Evidence-based. That is the buzz word these days, and it is critical for your coalition to use programs, policies and practices that are (as much as possible) grounded in strong theory and evidence. This is where research comes in. Research is used to test out theories and examine the effectiveness of programs, practices and policies. Coalitions need to use this information to make the best decisions about what strategies they will use to address their local substance abuse issues. It is important to be an informed consumer of research information, and this means reading a research article and assessing the quality of the findings reported and its appropriateness to the work you do. Unfortunately, deciphering these technical articles can be daunting. However, all hope is not lost!

The following article helps break down the mystery of reading research so that your coalition can get the most out of coalition-relevant research. Research published in peer review journals is typically presented in a very prescribed format, with defined sections (shown numbered below). Each section provides you with valuable information about the research study and by linking the pieces together, you can assess the quality and relevance of the research presented. So next time you get a research article, don’t toss it aside. Sit down, take a look through the article and make the most of the information in your hand.
– Evelyn Yang, M.A.

“Reading research: Go straight to the source to make science work for you”
By Jessica Campbell

1. Abstract
This is a summary of the key points in the article and should mention the hypothesis being tested. Read this to determine whether the article is relevant to your work.

2. Introduction
A context for the study is offered in this section. It should tell you what prompted the researchers to study the question at hand and upon which past research they are building. Ask yourself whether there is a logical connection between the study being introduced and past studies. Note whether the article is a research (reporting the findings of a single study) or review (reporting on a range of related studies) article. Note also whether research is quantitative (dealing with things that can be counted) or qualitative (dealing with interpretation or critique).

3. Methods
This section, sometimes also called “Methodology,” explains how the researchers set about testing their hypothesis. It should include information about the instruments, procedures, participants and analysis used by the researchers. Ask yourself whether these seem adequate to answer the question posed by the hypothesis. All of the instruments (questionnaires, surveys, interview protocols, etc.) should be described. Their appropriateness for use in the study should be justified and their quality verified. Then the procedures by which the instruments were applied to the participants should be described. This will help you compare the study to other similar studies. For example, if two studies examined coalition functioning, did one study gather information with a paper/pencil survey and the other with a face-to-face interview? Did one study gather information at just one time point and the other multiple times over the course of five years? How would these factors affect the results? Note not only the number and type of participants included in the study, but also the researchers’ reasons for choosing that number and type. Ask yourself whether the participants are demographically similar to the population with which you work and whether any differences in demographics would affect the relevance of the study to your work. The analysis is the final part of the Methods section and will explain how researchers organized and examined the data they collected. Often this takes the form of statistics, but you do not need not be familiar with statistical analysis to understand the study.

4. Results
The findings of the research are detailed in this section. In addition to raw data, the relationships between variables, as outlined in the introduction, should be explained here. Skim this section and note the subheadings used; they should reflect the questions in the introduction and help you organize your thoughts. The results are often depicted in graphs, tables or other illustrative elements. You might find it helpful to flip to the Discussion section for clarifications of specific findings included in this section.

5. Discussion
This is a summary of the results, written in narrative rather than statistical or numerical form. This section explains whether the results support the hypothesis and what they mean to previous studies on the topic. Often, suggestions for future research are included in this section. Ask yourself whether the conclusions the researchers draw here are supported by their findings. It can be helpful to read this section before reading the Methods and Results sections to get a better idea of the full scope of the research before delving into its minutiae.

6. Bibliography
This is a listing of all the sources cited in the article, as well as relevant articles or books that were not cited. Scan this to find other writings relevant to your work.

This article first appeared in the Spring 2004 issue of Prevention Forum, published by Prevention First. For more information, please visit www.prevention.org.

Evelyn Yang is the Evaluation and Research Manager at CADCA’s National Community Anti-Drug Coalition Institute. If you have any questions, she can be reached at eyang@cadca.org or
703-706-0560, ext. 243.