie, the point when new data do not add to a better understanding of the studied phenomenon but rather repeat what was previously expressed 12 ). Considering that the point of saturation cannot be specified in advance, we planned to conduct between 14 and 28 interviews, owing to usual points of data saturation reported in qualitative studies. 11 The point of data saturation was determined based on the seven parameters identified by Hennink et al , 13 14 including the study purpose, population, sampling strategy, data quality, type of codes, code book and saturation goal, and focus retrieved from the study. These parameters were discussed throughout the study primarily between the lead researcher (LN) and the senior researcher (DH).

Data collection and recording

Semistructured interviews were used for this study. The main reason for selecting semi-structured interviews was to allow for specific areas to be addressed while giving the interviewees the opportunity to reflect on their experiences and perspectives related to defining, identifying and presenting research gaps that are relevant to them and that may not have been explored or anticipated by the researcher(s). 15

The guide was developed by focusing on exploring key stakeholders’ perspectives and experiences with the following key areas:

• Participant background information.
• Definitions of research gaps.
• Knowledge and perceptions of and experiences with methods/practices used to identify and display gaps in health research to inform further health policy, practice and research.

These three categories were developed with information from the scoping review to guide the questions. The interview topic guide was piloted before data collection. It was also adapted according to key stakeholder groups to ensure that it was meaningful to their background and to gather more relevant information based on their experiences and knowledge. 16

The semistructured interview guide contained two levels of questions: main themes and follow‐up questions. The main themes covered the general content of the research gaps aimed at encouraging participants to speak freely about their perceptions, experiences and practices. The follow-up questions were used as prompts and probes aiming to follow respondents’ answers and to investigate the issues raised more in depth. The interview guide covered the main topics of the study, providing a focused structure for the discussion during the interview. 17

We conducted in-person, telephone and teleconference interviews. In-person interviews were conducted with participants residing or reachable in London, UK, and other participants were interviewed via telephone or teleconference (for the interview guide for both in-person and teleconference interviews, see online supplemental appendix ).

Supplementary data

All interviews were digitally recorded, transcribed verbatim and anonymised. The lead researcher (LN) transcribed two interviews to help inform the analytical process, and the other audio files were transcribed by a professional transcription agency licensed from the University of Liverpool.

Data analysis

We used analytical categories to describe and explain definitions, experiences and practices reported among the groups of participants. All data relevant to each category (defining research gaps, experiences with methods/practices used to identify and display gaps in health research) were identified and examined to ensure that each data item was checked accordingly.

Our approach was based on the thematic analysis outlined by Braun and Clarke. 18 The steps included the following: (1) transcription and checking transcripts with recordings for accuracy, (2) open coding from interview responses performed by two researchers independently (LN and DH), (3) agreement of initial codes discussed among the researchers and an initial codebook developed, (4) developing the code structure used for analysing the remaining responses with openness that included new codes and refined existing ones and (5) themes and subthemes identified from the final code structure and their relationships presented. 18

The initial coding framework for our analysis started from broad categories identified in the previous scoping review with which the interviews were structured. Within these broad categories (ie, defining research gaps, experiences with methods/practices used to identify and display gaps in health research), analytical categories were inductively derived from the data. In this sense, our approach includes both top-down and bottom-up development of analytical categories and themes.

QSR International’s NVivo V.12 qualitative data analysis software was used for data management and analysis.

Ensuring study quality

To further ensure rigour and trustworthiness, the study was guided by Lincoln and Guba ’s concepts for defining and investigating quality in qualitative research that can be considered parallel to quantitative research concepts of validity and reliability. 13 19 20 The concepts include credibility, transferability, dependability, confirmability, audit trails and reflexivity. They are interrelated, and thinking through them from the onset and incorporating them into a study improve the study’s rigour.

The main researcher’s (LN) past experience as a Public Health Advisor at a National Institute of Public Health in Europe influenced the conceptualisation and conduct of this study, including the interviews. Her previous role focused on knowledge production for the health sector and providing knowledge about the health status of the population, influencing factors and how the status can be improved. She recognised the need for evidence to inform research planning, implementation and evaluation. Therefore, the design and conduct of this study were informed by her previous role and influenced the development of the interview guide, and interpretation and reporting of study findings. Throughout the different steps of the study, she consulted a senior researcher (DH) to discuss all matters related to the study design, conduct and reporting.

Patient and public involvement

Patients and the public were not involved in the design or analysis of this study. However, we involved them as study participants and will disseminate the study findings that pertain to them using a patient/public online platform, peopleinresearch.org.

