research gap identification

• Privacy Policy

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

Research Gap – Types, Examples and How to Identify

Table of Contents

Research Gap

Definition:

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

How to Identify Research Gap

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

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

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

Types of Research Gap

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

Theoretical Gap

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

Empirical Gap

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

Methodological Gap

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

Practical Gap

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

Knowledge Gap

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

Examples of Research Gap

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

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

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

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

How to Write Research Gap

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

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

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

Importance of Research Gap

The importance of research gaps can be summarized as follows:

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

Applications of Research Gap

Here are some potential applications of research gap:

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

Advantages of Research Gap

Here are some of the advantages of research gap:

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

Disadvantages of Research Gap

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

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

About the author

Muhammad Hassan

Researcher, Academic Writer, Web developer

You may also like

Research Paper – Structure, Examples and Writing...

Research Design – Types, Methods and Examples

Dissertation – Format, Example and Template

Context of the Study – Writing Guide and Examples

APA Table of Contents – Format and Example

Research Methods – Types, Examples and Guide

Identifying Research Gaps to Pursue Innovative Research

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

What is a Research Gap?

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

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

How to Identify Research Gap?

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

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

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

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

Different Types of Research Gaps

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

1. Knowledge gaps

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

2. Conceptual gaps

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

3. Methodological gaps

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

4. Data gaps

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

5. Practical gaps

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

Examples of Research Gap

Limited understanding of the underlying mechanisms of a disease:.

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

Inconsistencies in the findings of previous research:

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

Limited research on emerging technologies:

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

How to Deal with Literature Gap?

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

Tools to Help Your Search

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

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

Class dismissed!

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

Frequently Asked Questions

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

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

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

Thank u for your suggestion.

Very useful tips specially for a beginner

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

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

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

Thanks for sharing

Thank you very much.The work is brief and understandable

Thank you it is very informative

Thanks for sharing this educative article

Thank you for such informative explanation.

Great job smart guy! Really outdid yourself!

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

Thank you so much for this. Much appreciated

Thank you so much.

Thankyou for ur briefing…its so helpful

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

Very exciting and useful piece for researchers.

Your are awesome, it’s a great article.

Rate this article Cancel Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Enago Academy's Most Popular Articles

• Reporting Research

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

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

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

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

• Career Corner

Unlocking the Power of Networking in Academic Conferences

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

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

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

• AI in Academia

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

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

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

10 Ways to Help Students Restore Focus on Learning

Switching Your Major As a Researcher: Things to Consider Before Making the Decision

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
• Publishing Research
• Promoting Research
• Diversity and Inclusion
• Infographics
• Expert Video Library
• Other Resources
• Enago Learn
• Upcoming & On-Demand Webinars
• Peer Review Week 2024
• 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:

Which among these features would you prefer the most in a peer review assistant?

How To Find A Research Gap, Quickly

A step-by-step guide for new researchers

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

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

Overview: Finding Research Gaps

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

What is a research gap?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

How to find a research gap

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

Step 1: Identify your broad area of interest

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

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

Step 2: Do an initial literature scan

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

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

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

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

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

Need a helping hand?

Step 3: Review and shortlist articles that interest you

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

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

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

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

Step 4: Skim-read your article shortlist

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

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

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

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

Step 5: Go “FRIN hunting”

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

How to evaluate potential research gaps

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

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

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

Recap: Key Takeaways

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

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

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

Psst... there’s more!

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

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

Powerful notes! Thanks a lot.

This is helpful. Thanks a lot.

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

Very Useful

It nice job

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

It’s educative and an inspiring way of impacting research knowledge…

Thanks to the writer

Submit a Comment Cancel reply

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

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

• Print Friendly

The Best Method In Identifying Research Gap: An In-depth Analysis

What is research gap.

A research gap refers to an area or topic that has not been sufficiently explored or studied, leaving unanswered questions or unresolved issues. This article will provide an overview of the research gaps concept and their significance in the research process. It will also discuss the importance of identifying research gaps and how they can be used to formulate research objectives and problem statements. Additionally, this section will explore various techniques and strategies for conducting research gap analysis and bridging the gap between existing knowledge and future research endeavors.

Background of Research Gap

In the world of research, identifying and addressing research gaps is a crucial step towards advancing knowledge and understanding in a particular field. A research gap refers to an area in the existing body of knowledge where there is a lack of research or unanswered questions. In other words, it is a gap in the literature that needs to be addressed through further research.

Research gaps can occur for various reasons, such as a lack of studies on a specific topic, contradictory findings in existing research, or the emergence of new ideas or concepts that have not been explored. Identifying research gaps is crucial for the advancement of knowledge and the development of new research questions . By filling these gaps, researchers can contribute to the existing body of knowledge and address unanswered questions.

Furthermore, research gaps provide opportunities for researchers to make significant contributions to their field by conducting innovative and impactful studies. Understanding the background of research gaps is essential for researchers to identify areas where their research can make a meaningful impact.

Significance of Research Gap

The research gap plays a crucial role in the field of academia and scientific research. It holds significant importance for researchers, scholars, and the overall advancement of knowledge.

Contributing to Knowledge and Developing New Theories

One of the primary reasons why the research gap is significant is that it identifies areas where there is a lack of knowledge or understanding. It highlights the gaps in existing research, indicating the need for further investigation and exploration. By identifying research gaps, researchers can contribute to the existing body of knowledge by filling in the missing pieces. This leads to the development of new theories, concepts, and insights that can enhance our understanding of a particular subject or field.

Fostering Innovation and Progress through Unexplored Areas

Furthermore, the significance of research gaps lies in their potential to drive innovation and progress. When researchers identify areas that have not been extensively studied, they have the opportunity to explore new ideas, methodologies, and approaches. This can lead to groundbreaking discoveries and advancements in various disciplines.

Efficient Utilization of Resources to Avoid Duplication

Moreover, research gaps also help in avoiding duplication of efforts. By identifying what has already been studied and what areas are yet to be explored, researchers can focus their efforts on addressing the gaps rather than repeating existing research. This ensures that resources are utilized effectively and efficiently.

Impacting Practical Applications and Real-World Solutions

Additionally, the significance of research gaps extends to the practical application of research findings. By addressing the gaps in existing knowledge, researchers can provide valuable insights and solutions to real-world problems. This can have a direct impact on industries, policy-making, and decision-making processes. In conclusion, the significance of research gaps cannot be overstated. They serve as catalysts for knowledge advancement, innovation, and practical application. By identifying and addressing these gaps, researchers contribute to the growth and development of their respective fields, ultimately benefiting society as a whole.

Research Gap Examples

Identifying research gaps is crucial for pursuing innovative research. There are various types of research gaps that can be found in existing literature.

Knowledge gaps

Sometimes, a research gap exists when there is a concept or new idea that hasn’t been studied at all. For example, in the field of psychology, there might be a lack of research on the effects of social media on mental health in adolescents.

Conceptual gaps

Conceptual gaps occur when there is a lack of understanding or clarity about a particular concept or theory. For instance, in the field of economics, there might be a research gap in understanding the relationship between income inequality and economic growth.

Methodological gaps

Methodological gaps refer to the absence of appropriate research methods or techniques to study a specific phenomenon. For example, in the field of biology, there might be a research gap in developing a reliable method to detect a certain type of genetic mutation.

Data gaps occur when there is a lack of available data or insufficient data to address a research question. For instance, in the field of climate science, there might be a research gap in obtaining long-term temperature data for a specific region.

Practical gaps

Practical gaps exist when there is a discrepancy between theoretical knowledge and practical application. For example, in the field of education, there might be a research gap in implementing effective teaching strategies for students with learning disabilities.

Research Gap Analysis Techniques

Carry out a comprehensive literature review.

There are several techniques that can be used to identify research gaps. One common technique is conducting a comprehensive literature review, where researchers examine existing research papers, articles, books, and other relevant sources. By analyzing these materials, researchers can pinpoint what has already been explored and identify areas that require further investigation.

Examining Limitations and Contradictions in Existing Studies

During the literature review, researchers should pay attention to the limitations and gaps in the existing studies. These limitations can include unanswered research questions, contradictory findings, methodological issues, or areas that have not been explored in depth. Researchers can also gain insights by comparing and contrasting the findings, methodologies, and conclusions of different studies within their field, which helps in building a more complete understanding of the topic.

Exploring Interdisciplinary Insights to Identify Gaps

Additionally, researchers can seek inspiration from interdisciplinary fields or related disciplines to identify research gaps. Sometimes, a research gap in one field may have been addressed in another field, and researchers can draw upon these insights to identify areas that have not been explored within their own field. It is important to note that identifying research gaps is not a one-time process. As new studies are published and the field evolves, new gaps may emerge. Therefore, researchers should continuously update their knowledge and review the literature to stay informed about the latest developments and identify new research gaps.

Utilizing Surveys and Interviews for Direct Insights

Another technique is conducting surveys or interviews . This allows researchers to gather information directly from individuals who are knowledgeable in the field. Surveys can be distributed to a large number of participants, while interviews provide more in-depth insights from a smaller group of experts. By collecting data through surveys or interviews, researchers can identify gaps in knowledge or areas where more research is needed. Focus groups are another effective technique for conducting a research gap analysis. In a focus group, a small group of individuals with relevant expertise or experience is brought together to discuss a specific topic. Through group discussions and interactions, researchers can gain valuable insights and identify gaps in knowledge or areas that require further investigation.

Employing Quantitative Analysis to Discover Data Gaps

Quantitative analysis techniques, such as statistical analysis, can also be used to identify research gaps. By analyzing existing data sets, researchers can identify patterns, trends, or gaps in the data that may indicate areas where further research is needed. This type of analysis can provide valuable insights into the gaps in existing knowledge and guide future research directions.

Applying Gap Analysis Frameworks for Structured Assessment

In addition to these techniques, researchers can also use gap analysis frameworks or models to systematically identify and analyze research gaps. These frameworks provide a structured approach to assess the current state of knowledge, determine the desired future state, and identify the gaps that need to be addressed. By using a framework, researchers can ensure a comprehensive analysis of research gaps and develop strategies to bridge those gaps.

Research Gap and Problem Statement

A research problem is a specific issue or question that a researcher wants to investigate. It is the foundation of a research study and provides a clear direction for the research process. The identification of a research gap often leads to the formulation of a research problem.

The problem statement is a constructed sentence that defines the research problem and guides the research question. It helps to clarify the purpose of the study and provides a framework for the research design and research methodology. By addressing the research gap through the problem statement, researchers can contribute to the existing body of knowledge and fill the void in the literature. The research problem becomes the focal point of the study, and the research gap serves as the motivation for conducting the research.

Identifying a research gap and formulating a problem statement are crucial steps in the research process. They ensure that the research study is relevant, meaningful, and contributes to the advancement of knowledge in the field. As a key component of the research framework , the problem statement integrates directly into the overall structure that guides the entire research process, ensuring that all aspects of the investigation are aligned with the identified gaps and research questions.

Bridging the Research Gap

Bridging the research gap is crucial for the advancement of knowledge and the improvement of various fields. It involves closing the divide between research findings and their practical application in real-world settings. By bridging this gap, researchers can ensure that their work has a meaningful impact on society and that it is effectively utilized by practitioners and policymakers.

Effective Collaboration between Researchers and Practitioners

There are several strategies and approaches that can be employed to bridge the research gap. One practical way is to establish collaborations and partnerships between researchers and practitioners. By working together, researchers can gain valuable insights from practitioners’ experiences and expertise, while practitioners can benefit from the latest research findings and evidence-based practices. This collaboration can lead to the development of more relevant and effective solutions to real-world problems.

For facilitating such connections and collaborations, platforms like Researchmate.net are invaluable resources, providing the tools and community needed to bring together researchers and practitioners from diverse fields.

Intermediary Organizations in Facilitating Research Application

Another approach to bridging the research gap is through the use of intermediary organizations. These organizations act as a bridge between researchers and practitioners, facilitating the translation and dissemination of research findings into practical applications. They can provide training, resources, and support to practitioners, helping them to implement evidence-based practices in their work. Intermediary organizations also play a crucial role in promoting knowledge exchange and collaboration between researchers and practitioners.

Enhancing Communication and Knowledge Transfer in Research

Furthermore, bridging the research gap requires effective communication and knowledge transfer. Researchers need to communicate their findings in a clear and accessible manner, using language that is understandable to practitioners and policymakers. This can be achieved through the use of plain language summaries, policy briefs, and other forms of knowledge translation.

Engaging with Practitioners and Policymakers

Additionally, researchers should actively engage with practitioners and policymakers, seeking their input and feedback to ensure that research findings are relevant and applicable to real-world contexts.

