background of the study on research

• Privacy Policy

Home » Background of The Study – Examples and Writing Guide

Background of The Study – Examples and Writing Guide

Table of Contents

Background of The Study

Definition:

Background of the study refers to the context, circumstances, and history that led to the research problem or topic being studied. It provides the reader with a comprehensive understanding of the subject matter and the significance of the study.

The background of the study usually includes a discussion of the relevant literature, the gap in knowledge or understanding, and the research questions or hypotheses to be addressed. It also highlights the importance of the research topic and its potential contributions to the field. A well-written background of the study sets the stage for the research and helps the reader to appreciate the need for the study and its potential significance.

How to Write Background of The Study

Here are some steps to help you write the background of the study:

Identify the Research Problem

Start by identifying the research problem you are trying to address. This problem should be significant and relevant to your field of study.

Provide Context

Once you have identified the research problem, provide some context. This could include the historical, social, or political context of the problem.

Review Literature

Conduct a thorough review of the existing literature on the topic. This will help you understand what has been studied and what gaps exist in the current research.

Identify Research Gap

Based on your literature review, identify the gap in knowledge or understanding that your research aims to address. This gap will be the focus of your research question or hypothesis.

State Objectives

Clearly state the objectives of your research . These should be specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time-bound (SMART).

Discuss Significance

Explain the significance of your research. This could include its potential impact on theory , practice, policy, or society.

Finally, summarize the key points of the background of the study. This will help the reader understand the research problem, its context, and its significance.

How to Write Background of The Study in Proposal

The background of the study is an essential part of any proposal as it sets the stage for the research project and provides the context and justification for why the research is needed. Here are the steps to write a compelling background of the study in your proposal:

• Identify the problem: Clearly state the research problem or gap in the current knowledge that you intend to address through your research.
• Provide context: Provide a brief overview of the research area and highlight its significance in the field.
• Review literature: Summarize the relevant literature related to the research problem and provide a critical evaluation of the current state of knowledge.
• Identify gaps : Identify the gaps or limitations in the existing literature and explain how your research will contribute to filling these gaps.
• Justify the study : Explain why your research is important and what practical or theoretical contributions it can make to the field.
• Highlight objectives: Clearly state the objectives of the study and how they relate to the research problem.
• Discuss methodology: Provide an overview of the methodology you will use to collect and analyze data, and explain why it is appropriate for the research problem.
• Conclude : Summarize the key points of the background of the study and explain how they support your research proposal.

How to Write Background of The Study In Thesis

The background of the study is a critical component of a thesis as it provides context for the research problem, rationale for conducting the study, and the significance of the research. Here are some steps to help you write a strong background of the study:

• Identify the research problem : Start by identifying the research problem that your thesis is addressing. What is the issue that you are trying to solve or explore? Be specific and concise in your problem statement.
• Review the literature: Conduct a thorough review of the relevant literature on the topic. This should include scholarly articles, books, and other sources that are directly related to your research question.
• I dentify gaps in the literature: After reviewing the literature, identify any gaps in the existing research. What questions remain unanswered? What areas have not been explored? This will help you to establish the need for your research.
• Establish the significance of the research: Clearly state the significance of your research. Why is it important to address this research problem? What are the potential implications of your research? How will it contribute to the field?
• Provide an overview of the research design: Provide an overview of the research design and methodology that you will be using in your study. This should include a brief explanation of the research approach, data collection methods, and data analysis techniques.
• State the research objectives and research questions: Clearly state the research objectives and research questions that your study aims to answer. These should be specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time-bound.
• Summarize the chapter: Summarize the chapter by highlighting the key points and linking them back to the research problem, significance of the study, and research questions.

How to Write Background of The Study in Research Paper

Here are the steps to write the background of the study in a research paper:

• Identify the research problem: Start by identifying the research problem that your study aims to address. This can be a particular issue, a gap in the literature, or a need for further investigation.
• Conduct a literature review: Conduct a thorough literature review to gather information on the topic, identify existing studies, and understand the current state of research. This will help you identify the gap in the literature that your study aims to fill.
• Explain the significance of the study: Explain why your study is important and why it is necessary. This can include the potential impact on the field, the importance to society, or the need to address a particular issue.
• Provide context: Provide context for the research problem by discussing the broader social, economic, or political context that the study is situated in. This can help the reader understand the relevance of the study and its potential implications.
• State the research questions and objectives: State the research questions and objectives that your study aims to address. This will help the reader understand the scope of the study and its purpose.
• Summarize the methodology : Briefly summarize the methodology you used to conduct the study, including the data collection and analysis methods. This can help the reader understand how the study was conducted and its reliability.

Examples of Background of The Study

Here are some examples of the background of the study:

Problem : The prevalence of obesity among children in the United States has reached alarming levels, with nearly one in five children classified as obese.

Significance : Obesity in childhood is associated with numerous negative health outcomes, including increased risk of type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular disease, and certain cancers.

Gap in knowledge : Despite efforts to address the obesity epidemic, rates continue to rise. There is a need for effective interventions that target the unique needs of children and their families.

Problem : The use of antibiotics in agriculture has contributed to the development of antibiotic-resistant bacteria, which poses a significant threat to human health.

Significance : Antibiotic-resistant infections are responsible for thousands of deaths each year and are a major public health concern.

Gap in knowledge: While there is a growing body of research on the use of antibiotics in agriculture, there is still much to be learned about the mechanisms of resistance and the most effective strategies for reducing antibiotic use.

Edxample 3:

Problem : Many low-income communities lack access to healthy food options, leading to high rates of food insecurity and diet-related diseases.

Significance : Poor nutrition is a major contributor to chronic diseases such as obesity, type 2 diabetes, and cardiovascular disease.

Gap in knowledge : While there have been efforts to address food insecurity, there is a need for more research on the barriers to accessing healthy food in low-income communities and effective strategies for increasing access.

Examples of Background of The Study In Research

Here are some real-life examples of how the background of the study can be written in different fields of study:

Example 1 : “There has been a significant increase in the incidence of diabetes in recent years. This has led to an increased demand for effective diabetes management strategies. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of a new diabetes management program in improving patient outcomes.”

Example 2 : “The use of social media has become increasingly prevalent in modern society. Despite its popularity, little is known about the effects of social media use on mental health. This study aims to investigate the relationship between social media use and mental health in young adults.”

Example 3: “Despite significant advancements in cancer treatment, the survival rate for patients with pancreatic cancer remains low. The purpose of this study is to identify potential biomarkers that can be used to improve early detection and treatment of pancreatic cancer.”

Examples of Background of The Study in Proposal

Here are some real-time examples of the background of the study in a proposal:

Example 1 : The prevalence of mental health issues among university students has been increasing over the past decade. This study aims to investigate the causes and impacts of mental health issues on academic performance and wellbeing.

Example 2 : Climate change is a global issue that has significant implications for agriculture in developing countries. This study aims to examine the adaptive capacity of smallholder farmers to climate change and identify effective strategies to enhance their resilience.

Example 3 : The use of social media in political campaigns has become increasingly common in recent years. This study aims to analyze the effectiveness of social media campaigns in mobilizing young voters and influencing their voting behavior.

Example 4 : Employee turnover is a major challenge for organizations, especially in the service sector. This study aims to identify the key factors that influence employee turnover in the hospitality industry and explore effective strategies for reducing turnover rates.

Examples of Background of The Study in Thesis

Here are some real-time examples of the background of the study in the thesis:

Example 1 : “Women’s participation in the workforce has increased significantly over the past few decades. However, women continue to be underrepresented in leadership positions, particularly in male-dominated industries such as technology. This study aims to examine the factors that contribute to the underrepresentation of women in leadership roles in the technology industry, with a focus on organizational culture and gender bias.”

Example 2 : “Mental health is a critical component of overall health and well-being. Despite increased awareness of the importance of mental health, there are still significant gaps in access to mental health services, particularly in low-income and rural communities. This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of a community-based mental health intervention in improving mental health outcomes in underserved populations.”

Example 3: “The use of technology in education has become increasingly widespread, with many schools adopting online learning platforms and digital resources. However, there is limited research on the impact of technology on student learning outcomes and engagement. This study aims to explore the relationship between technology use and academic achievement among middle school students, as well as the factors that mediate this relationship.”

Examples of Background of The Study in Research Paper

Here are some examples of how the background of the study can be written in various fields:

Example 1: The prevalence of obesity has been on the rise globally, with the World Health Organization reporting that approximately 650 million adults were obese in 2016. Obesity is a major risk factor for several chronic diseases such as diabetes, cardiovascular diseases, and cancer. In recent years, several interventions have been proposed to address this issue, including lifestyle changes, pharmacotherapy, and bariatric surgery. However, there is a lack of consensus on the most effective intervention for obesity management. This study aims to investigate the efficacy of different interventions for obesity management and identify the most effective one.

Example 2: Antibiotic resistance has become a major public health threat worldwide. Infections caused by antibiotic-resistant bacteria are associated with longer hospital stays, higher healthcare costs, and increased mortality. The inappropriate use of antibiotics is one of the main factors contributing to the development of antibiotic resistance. Despite numerous efforts to promote the rational use of antibiotics, studies have shown that many healthcare providers continue to prescribe antibiotics inappropriately. This study aims to explore the factors influencing healthcare providers’ prescribing behavior and identify strategies to improve antibiotic prescribing practices.

Example 3: Social media has become an integral part of modern communication, with millions of people worldwide using platforms such as Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram. Social media has several advantages, including facilitating communication, connecting people, and disseminating information. However, social media use has also been associated with several negative outcomes, including cyberbullying, addiction, and mental health problems. This study aims to investigate the impact of social media use on mental health and identify the factors that mediate this relationship.

Purpose of Background of The Study

The primary purpose of the background of the study is to help the reader understand the rationale for the research by presenting the historical, theoretical, and empirical background of the problem.

More specifically, the background of the study aims to:

• Provide a clear understanding of the research problem and its context.
• Identify the gap in knowledge that the study intends to fill.
• Establish the significance of the research problem and its potential contribution to the field.
• Highlight the key concepts, theories, and research findings related to the problem.
• Provide a rationale for the research questions or hypotheses and the research design.
• Identify the limitations and scope of the study.

When to Write Background of The Study

The background of the study should be written early on in the research process, ideally before the research design is finalized and data collection begins. This allows the researcher to clearly articulate the rationale for the study and establish a strong foundation for the research.

The background of the study typically comes after the introduction but before the literature review section. It should provide an overview of the research problem and its context, and also introduce the key concepts, theories, and research findings related to the problem.

Writing the background of the study early on in the research process also helps to identify potential gaps in knowledge and areas for further investigation, which can guide the development of the research questions or hypotheses and the research design. By establishing the significance of the research problem and its potential contribution to the field, the background of the study can also help to justify the research and secure funding or support from stakeholders.

Advantage of Background of The Study

The background of the study has several advantages, including:

• Provides context: The background of the study provides context for the research problem by highlighting the historical, theoretical, and empirical background of the problem. This allows the reader to understand the research problem in its broader context and appreciate its significance.
• Identifies gaps in knowledge: By reviewing the existing literature related to the research problem, the background of the study can identify gaps in knowledge that the study intends to fill. This helps to establish the novelty and originality of the research and its potential contribution to the field.
• Justifies the research : The background of the study helps to justify the research by demonstrating its significance and potential impact. This can be useful in securing funding or support for the research.
• Guides the research design: The background of the study can guide the development of the research questions or hypotheses and the research design by identifying key concepts, theories, and research findings related to the problem. This ensures that the research is grounded in existing knowledge and is designed to address the research problem effectively.
• Establishes credibility: By demonstrating the researcher’s knowledge of the field and the research problem, the background of the study can establish the researcher’s credibility and expertise, which can enhance the trustworthiness and validity of the research.

Disadvantages of Background of The Study

Some Disadvantages of Background of The Study are as follows:

• Time-consuming : Writing a comprehensive background of the study can be time-consuming, especially if the research problem is complex and multifaceted. This can delay the research process and impact the timeline for completing the study.
• Repetitive: The background of the study can sometimes be repetitive, as it often involves summarizing existing research and theories related to the research problem. This can be tedious for the reader and may make the section less engaging.
• Limitations of existing research: The background of the study can reveal the limitations of existing research related to the problem. This can create challenges for the researcher in developing research questions or hypotheses that address the gaps in knowledge identified in the background of the study.
• Bias : The researcher’s biases and perspectives can influence the content and tone of the background of the study. This can impact the reader’s perception of the research problem and may influence the validity of the research.
• Accessibility: Accessing and reviewing the literature related to the research problem can be challenging, especially if the researcher does not have access to a comprehensive database or if the literature is not available in the researcher’s language. This can limit the depth and scope of the background of the study.

About the author

Muhammad Hassan

Researcher, Academic Writer, Web developer

You may also like

What is a Hypothesis – Types, Examples and...

Research Methodology – Types, Examples and...

Tables in Research Paper – Types, Creating Guide...

Theoretical Framework – Types, Examples and...

Informed Consent in Research – Types, Templates...

Table of Contents – Types, Formats, Examples

• Resources Home 🏠
• Try SciSpace Copilot
• Search research papers
• Add Copilot Extension
• Try AI Detector
• Try Paraphraser
• Try Citation Generator
• April Papers
• June Papers
• July Papers

How to Write an Effective Background of the Study: A Comprehensive Guide

Table of Contents

The background of the study in a research paper offers a clear context, highlighting why the research is essential and the problem it aims to address.

As a researcher, this foundational section is essential for you to chart the course of your study, Moreover, it allows readers to understand the importance and path of your research.

Whether in academic communities or to the general public, a well-articulated background aids in communicating the essence of the research effectively.

While it may seem straightforward, crafting an effective background requires a blend of clarity, precision, and relevance. Therefore, this article aims to be your guide, offering insights into:

• Understanding the concept of the background of the study.
• Learning how to craft a compelling background effectively.
• Identifying and sidestepping common pitfalls in writing the background.
• Exploring practical examples that bring the theory to life.
• Enhancing both your writing and reading of academic papers.

Keeping these compelling insights in mind, let's delve deeper into the details of the empirical background of the study, exploring its definition, distinctions, and the art of writing it effectively.

What is the background of the study?

The background of the study is placed at the beginning of a research paper. It provides the context, circumstances, and history that led to the research problem or topic being explored.

It offers readers a snapshot of the existing knowledge on the topic and the reasons that spurred your current research.

When crafting the background of your study, consider the following questions.

• What's the context of your research?
• Which previous research will you refer to?
• Are there any knowledge gaps in the existing relevant literature?
• How will you justify the need for your current research?
• Have you concisely presented the research question or problem?

In a typical research paper structure, after presenting the background, the introduction section follows. The introduction delves deeper into the specific objectives of the research and often outlines the structure or main points that the paper will cover.

Together, they create a cohesive starting point, ensuring readers are well-equipped to understand the subsequent sections of the research paper.

While the background of the study and the introduction section of the research manuscript may seem similar and sometimes even overlap, each serves a unique purpose in the research narrative.

Difference between background and introduction

A well-written background of the study and introduction are preliminary sections of a research paper and serve distinct purposes.

Here’s a detailed tabular comparison between the two of them.

What is the relevance of the background of the study?

It is necessary for you to provide your readers with the background of your research. Without this, readers may grapple with questions such as: Why was this specific research topic chosen? What led to this decision? Why is this study relevant? Is it worth their time?

Such uncertainties can deter them from fully engaging with your study, leading to the rejection of your research paper. Additionally, this can diminish its impact in the academic community, and reduce its potential for real-world application or policy influence .

To address these concerns and offer clarity, the background section plays a pivotal role in research papers.

The background of the study in research is important as it:

• Provides context: It offers readers a clear picture of the existing knowledge, helping them understand where the current research fits in.
• Highlights relevance: By detailing the reasons for the research, it underscores the study's significance and its potential impact.
• Guides the narrative: The background shapes the narrative flow of the paper, ensuring a logical progression from what's known to what the research aims to uncover.
• Enhances engagement: A well-crafted background piques the reader's interest, encouraging them to delve deeper into the research paper.
• Aids in comprehension: By setting the scenario, it aids readers in better grasping the research objectives, methodologies, and findings.

How to write the background of the study in a research paper?

The journey of presenting a compelling argument begins with the background study. This section holds the power to either captivate or lose the reader's interest.

An effectively written background not only provides context but also sets the tone for the entire research paper. It's the bridge that connects a broad topic to a specific research question, guiding readers through the logic behind the study.

But how does one craft a background of the study that resonates, informs, and engages?

Here, we’ll discuss how to write an impactful background study, ensuring your research stands out and captures the attention it deserves.

Identify the research problem

The first step is to start pinpointing the specific issue or gap you're addressing. This should be a significant and relevant problem in your field.

A well-defined problem is specific, relevant, and significant to your field. It should resonate with both experts and readers.

Here’s more on how to write an effective research problem .

Provide context

Here, you need to provide a broader perspective, illustrating how your research aligns with or contributes to the overarching context or the wider field of study. A comprehensive context is grounded in facts, offers multiple perspectives, and is relatable.

In addition to stating facts, you should weave a story that connects key concepts from the past, present, and potential future research. For instance, consider the following approach.

• Offer a brief history of the topic, highlighting major milestones or turning points that have shaped the current landscape.
• Discuss contemporary developments or current trends that provide relevant information to your research problem. This could include technological advancements, policy changes, or shifts in societal attitudes.
• Highlight the views of different stakeholders. For a topic like sustainable agriculture, this could mean discussing the perspectives of farmers, environmentalists, policymakers, and consumers.
• If relevant, compare and contrast global trends with local conditions and circumstances. This can offer readers a more holistic understanding of the topic.

Literature review

For this step, you’ll deep dive into the existing literature on the same topic. It's where you explore what scholars, researchers, and experts have already discovered or discussed about your topic.

Conducting a thorough literature review isn't just a recap of past works. To elevate its efficacy, it's essential to analyze the methods, outcomes, and intricacies of prior research work, demonstrating a thorough engagement with the existing body of knowledge.

• Instead of merely listing past research study, delve into their methodologies, findings, and limitations. Highlight groundbreaking studies and those that had contrasting results.
• Try to identify patterns. Look for recurring themes or trends in the literature. Are there common conclusions or contentious points?
• The next step would be to connect the dots. Show how different pieces of research relate to each other. This can help in understanding the evolution of thought on the topic.

By showcasing what's already known, you can better highlight the background of the study in research.

Highlight the research gap

This step involves identifying the unexplored areas or unanswered questions in the existing literature. Your research seeks to address these gaps, providing new insights or answers.

A clear research gap shows you've thoroughly engaged with existing literature and found an area that needs further exploration.

How can you efficiently highlight the research gap?

• Find the overlooked areas. Point out topics or angles that haven't been adequately addressed.
• Highlight questions that have emerged due to recent developments or changing circumstances.
• Identify areas where insights from other fields might be beneficial but haven't been explored yet.

State your objectives

Here, it’s all about laying out your game plan — What do you hope to achieve with your research? You need to mention a clear objective that’s specific, actionable, and directly tied to the research gap.

How to state your objectives?

• List the primary questions guiding your research.
• If applicable, state any hypotheses or predictions you aim to test.
• Specify what you hope to achieve, whether it's new insights, solutions, or methodologies.

Discuss the significance

This step describes your 'why'. Why is your research important? What broader implications does it have?

The significance of “why” should be both theoretical (adding to the existing literature) and practical (having real-world implications).

How do we effectively discuss the significance?

• Discuss how your research adds to the existing body of knowledge.
• Highlight how your findings could be applied in real-world scenarios, from policy changes to on-ground practices.
• Point out how your research could pave the way for further studies or open up new areas of exploration.

Summarize your points

A concise summary acts as a bridge, smoothly transitioning readers from the background to the main body of the paper. This step is a brief recap, ensuring that readers have grasped the foundational concepts.

How to summarize your study?

• Revisit the key points discussed, from the research problem to its significance.
• Prepare the reader for the subsequent sections, ensuring they understand the research's direction.

Include examples for better understanding

Research and come up with real-world or hypothetical examples to clarify complex concepts or to illustrate the practical applications of your research. Relevant examples make abstract ideas tangible, aiding comprehension.

How to include an effective example of the background of the study?

• Use past events or scenarios to explain concepts.
• Craft potential scenarios to demonstrate the implications of your findings.
• Use comparisons to simplify complex ideas, making them more relatable.

Crafting a compelling background of the study in research is about striking the right balance between providing essential context, showcasing your comprehensive understanding of the existing literature, and highlighting the unique value of your research .

While writing the background of the study, keep your readers at the forefront of your mind. Every piece of information, every example, and every objective should be geared toward helping them understand and appreciate your research.

How to avoid mistakes in the background of the study in research?

To write a well-crafted background of the study, you should be aware of the following potential research pitfalls .

• Stay away from ambiguity. Always assume that your reader might not be familiar with intricate details about your topic.
• Avoid discussing unrelated themes. Stick to what's directly relevant to your research problem.
• Ensure your background is well-organized. Information should flow logically, making it easy for readers to follow.
• While it's vital to provide context, avoid overwhelming the reader with excessive details that might not be directly relevant to your research problem.
• Ensure you've covered the most significant and relevant studies i` n your field. Overlooking key pieces of literature can make your background seem incomplete.
• Aim for a balanced presentation of facts, and avoid showing overt bias or presenting only one side of an argument.
• While academic paper often involves specialized terms, ensure they're adequately explained or use simpler alternatives when possible.
• Every claim or piece of information taken from existing literature should be appropriately cited. Failing to do so can lead to issues of plagiarism.
• Avoid making the background too lengthy. While thoroughness is appreciated, it should not come at the expense of losing the reader's interest. Maybe prefer to keep it to one-two paragraphs long.
• Especially in rapidly evolving fields, it's crucial to ensure that your literature review section is up-to-date and includes the latest research.

Example of an effective background of the study

Let's consider a topic: "The Impact of Online Learning on Student Performance." The ideal background of the study section for this topic would be as follows.

In the last decade, the rise of the internet has revolutionized many sectors, including education. Online learning platforms, once a supplementary educational tool, have now become a primary mode of instruction for many institutions worldwide. With the recent global events, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, there has been a rapid shift from traditional classroom learning to online modes, making it imperative to understand its effects on student performance.

Previous studies have explored various facets of online learning, from its accessibility to its flexibility. However, there is a growing need to assess its direct impact on student outcomes. While some educators advocate for its benefits, citing the convenience and vast resources available, others express concerns about potential drawbacks, such as reduced student engagement and the challenges of self-discipline.

This research aims to delve deeper into this debate, evaluating the true impact of online learning on student performance.

Why is this example considered as an effective background section of a research paper?

This background section example effectively sets the context by highlighting the rise of online learning and its increased relevance due to recent global events. It references prior research on the topic, indicating a foundation built on existing knowledge.

By presenting both the potential advantages and concerns of online learning, it establishes a balanced view, leading to the clear purpose of the study: to evaluate the true impact of online learning on student performance.

As we've explored, writing an effective background of the study in research requires clarity, precision, and a keen understanding of both the broader landscape and the specific details of your topic.

From identifying the research problem, providing context, reviewing existing literature to highlighting research gaps and stating objectives, each step is pivotal in shaping the narrative of your research. And while there are best practices to follow, it's equally crucial to be aware of the pitfalls to avoid.

Remember, writing or refining the background of your study is essential to engage your readers, familiarize them with the research context, and set the ground for the insights your research project will unveil.

Drawing from all the important details, insights and guidance shared, you're now in a strong position to craft a background of the study that not only informs but also engages and resonates with your readers.

Now that you've a clear understanding of what the background of the study aims to achieve, the natural progression is to delve into the next crucial component — write an effective introduction section of a research paper. Read here .

Frequently Asked Questions

The background of the study should include a clear context for the research, references to relevant previous studies, identification of knowledge gaps, justification for the current research, a concise overview of the research problem or question, and an indication of the study's significance or potential impact.

The background of the study is written to provide readers with a clear understanding of the context, significance, and rationale behind the research. It offers a snapshot of existing knowledge on the topic, highlights the relevance of the study, and sets the stage for the research questions and objectives. It ensures that readers can grasp the importance of the research and its place within the broader field of study.

The background of the study is a section in a research paper that provides context, circumstances, and history leading to the research problem or topic being explored. It presents existing knowledge on the topic and outlines the reasons that spurred the current research, helping readers understand the research's foundation and its significance in the broader academic landscape.

The number of paragraphs in the background of the study can vary based on the complexity of the topic and the depth of the context required. Typically, it might range from 3 to 5 paragraphs, but in more detailed or complex research papers, it could be longer. The key is to ensure that all relevant information is presented clearly and concisely, without unnecessary repetition.

You might also like

Boosting Citations: A Comparative Analysis of Graphical Abstract vs. Video Abstract

The Impact of Visual Abstracts on Boosting Citations

Introducing SciSpace’s Citation Booster To Increase Research Visibility

Educational resources and simple solutions for your research journey

What is the Background of a Study and How to Write It (Examples Included)

Have you ever found yourself struggling to write a background of the study for your research paper? You’re not alone. While the background of a study is an essential element of a research manuscript, it’s also one of the most challenging pieces to write. This is because it requires researchers to provide context and justification for their research, highlight the significance of their study, and situate their work within the existing body of knowledge in the field.  

Despite its challenges, the background of a study is crucial for any research paper. A compelling well-written background of the study can not only promote confidence in the overall quality of your research analysis and findings, but it can also determine whether readers will be interested in knowing more about the rest of the research study.  

In this article, we’ll explore the key elements of the background of a study and provide simple guidelines on how to write one effectively. Whether you’re a seasoned researcher or a graduate student working on your first research manuscript, this post will explain how to write a background for your study that is compelling and informative.  

Table of Contents

What is the background of a study ?  

Typically placed in the beginning of your research paper, the background of a study serves to convey the central argument of your study and its significance clearly and logically to an uninformed audience. The background of a study in a research paper helps to establish the research problem or gap in knowledge that the study aims to address, sets the stage for the research question and objectives, and highlights the significance of the research. The background of a study also includes a review of relevant literature, which helps researchers understand where the research study is placed in the current body of knowledge in a specific research discipline. It includes the reason for the study, the thesis statement, and a summary of the concept or problem being examined by the researcher. At times, the background of a study can may even examine whether your research supports or contradicts the results of earlier studies or existing knowledge on the subject.  

How is the background of a study different from the introduction?  

It is common to find early career researchers getting confused between the background of a study and the introduction in a research paper. Many incorrectly consider these two vital parts of a research paper the same and use these terms interchangeably. The confusion is understandable, however, it’s important to know that the introduction and the background of the study are distinct elements and serve very different purposes.   

• The basic different between the background of a study and the introduction is kind of information that is shared with the readers . While the introduction provides an overview of the specific research topic and touches upon key parts of the research paper, the background of the study presents a detailed discussion on the existing literature in the field, identifies research gaps, and how the research being done will add to current knowledge.  
• The introduction aims to capture the reader’s attention and interest and to provide a clear and concise summary of the research project. It typically begins with a general statement of the research problem and then narrows down to the specific research question. It may also include an overview of the research design, methodology, and scope. The background of the study outlines the historical, theoretical, and empirical background that led to the research question to highlight its importance. It typically offers an overview of the research field and may include a review of the literature to highlight gaps, controversies, or limitations in the existing knowledge and to justify the need for further research.  
• Both these sections appear at the beginning of a research paper. In some cases the introduction may come before the background of the study , although in most instances the latter is integrated into the introduction itself. The length of the introduction and background of a study can differ based on the journal guidelines and the complexity of a specific research study.  

Learn to convey study relevance, integrate literature reviews, and articulate research gaps in the background section. Get your All Access Pack now!    

To put it simply, the background of the study provides context for the study by explaining how your research fills a research gap in existing knowledge in the field and how it will add to it. The introduction section explains how the research fills this gap by stating the research topic, the objectives of the research and the findings – it sets the context for the rest of the paper.   

Where is the background of a study placed in a research paper?  

T he background of a study is typically placed in the introduction section of a research paper and is positioned after the statement of the problem. Researchers should try and present the background of the study in clear logical structure by dividing it into several sections, such as introduction, literature review, and research gap. This will make it easier for the reader to understand the research problem and the motivation for the study.  

So, when should you write the background of your study ? It’s recommended that researchers write this section after they have conducted a thorough literature review and identified the research problem, research question, and objectives. This way, they can effectively situate their study within the existing body of knowledge in the field and provide a clear rationale for their research.  

Creating an effective background of a study structure  

Given that the purpose of writing the background of your study is to make readers understand the reasons for conducting the research, it is important to create an outline and basic framework to work within. This will make it easier to write the background of the study and will ensure that it is comprehensive and compelling for readers.  

While creating a background of the study structure for research papers, it is crucial to have a clear understanding of the essential elements that should be included. Make sure you incorporate the following elements in the background of the study section :   

• Present a general overview of the research topic, its significance, and main aims; this may be like establishing the “importance of the topic” in the introduction.   
• Discuss the existing level of research done on the research topic or on related topics in the field to set context for your research. Be concise and mention only the relevant part of studies, ideally in chronological order to reflect the progress being made.  
• Highlight disputes in the field as well as claims made by scientists, organizations, or key policymakers that need to be investigated. This forms the foundation of your research methodology and solidifies the aims of your study.   
• Describe if and how the methods and techniques used in the research study are different from those used in previous research on similar topics.   

By including these critical elements in the background of your study , you can provide your readers with a comprehensive understanding of your research and its context.  

How to write a background of the study in research papers ?  

Now that you know the essential elements to include, it’s time to discuss how to write the background of the study in a concise and interesting way that engages audiences. The best way to do this is to build a clear narrative around the central theme of your research so that readers can grasp the concept and identify the gaps that the study will address. While the length and detail presented in the background of a study could vary depending on the complexity and novelty of the research topic, it is imperative to avoid wordiness. For research that is interdisciplinary, mentioning how the disciplines are connected and highlighting specific aspects to be studied helps readers understand the research better.   

While there are different styles of writing the background of a study , it always helps to have a clear plan in place. Let us look at how to write a background of study for research papers.    

• Identify the research problem: Begin the background by defining the research topic, and highlighting the main issue or question that the research aims to address. The research problem should be clear, specific, and relevant to the field of study. It should be framed using simple, easy to understand language and must be meaningful to intended audiences.  
• Craft an impactful statement of the research objectives: While writing the background of the study it is critical to highlight the research objectives and specific goals that the study aims to achieve. The research objectives should be closely related to the research problem and must be aligned with the overall purpose of the study.  
• Conduct a review of available literature: When writing the background of the research , provide a summary of relevant literature in the field and related research that has been conducted around the topic. Remember to record the search terms used and keep track of articles that you read so that sources can be cited accurately. Ensure that the literature you include is sourced from credible sources.  
• Address existing controversies and assumptions: It is a good idea to acknowledge and clarify existing claims and controversies regarding the subject of your research. For example, if your research topic involves an issue that has been widely discussed due to ethical or politically considerations, it is best to address them when writing the background of the study .  
• Present the relevance of the study: It is also important to provide a justification for the research. This is where the researcher explains why the study is important and what contributions it will make to existing knowledge on the subject. Highlighting key concepts and theories and explaining terms and ideas that may feel unfamiliar to readers makes the background of the study content more impactful.  
• Proofread to eliminate errors in language, structure, and data shared: Once the first draft is done, it is a good idea to read and re-read the draft a few times to weed out possible grammatical errors or inaccuracies in the information provided. In fact, experts suggest that it is helpful to have your supervisor or peers read and edit the background of the study . Their feedback can help ensure that even inadvertent errors are not overlooked.  

Get exclusive discounts on e xpert-led editing to publication support with Researcher.Life’s All Access Pack. Get yours now!  

How to avoid mistakes in writing the background of a study  

While figuring out how to write the background of a study , it is also important to know the most common mistakes authors make so you can steer clear of these in your research paper.   

• Write the background of a study in a formal academic tone while keeping the language clear and simple. Check for the excessive use of jargon and technical terminology that could confuse your readers.   
• Avoid including unrelated concepts that could distract from the subject of research. Instead, focus your discussion around the key aspects of your study by highlighting gaps in existing literature and knowledge and the novelty and necessity of your study.   
• Provide relevant, reliable evidence to support your claims and citing sources correctly; be sure to follow a consistent referencing format and style throughout the paper.   
• Ensure that the details presented in the background of the study are captured chronologically and organized into sub-sections for easy reading and comprehension.  
• Check the journal guidelines for the recommended length for this section so that you include all the important details in a concise manner. 

By keeping these tips in mind, you can create a clear, concise, and compelling background of the study for your research paper. Take this example of a background of the study on the impact of social media on mental health.  

Social media has become a ubiquitous aspect of modern life, with people of all ages, genders, and backgrounds using platforms such as Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter to connect with others, share information, and stay updated on news and events. While social media has many potential benefits, including increased social connectivity and access to information, there is growing concern about its impact on mental health.   Research has suggested that social media use is associated with a range of negative mental health outcomes, including increased rates of anxiety, depression, and loneliness. This is thought to be due, in part, to the social comparison processes that occur on social media, whereby users compare their lives to the idealized versions of others that are presented online.   Despite these concerns, there is also evidence to suggest that social media can have positive effects on mental health. For example, social media can provide a sense of social support and community, which can be beneficial for individuals who are socially isolated or marginalized.   Given the potential benefits and risks of social media use for mental health, it is important to gain a better understanding of the mechanisms underlying these effects. This study aims to investigate the relationship between social media use and mental health outcomes, with a particular focus on the role of social comparison processes. By doing so, we hope to shed light on the potential risks and benefits of social media use for mental health, and to provide insights that can inform interventions and policies aimed at promoting healthy social media use.  

To conclude, the background of a study is a crucial component of a research manuscript and must be planned, structured, and presented in a way that attracts reader attention, compels them to read the manuscript, creates an impact on the minds of readers and sets the stage for future discussions. 

A well-written background of the study not only provides researchers with a clear direction on conducting their research, but it also enables readers to understand and appreciate the relevance of the research work being done.   

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) on background of the study

Q: How does the background of the study help the reader understand the research better?

The background of the study plays a crucial role in helping readers understand the research better by providing the necessary context, framing the research problem, and establishing its significance. It helps readers:

• understand the larger framework, historical development, and existing knowledge related to a research topic
• identify gaps, limitations, or unresolved issues in the existing literature or knowledge
• outline potential contributions, practical implications, or theoretical advancements that the research aims to achieve
• and learn the specific context and limitations of the research project

Q: Does the background of the study need citation?

Yes, the background of the study in a research paper should include citations to support and acknowledge the sources of information and ideas presented. When you provide information or make statements in the background section that are based on previous studies, theories, or established knowledge, it is important to cite the relevant sources. This establishes credibility, enables verification, and demonstrates the depth of literature review you’ve done.

Q: What is the difference between background of the study and problem statement?

The background of the study provides context and establishes the research’s foundation while the problem statement clearly states the problem being addressed and the research questions or objectives.

Editage All Access is a subscription-based platform that unifies the best AI tools and services designed to speed up, simplify, and streamline every step of a researcher’s journey. The Editage All Access Pack is a one-of-a-kind subscription that unlocks full access to an AI writing assistant, literature recommender, journal finder, scientific illustration tool, and exclusive discounts on professional publication services from Editage.  

Based on 22+ years of experience in academia, Editage All Access empowers researchers to put their best research forward and move closer to success. Explore our top AI Tools pack, AI Tools + Publication Services pack, or Build Your Own Plan. Find everything a researcher needs to succeed, all in one place –  Get All Access now starting at just $14 a month !    

Related Posts

What is Thematic Analysis and How to Do It (with Examples)

What Skills are Required for Academic Writing

• Research Process
• Manuscript Preparation
• Manuscript Review
• Publication Process
• Publication Recognition
• Language Editing Services
• Translation Services

What is the Background of a Study and How Should it be Written?

• 3 minute read
• 966.9K views

Table of Contents

The background of a study is one of the most important components of a research paper. The quality of the background determines whether the reader will be interested in the rest of the study. Thus, to ensure that the audience is invested in reading the entire research paper, it is important to write an appealing and effective background. So, what constitutes the background of a study, and how must it be written?

What is the background of a study?

The background of a study is the first section of the paper and establishes the context underlying the research. It contains the rationale, the key problem statement, and a brief overview of research questions that are addressed in the rest of the paper. The background forms the crux of the study because it introduces an unaware audience to the research and its importance in a clear and logical manner. At times, the background may even explore whether the study builds on or refutes findings from previous studies. Any relevant information that the readers need to know before delving into the paper should be made available to them in the background.