Among the 30 key stakeholders contacted, 20 agreed to participate in the study. Hence, we conducted 20 interviews with 20 participants involved in using evidence for informing health policy, practice or future research ( table 1 ).

Definitions of gaps in health research

We first explored what participants reported as gaps in health research. Given the nature of our interest, all participants’ answers were grouped under a single theme ‘Definitions of Gaps in Health Research’. However, the focus of the definitions differed, and within this main theme, we identified five subthemes related to gaps in health research described by the participants (ie, gaps in information, knowledge/evidence-related gaps, quality of evidence, uncertainties and patient-related gaps; summarised in figure 1 ). The discrepancies and similarities of terms used are further illustrated in the online supplemental appendix . Terms ranged from lack of information/insufficient information, known unknowns/unanswered research questions and evidence uncertainty to treatment uncertainty, among others.

Reported descriptions of gaps in health research.

We identified some similarities among the participants on how they defined research gaps, for example, researchers and oversight bodies mainly defined gaps in health research as a lack of information/insufficient information, known unknowns and no primary studies (more information can be found in online supplemental appendix ). Patient/public participants defined research gaps in a much more literal manner, for example, ‘The gap is to get more patients involved in doing … clinical trials; have [someone] at the beginning introduce me, [educate me], [provide] awareness [because] I didn’t know what [a clinical trial] was. I [didn’t] know what they’re talking about’ (patient/public person, PPI01) and ‘Get me involved in co-production. That is the gap that is missing in clinical research’ (patient/public person, PPI01). The most common description research participants provided was the absence of scientific information to answer a research question, for example,

An area where there is missing or … insufficient information. And because of this … you cannot reach a conclusion for a question. So … it is a field, it is an area, a question an issue to which you don’t have an appropriate answer because there is missing … information or the research that still needs to be done in that particular area. (Funding body, F01)

One participant related research gaps to quality of evidence by use of Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE), an approach for rating the quality of evidence and grading the strength of recommendations in healthcare. 21 Another participant emphasised the importance of public and community involvement in gap identification to ensure that it takes into account their perspectives and contributions to the research ecosystem:

existing knowledge but not documented is of key importance in understanding the current body of knowledge on a particular topic area …. Evidence gaps need to be defined not only by [the] research community but also according to the key stakeholders including community members. Community knowledge is of key importance to inform the evidence base. Further evaluation on research findings to characterise the nature of research gaps can be carried out by evaluating community perspectives and local evidence to confirm scientific evidence. (Health research PhD student, R01)

We identified variability in participant responses on how to define gaps in health research; this variability was mainly observed in individual responses for the three main categories (research, practice, and policy and funding).

Methods to identify gaps in health research

Participants reported a range of applicable methods to identify gaps in health research (eg, surveys, reviews, syntheses, priority-setting partnerships and assessments) as shown in figure 2 . The methods were also characterised by the different research methodologies used (ie, primary, secondary and both). Participants also expressed their difficulty in identifying research gaps, for example,

Methods used to identify gaps in health research.

It is really difficult to identify research gaps. Lots of people you know will try and use the discussion section from research, [whereas] other authors have asked for further research, but in my experience that has not been a very useful method because sometimes authors will write that you know without really seeing or understanding that there has been something similar done in that field. (Health research methodologist, R02)

The variety of identified methods reflected the state of the field in the sense of the wide array of methods currently used, in line with the variety of specific goals of studies on research gaps ( figure 1 ). The difficulty in identifying research gaps raised by participants, together with the plurality of definition of gaps and range of methodologies, may, however, also reflect a possible lack of consensus and guidance on what method would be best suited for a given objective.

Methods to display gaps in health research

Participants referred to a number of different methods used to display gaps in health research (ie, forest plots, diagrams/illustrations, evidence maps, mega maps, 3IE gap maps and info graphics) ( figure 3 ). Participant perspectives varied; one of the interviewees pointed out,

Methods used to display gaps in health research.

I think with the growth of technology, it is very important to use sophisticated methods to better communicate evidence for policy-making and decision-making. I think the availability of evidence is not enough on its own and finding different methods to communicate is important, not only the analysis and findings but also sharing it in different platforms online for a greater audience. (Health policy and guideline developer, P02)

Another participant highlighted that one of the key benefits of visually presenting research is being able to immediately see what information is available and missing.