In conclusion, exploring the research gap is a critical step in the research process. It helps researchers identify areas where further investigation is needed, contributes to the advancement of knowledge, and drives innovation. By understanding the research gap, researchers can make meaningful contributions to their field and address unanswered questions. Bridging the research gap requires collaboration and commitment from all stakeholders, but the potential benefits are immense.

Leave a Comment Cancel reply

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

Related articles

How to Formulate Research Questions in a Research Proposal? Discover The No. 1 Easiest Template Here!

7 Easy Step-By-Step Guide of Using ChatGPT: The Best Literature Review Generator for Time-Saving Academic Research

Writing Engaging Introduction in Research Papers : 7 Tips and Tricks!

Understanding Comparative Frameworks: Their Importance, Components, Examples and 8 Best Practices

Revolutionizing Effective Thesis Writing for PhD Students Using Artificial Intelligence!

3 Types of Interviews in Qualitative Research: An Essential Research Instrument and Handy Tips to Conduct Them

Highlight Abstracts: An Ultimate Guide For Researchers!

Crafting Critical Abstracts: 11 Expert Strategies for Summarizing Research

How to identify research gaps

Anthony Newman

About this video

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

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

About the presenter

Senior Publisher, Life Sciences, Elsevier

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

Researcher Academy on Twitter

• Interesting
• Scholarships
• UGC-CARE Journals

Six Effective Tips to Identify Research Gap

Conquer Research! How to Identify Gaps & Uncover Groundbreaking Topics

The first step in carrying out any sort of research is identifying the research gap. Choosing an unexplored area in your research field will enable the smooth and successful completion of your research work with a good number of publications . But the big question is, how to identify the research problem from the existing literature. Some researchers have a clear idea about the research problem they want to pursue. However, some researchers, especially those who are at an early stage of their career, find it difficult to choose a research problem that is unique and novel. So, the best way to handle this is to identify the gap in existing research i.e., identifying the research gap!

In this article, iLovePhD explains the research gap and discusses six important tips to identify the gap.

What is a Research Gap?

• A research gap is a problem or a question that has not been answered by any of the existing studies within your area of research.
• For instance, when you read a research or review article on topics of your research interest, you may notice some areas have significant scope for more research but they have not been explored by other researchers.
• So, a research gap or a literature gap refers to such unexplored areas that have scope for further research.

Significance of Unique Research Gap

• Assume that you have completed all your experimental works and you are in the process of publishing your findings in reputed journals.
• But the journal editors keep rejecting your paper stating that the research work is not unique and novel.
• Knowing this information then would be distressing for you.
• Therefore, it is important to find out the unique and novel research problems which have not been answered before.
• Remember you are investing your time, knowledge, funds, and resources in the research .
• So, invest in the right work which enables you to publish your research findings quickly.

How to Identify Research Gap?

Here are the 6 effective tips to identify the research gap.

1. Understand the Existing Literature:

The first step in gap analysis is to do a systematic review of existing literature relevant to your research. A comprehensive literature survey would provide a clear understanding of the existing works. Conduct a systematic review of relevant scholarly articles, books, conference papers, and other reliable sources. This will not only help you to understand the depth of work but also provide an opportunity to ask questions that can lead you to identify research gaps.

Also Read: How to Write a Literature Review ?

When you are reading research articles, focus more on the Introduction section where the authors explain the importance of their research and the gaps they have identified and attempted to fill through their research. Reading review articles on a particular area of research is more important and also it is the easiest way to understand the gap in your research in a short time. Read meta-analyses and review papers to learn more about the developments and trends in research over the years in your field of research.

Pay attention to areas where there are conflicting results, contradictory theories, or unanswered questions. These areas often indicate potential research gaps that you can explore further.

It is always a good practice to note all the questions that cross your mind while reading articles. You can use tables, charts, or tools to record this. You know, it will help you in the long run when you are developing your idea into a research problem or even when writing your manuscript.

2. Skim-read the Existing Literature

Skim-reading the literature in the sense, you don’t need to read the articles from start to end. Instead, you need to focus on these three key sections. They are:

Abstract – Here you will get to know what the work is all about and their key findings.

Introduction – It will give you more detail about the context and background of the study, as well as how the researchers filled the gap with their novel and unique research work.

Conclusion – Another useful way to find a research gap is to focus on the recommendations for future research or the conclusion section in the research or review article. It will give you directions or suggestions for future research that could be highly interesting and inspiring.

By skimming through these three sections of any research and review article, you will gain a reasonable idea of what each study was about, without taking much of your time.

3. Search for “FRIN phrase”

FRIN stands for “Future Research is Needed”. This is an easy method to identify the research gap. You will have to search for a few specific phrases in the articles you read. The phrases are

…investigation on this is still required/needed….

…it is important to understand this…

…have not been reported…

…the key question remains unanswered…

…it is important to address…

These expressions indicate the gaps or issues related to the main question that still need extensive scientific study. Therefore, it is important to take notice of them and use this information to develop novel research that is worth exploring.

4 . Get Feedback from the Supervisor

Discuss the issues and problems with your research Supervisor or advisor to get their suggestions. These conversations can provide valuable insights and help you to refine your research focus. They can help you to identify the blind spots in your thinking.

5. Use digital tools to Identify Research Gap

You can use digital tools as they can save time and make your search easy. Tools like Essential Science Indicator – identify the most cited articles in your field to know which topics are considered important. You can also use Google Trends to learn more about the popular questions related to your research area. This will ease your search for an unexplored area.

6. Conduct a Laboratory-scale Study:

Consider conducting a laboratory-scale study to test the feasibility and viability of your research problem. A lab-scale study will provide you with initial data and you also get an idea on how to design your experiments. It can help you to identify any potential limitations or challenges that need to be addressed before undertaking a full-scale research study.

Also Read: Comparison Between Laboratory-Scale, Pilot-Scale, and Full-Scale Studies in Research

How to Evaluate Potential Research Gaps?

Once you have a list of potential research gaps that could be explored, you need to systematically evaluate them to choose a good research problem. This will help you to avoid duplication of work. The key factors to be considered are listed here.

Originality and Novel – You need to ensure that the research problem should be original, unique, and novel.

Data Collection and Analysis – You need to check whether the data collection and sampling methods are easy and feasible. Also, check the instrumentation facilities are available for the study.

Costs – Check for any additional costs involved in data collection and analysis.

Time frames – Check that you can complete the research works within the timeframe specified by your university.

Supervisor’s guidance – The most important factor is, to ensure that your supervisor is comfortable in guiding you in your chosen topic throughout your research work.

Different types of research gaps in the literature review

According to Robinson, Saldanhea & McKoy (2011), Muller-Bloch, & Kranz (2015), and Miles (2017), the research gap has been classified into seven categories .

Evidence gap : Little or no evidence to address the research problem.

Knowledge gap : Knowledge may not exist in the actual field. It might be the case that the result of a study differs from what was expected.

Practical-Knowledge gap : When professional behavior or practices deviate from research findings or are not covered by research.

Methodology gap : A distinction in research methods is needed to have new insights or to avoid ambiguous findings.

Empirical gap : Research findings need to be evaluated or empirically verified.

Theoretical gap : Theory should be applied to certain research issues to generate new insights; a lack of theoretical knowledge may lead to a gap in research.

Population gap : Type of research gap that deals with a population that is not adequately represented or under-researched in the prior research (Eg., Gender, age, race).

By following the above-said tips, I am sure that you can very well identify the research gaps in your area of research. Unique research topics emerge from research gaps, so it’s important to do a gap analysis before you attempt to define a topic. Once you have identified a potential research gap and resultant topic, frame your objectives, then develop a clear methodology, and carry out your experiments, and this will certainly lead to breakthrough results.

• Academic Writing
• Find Gaps in Research
• groundbreaking topics
• Identify Research Gap
• Literature Review
• research gap
• Research Problem
• strengthen research
• uncover new research

Top 100 Journal Publications in the World 2024

Psychological reasons for delaying phd completion, how to complete your phd in 3 years, leave a reply cancel reply, most popular, dst-cetp joint call 2024: a major opportunity in carbon capture, utilisation, and storage (ccus), the research proposal flow chart: your guide to academic success, anna’s archive – download research papers for free, top 50 research institutions in india: nirf rankings 2024, indo-danish collaboration on cutting-edge hydrogen technologies, how to use openai o1 for your phd research, focus on phd quality, not just publications, best for you, 24 best online plagiarism checker free – 2024, what is a phd a comprehensive guide for indian scientists and aspiring researchers, popular posts, top 488 scopus indexed journals in computer science – open access, scopus indexed journals list 2024, popular category.

• POSTDOC 317
• Interesting 258
• Journals 236
• Fellowship 134
• Research Methodology 103
• All Scopus Indexed Journals 94

Mail Subscription

iLovePhD is a research education website to know updated research-related information. It helps researchers to find top journals for publishing research articles and get an easy manual for research tools. The main aim of this website is to help Ph.D. scholars who are working in various domains to get more valuable ideas to carry out their research. Learn the current groundbreaking research activities around the world, love the process of getting a Ph.D.

Contact us: [email protected]

Google News

Copyright © 2024 iLovePhD. All rights reserved

• Artificial intelligence

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

How to Identify a Research Gap

5-minute read

• 10th January 2024

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

What Is a Research Gap?

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

Why Is Identifying a Research Gap Important?

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

1. Avoid Redundancy in Your Research

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

2. Guide the Research Design

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

3. Practical Applications

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

4. Field Advancements

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

5. Strategic Research Planning

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

6. Academic and Professional Recognition

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

How Do I Identify a Research Gap?

1. clearly define your research topic .

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

Find this useful?

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

2. Conduct a Thorough Literature Review

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

3. Evaluate Existing Studies

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

4. Identify Unexplored Perspectives

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

Additional Tips

Stay up to date with emerging trends.

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

Seek Guidance From Experts

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

Use Research Tools and Analytics

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

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

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

Share this article:

Post A New Comment

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

Free email newsletter template.

Promoting a brand means sharing valuable insights to connect more deeply with your audience, and...

6-minute read

How to Write a Nonprofit Grant Proposal

If you’re seeking funding to support your charitable endeavors as a nonprofit organization, you’ll need...

9-minute read

How to Use Infographics to Boost Your Presentation

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

8-minute read

Why Interactive PDFs Are Better for Engagement

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

7-minute read

Seven Key Strategies for Voice Search Optimization

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

4-minute read

Five Creative Ways to Showcase Your Digital Portfolio

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

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

From research discovery to gap finding

ResGap is an application that helps you identify research gaps quickly and easily, specifically it:

• Provides a quick and comprehensive overview of your research topic.
• Finds the most cited publications, authors, journals and refereed outlets in your research area.
• Visualises how topics in your area have evolved over time, showing topics that have increased or decreased in appearance.
• Identifies research gaps by comparing different sets of literature (i.e. academic vs practitioner publications).

ResGap showcases research where the application was used:

ResGap showcases research conducted in a variety of research areas with diverse collaborators across the globe. This research applies the ResGap tool and associated methodologies, e.g. entity-linking, machine learning, text mining, natural language processing, etc.

Browse examples below:

• environmental accounting
• interdisciplinary research maps
• digital disruption and digital transformation
• trending topics in the top Information System journals from 1996 to 2017

Follow the ResGap blog for current updates.

Researchers

Whether you are a senior researcher or are just embarking on an academic career, ResGap can speed up your data analysis for literature reviews.

ResGap can help you to identify, for example:

• which are the most important topics within an area of study
• how research trends evolve over time
• which topics are being explored extensively, and which are possibly being overlooked
• which are the “hot” topics for top journals

Institutions

ResGap helps organisations determine where new research should be focused. The tool helps identify gaps and helps build a case for the development or expansion of research centres or departments.

Curricula are continuously evolving and must reflect the most up to date research. ResGap can highlight trends in the relevant literature, helping to identify learning objectives which may be overlooked or inadequately covered in course materials. As a ResGap user, you will have access to a bank of data covering 6,000+ published articles (from 1999 to 2017), enabling you to track the progression & popularity of published topics, which should inform curriculum development.

Empower your academic work and research with an automated, intelligent and efficient assistant which can help you identify relevant research gaps.

With ResGap you can simply, efficiently and reliably identify research trends, finding which topics in your area of interest are salient, emergent or waning. Efficiently comparing literature at scale while drawing reliable conclusions which assist you in your academic research, ResGap can help you uncover unmet research needs and more.

Our portal shows research trends of topics appearing in Information Systems journals (basket of 8). ResGap consolidates and groups data on over 6,000 actual publications (from 1996 until 2017). This data is then be used to generate a range of accessible graphics and models, allowing you to track the most important topics within your area of study over time.