How is a background different from the introduction?

The introduction of your research paper is presented before the background. Let’s find out what factors differentiate the background from the introduction.

• The introduction only contains preliminary data about the research topic and does not state the purpose of the study. On the contrary, the background clarifies the importance of the study in detail.
• The introduction provides an overview of the research topic from a broader perspective, while the background provides a detailed understanding of the topic.
• The introduction should end with the mention of the research questions, aims, and objectives of the study. In contrast, the background follows no such format and only provides essential context to the study.

How should one write the background of a research paper?

The length and detail presented in the background varies for different research papers, depending on the complexity and novelty of the research topic. At times, a simple background suffices, even if the study is complex. Before writing and adding details in the background, take a note of these additional points:

• Start with a strong beginning: Begin the background by defining the research topic and then identify the target audience.
• Cover key components: Explain all theories, concepts, terms, and ideas that may feel unfamiliar to the target audience thoroughly.
• Take note of important prerequisites: Go through the relevant literature in detail. Take notes while reading and cite the sources.
• Maintain a balance: Make sure that the background is focused on important details, but also appeals to a broader audience.
• Include historical data: Current issues largely originate from historical events or findings. If the research borrows information from a historical context, add relevant data in the background.
• Explain novelty: If the research study or methodology is unique or novel, provide an explanation that helps to understand the research better.
• Increase engagement: To make the background engaging, build a story around the central theme of the research

Avoid these mistakes while writing the background:

• Ambiguity: Don’t be ambiguous. While writing, assume that the reader does not understand any intricate detail about your research.
• Unrelated themes: Steer clear from topics that are not related to the key aspects of your research topic.
• Poor organization: Do not place information without a structure. Make sure that the background reads in a chronological manner and organize the sub-sections so that it flows well.

Writing the background for a research paper should not be a daunting task. But directions to go about it can always help. At Elsevier Author Services we provide essential insights on how to write a high quality, appealing, and logically structured paper for publication, beginning with a robust background. For further queries, contact our experts now!

How to Use Tables and Figures effectively in Research Papers

The Top 5 Qualities of Every Good Researcher

You may also like.

Submission 101: What format should be used for academic papers?

Page-Turner Articles are More Than Just Good Arguments: Be Mindful of Tone and Structure!

A Must-see for Researchers! How to Ensure Inclusivity in Your Scientific Writing

Make Hook, Line, and Sinker: The Art of Crafting Engaging Introductions

Can Describing Study Limitations Improve the Quality of Your Paper?

A Guide to Crafting Shorter, Impactful Sentences in Academic Writing

6 Steps to Write an Excellent Discussion in Your Manuscript

How to Write Clear and Crisp Civil Engineering Papers? Here are 5 Key Tips to Consider

Input your search keywords and press Enter.

What Is Background in a Research Paper?

So you have carefully written your research paper  and probably ran it through your colleagues ten to fifteen times. While there are many elements to a good research article, one of the most important elements for your readers is the background of your study.

What is Background of the Study in Research

The background of your study will provide context to the information discussed throughout the research paper . Background information may include both important and relevant studies. This is particularly important if a study either supports or refutes your thesis.

Why is Background of the Study Necessary in Research?

The background of the study discusses your problem statement, rationale, and research questions. It links  introduction to your research topic  and ensures a logical flow of ideas.  Thus, it helps readers understand your reasons for conducting the study.

Providing Background Information

The reader should be able to understand your topic and its importance. The length and detail of your background also depend on the degree to which you need to demonstrate your understanding of the topic. Paying close attention to the following questions will help you in writing background information:

• Are there any theories, concepts, terms, and ideas that may be unfamiliar to the target audience and will require you to provide any additional explanation?
• Any historical data that need to be shared in order to provide context on why the current issue emerged?
• Are there any concepts that may have been borrowed from other disciplines that may be unfamiliar to the reader and need an explanation?

Related: Ready with the background and searching for more information on journal ranking? Check this infographic on the SCImago Journal Rank today!

Is the research study unique for which additional explanation is needed? For instance, you may have used a completely new method

How to Write a Background of the Study

The structure of a background study in a research paper generally follows a logical sequence to provide context, justification, and an understanding of the research problem. It includes an introduction, general background, literature review , rationale , objectives, scope and limitations , significance of the study and the research hypothesis . Following the structure can provide a comprehensive and well-organized background for your research.

Here are the steps to effectively write a background of the study.

1. Identify Your Audience:

Determine the level of expertise of your target audience. Tailor the depth and complexity of your background information accordingly.

2. Understand the Research Problem:

Define the research problem or question your study aims to address. Identify the significance of the problem within the broader context of the field.

3. Review Existing Literature:

Conduct a thorough literature review to understand what is already known in the area. Summarize key findings, theories, and concepts relevant to your research.

4. Include Historical Data:

Integrate historical data if relevant to the research, as current issues often trace back to historical events.

5. Identify Controversies and Gaps:

Note any controversies or debates within the existing literature. Identify gaps , limitations, or unanswered questions that your research can address.

6. Select Key Components:

Choose the most critical elements to include in the background based on their relevance to your research problem. Prioritize information that helps build a strong foundation for your study.

7. Craft a Logical Flow:

Organize the background information in a logical sequence. Start with general context, move to specific theories and concepts, and then focus on the specific problem.

8. Highlight the Novelty of Your Research:

Clearly explain the unique aspects or contributions of your study. Emphasize why your research is different from or builds upon existing work.

Here are some extra tips to increase the quality of your research background:

Example of a Research Background

Here is an example of a research background to help you understand better.

The above hypothetical example provides a research background, addresses the gap and highlights the potential outcome of the study; thereby aiding a better understanding of the proposed research.

What Makes the Introduction Different from the Background?

Your introduction is different from your background in a number of ways.

• The introduction contains preliminary data about your topic that  the reader will most likely read , whereas the background clarifies the importance of the paper.
• The background of your study discusses in depth about the topic, whereas the introduction only gives an overview.
• The introduction should end with your research questions, aims, and objectives, whereas your background should not (except in some cases where your background is integrated into your introduction). For instance, the C.A.R.S. ( Creating a Research Space ) model, created by John Swales is based on his analysis of journal articles. This model attempts to explain and describe the organizational pattern of writing the introduction in social sciences.

Points to Note

Your background should begin with defining a topic and audience. It is important that you identify which topic you need to review and what your audience already knows about the topic. You should proceed by searching and researching the relevant literature. In this case, it is advisable to keep track of the search terms you used and the articles that you downloaded. It is helpful to use one of the research paper management systems such as Papers, Mendeley, Evernote, or Sente. Next, it is helpful to take notes while reading. Be careful when copying quotes verbatim and make sure to put them in quotation marks and cite the sources. In addition, you should keep your background focused but balanced enough so that it is relevant to a broader audience. Aside from these, your background should be critical, consistent, and logically structured.

Writing the background of your study should not be an overly daunting task. Many guides that can help you organize your thoughts as you write the background. The background of the study is the key to introduce your audience to your research topic and should be done with strong knowledge and thoughtful writing.

The background of a research paper typically ranges from one to two paragraphs, summarizing the relevant literature and context of the study. It should be concise, providing enough information to contextualize the research problem and justify the need for the study. Journal instructions about any word count limits should be kept in mind while deciding on the length of the final content.

The background of a research paper provides the context and relevant literature to understand the research problem, while the introduction also introduces the specific research topic, states the research objectives, and outlines the scope of the study. The background focuses on the broader context, whereas the introduction focuses on the specific research project and its objectives.

When writing the background for a study, start by providing a brief overview of the research topic and its significance in the field. Then, highlight the gaps in existing knowledge or unresolved issues that the study aims to address. Finally, summarize the key findings from relevant literature to establish the context and rationale for conducting the research, emphasizing the need and importance of the study within the broader academic landscape.

The background in a research paper is crucial as it sets the stage for the study by providing essential context and rationale. It helps readers understand the significance of the research problem and its relevance in the broader field. By presenting relevant literature and highlighting gaps, the background justifies the need for the study, building a strong foundation for the research and enhancing its credibility.

The presentation very informative

It is really educative. I love the workshop. It really motivated me into writing my first paper for publication.

an interesting clue here, thanks.

thanks for the answers.

Good and interesting explanation. Thanks

Thank you for good presentation.

Hi Adam, we are glad to know that you found our article beneficial

The background of the study is the key to introduce your audience to YOUR research topic.

Awesome. Exactly what i was looking forwards to 😉

Hi Maryam, we are glad to know that you found our resource useful.

my understanding of ‘Background of study’ has been elevated.

Hi Peter, we are glad to know that our article has helped you get a better understanding of the background in a research paper.

thanks to give advanced information

Hi Shimelis, we are glad to know that you found the information in our article beneficial.

When i was studying it is very much hard for me to conduct a research study and know the background because my teacher in practical research is having a research so i make it now so that i will done my research

Very informative……….Thank you.

The confusion i had before, regarding an introduction and background to a research work is now a thing of the past. Thank you so much.

Thanks for your help…

Thanks for your kind information about the background of a research paper.

Thanks for the answer

Very informative. I liked even more when the difference between background and introduction was given. I am looking forward to learning more from this site. I am in Botswana

Hello, I am Benoît from Central African Republic. Right now I am writing down my research paper in order to get my master degree in British Literature. Thank you very much for posting all this information about the background of the study. I really appreciate. Thanks!

The write up is quite good, detailed and informative. Thanks a lot. The article has certainly enhanced my understanding of the topic.

Rate this article Cancel Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Enago Academy's Most Popular Articles

• AI in Academia
• Infographic
• Manuscripts & Grants
• Reporting Research
• Trending Now

Can AI Tools Prepare a Research Manuscript From Scratch? — A comprehensive guide

As technology continues to advance, the question of whether artificial intelligence (AI) tools can prepare…

Abstract Vs. Introduction — Do you know the difference?

Ross wants to publish his research. Feeling positive about his research outcomes, he begins to…

• Old Webinars
• Webinar Mobile App

Demystifying Research Methodology With Field Experts

Choosing research methodology Research design and methodology Evidence-based research approach How RAxter can assist researchers

• Manuscript Preparation
• Publishing Research

How to Choose Best Research Methodology for Your Study

Successful research conduction requires proper planning and execution. While there are multiple reasons and aspects…

Top 5 Key Differences Between Methods and Methodology

While burning the midnight oil during literature review, most researchers do not realize that the…

How to Draft the Acknowledgment Section of a Manuscript

Discussion Vs. Conclusion: Know the Difference Before Drafting Manuscripts

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.

• Industry News
• Promoting Research
• Career Corner
• Diversity and Inclusion
• Infographics
• Expert Video Library
• Other Resources
• Enago Learn
• Upcoming & On-Demand Webinars
• Peer-Review Week 2023
• Open Access Week 2023
• Conference Videos
• Enago Report
• Journal Finder
• Enago Plagiarism & AI Grammar Check
• Editing Services
• Publication Support Services
• Research Impact
• Translation Services
• Publication solutions
• AI-Based Solutions
• Thought Leadership
• Call for Articles
• Call for Speakers
• Author Training
• Edit Profile

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

In your opinion, what is the most effective way to improve integrity in the peer review process?

• USC Libraries
• Research Guides

Organizing Your Social Sciences Research Paper

• Background Information
• Purpose of Guide
• Design Flaws to Avoid
• Independent and Dependent Variables
• Glossary of Research Terms
• Reading Research Effectively
• Narrowing a Topic Idea
• Broadening a Topic Idea
• Extending the Timeliness of a Topic Idea
• Academic Writing Style
• Applying Critical Thinking
• Choosing a Title
• Making an Outline
• Paragraph Development
• Research Process Video Series
• Executive Summary
• The C.A.R.S. Model
• The Research Problem/Question
• Theoretical Framework
• Citation Tracking
• Content Alert Services
• Evaluating Sources
• Primary Sources
• Secondary Sources
• Tiertiary Sources
• Scholarly vs. Popular Publications
• Qualitative Methods
• Quantitative Methods
• Insiderness
• Using Non-Textual Elements
• Limitations of the Study
• Common Grammar Mistakes
• Writing Concisely
• Avoiding Plagiarism
• Footnotes or Endnotes?
• Further Readings
• Generative AI and Writing
• USC Libraries Tutorials and Other Guides
• Bibliography

Background information identifies and describes the history and nature of a well-defined research problem with reference to contextualizing existing literature. The background information should indicate the root of the problem being studied, appropriate context of the problem in relation to theory, research, and/or practice , its scope, and the extent to which previous studies have successfully investigated the problem, noting, in particular, where gaps exist that your study attempts to address. Background information does not replace the literature review section of a research paper; it is intended to place the research problem within a specific context and an established plan for its solution.

Fitterling, Lori. Researching and Writing an Effective Background Section of a Research Paper. Kansas City University of Medicine & Biosciences; Creating a Research Paper: How to Write the Background to a Study. DurousseauElectricalInstitute.com; Background Information: Definition of Background Information. Literary Devices Definition and Examples of Literary Terms.

Importance of Having Enough Background Information

Background information expands upon the key points stated in the beginning of your introduction but is not intended to be the main focus of the paper. It generally supports the question, what is the most important information the reader needs to understand before continuing to read the paper? Sufficient background information helps the reader determine if you have a basic understanding of the research problem being investigated and promotes confidence in the overall quality of your analysis and findings. This information provides the reader with the essential context needed to conceptualize the research problem and its significance before moving on to a more thorough analysis of prior research.

Forms of contextualization included in background information can include describing one or more of the following:

• Cultural -- placed within the learned behavior of a specific group or groups of people.
• Economic -- of or relating to systems of production and management of material wealth and/or business activities.
• Gender -- located within the behavioral, cultural, or psychological traits typically associated with being self-identified as male, female, or other form of  gender expression.
• Historical -- the time in which something takes place or was created and how the condition of time influences how you interpret it.
• Interdisciplinary -- explanation of theories, concepts, ideas, or methodologies borrowed from other disciplines applied to the research problem rooted in a discipline other than the discipline where your paper resides.
• Philosophical -- clarification of the essential nature of being or of phenomena as it relates to the research problem.
• Physical/Spatial -- reflects the meaning of space around something and how that influences how it is understood.
• Political -- concerns the environment in which something is produced indicating it's public purpose or agenda.
• Social -- the environment of people that surrounds something's creation or intended audience, reflecting how the people associated with something use and interpret it.
• Temporal -- reflects issues or events of, relating to, or limited by time. Concerns past, present, or future contextualization and not just a historical past.

Background information can also include summaries of important research studies . This can be a particularly important element of providing background information if an innovative or groundbreaking study about the research problem laid a foundation for further research or there was a key study that is essential to understanding your arguments. The priority is to summarize for the reader what is known about the research problem before you conduct the analysis of prior research. This is accomplished with a general summary of the foundational research literature [with citations] that document findings that inform your study's overall aims and objectives.

NOTE: Research studies cited as part of the background information of your introduction should not include very specific, lengthy explanations. This should be discussed in greater detail in your literature review section. If you find a study requiring lengthy explanation, consider moving it to the literature review section.

ANOTHER NOTE: In some cases, your paper's introduction only needs to introduce the research problem, explain its significance, and then describe a road map for how you are going to address the problem; the background information basically forms the introduction part of your literature review. That said, while providing background information is not required, including it in the introduction is a way to highlight important contextual information that could otherwise be hidden or overlooked by the reader if placed in the literature review section.

YET ANOTHER NOTE: In some research studies, the background information is described in a separate section after the introduction and before the literature review. This is most often done if the topic is especially complex or requires a lot of context in order to fully grasp the significance of the research problem. Most college-level research papers do not require this unless required by your professor. However, if you find yourself needing to write more than a couple of pages [double-spaced lines] to provide the background information, it can be written as a separate section to ensure the introduction is not too lengthy.

Background of the Problem Section: What do you Need to Consider? Anonymous. Harvard University; Hopkins, Will G. How to Write a Research Paper. SPORTSCIENCE, Perspectives/Research Resources. Department of Physiology and School of Physical Education, University of Otago, 1999; Green, L. H. How to Write the Background/Introduction Section. Physics 499 Powerpoint slides. University of Illinois; Pyrczak, Fred. Writing Empirical Research Reports: A Basic Guide for Students of the Social and Behavioral Sciences . 8th edition. Glendale, CA: Pyrczak Publishing, 2014; Stevens, Kathleen C. “Can We Improve Reading by Teaching Background Information?.” Journal of Reading 25 (January 1982): 326-329; Woodall, W. Gill. Writing the Background and Significance Section. Senior Research Scientist and Professor of Communication. Center on Alcoholism, Substance Abuse, and Addictions. University of New Mexico.

Structure and Writing Style

Providing background information in the introduction of a research paper serves as a bridge that links the reader to the research problem . Precisely how long and in-depth this bridge should be is largely dependent upon how much information you think the reader will need to know in order to fully understand the problem being discussed and to appreciate why the issues you are investigating are important.

From another perspective, the length and detail of background information also depends on the degree to which you need to demonstrate to your professor how much you understand the research problem. Keep this in mind because providing pertinent background information can be an effective way to demonstrate that you have a clear grasp of key issues, debates, and concepts related to your overall study.

The structure and writing style of your background information can vary depending upon the complexity of your research and/or the nature of the assignment. However, in most cases it should be limited to only one to two paragraphs in your introduction.

Given this, here are some questions to consider while writing this part of your introduction :

• Are there concepts, terms, theories, or ideas that may be unfamiliar to the reader and, thus, require additional explanation?
• Are there historical elements that need to be explored in order to provide needed context, to highlight specific people, issues, or events, or to lay a foundation for understanding the emergence of a current issue or event?
• Are there theories, concepts, or ideas borrowed from other disciplines or academic traditions that may be unfamiliar to the reader and therefore require further explanation?
• Is there a key study or small set of studies that set the stage for understanding the topic and frames why it is important to conduct further research on the topic?
• Y our study uses a method of analysis never applied before;
• Your study investigates a very esoteric or complex research problem;
• Your study introduces new or unique variables that need to be taken into account ; or,
• Your study relies upon analyzing unique texts or documents, such as, archival materials or primary documents like diaries or personal letters that do not represent the established body of source literature on the topic?

Almost all introductions to a research problem require some contextualizing, but the scope and breadth of background information varies depending on your assumption about the reader's level of prior knowledge . However, despite this assessment, background information should be brief and succinct and sets the stage for the elaboration of critical points or in-depth discussion of key issues in the literature review section of your paper.

Writing Tip

Background Information vs. the Literature Review

Incorporating background information into the introduction is intended to provide the reader with critical information about the topic being studied, such as, highlighting and expanding upon foundational studies conducted in the past, describing important historical events that inform why and in what ways the research problem exists, defining key components of your study [concepts, people, places, phenomena] and/or placing the research problem within a particular context. Although introductory background information can often blend into the literature review portion of the paper, essential background information should not be considered a substitute for a comprehensive review and synthesis of relevant research literature.

Hart, Cris. Doing a Literature Review: Releasing the Social Science Research Imagination . Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 1998; Pyrczak, Fred. Writing Empirical Research Reports: A Basic Guide for Students of the Social and Behavioral Sciences . 8th edition. Glendale, CA: Pyrczak Publishing, 2014.

• << Previous: The C.A.R.S. Model
• Next: The Research Problem/Question >>
• Last Updated: Jul 3, 2024 10:07 AM
• URL: https://libguides.usc.edu/writingguide

In a research paper, what is the background of study?

Research papers should include a background of study statement that provides context for the study. Read the article and learn more about it!

Unless you provide the background information needed for the reader to understand your choice of the subject and why your study is important, they will not be able to grasp the significance of the findings of your research, regardless of how significant and fascinating they are. 

Research papers should include a background of study statement that provides context for the study. A reader’s interest in the rest of the study is determined by the quality of the background. It is therefore imperative to write an engaging and effective background. How should a study’s background be written, and how should it be presented?

What is the background of study in the research paper?

The background of a study outlines how your research began, your interest in the subject, and the development of your study question. In other words, you should provide a broad overview of the research that you performed, followed by a discussion of what motivated you to choose the particular problem that you studied. 

Your topic should be clearly understood by the reader. Whether and to what extent you need to explain your background depends on what you are writing about. 

A research paper’s background section

The background of a research paper acts as the first element readers will notice; so it is important that it is informative and fascinating enough to get them interested in reading further. In the background, the volume and the specifics vary according to the research paper, particularly if the topic is complex or novel. 

Complex studies can sometimes be simplified by a simple background. Reviewing previous literature on the topic of your study is typically part of your research background. After identifying the gaps in existing knowledge, you should explain how your study will fill them.

The difference between the background of the study and the introduction section

There are a number of ways in which your introduction differs from your background. In the introduction, you provide preliminary information about the paper that is likely to be studied by the reader, but in the background section, you explain why the paper is relevant. 

In your study’s background, you discuss the topic in great detail, in contrast to the introduction, which provides an overall view of the topic. You should conclude your introduction with reasons for conducting research, objectives, and research goals, not your background, other than when it is incorporated into the introduction.

Here are the steps to writing a background of study

• Defining the research topic and identifying the target audience is the best way to start the background.
• Provide a detailed discussion of all concepts, terminology, keywords, and information that may feel new to the intended audience.
• Examine the relevant literature in depth to learn more about the essential requirements. 
• Read carefully and make notes. Cite your sources when you are done.
• Be sure to strike a balance between emphasizing key points, as well as communicating to a wide audience.
• History is a significant source of current issues. Add relevant data in the background if your research relies on historical information.
• Provide an explanation to help people understand the research if it is groundbreaking or novel.
• Develop a compelling narrative around the research theme to increase engagement. Don’t forget to add the necessary infographics.

Here are some things to avoid in a study’s background

In the case of your research paper, when you established the background in an organized manner, you would have been able to lead the reader seamlessly throughout. Nevertheless, you should be careful as well, here are a few points to keep in mind.

• Avoid unclear language at all costs. Consider your reader as unaware of any complex details about your research while writing.
• Avoid writing an excessively long or short background. Write concisely while not forgetting to include everything that is important.  
• Don’t devote time to topics that don’t relate to the main thrust of the research.
• Putting information without a structure is a disorganized approach. A chronology should be followed for the background, and subsections should be ordered logically.
• Be sure to cite every source.

For more information on how to write research articles and papers, please visit our blog . 

Create science-based infographics in a few clicks

That’s right, creating infographics is as easy as clicking a few buttons. With Mind the Graph’s infographic maker, you can create accurate science-based infographics for your research paper effortlessly.

Subscribe to our newsletter

Exclusive high quality content about effective visual communication in science.

Sign Up for Free

Try the best infographic maker and promote your research with scientifically-accurate beautiful figures

no credit card required

About Aayushi Zaveri

Aayushi Zaveri majored in biotechnology engineering. She is currently pursuing a master's degree in Bioentrepreneurship from Karolinska Institute. She is interested in health and diseases, global health, socioeconomic development, and women's health. As a science enthusiast, she is keen in learning more about the scientific world and wants to play a part in making a difference.

Content tags

What is the Background in a Research Paper?

An effective Background section in your manuscript establishes the context for your study. And while original research requires novel findings, providing the necessary background information for these findings may be just as important. It lets your readers know that your findings are novel, important, and worthy of their time and attention.

Updated on October 3, 2022

A good Background section explains the history and nature of your research question in relation to existing literature – a “state of the art.” This section, along with the rationale, helps readers understand why you chose to study this problem and why your study is worthwhile. This article will show you how to do this.

Read on to better understand the:

• Real purpose of the Background section
• Typical length of a Background section and its placement
• Elements of an effective Background

What is the Background section of a research paper?

The Background section is an essential element of every study, answering:

• What do we already know about the topic?
• How does your study relate to what's been done so far in your field?
• What is its scope?
• Why does the topic warrant your interest and their interest?
• How did you develop the research question that you'll later introduce?

In grant writing, a Background section is often referred to as the “state of the art,” and this is a useful term to have in mind when writing this part of your paper.

What comes next?

After you make the above points,

• Formulate your research question/hypothesis . Research aims and objectives should be closely related to how you'll fill the gap you've identified in the literature. Your research gap is the central theme of your article and why people should read it.
• Summarize how you'll address it in the paper . Your methodology needs to be appropriate for addressing the “problem” you've identified.
• Describe the significance of your study . Show how your research fits into the bigger picture.

Note that the Background section isn't the same as the research rationale. Rather, it provides the relevant information the reader needs so they can follow your rationale. For example, it

• Explains scientific terms
• Provides available data and statistics on the topic
• Describes the methods used so far on your topic. Especially if these are different from what you're going to do. Take special care here, because this is often where peer reviewers focus intently.

This is a logical approach to what comes after the study's background. Use it and the reader can easily follow along from the broader information to the specific details that come later. Crucially, they'll have confidence that your analysis and findings are valid.

Where should the background be placed in a research paper?

Usually, the background comes after the statement of the problem, in the Introduction section. Logically, you need to provide the study context before discussing the research questions, methodology, and results.

The background can be found in:

The abstract

The background typically forms the first few sentences of the abstract. Why did you do the study? Most journals state this clearly. In an unstructured (no subheadings) abstract, it's the first sentence or two. In a structured abstract, it might be called the Introduction, Background, or State-of-the-Art.

PLOS Medicine , for example, asks for research article abstracts to be split into three sections: Background, Methods and Findings, and Conclusions. Journals in the humanities or social sciences might not clearly ask for it because articles sometimes have a looser structure than STEM articles.

The first part of the Introduction section

In the journal Nature , for example, the Introduction should be around 200 words and include

• Two to three sentences giving a basic introduction to the field.
• The background and rationale of the study are stated briefly.
• A simple phrase “Here we show ...”, or “In this study, we show ....” (to round out the Introduction).

The Journal of Organic Chemistry has similar author guidelines.

The Background as a distinct section

This is often the case for research proposals or some types of reports, as discussed above. Rather than reviewing the literature, this is a concise summary of what's currently known in the field relevant to the question being addressed in this proposed study.

How long should the Background section be?

As mentioned, there's no set length for the Background section. It generally depends on the journal and the content of your manuscript. Check the journal's author guidelines, the research center, granting agency, etc. If it's still not clear or if the instructions are contradictory, email or phone them directly.

The length of your background will depend on:

The manuscript length and content

A book-length study needs a more extensive Background than a four-page research article. Exploring a relatively unknown method or question might also need a longer Background.

For example, see this Frontiers article on the applications of artificial intelligence for developing COVID-19 vaccines. It has a seven-paragraph long Background (1,200 words) in a separate section. The authors need to discuss earlier successful uses of machine learning for therapy discovery to make a convincing case.

An academic paper published in an international journal is usually around 5,000 words. Your paper needs to be balanced, with appropriate text lengths used for the different sections: It would make no sense to have a 300-word introduction and then 4,000 words for the methods, for example. In a 5,000-word manuscript, you'll be able to use about 1,500 for the introduction, which includes the background.

How much you need to show your understanding of the topic

A lengthy grant application might need a longer Background (sub-)section. That's because if they're going to grant you money, they need a very good reason to. You'll need to show that the work is both interesting and doable. The Background is where you can do this.

What should the Background of a research manuscript include?

The Background of a research paper needs to show two things:

The study's territory ( scope )

First, provide a general overview of the field. Scientists in most disciplines should find it relatively easy to understand. Be broad, keep it interesting. Don't go into the specifics of your particular study.

Let's look at two examples:

• one from basic research (seeking to generate new knowledge)
• one from applied research (trying to solve or improve existing processes or products)

Applied research

This Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence article explores how AI can help discover treatments for COVID-19.

The background of the study can be found (i) in the abstract and (ii) in a separate section discussed at the end of this article. The abstract starts with this general overview: “SARS-COV-2 has roused the scientific community with a call to action to combat the growing pandemic.” ( Arshadi et al., 2020 ). This is broad, and it's interesting. This is a topic that many researchers (even from outside this specific area) may want to learn more about.

Think of any theories, models, concepts, or terms (maybe borrowed from different disciplines) that may be unfamiliar to your reader. Be sure to clarify them in plainer language, if necessary.

For example, this systematic review looks at the connections of physician burnout with career engagement and quality of patient care. The Background is in the Introduction section. It starts by defining what burnout is:

• “Burnout is defined as a syndrome related to work that involves three key dimensions.” ( Hodkinson et al., 2022 )

The authors go on to explain its three aspects: emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and a sense of reduced personal accomplishment.

Basic research

Imagine you're investigating how universities' moves to online teaching during the COVID-19 pandemic impacted students' learning outcomes in the United Kingdom. The overview could be:

• The COVID-19 pandemic and the ensuing lockdown generated tremendous challenges across the higher education sector. University campuses were forced to close. Face-to-face teaching and assessment transitioned into a virtual format.

2. The niche in the field (motivation)

To establish the niche in your field, describe what drove you to explore this specific topic.

• Explain how (un)successfully previous studies have investigated the problem.
• Note the knowledge gap or present a problem with a currently used process/practice/product.

After setting the stage, the abstract of the Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence article identifies a problem:

• “At the time of this writing, there are as yet no novel antiviral agents or approved vaccines available for deployment as a frontline defense.” ( Arshadi et al., 2020 )

The authors need to support their claim that computational methods can help discover new COVID-19 treatments. They do so by referring to previous research findings:

• “In the last decade, machine learning-based models, trained on specific biomolecules, have offered inexpensive and rapid implementation methods for the discovery of effective viral therapies.” ( Arshadi et al., 2020 )

Going back to the study on students' learning outcomes after universities introduced e-learning. The background section will next identify and describe the current knowledge gap and your proposed method of fixing it. It may be something like:

• Existing literature and studies by the UK Department for Education reveal x + y changes and effects on teaching and learning. Yet they provide little to no information on students' learning outcomes. Understanding the impact of online teaching and assessments on student outcomes is key to adopting future teaching practices and ensuring students from disadvantaged backgrounds are not left behind.

How is the background different from the literature review?

Both the background and literature review sections compile previous studies that are relevant and important to the topic.

Despite their similarities, they're different in scope and aims.

Overall, the research background could be seen as a small part of the detailed critical discussion in the literature review. Almost always, primary research articles do not include a detailed literature review.

How is the Background different from the Introduction section?

Although often part of the Introduction, the Background differs from the Introduction in scope and aim.

Breakdown of the Background in published articles

Consider this systematic review looking at the connections of physician burnout with career engagement and quality of patient care.

The Background is placed in the Introduction section. It's critical, consistent, and logically structured, moving from general to specific information.

You can also check out the summary paragraph breakdown provided by Nature. (Nature's “summary paragraph” is essentially an abstract.)

And if you're looking for some help, or have an article that's finished but needs a pre-submission review click here to connect with one of our expert AJE editors.

Gareth Dyke, PhD

Director of Global Content

See our "Privacy Policy"

• Translators
• Graphic Designers

Please enter the email address you used for your account. Your sign in information will be sent to your email address after it has been verified.

Tips for Writing an Effective Background of the Study

The Background of the Study is an integral part of any research paper that sets the context and the stage for the research presented in the paper. It's the section that provides a detailed context of the study by explaining the problem under investigation, the gaps in existing research that the study aims to fill, and the relevance of the study to the research field. It often incorporates aspects of the existing literature and gives readers an understanding of why the research is necessary and the theoretical framework that it is grounded in.

The Background of the Study holds a significant position in the process of research. It serves as the scaffold upon which the entire research project is built. It helps the reader understand the problem, its significance, and how your research will contribute to the existing body of knowledge. A well-articulated background can provide a clear roadmap for your study and assist others in understanding the direction and value of your research. Without it, readers may struggle to grasp the purpose and importance of your work.

The aim of this blog post is to guide budding researchers, students, and academicians on how to craft an effective Background of the Study section for their research paper. It is designed to provide practical tips, highlight key components, and elucidate common mistakes to avoid. By the end of this blog post, readers should have a clear understanding of how to construct a compelling background that successfully contextualizes their research, highlights its significance, and sets a clear path for their investigation.

Understanding the background of the study

The Background of the Study in a research context refers to a section of your research paper that discloses the basis and reasons behind the conduction of the study. It sets the broader context for your research by presenting the problem that your study intends to address, giving a brief overview of the subject domain, and highlighting the existing gaps in knowledge. This section also presents the theoretical or conceptual framework and states the research objectives, and often includes the research question or hypothesis . The Background of the Study gives your readers a deeper understanding of the purpose, importance, and direction of your study.

How it fits into the overall structure of a research paper

The Background of the Study typically appears after the introduction and before the literature review in the overall structure of a research paper. It acts as a bridge between the general introduction, where the topic is initially presented, and the more specific aspects of the paper such as the literature review, methodology , results , and discussion. It provides necessary information to help readers understand the relevance and value of the study in a wider context, before zooming in to specific details of your research.

Difference between the background of the study, introduction, and literature review

Now that we understand the role of the Background of the Study within a research paper, let's delve deeper to differentiate it from two other crucial components of the paper - the Introduction and the Literature Review.

• Background of the Study: This section provides a comprehensive context for the research, including a statement of the problem , the theoretical or conceptual framework, the gap that the study intends to fill, and the overall significance of the research. It guides the reader from a broad understanding of the research context to the specifics of your study.
• Introduction: This is the first section of the research paper that provides a broad overview of the topic , introduces the research question or hypothesis , and briefly mentions the methodology used in the study. It piques the reader's interest and gives them a reason to continue reading the paper.
• Literature Review: This section presents an organized summary of the existing research related to your study. It helps identify what we already know and what we do not know about the topic, thereby establishing the necessity for your research. The literature review allows you to demonstrate how your study contributes to and extends the existing body of knowledge.

While these three sections may overlap in some aspects, each serves a unique purpose and plays a critical role in the research paper.

Components of the background of the study

Statement of the problem.

This is the issue or situation that your research is intended to address. It should be a clear, concise declaration that explains the problem in detail, its context, and the negative impacts if it remains unresolved. This statement also explains why there's a need to study the problem, making it crucial for defining the research objectives.

Importance of the study

In this component, you outline the reasons why your research is significant. How does it contribute to the existing body of knowledge? Does it provide insights into a particular issue, offer solutions to a problem, or fill gaps in existing research? Clarifying the importance of your study helps affirm its value to your field and the larger academic community.

Relevant previous research and literature

Present an overview of the major studies and research conducted on the topic. This not only shows that you have a broad understanding of your field, but it also allows you to highlight the knowledge gaps that your study aims to fill. It also helps establish the context of your study within the larger academic dialogue.

Theoretical framework

The theoretical framework is the structure that can hold or support a theory of a research study. It presents the theories, concepts, or ideas which are relevant to the study and explains how these theories apply to your research. It helps to connect your findings to the broader constructs and theories in your field.

Research questions or hypotheses

These are the specific queries your research aims to answer or the predictions you are testing. They should be directly aligned with your problem statement and clearly set out what you hope to discover through your research.

Potential implications of the research

This involves outlining the potential applications of your research findings in your field and possibly beyond. What changes could your research inspire? How might it influence future studies? By explaining this, you underscore the potential impact of your research and its significance in a broader context.

How to write a comprehensive background of the study

Identify and articulate the problem statement.

To successfully identify and articulate your problem statement, consider the following steps:

• Start by clearly defining the problem your research aims to solve. The problem should be specific and researchable.
• Provide context for the problem. Where does it arise? Who or what is affected by it?
• Clearly articulate why the problem is significant. Is it a new issue, or has it been a long-standing problem in your field? How does it impact the broader field or society at large?
• Express the potential adverse effects if the problem remains unresolved. This can help underscore the urgency or importance of your research.
• Remember, while your problem statement should be comprehensive, aim for conciseness. You want to communicate the gravity of the issue in a precise and clear manner.

Conduct and summarize relevant literature review

A well-executed literature review is fundamental for situating your study within the broader context of existing research. Here's how you can approach it:

• Begin by conducting a comprehensive search for existing research that is relevant to your problem statement. Make use of academic databases, scholarly journals, and other credible sources of research.
• As you read these studies, pay close attention to their key findings, research methodologies, and any gaps in the research that they've identified. These elements will be crucial in the summary of your literature review.
• Make an effort to analyze, rather than just list, the studies. This means drawing connections between different research findings, contrasting methodologies, and identifying overarching trends or conflicts in the field.
• When summarizing the literature review, focus on synthesis . Explain how these studies relate to each other and how they collectively relate to your own research. This could mean identifying patterns, themes, or gaps that your research aims to address.