The participants mainly expressed the importance of using data visualisation in research; there was a common understanding on the use of data visualisation as a whole, particularly with the growth of technology and the need to capitalise on it. The main challenges expressed were how to identify an appropriate visualisation to present the research and also how to effectively present data. We summarise these general experiences with data visualisation in health research in figure 3 and the online supplemental appendix .

This study provides insight into issues related to defining, identifying and displaying research gaps in health from the perspectives of key stakeholders. The findings indicate several definitions of gaps in health research and methods used to identify and display research gaps.

Our study confirmed the ambiguity in defining research gaps and methodological approaches to identify 3 22 and display research gaps. 2 The methods used to identify research gaps were closely linked to the definition of research gaps. For example, the JLA method of gap identification and setting priorities for research begins by clearly defining what the alliance refers to as evidence uncertainty, that is, there is no up-to-date, reliable systematic review of research evidence addressing the uncertainty or showing that uncertainty. 23 This step further informs the rest of the methodology used and is critical in identifying treatment uncertainties and determining future research priorities. This method combines both primary and secondary approaches and not only identifies research gaps but also verifies them across different relevant stakeholders, including researchers, patients, their carers and clinicians, to ensure the relevance and potential benefit to them. 23 This verification is important, given that some research gaps may be of key interest to researchers but have little relevance and importance to patients or the public, who should be the main beneficiaries of research to improve their health and well-being.

The overall method to identify research gaps involved primary, secondary or both approaches ( figure 2 ). Most of the participants mentioned the use of secondary research methods; this is in accordance with the research that has been conducted on research gaps, which has also primarily focused on the use of secondary research and developed frameworks for identifying research gaps. 2 3 8 24 25 The most commonly adopted framework involves identifying research gaps from systematic reviews using the Population, Intervention, Comparison and Outcome framework to characterise a research gap. 3 The other framework involves identifying research gaps in qualitative literature reviews. 25 In addition, the GRADE approach for rating the quality of evidence and grading the strength of recommendations in healthcare 21 presents the use of a prominent framework for evaluating the certainty of evidence that can inform the research gap and characterise it. 26 Moreover, scoping reviews are commonly used, and the definition includes aiming to identify research gaps by mapping the current body of evidence. These examples focus on the use of secondary research methods, but we lack studies that specifically explore the use of primary or both primary and secondary methods to identify research gaps, yet these methods equally exist and are being used. Additional exploration of applicable methods for identifying gaps can improve their usefulness and relevance in health research.

In summary, this study showed that research gaps need to be defined by researchers and confirmed by different research stakeholders such as patients and the public to ensure societal relevance and importance. 1 We also found that clearly defining research gaps can provide information on the most appropriate methodological approach to adopt in identifying and displaying gaps, for example, for exploring research gaps in a specific or broad area. For a specific area, a systematic review can be considered, and within a broad area, an umbrella review can be considered. The study also showed that the use of both primary and secondary methods (JLA method) to identify gaps is the most robust method for gap identification. The main reported advantage of this method is that it identifies gaps (treatment uncertainties) and involves different stakeholders, including patients and the public, to confirm and prioritise gaps. The main disadvantage is that it is labor-intensive (requires a team of different specialists) and expensive (administrative support, meeting rooms and catering, among others) compared with secondary methods (evidence synthesis) or primary methods (survey).

Participants mainly expressed the importance of data visualisation in communicating research; no specific methods or formats to present gaps were expressed. Thus, the use of data visualisation is desirable among different stakeholders, particularly researchers, when communicating research, although we found few examples of experiences with developing and using data visualisation. The participants mainly expressed their difficulty in finding the right tool to use to present research findings.

Finally, although scientific articles often refer to the existence of research gaps in studies, few respondents were able to define research gaps, unless contextualising them within a specific study or area, or methods of identification. Fully understanding research gaps in health research and adequately addressing them are difficult. In this study, we highlighted three key items on the topic: (1) clearly defining research gaps provides a context to understand better what the gaps are and what they are caused by; (2) a clear definition of research gaps can inform the methods used to identify research gaps, similar to how a clear research question can inform the research study methodology; and (3) on adopting the most appropriate methods to identify research gaps, finding the right visualisation to communicate them effectively is important. Last but not least, public involvement, when applicable, is needed to verify that gaps are important and relevant to the public.