Once signed into ResGap, you will also have access to a literature-comparison tool which was developed to identify gaps in different sets of literature and offers a wide variety of applications and features.

Dr. Mauricio Marrone – Founder

An Associate Professor at Macquarie University (Sydney, Australia) with interests in Information Systems, Research Methods, Innovation Diffusion and Text Analytics, Mauricio originally developed ResGap as a means to identify gaps in the research in his field. It soon became apparent that the portal had broader applications.

Tim Chard – Developer

Assoc. prof. mark dras – advisor, yvonne black – outreach manager.

Educational resources and simple solutions for your research journey

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

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

Table of Contents

What is a research gap ?  

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

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

Why is it important to identify research gaps ?  

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

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

Identifying research gaps : A challenge for early researchers  

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

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

How to identify research gaps  in the literature  

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

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

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

-Identify key terms.

-Identify relevant articles based on the keywords.

-Review selected articles to identify gaps in the literature.  

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

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

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

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

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

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

References  

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

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

Question: How can research gaps be addressed?

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

Question: Can research gaps change over time?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Related Posts

How to get a PhD in Computer Science? 

How to get a PhD in Accounting? 

•   [email protected]
• Shapiro Library
• SNHU Library Frequently Asked Questions

FAQ: What is a research gap and how do I find one?

• 7 Academic Integrity & Plagiarism
• 61 Academic Support, Writing Help, & Presentation Help
• 28 Access/Remote Access
• 7 Accessibility
• 8 Building/Facilities
• 6 Career/Job Information
• 25 Catalog/Print Books
• 25 Circulation
• 134 Citing Sources
• 14 Copyright
• 306 Databases
• 23 Directions/Location
• 19 Faculty Resources/Needs
• 7 Hours/Contacts
• 2 Innovation Lab & Makerspace/3D Printing
• 25 Interlibrary Loan
• 42 IT/Computer/Printing Support
• 3 Library Instruction
• 37 Library Technology Help
• 6 Multimedia
• 16 Online Programs
• 20 Periodicals
• 24 Policies
• 8 RefWorks/Citation Managers
• 4 Research Guides (LibGuides)
• 213 Research Help
• 22 University Services

Last Updated: Aug 26, 2024 Views: 500687

What is a research gap.

A research gap is a question or a problem that has not been answered by any of the existing studies or research within your field. Sometimes, a research gap exists when there is a concept or new idea that hasn't been studied at all. Sometimes you'll find a research gap if all the existing research is outdated and in need of new/updated research (studies on Internet use in 2001, for example). Or, perhaps a specific population has not been well studied (perhaps there are plenty of studies on teenagers and video games, but not enough studies on toddlers and video games, for example). These are just a few examples, but any research gap you find is an area where more studies and more research need to be conducted. Please view this video clip from our Sage Research Methods database for more helpful information: How Do You Identify Gaps in Literature?

How do I find one?

It will take a lot of research and reading.  You'll need to be very familiar with all the studies that have already been done, and what those studies contributed to the overall body of knowledge about that topic. Make a list of any questions you have about your topic and then do some research to see if those questions have already been answered satisfactorily. If they haven't, perhaps you've discovered a gap!  Here are some strategies you can use to make the most of your time:

• One useful trick is to look at the “suggestions for future research” or conclusion section of existing studies on your topic. Many times, the authors will identify areas where they think a research gap exists, and what studies they think need to be done in the future.
• As you are researching, you will most likely come across citations for seminal works in your research field. These are the research studies that you see mentioned again and again in the literature.  In addition to finding those and reading them, you can use a database like Web of Science to follow the research trail and discover all the other articles that have cited these. See the FAQ: I found the perfect article for my paper. How do I find other articles and books that have cited it? on how to do this. One way to quickly track down these seminal works is to use a database like SAGE Navigator, a social sciences literature review tool. It is one of the products available via our SAGE Knowledge database.
• In the PsycINFO and PsycARTICLES databases, you can select literature review, systematic review, and meta analysis under the Methodology section in the advanced search to quickly locate these. See the FAQ: Where can I find a qualitative or quantitative study? for more information on how to find the Methodology section in these two databases.
• In CINAHL , you can select Systematic review under the Publication Type field in the advanced search. 
• In Web of Science , check the box beside Review under the Document Type heading in the “Refine Results” sidebar to the right of the list of search hits.
• If the database you are searching does not offer a way to filter your results by document type, publication type, or methodology in the advanced search, you can include these phrases (“literature reviews,” meta-analyses, or “systematic reviews”) in your search string.  For example, “video games” AND “literature reviews” could be a possible search that you could try.

Please give these suggestions a try and contact a librarian for additional assistance.

Content authored by: GS

• Share on Facebook

Was this helpful? Yes 401 No 155

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) are a self-serve option for users to search and find answers to their questions. 

Use the search box above to type your question to search for an answer or browse existing FAQs by group, topic, etc.

Tell Me More

Link to Question Form

More assistance.

Submit a Question

Related FAQs

Loading metrics

Open Access

Peer-reviewed

Research Article

Mentorship in health research institutions in Africa: A systematic review of approaches, benefits, successes, gaps and challenges

Roles Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Supervision, Validation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing

* E-mail: [email protected] , [email protected]

Affiliation African Population and Health Research Center, Nairobi, Kenya

Roles Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing

Affiliations African Population and Health Research Center, Nairobi, Kenya, School of Public Health, University of Ghana, Accra, Ghana

Roles Conceptualization, Data curation, Investigation, Methodology, Writing – review & editing

Affiliation Department of Biosciences and Biotechnology, University of Medical Sciences, Ondo City, Ondo Estate, Nigeria

Roles Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing

Roles Conceptualization, Writing – review & editing

Roles Conceptualization, Data curation, Funding acquisition, Project administration, Resources

Roles Conceptualization, Data curation, Writing – review & editing

Roles Conceptualization, Data curation, Funding acquisition, Methodology, Project administration, Supervision, Writing – review & editing

Roles Conceptualization, Data curation, Funding acquisition, Methodology, Project administration, Resources, Supervision, Validation, Writing – review & editing

Roles Funding acquisition, Project administration

• Maurine Ng’oda, 
• Peter Muriuki Gatheru, 
• Oyetunde Oyeyemi, 
• Phylis Busienei, 
• Caroline H. Karugu, 
• Sharon Mugo, 
• Lilian Okoth, 
• Margaret Nampijja, 
• Sylvia Kiwuwa-Muyingo, 

• Published: September 23, 2024
• https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgph.0003314
• Peer Review
• Reader Comments

In Africa, where the burden of diseases is disproportionately high, significant challenges arise from a shortage of skilled researchers, lack of research funding, and limited mentorship opportunities. The continent faces a substantial gap in research output largely attributed to the dearth of mentorship opportunities for early career researchers.

To explore existing mentorship approaches, identify challenges, gaps, successes, and benefits, and provide insights for strengthening mentorship programs in African health research institutions.

We registered the review protocol on the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews [CRD42021285018] and searched six electronic databases–EMBASE, AJOL, Web of Science, PubMed, DOAJ, and JSTOR from inception to 10 November 2023, for studies published in English reporting on approaches of mentorship in health research in African countries. We also searched grey literature repositories, institutional websites, and reference lists of included studies for additional literature. Two independent reviewers conducted screening of titles and abstracts of identified studies, full-text screening, assessment of methodological quality, and data extraction. We assessed study quality against the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT). We resolved any disagreements through discussion and consensus. We employed a narrative approach to synthesize the findings.

We retrieved 1799 articles and after screening, included 21 studies in the review. The reviewers identified 20 mentorship programs for health researchers (N = 1198) in 12 African countries mostly focusing on early-career researchers and junior faculty members. A few included mid-career and senior researchers.

We categorized the programs under three key mentoring approaches: international collaborative programs, regional and in-country collaborations, and specialized capacity-building initiatives. Our review highlighted the following successes and benefits of health research mentorship programs: the establishment of collaborations and partnerships, development of research programs and capacities, improvement of individual skills and confidence, increased publications, and successful grant applications. The gaps identified were limited funding, lack of a mentorship culture, negative attitudes towards research careers, and lack of prioritization of research mentorship.

Our review highlights a diverse landscape of health research mentorship aspects predominantly targeting early career researchers and heavily driven by the North. There is a need for locally driven mentorship initiatives in Africa to strengthen mentorship to advance health research in the region.

Trial registration

PROSPERO registration number: CRD42021285018 .

Citation: Ng’oda M, Gatheru PM, Oyeyemi O, Busienei P, Karugu CH, Mugo S, et al. (2024) Mentorship in health research institutions in Africa: A systematic review of approaches, benefits, successes, gaps and challenges. PLOS Glob Public Health 4(9): e0003314. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgph.0003314

Editor: Janet Seeley, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, UNITED KINGDOM OF GREAT BRITAIN AND NORTHERN IRELAND

Received: May 23, 2024; Accepted: August 26, 2024; Published: September 23, 2024

Copyright: © 2024 Ng’oda et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Data Availability: Data underlying the findings for this review has been provided as part of the submitted article in the supplementary information .

Funding: This work was supported by the African Research Excellent Fund (AREF to EG). The funder had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interest exist.

Introduction

There exists a significant gap in research output in sub-Saharan Africa where the burden of disease is disproportionately high [ 1 ]. The current state of health science research, funding, and research capacity in the continent falls short of addressing the existing and unmet health research needs [ 2 ]. Some of the contributing factors to this challenge are the scarcity of well-trained and skilled researchers and the lack of opportunities for hands-on research experience with research specialists, leading to inadequate supervision and limited mentorship opportunities for early career researchers [ 3 ].

Mentorship is defined in simple terms as a relationship where someone experienced, in this context researcher, guides and supports another person to help them learn and grow professionally [ 4 ]. There are two common approaches to mentorship. The first approach is the traditional one-on-one mentoring model [ 5 ]. In this paradigm, an experienced researcher, often with a distinguished record of accomplishment, provides guidance and support to a less experienced mentee. This close, personalized interaction facilitates in-depth discussions, transfer of skills, and the cultivation of a strong mentor-mentee relationship [ 6 ]. Through this approach, the mentor can offer valuable insights, share experiences, and assist the mentee in navigating the complexities of the research landscape. The one-on-one model is particularly effective for tailoring mentorship to the unique needs and goals of the mentee, fostering a deep sense of individualized support and professional development [ 5 ].

The second common approach to mentorship in research involves group or team-based mentoring [ 7 ]. In this collaborative model, a mentor oversees a cohort of mentees who work together on related research projects or within a shared research theme. This approach promotes a sense of community and encourages peer learning among mentees.

Group mentoring can be especially beneficial in fostering interdisciplinary collaborations, providing diverse perspectives, and creating a supportive network for mentees [ 6 ]. It also allows the mentor’s expertise to be leveraged across multiple individuals simultaneously [ 8 ]. The group dynamic enhances social learning, as mentees not only benefit from the mentor’s guidance but also from the collective knowledge and experiences of their peers. Group mentorship is adaptable to various research settings and can effectively address the evolving needs of mentees in collaborative research environments [ 7 ].

Recognizing mentorship as a vital strategy for personal and professional growth [ 9 , 10 ], there is a growing awareness of its importance in enhancing the capacities of individuals, including researchers [ 11 ]. However, mentorship practices are not widespread in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) [ 12 ], and available evidence on existing approaches demonstrates mixed results regarding effectiveness, often failing to account for the unique challenges and structures present in the research systems. The dearth of a well-established culture of mentorship, the absence of formal policies, and the inadequacy of structured tools for assessing mentorship further compound the challenges faced in fostering effective mentorship programs in LMICs [ 13 ].

The systematic review aimed to inform the development of optimized mentorship programs that address the specific needs and challenges faced by health researchers in Africa. We sought to synthesize evidence on various mentorship approaches prevalent in the region to provide a more comprehensive understanding of mentorship in health research institutions in Africa. We explored the nature and effectiveness of mentorship initiatives in African research institutions to identify both successes and challenges encountered in implementing these programs, pinpoint existing gaps in mentorship practices, and provide valuable insights.

The mentorship was considered effective if it resulted in early and mid-level career researchers taking up leadership roles and positions in research and academia, fostering a collaborative research environment, contributing to research outputs such as publications, and strengthening the skills of early and mid-level career researchers.

Protocol registration

We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines (2020) as shown in supplementary document ( S1 Checklist ). We registered the protocol for this review with the PROSPERO under the registration number CRD42021285018.