Describe the theoretical framework

The theoretical framework of your research is crucial as it grounds your work in established concepts and provides a lens through which your results can be interpreted. Here's how to effectively describe it:

• Begin by identifying the theories, ideas, or models upon which your research is based. These may come from your literature review or your understanding of the subject matter.
• Explain these theories or concepts in simple terms, bearing in mind that your reader may not be familiar with them. Be sure to define any technical terms or jargon that you use.
• Make connections between these theories and your research. How do they relate to your study? Do they inform your research questions or hypotheses?
• Show how these theories guide your research methodology and your analysis. For instance, do they suggest certain methods for data collection or specific ways of interpreting your data?
• Remember, your theoretical framework should act as the "lens" through which your results are viewed, so it needs to be relevant and applicable to your study.

Formulate your research questions or hypotheses

Crafting well-defined research questions or hypotheses is a crucial step in outlining the scope of your research. Here's how you can effectively approach this process:

• Begin by establishing the specific questions your research aims to answer. If your study is more exploratory in nature, you may formulate research questions. If it is more explanatory or confirmatory, you may state hypotheses.
• Ensure that your questions or hypotheses are researchable. They should be specific, clear, and measurable with the methods you plan to use.
• Check that your research questions or hypotheses align with your problem statement and research objectives. They should be a natural extension of the issues outlined in your background of the study.
• Finally, remember that well-crafted research questions or hypotheses will guide your research design and help structure your entire paper. They act as the anchors around which your research revolves.

Highlight the potential implications and significance of your research

To conclude your Background of the Study, it's essential to highlight the potential implications and significance of your work. Here's how to do it effectively:

• Start by providing a clear explanation of your research's potential implications. This could relate to the advancement of theoretical knowledge or practical applications in the real world.
• Discuss the importance of your research within the context of your field. How does it contribute to the existing body of knowledge? Does it challenge current theories or practices?
• Highlight how your research could influence future studies. Could it open new avenues of inquiry? Does it suggest a need for further research in certain areas?
• Finally, consider the practical applications of your research. How could your findings be used in policy-making, business strategies, educational practices, or other real-world scenarios?
• Always keep in mind that demonstrating the broader impact of your research increases its relevance and appeal to a wider audience, extending beyond the immediate academic circle.

Following these guidelines can help you effectively highlight the potential implications and significance of your research, thereby strengthening the impact of your study.

Practical tips for writing the background of the study

Keeping the section concise and focused.

Maintain clarity and brevity in your writing. While you need to provide sufficient detail to set the stage for your research, avoid unnecessary verbosity. Stay focused on the main aspects related to your research problem, its context, and your study's contribution.

Ensuring the background aligns with your research questions or hypotheses

Ensure a clear connection between your background and your research questions or hypotheses. Your problem statement, review of relevant literature, theoretical framework, and the identified gap in research should logically lead to your research questions or hypotheses.

Citing your sources correctly

Always attribute the ideas, theories, and research findings of others appropriately to avoid plagiarism . Correct citation not only upholds academic integrity but also allows your readers to access your sources if they wish to explore them in depth. The citation style may depend on your field of study or the requirements of the journal or institution.

Bridging the gap between existing research and your study

Identify the gap in existing research that your study aims to fill and make it explicit. Show how your research questions or hypotheses emerged from this identified gap. This helps to position your research within the broader academic conversation and highlights the unique contribution of your study.

Avoiding excessive jargon

While technical terms are often unavoidable in academic writing, use them sparingly and make sure to define any necessary jargon for your reader. Your Background of the Study should be understandable to people outside your field as well. This will increase the accessibility and impact of your research.

Common mistakes to avoid while writing the background of the study

Being overly verbose or vague.

While it's important to provide sufficient context, avoid being overly verbose in your descriptions. Also, steer clear of vague or ambiguous phrases. The Background of the Study should be clear, concise, and specific, giving the reader a precise understanding of the study's purpose and context.

Failing to relate the background to the research problem

The entire purpose of the Background of the Study is to set the stage for your research problem. If it doesn't directly relate to your problem statement, research questions, or hypotheses, it may confuse the reader. Always ensure that every element of the background ties back to your study.

Neglecting to mention important related studies

Not mentioning significant related studies is another common mistake. The Background of the Study section should give a summary of the existing literature related to your research. Omitting key pieces of literature can give the impression that you haven't thoroughly researched the topic.

Overusing technical jargon without explanation

While certain technical terms may be necessary, overuse of jargon can make your paper inaccessible to readers outside your immediate field. If you need to use technical terms, make sure you define them clearly. Strive for clarity and simplicity in your writing as much as possible.

Not citing sources or citing them incorrectly

Academic integrity is paramount in research writing. Ensure that every idea, finding, or theory that is not your own is properly attributed to its original source. Neglecting to cite, or citing incorrectly, can lead to accusations of plagiarism and can discredit your research. Always follow the citation style guide relevant to your field.

Writing an effective Background of the Study is a critical step in crafting a compelling research paper. It serves to contextualize your research, highlight its significance, and present the problem your study seeks to address. Remember, your background should provide a comprehensive overview of the current state of research, identify gaps in existing literature, and indicate how your research will fill these gaps. Keep your writing concise, focused, and jargon-free, making sure to correctly cite all sources. Avoiding common mistakes and adhering to the strategies outlined in this post will help you develop a robust and engaging background for your study. As you embark on your research journey, remember that the Background of the Study sets the stage for your entire research project, so investing time and effort into crafting it effectively will undoubtedly pay dividends in the end.

Header image by Flamingo Images .

• Academic Writing Advice
• All Blog Posts
• Writing Advice
• Admissions Writing Advice
• Book Writing Advice
• Short Story Advice
• Employment Writing Advice
• Business Writing Advice
• Web Content Advice
• Article Writing Advice
• Magazine Writing Advice
• Grammar Advice
• Dialect Advice
• Editing Advice
• Freelance Advice
• Legal Writing Advice
• Poetry Advice
• Graphic Design Advice
• Logo Design Advice
• Translation Advice
• Blog Reviews
• Short Story Award Winners
• Scholarship Winners

Elevate your research paper with expert editing services

Mastering the Basics of Writing Background of the Study

Table of contents

• 1 Purpose of the Research Paper Background
• 2.1 Starting with Preliminary Research for Broad Context
• 2.2.1 Chronological
• 2.2.2 Thematical
• 2.2.3 Methodological
• 2.3 Link to Your Research Question
• 2.4 Avoid Plagiarism and Ensuring Proper Citation
• 2.5 Using Clear, Academic Language
• 2.6 Don’t Overload with Excessive Details
• 2.7 Review Relevant Literature
• 2.8 Identify Gaps or Contradiction
• 2.9 Keep Your Target Audience in Mind
• 2.10 Stay Objective
• 2.11 Mention Methodologies, Scope, and Limitations
• 3 Bottom Line
• 4.1 How long should background information be?
• 4.2 What is the difference between background of the study and problem statement?
• 4.3 Why is background research important to the research process?

Writing a research paper can be a juggling act, especially for those with little experience. There are so many elements to consider, and you need to cover all the bases if you want your paper to elevate your academic standings.

The background in research paper is where you lay out the topic, the gaps in the literature that this study seeks to fill, and your study’s general and unique contributions. Thus, developing the research paper background section is crucial to give a general overview of the study.

That’s why we’ve decided to give you some pointers, including:

• The purpose of the background of the study;
• Collecting and organizing background information;
• Linking the background to your present study;
• Using proper citation and wording, retaining objectivity.

Purpose of the Research Paper Background

When you write a research background of the study, you explain the rationale and foundation for doing the research. It’s quite different from the research paper introduction section or a literature review. Here, you explore the history, nature, and scope of your research problem. Once you determine how previous studies have covered the problem, you can pinpoint the remaining gaps, discuss their importance, and how your study can fill them.

Essentially, it’s the foundation of your entire study. It determines the structure of your paper, highlights a well-defined research problem, and helps the reader determine your research’s unique and general contributions. Besides serving as a clear roadmap, a well-written background of the study must help the reader understand the value and purpose of your research.

How to Write a Background of the Study

Any researcher needs to understand the steps that go into writing an effective background of the study. Since you don’t have clarity in the early stages, you need to collect more information via preliminary research. Then, you should organize your information in a structure that can seamlessly lead up to your research paper in a way that shows the significance of your study.

So, if you’re wondering what is background of the study in research and how to compose it, here are some tips.

Starting with Preliminary Research for Broad Context

Before delving into writing the background of a research paper, you need a comprehensive review of the most important articles and reports on the subject in a literature review to acquire some introductory background information. Basically, you need to collect as much research data as possible.

To start with the background of an article, look for prior studies that address your issue statement in detail. Refer to reputable resources, such as academic databases and publications, and use their bibliography and literature review section to find new sources. This lets you discover new authors treating your research topic.

Finally, keep note of each piece of material you find if you decide to include it in your thesis. It helps you avoid or at least reduce plagiarism in research when you integrate those sources into your work.

Organize the Information

Now it’s time to discuss a vital writing tip: background information categorization. Most researchers use one of the three approaches: chronological, thematic, or methodological.

Chronological

Here, the study background and contextual information are organized in a chronological structure. As such, the reader can understand how you arrived at your conclusions about the development and the next steps you want to take in your research.

It can also be based on a trend. This method should be used only if you’re sure that the trends build logically upon one another and trace back in time. Overall, you must:

• Highlight only the most crucial background information in research
• Only use facts that can be objectively confirmed
• Find gaps in previous studies
• Give your opinion

When the background of a research paper is thematic, it is structured around the topics comprising your research problem. Start by identifying the main and secondary themes. Then, create hierarchies based on their importance or how they’re related to each other.

In other words, it requires structuring the basic background information into paragraphs that highlight themes and identify patterns in the research topic.

Separate each paragraph with a topic sentence, and ensure that each sentence effectively synthesizes background information from many sources. You can also use the famous inverted pyramid method to go from a general overview to the specifics. Overall, this method gives an overview of all topics and themes of your research subject.

Methodological

This approach for writing background of study in research focuses on the methodology in research paper rather than specific topics or the chronological order. It draws attention to the differences and similarities across research methods and offers alternative insights into the subject.

If you cover a topic where there are many relevant models or theories, it is helpful to highlight the most popular ones. In this manner, you can get a basic understanding of the most common perspectives on your subject by categorizing the paper according to the theoretical framework.

Link to Your Research Question

Be specific about the knowledge gap your research study intends to fill and show how this inspired your research questions or theories. This will help place your study in the context of the larger academic discussion while also highlighting its unique contribution.

Avoid talking about irrelevant topics, and focus on what is most important regarding your subject. In other words, every step or theme you discuss should disclose the problems and explain why you deem it important to solve them.

Avoid Plagiarism and Ensuring Proper Citation

Plagiarism is one of the main reasons for writers to seek professional help with research paper writing. To avoid accusations of plagiarism, it is important to properly credit the ideas, models, and conclusions of others. Accurately citing your sources helps maintain academic honesty and gives readers easy access to further basic research papers.

The citation style you use may be determined by the guidelines of the publication or the institution you’re affiliated with. There are plenty of online resources, including guidelines and generators, that help you adhere to the given requirements.

Using Clear, Academic Language

An effective background should clearly highlight the research problem and how you plan to address it. This can only be achieved by using the correct terminology while keeping the text clear and understandable. Thus, use technical phrases with caution and provide essential context and definitions for any unfamiliar term.

Make sure that even readers who aren’t familiar with your field can understand the rationale and hypothesis in study papers. Your study will be more accessible and appealing if you do this.

Don’t Overload with Excessive Details

Keep your writing simple and to the point. Although providing sufficient background information helps simplify your study, you should avoid using too many words. Going too deeply into the evidence that inspired your research problem might just confuse your readers.

In other words, it is not necessary to describe every step or every point of relevant research studies. In the background section, only discuss the important details and results that led you to formulate your research question.

Review Relevant Literature

Only by knowing and understanding what has been said and discovered before you can hope to give your contribution. When reviewing relevant research literature, you should provide a concise summary of previous studies and other works that have laid the groundwork for your own. Ensuring the material you use comes from credible sources in research is key. Also, remember to explore all nuances that could help with your research topic.

Identify Gaps or Contradiction

Normally, research objectives are based on the gaps and contradictions found in analyzing the literature review and previous research. Failing to do so might create a redundant or meaningless paper. That’s why, in the background section, you must clarify the reasoning behind how you unveiled the problems you seek to solve. You should also detail the methods to test and quantify your study hypothesis and how your findings will add to what’s already known.

Note that you’re also likely to leave a research gap or have some contradictions in your study. Don’t forget to recognize and inform your readers about them. It shows professionalism and enhances your credibility.

Keep Your Target Audience in Mind

It’s crucial to tailor the background of the study to your audience. Whether for an assignment or an academic publishing, you must write in a way that makes your message come across. So, if you know that the paper is going to be read by experts in the field, it’s ok to use a more technical and complex vocabulary.

Conversely, if the audience is more general, consider their scholarly background, avoid jargon, provide contextual information and explain concepts in a simple way.

Stay Objective

Retaining objectivity is one of the defining key components for all academic essay writers . However, having a personal interest or predisposition for a certain point of view might make it difficult to avoid bias and retain impartiality. Using a wide range of sources that address various topics, viewpoints, and research methods is crucial for maintaining objectivity both in the background and literature review section.

Mention Methodologies, Scope, and Limitations

Scientific research demands appropriate and proven methodologies. That’s why it’s important to clarify which ones you used, why and how they fit in the context of your research. The explanation should include the methodology for data collection and analysis, models, and the tools used.

The reasoning must be linked with the scope of your research. This must be clearly stated and intertwined with methods and context.

Finally, identify and discuss the shortcomings of your study background. It demonstrates that you’ve given careful thought to the study’s limits and have a firm grasp of the subject at hand. Researchers and reviewers will respect you more if you are upfront about the limits of your research methodology and go into depth about them rather than pretending they don’t exist.

Bottom Line

The first stage in writing a great research paper is to provide an intriguing background for the study. Its purpose is to explain the bigger picture, stress the importance of your study, and lay out the key issues you chose to study. Don’t forget that the background section of research paper writing isn’t a literature review. It discusses the reasons behind your study, points out any gaps in existing works, and explains how you would help fill those gaps.

All this should have taught you how to write a background for a research paper. But don’t forget that knowing the theory is only the first step. Whenever you feel stuck, don’t be shy to ask for guidance and rely on the help of experts.

How long should background information be?

What is the difference between background of the study and problem statement, why is background research important to the research process, readers also enjoyed.

WHY WAIT? PLACE AN ORDER RIGHT NOW!

Just fill out the form, press the button, and have no worries!

We use cookies to give you the best experience possible. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy.

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
• J Korean Med Sci
• v.37(16); 2022 Apr 25

A Practical Guide to Writing Quantitative and Qualitative Research Questions and Hypotheses in Scholarly Articles

Edward barroga.

1 Department of General Education, Graduate School of Nursing Science, St. Luke’s International University, Tokyo, Japan.

Glafera Janet Matanguihan

2 Department of Biological Sciences, Messiah University, Mechanicsburg, PA, USA.

The development of research questions and the subsequent hypotheses are prerequisites to defining the main research purpose and specific objectives of a study. Consequently, these objectives determine the study design and research outcome. The development of research questions is a process based on knowledge of current trends, cutting-edge studies, and technological advances in the research field. Excellent research questions are focused and require a comprehensive literature search and in-depth understanding of the problem being investigated. Initially, research questions may be written as descriptive questions which could be developed into inferential questions. These questions must be specific and concise to provide a clear foundation for developing hypotheses. Hypotheses are more formal predictions about the research outcomes. These specify the possible results that may or may not be expected regarding the relationship between groups. Thus, research questions and hypotheses clarify the main purpose and specific objectives of the study, which in turn dictate the design of the study, its direction, and outcome. Studies developed from good research questions and hypotheses will have trustworthy outcomes with wide-ranging social and health implications.

INTRODUCTION

Scientific research is usually initiated by posing evidenced-based research questions which are then explicitly restated as hypotheses. 1 , 2 The hypotheses provide directions to guide the study, solutions, explanations, and expected results. 3 , 4 Both research questions and hypotheses are essentially formulated based on conventional theories and real-world processes, which allow the inception of novel studies and the ethical testing of ideas. 5 , 6

It is crucial to have knowledge of both quantitative and qualitative research 2 as both types of research involve writing research questions and hypotheses. 7 However, these crucial elements of research are sometimes overlooked; if not overlooked, then framed without the forethought and meticulous attention it needs. Planning and careful consideration are needed when developing quantitative or qualitative research, particularly when conceptualizing research questions and hypotheses. 4

There is a continuing need to support researchers in the creation of innovative research questions and hypotheses, as well as for journal articles that carefully review these elements. 1 When research questions and hypotheses are not carefully thought of, unethical studies and poor outcomes usually ensue. Carefully formulated research questions and hypotheses define well-founded objectives, which in turn determine the appropriate design, course, and outcome of the study. This article then aims to discuss in detail the various aspects of crafting research questions and hypotheses, with the goal of guiding researchers as they develop their own. Examples from the authors and peer-reviewed scientific articles in the healthcare field are provided to illustrate key points.

DEFINITIONS AND RELATIONSHIP OF RESEARCH QUESTIONS AND HYPOTHESES

A research question is what a study aims to answer after data analysis and interpretation. The answer is written in length in the discussion section of the paper. Thus, the research question gives a preview of the different parts and variables of the study meant to address the problem posed in the research question. 1 An excellent research question clarifies the research writing while facilitating understanding of the research topic, objective, scope, and limitations of the study. 5

On the other hand, a research hypothesis is an educated statement of an expected outcome. This statement is based on background research and current knowledge. 8 , 9 The research hypothesis makes a specific prediction about a new phenomenon 10 or a formal statement on the expected relationship between an independent variable and a dependent variable. 3 , 11 It provides a tentative answer to the research question to be tested or explored. 4

Hypotheses employ reasoning to predict a theory-based outcome. 10 These can also be developed from theories by focusing on components of theories that have not yet been observed. 10 The validity of hypotheses is often based on the testability of the prediction made in a reproducible experiment. 8

Conversely, hypotheses can also be rephrased as research questions. Several hypotheses based on existing theories and knowledge may be needed to answer a research question. Developing ethical research questions and hypotheses creates a research design that has logical relationships among variables. These relationships serve as a solid foundation for the conduct of the study. 4 , 11 Haphazardly constructed research questions can result in poorly formulated hypotheses and improper study designs, leading to unreliable results. Thus, the formulations of relevant research questions and verifiable hypotheses are crucial when beginning research. 12

CHARACTERISTICS OF GOOD RESEARCH QUESTIONS AND HYPOTHESES

Excellent research questions are specific and focused. These integrate collective data and observations to confirm or refute the subsequent hypotheses. Well-constructed hypotheses are based on previous reports and verify the research context. These are realistic, in-depth, sufficiently complex, and reproducible. More importantly, these hypotheses can be addressed and tested. 13

There are several characteristics of well-developed hypotheses. Good hypotheses are 1) empirically testable 7 , 10 , 11 , 13 ; 2) backed by preliminary evidence 9 ; 3) testable by ethical research 7 , 9 ; 4) based on original ideas 9 ; 5) have evidenced-based logical reasoning 10 ; and 6) can be predicted. 11 Good hypotheses can infer ethical and positive implications, indicating the presence of a relationship or effect relevant to the research theme. 7 , 11 These are initially developed from a general theory and branch into specific hypotheses by deductive reasoning. In the absence of a theory to base the hypotheses, inductive reasoning based on specific observations or findings form more general hypotheses. 10

TYPES OF RESEARCH QUESTIONS AND HYPOTHESES

Research questions and hypotheses are developed according to the type of research, which can be broadly classified into quantitative and qualitative research. We provide a summary of the types of research questions and hypotheses under quantitative and qualitative research categories in Table 1 .

Research questions in quantitative research

In quantitative research, research questions inquire about the relationships among variables being investigated and are usually framed at the start of the study. These are precise and typically linked to the subject population, dependent and independent variables, and research design. 1 Research questions may also attempt to describe the behavior of a population in relation to one or more variables, or describe the characteristics of variables to be measured ( descriptive research questions ). 1 , 5 , 14 These questions may also aim to discover differences between groups within the context of an outcome variable ( comparative research questions ), 1 , 5 , 14 or elucidate trends and interactions among variables ( relationship research questions ). 1 , 5 We provide examples of descriptive, comparative, and relationship research questions in quantitative research in Table 2 .

Hypotheses in quantitative research

In quantitative research, hypotheses predict the expected relationships among variables. 15 Relationships among variables that can be predicted include 1) between a single dependent variable and a single independent variable ( simple hypothesis ) or 2) between two or more independent and dependent variables ( complex hypothesis ). 4 , 11 Hypotheses may also specify the expected direction to be followed and imply an intellectual commitment to a particular outcome ( directional hypothesis ) 4 . On the other hand, hypotheses may not predict the exact direction and are used in the absence of a theory, or when findings contradict previous studies ( non-directional hypothesis ). 4 In addition, hypotheses can 1) define interdependency between variables ( associative hypothesis ), 4 2) propose an effect on the dependent variable from manipulation of the independent variable ( causal hypothesis ), 4 3) state a negative relationship between two variables ( null hypothesis ), 4 , 11 , 15 4) replace the working hypothesis if rejected ( alternative hypothesis ), 15 explain the relationship of phenomena to possibly generate a theory ( working hypothesis ), 11 5) involve quantifiable variables that can be tested statistically ( statistical hypothesis ), 11 6) or express a relationship whose interlinks can be verified logically ( logical hypothesis ). 11 We provide examples of simple, complex, directional, non-directional, associative, causal, null, alternative, working, statistical, and logical hypotheses in quantitative research, as well as the definition of quantitative hypothesis-testing research in Table 3 .

Research questions in qualitative research

Unlike research questions in quantitative research, research questions in qualitative research are usually continuously reviewed and reformulated. The central question and associated subquestions are stated more than the hypotheses. 15 The central question broadly explores a complex set of factors surrounding the central phenomenon, aiming to present the varied perspectives of participants. 15

There are varied goals for which qualitative research questions are developed. These questions can function in several ways, such as to 1) identify and describe existing conditions ( contextual research question s); 2) describe a phenomenon ( descriptive research questions ); 3) assess the effectiveness of existing methods, protocols, theories, or procedures ( evaluation research questions ); 4) examine a phenomenon or analyze the reasons or relationships between subjects or phenomena ( explanatory research questions ); or 5) focus on unknown aspects of a particular topic ( exploratory research questions ). 5 In addition, some qualitative research questions provide new ideas for the development of theories and actions ( generative research questions ) or advance specific ideologies of a position ( ideological research questions ). 1 Other qualitative research questions may build on a body of existing literature and become working guidelines ( ethnographic research questions ). Research questions may also be broadly stated without specific reference to the existing literature or a typology of questions ( phenomenological research questions ), may be directed towards generating a theory of some process ( grounded theory questions ), or may address a description of the case and the emerging themes ( qualitative case study questions ). 15 We provide examples of contextual, descriptive, evaluation, explanatory, exploratory, generative, ideological, ethnographic, phenomenological, grounded theory, and qualitative case study research questions in qualitative research in Table 4 , and the definition of qualitative hypothesis-generating research in Table 5 .

Qualitative studies usually pose at least one central research question and several subquestions starting with How or What . These research questions use exploratory verbs such as explore or describe . These also focus on one central phenomenon of interest, and may mention the participants and research site. 15

Hypotheses in qualitative research

Hypotheses in qualitative research are stated in the form of a clear statement concerning the problem to be investigated. Unlike in quantitative research where hypotheses are usually developed to be tested, qualitative research can lead to both hypothesis-testing and hypothesis-generating outcomes. 2 When studies require both quantitative and qualitative research questions, this suggests an integrative process between both research methods wherein a single mixed-methods research question can be developed. 1

FRAMEWORKS FOR DEVELOPING RESEARCH QUESTIONS AND HYPOTHESES

Research questions followed by hypotheses should be developed before the start of the study. 1 , 12 , 14 It is crucial to develop feasible research questions on a topic that is interesting to both the researcher and the scientific community. This can be achieved by a meticulous review of previous and current studies to establish a novel topic. Specific areas are subsequently focused on to generate ethical research questions. The relevance of the research questions is evaluated in terms of clarity of the resulting data, specificity of the methodology, objectivity of the outcome, depth of the research, and impact of the study. 1 , 5 These aspects constitute the FINER criteria (i.e., Feasible, Interesting, Novel, Ethical, and Relevant). 1 Clarity and effectiveness are achieved if research questions meet the FINER criteria. In addition to the FINER criteria, Ratan et al. described focus, complexity, novelty, feasibility, and measurability for evaluating the effectiveness of research questions. 14

The PICOT and PEO frameworks are also used when developing research questions. 1 The following elements are addressed in these frameworks, PICOT: P-population/patients/problem, I-intervention or indicator being studied, C-comparison group, O-outcome of interest, and T-timeframe of the study; PEO: P-population being studied, E-exposure to preexisting conditions, and O-outcome of interest. 1 Research questions are also considered good if these meet the “FINERMAPS” framework: Feasible, Interesting, Novel, Ethical, Relevant, Manageable, Appropriate, Potential value/publishable, and Systematic. 14

As we indicated earlier, research questions and hypotheses that are not carefully formulated result in unethical studies or poor outcomes. To illustrate this, we provide some examples of ambiguous research question and hypotheses that result in unclear and weak research objectives in quantitative research ( Table 6 ) 16 and qualitative research ( Table 7 ) 17 , and how to transform these ambiguous research question(s) and hypothesis(es) into clear and good statements.

a These statements were composed for comparison and illustrative purposes only.

b These statements are direct quotes from Higashihara and Horiuchi. 16

a This statement is a direct quote from Shimoda et al. 17

The other statements were composed for comparison and illustrative purposes only.

CONSTRUCTING RESEARCH QUESTIONS AND HYPOTHESES

To construct effective research questions and hypotheses, it is very important to 1) clarify the background and 2) identify the research problem at the outset of the research, within a specific timeframe. 9 Then, 3) review or conduct preliminary research to collect all available knowledge about the possible research questions by studying theories and previous studies. 18 Afterwards, 4) construct research questions to investigate the research problem. Identify variables to be accessed from the research questions 4 and make operational definitions of constructs from the research problem and questions. Thereafter, 5) construct specific deductive or inductive predictions in the form of hypotheses. 4 Finally, 6) state the study aims . This general flow for constructing effective research questions and hypotheses prior to conducting research is shown in Fig. 1 .

Research questions are used more frequently in qualitative research than objectives or hypotheses. 3 These questions seek to discover, understand, explore or describe experiences by asking “What” or “How.” The questions are open-ended to elicit a description rather than to relate variables or compare groups. The questions are continually reviewed, reformulated, and changed during the qualitative study. 3 Research questions are also used more frequently in survey projects than hypotheses in experiments in quantitative research to compare variables and their relationships.

Hypotheses are constructed based on the variables identified and as an if-then statement, following the template, ‘If a specific action is taken, then a certain outcome is expected.’ At this stage, some ideas regarding expectations from the research to be conducted must be drawn. 18 Then, the variables to be manipulated (independent) and influenced (dependent) are defined. 4 Thereafter, the hypothesis is stated and refined, and reproducible data tailored to the hypothesis are identified, collected, and analyzed. 4 The hypotheses must be testable and specific, 18 and should describe the variables and their relationships, the specific group being studied, and the predicted research outcome. 18 Hypotheses construction involves a testable proposition to be deduced from theory, and independent and dependent variables to be separated and measured separately. 3 Therefore, good hypotheses must be based on good research questions constructed at the start of a study or trial. 12

In summary, research questions are constructed after establishing the background of the study. Hypotheses are then developed based on the research questions. Thus, it is crucial to have excellent research questions to generate superior hypotheses. In turn, these would determine the research objectives and the design of the study, and ultimately, the outcome of the research. 12 Algorithms for building research questions and hypotheses are shown in Fig. 2 for quantitative research and in Fig. 3 for qualitative research.

EXAMPLES OF RESEARCH QUESTIONS FROM PUBLISHED ARTICLES

• EXAMPLE 1. Descriptive research question (quantitative research)
• - Presents research variables to be assessed (distinct phenotypes and subphenotypes)
• “BACKGROUND: Since COVID-19 was identified, its clinical and biological heterogeneity has been recognized. Identifying COVID-19 phenotypes might help guide basic, clinical, and translational research efforts.
• RESEARCH QUESTION: Does the clinical spectrum of patients with COVID-19 contain distinct phenotypes and subphenotypes? ” 19
• EXAMPLE 2. Relationship research question (quantitative research)
• - Shows interactions between dependent variable (static postural control) and independent variable (peripheral visual field loss)
• “Background: Integration of visual, vestibular, and proprioceptive sensations contributes to postural control. People with peripheral visual field loss have serious postural instability. However, the directional specificity of postural stability and sensory reweighting caused by gradual peripheral visual field loss remain unclear.
• Research question: What are the effects of peripheral visual field loss on static postural control ?” 20
• EXAMPLE 3. Comparative research question (quantitative research)
• - Clarifies the difference among groups with an outcome variable (patients enrolled in COMPERA with moderate PH or severe PH in COPD) and another group without the outcome variable (patients with idiopathic pulmonary arterial hypertension (IPAH))
• “BACKGROUND: Pulmonary hypertension (PH) in COPD is a poorly investigated clinical condition.
• RESEARCH QUESTION: Which factors determine the outcome of PH in COPD?
• STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: We analyzed the characteristics and outcome of patients enrolled in the Comparative, Prospective Registry of Newly Initiated Therapies for Pulmonary Hypertension (COMPERA) with moderate or severe PH in COPD as defined during the 6th PH World Symposium who received medical therapy for PH and compared them with patients with idiopathic pulmonary arterial hypertension (IPAH) .” 21
• EXAMPLE 4. Exploratory research question (qualitative research)
• - Explores areas that have not been fully investigated (perspectives of families and children who receive care in clinic-based child obesity treatment) to have a deeper understanding of the research problem
• “Problem: Interventions for children with obesity lead to only modest improvements in BMI and long-term outcomes, and data are limited on the perspectives of families of children with obesity in clinic-based treatment. This scoping review seeks to answer the question: What is known about the perspectives of families and children who receive care in clinic-based child obesity treatment? This review aims to explore the scope of perspectives reported by families of children with obesity who have received individualized outpatient clinic-based obesity treatment.” 22
• EXAMPLE 5. Relationship research question (quantitative research)
• - Defines interactions between dependent variable (use of ankle strategies) and independent variable (changes in muscle tone)
• “Background: To maintain an upright standing posture against external disturbances, the human body mainly employs two types of postural control strategies: “ankle strategy” and “hip strategy.” While it has been reported that the magnitude of the disturbance alters the use of postural control strategies, it has not been elucidated how the level of muscle tone, one of the crucial parameters of bodily function, determines the use of each strategy. We have previously confirmed using forward dynamics simulations of human musculoskeletal models that an increased muscle tone promotes the use of ankle strategies. The objective of the present study was to experimentally evaluate a hypothesis: an increased muscle tone promotes the use of ankle strategies. Research question: Do changes in the muscle tone affect the use of ankle strategies ?” 23

EXAMPLES OF HYPOTHESES IN PUBLISHED ARTICLES

• EXAMPLE 1. Working hypothesis (quantitative research)
• - A hypothesis that is initially accepted for further research to produce a feasible theory
• “As fever may have benefit in shortening the duration of viral illness, it is plausible to hypothesize that the antipyretic efficacy of ibuprofen may be hindering the benefits of a fever response when taken during the early stages of COVID-19 illness .” 24
• “In conclusion, it is plausible to hypothesize that the antipyretic efficacy of ibuprofen may be hindering the benefits of a fever response . The difference in perceived safety of these agents in COVID-19 illness could be related to the more potent efficacy to reduce fever with ibuprofen compared to acetaminophen. Compelling data on the benefit of fever warrant further research and review to determine when to treat or withhold ibuprofen for early stage fever for COVID-19 and other related viral illnesses .” 24
• EXAMPLE 2. Exploratory hypothesis (qualitative research)
• - Explores particular areas deeper to clarify subjective experience and develop a formal hypothesis potentially testable in a future quantitative approach
• “We hypothesized that when thinking about a past experience of help-seeking, a self distancing prompt would cause increased help-seeking intentions and more favorable help-seeking outcome expectations .” 25
• “Conclusion
• Although a priori hypotheses were not supported, further research is warranted as results indicate the potential for using self-distancing approaches to increasing help-seeking among some people with depressive symptomatology.” 25
• EXAMPLE 3. Hypothesis-generating research to establish a framework for hypothesis testing (qualitative research)
• “We hypothesize that compassionate care is beneficial for patients (better outcomes), healthcare systems and payers (lower costs), and healthcare providers (lower burnout). ” 26
• Compassionomics is the branch of knowledge and scientific study of the effects of compassionate healthcare. Our main hypotheses are that compassionate healthcare is beneficial for (1) patients, by improving clinical outcomes, (2) healthcare systems and payers, by supporting financial sustainability, and (3) HCPs, by lowering burnout and promoting resilience and well-being. The purpose of this paper is to establish a scientific framework for testing the hypotheses above . If these hypotheses are confirmed through rigorous research, compassionomics will belong in the science of evidence-based medicine, with major implications for all healthcare domains.” 26
• EXAMPLE 4. Statistical hypothesis (quantitative research)
• - An assumption is made about the relationship among several population characteristics ( gender differences in sociodemographic and clinical characteristics of adults with ADHD ). Validity is tested by statistical experiment or analysis ( chi-square test, Students t-test, and logistic regression analysis)
• “Our research investigated gender differences in sociodemographic and clinical characteristics of adults with ADHD in a Japanese clinical sample. Due to unique Japanese cultural ideals and expectations of women's behavior that are in opposition to ADHD symptoms, we hypothesized that women with ADHD experience more difficulties and present more dysfunctions than men . We tested the following hypotheses: first, women with ADHD have more comorbidities than men with ADHD; second, women with ADHD experience more social hardships than men, such as having less full-time employment and being more likely to be divorced.” 27
• “Statistical Analysis
• ( text omitted ) Between-gender comparisons were made using the chi-squared test for categorical variables and Students t-test for continuous variables…( text omitted ). A logistic regression analysis was performed for employment status, marital status, and comorbidity to evaluate the independent effects of gender on these dependent variables.” 27

EXAMPLES OF HYPOTHESIS AS WRITTEN IN PUBLISHED ARTICLES IN RELATION TO OTHER PARTS

• EXAMPLE 1. Background, hypotheses, and aims are provided
• “Pregnant women need skilled care during pregnancy and childbirth, but that skilled care is often delayed in some countries …( text omitted ). The focused antenatal care (FANC) model of WHO recommends that nurses provide information or counseling to all pregnant women …( text omitted ). Job aids are visual support materials that provide the right kind of information using graphics and words in a simple and yet effective manner. When nurses are not highly trained or have many work details to attend to, these job aids can serve as a content reminder for the nurses and can be used for educating their patients (Jennings, Yebadokpo, Affo, & Agbogbe, 2010) ( text omitted ). Importantly, additional evidence is needed to confirm how job aids can further improve the quality of ANC counseling by health workers in maternal care …( text omitted )” 28
• “ This has led us to hypothesize that the quality of ANC counseling would be better if supported by job aids. Consequently, a better quality of ANC counseling is expected to produce higher levels of awareness concerning the danger signs of pregnancy and a more favorable impression of the caring behavior of nurses .” 28
• “This study aimed to examine the differences in the responses of pregnant women to a job aid-supported intervention during ANC visit in terms of 1) their understanding of the danger signs of pregnancy and 2) their impression of the caring behaviors of nurses to pregnant women in rural Tanzania.” 28
• EXAMPLE 2. Background, hypotheses, and aims are provided
• “We conducted a two-arm randomized controlled trial (RCT) to evaluate and compare changes in salivary cortisol and oxytocin levels of first-time pregnant women between experimental and control groups. The women in the experimental group touched and held an infant for 30 min (experimental intervention protocol), whereas those in the control group watched a DVD movie of an infant (control intervention protocol). The primary outcome was salivary cortisol level and the secondary outcome was salivary oxytocin level.” 29
• “ We hypothesize that at 30 min after touching and holding an infant, the salivary cortisol level will significantly decrease and the salivary oxytocin level will increase in the experimental group compared with the control group .” 29
• EXAMPLE 3. Background, aim, and hypothesis are provided
• “In countries where the maternal mortality ratio remains high, antenatal education to increase Birth Preparedness and Complication Readiness (BPCR) is considered one of the top priorities [1]. BPCR includes birth plans during the antenatal period, such as the birthplace, birth attendant, transportation, health facility for complications, expenses, and birth materials, as well as family coordination to achieve such birth plans. In Tanzania, although increasing, only about half of all pregnant women attend an antenatal clinic more than four times [4]. Moreover, the information provided during antenatal care (ANC) is insufficient. In the resource-poor settings, antenatal group education is a potential approach because of the limited time for individual counseling at antenatal clinics.” 30
• “This study aimed to evaluate an antenatal group education program among pregnant women and their families with respect to birth-preparedness and maternal and infant outcomes in rural villages of Tanzania.” 30
• “ The study hypothesis was if Tanzanian pregnant women and their families received a family-oriented antenatal group education, they would (1) have a higher level of BPCR, (2) attend antenatal clinic four or more times, (3) give birth in a health facility, (4) have less complications of women at birth, and (5) have less complications and deaths of infants than those who did not receive the education .” 30

Research questions and hypotheses are crucial components to any type of research, whether quantitative or qualitative. These questions should be developed at the very beginning of the study. Excellent research questions lead to superior hypotheses, which, like a compass, set the direction of research, and can often determine the successful conduct of the study. Many research studies have floundered because the development of research questions and subsequent hypotheses was not given the thought and meticulous attention needed. The development of research questions and hypotheses is an iterative process based on extensive knowledge of the literature and insightful grasp of the knowledge gap. Focused, concise, and specific research questions provide a strong foundation for constructing hypotheses which serve as formal predictions about the research outcomes. Research questions and hypotheses are crucial elements of research that should not be overlooked. They should be carefully thought of and constructed when planning research. This avoids unethical studies and poor outcomes by defining well-founded objectives that determine the design, course, and outcome of the study.

