dissertation findings and discussion

• How it works

How to Write the Dissertation Findings or Results – Tips

Published by Grace Graffin at August 11th, 2021 , Revised On August 13, 2024

Each  part of the dissertation is unique, and some general and specific rules must be followed. The dissertation’s findings section presents the key results of your research without interpreting their meaning .

Theoretically, this is an exciting section of a dissertation because it involves writing what you have observed and found. However, it can be a little tricky if there is too much information to confuse the readers.

The goal is to include only the essential and relevant findings in this section. The results must be presented in an orderly sequence to provide clarity to the readers.

This section of the dissertation should be easy for the readers to follow, so you should avoid going into a lengthy debate over the interpretation of the results.

It is vitally important to focus only on clear and precise observations. The findings chapter of the  dissertation  is theoretically the easiest to write.

It includes  statistical analysis and a brief write-up about whether or not the results emerging from the analysis are significant. This segment should be written in the past sentence as you describe what you have done in the past.

This article will provide detailed information about  how to   write the findings of a dissertation .

When to Write Dissertation Findings Chapter

As soon as you have gathered and analysed your data, you can start to write up the findings chapter of your dissertation paper. Remember that it is your chance to report the most notable findings of your research work and relate them to the research hypothesis  or  research questions set out in  the introduction chapter of the dissertation .

You will be required to separately report your study’s findings before moving on to the discussion chapter  if your dissertation is based on the  collection of primary data  or experimental work.

However, you may not be required to have an independent findings chapter if your dissertation is purely descriptive and focuses on the analysis of case studies or interpretation of texts.

• Always report the findings of your research in the past tense.
• The dissertation findings chapter varies from one project to another, depending on the data collected and analyzed.
• Avoid reporting results that are not relevant to your research questions or research hypothesis.

Does your Dissertation Have the Following?

• Great Research/Sources
• Perfect Language
• Accurate Sources

If not, we can help. Our panel of experts makes sure to keep the 3 pillars of the Dissertation strong.

1. Reporting Quantitative Findings

The best way to present your quantitative findings is to structure them around the research  hypothesis or  questions you intend to address as part of your dissertation project.

Report the relevant findings for each research question or hypothesis, focusing on how you analyzed them.

Analysis of your findings will help you determine how they relate to the different research questions and whether they support the hypothesis you formulated.

While you must highlight meaningful relationships, variances, and tendencies, it is important not to guess their interpretations and implications because this is something to save for the discussion  and  conclusion  chapters.

Any findings not directly relevant to your research questions or explanations concerning the data collection process  should be added to the dissertation paper’s appendix section.

Use of Figures and Tables in Dissertation Findings

Suppose your dissertation is based on quantitative research. In that case, it is important to include charts, graphs, tables, and other visual elements to help your readers understand the emerging trends and relationships in your findings.

Repeating information will give the impression that you are short on ideas. Refer to all charts, illustrations, and tables in your writing but avoid recurrence.

The text should be used only to elaborate and summarize certain parts of your results. On the other hand, illustrations and tables are used to present multifaceted data.

It is recommended to give descriptive labels and captions to all illustrations used so the readers can figure out what each refers to.

How to Report Quantitative Findings

Here is an example of how to report quantitative results in your dissertation findings chapter;

Two hundred seventeen participants completed both the pretest and post-test and a Pairwise T-test was used for the analysis. The quantitative data analysis reveals a statistically significant difference between the mean scores of the pretest and posttest scales from the Teachers Discovering Computers course. The pretest mean was 29.00 with a standard deviation of 7.65, while the posttest mean was 26.50 with a standard deviation of 9.74 (Table 1). These results yield a significance level of .000, indicating a strong treatment effect (see Table 3). With the correlation between the scores being .448, the little relationship is seen between the pretest and posttest scores (Table 2). This leads the researcher to conclude that the impact of the course on the educators’ perception and integration of technology into the curriculum is dramatic.

Paired Samples

Paired Samples Correlation

Paired Samples Test

Also Read: How to Write the Abstract for the Dissertation.

2. Reporting Qualitative Findings

A notable issue with reporting qualitative findings is that not all results directly relate to your research questions or hypothesis.

The best way to present the results of qualitative research is to frame your findings around the most critical areas or themes you obtained after you examined the data.

In-depth data analysis will help you observe what the data shows for each theme. Any developments, relationships, patterns, and independent responses directly relevant to your research question or hypothesis should be mentioned to the readers.