Information sources and search

We identified relevant studies by searching various databases such as EMBASE, AJOL, Web of Science, DOAJ, PubMed, and JSTOR from their inception up to 10 th November 2023. Additionally, we conducted searches on open grey literature repositories and specific institutional websites to identify any other relevant studies. We also conducted a manual search of reference lists of identified studies for any additional findings. A list of relevant search terms and keywords was prepared. The search terms were used in the following combinations: (“Practices”) AND (“Success” OR “Benefits” OR “Advantages”) AND (“Gaps” OR “Challenges”) AND (“mentor” OR “mentorship” OR “mentoring” OR “mentoring relationship” OR “onsite training” OR “vertical mentorship” OR “on-the-job training” OR “OJT” OR “capacity building” OR “capacity strengthening” OR “mentee” OR “mentoring program” OR “mentoring models” OR “career coaching” OR “career counselling” OR “career support” OR “mentorship advice”) AND (“research institutions” OR “research program” OR “researchers” OR “research organizations”) AND (“Africa” OR “African” OR “sub-Saharan Africa” OR “Africa South of the Sahara” OR “East Africa” OR “West Africa” OR “Southern Africa” OR “Central Africa” OR “Northern Africa”). To ensure that we retrieved articles from each country, we substituted the names of the study setting with the country-specific names. For example, to retrieve articles from East Africa, we replaced "East Africa" with Uganda, Kenya, Tanzania, Burundi, and Rwanda. The detailed search strategy is described in the supplementary documents ( S1 Table ).

Study selection and eligibility criteria

Teams of two reviewers from MN, PMG, OO, SM, CHK, SM, LO, MNa, SKM, YDW, and PKW independently screened titles, abstracts, and full texts of the selected studies. Any disagreements between the two reviewers were addressed through discussion and consensus, or by consulting a senior reviewer (GA). The scope of our search was limited to studies published in the English language. We used the Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcomes, and Study (PICOS) design as a framework to formulate eligibility criteria. The PICOS elements comprised; i) participants–researchers at any career level, serving as mentors or mentees; ii) interventions–diverse mentoring programs of varied types, durations, and regularities; iii) comparisons–all mentorship programs were considered, regardless of the presence of a comparison group; iv) outcomes–studies reporting on mentorship approaches, benefits, successes, gaps, and challenges were included in the review; v) settings–African academic and/or research institutions. Articles focusing on non-human health research were not eligible. We also excluded systematic reviews, conference abstracts, commentaries, and opinion pieces.

Data collection process

Four reviewers (MN, PMG, OO, PB) independently extracted data from the selected studies using a Microsoft Excel extraction form. Key variables extracted were study author and date, country, study design, characteristics of the study population, sample size, intervention, mode of delivery, and outcome measures, including challenges, gaps, benefits, and successes. Discrepancies during the extraction process were resolved through discussion and consensus building.

Assessment of methodological quality

Two reviewers (MN and PM) independently evaluated the quality of the included studies using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) [ 14 ], which enables the concurrent assessment of various empirical study types. The MMAT encompasses two general screening questions applicable to all study types and specific sets of five questions for each of the five study types: qualitative, quantitative randomized controlled trials, quantitative non-randomized, quantitative descriptive, and mixed methods design. Both reviewers utilized the MMAT criteria to assess key methodological components, including sampling, data collection, response bias, outcome measurements, and data analysis/reporting, providing a comprehensive evaluation of each study’s overall quality. Disagreements were resolved through discussion and consensus. Ratings were assigned based on the proportion of fulfilled quality criteria, with studies classified as low risk (≥75%), moderate risk (25–75%), or high risk (<25%). The included articles were categorised as qualitative, quantitative (observational), and mixed methods studies.

Outcome measures

The primary outcome of this review was the mentorship approach including the mode and period of delivery. Secondary outcomes included successes, benefits, gaps, and challenges associated with the mentorship interventions.

Synthesis of evidence

We employed a narrative synthesis approach to interpret findings from the included studies. For this reason, publication bias and heterogeneity in study designs, interventions, and outcomes were not considered. A comprehensive exploration of the outcomes of interest within the literature was achieved through a narrative synthesis. The synthesis involved summarizing the characteristics of included studies, such as study design, population, interventions, and key outcomes. We then categorized findings based on themes, similarities, and differences, providing a nuanced understanding of the evidence. The narrative synthesis was guided by the PRISMA guidelines.

Search output

The initial search yielded 1623 articles from six databases. We identified an additional 176 articles through searches on open grey and specific institutional websites, resulting in 1799 retrieved articles. After removing 423 duplicates, we screened 1376 titles and abstracts, leading to the preliminary selection of 303 articles for full-text review. Ultimately, 21 studies that met the inclusion criteria were included in the review as shown in Fig 1 in the supplementary documents.

• PPT PowerPoint slide
• PNG larger image
• TIFF original image

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgph.0003314.g001

Study characteristics

All the 21 studies included in the review were observational studies published between 2013 and 2023. The studies were from 12 different African countries including Kenya, Tanzania, Uganda, Ethiopia, Nigeria, South Africa, Malawi, Ghana, Liberia, Zimbabwe, Rwanda, and Lesotho. The primary studies used diverse methods which included qualitative designs (10 studies; 48%) [ 15 – 24 ], quantitative designs (9 studies; 43%) [ 25 – 33 ], and mixed methods (2 studies; (9%) [ 32 , 33 ].

Characteristics of participants

The review included a diverse cohort of early-career, mid-career, and senior researchers (N = 1198) from various institutions. The participants were recruited from universities [ 13 , 14 , 18 , 19 , 21 , 24 , 26 , 27 , 29 , 30 , 32 ], health research institutions [ 15 – 17 , 20 , 22 , 23 , 25 , 28 ], public health teaching institutions [ 33 ], and hospitals [ 35 ]. Notably, their work focus spanned a range of fields, including HIV/AIDS rsearch, mental health, sanitation and hygiene, family health, biomedical sciences, biostatistics, health system and policy, and public health. The inclusion of mid- or senior-level faculty researchers, doctoral fellows, statisticians, and undergraduate students contributed to a well-rounded participant pool. This diversity not only enriches the study’s findings but also underscores the broad relevance and applicability of research mentorship across multiple disciplines within the health sciences. The detailed characteristics of the individual studies included in the review can be found in supplementary information ( S2 Table ).

Methodological quality of individual studies

Ten qualitative studies, nine quantitative studies, and two mixed-methods studies were assessed for methodological quality. We rated eight studies as low risk and 13 studies as moderate risk. Detailed information on the risk rating for each study can be found in supplementary information ( S3 Table ).

Approaches of research mentorship

We identified three key approaches from the included studies that have been used for mentoring health researchers in Africa. Broadly, we have categorized these into international collaborative programs [ 14 – 16 , 19 , 24 , 33 ], regional and in-country collaborations [ 17 , 18 , 20 , 23 , 31 ], and specialized capacity-building programs [ 21 , 22 , 25 – 28 , 30 , 32 , 34 ].

International collaborative programs.

International collaboration emerged as a central theme in the findings as one of the approaches used in health research mentorship, demonstrating a concerted effort to foster exchanges through cross-cultural training programs global symposia and workshops, resources sharing through north-south and south-south collaborations, and building global community of researchers through multinational research hubs, global networks, and infrastructure development. These collaborative initiatives aimed to transcend geographical boundaries, leverage diverse expertise, and collectively address health research challenges to achieve sustainable and impactful outcomes.

The ARCADE project [ 20 ] and the 5-year multinational collaboration across five African countries, the USA, and the UK highlight both north-south and south-south collaborations [ 34 ]. These initiatives brought together researchers from different continents, acknowledging the importance of shared expertise and resources. The collaborative capacity strengthening initiative at the University of Western Cape (UWC) in South Africa [ 16 ], involving international symposia and workshops provided platforms for researchers to come together, share insights, and engage in collaborative learning. The exchange of ideas fosters a global perspective on research challenges, methodologies, and solutions. The AIDS International Training and Research Program (AITRP) [ 15 ] and the collaborative capacity strengthening initiative involving the UWC in South Africa [ 16 ] exemplify cross-cultural training programs.

Regional and in-country collaborations.

In-country and regional collaborations are also prominently highlighted as an avenue to mentorship, reflecting the recognition of the importance of strengthening research capacity at the local and regional levels. This theme involves partnerships and initiatives that focus on collaboration within a specific country or region. For instance, the Nigeria Implementation Science Alliance (NISA) [ 19 ], an initiative that involves collaboration among partners within Nigeria and the sub-Saharan African region focuses on local research capacity strengthening. The program aims to facilitate collaboration, enhance implementation research, and identify culturally appropriate strategies to improve public health through research.

The Transforming Health Professions Education in Tanzania (THET) project [ 32 ] included a component where young peers received mentorship from senior researchers through mentored research awards and research training. These peers, in turn, provided reciprocal peer-to-peer mentorship to undergraduate students.

This approach emphasizes the importance of building mentorship networks within the country, creating a sustainable model for capacity strengthening. In a separate example, a series of two-day intensive regional mentorship workshops were conducted over four years to train mid- and senior-level investigators engaged in public health, clinical, and basic science research across multiple academic institutions in LMICs [ 21 ]. These workshops focused on developing mentorship skills locally and regionally, recognizing the value of nurturing research talent within specific geographic contexts. The African Mental Health Research Initiative (AMARI) [ 23 ] recruits and trains research fellows at Master’s, PhD, and post-doc levels within the African region. The initiative aims to equip these fellows with research, teaching, and leadership skills to build a viable and sustainable research network.

Specialized capacity-building programs.

This approach recognizes the importance of tailoring mentorship initiatives to the unique needs and challenges faced by researchers in Africa and involves targeted initiatives designed to enhance specific skills and competencies related to health research. For example, the Consortium for Advanced Research Training in Africa (CARTA) program [ 26 ], delivered through PhD training fellowships is a specialized training that focuses on creating a network of locally trained but globally recognized African scholars. CARTA recognizes the importance of advancing research capacity at the doctoral level locally, contributing to the development of a cadre of highly skilled researchers.

The Sanitation and Hygiene Applied Research for Equity (SHARE) program [ 28 ] incorporates specialized mentoring integrated into research, administration, financial management, and communication activities. This approach ensures that participants receive guidance and support in areas directly relevant to their research projects.

The Sexual Violence Research Initiative [ 18 ] provided intensive mentoring and technical advice specifically for the development or adaptation and conduct of preliminary proof of concept testing of violence against women and violence against children primary prevention interventions. This specialized training addressed the unique challenges associated with research on sensitive topics and provided targeted support for researchers in the field of sexual violence prevention. The Medical Education Partnership Initiative–Medical Education for Equitable Services for All Ugandans (MEPI-MESAU) program [ 29 ] goes beyond the traditional mentorship by providing infrastructure support including administrative support, paid tuition fees, tools, and skills training–on study design, biostatistics, manuscript and grant writing, to early career researchers.

Lastly, initiatives like AFFIRM, LATIN-MH, PAM-D, RedeAmericas, and SHARE, funded by the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH), specifically targeted mental health research [ 24 ]. These hubs aimed to improve the research core for evidence-based mental health interventions, enhance research skills in global mental health, and provide capacity-building opportunities for early career investigators in LMICs. In Rwanda, the 6-week deliverable-driven survey analysis training program [ 27 ] aimed at strengthening the skills of local research leaders and statisticians. This hands-on training focused on a specific aspect of research (survey analysis) and was designed to achieve tangible outcomes within a defined period. S4 Table summarizes the approaches to mentorship in health research identified in the 21 studies included in this review.

In this section, we highlight the diverse successes derived from the health research mentorship programs implemented in 12 different African countries. We consolidate these successes into five crucial themes outlined herewith: establishment of partnerships and collaborations; development of research programs; individual capacity strengthening; development of research publications; and successful grant applications and awards.

Establishment of partnerships and collaborations.

Six studies mentioned the establishment of partnerships and collaborations as one of the successes of mentorship programs in health research institutions in Africa [ 15 , 19 , 24 , 25 , 28 , 29 ]. The successes related to this aspect included the establishment of mutually beneficial collaborations between investigators in different countries that were developed during training, which built a supportive research environment. There were also shared and mutually beneficial resources within international research collaborations, which supported early career investigators and served as a conduit to transfer health research training opportunities to researchers in African institutions [ 15 ]. Through mentorship programs, various organizations and government agencies were able to make definite commitments toward more investment in implementation research. For example, in Nigeria, the National Agency for the Control of AIDS (NACA) in collaboration with the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) and the Population Council was able to launch the “Adolescent and Young People Challenge” pilot project. This project sought to fund innovative ideas led by youth to provide comprehensive HIV education to at least 200,000 Nigerians [ 19 ]. The mentorship programs also led to the establishment of sustainable partnerships between researchers in sub-Saharan African countries and other LMICs, as well as with institutions in the north.