Disclosure: The authors have no potential conflicts of interest to disclose.

Author Contributions:

• Conceptualization: Barroga E, Matanguihan GJ.
• Methodology: Barroga E, Matanguihan GJ.
• Writing - original draft: Barroga E, Matanguihan GJ.
• Writing - review & editing: Barroga E, Matanguihan GJ.

Writing Research Background

Research background is a brief outline of the most important studies that have been conducted so far presented in a chronological order. Research background part in introduction chapter can be also headed ‘Background of the Study.” Research background should also include a brief discussion of major theories and models related to the research problem.

Specifically, when writing research background you can discuss major theories and models related to your research problem in a chronological order to outline historical developments in the research area.  When writing research background, you also need to demonstrate how your research relates to what has been done so far in the research area.

Research background is written after the literature review. Therefore, literature review has to be the first and the longest stage in the research process, even before the formulation of research aims and objectives, right after the selection of the research area. Once the research area is selected, the literature review is commenced in order to identify gaps in the research area.

Research aims and objectives need to be closely associated with the elimination of this gap in the literature. The main difference between background of the study and literature review is that the former only provides general information about what has been done so far in the research area, whereas the latter elaborates and critically reviews previous works.

John Dudovskiy

PHILO-notes

Free Online Learning Materials

How to Write the Background of the Study in Research (Part 1)

Background of the Study in Research: Definition and the Core Elements it Contains

Before we embark on a detailed discussion on how to write the background of the study of your proposed research or thesis, it is important to first discuss its meaning and the core elements that it should contain. This is obviously because understanding the nature of the background of the study in research and knowing exactly what to include in it allow us to have both greater control and clear direction of the writing process.

So, what really is the background of the study and what are the core elements that it should contain?

The background of the study, which usually forms the first section of the introduction to a research paper or thesis, provides the overview of the study. In other words, it is that section of the research paper or thesis that establishes the context of the study. Its main function is to explain why the proposed research is important and essential to understanding the main aspects of the study.

The background of the study, therefore, is the section of the research paper or thesis that identifies the problem or gap of the study that needs to addressed and justifies the need for conducting the study. It also articulates the main goal of the study and the thesis statement, that is, the main claim or argument of the paper.

Given this brief understanding of the background of the study, we can anticipate what readers or thesis committee members expect from it. As we can see, the background of the study should contain the following major points:

1) brief discussion on what is known about the topic under investigation; 2) An articulation of the research gap or problem that needs to be addressed; 3) What the researcher would like to do or aim to achieve in the study ( research goal); 4) The thesis statement, that is, the main argument or contention of the paper (which also serves as the reason why the researcher would want to pursue the study); 5) The major significance or contribution of the study to a particular discipline; and 6) Depending on the nature of the study, an articulation of the hypothesis of the study.

Thus, when writing the background of the study, you should plan and structure it based on the major points just mentioned. With this, you will have a clear picture of the flow of the tasks that need to be completed in writing this section of your research or thesis proposal.

Now, how do you go about writing the background of the study in your proposed research or thesis?

The next lessons will address this question.

How to Write the Opening Paragraphs of the Background of the Study?

To begin with, let us assume that you already have conducted a preliminary research on your chosen topic, that is, you already have read a lot of literature and gathered relevant information for writing the background of your study. Let us also assume that you already have identified the gap of your proposed research and have already developed the research questions and thesis statement. If you have not yet identified the gap in your proposed research, you might as well go back to our lesson on how to identify a research gap.

So, we will just put together everything that you have researched into a background of the study (assuming, again, that you already have the necessary information). But in this lesson, let’s just focus on writing the opening paragraphs.

It is important to note at this point that there are different styles of writing the background of the study. Hence, what I will be sharing with you here is not just “the” only way of writing the background of the study. As a matter of fact, there is no “one-size-fits-all” style of writing this part of the research or thesis. At the end of the day, you are free to develop your own. However, whatever style it would be, it always starts with a plan which structures the writing process into stages or steps. The steps that I will share with below are just some of the most effective ways of writing the background of the study in research.

So, let’s begin.

It is always a good idea to begin the background of your study by giving an overview of your research topic. This may include providing a definition of the key concepts of your research or highlighting the main developments of the research topic.

Let us suppose that the topic of your study is the “lived experiences of students with mathematical anxiety”.

Here, you may start the background of your study with a discussion on the meaning, nature, and dynamics of the term “mathematical anxiety”. The reason for this is too obvious: “mathematical anxiety” is a highly technical term that is specific to mathematics. Hence, this term is not readily understandable to non-specialists in this field.

So, you may write the opening paragraph of your background of the study with this:

“Mathematical anxiety refers to the individual’s unpleasant emotional mood responses when confronted with a mathematical situation.”

Since you do not invent the definition of the term “mathematical anxiety”, then you need to provide a citation to the source of the material from which you are quoting. For example, you may now say:

“Mathematical anxiety refers to the individual’s unpleasant emotional mood responses when confronted with a mathematical situation (Eliot, 2020).”

And then you may proceed with the discussion on the nature and dynamics of the term “mathematical anxiety”. You may say:

“Lou (2019) specifically identifies some of the manifestations of this type of anxiety, which include, but not limited to, depression, helplessness, nervousness and fearfulness in doing mathematical and numerical tasks.”

After explaining to your readers the meaning, nature, and dynamics (as well as some historical development if you wish to) of the term “mathematical anxiety”, you may now proceed to showing the problem or gap of the study. As you may already know, the research gap is the problem that needs to be addressed in the study. This is important because no research activity is possible without the research gap.

Let us suppose that your research problem or gap is: “Mathematical anxiety can negatively affect not just the academic achievement of the students but also their future career plans and total well-being. Also, there are no known studies that deal with the mathematical anxiety of junior high school students in New Zealand.” With this, you may say:

“If left unchecked, as Shapiro (2019) claims, this problem will expand and create a total avoidance pattern on the part of the students, which can be expressed most visibly in the form of cutting classes and habitual absenteeism. As we can see, this will negatively affect the performance of students in mathematics. In fact, the study conducted by Luttenberger and Wimmer (2018) revealed that the outcomes of mathematical anxiety do not only negatively affect the students’ performance in math-related situations but also their future career as professionals. Without a doubt, therefore, mathematical anxiety is a recurring problem for many individuals which will negatively affect the academic success and future career of the student.”

Now that you already have both explained the meaning, nature, and dynamics of the term “mathematical anxiety” and articulated the gap of your proposed research, you may now state the main goal of your study. You may say:

“Hence, it is precisely in this context that the researcher aims to determine the lived experiences of those students with mathematical anxiety. In particular, this proposed thesis aims to determine the lived experiences of the junior high school students in New Zealand and identify the factors that caused them to become disinterested in mathematics.”

Please note that you should not end the first paragraph of your background of the study with the articulation of the research goal. You also need to articulate the “thesis statement”, which usually comes after the research goal. As is well known, the thesis statement is the statement of your argument or contention in the study. It is more of a personal argument or claim of the researcher, which specifically highlights the possible contribution of the study. For example, you may say:

“The researcher argues that there is a need to determine the lived experiences of these students with mathematical anxiety because knowing and understanding the difficulties and challenges that they have encountered will put the researcher in the best position to offer some alternatives to the problem. Indeed, it is only when we have performed some kind of a ‘diagnosis’ that we can offer practicable solutions to the problem. And in the case of the junior high school students in New Zealand who are having mathematical anxiety, determining their lived experiences as well as identifying the factors that caused them to become disinterested in mathematics are the very first steps in addressing the problem.”

If we combine the bits and pieces that we have written above, we can now come up with the opening paragraphs of your background of the study, which reads:

As we can see, we can find in the first paragraph 5 essential elements that must be articulated in the background of the study, namely:

1) A brief discussion on what is known about the topic under investigation; 2) An articulation of the research gap or problem that needs to be addressed; 3) What the researcher would like to do or aim to achieve in the study (research goal); 4) The thesis statement , that is, the main argument or claim of the paper; and 5) The major significance or contribution of the study to a particular discipline. So, that’s how you write the opening paragraphs of your background of the study. The next lesson will talk about writing the body of the background of the study.

How to Write the Body of the Background of the Study?

If we liken the background of the study to a sitting cat, then the opening paragraphs that we have completed in the previous lesson would just represent the head of the cat.

This means we still have to write the body (body of the cat) and the conclusion (tail). But how do we write the body of the background of the study? What should be its content?

Truly, this is one of the most difficult challenges that fledgling scholars faced. Because they are inexperienced researchers and didn’t know what to do next, they just wrote whatever they wished to write. Fortunately, this is relatively easy if they know the technique.

One of the best ways to write the body of the background of the study is to attack it from the vantage point of the research gap. If you recall, when we articulated the research gap in the opening paragraphs, we made a bold claim there, that is, there are junior high school students in New Zealand who are experiencing mathematical anxiety. Now, you have to remember that a “statement” remains an assumption until you can provide concrete proofs to it. This is what we call the “epistemological” aspect of research. As we may already know, epistemology is a specific branch of philosophy that deals with the validity of knowledge. And to validate knowledge is to provide concrete proofs to our statements. Hence, the reason why we need to provide proofs to our claim that there are indeed junior high school students in New Zealand who are experiencing mathematical anxiety is the obvious fact that if there are none, then we cannot proceed with our study. We have no one to interview with in the first. In short, we don’t have respondents.

The body of the background of the study, therefore, should be a presentation and articulation of the proofs to our claim that indeed there are junior high school students in New Zealand who are experiencing mathematical anxiety. Please note, however, that this idea is true only if you follow the style of writing the background of the study that I introduced in this course.

So, how do we do this?

One of the best ways to do this is to look for literature on mathematical anxiety among junior high school students in New Zealand and cite them here. However, if there are not enough literature on this topic in New Zealand, then we need to conduct initial interviews with these students or make actual classroom observations and record instances of mathematical anxiety among these students. But it is always a good idea if we combine literature review with interviews and actual observations.

Assuming you already have the data, then you may now proceed with the writing of the body of your background of the study. For example, you may say:

“According to records and based on the researcher’s firsthand experience with students in some junior high schools in New Zealand, indeed, there are students who lost interest in mathematics. For one, while checking the daily attendance and monitoring of the students, it was observed that some of them are not always attending classes in mathematics but are regularly attending the rest of the required subjects.”

After this sentence, you may insert some literature that will support this position. For example, you may say:

“As a matter of fact, this phenomenon is also observed in the work of Estonanto. In his study titled ‘Impact of Math Anxiety on Academic Performance in Pre-Calculus of Senior High School’, Estonanto (2019) found out that, inter alia, students with mathematical anxiety have the tendency to intentionally prioritize other subjects and commit habitual tardiness and absences.”

Then you may proceed saying:

“With this initial knowledge in mind, the researcher conducted initial interviews with some of these students. The researcher learned that one student did not regularly attend his math subject because he believed that he is not good in math and no matter how he listens to the topic he will not learn.”

Then you may say:

“Another student also mentioned that she was influenced by her friends’ perception that mathematics is hard; hence, she avoids the subject. Indeed, these are concrete proofs that there are some junior high school students in New Zealand who have mathematical anxiety. As already hinted, “disinterest” or the loss of interest in mathematics is one of the manifestations of a mathematical anxiety.”

If we combine what we have just written above, then we can have the first two paragraphs of the body of our background of the study. It reads:

“According to records and based on the researcher’s firsthand experience with students in some junior high schools in New Zealand, indeed there are students who lost interest in mathematics. For one, while checking the daily attendance and monitoring of the students, it was observed that some of them are not always attending classes in mathematics but are regularly attending the rest of the required subjects. As a matter of fact, this phenomenon is also observed in the work of Estonanto. In his study titled ‘Impact of Math Anxiety on Academic Performance in Pre-Calculus of Senior High School’, Estonanto (2019) found out that, inter alia, students with mathematical anxiety have the tendency to intentionally prioritize other subjects and commit habitual tardiness and absences.

With this initial knowledge in mind, the researcher conducted initial interviews with some of these students. The researcher learned that one student did not regularly attend his math subject because he believed that he is not good in math and no matter how he listens to the topic he will not learn. Another student also mentioned that she was influenced by her friends’ perception that mathematics is hard; hence, she avoids the subject. Indeed, these are concrete proofs that there are some junior high school students in New Zealand who have mathematical anxiety. As already hinted, “disinterest” or the loss of interest in mathematics is one of the manifestations of a mathematical anxiety.”

And then you need validate this observation by conducting another round of interview and observation in other schools. So, you may continue writing the body of the background of the study with this:

“To validate the information gathered from the initial interviews and observations, the researcher conducted another round of interview and observation with other junior high school students in New Zealand.”

“On the one hand, the researcher found out that during mathematics time some students felt uneasy; in fact, they showed a feeling of being tensed or anxious while working with numbers and mathematical problems. Some were even afraid to seat in front, while some students at the back were secretly playing with their mobile phones. These students also show remarkable apprehension during board works like trembling hands, nervous laughter, and the like.”

Then provide some literature that will support your position. You may say:

“As Finlayson (2017) corroborates, emotional symptoms of mathematical anxiety involve feeling of helplessness, lack of confidence, and being nervous for being put on the spot. It must be noted that these occasionally extreme emotional reactions are not triggered by provocative procedures. As a matter of fact, there are no personally sensitive questions or intentional manipulations of stress. The teacher simply asked a very simple question, like identifying the parts of a circle. Certainly, this observation also conforms with the study of Ashcraft (2016) when he mentions that students with mathematical anxiety show a negative attitude towards math and hold self-perceptions about their mathematical abilities.”

And then you proceed:

“On the other hand, when the class had their other subjects, the students show a feeling of excitement. They even hurried to seat in front and attentively participating in the class discussion without hesitation and without the feeling of being tensed or anxious. For sure, this is another concrete proof that there are junior high school students in New Zealand who have mathematical anxiety.”

To further prove the point that there indeed junior high school students in New Zealand who have mathematical anxiety, you may solicit observations from other math teachers. For instance, you may say:

“The researcher further verified if the problem is also happening in other sections and whether other mathematics teachers experienced the same observation that the researcher had. This validation or verification is important in establishing credibility of the claim (Buchbinder, 2016) and ensuring reliability and validity of the assertion (Morse et al., 2002). In this regard, the researcher attempted to open up the issue of math anxiety during the Departmentalized Learning Action Cell (LAC), a group discussion of educators per quarter, with the objective of ‘Teaching Strategies to Develop Critical Thinking of the Students’. During the session, one teacher corroborates the researcher’s observation that there are indeed junior high school students in New Zealand who have mathematical anxiety. The teacher pointed out that truly there were students who showed no extra effort in mathematics class in addition to the fact that some students really avoided the subject. In addition, another math teacher expressed her frustrations about these students who have mathematical anxiety. She quipped: “How can a teacher develop the critical thinking skills or ability of the students if in the first place these students show avoidance and disinterest in the subject?’.”

Again, if we combine what we have just written above, then we can now have the remaining parts of the body of the background of the study. It reads:

So, that’s how we write the body of the background of the study in research . Of course, you may add any relevant points which you think might amplify your content. What is important at this point is that you now have a clear idea of how to write the body of the background of the study.

How to Write the Concluding Part of the Background of the Study?

Since we have already completed the body of our background of the study in the previous lesson, we may now write the concluding paragraph (the tail of the cat). This is important because one of the rules of thumb in writing is that we always put a close to what we have started.

It is important to note that the conclusion of the background of the study is just a rehashing of the research gap and main goal of the study stated in the introductory paragraph, but framed differently. The purpose of this is just to emphasize, after presenting the justifications, what the study aims to attain and why it wants to do it. The conclusion, therefore, will look just like this:

“Given the above discussion, it is evident that there are indeed junior high school students in New Zealand who are experiencing mathematical anxiety. And as we can see, mathematical anxiety can negatively affect not just the academic achievement of the students but also their future career plans and total well-being. Again, it is for this reason that the researcher attempts to determine the lived experiences of those junior high school students in New Zealand who are experiencing a mathematical anxiety.”

If we combine all that we have written from the very beginning, the entire background of the study would now read:

If we analyze the background of the study that we have just completed, we can observe that in addition to the important elements that it should contain, it has also addressed other important elements that readers or thesis committee members expect from it.

On the one hand, it provides the researcher with a clear direction in the conduct of the study. As we can see, the background of the study that we have just completed enables us to move in the right direction with a strong focus as it has set clear goals and the reasons why we want to do it. Indeed, we now exactly know what to do next and how to write the rest of the research paper or thesis.

On the other hand, most researchers start their research with scattered ideas and usually get stuck with how to proceed further. But with a well-written background of the study, just as the one above, we have decluttered and organized our thoughts. We have also become aware of what have and have not been done in our area of study, as well as what we can significantly contribute in the already existing body of knowledge in this area of study.

Please note, however, as I already mentioned previously, that the model that I have just presented is only one of the many models available in textbooks and other sources. You are, of course, free to choose your own style of writing the background of the study. You may also consult your thesis supervisor for some guidance on how to attack the writing of your background of the study.

Lastly, and as you may already know, universities around the world have their own thesis formats. Hence, you should follow your university’s rules on the format and style in writing your research or thesis. What is important is that with the lessons that you learned in this course, you can now easily write the introductory part of your thesis, such as the background of the study.

• Affiliate Program

• UNITED STATES
• 台灣 (TAIWAN)
• TÜRKIYE (TURKEY)
• Academic Editing Services
• - Research Paper
• - Journal Manuscript
• - Dissertation
• - College & University Assignments
• Admissions Editing Services
• - Application Essay
• - Personal Statement
• - Recommendation Letter
• - Cover Letter
• - CV/Resume
• Business Editing Services
• - Business Documents
• - Report & Brochure
• - Website & Blog
• Writer Editing Services
• - Script & Screenplay
• Our Editors
• Client Reviews
• Editing & Proofreading Prices
• Wordvice Points
• Partner Discount
• Plagiarism Checker
• APA Citation Generator
• MLA Citation Generator
• Chicago Citation Generator
• Vancouver Citation Generator
• - APA Style
• - MLA Style
• - Chicago Style
• - Vancouver Style
• Writing & Editing Guide
• Academic Resources
• Admissions Resources

How to Write the Rationale of the Study in Research (Examples)

What is the Rationale of the Study?

The rationale of the study is the justification for taking on a given study. It explains the reason the study was conducted or should be conducted. This means the study rationale should explain to the reader or examiner why the study is/was necessary. It is also sometimes called the “purpose” or “justification” of a study. While this is not difficult to grasp in itself, you might wonder how the rationale of the study is different from your research question or from the statement of the problem of your study, and how it fits into the rest of your thesis or research paper. 

The rationale of the study links the background of the study to your specific research question and justifies the need for the latter on the basis of the former. In brief, you first provide and discuss existing data on the topic, and then you tell the reader, based on the background evidence you just presented, where you identified gaps or issues and why you think it is important to address those. The problem statement, lastly, is the formulation of the specific research question you choose to investigate, following logically from your rationale, and the approach you are planning to use to do that.

Table of Contents:

How to write a rationale for a research paper , how do you justify the need for a research study.

• Study Rationale Example: Where Does It Go In Your Paper?

The basis for writing a research rationale is preliminary data or a clear description of an observation. If you are doing basic/theoretical research, then a literature review will help you identify gaps in current knowledge. In applied/practical research, you base your rationale on an existing issue with a certain process (e.g., vaccine proof registration) or practice (e.g., patient treatment) that is well documented and needs to be addressed. By presenting the reader with earlier evidence or observations, you can (and have to) convince them that you are not just repeating what other people have already done or said and that your ideas are not coming out of thin air. 

Once you have explained where you are coming from, you should justify the need for doing additional research–this is essentially the rationale of your study. Finally, when you have convinced the reader of the purpose of your work, you can end your introduction section with the statement of the problem of your research that contains clear aims and objectives and also briefly describes (and justifies) your methodological approach. 

When is the Rationale for Research Written?

The author can present the study rationale both before and after the research is conducted. 

• Before conducting research : The study rationale is a central component of the research proposal . It represents the plan of your work, constructed before the study is actually executed.
• Once research has been conducted : After the study is completed, the rationale is presented in a research article or  PhD dissertation  to explain why you focused on this specific research question. When writing the study rationale for this purpose, the author should link the rationale of the research to the aims and outcomes of the study.

What to Include in the Study Rationale

Although every study rationale is different and discusses different specific elements of a study’s method or approach, there are some elements that should be included to write a good rationale. Make sure to touch on the following:

• A summary of conclusions from your review of the relevant literature
• What is currently unknown (gaps in knowledge)
• Inconclusive or contested results  from previous studies on the same or similar topic
• The necessity to improve or build on previous research, such as to improve methodology or utilize newer techniques and/or technologies

There are different types of limitations that you can use to justify the need for your study. In applied/practical research, the justification for investigating something is always that an existing process/practice has a problem or is not satisfactory. Let’s say, for example, that people in a certain country/city/community commonly complain about hospital care on weekends (not enough staff, not enough attention, no decisions being made), but you looked into it and realized that nobody ever investigated whether these perceived problems are actually based on objective shortages/non-availabilities of care or whether the lower numbers of patients who are treated during weekends are commensurate with the provided services.

In this case, “lack of data” is your justification for digging deeper into the problem. Or, if it is obvious that there is a shortage of staff and provided services on weekends, you could decide to investigate which of the usual procedures are skipped during weekends as a result and what the negative consequences are. 

In basic/theoretical research, lack of knowledge is of course a common and accepted justification for additional research—but make sure that it is not your only motivation. “Nobody has ever done this” is only a convincing reason for a study if you explain to the reader why you think we should know more about this specific phenomenon. If there is earlier research but you think it has limitations, then those can usually be classified into “methodological”, “contextual”, and “conceptual” limitations. To identify such limitations, you can ask specific questions and let those questions guide you when you explain to the reader why your study was necessary:

Methodological limitations

• Did earlier studies try but failed to measure/identify a specific phenomenon?
• Was earlier research based on incorrect conceptualizations of variables?
• Were earlier studies based on questionable operationalizations of key concepts?
• Did earlier studies use questionable or inappropriate research designs?

Contextual limitations

• Have recent changes in the studied problem made previous studies irrelevant?
• Are you studying a new/particular context that previous findings do not apply to?

Conceptual limitations

• Do previous findings only make sense within a specific framework or ideology?

Study Rationale Examples

Let’s look at an example from one of our earlier articles on the statement of the problem to clarify how your rationale fits into your introduction section. This is a very short introduction for a practical research study on the challenges of online learning. Your introduction might be much longer (especially the context/background section), and this example does not contain any sources (which you will have to provide for all claims you make and all earlier studies you cite)—but please pay attention to how the background presentation , rationale, and problem statement blend into each other in a logical way so that the reader can follow and has no reason to question your motivation or the foundation of your research.

Background presentation

Since the beginning of the Covid pandemic, most educational institutions around the world have transitioned to a fully online study model, at least during peak times of infections and social distancing measures. This transition has not been easy and even two years into the pandemic, problems with online teaching and studying persist (reference needed) . 

While the increasing gap between those with access to technology and equipment and those without access has been determined to be one of the main challenges (reference needed) , others claim that online learning offers more opportunities for many students by breaking down barriers of location and distance (reference needed) .  

Rationale of the study

Since teachers and students cannot wait for circumstances to go back to normal, the measures that schools and universities have implemented during the last two years, their advantages and disadvantages, and the impact of those measures on students’ progress, satisfaction, and well-being need to be understood so that improvements can be made and demographics that have been left behind can receive the support they need as soon as possible.

Statement of the problem

To identify what changes in the learning environment were considered the most challenging and how those changes relate to a variety of student outcome measures, we conducted surveys and interviews among teachers and students at ten institutions of higher education in four different major cities, two in the US (New York and Chicago), one in South Korea (Seoul), and one in the UK (London). Responses were analyzed with a focus on different student demographics and how they might have been affected differently by the current situation.

How long is a study rationale?

In a research article bound for journal publication, your rationale should not be longer than a few sentences (no longer than one brief paragraph). A  dissertation or thesis  usually allows for a longer description; depending on the length and nature of your document, this could be up to a couple of paragraphs in length. A completely novel or unconventional approach might warrant a longer and more detailed justification than an approach that slightly deviates from well-established methods and approaches.

Consider Using Professional Academic Editing Services

Now that you know how to write the rationale of the study for a research proposal or paper, you should make use of Wordvice AI’s free AI Grammar Checker , or receive professional academic proofreading services from Wordvice, including research paper editing services and manuscript editing services to polish your submitted research documents.

You can also find many more articles, for example on writing the other parts of your research paper , on choosing a title , or on making sure you understand and adhere to the author instructions before you submit to a journal, on the Wordvice academic resources pages.

Numbers, Facts and Trends Shaping Your World

Read our research on:

Full Topic List

Regions & Countries

• Publications
• Our Methods
• Short Reads
• Tools & Resources

Read Our Research On:

Key facts about Americans and guns

Guns are deeply ingrained in American society and the nation’s political debates.

The Second Amendment to the United States Constitution guarantees the right to bear arms, and about a third of U.S. adults say they personally own a gun. At the same time, in response to concerns such as  rising gun death rates  and  mass shootings , the U.S. surgeon general has taken the unprecedented step of declaring gun violence a public health crisis .

Here are some key findings about Americans’ views of gun ownership, gun policy and other subjects, drawn from Pew Research Center surveys. 

Pew Research Center conducted this analysis to summarize key facts about Americans’ relationships with guns. We used data from recent Center surveys to provide insights into Americans’ views on gun policy and how those views have changed over time, as well as to examine the proportion of adults who own guns and their reasons for doing so.

The Center survey questions used in this analysis, and more information about the surveys’ methodologies, and can be found at the links in the text.

Measuring gun ownership in the United States comes with unique challenges. Unlike many demographic measures, there is not a definitive data source from the government or elsewhere on how many American adults own guns.

The Pew Research Center survey conducted June 5-11, 2023, on the Center’s American Trends Panel, used two separate questions to measure personal and household ownership. About a third of adults (32%) say they own a gun, while another 10% say they do not personally own a gun but someone else in their household does. These shares have changed little from surveys conducted in  2021  and  2017 . In each of those surveys, 30% reported they owned a gun.

These numbers are largely consistent with  rates of gun ownership reported by Gallup and those reported by  NORC’s General Social Survey .  

The FBI maintains data on background checks on individuals attempting to purchase firearms in the United States. The FBI reported  a surge in background checks  in 2020 and 2021, during the coronavirus pandemic, but FBI statistics show that the number of federal background checks declined in 2022 and 2023. This pattern seems to be continuing so far in 2024. As of June, fewer background checks have been conducted than at the same point in 2023, according to FBI statistics.

About   four-in-ten U.S. adults say they live in a household with a gun, including 32% who say they personally own one,  according to  a Center survey conducted in June 2023 . These numbers are virtually unchanged since the last time we asked this question in 2021.

There are differences in gun ownership rates by political affiliation, gender, community type and other factors.

• Party: 45% of Republicans and GOP-leaning independents say they personally own a gun, compared with 20% of Democrats and Democratic leaners.
• Gender: 40% of men say they own a gun, versus 25% of women.
• Community type: 47% of adults living in rural areas report owning a firearm, as do smaller shares of those who live in suburbs (30%) or urban areas (20%).
• Race and ethnicity: 38% of White Americans own a gun, compared with smaller shares of Black (24%), Hispanic (20%) and Asian (10%) Americans.

Personal protection tops the list of reasons gun owners give for having a firearm.  About seven-in-ten gun owners (72%) say protection is a major reason they own a gun. Considerably smaller shares say that a major reason they own a gun is for hunting (32%), for sport shooting (30%), as part of a gun collection (15%) or for their job (7%). 

Americans’ reasons behind gun ownership have changed only modestly since we fielded a separate survey  about these topics in spring 2017. At that time, 67% of gun owners cited protection as a major reason they had a firearm.

Gun owners tend to have much more positive feelings about having a gun in the house than nonowners who live with them do.  For instance, 71% of gun owners say they enjoy owning a gun – but just 31% of nonowners living in a household with a gun say they enjoy having one in the home. And while 81% of gun owners say owning a gun makes them feel safer, a narrower majority of nonowners in gun households (57%) say the same. Nonowners are also more likely than owners to worry about having a gun at home (27% vs. 12%).

Feelings about gun ownership also differ by political affiliation, even among those who personally own a firearm. Republican gun owners are more likely than Democratic owners to say owning one gives them feelings of safety and enjoyment, while Democratic owners are more likely to say they worry about having a gun in the home.

Non-gun owners are split on whether they see themselves owning a firearm in the future.  About half of Americans who don’t own a gun (52%) say they could never see themselves owning one, while nearly as many (47%) could imagine themselves as gun owners in the future.

Among those who currently do not own a gun, attitudes about owning one in the future differ by party and other factors.

• Party: 61% of Republicans who don’t own a gun say they could see themselves owning one in the future, compared with 40% of Democrats.
• Gender: 56% of men who don’t own a gun say they could see themselves owning one someday; 40% of women nonowners say the same.
• Race and ethnicity: 56% of Black nonowners say they could see themselves owning a gun one day, compared with smaller shares of White (48%), Hispanic (40%) and Asian (38%) nonowners.

A majority of Americans (61%) say it is too easy to legally obtain a gun in this country, according to the June 2023 survey. Far fewer (9%) say it is too hard, while another 30% say it’s about right.

Non-gun owners are nearly twice as likely as gun owners to say it is too easy to legally obtain a gun (73% vs. 38%). Gun owners, in turn, are more than twice as likely as nonowners to say the ease of obtaining a gun is about right (48% vs. 20%).

There are differences by party and community type on this question, too. While 86% of Democrats say it is too easy to obtain a gun legally, far fewer Republicans (34%) say the same. Most urban (72%) and suburban (63%) residents say it’s too easy to legally obtain a gun, but rural residents are more divided: 47% say it is too easy, 41% say it is about right and 11% say it is too hard.

About six-in-ten U.S. adults (58%) favor stricter gun laws. Another 26% say that U.S. gun laws are about right, while 15% favor less strict gun laws.

There   is broad partisan agreement on some gun policy proposals, but most are politically divisive. Majorities of U.S. adults in both partisan coalitions somewhat or strongly favor two policies that would restrict gun access: preventing those with mental illnesses from purchasing guns (88% of Republicans and 89% of Democrats support this) and increasing the minimum age for buying guns to 21 years old (69% of Republicans, 90% of Democrats). Majorities in both parties also  oppose  allowing people to carry concealed firearms without a permit (60% of Republicans and 91% of Democrats oppose this).

Republicans and Democrats differ on several other proposals. While 85% of Democrats favor banning both assault-style weapons and high-capacity ammunition magazines that hold more than 10 rounds, majorities of Republicans oppose  these proposals (57% and 54%, respectively).

Most Republicans, on the other hand, support allowing teachers and school officials to carry guns in K-12 schools (74%) and allowing people to carry concealed guns in more places (71%). These proposals are supported by just 27% and 19% of Democrats, respectively.

The public remains closely divided over whether it’s more important to protect gun rights or control gun ownership, according to an April 2024 survey . Overall, 51% of U.S. adults say it’s more important to protect the right of Americans to own guns, while a similar share (48%) say controlling gun ownership is more important.

Views have shifted slightly since 2022, when we last asked this question. That year, 47% of adults prioritized protecting Americans’ rights to own guns, while 52% said controlling gun ownership was more important.

Views on this topic differ sharply by party. In the most recent survey, 83% of Republicans say protecting gun rights is more important, while 79% of Democrats prioritize controlling gun ownership.

Americans are slightly more likely to say gun ownership does more to increase safety than to decrease it.  Around half of Americans (52%) say gun ownership does more to increase safety by allowing law-abiding citizens to protect themselves, while a slightly smaller share (47%) say gun ownership does more to reduce safety by giving too many people access to firearms and increasing misuse. Views were evenly divided (49% vs. 49%) when we last asked in 2023.

Republicans and Democrats differ widely on this question: 81% of Republicans say gun ownership does more to increase safety, while 74% of Democrats say it does more to reduce safety.

Rural and urban Americans also have starkly different views. Among adults who live in rural areas, 64% say gun ownership increases safety, while among those in urban areas, 57% say it  reduces  safety. Those living in the suburbs are about evenly split in their views.

More than half of U.S. adults say an increase in the number of guns in the country is bad for society, according to the April 2024 survey. Some 54% say, generally, this is very or somewhat bad for society. Another 21% say it is very or somewhat good for society, and a quarter say it is neither good nor bad for society.

About half of Americans (49%) see gun violence as a major problem,  according to a May 2024 survey. This is down from 60% in June 2023, but roughly on par with views in previous years. In the more recent survey, 27% say gun violence is a moderately big problem, and about a quarter say it is either a small problem (19%) or not a problem at all (4%).

A majority of public K-12 teachers (59%) say they are at least somewhat worried about the possibility of a shooting ever happening at their school, including 18% who are very or extremely worried, according to a fall 2023 Center survey of teachers . A smaller share of teachers (39%) say they are not too or not at all worried about a shooting occurring at their school.

School shootings are a concern for K-12 parents as well: 32% say they are very or extremely worried about a shooting ever happening at their children’s school, while 37% are somewhat worried, according to  a fall 2022 Center survey of parents with at least one child younger than 18 who is not homeschooled. Another 31% of K-12 parents say they are not too or not at all worried about this.

Note: This is an update of a post originally published on Jan. 5, 2016 .

• Partisanship & Issues
• Political Issues

Katherine Schaeffer is a research analyst at Pew Research Center .

Americans’ Extreme Weather Policy Views and Personal Experiences

U.s. adults under 30 have different foreign policy priorities than older adults, many adults in east and southeast asia support free speech, are open to societal change, nato seen favorably in member states; confidence in zelenskyy down in europe, u.s., same-sex marriage around the world, most popular.

901 E St. NW, Suite 300 Washington, DC 20004 USA (+1) 202-419-4300 | Main (+1) 202-857-8562 | Fax (+1) 202-419-4372 |  Media Inquiries

Research Topics

• Email Newsletters

ABOUT PEW RESEARCH CENTER  Pew Research Center is a nonpartisan fact tank that informs the public about the issues, attitudes and trends shaping the world. It conducts public opinion polling, demographic research, media content analysis and other empirical social science research. Pew Research Center does not take policy positions. It is a subsidiary of  The Pew Charitable Trusts .