To conclude, our study found that various methods can be used to identify gaps (ie, primary, secondary and both primary and secondary). Of all the methods used to identify gaps, secondary methods are the most common, specifically systematic reviews, which are considered the gold standard in that they address a highly focused question related to the existing evidence and thus present difficulties for explicitly identifying research gaps in a general area. 3 8 27 Other secondary research methods reported were overviews of reviews, also known as umbrella reviews, scoping reviews and evidence mapping. Overviews of reviews focus on a much broader area, compiling evidence from multiple reviews into one accessible and usable document and highlighting other reviews within the specified topic area. 28 29 Given the resource requirements of formal evidence reviews, topic prioritisation is needed to best allocate resources to those areas deemed the most relevant for the health system. Regardless of the topic, the prioritisation process is likely to be stakeholder-dependent. Priorities for evidence synthesis will vary depending on the mission of the healthcare system and the local needs of the healthcare stakeholders. 1 Hence, using both primary and secondary methods is the most robust because it involves the participation of patients, caregivers and healthcare and social care professionals in identifying research questions and then prioritising them using a combination of primary and secondary research. 30–49

To advance efforts in identifying research gaps, further work and different study designs are needed to take this work to the next step, to find consensus on definitions and different practices for methods in identifying research gaps. Subsequently, also assessing the best methods according to different stakeholders will be informative and important.

One of the main challenges of this study was that because the topic area is still very vague and unclear, the recruitment and interview process was challenging. Therefore, this study was primarily limited to what participants were familiar with and not necessarily representative of the full scope of the status of health researchers, health practitioners, oversight bodies and patients/public. A more generalisable understanding of this topic area would require a larger sample of participants and methodology, such as a Delphi survey, and/or a priority-setting partnership with representatives using evidence to inform policy, practice and research. This study would also have benefited from widening the scope of the stakeholder categories (use of evidence to inform health policy, health practice and health research). 2 This would have enriched our study findings and provided a wider view of stakeholder experiences outside our categories. Another limitation of this study is not including patients/public in designing the study. Including patient/public perspectives would have benefited the study design by being able to improve the importance and relevance of the findings for this population.

One of the main strengths of the study is improving the definition of research gaps and subsequently improving the accurate reporting of research gaps to elucidate the characteristics, which can help in evidence-based decisions. For example, a decision based on a research gap contributing to lack of primary research on a specific health problem can differ from the one based on a research gap related to lack of secondary research summarising the research. Hence, all these factors regarding research gaps need to be highlighted if they are known and made explicit when disseminating and communicating research. In addition, providing more information on what the gap represents may inform users of evidence of more specific information about the research gap and how it can be addressed more accurately.

Supplementary Material

Acknowledgments.

The authors thank the interviewees for their time and input. They also thank Laura Smales (BioMedEditing, Toronto, ON) for editing the manuscript.

Twitter: @LindaNyanchoka

Contributors: LN and DH conceived the study with guidance and feedback from RP and CT-S. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Funding: This project is a part of an MiRoR (Methods in Research on Research)-funded PhD undertaken by LN. MiRoR received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under a Marie Sklodowska-Curie grant (agreement no. 676207).

Competing interests: None declared.

Patient consent for publication: Not required.

Ethics approval: Informed consent was obtained in accordance with the University of Liverpool Ethics Committee board requirements. Verbal consent was sought for phone interviews and written consent for in-person interviews. Confidentiality and data protection will be ensured in accordance with the University of Liverpool Ethics Committee board. All participant information will be anonymised, and hard-copy data will be stored in a locked unit. Soft-copy material will be stored in a password-protected file. On completion of the study and publication of the study results, all study material will be stored and disposed of according to the rules and regulations of the University of Liverpool. The study protocol was stored in the data repository Zenodo. The research obtained ethical approval from the University of Liverpool, UK. This research project is part of a doctoral thesis of the PhD fellow (LN).

Provenance and peer review: Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

Data availability statement: All data relevant to the study are included in the article or uploaded as supplemental information. Supporting data items can be found on Zenodo, https://zenodo.org/record/3664981%23.X4g7otAzY2y .

Supplemental material This content has been supplied by the author(s). It has not been vetted by BMJ Publishing Group Limited (BMJ) and may not have been peer-reviewed. Any opinions or recommendations discussed are solely those of the author(s) and are not endorsed by BMJ. BMJ disclaims all liability and responsibility arising from any reliance placed on the content. Where the content includes any translated material, BMJ does not warrant the accuracy and reliability of the translations (including but not limited to local regulations, clinical guidelines, terminology, drug names and drug dosages), and is not responsible for any error and/or omissions arising from translation and adaptation or otherwise.