These partnerships facilitated collaborative cutting-edge research in global mental health and provided a management strategy that builds partnerships between local and international partners for efficient coordination and timely achievement of set goals [ 25 ].

Development of research programs.

Thirteen studies reported the development of research programs as a key success of the respective mentorship programs. The different aspects achieved under this theme, as reported by the highlighted studies, were that early career investigators learned how to navigate the complex international research environment to build local research capacity [ 14 , 16 ] with trainees experiencing moderate increases in research confidence that were statistically significant, and an observed positive research culture being created [ 35 ]. In a study conducted in Uganda, the mentored PhD students were able to supervise and mentor 65 Master’s students, thus building local research capacity [ 28 ]. Participation in workshops provided knowledge of valuable concepts and a structure for the development and strengthening of formal mentoring programs across LMIC institutions, leading to the growth of institutional support, the establishment of several new institutional mentorship training programs, the initiation of peer mentorship networks, and regular mentor-mentee meetings. A qualitative study conducted in Kenya, Peru, India, and South Africa reported that the mentorship training model expanded as a national mandate for research training, nested within a required training program [ 21 ]. Hubs that evolved into centers of research excellence with a crop of dedicated researchers were also established [ 25 ].

Individual capacity strengthening.

Individual capacity strengthening was reported to increase as participants engaged in various training programs, workshops, and research activities.

For instance, in Zimbabwe, faculty members attended at least one of 15 faculty development workshops. Forty-one faculty members underwent a one-year advanced faculty development training in medical education and leadership, 33 mentored research scholars were trained under the novel NECTAR, and 52 and 12 in cardiovascular and mental health programs, respectively [ 34 ]. In Rwanda, three-quarters of the participants mentored others in survey data analysis or conducted an additional survey analysis in the year following the training. Similarly, 36% of participants completed an additional DHS analysis, 71% completed an additional survey analysis, and 79% provided mentorship to others about survey data analysis [ 27 ].

In addition, individual capacity strengthening was achieved as mentors enrolled in other courses or training. In Tanzania, most young peers had taken at least three research training short courses, and six had enrolled in PhD programs. The number of fellows increased from 12 to 24, and mentored graduates increased from 41 to 67 in the second cohort. Eight senior fellows enrolled in PhD programs, and 10 of 12 had registered for a PhD fellowship [ 31 – 33 ]. In Malawi, Uganda, and South Africa, the ARCADE project was successful in developing and delivering courses that reached over 920 postgraduate students [ 20 ]. In Ethiopia, Ghana, Malawi, South Africa, Uganda, Zimbabwe, Kenya, Liberia, Nigeria, and Sri Lanka, the mentorship programs have achieved more success, including participants completing their courses for second master’s degrees with a special focus on specific health aspects, winning awards to support the further development of their research careers, and the appointment of one participant as a professor and another young researcher at a Health Institute [ 24 ].

Development of research publications.

The mentorship programs led to the development of new publications in various fields, as reported by nine studies. For instance, during the first two years of the program in Tanzania, various research articles from the mentored programs were published, with other manuscripts in the final stages of preparation. Each mentee had at least one or more manuscripts published or accepted for publication, and young peers shared authorship in at least one of the published articles [ 31 – 33 ]. Various publications were also done in other different mentorship programs across various countries, with authorship being from multi-institutional teams and submitted to international peer-reviewed scientific journals [ 23 , 24 , 26 – 28 ]. In South Africa, 70 interns contributed to 51 peer-reviewed articles [ 22 ], while in Uganda, 80 publications not related to PhD thesis work were co-authored by PhD students [ 29 ].

Successful grant applications and awards.

Five studies reported funding applications with some grants being awarded as a major success derived from the mentorship programs. A study done in Ghana, Kenya, Liberia, Nigeria, and South Africa reported 21 grant applications being made successfully over the mentorship period [ 25 ]. Similarly, in Tanzania, young peers began to broaden their research careers by involvement in other ongoing research projects and grant applications [ 33 ], with a majority (n = 7/12) receiving research grants for their research program [ 32 ] and six small- to medium-sized research grants won [ 31 ]. Similarly, the mentorship programs led to the formation of a peer network of researchers that was deemed a pivot of success.

For instance, through the SHARE program, nine networks were created during phase II of the project, out of which six of the PhD students have pursued research that has led to independent grant funding, as well as collaborative grants on which they are listed as a co-investigators [ 29 ]. The mentorship programs also led to awards. For instance, two travel fellowship grants for early career researchers to attend the 2016 and 2017 World Psychiatric Association International Congress were won. Grants to attend conferences to share findings for completed dissertation projects were won, enabling participants to interact with other external partners and build sustainable collaborations [ 24 ].

This review reveals benefits that extend beyond the individual participants. We summarize these benefits under three pivotal themes: capacity building and skill development; networking and collaboration; and career advancement and marketability.

Capacity building and skill development.

The mentorship programs led to significant skill development and capacity building among participants [ 26 , 32 ]. This was evident through diverse training in research methodologies, epidemiology, biostatistics, grant writing, and other crucial aspects [ 33 ]. The acquisition of these skills not only enhanced the participants’ ability to conduct high-quality research [ 28 , 33 ] but also made them valuable contributors to national and international projects [ 17 ]. The establishment of training centers and departments further institutionalised these skills, fostering a culture of continuous learning and research excellence [ 26 , 28 ].

Networking and collaboration.

The initiatives for research mentorship played a crucial role in fostering strong collaborations among institutions and researchers [ 20 ]. These collaborations were instrumental in the success of various projects and contributed to the publication of research papers [ 24 , 28 ]. The projects served as a platform for early career and mid-level researchers to take leadership roles in published papers [ 25 ], demonstrating the effectiveness of mentorship in fostering a collaborative research environment. In addition, the North-South and regional collaboration programs exposed participants to international perspectives thus encouraging the integration of local and global knowledge [ 16 , 33 ].

Career advancement and marketability.

There was a positive impact of the mentorship programs on the career trajectories of participants [ 28 , 32 , 33 ]. Interns who engaged in significant research projects became more marketable as research practitioners [ 22 ]. The experience gained and the demonstrated completeness of their work opened doors to attractive positions in academia [ 32 , 33 ], government, and other sectors [ 22 ]. Additionally, the model of mentorship proved effective in strengthening skills among full-time working professionals [ 27 ], allowing them to enhance their capabilities without disrupting ongoing work commitments. This contributed to the overall growth of faculty [ 34 ], increased student enrolment [ 33 ], and the establishment of new research support centers [ 34 ].

Challenges and gaps

The reviewed studies identified limited funding and the absence of a robust mentorship culture as significant barriers to research advancement.

Negative perceptions of research as a career path and the lack of emphasis on mentorship in research further exacerbated the reported obstacles. The challenges were compounded by the COVID-19 pandemic, which disrupted research operations and constrained available resources. These factors are discussed in detail in the following section.

Limited funding.

Six studies [ 15 , 16 , 18 , 23 , 25 , 32 ] reported on the challenges of funding for health research mentorship programs. Limited funding encompassed the failure of health researchers to access funding to support research, the inability of early career researchers to access independent research funding without external collaborators, and the inability to secure long-term funding for meaningful capacity strengthening. Limited funding was also reported to include a lack of support for degree programs, post-doctoral training, and research [ 14 , 25 ]. A mismatch between the availability of short-term funds for specific research initiatives and requirements for longer-term investment in capacity building was reported as a gap [ 16 ]. Lastly, in instances where funding is available, the funders often drive the focus of mentorship programs, and the lack of southern ownership was identified as a gap [ 16 ].

Lack of a healthy mentorship culture.

In seven studies, [ 15 , 20 – 23 , 25 , 27 ], the lack of understanding of the concept of mentorship leading to a lack of institutional mentoring culture was highlighted as a challenge. Sustaining mentorship and institutional support for mentorship, and failure by institutions to acknowledge or ‘give credit’ for mentoring activities in the merit or promotional processes are notable challenges in health research mentorship.

Of particular concern in many of the mentorship programs was a general lack of time management strategies to balance mentoring with other competing activities including academic pursuits, teaching duties, and burdensome administrative roles. Related to the lack of a mentorship culture were limited mentoring skills, and a lack of motivation, or zeal on the part of both mentors and mentees. Mentors reported that getting mentees to understand their roles and commit to achieving the set goals was a burdensome challenge [ 16 ]. Mentorship was also reported to place a heavy demand on senior researchers’ time [ 21 ], which is already committed to urgent needs such as obtaining donor funds, reporting to donors, managing projects, networking, and publishing–all attached to a researcher’s performance appraisal. This in turn led to increasing levels of stress among mentors and very little time left to focus on mentees who needed significant guidance and support [ 28 ].

For mentees, different sets of administrative regulations across institutions were reported to lead to complications and delays in starting or sustaining certain capacity-building activities. Mentees reported difficulties in balancing work burdens, as they were involved in research activities as well as the training and support for their institutions and their development. This lack of protected time for health research mentorship was also cited as a gap by one study [ 33 ]. Lack of infrastructure support that enables high-quality research including grants administration, mentorship, research leadership, research culture, and open communication between policymakers and researchers as well as difficulties in accessing a PhD supervisor were other challenges faced by mentees [ 20 – 23 ]. Several other gaps were also identified including the lack of recognition of mentorship as a key success factor for early career researchers [ 21 ], the absence of a formal mentorship structure [ 21 , 26 ], and the lack of clarity in expectations of a mentor-mentee relationship [ 21 ].

Negative attitudes towards research as a career.

Research, as a career, was not a very attractive proposition in many Southern contexts according to some studies [ 16 – 19 ]. Researchers being drawn by incentives to ‘consultancy not research’ complicated this. Research was also viewed as inaccessible, especially to young people and outside academic settings. Lack of research interest was cited as a gap in three studies [ 14 , 15 , 22 ], with institutions such as universities or health departments prioritizing teaching rather than focusing on research careers [ 18 , 29 ].

Lack of prioritisation of research mentorship.

The low priority given to research mentorship by funders and governments was recognized in studies conducted in South Africa, Rwanda, Ghana, Kenya, Liberia, and Nigeria [ 21 , 24 ], and weak collaborations between different stakeholders and countries involved in mentorship may have contributed to this [ 16 ]. The absence of a national research strategy [ 16 ] was also identified as a gap in research mentorship programs in various African countries.

COVID-19 related factors.

Challenges related to the emergence of COVID-19 were reported in two studies [ 31 , 32 ] and included halting physical meetings between mentors and mentees because of the global restriction of face-to-face meetings. Other COVID-19-related challenges included the suspension of research activities such as enrolment of participants, procuring of laboratory reagents, delays in data collection, hiking of prices, and delays in delivery of procured research materials [ 32 ]. Internet connectivity challenges leading to suboptimal quality of video conferences were also highlighted as challenges [ 33 ].

In this review, we identified 20 mentorship programs involving a diverse group of African health researchers across 12 countries in sub-Saharan Africa. Only two of these were initiated in Africa and funded from local sources. While most African researchers have benefited from North-South collaboration, there is an opportunity to develop local mentorship programs to reduce the overreliance on foreign-funded and foreign-driven programs. Foreign-initiated and driven programs can be beneficial to building local health research capacity; however, local programs are often more accessible and sustainable, given their understanding of the local, context, infrastructure, and resources [ 30 ]. Such programs can foster a stronger sense of community and collaboration, contributing to long-term impact. Locally led initiatives also empower African mentors to play leadership roles, reinforcing a sense of ownership and self-determination in shaping the future of their communities [ 26 ]. Overall, locally initiated mentorship programs are better positioned to address the nuanced localized needs of mentees, promoting a more inclusive and impactful approach to personal and professional development. This finding is similar to those reported in earlier studies [ 36 ] that most health research mentorship initiatives in LMICs were introduced and funded by high-income countries and were not institutionalized as yet. Nevertheless, even though few, Africa-led, Africa-centered, and Africa-specific initiatives such as the Alliance for Accelerating Excellence in Africa (AESA) and the Coalition for Research and Innovation (CARI) are platforms that can provide support for training African researchers and opportunities for collaboration [ 1 ].

Our review highlights mentorship benefits that extend beyond the individual level to institutional, country, regional, and international arenas. Capacity building and skills development, networking and collaboration, and career development and marketability were highlighted in the reviewed studies.

Not only were individuals participating in mentorship programs upskilled in various aspects such as research methodologies, epidemiology, biostatistics, and grant writing among other skills, but mentorship enabled individuals to contribute to national and international projects. Enhancing individual capacities enables local researchers and junior faculty to navigate the complex international research environment and transfer health research training to African institutions. Even though most mentorship initiatives are North-initiated and driven, the programs expose participants to international perspectives that contribute to the integration of local and international knowledge. Additionally, participants are also enabled to develop their research niches within academia, government, and the private sector.