© 2024 Pew Research Center

• Open access
• Published: 25 July 2024

Strategies to strengthen the resilience of primary health care in the COVID-19 pandemic: a scoping review

• Ali Mohammad Mosadeghrad 1 ,
• Mahnaz Afshari 2 ,
• Parvaneh Isfahani 3 ,
• Farahnaz Ezzati 4 ,
• Mahdi Abbasi 4 ,
• Shahrzad Akhavan Farahani 4 ,
• Maryam Zahmatkesh 5 &
• Leila Eslambolchi 4  

BMC Health Services Research volume  24 , Article number:  841 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

Metrics details

Primary Health Care (PHC) systems are pivotal in delivering essential health services during crises, as demonstrated during the COVID-19 pandemic. With varied global strategies to reinforce PHC systems, this scoping review consolidates these efforts, identifying and categorizing key resilience-building strategies.

Adopting Arksey and O'Malley's scoping review framework, this study synthesized literature across five databases and Google Scholar, encompassing studies up to December 31st, 2022. We focused on English and Persian studies that addressed interventions to strengthen PHC amidst COVID-19. Data were analyzed through thematic framework analysis employing MAXQDA 10 software.

Our review encapsulated 167 studies from 48 countries, revealing 194 interventions to strengthen PHC resilience, categorized into governance and leadership, financing, workforce, infrastructures, information systems, and service delivery. Notable strategies included telemedicine, workforce training, psychological support, and enhanced health information systems. The diversity of the interventions reflects a robust global response, emphasizing the adaptability of strategies across different health systems.

Conclusions

The study underscored the need for well-resourced, managed, and adaptable PHC systems, capable of maintaining continuity in health services during emergencies. The identified interventions suggested a roadmap for integrating resilience into PHC, essential for global health security. This collective knowledge offered a strategic framework to enhance PHC systems' readiness for future health challenges, contributing to the overall sustainability and effectiveness of global health systems.

Peer Review reports

The health system is a complex network that encompasses individuals, groups, and organizations engaged in policymaking, financing, resource generation, and service provision. These efforts collectively aim to safeguard and enhance people health, meet their expectations, and provide financial protection [ 1 ]. The World Health Organization's (WHO) framework outlines six foundational building blocks for a robust health system: governance and leadership, financing, workforce, infrastructure along with technologies and medicine, information systems, and service delivery. Strengthening these elements is essential for health systems to realize their objectives of advancing and preserving public health [ 2 ].

Effective governance in health systems encompasses the organization of structures, processes, and authority, ensuring resource stewardship and aligning stakeholders’ behaviors with health goals [ 3 ]. Financial mechanisms are designed to provide health services without imposing financial hardship, achieved through strategic fund collection, management and allocation [ 4 , 5 ]. An equitable, competent, and well-distributed health workforce is crucial in delivering healthcare services and fulfilling health system objectives [ 2 ]. Access to vital medical supplies, technologies, and medicines is a cornerstone of effective health services, while health information systems play a pivotal role in generating, processing, and utilizing health data, informing policy decisions [ 2 , 5 ]. Collectively, these components interact to offer quality health services that are safe, effective, timely, affordable, and patient-centered [ 2 ]

The WHO, at the 1978 Alma-Ata conference, introduced primary health care (PHC) as the fundamental strategy to attain global health equity [ 6 ]. Subsequent declarations, such as the one in Astana in 2018, have reaffirmed the pivotal role of PHC in delivering high-quality health care for all [ 7 ]. PHC represents the first level of contact within the health system, offering comprehensive, accessible, community-based care that is culturally sensitive and supported by appropriate technology [ 8 ]. Essential care through PHC encompasses health education, proper nutrition, access to clean water and sanitation, maternal and child healthcare, immunizations, treatment of common diseases, and the provision of essential drugs [ 6 ]. PHC aims to provide protective, preventive, curative, and rehabilitative services that are as close to the community as possible [ 9 ].

Global health systems, however, have faced significant disruptions from various shocks and crises [ 10 ], with the COVID-19 pandemic being a recent and profound example. The pandemic has stressed health systems worldwide, infecting over 775 million and claiming more than 7.04 million lives as of April 13th, 2024 [ 11 ]. Despite the pandemic highlighting the critical role of hospitals and intensive care, it also revealed the limitations of specialized medicine when not complemented by a robust PHC system [ 12 ].

The pandemic brought to light the vulnerabilities of PHC systems, noting a significant decrease in the use of primary care for non-emergency conditions. Routine health services, including immunizations, prenatal care, and chronic disease management, were severely impacted [ 13 ]. The challenges—quarantine restrictions, fears of infection, staffing and resource shortages, suspended non-emergency services, and financial barriers—reduced essential service utilization [ 14 ]. This led to an avoidance of healthcare, further exacerbating health inequalities and emphasizing the need for more resilient PHC systems [ 15 , 16 , 17 ].

Resilient PHC systems are designed to predict, prevent, prepare, absorb, adapt, and transform when facing crises, ensuring the continuity of routine health services [ 18 ]. Investing in the development of such systems can not only enhance crisis response but also foster post-crisis transformation and improvement. This study focuses on identifying global interventions and strategies to cultivate resilient PHC systems, aiding policymakers and managers in making informed decisions in times of crisis.

In 2023, we conducted a scoping review to collect and synthesize evidence from a broad spectrum of studies addressing the COVID-19 pandemic. A scoping review allows for the assessment of literature's volume, nature, and comprehensiveness, and is uniquely inclusive of both peer-reviewed articles and gray literature—such as reports, white papers, and policy documents. Unlike systematic reviews, it typically does not require a quality assessment of the included literature, making it well-suited for rapidly gathering a wide scope of evidence [ 19 ]. Our goal was to uncover the breadth of solutions aimed at bolstering the resilience of the PHC system throughout the COVID-19 crisis. The outcomes of this review are intended to inform the development of a model that ensures the PHC system's ability to continue delivering not just emergency services but also essential care during times of crisis.

We employed Arksey and O'Malley's methodological framework, which consists of six steps: formulating the research question, identifying relevant studies, selecting the pertinent studies, extracting data, synthesizing and reporting the findings, and, where applicable, consulting with stakeholders to inform and validate the results [ 20 ]. This comprehensive approach is designed to capture a wide range of interventions and strategies, with the ultimate aim of crafting a robust PHC system that can withstand the pressures of a global health emergency

Stage 1: identifying the research question

Our scoping review was guided by the central question: "Which strategies and interventions have been implemented to enhance the resilience of primary healthcare systems in response to the COVID-19 pandemic?" This question aimed to capture a comprehensive array of responses to understand the full scope of resilience-building activities within PHC systems.

Stage 2: identifying relevant studies

To ensure a thorough review, we conducted systematic searches across multiple databases, specifically targeting literature up to December 31st, 2022. The databases included PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, Magiran, and SID. We also leveraged the expansive reach of Google Scholar. Our search strategy incorporated a bilingual approach, utilizing both English and Persian keywords that encompassed "PHC," "resilience," "strategies," and "policies," along with the logical operators AND/OR to refine the search. Additionally, we employed Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) terms to enhance the precision of our search. The results were meticulously organized and managed using the Endnote X8 citation manager, facilitating the systematic selection and review of pertinent literature.

Stage 3: selecting studies

In the third stage, we meticulously vetted our search results to exclude duplicate entries by comparing bibliographic details such as titles, authors, publication dates, and journal names. This task was performed independently by two of our authors, LE and MA, who rigorously screened titles and abstracts. Discrepancies encountered during this process were brought to the attention of a third author, AMM, for resolution through consensus.

Subsequently, full-text articles were evaluated by four team members—LE, MA, PI, and SHZ—to ascertain their relevance to our research question. The selection hinged on identifying articles that discussed strategies aimed at bolstering the resilience of PHC systems amidst the COVID-19 pandemic Table 1 .

We have articulated the specific inclusion and exclusion criteria that guided our selection process in Table 2 , ensuring transparency and replicability of our review methodology

Stage 4: charting the data

Data extraction was conducted by a team of six researchers (LE, MA, PI, MA, FE, and SHZ), utilizing a structured data extraction form. For each selected study, we collated details including the article title, the first author’s name, the year of publication, the country where the study was conducted, the employed research methodology, the sample size, the type of document, and the PHC strengthening strategies described.

In pursuit of maintaining rigorous credibility in our study, we adopted a dual-review process. Each article was independently reviewed by pairs of researchers to mitigate bias and ensure a thorough analysis. Discrepancies between reviewers were addressed through discussion to reach consensus. In instances where consensus could not be reached, the matter was escalated to a third, neutral reviewer. Additionally, to guarantee thoroughness, either LE or MA conducted a final review of the complete data extraction for each study.

Stage 5: collating, summarizing and reporting the results

In this stage, authors LE, MZ, and MA worked independently to synthesize the data derived from the selected studies. Differences in interpretation were collaboratively discussed until a consensus was reached, with AMM providing arbitration where required.

We employed a framework thematic analysis, underpinned by the WHO's health system building blocks model, to structure our findings. This model categorizes health system components into six foundational elements: governance and leadership; health financing; health workforce; medical products, vaccines, and technologies; health information systems; and service delivery [ 2 ]. Using MAXQDA 10 software, we coded the identified PHC strengthening strategies within these six thematic areas.

Summary of search results and study selection

In total, 4315 articles were found by initial search. After removing 397 duplicates, 3918 titles and abstracts were screened and 3606 irrelevant ones were deleted. Finally, 167 articles of 312 reviewed full texts were included in data synthesis (Fig.  1 ). Main characteristics of included studies are presented in Appendix 1.

PRISMA Flowchart of search process and results

Characteristics of studies

These studies were published in 2020 (18.6%), 2021 (36.5%) and 2022 (44.9%). They were conducted in 48 countries, mostly in the US (39 studies), the UK (16 studies), Canada (11 studies), Iran (10 studies) and Brazil (7 studies) as shown in Fig.  2 .

Distribution of reviewed studies by country

Although the majority of the reviewed publications were original articles (55.1 %) and review papers (21 %), other types of documents such as reports, policy briefs, analysis, etc., were also included in this review (Fig.  3 ).

An overview of the publication types

Strengthening interventions to build a resilient PHC system

In total, 194 interventions were identified for strengthening the resilience of PHC systems to respond to the COVID-19 pandemic. They were grouped into six themes of PHC governance and leadership (46 interventions), PHC financing (21 interventions), PHC workforce (37 interventions), PHC infrastructures, equipment, medicines and vaccines (30 interventions), PHC information system (21 interventions) and PHC service delivery (39 interventions). These strategies are shown in Table 3 .

This scoping review aimed to identify and categorize the range of interventions employed globally to strengthen the resilience of primary healthcare (PHC) systems in the face of the COVID-19 pandemic. Our comprehensive search yielded 194 distinct interventions across 48 countries, affirming the significant international efforts to sustain healthcare services during this unprecedented crisis. These interventions have been classified according to the WHO’s six building block model of health systems, providing a framework for analyzing their breadth and depth. This review complements and expands upon the findings from Pradhan et al., who identified 28 interventions specifically within low and middle-income countries, signaling the universality of the challenge and the myriad of innovative responses it has provoked globally [ 178 ].

The review highlights the critical role of governance and leadership in PHC resilience. Effective organizational structure changes, legal reforms, and policy development were crucial in creating adaptive healthcare systems capable of meeting the dynamic challenges posed by the pandemic. These findings resonate with the two strategies of effective leadership and coordination emphasized by Pradhan et al. (2023), and underscore the need for clear vision, evidence-based policy, and active community engagement in governance [ 178 ]. The COVID-19 pandemic posed significant challenges for PHC systems globally. A pivotal response to these challenges was the active involvement of key stakeholders in the decision-making process. This inclusivity spanned across the spectrum of general practitioners, health professionals, health managers, and patients. By engaging these vital contributors, it became possible to address their specific needs and to design and implement people-centered services effectively [ 41 , 42 , 43 ].

The development and implementation of collaborative, evidence-informed policies and national healthcare plans were imperative. Such strategies required robust leadership, bolstered by political commitment, to ensure that the necessary changes could be enacted swiftly and efficiently [ 41 , 45 ]. Leaders within the health system were called upon to foster an environment of good governance. This entailed promoting increased participation from all sectors of the healthcare community, enhancing transparency in decision-making processes, and upholding the principles of legitimacy, accountability, and responsibility within the health system [ 10 ]. The collective aim was to create a more resilient, responsive, and equitable healthcare system in the face of the pandemic's demands.

In the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, governments were compelled to implement new laws and regulations. These were designed to address a range of issues from professional accreditation and ethical concerns to supporting the families of healthcare workers. Additionally, these legal frameworks facilitated the integration of emerging services such as telemedicine into the healthcare system, ensuring that these services were regulated and standardized [ 38 , 40 , 61 ]. A key aspect of managing the pandemic was the establishment of effective and transparent communication systems for patients, public health authorities, and the healthcare system at large [ 60 , 61 ]. To disseminate vital information regarding the pandemic, vaccination programs, and healthcare services, authorities leveraged various channels. Public media, local online platforms, and neighborhood networks were instrumental in keeping the public informed about the ongoing situation and available services [ 53 , 60 , 86 ]. For health professionals, digital communication tools such as emails and WhatsApp groups, as well as regular meetings, were utilized to distribute clinical guidelines, government directives, and to address any queries they might have had. This ensured that healthcare workers were kept up-to-date with the evolving landscape of the pandemic and could adapt their practices accordingly [ 60 , 144 ].

Healthcare facilities function as complex socio-technical entities, combining multiple specialties and adapting to the ever-changing landscape of healthcare needs and environments [ 179 ]. To navigate this dynamic, policy makers must take into account an array of determinants—political, economic, social, and environmental—that influence health outcomes. Effective management of a health crisis necessitates robust collaboration across various sectors, including government bodies, public health organizations, primary healthcare systems, and hospitals. Such collaboration is not only pivotal during crisis management but also during the development of preparedness plans [ 63 ]. Within the health system, horizontal collaboration among departments and vertical collaboration between the Ministry of Health and other governmental departments are vital. These cooperative efforts are key to reinforce the resilience of the primary healthcare system. Moreover, a strong alliance between national pandemic response teams and primary healthcare authorities is essential to identifying and resolving issues within the PHC system [ 29 ]. On an international scale, collaborations and communications are integral to the procurement of essential medical supplies, such as medicines, equipment, and vaccines. These international partnerships are fundamental to ensuring that health systems remain equipped to face health emergencies [ 63 ].

To ensure the PHC system's preparedness and response capacity was at its best, regular and effective monitoring and evaluation programs were put in place. These included rigorous quarterly stress tests at the district level, which scrutinized the infrastructure and technology to pinpoint the system’s strengths and areas for improvement [ 43 ]. Furthermore, clinical audits were conducted to assess the structure, processes, and outcomes of healthcare programs, thereby enhancing the quality and effectiveness of the services provided [ 63 ]. These evaluation measures were crucial for maintaining a high standard of care and for adapting to the ever-evolving challenges faced by the PHC system.

Financial strategies played a critical role in enabling access to essential health services without imposing undue financial hardship. Various revenue-raising, pooling, and purchasing strategies were implemented to expand PHC financing during the pandemic, illustrating the multifaceted approach needed to sustain healthcare operations under strained circumstances [ 9 , 19 ].

In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the Indian government took decisive action to bolster the country's healthcare infrastructure. By enhancing the financial capacity of states, the government was able to inject more funds into the Primary Health Care (PHC) system. This influx of resources made it possible to introduce schemes providing free medications and diagnostic services [ 50 ]. The benefits of increased financial resources were also felt beyond India's borders, enabling the compensation of health services in various forms. In Greece, it facilitated the monitoring and treatment of COVID-19 through in-person, home-based, and remote health services provided by physicians in private practice. Similarly, in Iran, the financial boost supported the acquisition of basic and para-clinical services from the private sector [ 21 , 65 ]. These measures reflect a broader international effort to adapt and sustain health services during a global health crisis.

The COVID-19 pandemic presented a formidable challenge to the PHC workforce worldwide. Healthcare workers were subjected to overwhelming workloads and faced significant threats to both their physical and mental well-being. To build resilience in the face of this crisis, a suite of interventions was implemented. These included recruitment strategies, training and development programs, enhanced teamwork, improved protective measures, comprehensive performance appraisals, and appropriate compensation mechanisms, as documented in Table 3 . To address staffing needs within PHC centers, a range of professionals including general practitioners, nurses, community health workers, and technical staff were either newly employed or redeployed from other healthcare facilities [ 63 ]. Expert practitioners were positioned on the frontlines, providing both in-person services and telephone consultations, acting as gatekeepers in the health system [ 49 , 63 ]. Support staff with technological expertise played a crucial role as well, assisting patients in navigating patient portals, utilizing new digital services, and conducting video visits [ 102 ]. Furthermore, the acute shortage of healthcare workers was mitigated by recruiting individuals who were retired, not currently practicing, or in training as students, as well as by enlisting volunteers. This strategy was key to bolstering the workforce and ensuring continuity of care during the pandemic [ 109 ].

During the pandemic, new training programs were developed to prepare healthcare staff for the evolving demands of their roles. These comprehensive courses covered a wide array of critical topics, including the correct use of personal protective equipment (PPE), the operation of ventilators, patient safety protocols, infection prevention, teamwork, problem-solving, self-care techniques, mental health support, strategies for managing stress, navigating and applying reliable web-based information, emergency response tactics, telemedicine, and direct care for COVID-19 patients [ 74 , 95 , 100 , 108 , 110 , 112 , 117 ].

Acknowledging the psychological and professional pressures faced by the primary healthcare workforce, health managers took active measures to safeguard both the physical and mental well-being of their employees during this challenging period [ 124 ]. Efforts to protect physical health included monitoring health status, ensuring vaccination against COVID-19, and providing adequate PPE [ 63 , 72 ]. To address mental health, a variety of interventions were deployed to mitigate anxiety and related issues among frontline workers. In Egypt, for instance, healthcare workers benefited from psychotherapy services and adaptable work schedules to alleviate stress [ 126 ]. Singapore employed complementary strategies, such as yoga, meditation, and the encouragement of religious practices, to promote relaxation among staff [ 133 ]. In the United States, the Wellness Hub application was utilized as a tool for employees to enhance their mental health [ 132 ]. In addition to health and wellness initiatives, there were financial incentives aimed at motivating employees. Payment protocols were revised, and new incentives, including scholarship opportunities and career development programs, were introduced to foster job satisfaction and motivation among healthcare workers [ 63 ].

The resilience of PHC systems during the pandemic hinged on several key improvements. Enhancing health facilities, supplying medicines and diagnostic kits, distributing vaccines, providing medical equipment, and building robust digital infrastructure were all fundamental elements that contributed to the strength of PHC systems, as outlined in Table 3 . Safe and accessible primary healthcare was facilitated through various means. Wheelchair routes were created for patients to ensure their mobility within healthcare facilities. , dedicated COVID-19 clinics were established, mass vaccination centers were opened to expedite immunization, and mobile screening stations were launched to extend testing capabilities [ 23 , 33 , 63 , 140 ].

In Iran, the distribution and availability of basic medicines were managed in collaboration with the Food and Drug Organization, ensuring that essential medications reached those in need [ 89 ]. During the outbreak, personal protective equipment (PPE) was among the most critical supplies. Access to PPE was prioritized, particularly for vulnerable groups and healthcare workers, to provide a layer of safety against the virus [ 63 ]. Vaccines were made available at no cost, with governments taking active measures to monitor their safety and side effects, to enhance their quality, and to secure international approvals. Furthermore, effective communication strategies were employed to keep the public informed about vaccine-related developments [ 32 , 83 ].

These comprehensive efforts underscored the commitment to maintaining a resilient PHC system in the face of a global health every individual in the community could access healthcare services. To facilitate this, free high-speed Wi-Fi hotspots were established, enabling patients to engage in video consultations and utilize a range of e-services without the barrier of internet costs crisis. Significant enhancements were made to the digital infrastructure. This expansion was critical in ensuring that [ 30 , 54 ]. Complementing these measures, a variety of digital health tools were deployed to further modernize care delivery. Countries like Nigeria and Germany, for instance, saw the introduction of portable electrocardiograms and telemedical stethoscopes. These innovations allowed for more comprehensive remote assessments and diagnostics, helping to bridge the gap between traditional in-person consultations and the emerging needs for telemedicine [ 141 , 180 ].

Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, targeted interventions were implemented to bolster information systems and research efforts, as outlined in Table 3 . Key among these was the advancement of a modern, secure public health information system to ensure access to health data was not only reliable and timely but also transparent and accurate [ 33 , 45 , 49 ]. The "Open Notes" initiative in the United States exemplified this effort, guaranteeing patient access to, and editorial control over, their health records [ 141 ]. Management strategies also promoted the "one-health" approach, facilitating the exchange of health data across various departments and sectors to enhance public health outcomes [ 10 ].

In addition to these information system upgrades, active patient surveillance and early warning systems were instituted in collaboration with public health agencies. These systems played a pivotal role in detecting outbreaks, providing precise reports on the incidents, characterizing the epidemiology of pathogens, tracking their spread, and evaluating the efficacy of control strategies. They were instrumental in pinpointing areas of concern, informing smart lockdowns, and improving contact tracing methods [ 33 , 63 , 72 ]. The reinforcement of these surveillance and warning systems had a profound impact on shaping and implementing a responsive strategy to the health crisis [ 10 ].

To further reinforce the response to the pandemic, enhancing primary healthcare (PHC) research capacity became crucial. This enabled healthcare professionals and policymakers to discern both facilitators and barriers within the system and to devise fitting strategies to address emerging challenges. To this end, formal advisory groups and multidisciplinary expert panels, which included specialists from epidemiology, clinical services, social care, sociology, policy-making, and management, were convened. These groups harnessed the best available evidence to inform decision-making processes [ 30 ]. Consequently, research units were established to carry out regular telephone surveys and to collect data on effective practices, as well as new diagnostic and therapeutic approaches [ 31 , 89 ]. The valuable insights gained from these research endeavors were then disseminated through trusted channels to both the public and policymakers, ensuring informed decisions at all levels [ 36 ].

The COVID-19 pandemic acted as a catalyst for the swift integration of telemedicine into healthcare systems globally. This period saw healthcare providers leverage telecommunication technologies to offer an array of remote services, addressing medical needs such as consultations, diagnosis, monitoring, and prescriptions. This transition was instrumental in ensuring care continuity and mitigating infection risks for both patients and healthcare workers, highlighting an innovative evolution in healthcare delivery [ 170 , 181 ].

Countries adapted to this new model of healthcare with varied applications: Armenia established telephone follow-ups and video consultations for remote patient care, while e-pharmacies and mobile health tools provided immediate access to medical information and services [ 29 ]. In France and the United States, tele-mental health services and online group support became a means to support healthy living during the pandemic [ 147 , 158 ] . New Zealand introduced the Aroha chatbot, an initiative to assist with mental health management [ 139 ].

The implementation and effectiveness of these telehealth services were not limited by economic barriers, as underscored by Pradhan et al. (2023), who noted the key role of telemedicine in low and middle-income countries. These countries embraced the technology to maintain health service operations, proving its global applicability and utility [ 178 ]. The widespread adoption of telemedicine, therefore, represents a significant and perhaps lasting shift in healthcare practice, one that has redefined patient care in the face of a global health crisis and may continue to shape the future of healthcare delivery [ 170 , 178 , 181 ].

The study highlighted PHC strengthening strategies in COVID-19 time . Notably, the adaptations and reforms spanned across governance, financing, workforce management, information system, infrastructural readiness, and service delivery enhancements. These interventions collectively contributed to the robustness of health systems against the sudden surge in demand and the multifaceted challenges imposed by the pandemic and resulted.

Significantly, the findings have broader implications for health policy and system design worldwide. The pandemic has highlighted the critical need for resilient health systems that are capable of not only responding to health emergencies but also maintaining continuity in essential services. The strategies documented in this review serve as a template for countries to fortify their health systems by embedding resilience into their PHC frameworks (Fig.  4 ). Future health crises can be better managed by learning from these evidenced responses, which emphasize the necessity of integrated, well-supported, and dynamically adaptable health care structures.

A model for strengthening the resilience of the primary health care system

Looking ahead, realist reviews could play a pivotal role in refining PHC resilience strategies. By understanding the context in which specific interventions succeed or fail, realist reviews can help policymakers and practitioners design more effective health system reforms, as echoed in the need for evidence-based planning in health system governance [ 9 ] ​​. These reviews offer a methodological advantage by focusing on the causality between interventions and outcomes, aligning with the importance of effective health system leadership and management [ 50 , 182 ] ​​. They take into account the underlying mechanisms and contextual factors, thus providing a nuanced understanding that is crucial for tailoring interventions to meet local needs effectively [ 28 , 86 ] ​​, ultimately leading to more sustainable health systems globally. This shift towards a more analytical and context-sensitive approach in evaluating health interventions, as supported by WHO's framework for action [ 2 , 10 ] ​​, will be crucial for developing strategies that are not only effective in theory but also practical and sustainable in diverse real-world settings.

Limitations and future research

In our comprehensive scoping review, we analyzed 167 articles out of a dataset of 4,315, classifying 194 interventions that build resilience in primary healthcare systems across the globe in response to pandemics like COVID-19. While the review's extensive search provides a sweeping overview of various strategies, it may not capture the full diversity of interventions across all regions and economies. Future research should focus on meta-analyses to evaluate the effectiveness of these interventions in greater detail and employ qualitative studies to delve into the specific challenges and successes, thus gaining a more nuanced understanding of the context. As the review includes articles only up to December 31, 2022, it may overlook more recent studies. Regular updates, a broader linguistic range, and the inclusion of a more diverse array of databases are recommended to maintain relevance and expand the breadth of literature, ultimately guiding more focused research that could significantly enhance the resilience of PHC systems worldwide.

Availability of data and materials

The datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Abbreviations

Primary Health Care

World Health Organization

Sustainable Development Goals

Universal Health Coverage

Personal Protective Equipment

General Practitioner

Mosadeghrad AM. A practical model for health policy making and analysis. Payesh. 2022;21(1):7–24 ([in Persian]).

Article   Google Scholar  

World Health Organization. Everybody’s Business: Strengthening Health Systems to Improve Health Outcomes. WHO’s Framework for Action. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2007.

Google Scholar  

Khosravi MF, Mosadeghrad AM, Arab M. Health System Governance Evaluation: A Scoping Review. Iran J Public Health. 2023;52(2):265.

PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Mosadeghrad AM, Abbasi M, Abbasi M, Heidari M. Sustainable health financing methods in developing countries: a scoping review. J of School Public Health Inst Public Health Res. 2023;20(4):358–78 ([in Persian]).

Mosadeghrad AM. Health strengthening plan, a supplement to Iran health transformation plan: letter to the editor. Tehran Univ Med J. 2019;77(8):537–8 ([in Persian]).

World Health Organization. Declaration of alma-ata. Copenhagen: Regional Office for Europe; 1978. p. 1–4.

Rasanathan K, Evans TG. Primary health care, the Declaration of Astana and COVID-19. Bull World Health Organ. 2020;98(11):801.

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

World Health Organization, UNICEF. Operational framework for primary health care: transforming vision into action. Geneva: World Health Organization and the United Nations Children’s Fund; 2020.

Mosadeghrad AM, Heydari M, Esfahani P. Primary health care strengthening strategies in Iran: a realistic review. J School Public Health Inst Public Health Res. 2022;19(3):237–58 ([in Persian]).

Sagan A, Webb E, Azzopardi-Muscat N, de la Mata I, McKee M, Figueras J. Health systems resilience during COVID-19: Lessons for building back better. Regional Office for Europe: World Health Organization; 2021.

World Health Organization, Coronavirus (COVID-19) map. Available at https://covid19.who.int/ /. Access date 14/04/2024.

Plagg B, Piccoliori G, Oschmann J, Engl A, Eisendle K. Primary health care and hospital management during COVID-19: lessons from lombardy. Risk Manag Healthc Policy. 2021:3987–92.

World Health Organization. Pulse survey on continuity of essential health services during the COVID-19 pandemic: interim report, 27 August 2020. World Health Organization; 2020. https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/WHO-2019-nCoV-EHS_continuity-survey-2020.1 .

Mosadeghrad AM, Jajarmizadeh A. Continuity of essential health services during the COVID-19 pandemic. Tehran Univ Med J. 2021;79(10):831–2 ([in Persian]).

Splinter MJ, Velek P, Ikram MK, Kieboom BC, Peeters RP, Bindels PJ, Ikram MA, Wolters FJ, Leening MJ, de Schepper EI, Licher S. Prevalence and determinants of healthcare avoidance during the COVID-19 pandemic: A population-based cross-sectional study. PLoS Med. 2021;18(11):e1003854.

Article   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Wangmo S, Sarkar S, Islam T, Rahman MH, Landry M. Maintaining essential health services during the pandemic in Bangladesh: the role of primary health care supported by routine health information system. WHO South East Asia J Public Health. 2021;10(3):93.

Kumpunen S, Webb E, Permanand G, Zheleznyakov E, Edwards N, van Ginneken E, Jakab M. Transformations in the landscape of primary health care during COVID-19: Themes from the European region. Health Policy. 2022;126(5):391–7.

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Ezzati F, Mosadeghrad AM, Jaafaripooyan E. Resiliency of the Iranian healthcare facilities against the Covid-19 pandemic: challenges and solutions. BMC Health Serv Res. 2023;23(207):1–16.

Mosadeghrad AM, Isfahani P, Eslambolchi L, Zahmatkesh M, Afshari M. Strategies to strengthen a climate-resilient health system: a scoping review. Global Health. 2023;19(1):62.

Arksey H, O’Malley L. Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. Int J Social Res Methodol. 2005;8(1):19–32.

Akrami F, Riazi-Isfahani S, Mahdavi hezaveh A, Ghanbari Motlagh A, Najmi M, Afkar M, et al. Iran’s Status of NCDs Prevention and Management Services during COVID-19 Pandemic at PHC Level. SJKU. 2021;26(5):50–68.

Etienne CF, Fitzgerald J, Almeida G, Birmingham ME, Brana M, Bascolo E, Cid C, Pescetto C. COVID-19: transformative actions for more equitable, resilient, sustainable societies and health systems in the Americas. BMJ Global Health. 2020;5(8):e003509.

Tabrizi JS, Raeisi A, Namaki S. Primary health care and COVID-19 Pandemic in the Islamic Republic of Iran. Depict Health. 2022;13(Suppl 1):S1-10.

Danhieux K, Buffel V, Pairon A, Benkheil A, Remmen R, Wouters E, Van Olmen J. The impact of COVID-19 on chronic care according to providers: a qualitative study among primary care practices in Belgium. BMC Fam Pract. 2020;21:1–6.

Goodyear-Smith F, Kidd M, Oseni TIA, Nashat N, Mash R, Akman M, Phillips RL, van Weel C. Internationalexamples of primary care COVID-19 preparedness and response: a comparison of four countries. Fam MedCommunity Health. 2022;10(2):e001608.

Kinder K, Bazemore A, Taylor M, Mannie C, Strydom S, George J, Goodyear-Smith F. Integrating primary care and public health to enhance response to a pandemic. Prim Health Care Res Dev. 2021;22:e27.

De Maeseneer J. Prim Health Care Res Dev. 2021;22:e73.

Westfall JM, Liaw W, Griswold K, Stange K, Green LA, Phillips R, Bazemore A, Jaén CR, Hughes LS, DeVoe J, Gullett H. Uniting public health and primary care for healthy communities in the COVID-19 era and beyond. J Am Board Fam Med. 2021;34(Supplement):S203-9.

Johansen AS, Shriwise A, Lopez-Acuna D, Vracko P. Strengthening the primary health care response to COVID-19: an operational tool for policymakers. Prim Health Care ResDev. 2021;22:e81.

Reath J, Lau P, Lo W, Trankle S, Brooks M, Shahab Y, Abbott P. Strengthening learning and research in health equity–opportunities for university departments of primary health care and general practice. Aust J Prim Health. 2022;29(2):131–6.

Ferenčina J, Tomšič V. COVID-19 clinic as a basis of quality primary health care in the light of the pandemic - an observational study. Med Glas (Zenica). 2022;19(1). https://doi.org/10.17392/1437-21 .

Mosadeghrad AH. Promote COVID-19 vaccination uptake: a letter to editor. Tehran Univ Med Sci J. 2022;80(2):159–60.

Chaiban L, Benyaich A, Yaacoub S, Rawi H, Truppa C, Bardus M. Access to primary and secondary health care services for people living with diabetes and lower-limb amputation during the COVID-19 pandemic in Lebanon: a qualitative study. BMC Health Serv Res. 2022;22(1):593.

Džakula A, Banadinović M, Lovrenčić IL, Vajagić M, Dimova A, Rohova M, Minev M, Scintee SG, Vladescu C, Farcasanu D, Robinson S. A comparison of health system responses to COVID-19 in Bulgaria, Croatia and Romania in 2020. Health Policy. 2022;126(5):456–64.

Ghazi Saeedi M, Tanhapour M. Telemedicine System: A Mandatory Requirement in Today’s World. Payavard. 2022;15(5):490–507.

Ferorelli D, Nardelli L, Spagnolo L, Corradi S, Silvestre M, Misceo F, Marrone M, Zotti F, Mandarelli G, Solarino B, Dell’Erba A. Medical legal aspects of telemedicine in Italy: application fields, professional liability and focus on care services during the COVID-19 health emergency. J Prim CareCommun Health. 2020;11:2150132720985055.

CAS   Google Scholar  

Fulmer T, Reuben DB, Auerbach J, Fick DM, Galambos C, Johnson KS. Actualizing better health and health care for older adults: commentary describes six vital directions to improve the care and quality of life for all older Americans. Health Aff. 2021;40(2):219–25.

Hernández Rincón EH, Pimentel González JP, Aramendiz Narváez MF, Araujo Tabares RA, Roa González JM. Description and analysis of primary care-based COVID-19 interventions in Colombia. Medwave. 2021;21(3):e8147.

Giannopoulou I, Tsobanoglou GO. COVID-19 pandemic: challenges and opportunities for the Greek health care system. Irish J Psychol Med. 2020;37(3):226–30.

Chow C, Goh SK, Tan CS, Wu HK, Shahdadpuri R. Enhancing frontline workforce volunteerism through exploration of motivations and impact during the COVID-19 pandemic. Int J Disaster Risk Reduct. 2021;1(66):102605.

Alboksmaty A, Kumar S, Parekh R, Aylin P. Management and patient safety of complex elderly patients in primary care during the COVID-19 pandemic in the UK—Qualitative assessment. PLoS One. 2021;16(3):e0248387.

Savoy A, Patel H, Shahid U, Offner AD, Singh H, Giardina TD, Meyer AN. Electronic Co-design (ECO-design) Workshop for Increasing Clinician Participation in the Design of Health Services Interventions: Participatory Design Approach. JMIR Hum Fact. 2022;9(3):e37313.

Tumusiime P, Karamagi H, Titi-Ofei R, Amri M, Seydi AB, Kipruto H, Droti B, Zombre S, Yoti Z, Zawaira F, Cabore J. Building health system resilience in the context of primary health care revitalization for attainment of UHC: proceedings from the Fifth Health Sector Directors’ Policy and Planning Meeting for the WHO African Region. BMC Proc. 2020;14:1–8 (BioMed Central).

Atoofi MK, Rezaei N, Kompani F, Shirzad F, Sh D. Requirements of mental health services during the COVID-19 outbreak: a systematic review. Iran J Psychiatry Clin Psychol. 2020;26(3):264–79.

Mosadeghrad AM, Taherkhani T, Shojaei S, Jafari M, Mohammadi S, Emamzadeh A, Akhavan S. Strengthening primary health care system resilience in COVID-19 pandemic: a scoping review. sjsph 2022;20(1):13-24.

Fotokian Z, Mohammadkhah F. Primary health care as a strategy to fight COVID-19 pandemic: letter to the editor. J Isfahan Med School. 2021;39(630):470–4. https://doi.org/10.22122/jims.v39i630.14016 .

Li D, Howe AC, Astier-Peña MP. Primary health care response in the management of pandemics: Learnings from the COVID-19 pandemic. Atención Primaria. 2021;1(53):102226.

Chua AQ, Tan MMJ, Verma M, Han EKL, Hsu LY, Cook AR, et al. BMJ Global Health. 2020;5(9):e003317.