Additional information not directly relevant to your research can be included in the appendix .

How to Report Qualitative Findings

Here is an example of how to report qualitative results in your dissertation findings chapter;

The last question of the interview focused on the need for improvement in Thai ready-to-eat products and the industry at large, emphasizing the need for enhancement in the current products being offered in the market. When asked if there was any particular need for Thai ready-to-eat meals to be improved and how to improve them in case of ‘yes,’ the males replied mainly by saying that the current products need improvement in terms of the use of healthier raw materials and preservatives or additives. There was an agreement amongst all males concerning the need to improve the industry for ready-to-eat meals and the use of more healthy items to prepare such meals. The females were also of the opinion that the fast-food items needed to be improved in the sense that more healthy raw materials such as vegetable oil and unsaturated fats, including whole-wheat products, to overcome risks associated with trans fat leading to obesity and hypertension should be used for the production of RTE products. The frozen RTE meals and packaged snacks included many preservatives and chemical-based flavouring enhancers that harmed human health and needed to be reduced. The industry is said to be aware of this fact and should try to produce RTE products that benefit the community in terms of healthy consumption.

Looking for dissertation help?

Research prospect to the rescue then.

We have expert writers on our team who are skilled at helping students with dissertations across a variety of disciplines. Guaranteeing 100% satisfaction!

What to Avoid in Dissertation Findings Chapter

• Avoid using interpretive and subjective phrases and terms such as “confirms,” “reveals,” “suggests,” or “validates.” These terms are more suitable for the discussion chapter , where you will be expected to interpret the results in detail.
• Only briefly explain findings in relation to the key themes, hypothesis, and research questions. You don’t want to write a detailed subjective explanation for any research questions at this stage.

The Do’s of Writing the Findings or Results Section

• Ensure you are not presenting results from other research studies in your findings.
• Observe whether or not your hypothesis is tested or research questions answered.
• Illustrations and tables present data and are labelled to help your readers understand what they relate to.
• Use software such as Excel, STATA, and SPSS to analyse results and important trends.

Essential Guidelines on How to Write Dissertation Findings

The dissertation findings chapter should provide the context for understanding the results. The research problem should be repeated, and the research goals should be stated briefly.

This approach helps to gain the reader’s attention toward the research problem. The first step towards writing the findings is identifying which results will be presented in this section.

The results relevant to the questions must be presented, considering whether the results support the hypothesis. You do not need to include every result in the findings section. The next step is ensuring the data can be appropriately organized and accurate.

You will need to have a basic idea about writing the findings of a dissertation because this will provide you with the knowledge to arrange the data chronologically.

Start each paragraph by writing about the most important results and concluding the section with the most negligible actual results.

A short paragraph can conclude the findings section, summarising the findings so readers will remember as they transition to the next chapter. This is essential if findings are unexpected or unfamiliar or impact the study.

Our writers can help you with all parts of your dissertation, including statistical analysis of your results . To obtain free non-binding quotes, please complete our online quote form here .

Be Impartial in your Writing

When crafting your findings, knowing how you will organize the work is important. The findings are the story that needs to be told in response to the research questions that have been answered.

Therefore, the story needs to be organized to make sense to you and the reader. The findings must be compelling and responsive to be linked to the research questions being answered.

Always ensure that the size and direction of any changes, including percentage change, can be mentioned in the section. The details of p values or confidence intervals and limits should be included.

The findings sections only have the relevant parts of the primary evidence mentioned. Still, it is a good practice to include all the primary evidence in an appendix that can be referred to later.

The results should always be written neutrally without speculation or implication. The statement of the results mustn’t have any form of evaluation or interpretation.

Negative results should be added in the findings section because they validate the results and provide high neutrality levels.

The length of the dissertation findings chapter is an important question that must be addressed. It should be noted that the length of the section is directly related to the total word count of your dissertation paper.

The writer should use their discretion in deciding the length of the findings section or refer to the dissertation handbook or structure guidelines.

It should neither belong nor be short nor concise and comprehensive to highlight the reader’s main findings.

Ethically, you should be confident in the findings and provide counter-evidence. Anything that does not have sufficient evidence should be discarded. The findings should respond to the problem presented and provide a solution to those questions.

Structure of the Findings Chapter

The chapter should use appropriate words and phrases to present the results to the readers. Logical sentences should be used, while paragraphs should be linked to produce cohesive work.