We further establish that the main hindrance to the development of health research capacity including mentorship programs is limited local funding. Current funding for health research and research capacity development remains inadequate to address Africa’s unmet health needs. This calls for African countries to develop clear and context-informed strategies and mechanisms to foster both private and public investment in health research capacity development. Furthermore, African countries can leverage international programs that can be institutionalized and tailored to respond to local needs for health research capacity development. Consistent with our findings, limited local health research capacity development funding has also been previously highlighted by other researchers as a major challenge to capacity development [ 1 , 14 , 35 ].

Additionally, the lack of a healthy mentorship culture in most African health research institutions mostly arising from a lack of understanding of the concept and importance of mentorship in research capacity development was a substantial gap. Efforts are needed to ensure that mentorship is appreciated and given credit during merit and promotion activities.

This will ensure that mentorship is prioritized alongside other core research capacity activities such as teaching, administrative roles, applying for grants, managing projects, reporting to donors, and networking. Coupled with mentorship prioritization, capacity development in mentorship skills, and arousing interest to engage in mentorship would also contribute to mentorship being treated as an important part of health research capacity development.

Lastly, for mentorship to be viewed as a key success factor for early career researchers and junior faculty, institutions must address unfavorable administrative regulations, and lack of protected time along the mentorship continuum for both mentors and mentees. Additionally, deliberate efforts to establish formal mentorship structures, provide clarity in expectations of a mentor-mentee relationship, and prioritize mentorship on the part of funders, governments, and institutions will go a long way in institutionalizing health research mentorship in Africa.

Our review revealed three main approaches to mentorship in Africa: international collaborative programs, regional and in-country collaborations, and specialized capacity-building programs. The successes of these programs were diverse and included the establishment of partnerships, the development of research programs, individual capacity strengthening, increased publication outputs, and successful grant applications and awards. These programs not only benefited individual participants but also contributed to broader capacity building, skill development, networking, collaboration, and career advancement at institutional, country, regional, and international levels.

However, several challenges and gaps were identified, such as limited funding, a lack of a healthy mentorship culture, negative attitudes toward research as a career, lack of prioritization of research mentorship, and challenges related to the COVID-19 pandemic. The review emphasizes the critical need for increased local funding for health research mentorship programs, the establishment of a robust mentorship culture, and addressing challenges related to administrative regulations, protected time, and mentorship skills. Furthermore, the findings underscore the importance of developing locally initiated mentorship programs to reduce reliance on foreign-funded initiatives. Researchers should make efforts to establish local and regional collaborative partnerships. While international collaborations are valuable, locally-led programs can be more accessible, sustainable, and tailored to address nuanced local needs, fostering a stronger sense of community and collaboration.

In addressing the identified challenges and building on the successes, African countries must develop clear and context-informed strategies for both public and private investment in health research capacity development. Additionally, efforts are needed to promote mentorship appreciation in merit and promotion activities, develop mentorship skills, and institutionalize mentorship structures. Only through these comprehensive efforts can health research mentorship be prioritized and effectively contribute to the sustainable development of research capacity in Africa.

Limitations of the study

While this systematic review provides important insights into mentorship programs for health researchers in African institutions, it is crucial to recognize certain inherent limitations in the study design and execution. The review’s focus on studies published exclusively in English introduces a potential language bias, as pertinent research in other languages might have been overlooked, potentially impacting the thoroughness of the findings. Additionally, despite efforts to include diverse African regions, the search strategy may exhibit biases toward specific countries or regions, stemming from variations in research visibility and accessibility. This potential bias could constrain the generalizability of the findings across the entire African continent. To mitigate these limitations, multiple databases were consulted, and searches were conducted using a variety of relevant keywords and MeSH terms to retrieve as many articles as possible and to ensure a comprehensive coverage of mentorship programs across different African contexts. Additionally, we did not synthesize data regarding the most successful mentorship approaches in terms of the outputs so this topic should be explored in future reviews. Lastly, the heterogeneity of mentorship programs, characterized by variations in types, durations, and regularities, poses challenges in comparing and synthesizing outcomes. To address this challenge, we systematically categorized and classified mentorship programs based on predefined criteria, allowing for a structured synthesis of findings. Despite these limitations, the systematic approach, adherence to PRISMA guidelines, and comprehensive exploration of mentorship outcomes enhance the credibility of the findings derived from this review. Nevertheless, researchers and policymakers should approach the interpretation of the results with an awareness of these limitations and endeavour to conduct further research addressing identified gaps and challenges in mentorship programs for health researchers in Africa.

Supporting information

S1 checklist. prisma 2020 checklist..

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgph.0003314.s001

S1 Table. Search stratey.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgph.0003314.s002

S2 Table. Characteristics of studies included in the review.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgph.0003314.s003

S3 Table. Risk of bias assessment.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgph.0003314.s004

S4 Table. Mentorship approaches.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgph.0003314.s005

S5 Table. List f abbreviations.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgph.0003314.s006

S6 Table. Studies retrieved.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgph.0003314.s007

S7 Table. Data extracted.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgph.0003314.s008

• View Article
• Google Scholar
• PubMed/NCBI

Integrating 4C/ID model into computer- supported formative assessment system to improve the effectiveness of complex skills training for vocational education

• Published: 23 September 2024

Cite this article

• Haoxin Xu 1 ,
• Tianrun Deng 2 ,
• Xianlong Xu   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-0736-7932 2 ,
• Xiaoqing Gu 2 ,
• Lingyun Huang 3 ,
• Haoran Xie 4 &
• Minhong Wang 3  

In the 21st century, the urgent educational demand for cultivating complex skills in vocational training and learning is met with the effectiveness of the four-component instructional design model. Despite its success, research has identified a notable gap in the address of formative assessment, particularly within computer-supported frameworks. This deficiency impedes student self-awareness of skill mastery and limits effective monitoring of skill learning in the classroom by teachers. To address this gap, the study introduces an enhanced four-component instructional design model that seamlessly integrates formative assessment. Based on this model, an automated system for assessing complex skills was developed, with the aim of formative assessment and improving skill learning. A control experiment involving 54 industrial robot professional participants in vocational colleges has preliminarily verified the feasibility and effectiveness of computer-supported formative assessment. The findings reveal that this approach significantly enhances students’ schema construction, knowledge, skill mastery, and transfer ability, thereby improving the overall effectiveness of complex skill learning. In addition, participants who underwent computer-supported formative assessment reported high levels of system satisfaction and usefulness, with no adverse impact on their learning attitudes, motivation, or cognitive load. This study contributes a robust theoretical framework and practical case study for computer-supported formative assessment in complex skill learning, providing empirical support for the advancement of computer-supported teaching. The integration of formative assessment within the four-component instructional design model offers a novel perspective, addressing a critical gap in the existing literature and laying the foundation for future developments in this educational domain.

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

Access this article

Subscribe and save.

• Get 10 units per month
• Download Article/Chapter or eBook
• 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
• Cancel anytime

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Explore related subjects

• Artificial Intelligence
• Digital Education and Educational Technology

Data Availability

Data will be made available on request.

Ackermans, K., Rusman, E., Brand-Gruwel, S., & Specht, M. (2017). A first step towards synthesizing rubrics and video for the formative assessment of complex skills. Technology enhanced assessment (pp. 1–10). Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-57744-9_1

Ackermans, K., Rusman, E., Nadolski, R., Specht, M., & Brand-Gruwel, S. (2021). Video-enhanced or textual rubrics: Does the viewbrics’ formative assessment methodology support the mastery of complex (21st century) skills? Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 37 (3), 810–824. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12525

Article   Google Scholar  

Agustina, M., & Purnawarman, P. (2020). Investigating learners’ satisfaction utilizing google classroom as online formative feedback tool. 2020 6th International Conference on Education and Technology (ICET) (pp. 26–31). Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1109/ICET51153.2020.9276616

Alahmad, A., Stamenkovska, T., & Győri, J. (2021). Preparing pre-service teachers for 21st century skills education: A teacher education model. GiLE Journal of Skills Development , 1 (1), 67–86. https://doi.org/10.52398/gjsd.2021.v1.i1.pp67-86

Al-Fraihat, D., Joy, M., Masa’deh, R., & Sinclair, J. (2020). Evaluating e-learning systems success: An empirical study. Computers in Human Behavior, 102 , 67–86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.08.004

Alshurideh, M., Kurdi, B. A., & Salloum, S. A. (2019). Examining the main mobile learning system drivers’ effects: A mix empirical examination of both the expectation-confirmation model (ecm) and the technology acceptance model (tam). Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing, 406–417. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-31129-2_37

Andrade, H. L. (2019). A critical review of research on student self-assessment. Frontiers in Education, 4 , 1–13. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2019.00087

Bhagat, K. K., & Spector, J. M. (2017). Formative assessment in complex problemsolving domains: The emerging role of assessment technologies. Journal of Educational Technology & Society , 20 (4), 312–317. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/26229226

Black, P. (2015). Formative assessment–an optimistic but incomplete vision. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 22 (1), 161–177. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2014.999643

Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (2009). Developing the theory of formative assessment. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability (formerly: Journal of personnel evaluation in education) , 21 , 5–31. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-008-9068-5

Brookhart, S. M. (2013). Develop a student-centered mind-set for formative assessment. Voices from the Middle , 21 (2), 21–25. https://doi.org/10.58680/vm201324462

Brookhart, S. M., Moss, C. M., & Long, B. A. (2010). Teacher inquiry into formative assessment practices in remedial reading classrooms. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 17 (1), 41–58. https://doi.org/10.1080/09695940903565545

Castillo-Segura, P., Fernández-Panadero, C., Alario-Hoyos, C., Muñoz-Merino, P. J., & Kloos, C. D. (2021). Objective and automated assessment of surgical technical skills with iot systems: A systematic literature review. Artificial Intelligence in Medicine, 112 , 102007. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.artmed.2020.102007

Chu, H.-C., Chen, J.-M., Hwang, G.-J., & Chen, T.-W. (2019). Effects of formative assessment in an augmented reality approach to conducting ubiquitous learning activities for architecture courses. Universal Access in the Information Society, 18 , 221–230. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-017-0588-y

Chu, H.-C., Hwang, G.-J., & Tsai, C.-C. (2010). A knowledge engineering approach to developing mindtools for context-aware ubiquitous learning. Computers & Education, 54 (1), 289–297. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2009.08.023

Cidral, W. A., Oliveira, T., Felice, M. D., & Aparicio, M. (2018). E-learning success determinants: Brazilian empirical study. Computers & Education, 122 , 273–290. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2017.12.001

Corbalan, G., Kester, L., & Van Merriënboer, J. J. (2006). Towards a personalized task selection model with shared instructional control. Instructional Science, 34 (5), 399–422. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-005-5774-2

Costa, J. M., Miranda, G. L., & Melo, M. (2022). Four-component instructional design (4c/id) model: A meta-analysis on use and effect. Learning Environments Research, 25 (2), 445–463. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-021-09373-y

Delacre, M., Lakens, D., & Leys, C. (2017). Why psychologists should by default use welch’s t-test instead of student’s t-test. International Review of Social Psychology, 30 (1), 92–101. https://doi.org/10.5334/irsp.82

Faber, J. M., & Visscher, A. J. (2018). The effects of a digital formative assessment tool on spelling achievement: Results of a randomized experiment. Computers & Education, 122 , 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.03.008

Frerejean, J., van Geel, M., Keuning, T., Dolmans, D., van Merriënboer, J. J., & Visscher, A. J. (2021). Ten steps to 4c/id: training differentiation skills in a professional development program for teachers. Instructional Science, 49 (3), 395–418. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-021-09540-x

Frerejean, J., van Merriënboer, J. J., Kirschner, P. A., Roex, A., Aertgeerts, B., & Marcellis, M. (2019). Designing instruction for complex learning: 4c/id in higher education. European Journal of Education, 54 (4), 513–524. https://doi.org/10.1111/ejed.12363

Frerejean, J., Van Merriënboer, J. J., Condron, C., Strauch, U., & Eppich, W. (2023). Critical design choices in healthcare simulation education: a 4c/id perspective on design that leads to transfer. Advances in Simulation, 8 (1), 5. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41077-023-00242-7

Herde, C. N., Wüstenberg, S., & Greiff, S. (2016). Assessment of complex problem solving: What we know and what we don’t know. Applied Measurement in Education, 29 , 265–277. https://doi.org/10.1080/08957347.2016.1209208