Eisele M, Pohontsch NJ, Scherer M. Strategies in primary care to face the SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19 pandemic: an online survey. Front Med. 2021;2(8):613537.

Lamberti-Castronuovo A, Valente M, Barone-Adesi F, Hubloue I, Ragazzoni L. Primary health care disaster preparedness: a review of the literature and the proposal of a new framework. Int J Dis Risk Reduct. 2022;2:103278.

Piché-Renaud PP, Ji C, Farrar DS, Friedman JN, Science M, Kitai I, Burey S, Feldman M, Morris SK. Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the provision of routine childhood immunizations in Ontario Canada. Vaccine. 2021;39(31):4373–82.

Saxenian H, Alkenbrack S, Freitas Attaran M, Barcarolo J, Brenzel L, Brooks A, Ekeman E, Griffiths UK, Rozario S, Vande Maele N, Ranson MK. Sustainable financing for Immunization Agenda 2030. Vaccine. 2024;42 Suppl 1:S73-S81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2022.11.037 .

Saso A, Skirrow H, Kampmann B. Impact of COVID-19 on immunization services for maternal and infant vaccines: results of a survey conducted by imprint—the immunising pregnant women and infants network. Vaccines. 2020;8(3):556.

Sagan A, Thomas S, McKee M, Karanikolos M, Azzopardi-Muscat N, de la Mata I, Figueras J, World Health Organization. COVID-19 and health systems resilience: lessons going forwards. Eurohealth. 2020;26(2):20–4.

Celuppi IC, Meirelles BH, Lanzoni GM, Geremia DS, Metelski FK. Management in the care of people with HIV in primary health care in times of the new coronavirus. Revista de Saúde Pública. 2022;1(56):13.

Denis JL, Potvin L, Rochon J, Fournier P, Gauvin L. On redesigning public health in Québec: lessons learned from the pandemic. Can J Public Health= Revue Canadienne de Sante Publique. 2020;111(6):912.

PubMed   Google Scholar  

Wilson G, Windner Z, Dowell A, Toop L, Savage R, Hudson B. Navigating the health system during COVID-19: primary care perspectives on delayed patient care. N Z Med J. 2021;134(1546):17–27 (PMID: 34855730).

Zhang N, Yang S, Jia P. Cultivating resilience during the COVID-19 pandemic: a socioecological perspective. Annu Rev Psychol. 2022;4(73):575–98. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-030221-031857 . (Epub 2021 Sep 27 PMID: 34579547).

Al Ghafri T, Al Ajmi F, Al Balushi L, Kurup PM, Al Ghamari A, Al Balushi Z, Al Fahdi F, Al Lawati H, Al Hashmi S, Al Manji A, Al Sharji A. Responses to the pandemic covid-19 in primary health care in oman: muscat experience. Oman Med J. 2021;36(1):e216.

Adler L, Vinker S, Heymann AD, Van Poel E, Willems S, Zacay G. The effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on primary care physicians in Israel, with comparison to an international cohort: a cross-sectional study. Israel J Health Policy Res. 2022;11(1):1.

Haldane V, Zhang Z, Abbas RF, Dodd W, Lau LL, Kidd MR, Rouleau K, Zou G, Chao Z, Upshur RE, Walley J. National primary care responses to COVID-19: a rapid review of the literature. BMJ Open. 2020;10(12):e041622.

Hussein ES, Al-Shenqiti AM, Ramadan RM. Applications of medical digital technologies for noncommunicable diseases for follow-up during the COVID-19 pandemic. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022;19(19):12682.

Desborough J, Dykgraaf SH, Phillips C, Wright M, Maddox R, Davis S, Kidd M. Lessons for the global primary care response to COVID-19: a rapid review of evidence from past epidemics. Fam Pract. 2021;38(6):811–25.

Sandhu HS, Smith RW, Jarvis T, O’Neill M, Di Ruggiero E, Schwartz R, Rosella LC, Allin S, Pinto AD. Early impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on public health systems and practice in 3 Canadian provinces from the perspective of public health leaders: a qualitative study. J Public Health Manag Pract. 2022;28(6):702–11.

Farsalinos K, Poulas K, Kouretas D, Vantarakis A, Leotsinidis M, Kouvelas D, Docea AO, Kostoff R, Gerotziafas, Antoniou MN, Polosa R. Improved strategies to counter the COVID-19 pandemic: Lockdowns vs. primary and community healthcare. Toxicol Rep. 2021;8:1–9.

Article   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Fitzpatrick K, Sehgal A, Montesanti S, Pianarosa E, Barnabe C, Heyd A, Kleissen T, Crowshoe L. Examining the role of Indigenous primary healthcare across the globe in supporting populations during public health crises. Global Public Health. 2022;24:1–29.

Liaw ST, Kuziemsky C, Schreiber R, Jonnagaddala J, Liyanage H, Chittalia A, Bahniwal R, He JW, Ryan BL, Lizotte DJ, Kueper JK. Primary care informatics response to Covid-19 pandemic: adaptation, progress, and lessons from four countries with high ICT development. Yearbook Med Inform. 2021;30(01):044–55.

Djalante R, Shaw R, DeWit A. Progress in disaster. Science. 2020;6:100080.

Fatima R, Akhtar N, Yaqoob A, Harries AD, Khan MS. Building better tuberculosis control systems in a post-COVID world: learning from Pakistan during the COVID-19 pandemic. Int J Infect Dis. 2021;1(113):S88-90.

Shin WY, Kim C, Lee SY, Lee W, Kim JH. Role of primary care and challenges for public–private cooperation during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic: An expert Delphi study in South Korea. Yonsei Med J. 2021;62(7):660.

Thompson RN, et al. Key questions for modelling COVID-19exit strategies. Proc R Soc B. 2020;287:20201405. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2020.1405 .

Baral P. Health systems and services during COVID-19: lessons and evidence from previous crises: a rapid scoping review to inform the United Nations research roadmap for the COVID-19 recovery. Int J Health Serv. 2021;51(4):474–93.

Daou M, Helou S, El Helou J, El Hachem C, El Helou E. Ensuring care continuity in extreme crises: A participatory action research approach. InMEDINFO 2021: One World, One Health–Global Partnership for Digital Innovation 2022 (pp. 937-941). IOS Press.

Besigye IK, Namatovu J, Mulowooza M. Coronavirus disease-2019 epidemic response in Uganda: the need to strengthen and engage primary healthcare. Afr J Prim Health Care Fam Med. 2020;12(1):1–3.

Silva MJ, Santos P. The impact of health literacy on knowledge and attitudes towards preventive strategies against COVID-19: a cross-sectional study. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021;18(10):5421. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18105421 . (PMID:34069438;PMCID:PMC8159089).

Sultana A, Bhattacharya S, Hossain MM. COVID-19 and primary care: a critical need for strengthening emergency preparedness across health systems. J Fam Med Primary Care. 2021;10(1):584–5.

Xu RH, Shi LS, Xia Y, Wang D. Associations among eHealth literacy, social support, individual resilience, and emotional status in primary care providers during the outbreak of the SARS-CoV-2 Delta variant. Digit Health. 2022;25(8):20552076221089788. https://doi.org/10.1177/20552076221089789 . (PMID:35355807;PMCID:PMC8958311).

Bajgain BB, Jackson J, Aghajafari F, Bolo C, Santana MJ. Immigrant Healthcare Experiences and Impacts During COVID-19: A Cross-Sectional Study in Alberta Canada. J Patient Exp. 2022;9:23743735221112708.

Kim AY, Choi WS. Considerations on the implementation of the telemedicine system encountered with stakeholders’ resistance in COVID-19 pandemic. Telemed e-Health. 2021;27(5):475–80.

Tayade MC. Strategies to tackle by primary care physicians to mental health issues in India in COVId-19 pandemic. J Fam Med Prim Care. 2020;9(11):5814–5.

Thomas C. Resilient health and care: Learning the lessons of Covid-19 in the English NHS, IPPR. 2020.  http://www.ippr.org/research/publications/resilient-health-and-care .

Saab MM, O’Driscoll M, FitzGerald S, Sahm LJ, Leahy-Warren P, Noonan B, Kilty C, Lyons N, Burns HE, Kennedy U, Lyng Á. Primary healthcare professionals’ perspectives on patient help-seeking for lung cancer warning signs and symptoms: a qualitative study. BMC Prim Care. 2022;23(1):1–5.

Ma L, Han X, Ma Y, Yang Y, Xu Y, Liu D, Yang W, Feng L. Decreased influenza vaccination coverage among Chinese healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic. Infect Dis Pov. 2022;11(05):63–73.

Ismail SA, Lam ST, Bell S, Fouad FM, Blanchet K, Borghi J. Strengthening vaccination delivery system resilience in the context of protracted humanitarian crisis: a realist-informed systematic review. BMC Health Serv Res. 2022;22(1):1–21.

Litke N, Weis A, Koetsenruijter J, Fehrer V, Koeppen M, Kuemmel S, Szecsenyi J, Wensing M. Building resilience in German primary care practices: a qualitative study. BMC Prim Care. 2022;23(1):1–4.

Den Broeder L, South J, Rothoff A, Bagnall AM, Azarhoosh F, Van Der Linden G, Bharadwa M, Wagemakers A. Community engagement in deprived neighbourhoods during the COVID-19 crisis: perspectives for more resilient and healthier communities. Health promotion international. 2022;37(2):daab098.

Sundararaman T, Muraleedharan VR, Ranjan A. Pandemic resilience and health systems preparedness: lessons from COVID-19 for the twenty-first century. J Soc Econ Dev. 2021;23(Suppl 2):1–11. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40847-020-00133-x . (Epub ahead of print. PMID: 34720480; PMCID: PMC7786882).

Ferreira NN, Garibaldi PM, Moraes GR, Moura JC, Klein TM, Machado LE, Scofoni LF, Haddad SK, Calado RT, Covas DT, Fonseca BA. The impact of an enhanced health surveillance system for COVID-19 management in Serrana, Brazil. Public Health Pract. 2022;1(4):100301.

Harzheim E, Martins C, Wollmann L, Pedebos LA, Faller LD, Marques MD, Minei TS, Cunha CR, Telles LF, Moura LJ, Leal MH. Federal actions to support and strengthen local efforts to combat COVID-19: Primary Health Care (PHC) in the driver’s seat. Ciência Saúde Coletiva. 2020;5(25):2493–7.

Smaggus A, Long J, Ellis LA, Clay-Williams R, Braithwaite J. Government actions and their relation to resilience in healthcare during the COVID-19 pandemic in New South Wales, Australia and Ontario, Canada. Int J Health Policy Manag. 2022;11(9):1682–94. https://doi.org/10.34172/ijhpm.2021.67 .

Tselebis A, Pachi A. Primary mental health care in a New Era. Healthcare (Basel). 2022;10(10):2025. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare10102025 . (PMID:36292472;PMCID:PMC9601948).

Rieckert A, Schuit E, Bleijenberg N, Ten Cate D, de Lange W, de Man-van Ginkel JM, Mathijssen E, Smit LC, Stalpers D, Schoonhoven L, Veldhuizen JD, Trappenburg JC. How can we build and maintain the resilience of our health care professionals during COVID-19? Recommendations based on a scoping review. BMJ Open. 2021;11(1):e043718. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-043718 .

Basu P, Alhomoud S, Taghavi K, Carvalho AL, Lucas E, Baussano I. Cancer screening in the coronavirus pandemic era: adjusting to a new situation. JCO Global Oncol. 2021;7(1):416–24.

Rieckert A, Schuit E, Bleijenberg N, et al. How can we build and maintain the resilience of our health care professionals during COVID-19? Recommendations based on a scoping review. BMJ Open. 2021;11:e043718. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-043718 .

Shaikh BT. Strengthening health system building blocks: configuring post-COVID-19 scenario in Pakistan. Prim Health Care Res Dev. 2021;22:e9 Cambridge University Press.

Franzosa E, Gorbenko K, Brody AA, Leff B, Ritchie CS, Kinosian B, Ornstein KA, Federman AD. “At home, with care”: lessons from New York City home-based primary care practices managing COVID-19. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2021;69(2):300–6.

Adhikari B, Mishra SR, Schwarz R. Transforming Nepal’s primary health care delivery system in global health era: addressing historical and current implementation challenges. Global Health. 2022;18(1):1–2.

Mas Bermejo P, Sánchez Valdés L, Somarriba López L, Valdivia Onega NC, Vidal Ledo MJ, Alfonso Sánchez I, et al. Equity and the Cuban National Health System's response to COVID-19. Rev Panam Salud Publica. 2021;45:e80. https://doi.org/10.26633/RPSP.2021.80 .

Gong F, Hu G, Lin H, Sun X, Wang W. Integrated Healthcare Systems Response Strategies Based on the Luohu Model During the COVID-19 Epidemic in Shenzhen, China. Int J Integr Care. 2021;21(1):1. https://doi.org/10.5334/ijic.5628 .

Gomez T, Anaya YB, Shih KJ, Tarn DM. A qualitative study of primary care physicians’ experiences with telemedicine during COVID-19. J Am Board Fam Med. 2021;34(Supplement):S61-70.

Teng K, Russo F, Kanuch S, Caron A. Virtual Care Adoption-Challenges and Opportunities From the Lens of Academic Primary Care Practitioners. J Public Health Manag Pract. 2022;28(6):599–602. https://doi.org/10.1097/PHH.0000000000001548 . (Epub 2022 Aug 27. PMID: 36037465; PMCID: PMC9555588).

Anaya YB, Mota AB, Hernandez GD, Osorio A, Hayes-Bautista DE. Post-pandemic telehealth policy for primary care: an equity perspective. J Am Board Fam Med. 2022;35(3):588–92.

Florea M, Lazea C, Gaga R, Sur G, Lotrean L, Puia A, Stanescu AM, Lupsor-Platon M, Florea H, Sur ML. Lights and shadows of the perception of the use of telemedicine by Romanian family doctors during the COVID-19 pandemic. Int J Gen Med. 2021;14:1575.

Selick A, Durbin J, Hamdani Y, Rayner J, Lunsky Y. Accessibility of Virtual Primary Care for Adults With Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Qualitative Study. JMIR Form Res 2022;6(8):e38916. https://formative.jmir.org/2022/8/e38916 . https://doi.org/10.2196/38916 .

Frost R, Nimmons D, Davies N. Using remote interventions in promoting the health of frail older persons following the COVID-19 lockdown: challenges and solutions. J Am Med Direct Assoc. 2020;21(7):992.

Suija K, Mard LA, Laidoja R, et al. Experiences and expectation with the use of health data: a qualitative interview study in primary care. BMC Prim Care. 2022;23:159. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12875-022-01764-1 .

Sullivan EE, McKinstry D, Adamson J, Hunt L, Phillips RS, Linzer M. Burnout Among Missouri Primary Care Clinicians in 2021: Roadmap for Recovery? Mo Med. 2022;119(4):397–400 (PMID: 36118800; PMCID: PMC9462904).

Tang C, Chen X, Guan C, Fang P. Attitudes and Response Capacities for Public Health Emergencies of Healthcare Workers in Primary Healthcare Institutions: A Cross-Sectional Investigation Conducted in Wuhan, China, in 2020. Int Environ Res Public Health. 2022;19(19):12204. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph191912204 .

Haldane V, De Foo C, Abdalla SM, Jung AS, Tan M, Wu S, Chua A, Verma M, Shrestha P, Singh S, Perez T. Health systems resilience in managing the COVID-19 pandemic: lessons from 28 countries. Nat Med. 2021;27(6):964–80.

Haldane V, De Foo C, Abdalla SM, Jung AS, Tan M, Wu S, Chua A, Verma M, Shrestha P, Singh S, Perez T, Tan SM, Bartos M, Mabuchi S, Bonk M, McNab C, Werner GK, Panjabi R, Nordström A, Legido-Quigley H. Health systems resilience in managing the COVID-19 pandemic: lessons from 28 countries. Nat Med. 2021;27(6):964-80. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41591-021-01381-y .

Berger Z, De Jesus VA, Assoumou SA, Greenhalgh T. Long COVID and health inequities: the role of primary care. Milbank Q. 2021;99(2):519.

Haldane V, Dodd W, Kipp A, Ferrolino H, Wilson K, Servano D, Lau LL, Wei X. Extending health systems resilience into communities: a qualitative study with community-based actors providing health services during the COVID-19 pandemic in the Philippines. BMC Health Serv Res. 2022;22(1):1–2.

Haun JN, Cotner BA, Melillo C, Panaite V, Messina W, Patel-Teague S, Zilka B. Proactive integrated virtual healthcare resource use in primary care. BMC Health Serv Res. 2021;21(1):1–4.

Kelly F, Uys M, Bezuidenhout D, Mullane SL, Bristol C. Improving Healthcare Worker Resilience and Well-Being During COVID-19 Using a Self-Directed E-Learning Intervention. Front Psychol. 2021;12:748133. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.748133 .

Thekkur P, Fernando M, Nair D, Kumar AMV, Satyanarayana S, Chandraratne N, Chandrasiri A, Attygalle DE, Higashi H, Bandara J, Berger SD, Harries AD. Primary Health Care System Strengthening Project in Sri Lanka: Status and Challenges with Human Resources, Information Systems, Drugs and Laboratory Services. Healthcare. 2022;10(11):2251. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare10112251 .

Balogun M, Banke-Thomas A, Gwacham-Anisiobi U, Yesufu V, Ubani O, Afolabi BB. Actions and AdaptationsImplemented for Maternal, Newborn and Child Health Service Provision During the Early Phase of the COVID-19 Pandemic in Lagos, Nigeria: Qualitative Study of Health Facility Leaders. Ann Glob Health. 2022;88(1):13. https://doi.org/10.5334/aogh.3529 .

Llamas S, MP AP, Felipe P. Patient safety training and a safe teaching in primary care. Aten Primaria. 2021;53 Suppl 1(Suppl 1):102199.

Eze-Emiri C, Patrick F, Igwe E, Owhonda G. Retrospective study of COVID-19 outcomes among healthcare workers in Rivers State, Nigeria. BMJ Open. 2022;12(11):e061826.

Golechha M, Bohra T, Patel M, Khetrapal S. Healthcare worker resilience during the COVID-19 pandemic: a qualitative study of primary care providers in India. World Med Health Policy. 2022;14(1):6–18.

Gómez-Restrepo C, Cepeda M, Torrey WC, Suarez-Obando F, Uribe-Restrepo JM, Park S, Acosta MP, Camblor PM, Castro SM, Aguilera-Cruz J, González L. Perceived access to general and mental healthcare in primary care in Colombia during COVID-19: A cross-sectional study. Frontiers in Public Health. 2022;10:896318.

Nejat N, Borzabadi Farahani Z. COVID-19 pandemic: opportunities for continuing nursing professional development. J Med Educ Dev. 2022;14(44):1–2.

DeVoe JE, Cheng A, Krist A. JAMA Health Forum. 2020;1(4):e200423.

Hoeft TJ, Hessler D, Francis D, Gottlieb LM. Applying lessons from behavioral health integration to social care integration in primary care. Ann Fam Med. 2021;19(4):356–61.

Silsand L, Severinsen GH, Berntsen G. Preservation of Person-Centered care through videoconferencing for patient follow-up during the COVID-19 pandemic: case study of a multidisciplinary care team. JMIR Format Res. 2021;5(3):e25220.

Sullivan E, Phillips R.S. Sustaining primary care teams in the midst of a pandemic. Isr J Health Policy Res. 2020; 9. 77. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13584-020-00434-w .

Abd El Kader AI, Faramawy MA. COVID-19 anxiety and organizational commitment among front line nurses: Perceived role of nurse managers' caring behavior. Nurs Pract Today. 2022;9(1):X.

Croghan IT, Chesak SS, Adusumalli J, Fischer KM, Beck EW, Patel SR, Ghosh K, Schroeder DR, Bhagra A. Stress, resilience, and coping of healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic. J Prim Care Commun Health. 2021;12:21501327211008450.

Aragonès E, del Cura-González I, Hernández-Rivas L, Polentinos-Castro E, Fernández-San-Martín MI, López-Rodríguez JA, Molina-Aragonés JM, Amigo F, Alayo I, Mortier P, Ferrer M. Psychological impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on primary care workers: a cross-sectional study. Br J Gen Pract. 2022;72(720):e501-10.

Franck E, Goossens E, Haegdorens F, Geuens N, Portzky M, Tytens T, Dilles T, Beeckman K, Timmermans O, Slootmans S, Van Rompaey B. Role of resilience in healthcare workers’ distress and somatization during the COVID-19 pandemic: a cross-sectional study across Flanders Belgium. Nurs Open. 2022;9(2):1181–9.

DeTore NR, Sylvia L, Park ER, Burke A, Levison JH, Shannon A, et al. J Psychiatr Res. 2022;146:228–33.

Shi LS, Xu RH, Xia Y, Chen DX, Wang D. The impact of COVID-19-related work stress on the mental health of primary healthcare workers: the mediating effects of social support and resilience. Front Psychol. 2022;21(12):800183. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.800183 . (PMID:35126252;PMCID:PMC8814425).

Golden EA, Zweig M, Danieletto M, Landell K, Nadkarni G, Bottinger E, Katz L, Somarriba R, Sharma V, Katz CL, Marin DB. A resilience-building app to support the mental health of health care workers in the COVID-19 era: Design process, distribution, and evaluation. JMIR Format Res. 2021;5(5):e26590.

Chan AY, Ting C, Chan LG, Hildon ZJ. “The emotions were like a roller-coaster”: a qualitative analysis of e-diary data on healthcare worker resilience and adaptation during the COVID-19 outbreak in Singapore. Hum Resour Health. 2022;20(1):60.

Ashley C, James S, Williams A, Calma K, Mcinnes S, Mursa R, Stephen C, Halcomb E. The psychological well-being of primary healthcare nurses during COVID-19: a qualitative study. J Adv Nurs. 2021;77(9):3820–8.

Carmona LE, Nielfa MD, Alvarado AL. The Covid-19 pandemic seen from the frontline. Int Braz J Urol. 2020;27(46):181–94.

Delobelle PA, Abbas M, Datay I, De Sa A, Levitt N, Schouw D, Reid S. Non-communicable disease care and management in two sites of the Cape Town Metro during the first wave of COVID-19: A rapid appraisal. Afr J Prim Health Care Fam Med. 2022;14(1):e1-e7. https://doi.org/10.4102/phcfm.v14i1.3215 .

Luciani S, Agurto I, Caixeta R, Hennis A. Prioritizing noncommunicable diseases in the Americas region in the era of COVID-19. Rev Panam Salud Publica. 2022;46:e83. https://doi.org/10.26633/RPSP.2022.83 .

Cabral IE, Pestana-Santos M, Ciuffo LL, Nunes YDR, Lomba MLLF. Child health vulnerabilities during the COVID-19 pandemic in Brazil and Portugal. Rev Lat Am Enfermagem. 2021;29:e3422. https://doi.org/10.1590/1518-8345.4805.3422 . (Published 2021 Jul 2).

Ludin N, Holt-Quick C, Hopkins S, Stasiak K, Hetrick S, Warren J, Cargo T. A Chatbot to support young people during the COVID-19 Pandemic in New Zealand: evaluation of the real-world rollout of an open trial. J Med Internet Res. 2022;24(11):e38743.

Breton M, Deville-Stoetzel N, Gaboury I, Smithman MA, Kaczorowski J, Lussier MT, Haggerty J, Motulsky A, Nugus P, Layani G, Paré G. Telehealth in primary healthcare: a portrait of its rapid implementation during the COVID-19 pandemic. Healthcare Policy. 2021;17(1):73.

Knop M, Mueller M, Niehaves B. Investigating the use of telemedicine for digitally mediated delegation in team-based primary care: mixed methods study. J Med Internet Res. 2021;23(8):e28151.

Zamiela C, Hossain NUI, Jaradat R. Enablers of resilience in the healthcare supply chain: A case study of U.S healthcare industry during COVID-19 pandemic. Res Transport Econ. 2022;93:101174. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.retrec.2021.101174 . Epub 2021 Dec 24. PMCID: PMC9675944.

Lukong AM, Jafaru Y. Covid-19 pandemic challenges, coping strategies and resilience among healthcare workers: a multiple linear regression analysis. Afr J Health Nurs Midwifery. 2021;4:16–27.

Hearnshaw S, Serban S, Mohammed I, Zubair A, Jaswal D, Grant S. A local dental network approach to the COVID-19 pandemic: innovation through collaboration. Prim Dental J. 2021;10(1):33–9.

Haase CB, Bearman M, Brodersen J, Hoeyer K, Risor T. ‘You should see a doctor’, said the robot: Reflections on a digital diagnostic device in a pandemic age. Scand J Public Health. 2021;49(1):33–6.

Otu A, Okuzu O, Ebenso B, Effa E, Nihalani N, Olayinka A, Yaya S. Introduction of mobilehealth tools to support COVID-19 training and surveillance in Ogun State Nigeria. Frontiers in Sustainable Cities. 2021;3:638278:1-9.

Ibragimov K, Palma M, Keane G, Ousley J, Crowe M, Carreño C, Casas G, Mills C, Llosa A. Shifting to Tele-Mental Health in humanitarian and crisis settings: an evaluation of Médecins Sans Frontières experience during the COVID-19 pandemic. Conflict Health. 2022;16(1):1–5.

Wherton J, Greenhalgh T, Hughes G, Shaw SE. The role of information infrastructures in scaling up video consultations during COVID-19: mixed methods case study into opportunity, disruption, and exposure. J Med Internet Res. 2022;24(11):e42431. https://doi.org/10.2196/42431 . (PMID:36282978;PMCID:PMC9651004).

Jonnagaddala J, Godinho MA, Liaw ST. From telehealth to virtual primary care in Australia? a rapid scoping review. Int J Med Inform. 2021;1(151):104470.

Tanemura N, Chiba T. The usefulness of a checklist approach-based confirmation scheme in identifying unreliable COVID-19-related health information: a case study in Japan. Humanit Soc Sci Commun. 2022;9(1):270. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-022-01293-3 . (Epub 2022 Aug 15. PMID: 35990766; PMCID: PMC9376898).

Zaroushani V. Occupational safety and health and response to COVID-19 using the fourth industrial revolution technologies. J Health Saf Work. 2020;10(4):329–48.

Binagwaho A, Hirwe D, Mathewos K. Health System Resilience: Withstanding Shocks and Maintaining Progress. Glob Health Sci Pract. 2022;10(Suppl 1):e2200076. https://doi.org/10.9745/GHSP-D-22-00076 .

Freed SL, Thiele D, Gardner M, Myers E. COVID-19 evaluation and testing strategies in a federally qualified health center. Am J Public Health. 2022;112(S3):S284-7.

Levy P, McGlynn E, Hill AB, Zhang L, Korzeniewski SJ, Foster B, Criswell J, O’Brien C, Dawood K, Baird L, Shanley CJ. From pandemic response to portable population health: a formative evaluation of the Detroit mobile health unit program. Plos One. 2021;16(11):e0256908.

Corwin C, Sinnwell E, Culp K. A mobile primary care clinic mitigates an early COVID-19 outbreak among migrant farmworkers in Iowa. J Agromed. 2021;26(3):346–51.

Mills WR, Buccola JM, Sender S, Lichtefeld J, Romano N, Reynolds K, Price M, Phipps J, White L, Howard S. Home-based primary care led-outbreak mitigation in assisted living facilities in the first 100 days of coronavirus disease 2019. J Am Med Direct Assoc. 2020;21(7):951–3.

Sigurdsson EL, Blondal AB, Jonsson JS, Tomasdottir MO, Hrafnkelsson H, Linnet K, Sigurdsson JA. How primary healthcare in Iceland swiftly changed its strategy in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. BMJ Open. 2020;10(12):e043151. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-043151 . (PMID:33293329;PMCID:PMC7722808).

Mirsky JB, Thorndike AN. Virtual group visits: hope for improving chronic disease management in primary care during and after the COVID-19 pandemic. Am J Health Promot. 2021;35(7):904–7.

Lauriola P, Martín-Olmedo P, Leonardi GS, Bouland C, Verheij R, Dückers ML, Van Tongeren M, Laghi F, Van Den Hazel P, Gokdemir O, Segredo E. On the importance of primary and community healthcare in relation to global health and environmental threats: lessons from the COVID-19 crisis. BMJ Global Health. 2021;6(3):e004111.

Stengel S, Roth C, Breckner A, et al. Resilience of the primary health care system – German primary care practitioners’ perspectives during the early COVID-19 pandemic. BMC Prim Care. 2022;23:203. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12875-022-01786-9 .

Adu PA, Stallwood L, Adebola SO, Abah T, Okpani AI. The direct and indirect impact of COVID-19 pandemic on maternal and child health services in Africa: a scoping review. Global Health Res Policy. 2022;7(1):1–4.

Segal M, Giuffrida P, Possanza L, Bucciferro D. The critical role of health information technology in the safe integration of behavioral health and primary care to improve patient care. J Behav Health Serv Res. 2022;49(2):221–30. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11414-021-09774-0 . (Epub 2021 Oct 19. PMID: 34668115; PMCID: PMC8525847).

Gallardo-Rincón H, Gascon JL, Martínez-Juárez LA, Montoya A, Saucedo-Martínez R, Rosales RM, Tapia-Conyer R. MIDO COVID: A digital public health strategy designed to tackle chronic disease and the COVID-19 pandemic in Mexico. Plos One. 2022;17(11):e0277014.

Shah SS, Safa A, Johal K, et al. A prospective observational real world feasibility study assessing the role of app-based remote patient monitoring in reducing primary care clinician workload during the COVID pandemic. BMC Fam Pract. 2021;22:248. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12875-021-01594-7 .

Lu M, Liao X. Access to care through telehealth among US Medicare beneficiaries in the wake of the COVID-pandemic. Front Public Health. 2022;10:946944.

Reges O, Feldhamer I, Wolff Sagy Y, Lavie G. Factors associated with using telemedicine in the primary care clinics during the COVID-19 pandemic in Israel. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022;19(20):13207.

Neves AL, Li E, Gupta PP, Fontana G, Darzi A. Virtual primary care in high-income countries during the COVID-19 pandemic: Policy responses and lessons for the future. Eur J Gen Pract. 2021;27(1):241–7.

Fadul N, Regan N, Kaddoura L, Swindells S. A midwestern academic HIV clinic operation during the COVID-19 pandemic: implementation strategy and preliminary outcomes. J International Assoc Provid AIDS Care (JIAPAC). 2021;2(20):23259582211041424.

Gray C, Ambady L, Chao S PharmD, Smith W MPH, Yoon J. Virtual Management of Chronic Conditions During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Insights From Primary Care Providers and Clinical Pharmacists. Mil Med. 2023;188(7-8):e2615-e2620. https://doi.org/10.1093/milmed/usac277 .

Hincapié MA, Gallego JC, Gempeler A, Piñeros JA, Nasner D, Escobar MF. Implementation and usefulness of telemedicine during the COVID-19 pandemic: a scoping review. J Prim Care Commun Health. 2020;11:2150132720980612.

Calvo-Paniagua J, Díaz-Arribas MJ, Valera-Calero JA, et al. A tele-health primary care rehabilitation program improves self-perceived exertion in COVID-19 survivors experiencing Post-COVID fatigue and dyspnea: A quasi-experimental study. PLoS One. 2022;17(8):e0271802. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0271802 . (Published 2022 Aug 4).

Chen K, Davoodi NM, Strauss DH, Li M, Jiménez FN, Guthrie KM, et al. J Appl Gerontol. 2022;41(11):2282–95.

Murphy M, Scott LJ, Salisbury C, Turner A, Scott A, Denholm R, Lewis R, Iyer G, Macleod J, Horwood J. Implementation of remote consulting in UK primary care following the COVID-19 pandemic: a mixed-methods longitudinal study. Br J Gen Pract. 2021;71(704):e166-77.

Maria AR, Serra H, Heleno B. Teleconsultations and their implications for health care: a qualitative study on patients’ and physicians’ perceptions. Int J Med Inform. 2022;1(162):104751.

Liddy C, Singh J, Mitchell R, Guglani S, Keely E. How one eConsult service is addressing emerging COVID-19 questions. J Am Board Fam Med. 2022;35(3):601–4.

Schow DC, Thomson A, Trusty WT, Buchi-Fotre L. Use of a research as intervention approach to explore telebehavioral health services during the COVID-19 pandemic in Southeastern Idaho. J Prim Care Commun Health. 2022;13:21501319211073000.

Bruns BE, Lorenzo-Castro SA, Hale GM. Controlling blood pressure during a pandemic: The impact of telepharmacy for primary care patients. J Pharm Pract. 2022;27:08971900221136629.

Pradhan NA, Samnani AA, Abbas K, Rizvi N. Resilience of primary healthcare system across low-and middle-income countries during COVID-19 pandemic: a scoping review. Health Res Policy Syst. 2023;21(1):98.

Esfahani P, Mosadeghrad AM, Akbarisari A. The success of strategic planning in health care organizations of Iran. Int J Health Care Qual Assur. 2018;31(6):563–74.

Otu A, Okuzu O, Ebenso B, Effa E, Nihalani N, Olayinka A, Yaya S. Introduction of mobile health tools to support COVID-19 training and surveillance in Ogun State Nigeria. Front Sustain Cities. 2021;5(3):638278.

Ndayishimiye C, Lopes H, Middleton J. A systematic scoping review of digital health technologies during COVID-19: a new normal in primary health care delivery. Health Technol. 2023;13(2):273–84.

Ghiasipour M, Mosadeghrad AM, Arab M, Jaafaripooyan E. Leadership challenges in health care organizations: The case of Iranian hospitals. Med J Islam Repub Iran. 2017;31(1):560–7.

Download references

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank Dr. Arshad Altaf for his invaluable comments on the earlier drafts of this work.

Funding for this project was provided by the World Health Organization Eastern Mediterranean Region.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Health policy and management, Health Economics and Management Department, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

Ali Mohammad Mosadeghrad

Health policy, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Saveh University of Medical Sciences, Saveh, Iran

Mahnaz Afshari

Health management, School of Public Health, Zabol University of Medical Sciences, Zabol, Iran

Parvaneh Isfahani

Health services management, Health Economics and Management Department, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

Farahnaz Ezzati, Mahdi Abbasi, Shahrzad Akhavan Farahani & Leila Eslambolchi

Health Management, School of Business and Management, Royal Holloway University of London, London, UK

Maryam Zahmatkesh

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

LE, MA, MZ and AMM participated in the design of the study. LE, AMM, MA, MZ, PI, FE, MA and SHA undertook the literature review process. All authors drafted the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Leila Eslambolchi .

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate.

Ethical approval was obtained from the Tehran University of Medical Science (Approval ID: IR.TUMS.SPH.REC.1401.0979).

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

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

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Mosadeghrad, A.M., Afshari, M., Isfahani, P. et al. Strategies to strengthen the resilience of primary health care in the COVID-19 pandemic: a scoping review. BMC Health Serv Res 24 , 841 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-024-11278-4

Download citation

Received : 14 January 2024

Accepted : 03 July 2024

Published : 25 July 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-024-11278-4

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

• Primary health care system
• Strengthening strategies

BMC Health Services Research

ISSN: 1472-6963

• General enquiries: [email protected]

An official website of the United States government

Here’s how you know

Official websites use .gov A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS A lock ( Lock A locked padlock ) or https:// means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

'Twisters' movie: NOAA tornado science and staff behind the scenes

Universal Studios, with permission.

• NOAA Photo Library

More tornado news, stories and resources

Heading to the theater to see the new "Twisters" movie? Keep an eye out for NOAA! You'll see NOAA logos, props and people (as unpaid extras) throughout. Our scientists worked hard behind the scenes with the producers to make the science as accurate and realistic (in some parts!) as possible. 

The "Twisters" plot follows competing storm chasing teams as they come together to try to predict, and possibly tame, the immense power of tornadoes. (Did you know that the main female character of the "Twisters" movie is a fictional NOAA meteorologist?)

And remember: While it's exciting to think of chasing tornadoes, please don't attempt it yourself. Whether you call them twisters or tornadoes, these storms in real life are far from entertainment: They are deadly forces of nature.

Every year, 2024 included, tornadoes carve paths of immense destruction in just minutes , causing tragic loss of life and property. Just like the characters in the movie, real NOAA scientists are focused on saving lives in the face of these potentially lethal storms. From accurate forecasts and timely warnings from NOAA's National Weather Service, to researchers working on the cutting edge to increase knowledge and create better tools for monitoring storms, we're working every day to keep people safe  — and communities intact. (Know these  essential tornado survival tips .)