You must ensure all the significant results have been added in the section. Recheck after completing the section to ensure no mistakes have been made.

The structure of the findings section is something you may have to be sure of primarily because it will provide the basis for your research work and ensure that the discussions section can be written clearly and proficiently.

One way to arrange the results is to provide a brief synopsis and then explain the essential findings. However, there should be no speculation or explanation of the results, as this will be done in the discussion section.

Another way to arrange the section is to present and explain a result. This can be done for all the results while the section is concluded with an overall synopsis.

This is the preferred method when you are writing more extended dissertations. It can be helpful when multiple results are equally significant. A brief conclusion should be written to link all the results and transition to the discussion section.

Numerous data analysis dissertation examples are available on the Internet, which will help you improve your understanding of writing the dissertation’s findings.

Problems to Avoid When Writing Dissertation Findings

One of the problems to avoid while writing the dissertation findings is reporting background information or explaining the findings. This should be done in the introduction section .

You can always revise the introduction chapter based on the data you have collected if that seems an appropriate thing to do.

Raw data or intermediate calculations should not be added in the findings section. Always ask your professor if raw data needs to be included.

If the data is to be included, then use an appendix or a set of appendices referred to in the text of the findings chapter.

Do not use vague or non-specific phrases in the findings section. It is important to be factual and concise for the reader’s benefit.

The findings section presents the crucial data collected during the research process. It should be presented concisely and clearly to the reader. There should be no interpretation, speculation, or analysis of the data.

The significant results should be categorized systematically with the text used with charts, figures, and tables. Furthermore, avoiding using vague and non-specific words in this section is essential.

It is essential to label the tables and visual material properly. You should also check and proofread the section to avoid mistakes.

The dissertation findings chapter is a critical part of your overall dissertation paper. If you struggle with presenting your results and statistical analysis, our expert dissertation writers can help you get things right. Whether you need help with the entire dissertation paper or individual chapters, our dissertation experts can provide customized dissertation support .

FAQs About Findings of a Dissertation

How do i report quantitative findings.

The best way to present your quantitative findings is to structure them around the research hypothesis or research questions you intended to address as part of your dissertation project. Report the relevant findings for each of the research questions or hypotheses, focusing on how you analyzed them.

How do I report qualitative findings?

The best way to present the qualitative research results is to frame your findings around the most important areas or themes that you obtained after examining the data.

An in-depth analysis of the data will help you observe what the data is showing for each theme. Any developments, relationships, patterns, and independent responses that are directly relevant to your research question or hypothesis should be clearly mentioned for the readers.

Can I use interpretive phrases like ‘it confirms’ in the finding chapter?

No, It is highly advisable to avoid using interpretive and subjective phrases in the finding chapter. These terms are more suitable for the discussion chapter , where you will be expected to provide your interpretation of the results in detail.

Can I report the results from other research papers in my findings chapter?

NO, you must not be presenting results from other research studies in your findings.

You May Also Like

Stuck on the recommendations section of your research? Read our guide on how to write recommendations for a research study and get started.

When writing your dissertation, an abstract serves as a deal maker or breaker. It can either motivate your readers to continue reading or discourage them.

The list of figures and tables in dissertation help the readers find tables and figures of their interest without looking through the whole dissertation.

USEFUL LINKS

LEARNING RESOURCES

COMPANY DETAILS

• How It Works

• +44 (0) 207 391 9032

Recent Posts

• What Is an Internship? Everything You Should Know
• How Long Should a Thesis Statement Be?
• How to Write a Character Analysis Essay
• Best Colours for Your PowerPoint Presentation: How to Choose
• How to Write a Nursing Essay
• Top 5 Essential Skills You Should Build As An International Student
• How Professional Editing Services Can Take Your Writing to the Next Level
• How to Write an Effective Essay Outline
• How to Write a Law Essay: A Comprehensive Guide with Examples
• What Are the Limitations of ChatGPT?
• Academic News
• Custom Essays
• Dissertation Writing
• Essay Marking
• Essay Writing
• Essay Writing Companies
• Model Essays
• Model Exam Answers
• Oxbridge Essays Updates
• PhD Writing
• Significant Academics
• Student News
• Study Skills
• University Applications
• University Essays
• University Life
• Writing Tips

Dissertation findings and discussion sections

(Last updated: 2 March 2020)

Since 2006, Oxbridge Essays has been the UK’s leading paid essay-writing and dissertation service

We have helped 10,000s of undergraduate, Masters and PhD students to maximise their grades in essays, dissertations, model-exam answers, applications and other materials. If you would like a free chat about your project with one of our UK staff, then please just reach out on one of the methods below.