Heritage, M. (2020). Getting the emphasis right: Formative assessment through professional learning. Educational Assessment, 25 (4), 355–358. https://doi.org/10.1080/10627197.2020.1766959

Hosseinzadeh, A., Karami, M., Rezvanian, M. S., Rezvani, M. S., Bahmani, M. N. D., & Merriënboer, J. V. (2023). Developing media literacy as complex learning in secondary schools: the effect of 4c/id learning environments. Interactive Learning Environments, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2023.2244562

Hwang, G.-J., & Chang, H.-F. (2011). A formative assessment-based mobile learning approach to improving the learning attitudes and achievements of students. Computers & Education, 56 (4), 1023–1031. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.12.002

Hwang, G.-J., Yang, L.-H., & Wang, S.-Y. (2013). A concept map-embedded educational computer game for improving students’ learning performance in natural science courses. Computers & Education, 69 , 121–130. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.07.008

Janesarvatan, F., & Van Rosmalen, P. (2023). Instructional design of virtual patients in dental education through a 4c/id lens: a narrative review. Journal of Computers in Education, 1–34. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40692-023-00268-w

Kirschner, P. A. (2002). Cognitive load theory: Implications of cognitive load theory on the design of learning. Learning and Instruction, 12 (1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-4752(01)00014-7

Kukharuk, A., Goda, Y., & Suzuki, K. (2023). Designing an online pd program with 4c/id from scratch. International Journal of Designs for Learning , 14 (2), 72–86. https://doi.org/10.14434/ijdl.v14i2.34676

Kuklick, L., Greiff, S., & Lindner, M. A. (2023). Computer-based performance feedback: Effects of error message complexity on cognitive, metacognitive, and motivational outcomes. Computers & Education, 200 , 104785. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2023.104785

Kyun, K. T., & Hong, P. J. (2019). More about the basic assumptions of t-test: normality and sample size. Korean Journal of Anesthesiology, 72 (4), 331–335. https://doi.org/10.4097/kja.d.18.00292

Larmuseau, C., Coucke, H., Kerkhove, P., Desmet, P., & Depaepe, F. (2019). Cognitive load during online complex problem-solving in a teacher training context. Eden conference proceedings (p. 466–474). Retrieved from https://www.ceeol.com/search/article-detail?id=847176

Larmuseau, C., Elen, J., & Depaepe, F. (2018). The influence of students’ cognitive and motivational characteristics on students’ use of a 4c/id-based online learning environment and their learning gain. Proceedings of the 8th international conference on learning analytics and knowledge (p. 171–180). Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1145/3170358.3170363

Leenknecht, M., Wijnia, L., Köhlen, M., Fryer, L., Rikers, R., & Loyens, S. (2021). Formative assessment as practice: The role of students’ motivation. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 46 (2), 236–255. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2020.1765228

Lenhard, W., & Lenhard, A. (2022). Computation of effect sizes. Retrieved from http://www.psychometrica.de/effect_size.html (2022, Oct)

Leppink, J., Paas, F., Van Gog, T., van Der Vleuten, C. P., & Van Merrienboer, J. J. (2014). Effects of pairs of problems and examples on task performance and different types of cognitive load. Learning and Instruction, 30 , 32–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2013.12.001

Maddens, L., Depaepe, F., Raes, A., & Elen, J. (2020). The instructional design of a 4c/id-inspired learning environment for upper secondary school students’ research skills. International Journal of Designs for Learning , 11 (3), 126–147. https://doi.org/10.14434/ijdl.v11i3.29012

Maddens, L., Depaepe, F., Raes, A., & Elen, J. (2023). Fostering students’ motivation towards learning research skills: the role of autonomy, competence and relatedness support. Instructional Science, 51 (1), 165–199. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-022-09606-4

Maggio, L. A., Ten Cate, O., Irby, D. M., & O’Brien, B. C. (2015). Designing evidence-based medicine training to optimize the transfer of skills from the classroom to clinical practice: applying the four component instructional design model. Academic Medicine, 90 (11), 1457–1461. https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000000769

Mahantakhun, C., Koraneekij, P., & Khlaisang, J. (2020). The effects of 4c/idbased adaptive procedural simulation on safety awareness in undergraduate students majoring in gems and jewelry. Scholar: Human Sciences , 12 (1), 296. Retrieved from http://www.assumptionjournal.au.edu/index.php/Scholar/article/view/3898

Maier, U., Wolf, N., & Randler, C. (2016). Effects of a computer-assisted formative assessment intervention based on multiple-tier diagnostic items and different feedback types. Computers & Education, 95 (95), 85–98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.12.002

Marcellis, M., Barendsen, E., & van Merriënboer, J. (2018). Designing a blended course in android app development using 4c/id. Proceedings of the 18th Koli calling international conference on computing education research (p. 1–5). New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1145/3279720.3279739

Marchisio, M., Barana, A., Fioravera, M., Rabellino, S., & Conte, A. (2018). A model of formative automatic assessment and interactive feedback for stem. 2018 ieee 42nd annual computer software and applications conference (compsac) (Vol. 1, p. 1016–1025). Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1109/COMPSAC.2018.00178

Martínez-Mediano, C., & Losada, N. R. (2017). Internet-based performance support systems in engineering education. IEEE Revista Iberoamericana de Tecnologias del Aprendizaje, 12 (2), 86–93. https://doi.org/10.1109/RITA.2017.2697778

Melo, M., & Miranda, G.L. (2016). The effects of the 4c/id model in the acquisition and transfer of learning: a meta-analysis. RISTI (Revista Iberica de Sistemas e Tecnologias de Informacao) (18), 114–131. Retrieved from https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A464161712/AONE?u=anon~7cb43a6&sid=googleScholar &xid=5821580d

Mertens, U., Finn, B., & Lindner, M. A. (2022). Effects of computer-based feedback on lower-and higher-order learning outcomes: A network meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 114 (8), 1143–1772. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000764

Morris, R., Perry, T., & Wardle, L. (2021). Formative assessment and feedback for learning in higher education: A systematic review. Review of Education, 9 (3), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1002/rev3.3292

Mulders, M. (2022). Vocational training in virtual reality: A case study using the 4c/id model. Multimodal Technologies and Interaction, 6 (7), 49. https://doi.org/10.3390/mti6070049

Musharyanti, L., Haryanti, F., & Claramita, M. (2021). Improving nursing students’ medication safety knowledge and skills on using the 4c/id learning model. Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare, 14 , 287–295. https://doi.org/10.2147/JMDH.S293917

Ndiaye, Y., Hérold, J. -F., & Chatoney, M. (2021). Applying the 4c/id-model to help students structure their knowledge system when learning the concept of force in technology. Techne serien-Forskning i slöjdpedagogik och slöjdvetenskap , 28 (2), 260–268. Retrieved from https://journals.oslomet.no/index.php/techneA/article/view/4319

Pontes, T., Miranda, G., & Santos, D. (2021). Virtual learning environments: What makes them effective. Iceri2021 proceedings (p. 407–417). IATED. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.21125/iceri.2021.0159

Qiu, F., Liu, P., WangLiping, & Xie, Y. (2012). Exploring the architecture of a complex learning support platform based on the 4c/id model. Research on Electrochemical Education (4), 67–71. https://doi.org/10.13811/j.cnki.eer.2012.04.005

Roscoe, R. D., & Craig, S. D. (2022). A heuristic assessment framework for the design of self-regulated learning technologies. Journal of Formative Design in Learning, 6 , 77–94. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41686-022-00070-4

Rusman, E., & Nadolski, R. (2023). Pe(e)rfectly skilled underpinnings of an online formative assessment method for (inter)active and practice-based complex skills training in higher education (he). International Journal of Mobile and Blended Learning, 15 (2), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJMBL.318646

Sarfo, F.K., & Elen, J. (2006). Technical expertise development in secondary technical schools: Effects of ictenhanced 4c/id learning environments. Fourth ieee international workshop on technology for education in developing countries (tedc’06) (pp. 62–65). Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1109/TEDC.2006.25

Shepard, L. A. (2019). Classroom assessment to support teaching and learning. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 683 (1), 183–200. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002716219843818

Skulmowski, A., & Xu, K. M. (2021). Understanding cognitive load in digital and online learning: a new perspective on extraneous cognitive load. Educational Psychology Review, 34 (1), 171–196. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-021-09624-7

Spector, J. M., Ifenthaler, D., Sampson, D., Yang, L. J., Mukama, E., Warusavitarana, A., . . . Gibson, D. C. (2016). Technology enhanced formative assessment for 21st century learning. Journal of Educational Technology & Society , 19 (2), 58–71. Retrieved 2023-10-04, from https://www.jstor.org/stable/jeductechsoci.19.3.58

Sweller, J., Van Merrienboer, J. J., & Paas, F. (2019). Cognitive architecture and instructional design: 20 years later. Educational Psychology Review, 31 , 261–292. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-019-09465-5

Tapingkae, P., Panjaburee, P., Hwang, G.-J., & Srisawasdi, N. (2020). Effects of a formative assessment-based contextual gaming approach on students’ digital citizenship behaviours, learning motivations, and perceptions. Computers & Education, 159 , 103998. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.103998

Tempelaar, D. T., Heck, A., Cuypers, H., van der Kooij, H., & van de Vrie, E. (2013). Formative assessment and learning analytics. Proceedings of the third international conference on learning analytics and knowledge (p. 205-209). Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1145/2460296.2460337

Thima, S., & Chaijaroen, S. (2021). The framework for development of the constructivist learning environment model to enhance ill-structured problem solving in industrial automation system supporting by metacognition. Innovative technologies and learning: 4th international conference, icitl 2021, virtual event, November 29–December 1, 2021, proceedings 4 (p. 511–520). Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-91540-7_52

Van Laar, E., Van Deursen, A. J., Van Dijk, J. A., & de Haan, J. (2020). Determinants of 21st-century skills and 21st-century digital skills for workers: A systematic literature review. Sage Open, 10 (1), 2158244019900176. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244019900176

Van Merriënboer, J. J. (2019). The four-component instructional design model. Open Education Research , 26 (3), 35–43. Retrieved from https://www.4cid.org/publications

Van Merriënboer, J. J., Clark, R. E., & De Croock, M. B. (2002). Blueprints for complex learning: The 4c/id-model. Educational Technology Research and Development, 50 (2), 39–61. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02504993

Van Merriënboer, J. J., & Dolmans, D. H. (2015). Research on instructional design in the health sciences: From taxonomies of learning to whole-task models. In J. Cleland & S. J. Durning (Eds.), Researching medical education (p. 193–206). John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118838983.ch17

Van Merriënboer, J. J., & Kirschner, P. A. (2017). Ten steps to complex learning: A systematic approach to four-component instructional design . Retrieved from: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203096864

Book   Google Scholar  

Wang, L.-C., & Chen, M.-P. (2010). The effects of game strategy and preferencematching on flow experience and programming performance in game-based learning. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 47 (1), 39–52. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703290903525838

Weaver, B. (2011). Silly or pointless things people do when analyzing data: 1. Conducting a test of normality as a precursor to a t-test. manuskript eines vortrags auf der northern health research conference vom (Vol. 10). Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/299497976_Silly_or_Pointless_Things_People_Do_When_Analyzing_Data_1_Testing_for_Normality_as_a_Precursor_to_a_t-test

Webb, M. E., Prasse, D., Phillips, M., Kadijevich, D. M., Angeli, C., Strijker, A., & Laugesen, H. (2018). Challenges for it-enabled formative assessment of complex 21st century skills. Technology, knowledge and learning, 23 (3), 441–456. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-018-9379-7

Wilson, J., Ahrendt, C., Fudge, E. A., Raiche, A., Beard, G., & MacArthur, C. (2021). Elementary teachers’ perceptions of automated feedback and automated scoring: Transforming the teaching and learning of writing using automated writing evaluation. Computers & Education, 168 , 104208. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2021.104208

Wopereis, I., Frerejean, J., & Brand-Gruwel, S. (2015). Information problem solving instruction in higher education: A case study on instructional design. Information literacy: Moving toward sustainability: Third European conference, ecil 2015, Tallinn, Estonia, October 19-22, 2015, revised selected papers 3 (p. 293–302). Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-28197-1_30

Xu, X., Shen, W., Islam, A. A., & Zhou, Y. (2023). A whole learning process-oriented formative assessment framework to cultivate complex skills. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 10 , 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-023-02200-0

Xu, X., Zhou, Z., Ji, Y., Wang, M., & Gu, X. (2019). Design and effectiveness of comprehensive learning for complex skills based on the 4c/id model. China Educational Technology , 10 (08), 124–131. Retrieved from https://kns.cnki.net/kcms/detail/11.3792.g4.20191008.1824.036.html

Download references

Acknowledgements

The research will not have been possible without the cooperation of teachers and administrators from Shanghai Technical Institute of Electronics Information. We would particularly like to acknowledge our discussions with Dr. Wangqi Shen, who provided consultation in the preparation of this paper.