Join us back here this summer for feature content , including: More videos of real-life tornado science versus what you see in "Twisters;" an inside look at the latest NOAA tornado science; a virtual backstage tour of NOAA's role as consultants to the movie's producers; and more. Now, on with the show...

NOAA science with a twist

Explore six decades of NSSL braving the elements to research tornadoes and severe weather.

A note of caution:  Severe weather spotters are not trained storm chasers. NOAA strongly discourages chasing tornadoes, or any other kind of severe weather.

ON SOCIAL: Follow @NOAANSSL, @NOAAResearch and @NOAA using the hashtags #TwistersNOAA and #TwistersMovie. Plus:  Stay connected by joining our many social media communities .

Property	Value
Status
Version
Ad File
Disable Ads Flag
Environment
Moat Init
Moat Ready
Contextual Ready
Contextual URL
Contextual Initial Segments
Contextual Used Segments
AdUnit
SubAdUnit
Custom Targeting
Ad Events
Invalid Ad Sizes

• Submit       Member Login

Access provided by

Login to your account

If you don't remember your password, you can reset it by entering your email address and clicking the Reset Password button. You will then receive an email that contains a secure link for resetting your password

If the address matches a valid account an email will be sent to __email__ with instructions for resetting your password

• Academic & Personal: 24 hour online access
• Corporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
• Add To Online Library Powered By Mendeley
• Add To My Reading List
• Export Citation
• Create Citation Alert

Fa'a Samoa Recruitment for a Study on Caregiver Perceptions of Child Diet Quality in American Samoa

• Pauline McFall, MPH Pauline McFall Contact Affiliations University of Hawaii at Manoa Search for articles by this author
• Eirenei Tesimale, AS Eirenei Tesimale Affiliations American Samoa Community College Search for articles by this author
• Jean Butel, PhD Jean Butel Affiliations University of Hawaii at Manoa Search for articles by this author
• Rachel Novotny, PhD Rachel Novotny Affiliations University of Hawaii at Manoa Search for articles by this author

Study Design, Settings, Participants

Measurable outcome/analysis, conclusions, purchase one-time access:, sneb member login, article info, identification.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jneb.2024.05.187

ScienceDirect

Related articles.

• Download Hi-res image
• Download .PPT
• Access for Developing Countries
• Articles & Issues
• Articles In Press
• Current Issue
• List of Issues
• Supplements
• For Authors
• Author Guidelines
• Submit Your Manuscript
• Statistical Methods
• Guidelines for Authors of Educational Material Reviews
• Permission to Reuse
• About Open Access
• Researcher Academy
• For Reviewers
• General Guidelines
• Methods Paper Guidelines
• Qualitative Guidelines
• Quantitative Guidelines
• Questionnaire Methods Guidelines
• Statistical Methods Guidelines
• Systematic Review Guidelines
• Perspective Guidelines
• GEM Reviewing Guidelines
• Journal Info
• About the Journal
• Disclosures
• Abstracting/Indexing
• Impact/Metrics
• Contact Information
• Editorial Staff and Board
• Info for Advertisers
• Member Access Instructions
• New Content Alerts
• Sponsored Supplements
• Statistical Reviewers
• Reviewer Appreciation
• New Resources
• New Resources for Nutrition Educators
• Submit New Resources for Review
• Guidelines for Writing Reviews of New Resources for Nutrition Educators
• Podcast/Webinars
• New Resources Podcasts
• Press Release & Other Podcasts
• Collections
• Society News

The content on this site is intended for healthcare professionals.

• Privacy Policy   
• Terms and Conditions   
• Accessibility   
• Help & Contact

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• Brief Communication
• Open access
• Published: 22 July 2024

Evidence of dark oxygen production at the abyssal seafloor

• Andrew K. Sweetman   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-9547-9493 1 ,
• Alycia J. Smith 2 ,
• Danielle S. W. de Jonge   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-4093-2721 1 ,
• Tobias Hahn   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-9001-5753 3 ,
• Peter Schroedl   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-9874-3800 4 ,
• Michael Silverstein   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-2205-3624 5 ,
• Claire Andrade 4 ,
• R. Lawrence Edwards 6 ,
• Alastair J. M. Lough   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-8095-9064 7 ,
• Clare Woulds 7 ,
• William B. Homoky   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-9562-8591 7 ,
• Andrea Koschinsky   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-9224-0663 8 ,
• Sebastian Fuchs 9 ,
• Thomas Kuhn 9 ,
• Franz Geiger 10 &
• Jeffrey J. Marlow   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-2858-8806 4  

Nature Geoscience ( 2024 ) Cite this article

53k Accesses

1 Citations

3794 Altmetric

Metrics details

• Element cycles
• Environmental chemistry
• Environmental impact
• Marine biology
• Marine chemistry

Deep-seafloor organisms consume oxygen, which can be measured by in situ benthic chamber experiments. Here we report such experiments at the polymetallic nodule-covered abyssal seafloor in the Pacific Ocean in which oxygen increased over two days to more than three times the background concentration, which from ex situ incubations we attribute to the polymetallic nodules. Given high voltage potentials (up to 0.95 V) on nodule surfaces, we hypothesize that seawater electrolysis may contribute to this dark oxygen production.

Similar content being viewed by others

Substantial oxygen consumption by aerobic nitrite oxidation in oceanic oxygen minimum zones

Biological nitrous oxide consumption in oxygenated waters of the high latitude Atlantic Ocean

Microbial N2O consumption in and above marine N2O production hotspots

Oxygen (O 2 ) is prevalent in deep-sea surface sediments where its rate of consumption reflects the sum of aerobic respiration and oxidation of reduced inorganic compounds produced by anaerobic decay. These processes define sediment community O 2 consumption (SCOC), and quantifying SCOC is needed to estimate fluxes of major elemental cycles through marine systems 1 , 2 , 3 . We undertook multiple in situ benthic chamber lander experiments to measure abyssal SCOC in the Nauru Ocean Resources Inc. (NORI)-D licence area of the Clarion–Clipperton Zone (CCZ; Extended Data Fig. 1 and Extended Data Table 1 ) where polymetallic nodules cover extensive areas of seafloor. Sediments and nodules were exposed to different experimental treatments, which included the addition of dead-algal biomass, dissolved inorganic carbon and ammonium (NH 4 + ) or cold filtered surface seawater. No-injection controls were also performed. In contrast to previous deep-sea O 2 flux studies that only showed SCOC, we consistently found that more O 2 was accumulating in the chambers than was being consumed, resulting in net O 2 production.

Constant linear decreases in O 2 optode readings were observed in two experiments (Fig. 1 ), and SCOC determined by in situ O 2 microprofiling was 0.7 mmol O 2  m −2  d −1 indicating that SCOC occurs in NORI-D as in many abyssal habitats 2 , 3 , 4 . However, O 2 concentrations in 25 benthic chamber incubations started at 185.2 ± 2.9 µmol l −1 (1 standard error (SE)) and reached O 2 maxima between 201 and 819 µmol l −1 over 47 h (Fig. 1 ), indicating net dark O 2 production (DOP) corresponding to rates of 1.7–18 mmol O 2  m −2  d −1 . Independent measurements of O 2 concentration using the Winkler method also showed DOP (Extended Data Fig. 2 ), providing evidence that the optodes were not malfunctioning. No statistically significant difference in the total net O 2 produced (maximum [O 2 ] – initial [O 2 ]; Extended Data Table 2 ) was found between chambers (ANOVA, F 2,9  = 0.107, p  = 0.900) or experimental treatments (ANOVA, F 3,9  = 0.876, p  = 0.489), ruling out any experimental bias. We found no difference in the total net O 2 produced between cruises (ANOVA, F 2,12  = 0.391, p  = 0.684), though DOP was correlated to the average surface area of the nodules (Spearman’s correlation, ⍴  = 0.664, p  = 0.031). A re-evaluation of in situ O 2 optode data collected from 36-h benthic chamber experiments in the abyssal eastern and western CCZ (Extended Data Figs. 1 and 3 ) also showed DOP, indicating its occurrence in multiple locations across the CCZ. Our findings contrast with all published deep-sea benthic O 2 flux studies and suggest that DOP may provide O 2 for benthic respiration. Whereas the DOP measured was greater than SCOC, we would urge caution when temporally upscaling our results, as the nonlinear production of O 2 suggests that DOP may not be continuous in nature. Moreover, the variance in DOP activity seen between experiments and its relationship to nodule surface area suggests DOP activity may change with nodule spatial density and type (for example, diagenetic versus hydrogenetic), so upscaling our results by area is also imprudent without additional studies.

a – c , The in situ benthic chamber lander deployments were made during the 5D ( a ), 5E ( b ) and 7A ( c ) cruises to the NORI-D license area (Extended Data Fig. 1 ). Nodules were present in all incubation experiments. The green hue, blue hue and red lines in the 5D figure ( a ) denote dead-algal biomass, dissolved inorganic carbon + NH 4 + and filtered seawater treatments, respectively. The gap in the optode data in AKS279-Ch.3 was caused by the optode periodically not logging data. The black line indicates ambient O 2 concentration measured on the outside of the benthic chambers during AKS273 on the 5D cruise. The green and yellow hue lines in the 5E ( b ) and 7A ( c ) figures denote the dead-algal biomass and control (no injection) treatments, respectively. The minor drops seen in some of the O 2 concentration profiles at 28, 38 and 47 h are caused by the dilution of the chamber water with 50 ml of seawater that was entrained from the outside into the chamber through a 1.5 m (0.25 cm diameter) open tube when the syringe sampler collected seawater samples from within the chamber. The constant O 2 concentration measured during the first 2 h of the 5D and 7A experiments was due to the stirrers being turned off for 1 h to allow the substrates (for example, dead-algal biomass) to sink to the sediment surface. Stirrers were turned on during the 5E expedition from the moment the lander was deployed until the lander returned and power to the stirrers was disconnected.

Source data

Several lines of evidence indicate that the DOP was not caused by experimental artefacts. First, the total O 2 change between the experimental and control (non-injection) treatments was statistically indistinguishable, and a steady increase in O 2 concentration was recorded over many hours in multiple experiments; these observations demonstrate that DOP was not attributable to the injection of exogenous fluids. Second, diffusion of O 2 from trapped air bubbles within the chamber was unlikely because each chamber uses two one-way valves in the lid to purge air from the chambers as the lander sinks. Even if an air bubble could be trapped long enough to reach the seafloor, gaseous diffusion of O 2 into the water phase would take < 1 s at 4,000 m depth (Extended Data Table 3 ), which is inconsistent with the steady increase in O 2 over many hours seen in multiple experiments (Fig. 1 ). Third, intrusion of O 2 from the plastic chambers into the water phase is unlikely ( Methods ) as they are built from polyoxymethylene, which is both highly inert and chemically stable in well-oxygenated settings and would not explain the variation in DOP because all experiments used identical materials. Last, DOP was also observed during 48-h ex situ sediment incubations (Extended Data Fig. 4 ).

Several lines of enquiry were pursued to explain the DOP. Subsurface advection of oxic bottom water from seamount flanks into seafloor sediments 5 , 6 and then into the chambers was discounted based on in situ O 2 microprofiling that showed pore water was a net sink for O 2 and undersaturated compared with the O 2 seen in the chambers. Furthermore, DOP was measured in sealed ex situ experiments (Extended Data Fig. 4 ) that prevented O 2 intrusion from below. It is unlikely that biological mechanisms were responsible for the bulk of the DOP as ex situ core incubations revealed DOP in the presence of poison (HgCl 2 ; Extended Data Fig. 4 ). Whereas many microbes in the CCZ are able to detoxify Hg (II) to Hg (0) 7 , and some microhabitat pore spaces in the core may have remained HgCl 2 free, the taxa known to be capable of DOP (for example, Nitrosopumilus maritimus ) are killed by its addition 8 . We also observed weak statistical support between the relative abundance of certain nitrogen-cycling microbial taxa and DOP (for example, Candidatus Nitrosopumilus ⍴  = 0.474, p  = 0.420). The fact that DOP was detected in ex situ controls containing only polymetallic nodules (Extended Data Fig. 4 ) suggested that the DOP was linked to their presence. Hence, we estimated the potential contribution of radiolytic O 2 production using a kinetic model 9 and found 0.18 μmol l −1  O 2 would be generated by this process within 48 h. We also modelled the chemical reduction of manganese (IV) oxide at in situ temperature (1.6 °C) across a range of pH and O 2 conditions encountered at the seafloor to assess if this reaction (2MnO 2  → 2MnO + O 2 ;Extended Data Fig. 5 ) could liberate the O 2 but found that <0.1 nmol of manganese (IV) oxide would be chemically reduced to manganese (II) at seafloor conditions. As such, localized radiolytic O 2 production from the sediments and nodules and chemical dissolution explain only a negligible proportion (< 0.5%) of the DOP observed.

The oxygen evolution reaction requires an input voltage of 1.23 V plus an overpotential of approximately 0.37 V to split seawater into H 2 and O 2 (ref. 10 ) at NORI-D’s seafloor mean pH (7.41). This value can be lowered by several hundred millivolts if the reaction proceeds via the lattice-oxygen-mediated mechanism 11 . Use of metal catalysts such as Mn oxides enriched with transition metals (for example, Ni) found in nodules 12 and characterized by large tunnel areas and abundant defect sites can optimize the adsorption of reactants and enhance conductivity and catalytic performance 11 , 13 , 14 . We tested the electrical potential between two platinum electrodes at 153 sites on the surfaces of 12 nodules (Fig. 2 ) from the UK1, NORI-D and Bundesanstalt für Geowissenschaften und Rohstoffe (BGR) license areas. Although the potentials between different positions on the nodules were highly variable, - potentials up to 0.95 V were found and high mean background-corrected potentials were detected under cold-water conditions (Fig. 2 and Extended Data Table 4 ). On the basis of these studies and DOP being observed in nodule-only ex situ incubations (Extended Data Fig. 4 ), we hypothesize that the DOP may have partly resulted from seawater electrolysis, with the necessary energy coming from the potential difference between metal ions within the nodule layers, leading to an internal redistribution of electrons. Whereas questions remain concerning this potential mechanism (such as the identity of the energy source(s), longevity of DOP, catalytic stabilities, electrochemical conditions on exposed versus buried nodules surfaces and the influence of different chemistries within the nodule layers), the ‘geo-battery’ hypothesis was supported by the link between DOP and nodule average surface area. This connection could be due to an increased abundance of anode and cathode sites or a greater abundance of high Ni and Cu dendritic porous layers in larger nodules 15 . Assuming the ‘geo-battery’ is partly responsible for the DOP observed, the initial high DOP rate may have been related to the ‘bow-wave’ of the lander removing sediments from the surface of the nodules and exposing electrochemically active sites on the nodules. The slowdown in DOP seen later in the incubations could have then been caused by a reduction in voltage potential and/or degradation of metal-oxide catalysts that has been observed in Mn oxide catalysts previously 10 . Whereas this process requires further investigation, if true, DOP activity may fluctuate with sediment coverage on the nodules inviting the urgent question of how sediment remobilization and distribution over large areas during deep-sea mining may influence DOP.

The nodules were collected from the NORI-D (1-5), UK1 (6-8) and the BGR (9-12) license areas. Potentials were measured at 21 °C (nodules 1–12) and 5 °C (nodules 6 and 7 cold) and between two different UK1 nodules (Tests 1 and 2) and across the surface of a metamorphosed carbonate rock (control). Means are designated by the ‘x’ symbol, medians by the line, boxes show the lower and upper quartile values (excluding the median), whereas the whisker bars refer to the minimum and maximum data values. The number of technical replicate measurements made at different points on the surface of each nodule/rock to make each box-whisker is shown by the number above each whisker bar.

Understanding the mechanism(s) behind DOP, its temporal nature and its spatial distribution will allow its role in abyssal ocean ecosystems to be better understood. Future studies of DOP in the deep sea may also shed light on broader relationships between metal-oxide deposition, biological evolution and the oxygenation of Earth 16 , 17 .

A benthic chamber lander was deployed in the NORI-D license area six times in May–June 2021 (5D cruise), five times in November–December 2021 (5E cruise) and five times in August–September 2022 (7A cruise) (Extended Data Fig. 1 and Extended Data Table 1 ). The lander comprised three independent, autonomous, square benthic chambers (484 cm 2 ) separated by approximately <0.5 m. After arriving at the seafloor, the lander waited for 0.07–1.34 d before the chambers were pushed into the sediment to create an enclosed microcosm of the seafloor. Ten minutes into the incubation period, the enclosed chambers were injected with 50 ml of one of three solutions: (1) 0.45-µm-filtered, cold surface seawater containing 79.2 mg of freeze-dried Phaeodactylum tricornutum algae, (2) 32 µM Na 2 HCO 3 and 40 µM NH 4 Cl dissolved in cold artificial seawater (salinity 35) and (3) 0.45-µm-filtered, cold surface seawater. On some occasions, the injection mechanism failed allowing the response to control (no injection) conditions to be measured. The seafloor in the study area had a temperature of 1.6 °C ± 0.006 °C (SE, n  = 28) and a pH of 7.41 ± 0.05 (SE, n  = 17). Immediately after the injection, the overlying water was mixed with a submersible stirrer at 60 rpm for 1 min before the stirrer was turned off that allowed any particulate substrates to settle for 1 h. After 1 h, the stirrer was then turned on again for the remainder of the experiments. During the 5E expedition, the stirrers were programmed to continually stir the overlying water even immediately after injection.

The syringe samplers removed approximately 50 ml of seawater from the water phase of each chamber at 0.1 or 0.03, 1, 3, 9, 28, 38 and 47 h into the incubation experiment. Oxygen optodes (CONTROS HydroFlash O 2 manufactured by Kongsberg Maritime Contros GmbH) mounted in the lid of each chamber logged O 2 concentrations in the chamber every 10 seconds throughout each experiment. Two days before the first lander deployment of each cruise, the optodes underwent a two-point, multi-temperature calibration using 0 and 100% O 2 calibration solutions at 1.2, 7, 18 and 30 °C following the recommendations of Bittig et al. (ref. 18 ). On the 5D cruise, we also calibrated the sensors 2 d after the last lander experiment so we could estimate optode drift, which was negligible (0.27 µmol l −1  d − 1 ) over the course of the six-week cruise. The 0% and 100% O 2 saturation solutions were created by bubbling 0.45-µm-filtered surface seawater in a bottle sitting in a water-chilling/heating unit with N 2 gas (0%) or an aquarium air bubbling unit (100%) for 30 min. The O 2 concentration of the calibration solutions was confirmed in triplicate by Winkler titration. After incubating seafloor sediments for 47 h, the lander chambers were closed by a shutter door at the base of the chambers, and the chambers were then pulled slowly out of the sediment, which took 1 h. The lander was then recalled from the seafloor. In eight instances, the lander programme did not finish and the doors did not shut, preventing the sampling of sediment and determination of the volume of the water phase in the chambers (Extended Data Table 2 ). Once the lander was back and secured on deck, the chambers were opened and the water above the sediment removed via syphoning into a bucket. The distance from the top of the sediment to the base of the chamber lid was then measured in four places to get an accurate water depth for water volume estimates. Whenever possible, a photograph was then taken of the chamber sediment and nodules from directly above the opening of the chamber. All syringes containing water samples were removed and taken to the shipboard lab for immediate processing or stored in a cold lab (4 °C) before processing. The optodes were removed and their onboard data downloaded to a computer. Finally, the nodules were removed from the chambers and washed of attached organic debris with cold (4 °C), 0.45-µm-filtered surface seawater and placed in sterile Whirlpak bags to be weighed in the laboratory later. The number of polymetallic nodules at the seafloor determined from chamber counts was 1170 ± 97 m −2 .

Unfiltered syringe sample seawater was carefully transferred from each 50 ml syringe to a 12 ml exetainer via a 10 cm tube attached to the syringe nozzle, ensuring no air bubbles were introduced and immediately fixed for microWinkler titration. The sample was then mixed thoroughly using a glass bead placed in the exetainer and placed in the dark in a 4 °C refrigerator for 30–45 min to allow the precipitate to settle. Once the precipitate had sedimented, the exetainers were shaken again and left for 2–3 h before Winkler titrations were performed. All titrations were completed within 12 h after sampling to determine dissolved O 2 concentrations. Each Winkler sample (approximately 5 ml) was titrated twice, and duplicate measurements showed minor differences in O 2 concentration (5D cruise error: 3.5 ± 0.3 μmol l −1 , n  = 71; 5E cruise error: 1.3 ± 0.2 μmol l − 1 , n  = 69; 7A cruise error: 2.8 ± 0.4 μmol l − 1 , n  = 84). Winkler O 2 concentration data were averaged for each syringe sample. The O 2 concentrations estimated by Winkler analysis were 22 ± 1% ( n  = 42, SE, 5D cruise), 8 ± 4% ( n  = 39, SE, 5E cruise) and 24 ± 2% ( n  = 40, SE, 7A cruise) lower than the concentrations measured by the optodes at the same time point in the same incubations most likely due to out gassing of supersaturated O 2 caused by depressurization and warming of the externally mounted syringes (whose samples were used for Winkler analyses) during the lander recovery to the surface.

Back on shore, the final O 2 concentration values were calculated following Bittig et al. (ref. 18 ) from the optode, calibration and in situ pressure data that was derived from the depth where each lander deployment was made. Time stamps in the optode data were compared to the lander computer programme times so the optode readings could be aligned to the schedule of the chamber experiment. The total change in O 2 concentration in each chamber was then calculated from the volume of the water phase above the sediment and the difference in O 2 concentration from when the chambers started to seal off the sediment to the point when the maximum O 2 concentration was reached.

Benthic O 2 microprofiling

Benthic O 2 microprofiles were made during lander deployments AKS313, AKS316, AKS318 and AKS321 during the 5E cruise using a UNISENSE deep-sea microprofiling unit mounted <0.5 m from the benthic chambers. The microprofiles were made using 20 cm O 2 microsensors that penetrated the sediment in 0.05 mm steps. The microsensors were calibrated 2 h before the lander deployments at in situ temperature (1.6 °C) at 0% and 100% O 2 saturation (above). At each sampling depth, the microsensor stopped for 5 s before each measurement was made. The sensor then recorded five individual O 2 concentration measurements. The average of these five measurements was taken for each depth point. The sediment surface was determined manually based on the turning point in the slope of O 2 concentration with depth where O 2 started to become depleted. SCOC was determined from Fick’s first law of diffusion.

Microbiology sampling

Nodule and sediment samples for microbial community analyses were collected from the 5D experimental chambers. Approximately 30 g of sediment from each of the 0–2 cm and 2–5 cm horizons and 50 g of intact nodules were placed in separate sterile Whirlpak bags with a pre-sterilized spatula and then transferred to a −80 °C freezer. DNA from approximately 10 g of nodules and 250 mg of sediment were extracted using the Qiagen PowerMax soil and PowerSoil extraction kits, respectively. Extracted DNA was then shipped on dry ice to Laragen Inc. and sequenced using a proprietary in-house method. The V4 region of 16 S rRNA genes were amplified using the Earth Microbiome Project protocol 19 with the 515 F (5′‐GTGYCAGCMGCCGCGGTAA 20 ) and 806 R (5′-GGACTACNVGGGTWTCTAAT 21 ) primers. Raw fastq files were processed using a custom pipeline ( https://github.com/Boston-University-Microbiome-Initiative/BU16s ) built with QIIME 2020.2 ( https://www.nature.com/articles/s41587-019-0209-9 ). Adaptor sequences were removed using cutadapt ( https://doi.org/10.14806/ej.17.1.200 ), read truncation positions were determined by mineer (more below), amplicon sequence variants (ASVs) were generated using dada2 (trunc-len-r 20 ) ( https://doi.org/10.1038/nmeth.3869 ) and ASVs were clustered to 99% identity with the SILVA 132 database ( https://academic.oup.com/nar/article/42/D1/D643/1061236 ) using the vsearch cluster-features-closed-reference ( https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.2584 ). Due to drops in sequencing quality, all reverse reads were truncated by 49 bases (from a length of 301 to 252) as determined by minERR, an algorithm for determining optimal sequence length based on sequence quality scores ( https://github.com/michaelsilverstein/mineer ). Family- and genus-level abundance was computed by summing the relative abundance of all ASVs with the same family/genus classification within each sample. Spearman correlations were then computed between family- and genus-level abundance and observed optode-derived total O 2 changes. Sequences have been archived at National Centre for Biotechnology Information GenBank under the Bioproject ID PRJNA1117483.

Polymetallic nodule surface area measurements

Photographs of the surface sediment and nodules in the chambers were imported into Image J. The outline of each nodule in each chamber photograph was then traced and the surface area of the nodule automatically calculated in Image J (assuming each surface nodule was flat in shape) and logged as an Image J file before being exported and saved as an Excel file.

Radiolysis O 2 production estimates

To estimate the potential radiolytic O 2 production, published concentrations of 238 U, 235 U, 232 Th, 40 K (refs. 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 ) in seawater were used (Supplementary Table 1 ). For nodules, 238 U, 235 U and 232 Th isotopes of three nodules from chamber experiments from the 5D cruise were measured by Multicollector-Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometer using previously described methods 27 , 28 , 29 and averaged; 40 K values were derived from the literature 12 . Nodule and seawater contributions were calculated using a kinetic model developed by ref. 9 that incorporates 32 reactions (equation (1) in ref. 30 ). The nodule boundary layer was assumed to be fully integrated with the seawater, surpassing the respective ~23 to ~452 μm stopping power distance of alpha and beta particles used to model geologic materials 31 . Sediment radiolytic O 2 was calculated as half of the previously quantified H 2 production rates in equatorial Pacific subsurface sediment 32 , given the stoichiometry of water’s radiolytic decomposition (an equivalency that probably offers an overestimate of derived O 2 ). Contributions from these three components (nodules, sediment and seawater) were scaled by the benthic chamber’s size and contents to produce an estimate of 0.18 μmol l −1 of O 2 generated over 48 h according to the following expression.

Here (O 2 ) t is the mass (kg) of O 2 produced over a given time t (yr), Q iz is the mass (g) of the isotope, E a is the average energy (eV) released from the decay of one atom; G (O 2 ) is the radiation chemical yield of molecules per 100 eV of the radiation energy; M O2 is the O 2 molecular mass (g), A iz is the isotope atomic mass (g) and λ is the isotope-specific decay constant (y −1 ). The overall (O 2 ) t value summed the contributions from 238 U, 235 U, 232 Th and 40 K across water, nodule and sediment sources.

Electrochemistry measurements

Voltage potentials were measured using a Keithley DMM6500 digital multimeter on nodules previously collected by coring in the UK1, NORI-D and BGR license areas. Nodules were initially immersed for seven days in Instant Ocean artificial seawater (salinity 35). To measure the potentials, two electrodes (platinum wire, 99.9% purity) were first washed in perchloric acid, rinsed in Milli-Q water and dried before being attached to alligator clamps attached to the multimeter. The platinum wires were then immersed in Instant Ocean artificial seawater in a glass petri dish to measure background voltages (0.003 ± 0.001 V, SE, n  = 17) until stable. Once stable, a nodule was placed in the petri dish and the platinum probes placed on the nodule at random locations, ensuring contact in one of two ways. We either carefully drilled a hole into some nodules so one platinum wire could be fixed inside it while the second platinum wire was firmly pressed against the nodule surface using a clamp. Alternatively, the platinum wires were pressed firmly against two different spots on the nodule surface and held in place using a clamp. Voltages were then recorded for 1–2 min until the signal was stable. This procedure was repeated up to 20 times in different randomly selected regions of the nodules depending on their size. Measurements were undertaken on 12 nodules at 21 °C ( n  = 153) and a single control rock composed of metamorphosed carbonate ( n  = 10). Two nodules from UK1 were also retested after being cooled to 5 °C ( n  = 18) by placing them in Instant Ocean water in a refrigerator overnight. Voltage potentials ( n  = 20) between two nodules were measured using four nodules collected from UK1. Potentials measured during each measurement were averaged and corrected for the background seawater voltage measured using only Instant Ocean seawater in the absence of a nodule. Measured resistances inside some of the nodules that were broken up were in the kΩ to 100s of kΩ range, though it is unclear if these resistivities change at the nano- or microscale requiring further investigation.

Geochemistry modelling

The chemical stability and solubility of manganese (IV) oxide (birnessite) to dissolved Mn 2+ as a function of pH and O 2 activity was modelled using the Geochemist Workbench Professional (version 12) software, with the in-built and internally consistent THERMO database. The conditions used for generating the phase diagram (Extended Data Fig. 5 ) represent bottom seawater as measured in the eastern CCZ with a temperature of 1.6 °C and chlorine and manganese concentrations of 0.55 M Cl and 2e −10  M Mn, respectively.

Ex situ core incubations

Opportunistic ex situ experiments were undertaken during the 5D cruise using sediment cores retrieved by a multi-corer from the CTA area (Extended Data Fig. 1 ). Immediately after the multi-corer arrived back at the surface, cores were removed and transferred to a cold lab held at in situ temperature. The cores were then exposed to the following five treatments (administered using a 60 ml syringe), which included (1) Na 2 HCO 3 (0.3 μM final concentration, n  = 3), (2) NH 4 Cl (10 μM final concentration, n  = 3) and (3) NH 4 Cl (50 μM final concentration, n  = 3), (4) 0.3 μM Na 2 HCO 3  + 10 μM NH 4 Cl (final concentration, n  = 3) and (5) HgCl 2 (1.1 μM final concentration, n  = 3). No-injection controls ( n  = 3) were also performed and separate core experiments in which four nodules were incubated for 48 h by themselves with no additions. After addition, the water phase of each core was stirred and a 50-ml sample of top water was taken for microWinkler analysis (as above). Stoppers were then placed on the top of the cores, ensuring no air bubbles were present. The stoppers were secured tightly and the cores fully submerged in a large bucket containing 0.45-µm-filtered, cold, surface seawater (salinity 35). The bucket was covered with five black plastic bags and secured in the cold room with the lights turned off. After 48 h, the cores were removed from the bucket, and the cores were inspected for the presence of air bubbles. Only one core, a HgCl 2 treatment, had a gas bubble beneath the bung, which was rejected from further analysis, leaving n  = 2 for this treatment. The other cores were then re-sampled for dissolved O 2 and analysed as before. Core-specific water volume measurements were used together with the change in O 2 concentration to calculate the total net O 2 change per core.

To determine if our ex situ DOP detection was affected by intrusion of O 2 from the atmosphere into the core tube, two controls were performed: a shipboard test with an O 2 microprofiler and a lab-based test using the Winkler method. Shipboard, a clean core tube was filled with Milli-Q water and sparged with N 2 for 10 min before beginning the test. A Metrohm 8663 Multimeter was inserted through a predrilled hole in the rubber stopper, allowing for O 2 concentration to be recorded every 5 s. An increase from 39 to 69 µmol l −1 was observed over ~5 h, corresponding to a rate of 0.14 mmol m −2  d −1 or 4% of the 3.5 mmol m −2  d −1 mean net DOP measured in the ex situ experiments. Back in the home laboratory, three of the original core tubes were filled with 4 °C, 0.2-µm-filtered artificial seawater (salinity 35) and sparged with N 2 for 8 min through a filtered pipette tip to achieve an initial dissolved O 2 concentration of ~100 µmol l −1 (for example, the approximate starting O 2 concentrations for the shipboard experiments). The tubes were sealed with rubber stoppers and electrical tape, being careful to avoid bubble formation. They were then submerged in a 32-gallon plastic garbage can of unfiltered seawater (O 2 concentration: 228.12 µmol l −1 ) in a dark cold room (8 °C) for 48 h. After 48 h, the tubes were quickly unsealed and analysed one at a time to prevent additional O 2 dissolution from the air. A 50-ml sterile syringe was used to slowly collect 10 ml of seawater from the centre of the core tube, being sure to avoid bubble entrainment into the syringe. The sample was carefully expelled into a 10-ml reaction vial and fixed using the adjusted values for a 10-ml sample according to a volume-scaled Winkler titration protocol 33 and the reagents from the LaMotte Dissolved Oxygen Test Kit. The fixation of each collected sample was done in less than 2 min in a fume hood. Dissolved O 2 increased by 0.11 mmol m −2  d −1 during the 48 h, which corresponds to between 3.2% of the mean net DOP rate observed in the ex situ experiments (3.5 mmol m −2  d −1 ). Both of our control experiments provide high confidence that the diffusion of external O 2 into the core tubes did not cause the O 2 production measured in the ex situ core incubations.

Calculations to quantify intrusion of O 2 from the polyoxymethylene chambers and lids

Oxygen intrusion was estimated from Stephens 34 who calculated that 20.66 µmol l −1 of O 2 could diffuse out of 428 cm 2 of polyoxymethylene plastic when immersed for 48 h in hypoxic water (O 2 diffusion rate: 0.02 µmol O 2  cm −2  d −1 ). To determine the total area of plastic that would be available for diffusion (869–1,584 cm 2 ), we added the surface area of the lid to the surface area of the four walls that would be exposed at the seafloor (based on the depth of the water phase—above). The minimum and maximum areas available for diffusion were multiplied by 0.02 µmol O 2  cm −2  d −1 to estimate that 41.9–76.5 µmol O 2  l −1 would diffuse out of the polyoxymethylene chamber walls and lid in 48 h under hypoxic conditions. Thus, we are highly confident that O 2 leakage from the plastic chambers could not replicate the high O 2 concentration seen in some of our oxygenated experiments (Fig. 1 ).

Data availability

Source data are provided with this paper. These data are also available via Dryad at https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.tdz08kq6w (ref. 35 ), and geological samples were exported in accordance with relevant permits. The nucleotide sequences generated by metagenome sequencing have been deposited in the National Centre for Biotechnology Information database under BioProject ID PRJNA1117483 .

Jorgensen, B. B. et al. Sediment oxygen consumption: role in the global marine carbon cycle. Earth Sci. Rev. 228 , 103987 (2022).

Article   Google Scholar  

Smith, K. L. Jr et al. Climate, carbon cycling and deep-ocean ecosystems. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 106 , 19211–19218 (2009).

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Smith, Jr. K. L. et al. Large salp bloom export from the upper ocean and benthic community response in the abyssal northeast Pacific: day to week resolution. Limnol. Oceanogr. 59 , 745–757 (2014).

Sweetman, A. K. et al. Key role of bacteria in the short-term cycling of carbon at the abyssal seafloor in a low particulate organic carbon flux region of the eastern Pacific Ocean. Limnol. Oceanogr. 64 , 694–713 (2019).

Mewes, K. et al. Diffusive transfer of oxygen from seamount basaltic crust into overlying sediments: an example from the Clarion–Clipperton Fracture Zone. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 433 , 215–225 (2016).

Kuhn, T. et al. Widespread seawater circulation in 18–22 Ma oceanic crust: impact on heat flow and sediment geochemistry. Geology 45 , 799–802 (2017).

Zhang, D. et al. Microbe-driven elemental cycling enables microbial adaptation to deep-sea ferromanganese nodule sediment fields. Microbiome 11 , 160 (2023).

Kraft, B. et al. Oxygen and nitrogen production by an ammonia-oxidizing archaeon. Science 375 , 97–100 (2022).

Ershov, B. G. Radiation-chemical decomposition of seawater: the appearance and accumulation of oxygen in the Earth’s atmosphere. Radiat. Phys. Chem. 168 , 108530 (2020).

Dresp, S. et al. Direct electrolytic splitting of seawater: opportunities and challenges. ACS Energy Lett. 4 , 933–942 (2019).

He, Y. et al. Recent progress of manganese dioxide based electrocatalysts for the oxygen evolution reaction. Ind. Chem. Mater. 1 , 312 (2023).

Kuhn, T. et al. in Deep-Sea Mining (ed. Sharma, R.) 23–63 (Springer, 2017).

Tian, L. Advances in manganese-based oxides for the oxygen evolution reaction. J. Mater. Chem. A 8 , 14400 (2020).

Teng, Y. et al. Atomically thin defect-rich Fe–Mn–O hybrid nanosheets as highly efficient electrocatalysts for water oxidation. Adv. Funct. Mater. 28 , 1802463 (2018).

