From Dense Fog to Gentle Mist: Getting Started in Surgical Education Research

  • Deb ColvilleEmail author
  • Catherine Green
Part of the Innovation and Change in Professional Education book series (ICPE, volume 17)


Understanding and conducting surgical education research can be difficult for the beginner. The idea that prompted this chapter is that it is useful to break down some initially opaque concepts into steps. In this chapter, the reader is taken on a journey that provides an explanation of some signposts for the novice qualitative surgical researcher. These include scoping a broad list of “burning questions” down to asking a potentially answerable question and choosing a research paradigm that aligns with researcher perspective and the research setting. Some visual tools to aid the research process are presented.


Human research ethics Research integrity Beneficence Justice Consent Positivist paradigm Graduate programs in education Research Spider Research questions Literature review Supervisor Mentor “FINER” Creating a Research Space (CARS) 


  1. 1.
    Davis, M. H., & Ponnamperuma, G. G. (2006). Medical education research at the crossroads. Lancet, 367(9508), 377–378.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Gill, D., Griffin, A., Woolf, K., & Cave, J. (2009). Twelve tips for studying medical education at doctoral level. Medical Teacher, 31(7), 601–604.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Markert, R. J. (2010). Getting started on your research: Practical advice for medical educators. Teaching and Learning in Medicine, 22(4), 317–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kneebone, R. (2002). Total internal reflection: An essay on paradigms. Medical Education, 36(6), 514–518.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cook, D. A. (2010). Getting started in medical education scholarship. The Keio Journal of Medicine, 59(3), 96–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Smith, H., Wright, D., Morgan, S., Dunleavey, J., & Moore, M. (2002). The ‘research spider’: A simple method of assessing research experience. Primary Health Care Research & Development, 3(3), 139–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cristancho, S., & Varpio, L. (2016). Twelve tips for early career medical educators. Medical Teacher, 38(4), 358–363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Siddiqui, Z. S., & Jonas-Dwyer, D. R. (2012). Twelve tips for supervising research students. Medical Teacher, 34(7), 530–533.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bergman, E., de Feijter, J., Frambach, J., Godefrooij, M., Slootweg, I., Stalmeijer, R., et al. (2012). AM last page: A guide to research paradigms relevant to medical education. Academic Medicine: Journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges, 87(4), 545.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Cook, D. A., Bordage, G., & Schmidt, H. G. (2008). Description, justification and clarification: A framework for classifying the purposes of research in medical education. Medical Education, 42(2), 128–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Lingard, L., Reznick, R., Espin, S., Regehr, G., & DeVito, I. (2002). Team communications in the operating room: Talk patterns, sites of tension, and implications for novices. Academic Medicine: Journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges, 77(3), 232–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Swales, J., & Feak, C. B. (2004). Academic writing for graduate students: Essential skills and tasks (2nd ed.). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Blanco, M. A., & Lee, M. Y. (2012). Twelve tips for writing educational research grant proposals. Medical Teacher, 34(6), 450–453.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    National Health and Medical Research Council. Health and research ethics 2015 [cited 2016 31 October]. Available from:
  15. 15.
    Hill, E., & Vaughan, S. (2013). The only girl in the room: How paradigmatic trajectories deter female students from surgical careers. Medical Education, 47(6), 547–556.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Franco-Cardenas, V., Rosenberg, J., Ramirez, A., Lin, J., & Tsui, I. (2015). Decadelong profile of women in ophthalmic publications. JAMA Ophthalmology, 133(3), 255–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Parle, G., & Parle, J. (2015). Summary report: Expert Advisory Group advising the Royal Australasian College of Surgeons. Discrimination, bullying and sexual harassment prevalence survey.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Bordage, G. (2001). Reasons reviewers reject and accept manuscripts: The strengths and weaknesses in medical education reports. Academic Medicine: Journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges, 76(9), 889–896.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Lingard, L. (2015). Joining a conversation: The problem/gap/hook heuristic. Perspectives on Medical Education, 4(5), 252–253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ramani, S., & Mann, K. (2016). Introducing medical educators to qualitative study design: Twelve tips from inception to completion. Medical Teacher, 38(5), 456–463.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Colville, D. J. (2011). ‘We need you to be able to do this operation’: Continuity and contradiction in the training of ophthalmologists. Monash University
  22. 22.
    Higgs, J. (1988). Structuring Qualtiative research theses. In J. Higgs (Ed.), Writing qualitative research (pp. 137–150). Sydney: Hambden Press.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Byrne-Armstron, H., Higgs, J., & Horsfall, D. (Eds.). (2001). Critical moments in qualitative research. Oxford: Butterworth Heinemann. (Diagram is page 61).Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Higgs, J. (Ed.). (1988). Writing qualitative research (pp. 137–150). Sydney: Hambden Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Ophthalmology, Eye and Ear Hospital, Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health SciencesThe University of MelbourneMelbourneAustralia
  2. 2.Department of OphthalmologyRoyal Children’s HospitalMelbourneAustralia
  3. 3.Royal Australian and New Zealand College of OphthalmologistsSurry HillsAustralia
  4. 4.Royal Victorian Eye and Ear HospitalEast MelbourneAustralia

Personalised recommendations