This study was funded by Key Project of Science and Technology Commission of Shanghai Municipality (17DZ2281800).

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Lab of Artificial Intelligence for Education, East China Normal University, Shanghai, China

Department of Education Information Technology, East China Normal University, Shanghai, China

Tianrun Deng, Xianlong Xu & Xiaoqing Gu

Faculty of Education, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China

Lingyun Huang & Minhong Wang

Department of Computing and Decision Sciences, Lingnan University, Hong Kong, China

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors contributed to the study conception and design. Material preparation, data collection and analysis were performed by Haoxin Xu, Tianrun Deng, Xianlong Xu, Xiaoqing Gu, Lingyun Huang, Haoran Xie, and Minhong Wang. The first draft of the manuscript was written by Haoxin Xu and all authors commented on previous versions of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Xianlong Xu .

Ethics declarations

Statement regarding research involving human participants and/or animals.

The study was conducted with the approval of the East China Normal University Committee on Human Research Protection, and all subjects were adults. Prior to the start of the experiment, the subjects were informed of the purpose, method, process, and other information of the study, and written consent was obtained from all subjects.

Ethical Approval

The questionnaire and methodology for this study was approved by the Human Research Ethics committee of the East China Normal University (Ethics approval number: HR692-2023).

Consent to Participate

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Consent to Publish

The participant has consented to the submission of the case report to the journal.

Competing Interests

The authors have no competing interests to declare that are relevant to the content of this article.

Appendix A. Formative assessments interface for students

Scenario-based task

Subject knowledge test

Schema task

Appendix B. Interface of reports

Interface of students’ individual reports

Interface of class reports 1

Interface of class reports 2

Appendix C. Post subject knowledge test

1.1 c.1 post subject knowledge test.

Here are only part of the questions.

1. The ( workpiece ) refers to the object being processed in the mechanical machining process, while the tool denotes the instrument required for a robot to accomplish a specific task.

2. By default, when a single robot is in operation, the ( world coordinate system ) remains aligned with the base coordinate system.

3. The tool coordinate system is fixed at the end of the tool, and its coordinate origin is abbreviated as ( TCP ).

4. When creating tool coordinates using the six-point method in simulation software, it is advisable to switch to ( B ) mode when the reference point and fixed point are relatively close.

A. Normal B. Incremental C. Automatic D. Deceleration

5. When using the six-point method to create tool coordinates in simulation software, it is necessary to set ( AB ).

A. Center of gravity coordinates B. Tool mass C. TCP point D. Base coordinates

6. The recommended workflow for arranging peripheral devices outside the workstation is as follows: ( C-D-A-B-E )

A. Rotate the external device model.

B. Directly move or use point-and-click to approximate the device’s position.

C. Import the required models.

D. Display the robot’s workspace.

E. Use the “Set Position” function for fine-tuning the position.

7. In the incremental mode, the user increment in the teach pendant screen’s bottom right corner can be set in size. ( \(\underline{\checkmark }\) )

8. In the manual state of the robot, pressing the first gear of the enable button will stop the motors, putting the robot in a protective stop state. ( \(\underline{\times }\) )

Note: Fill-in-the-blank questions: 1, 2, 3. Multiple-choice questions: 4, 5. Sorting question: 6. Judgment questions: 7, 8

1.2 C.2 Post scenario-based task

Task description: Please create a robotic trajectory workstation, name the workstation with your student ID, and then import necessary models such as the robot, tool, workpiece, peripheral devices, etc. Use the six-point method to determine the tool coordinates, name the tool coordinates as “tool” followed by the last two digits of your student ID, and save the corresponding TCP data. Finally, through point teaching and programming, make the robot follow the counterclockwise trajectory as shown in Fig. 13 . Programming tasks include establishing initialization routines, trajectory walking routines, and returning home routines. Submit the task archive and program text upon completion.

Note: Ensure to perform programming tasks to establish initialization routines, trajectory walking routines, and returning home routines. Save all relevant data and submit the compressed task archive along with the program text.

The post-test for academic performance

1.3 C.3 Post schema task

Task description: Please draw a mind map illustrating the trajectory planning for operating industrial robots. Provide detailed descriptions for each step, including the purpose and significance of each step.

Note: There is an example of a student answering.

Appendix D. The survey scales for various aspects

Appendix e. the results of levene’s test, appendix f. the results of mann-whitney u-test, rights and permissions.

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

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Xu, H., Deng, T., Xu, X. et al. Integrating 4C/ID model into computer- supported formative assessment system to improve the effectiveness of complex skills training for vocational education. Educ Inf Technol (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-13037-8

Download citation

Received : 26 April 2024

Accepted : 02 September 2024

Published : 23 September 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-13037-8

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

• Complex skill learning
• 4C/ID model
• Formative assessment
• Computer-supported teaching
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

Warning: The NCBI web site requires JavaScript to function. more...

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
• Browse Titles

NCBI Bookshelf. A service of the National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health.

Framework for Determining Research Gaps During Systematic Review: Evaluation

Methods Research Reports

Investigators: Karen A Robinson , PhD, Oluwaseun Akinyede , MPH, Tania Dutta , MS, MPP, Veronica Ivey Sawin , BA, Tianjing Li , MD, PhD, Merianne Rose Spencer , BS, Charles M Turkelson , PhD, and Christine Weston , PhD.

Affiliations

• Copyright and Permissions

Structured Abstract

Background:.

Research gaps prevent systematic reviewers from making conclusions and, ultimately, limit our ability to make informed health care decisions. While there are well-defined methods for conducting a systematic review, there has been no explicit process for the identification of research gaps from systematic reviews. In a prior project we developed a framework to facilitate the systematic identification and characterization of research gaps from systematic reviews. This framework uses elements of PICOS (Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcomes, Setting) to describe the gaps and categorizes the reasons for the gaps as (A) insufficient or imprecise information, (B) biased information, (C) inconsistent or unknown consistency results, and/or (D) not the right information.

To further develop and evaluate a framework for the identification and characterization of research gaps from systematic reviews.

We conducted two types of evaluation: (1) We applied the framework to existing systematic reviews, and (2) Evidence-based Practice Centers (EPCs) applied the framework either during a systematic review or during a future research needs project (FRN). EPCs provided feedback on the framework using an evaluation form.

Our application of the framework to 50 systematic reviews identified about 600 unique research gaps. Key issues emerging from this evaluation included the need to clarify instructions for dealing with multiple comparisons (lumping vs. splitting) and need for guidance on applying the framework retrospectively. We received evaluation forms from seven EPCs. EPCs applied the framework in 8 projects, five of which were FRNs. Challenges identified by the EPCs led to revisions in the instructions including guidance for teams to decide a priori whether to limit the use of the framework to questions for which strength of evidence has been assessed, and the level of detail needed for the characterization of the gaps.

Conclusions:

Our team evaluated a revised framework, and developed guidance for its application. A final version is provided that incorporates revisions based on use of the framework across existing systematic reviews and feedback from other EPCs on their use of the framework. Future research is needed to evaluate the relative costs and benefits of using the framework, for review authors and for users of the systematic reviews.

• Collapse All
• Acknowledgments
• Peer Reviewers
• Introduction
• Review and Revise Framework and Develop Detailed Instructions
• Test Framework and Instructions Through Application to Existing Systematic Reviews
• Evaluate Implementation of Framework
• Revise and Finalize Framework and Instructions
• Peer Review and Public Commentary
• Key Findings
• Limitations
• Future Research
• Implications for Practice
• Conclusions
• Appendix A JHU EPC Frameworks Project: Research Gaps Worksheet and Instructions (Original)
• Appendix B JHU EPC Framework Evaluation Form
• Appendix C JHU EPC Frameworks Project: Research Gaps Worksheet and Instructions
• Appendix D Listing of Reviews Included in Retrospective Application of Framework
• Appendix E Detailed Analysis of Evaluation of the Use of the Research Gaps Framework by Evidence-based Practice Centers (EPCs)
• Appendix F JHU EPC Frameworks Project: Research Gaps Worksheet and Instructions (Final)

Prepared for: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services 1 , Contract No. 290-2007-10061-I. Prepared by: Johns Hopkins University Evidence-based Practice Center, Baltimore, MD

Suggested citation:

Robinson KA, Akinyede O, Dutta T, Sawin VI, Li T, Spencer MR, Turkelson CM, Weston C. Framework for Determining Research Gaps During Systematic Review: Evaluation. Methods Research Report. (Prepared by Johns Hopkins University Evidence-based Practice Center under Contract No. 290-2007-10061-I.) AHRQ Publication No. 13-EHC019-EF. Rockville, MD: Agency for Health care Research and Quality. February 2013. www.effectivehealthcare.ahrq.gov/reports/final.cfm .

This report is based on research conducted by the Johns Hopkins University Evidence-based Practice Center (EPC) under contract to the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), Rockville, MD (Contract No. 290-2007-10061-I). The findings and conclusions in this document are those of the authors, who are responsible for its contents; the findings and conclusions do not necessarily represent the views of AHRQ. Therefore, no statement in this report should be construed as an official position of AHRQ or of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

The information in this report is intended to help health care decisionmakers—patients and clinicians, health system leaders, and policymakers, among others—make well informed decisions and thereby improve the quality of health care services. This report is not intended to be a substitute for the application of clinical judgment. Anyone who makes decisions concerning the provision of clinical care should consider this report in the same way as any medical reference and in conjunction with all other pertinent information, i.e., in the context of available resources and circumstances presented by individual patients.

This report may be used, in whole or in part, as the basis for development of clinical practice guidelines and other quality enhancement tools, or as a basis for reimbursement and coverage policies. AHRQ or U.S. Department of Health and Human Services endorsement of such derivative products may not be stated or implied.

None of the investigators have any affiliations or financial involvement that conflicts with the material presented in this report.

540 Gaither Road, Rockville, MD 20850; www ​.ahrq.gov

• Cite this Page Robinson KA, Akinyede O, Dutta T, et al. Framework for Determining Research Gaps During Systematic Review: Evaluation [Internet]. Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2013 Feb.
• PDF version of this title (425K)

Other titles in these collections

• AHRQ Methods for Effective Health Care
• Health Services/Technology Assessment Texts (HSTAT)

Related information

• NLM Catalog Related NLM Catalog Entries

Similar articles in PubMed

• Review Frameworks for Determining Research Gaps During Systematic Reviews [ 2011] Review Frameworks for Determining Research Gaps During Systematic Reviews Robinson KA, Saldanha IJ, Mckoy NA. 2011 Jun
• Review Development of a framework to identify research gaps from systematic reviews. [J Clin Epidemiol. 2011] Review Development of a framework to identify research gaps from systematic reviews. Robinson KA, Saldanha IJ, McKoy NA. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011 Dec; 64(12):1325-30. Epub 2011 Sep 19.
• Review Prioritization Criteria Methodology for Future Research Needs Proposals Within the Effective Health Care Program: PiCMe-Prioritization Criteria Methods [ 2013] Review Prioritization Criteria Methodology for Future Research Needs Proposals Within the Effective Health Care Program: PiCMe-Prioritization Criteria Methods Andrews J. 2013 Jan
• How has the impact of 'care pathway technologies' on service integration in stroke care been measured and what is the strength of the evidence to support their effectiveness in this respect? [Int J Evid Based Healthc. 2008] How has the impact of 'care pathway technologies' on service integration in stroke care been measured and what is the strength of the evidence to support their effectiveness in this respect? Allen D, Rixson L. Int J Evid Based Healthc. 2008 Mar; 6(1):78-110.
• Review Grading the Strength of a Body of Evidence When Assessing Health Care Interventions for the Effective Health Care Program of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality: An Update. [Methods Guide for Effectivenes...] Review Grading the Strength of a Body of Evidence When Assessing Health Care Interventions for the Effective Health Care Program of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality: An Update. Berkman ND, Lohr KN, Ansari M, McDonagh M, Balk E, Whitlock E, Reston J, Bass E, Butler M, Gartlehner G, et al. Methods Guide for Effectiveness and Comparative Effectiveness Reviews. 2008

Recent Activity

• Framework for Determining Research Gaps During Systematic Review: Evaluation Framework for Determining Research Gaps During Systematic Review: Evaluation

Your browsing activity is empty.

Activity recording is turned off.

Turn recording back on

Connect with NLM

National Library of Medicine 8600 Rockville Pike Bethesda, MD 20894

Web Policies FOIA HHS Vulnerability Disclosure

Help Accessibility Careers