Wegorzewski, A. V. & Kuhn, T. The influence of suboxic diagenesis on the formation of manganese nodules in the Clarion Clipperton nodule belt of the Pacific Ocean. Mar. Geol. 357 , 123–138 (2014).

Robins, L. J. et al. Manganese oxides, Earth surface oxygenation, and the rise of oxygenic photosynthesis. Earth Sci. Rev. 239 , 104368 (2023).

Chyba, C. F. & Had, K. P. Life without photosynthesis. Science 292 , 2026–2027 (2001).

Bittig, H. C. et al. Oxygen optode sensors: principle, characterization, calibration, and application in the ocean. Front. Mar. Sci. 4 , 429 (2018).

Caporaso J. G. et al. EMP 16 S Illumina amplicon protocol V.1. protocols.io. https://doi.org/10.17504/protocols.io.nuudeww (2018).

Parada, A. E. et al. Every base matters. Assessing small subunit rRNA primers for marine microbiomes with mock communities, time series and global field samples. Environ. Microbiol. 18 , 1403–1414 (2016).

Apprill, A. et al. Minor revision to V4 region SSU rRNA 806 R gene primer greatly increases detection of SAR11 bacterioplankton. Aquat. Microb. Ecol. 75 , 129–137 (2015).

Choppin, G. et al. Radiochemistry and Nuclear Chemistry (Elsevier, 2002).

Katz, J. J. et al. The Chemistry of the Actinide Elements 2nd edn (Springer, 1986).

Lide, D. R. CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics Vol. 85 (CRC Press, 2004).

Nier, A. O. A redetermination of the relative abundances of the isotopes of carbon, nitrogen, oxygen, argon, and potassium. Phys. Rev. 77 , 789 (1950).

Stumm, W. and Morgan, J. J. Aquatic Chemistry: An Introduction Emphasizing Chemical Equilibria in Natural Waters 2nd edn (John Wiley & Sons, 1981).

Cheng, H. et al. Improvements in 230 Th dating, 230Th and 234U half-life values, and U–Th isotopic measurements by multi-collector inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 371 , 82–91 (2013).

Edwards, R. L. et al. 238 U, 234 U, 230 Th, 232 Th systematics and the precise measurement of time over the past 500,000 years. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 81 , 175–192 (1987).

Shen, C. C. et al. Uranium and thorium isotopic and concentration measurements by magnetic sector inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry. Chem. Geol. 185 , 165–178 (2002).

Ershov, B. G. & Gordeev, A. V. A model for radiolysis of water and aqueous solutions of H 2 , H 2 O 2 and O 2 . Radiat. Phys. Chem. 77 , 928–935 (2008).

DeWitt, J. et al. The effect of grain size on porewater radiolysis. Earth Space Sci. 9 , e2021EA002024 (2021).

Blair, C. C. et al. Radiolytic hydrogen and microbial respiration in subsurface sediments. Astrobiology 7 , 951–970 (2007).

Shriwastav, A. et al. A modified Winkler’s method for determination of dissolved oxygen concentration in water: dependence of method accuracy on sample volume. Measurement 106 , 190–195 (2017).

Stevens, E. D. Use of plastic materials in oxygen-measuring systems. J. Appl. Physiol. 72 , 801–804 (1992).

Sweetman, A. K. Data collected from replicate benthic chamber experiments conducted at abyssal depths across the Clarion Clipperton Zone (CCZ), Pacific Ocean. Dryad https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.tdz08kq6w (2024).

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank S. Wilson, E. Holsting, F. Mann and L. Carrera at Maersk Supply Service, the captain and crew of the research vessels ‘Maersk Launcher’ and ‘Island Pride’ for all their help preparing for the research expeditions and their excellent assistance at sea. We are grateful to R. Davis for help with the lander deployments and D. Anderson, M. Delgado and M. Cecchetto for help at sea. We thank Y. Maierhaba, C. Momjian and A. Shukla for their assistance with lab-based molecular analyses and R. Merrifield for his help with the electrochemistry analysis. We would like to acknowledge and give our thanks to K. M. Allen, M. Clarke, A. O’Sullivan, P. Clarke, L. Marsh and J. Smith for helping to initiate the research. The work was funded by The Metals Company Inc. through its subsidiary Nauru Ocean Resources Inc. (NORI). NORI holds exploration rights to the NORI-D contract area in the CCZ and is regulated by the International Seabed Authority and sponsored by the government of Nauru (A.K.S., C.W., W.B.H.). UK Seabed Resources funded the research expedition to the UK1 and OMS license areas in 2015 (A.K.S.), and the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation provided funding for the research cruise to APEIs 1, 4 and 7 in 2018 (A.K.S.). Research support from the Natural Environment Research Council SMARTEX (Seabed Mining And Resilience To Experimental impact) project (grant number NE/T003537/1) and the European Commission project iAtlantic (grant number 818123) to A.K.S. is also acknowledged. We thank K. Mizell at the US Geological Survey for comments on our manuscript.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

The Scottish Association for Marine Science, (SAMS), Oban, UK

Andrew K. Sweetman & Danielle S. W. de Jonge

Heriot-Watt University, Edinburgh, UK

Alycia J. Smith

GEOMAR Helmholtz Centre for Ocean Research Kiel, Kiel, Germany

Tobias Hahn

Department of Biology, Boston University, Boston, MA, USA

Peter Schroedl, Claire Andrade & Jeffrey J. Marlow

Bioinformatics Program, Boston University, Boston, MA, USA

Michael Silverstein

Department of Earth and Environmental Science, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA

R. Lawrence Edwards

Faculty of Environment, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK

Alastair J. M. Lough, Clare Woulds & William B. Homoky

School of Science, Physics and Earth Sciences, Constructor University Bremen, Bremen, Germany

Andrea Koschinsky

Federal Institute for Geoscience and Natural Resources (BGR), Hannover, Germany

Sebastian Fuchs & Thomas Kuhn

Technological Institute, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL, USA

Franz Geiger

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

A.K.S., C.W., W.B.H. and J.J.M. generated the funding. A.K.S. conceived the study and led the benthic chamber lander investigations with A.J.S. A.K.S., A.J.S., D.S.W.d.J., C.A., P.S. and J.J.M. conducted the Winkler analysis and ex situ core incubations. A.K.S., A.J.S., D.S.W.d.J. and T.H. carried out the in situ oxygen optode calibrations and analysis. M.S., P.S. and J.J.M. led the microbiology analysis, whereas P.S. and R.L.E. undertook the radioactivity measurements and radiolysis calculations. A.K., S.F., T.K. and A.K.S. did the solubility assessments, and F.G. and A.K.S. undertook the electrochemistry measurements. A.K.S., J.J.M. and W.B.H. drafted the paper, and all authors contributed further ideas and approved the final version.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Andrew K. Sweetman .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

A.K.S., C.W. and W.B.H. received research support (funding) from The Metals Company, and A.K.S. also received research support from UK Seabed Resources to carry out part of the work. The Metals Company and UK Seabed Resources aided in the selection of study sites and operational scheduling at sea in a collaborative effort. S.F. and T.K. also work for the Federal Institute for Geoscience and Natural Resources, which holds exploration rights in the CCZ.

Peer review

Peer review information.

Nature Geoscience thanks Bo Barker Jørgensen and Kira Mizell for their contribution to the peer review of this work. Primary Handling Editor: Stefan Lachowycz, in collaboration with the Nature Geoscience team.

Additional information

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

Extended data

Extended data fig. 1 benthic chamber lander and multi-corer deployment locations across the ccz..

Benthic chamber lander (BCL) locations in APEIs 1, 4, and 7 (western CCZ), UK1 and OMS and NORI-D (stars) (a) and both areas (Collector Test Area or CTA and Preservation Reference Zone or PRZ) (b–d) of NORI-D in the central abyssal Pacific. The deployment location for the multi-corer (MUC) that sampled sediments for the ex situ experiments conducted during the 5D cruise is also shown (c).

Extended Data Fig. 2 Oxygen concentrations measured from water samples by Winkler titration during the NORI-D benthic chamber lander experiments.

Mean O 2 concentration (μmol L −1 ) measured by micro-Winkler analysis conducted on water samples that were collected periodically from the chambers through time (hr) under different treatments. The treatments were dead-algal biomass during expeditions 5D (A), 5E (E), and 7A (G), DIC + NH 4 + during expedition 5D (B), 0.45-μm filtered seawater during expedition 5D (C), and control (no injection) during expeditions 5D (D), 5E (F), and 7A (H). Each datapoint is the mean of two Winkler measurements.

Extended Data Fig. 3 Oxygen optode concentrations measured during benthic chamber lander experiments in the UK1 and OMS license areas and APEIs 1, 4, and 7.

Oxygen optode readings through time (hr) from 36-hour abyssal (4037-5216m) in-situ benthic chamber lander experiments conducted in the UK1 and OMS license areas in 2015 and APEIs 1, 4, and 7 in the western CCZ in June 2018. The experiments that were conducted were identical to those carried out at NORI-D. The O 2 concentrations recorded by the optodes in the 2015 and 2018 experiments were derived from factory calibrations undertaken 4–6 months prior to the expeditions as in-situ temperature could not be replicated onboard during the optode calibration process. As such, only relative changes in O 2 concentrations can be interpreted.

Extended Data Fig. 4 Bar chart showing total net O 2 production in ex situ sediment cores.

Mean total net O 2 production (μmol O 2 core −1 ) measured on sediment cores (n=1-3) exposed to a variety of treatments during 48-hr ex situ incubations that were carried out on the ship at in-situ temperature and in the dark during the 5D cruise. Oxygen production was determined from the difference in O 2 concentration of the water phase overlying the sediment between t = 0 hours and 48 hours accounting for the core volume. Error bars refer to ± 1 standard deviation. Individual fluxes from the ex-situ incubations are also shown as data points overlying the bars.

Extended Data Fig. 5 Phase stability and solubility of birnessite in seawater as a function of O 2 activity and pH.

The phase stability and solubility of birnessite (manganese [IV] oxide) in seawater as a function of O 2 activity and pH at a temperature of 1.6 °C, 0.55M Cl, and 2e −10 M Mn. The bold black line illustrates the phase boundary between birnessite and dissolved Mn 2+ ; the dashed lines the solubility of birnessite into seawater. The green point indicates the predominant manganese form that would be experienced at the highest pH that was measured in MUC cores, and the lowest O 2 condition (average bottom seawater); the red point indicates the predominant manganese form at the lowest pH (measured in MUC cores) and highest O 2 concentration measured in the in-situ benthic chamber experiments at NORI-D with the arrows showing their range. Under the latter conditions, a vanishing small amount of birnessite would dissolve into seawater to form Mn 2+ .

Supplementary information

Supplementary information.

Supplementary Table 1 and caption.

Source Data Fig. 1

Oxygen optode concentration (μmol l −1 ) data from benthic chamber lander experiments made during cruises 5D, 5E and 7A.

Source Data Fig. 2

Voltages (V) measured on the surface of nodules from the NORI-D, UK1 and BGR license areas.

Source Data Extended Data Fig. 2

Oxygen concentrations (μmol l −1 ) determined by Winkler titration on syringe samples collected from benthic chamber lander experiments made during cruises 5D, 5E and 7A.

Source Data Extended Data Fig. 3

Oxygen optode concentration (μmol l −1 ) data from benthic chamber lander experiments made during research cruises to the OMS, UK1 and APEI 1, 4 and 7 areas.

Source Data Extended Data Fig. 4

Oxygen concentrations (μmol l −1 ) determined by Winkler titration from the ex situ experiments conducted during the 5D cruise.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Sweetman, A.K., Smith, A.J., de Jonge, D.S.W. et al. Evidence of dark oxygen production at the abyssal seafloor. Nat. Geosci. (2024). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41561-024-01480-8

Download citation

Received : 24 January 2024

Accepted : 06 June 2024

Published : 22 July 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1038/s41561-024-01480-8

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

This article is cited by

Mystery oxygen source discovered on the sea floor — bewildering scientists.

• Davide Castelvecchi

Nature (2024)

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

Sign up for the Nature Briefing: Anthropocene newsletter — what matters in anthropocene research, free to your inbox weekly.

This paper is in the following e-collection/theme issue:

Published on 26.7.2024 in Vol 26 (2024)

Patterns of Ownership and Usage of Wearable Devices in the United States, 2020-2022: Survey Study

Authors of this article:

Short Paper

• Ashwini Nagappan 1 , MBE   ; 
• Adriana Krasniansky 2 , MTS   ; 
• Madelyn Knowles 2 , MPH  

1 Department of Health Policy and Management, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, United States

2 Rock Health, San Francisco, CA, United States

Corresponding Author:

Ashwini Nagappan, MBE

Department of Health Policy and Management

University of California, Los Angeles

650 Charles E Young Dr S

Los Angeles, CA, 90095

United States

Phone: 1 3108252594

Email: [email protected]

Background: Although wearable technology has become increasingly common, comprehensive studies examining its ownership across different sociodemographic groups are limited. 

Objective: The aims of this study were to (1) measure wearable device ownership by sociodemographic characteristics in a cohort of US consumers and (2) investigate how these devices are acquired and used for health-related purposes.

Methods: Data from the Rock Health Digital Health Consumer Adoption Survey collected from 2020 to 2022 with 23,974 US participants were analyzed. The sample was US Census–matched for demographics, including age, race/ethnicity, gender, and income. The relationship between sociodemographic factors and wearable ownership was explored using descriptive analysis and multivariate logistic regression.

Results: Of the 23,974 respondents, 10,679 (44.5%) owned wearables. Ownership was higher among younger individuals, those with higher incomes and education levels, and respondents living in urban areas. Compared to those aged 18-24 years, respondents 65 years and older had significantly lower odds of wearable ownership (odds ratio [OR] 0.18, 95% CI 0.16-0.21). Higher annual income (≥US $200,000; OR 2.27, 95% CI 2.01-2.57) and advanced degrees (OR 2.23, 95% CI 2.01-2.48) were strong predictors of ownership. Living in rural areas reduced ownership odds (OR 0.65, 95% CI 0.60-0.72). There was a notable difference in ownership based on gender and health insurance status. Women had slightly higher ownership odds than men (OR 1.10, 95% CI 1.04-1.17). Private insurance increased ownership odds (OR 1.28, 95% CI 1.17-1.40), whereas being uninsured (OR 0.41, 95% CI 0.36-0.47) or on Medicaid (OR 0.75, 95% CI 0.68-0.82) decreased the odds of ownership. Interestingly, minority groups such as non-Hispanic Black (OR 1.14, 95% CI 1.03-1.25) and Hispanic/Latine (OR 1.20, 95% CI 1.10-1.31) respondents showed slightly higher ownership odds than other racial/ethnic groups.

Conclusions: Our findings suggest that despite overall growth in wearable ownership, sociodemographic divides persist. The data indicate a need for equitable access strategies as wearables become integral to clinical and public health domains.

Introduction

Consumers are increasingly integrating wearable technology, which refers to devices that can be worn on the body to capture data [ 1 ], into their daily lives [ 2 ]. Wearable devices now range from smartwatches to fertility trackers and sleep trackers, serving a variety of health monitoring applications [ 3 , 4 ]. While prior studies have focused on the adoption of wearables within specific populations such as adolescents, older adults, and underserved populations [ 5 - 7 ], large-scale studies examining differences in wearable adoption across sociodemographic characteristics remain limited.

This study aimed to measure wearable ownership by sociodemographic characteristics in a cohort of US consumers. Specifically, a respondent was considered a wearable owner if, at the time of the survey, they reported currently owning a wearable device, even if they did not currently use the device. Additionally, we examined how respondents received their wearable devices and explored relevant health-related uses. The findings provide important insights to guide wearable product development and identify priorities to improve ownership among underrepresented groups.

Study Design

This study aggregated data from 3 consecutive years (2020-2022) of the Rock Health Digital Health Consumer Adoption Survey [ 8 ]. The total sample consisted of 23,974 US-based respondents (7,980 in 2020, 7,980 in 2021, and 8,014 in 2022). Survey respondents were not excluded from participating in the study in subsequent years and repeat respondents comprised 3.3% (n=784) of the total cohort. The survey was administered by Toluna, a survey management organization. Toluna used its existing panel, initially recruited via online advertising, to identify participants. Eligible participants were 18 years or older, and the sample was Census-matched each year according to age, race/ethnicity, geographic region, gender, and annual household income.

Ethical Considerations

In accordance with the Common Rule (Federal Policy for the Protection of Human Subjects, 82 Federal Regulation 7259, January 19, 2017 [ 9 ]), this study was exempt from regulations for research with human subjects as the data were deidentified.

Data Collection and Survey Questions

Surveys were digitally administered through Toluna’s platform, and respondents used their personal desktop, laptop, smartphone, or tablet to complete the survey in English. The survey encompassed 4 main domains: (1) sociodemographic factors, (2) health status, (3) adoption of digital health tools (eg, telemedicine, wearables), and (4) attitudes toward and perceptions of digital health technology. For this study, we focused on questions about wearable technology adoption.

The primary outcome was wearable ownership as measured by the survey question, “Do you own a wearable device or smartwatch (note: this excludes smartphones) that helps you track your health? This could include: number of steps/exercise, sleep, heart rate, or blood pressure.” Covariates included sociodemographic characteristics (eg, age, gender, race/ethnicity, income level, and educational level) and self-reported health status. The secondary analysis was exploratory, delving into the cohort of wearable owners to investigate the source of their devices and their reasons for using wearables. Respondents were asked: “Do or did you use your wearable device or smartwatch for any of the purposes listed below? Select all that apply.”

Data Analysis

We performed a descriptive analysis of the pooled sample and examined associations with wearable ownership. The χ 2 test was used to assess variation across covariates and multivariate logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with wearable ownership. Additional analyses explored how respondents acquired their wearables and what they used the devices for. Analyses were conducted in Stata v.16.

The analytic sample included 23,974 survey respondents, including 13,295 wearable nonowners and 10,679 wearable owners ( Table 1 ). Younger respondents (18-44 years) exhibited higher ownership rates, while nonowners skewed toward the older demographic (55+ years). An income gradient emerged, with those earning less than US $25,000 annually representing a smaller fraction of owners (10.5%) than nonowners (25.8%), with ownership rates increasing with income. Advanced degree holders represented 31.4% of wearable device owners versus 13.5% of nonowners.

Ownership varied by rurality, with 45.6% of owners in urban areas compared to 12.6% in rural areas. Nonowners were more evenly distributed, with 27.8% in urban areas and 23.4% in rural areas. Men represented a slightly higher proportion of owners than women. Health insurance coverage emerged as another differentiator; 41.2% of wearable owners had employment-based insurance and 21.5% had private insurance, while nonowners were more likely to be covered by Medicare, Medicaid, or to be uninsured. Ownership also varied across racial and ethnic groups, with higher proportions of non-Hispanic Black, non-Hispanic Asian, and Hispanic/Latine respondents in the owner group. Nearly one-third of owners self-reported excellent health, which was over twice the rate among nonowners.

Multivariable logistic regression was used to model the relationship between sociodemographics and wearable ownership, controlling for covariates ( Table 2 ). Wearable device ownership increased from 2020 to 2022. Compared to the age group of 18-24 years, all other age groups showed decreased odds of ownership, especially those 65 years and older. Higher income and education significantly increased ownership odds, with those earning US $200,000 and above per year and those with advanced degrees showing more than double the odds compared to those of the comparator groups.

Characteristic			Nonowners (n=13,295), n (%)		Owners (n=10,679), n (%)		value
								<.001
	18-24	1340 (10.1)		1424 (13.3)
	25-34	1743 (13.1)		2574 (24.1)
	35-44	1457 (11.0)		2586 (24.2)
	45-54	2112 (15.9)		1778 (16.6)
	55-64	2677 (20.1)		1196 (11.2)
	65+	3966 (29.8)		1121 (10.5)
								<.001
	<25,000	3428 (25.8)		1117 (10.5)
	25,000-34,999	1401 (10.5)		758 (7.1)
	35,000-49,999	1854 (13.9)		1019 (9.5)
	50,000-74,999	2365 (17.8)		1627 (15.2)
	75,000-99,999	1381 (10.4)		1493 (14.0)
	100,000-149,999	1501 (11.3)		2072 (19.4)
	150,000-199,999	549 (4.1)		1128 (10.6)
	≥200,000	717 (5.4)		1443 (13.5)
	Prefer not to say	99 (0.7)		22 (0.2)
								<.001
	Less than high school	430 (3.2)		151 (1.4)
	High school graduate (includes equivalency)	3376 (25.4)		1560 (14.6)
	Some college, no degree	3232 (24.3)		1680 (15.7)
	Associate degree	1519 (11.4)		1227 (11.5)
	Bachelor degree	2897 (21.8)		2677 (25.1)
	Master degree	1244 (9.4)		2297 (21.5)
	PhD	160 (1.2)		306 (2.9)
	Graduate or professional degree (eg, MD, JD)	386 (2.9)		749 (7.0)
	Prefer not to say	51 (0.4)		32 (0.3)
								<.001
	Rural	3105 (23.4)		1346 (12.6)
	Suburban	6496 (48.9)		4461 (41.8)
	Urban	3694 (27.8)		4872 (45.6)
								<.001
	Woman	6840 (51.4)		5116 (47.9)
	Man	6330 (47.6)		5476 (51.3)
	Other	77 (0.6)		74 (0.7)
	Prefer not to disclose	48 (0.4)		13 (0.1)
								<.001
	Employment-based	3559 (26.8)		4405 (41.2)
	Private purchase	1375 (10.3)		2294 (21.5)
	Medicare (over the age of 65)	3995 (30.0)		1559 (14.6)
	Medicaid	2105 (15.8)		1287 (12.1)
	Other public	454 (3.4)		375 (3.5)
	Other	253 (1.9)		150 (1.4)
	Uninsured	1052 (7.9)		374 (3.5)
	I don’t know	502 (3.8)		235 (2.2)
								<.001
	NH -White	8941 (67.3)		6443 (60.3)
	NH-Black or African-American	1373 (10.3)		1310 (12.3)
	NH-American Indian or Alaska Native	53 (0.4)		58 (0.5)
	NH-Asian	603 (4.5)		570 (5.3)
	NH-Hawaiian Native or Pacific Islander	38 (0.3)		59 (0.6)
	NH-Other	69 (0.5)		24 (0.2)
	Multiracial, NH	257 (1.9)		230 (2.2)
	Hispanic/Latine	1881 (14.1)		1962 (18.4)
	Prefer not to say	80 (0.6)		23 (0.2)
								<.001
	Very poor	160 (1.2)		36 (0.3)
	Poor	958 (7.2)		238 (2.2)
	Moderate	3384 (25.5)		1609 (15.1)
	Good	6913 (52.0)		5386 (50.4)
	Excellent	1880 (14.1)		3410 (31.9)

a P values were calculated using χ 2 tests to compare the distributions of each variable across the two groups. Due to the large sample sizes, statistically significant P values may be observed even for minor differences; therefore, P values should be interpreted with caution and in the context of practice relevance beyond statistical significance.

b NH: non-Hispanic.

Variable		Adjusted odds ratio (95% CI)	value
	2021	1.16 (1.08-1.25)	<.001
	2022	1.27 (1.18-1.36)	<.001
	25-34	0.98 (0.88-1.09)	.68
	35-44	0.90 (0.80-1.01)	.06
	45-54	0.52 (0.46-0.58)	<.001
	55-64	0.32 (0.28-0.36)	<.001
	65+	0.18 (0.16-0.21)	<.001
	50,000-99,999	1.62 (1.50-1.75)	<.001
	100,000-149,999	2.02 (1.83-2.23)	<.001
	150,000-199,999	2.73 (2.40-3.12)	<.001
	≥200,000	2.27 (2.01-2.57)	<.001
	Some college	1.27 (1.17-1.38)	<.001
	Bachelor’s degree	1.44 (1.32-1.59)	<.001
	Advanced degree	2.23 (2.01-2.48)	<.001
	Rural	0.65 (0.60-0.72)	<.001
	Suburban	0.72 (0.68-0.77)	<.001
Gender: women (reference: men)		1.10 (1.04-1.17)	.001
	Private purchase	1.28 (1.17-1.40)	<.001
	Medicare (over the age of 65)	1.06 (0.95-1.19)	.29
	Medicaid	0.75 (0.68-0.82)	<.001
	Uninsured	0.41 (0.36-0.47)	<.001
-White)
	NH-Black or African-American	1.14 (1.03-1.25)	.008
	NH-American Indian or Alaska Native	1.04 (0.68-1.57)	.87
	NH-Asian	0.82 (0.72-0.94)	.004
	NH-Hawaiian Native or Pacific Islander	1.59 (1.03-2.45)	.04
	NH-Other	0.62 (0.38-1.03)	.07
	Multiracial, NH	1.02 (0.84-1.25)	.82
	Hispanic/Latine	1.20 (1.10-1.31)	<.001
	Very poor	0.30 (0.21-0.45)	<.001
	Poor	0.36 (0.31-0.43)	<.001
	Moderate	0.53 (0.48-0.58)	<.001
	Good	0.66 (0.62-0.72)	<.001

a NH: non-Hispanic.

Living in rural areas was associated with 35% lower ownership odds, and women demonstrated slightly higher odds than men. Compared to employment-based plans, private insurance increased ownership odds. Conversely, being uninsured significantly reduced the odds of wearable ownership, as did being covered by Medicaid. Relative to non-Hispanic White respondents, non-Hispanic Black and Hispanic/Latine respondents had higher ownership odds, whereas non-Hispanic Asian respondents showed lower odds. Excellent self-reported health predicted the highest odds of ownership.

The majority of owners purchased their devices (61.1%), followed by 24.1% who received them as gifts ( Table 3 ). Smaller proportions obtained devices from health care providers, employers, or insurance companies. Wearable owners primarily used their devices for fitness and wellness; top-use cases included physical activity (56.6%), fitness training (55.4%), and losing weight (43.8%). Approximately one-third of respondents reported using their wearable to manage a diagnosed condition ( Table 3 ).

Source and use		Respondents, n (%)
	I purchased it myself	6521 (61.1)
	It was a gift	2574 (24.1)
	It was offered to me by my doctor/clinician	862 (8.1)
	It was offered to me by my insurance company	376 (3.5)
	It was offered to me by my employer	123 (1.2)
	None of these	223 (2.1)
	More physical activity	6049 (56.6)
	Fitness training	5911 (55.4)
	Lose weight	4682 (43.8)
	Sleep better	3834 (35.9)
	Manage diagnosed condition	3643 (34.1)
	Manage stress	3075 (28.8)

Principal Findings

Despite steadily increasing wearable ownership from 2020 to 2022 among US consumers, sociodemographic disparities persist related to age, income, education, and residence. Ownership skews toward younger, more affluent, and highly educated respondents living in urban areas. This is consistent with prepandemic findings [ 2 , 10 ], suggesting continuity in the digital divide [ 11 ]. This unequal access impacts the potential benefits of wearables on health promotion and health outcomes [ 12 - 15 ].

Surprisingly, non-Hispanic Black and Hispanic/Latine respondents have slightly higher ownership odds than non-Hispanic White respondents. If corroborated by future research indicating active usage among these communities, this finding suggests that wearables can be harnessed to monitor chronic conditions prevalent in these communities, such as hypertension and diabetes [ 16 , 17 ]. The inclination of wearable ownership among these groups presents an opportunity to inform the design and development of new wearable technologies [ 18 ].

Reliance on direct-to-consumer channels (eg, direct purchase or gifts) for acquiring wearables underscores the discretionary nature of wearable purchase and signals a possible relationship between health consciousness and wearable ownership [ 19 ]. The self-motivated nature of acquisition points to the importance of consumer preferences in uptake and indicates a potential barrier to access among those with limited discretionary means. This signals a need to improve equitable access through alternative distribution pathways.

As wearables are considered for clinical care [ 20 ] and public health surveillance applications [ 21 - 23 ] such as communicable respiratory (eg, COVID-19) and infectious (eg, dengue) diseases, it will be critical to continue to track ownership patterns and address biases in the wearable user population related to age, income, education, and area of residence [ 24 , 25 ]. Thus, effective wearable-based public health surveillance efforts must actively mitigate such biases within the current wearable-owning population and increase wearable uptake among subgroups reporting lower rates of ownership. In the near term, acknowledging and adjusting for biases is essential. This requires recognizing barriers that lead to uneven ownership. Over the longer term, there is an opportunity to address barriers to wearable ownership, which can allow the user cohort to gradually better represent the general population.

Limitations

Study limitations include sampling bias, as the survey undersamples those without digital devices (eg, smartphones, tablets, or computers), regular internet connectivity, and non-English speakers. While the study used a pooled sample across 3 years, a small proportion of respondents were surveyed in multiple waves, which may affect comprehensiveness. Further, the study focuses on ownership, not wearable adoption, impacting findings related to active usage patterns of wearables. Additionally, respondents who indicated ownership may or may not own more than one device, which could impact the responses to subsequent questions.

This study provides an updated benchmark on wearable device ownership among US consumers, highlighting sociodemographic disparities in ownership across age, income, education, and residence. While some traditionally disadvantaged groups demonstrate higher ownership rates, other findings reflect persisting disparities, painting a mixed picture of progress toward a more equitable wearable distribution. This underscores the need for further research, particularly into higher ownership rates among minority groups. Future research may also explore reasons for nonownership among wearable nonowners, such as lack of interest, privacy concerns, cost, or other barriers. Understanding these differences is critical for designing inclusive wearable products and business models, and for ensuring the appropriate use of wearable data in health care and public health research by accounting for biases in sample representation.

Acknowledgments

AN was supported by a National Institutes of Health (NIH)/National Center for Advancing Translational Science (NCATS) University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) Clinical and Translational Science Institute (CTSI) grant (TL1TR001883). The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not represent the official views of the NIH or Rock Health.

Authors' Contributions

AN was involved in conceptualization; data curation, analysis, validation, and visualization; writing the original draft; and writing, review, and editing of the manuscript. AK was involved in data validation and writing, review, and editing of the manuscript. MK was involved in data curation, analysis, and validation; writing the original draft; and writing, review, and editing of the manuscript. All authors had full access to the data and accept responsibility to submit for publication.

Conflicts of Interest

AN reported fees from Rock Health as a Research Fellow. AK and MK are employed by Rock Health. No other disclosures are reported.

• Friend SH, Ginsburg GS, Picard RW. Wearable digital health technology. N Engl J Med. Nov 30, 2023;389(22):2100-2101. [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Vogels EA. About one-in-five Americans use a smart watch or fitness tracker. Pew Research Center. Jan 09, 2020. URL: https:/​/www.​pewresearch.org/​short-reads/​2020/​01/​09/​about-one-in-five-americans-use-a-smart-watch-or-fitness-tracker/​ [accessed 2023-10-21]
• Lu L, Zhang J, Xie Y, Gao F, Xu S, Wu X, et al. Wearable health devices in health care: narrative systematic review. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. Nov 09, 2020;8(11):e18907. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Dunn J, Runge R, Snyder M. Wearables and the medical revolution. Per Med. Sep 2018;15(5):429-448. [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Kim EH, Jenness JL, Miller AB, Halabi R, de Zambotti M, Bagot KS, et al. Association of demographic and socioeconomic indicators with the use of wearable devices among children. JAMA Netw Open. Mar 01, 2023;6(3):e235681. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Moore K, O'Shea E, Kenny L, Barton J, Tedesco S, Sica M, et al. Older adults' experiences with using wearable devices: qualitative systematic review and meta-synthesis. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. Jun 03, 2021;9(6):e23832. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Holko M, Litwin TR, Munoz F, Theisz KI, Salgin L, Jenks NP, et al. Wearable fitness tracker use in federally qualified health center patients: strategies to improve the health of all of us using digital health devices. NPJ Digit Med. Apr 25, 2022;5(1):53. [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Knowles M, Krasniansky A, Nagappan A. Consumer adoption of digital health in 2022: moving at the speed of trust. Rock Health. Feb 21, 2023. URL: https:/​/rockhealth.​com/​insights/​consumer-adoption-of-digital-health-in-2022-moving-at-the-speed-of-trust/​ [accessed 2023-08-10]
• Federal Policy for the Protection of Human Subjects. Common Rule. Federal Register National Archives. URL: https:/​/www.​federalregister.gov/​documents/​2017/​01/​19/​2017-01058/​federal-policy-for-the-protection-of-human-subjects [accessed 2024-07-18]
• Chandrasekaran R, Katthula V, Moustakas E. Patterns of use and key predictors for the use of wearable health care devices by US adults: insights from a national survey. J Med Internet Res. Oct 16, 2020;22(10):e22443. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Ramsetty A, Adams C. Impact of the digital divide in the age of COVID-19. J Am Med Inform Assoc. Jul 01, 2020;27(7):1147-1148. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Berryhill S, Morton CJ, Dean A, Berryhill A, Provencio-Dean N, Patel SI, et al. Effect of wearables on sleep in healthy individuals: a randomized crossover trial and validation study. J Clin Sleep Med. May 15, 2020;16(5):775-783. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Ferguson T, Olds T, Curtis R, Blake H, Crozier AJ, Dankiw K, et al. Effectiveness of wearable activity trackers to increase physical activity and improve health: a systematic review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Lancet Digit Health. Aug 2022;4(8):e615-e626. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Mattison G, Canfell O, Forrester D, Dobbins C, Smith D, Töyräs J, et al. The influence of wearables on health care outcomes in chronic disease: systematic review. J Med Internet Res. Jul 01, 2022;24(7):e36690. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Lee MA, Song M, Bessette H, Roberts Davis M, Tyner TE, Reid A. Use of wearables for monitoring cardiometabolic health: a systematic review. Int J Med Inform. Nov 2023;179:105218. [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Aggarwal R, Chiu N, Wadhera RK, Moran AE, Raber I, Shen C, et al. Racial/ethnic disparities in hypertension prevalence, awareness, treatment, and control in the United States, 2013 to 2018. Hypertension. Dec 2021;78(6):1719-1726. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Rodríguez JE, Campbell KM. Racial and ethnic disparities in prevalence and care of patients with type 2 diabetes. Clin Diabetes. Jan 2017;35(1):66-70. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Walter JR, Xu S, Rogers JA. From lab to life: how wearable devices can improve health equity. Nat Commun. Jan 02, 2024;15(1):123. [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Yang Meier D, Barthelmess P, Sun W, Liberatore F. Wearable technology acceptance in health care based on national culture differences: cross-country analysis between Chinese and Swiss consumers. J Med Internet Res. Oct 22, 2020;22(10):e18801. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Smuck M, Odonkor CA, Wilt JK, Schmidt N, Swiernik MA. The emerging clinical role of wearables: factors for successful implementation in healthcare. NPJ Digit Med. Mar 10, 2021;4(1):45. [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Radin JM, Wineinger NE, Topol EJ, Steinhubl SR. Harnessing wearable device data to improve state-level real-time surveillance of influenza-like illness in the USA: a population-based study. Lancet Digit Health. Feb 2020;2(2):e85-e93. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Mason AE, Hecht FM, Davis SK, Natale JL, Hartogensis W, Damaso N, et al. Detection of COVID-19 using multimodal data from a wearable device: results from the first TemPredict Study. Sci Rep. Mar 02, 2022;12(1):3463. [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Ming DK, Sangkaew S, Chanh HQ, Nhat PTH, Yacoub S, Georgiou P, et al. Continuous physiological monitoring using wearable technology to inform individual management of infectious diseases, public health and outbreak responses. Int J Infect Dis. Jul 2020;96:648-654. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Zinzuwadia A, Singh JP. Wearable devices-addressing bias and inequity. Lancet Digit Health. Dec 2022;4(12):e856-e857. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Canali S, Schiaffonati V, Aliverti A. Challenges and recommendations for wearable devices in digital health: data quality, interoperability, health equity, fairness. PLOS Digit Health. Oct 2022;1(10):e0000104. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]

Abbreviations

odds ratio

Edited by S Ma; submitted 19.01.24; peer-reviewed by C Sullivan, L Philpot; comments to author 14.03.24; revised version received 31.03.24; accepted 25.06.24; published 26.07.24.

©Ashwini Nagappan, Adriana Krasniansky, Madelyn Knowles. Originally published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research (https://www.jmir.org), 26.07.2024.

This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work, first published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research (ISSN 1438-8871), is properly cited. The complete bibliographic information, a link to the original publication on https://www.jmir.org/, as well as this copyright and license information must be included.