Granted that at some point in the discussion you are going to have to link back to this previous research. But you still have the opportunity to demonstrate how you have met that coveted gap in the research and generally made a useful contribution to knowledge.

There are many ways to write up both your findings and discussion. In shorter dissertations, it might make sense to have both of these comprise one section. In longer pieces of work, these chapters are usually separate.

Information contained in this section will highlight the finer details of writing up your findings and discussion sections. We will use the model of Description – Analysis – Synthesis , which are typically the three components readers expect to see in these two sections.

Preparing to write

We also assume that you have used some sort of software program to help you with the organisation of your findings. If you have not completed this process, you must do so before beginning to write. If not, your findings chapter may end up a confusing and unorganised mess of random information. If you need help in this area, make sure to seek it out before beginning to put your findings down on paper.

One of the main issues that students tend to encounter when writing up their findings is the amount of data to include. By the end of the research process, you've probably collected very large amounts of data . Not all of this can possibly appear in your dissertation without completely overwhelming the reader. As a result, you need to be able to make smart decisions about what to include and what to leave out.

One of the easiest ways to approach this task is to create an outline. In approaching the outline, it is in your best interest to focus on two key points. Firstly, you need to focus on answering your research questions. Secondly, you must include any particularly interesting findings that have cropped up as you completed your research.

An outline will give you the structure you need, and should make the whole process of presenting your findings easier. We realise that it is going to be a difficult process to pick and choose pieces of data to include. But you must be diligent in the work that you cut out. A findings chapter that is long and confusing is going to put the reader off reading the rest of your work.

Introducing your findings

It can be up to 40% of the total word count within your dissertation writing . This is a huge chunk of information, so it's essential that it is clearly organised and that the reader knows what is supposed to be happening. One of the ways you can achieve this is through a logical and organised introduction.

There are four main components that your introduction should include:

Reminding the reader of what you set out to do

A brief description of how you intend approaching the write up of the results

Placing the research in context

Letting the reader know where they can find the research instruments (i.e. the Appendix)

With a findings chapter, there should be no suspense for the reader. You need to tell them what they need to know right from the beginning. This way, they'll have a clear idea about what is still to come. A good introduction will start by telling the reader where you have come from in the research process and what the outcome was (in a couple of paragraphs or less).

You need to highlight the structure of the chapter (as you generally will do with all chapters) and where the reader might find any further information (e.g. in the appendices).

Organisation of data

This is really going to depend on the type of project you have created .

For example, if you have completed a qualitative research project, you might have identified some key themes within the software program you used to organise your data. In this case, highlighting these themes in your findings chapter may be the most appropriate way to proceed. Not only are you using information that you have already documented, you are telling a story in each of your sections (which can be useful in qualitative research).

But what if you undertook a more quantitative type study? You might be better off structuring your findings chapter in relation to your research questions or your hypotheses. This assumes, of course, that you have more than one research question or hypothesis. Otherwise you would end up just having one really long section.

This brings us to our next student mistake – trying to do too much within one section.

Subheadings are ultimately going to be your friend throughout your dissertation writing . Not only do they organise your information into logical pieces, they give the reader guidelines for where your research might be going. This is also a break for the reader. Looking at pages and pages of text without any breaks can be daunting and overwhelming for a reader. You don't want to overwhelm someone who is going to mark your work and who is responsible for your success (or failure).

When writing your introduction, be clear, organised and methodical. Tell the reader what they need to know and try to organise the information in a way that makes the most sense to you and your project. If in doubt, discuss this with your supervisor before you start writing.

Presentation of qualitative data

If you have conducted things like interviews or observations, you are likely to have transcripts that encompass pages and pages of work.

Putting this all together cohesively within one chapter can be particularly challenging. This is true for two reasons. First, it is always difficult to determine what you are going to cut and/or include. Secondly, unlike quantitative data, it can often be difficult to represent qualitative data through figures and tables, so condensing the information into a visual representation is simply not possible. As a writer, it is important to address both these challenges.

When considering how to present your qualitative data, it may be helpful to begin with the initial outline you have created (and the one described above). Within each of your subsections, you are going to have themes or headings that represent impactful talking points that you want to focus on.

Once you have these headings, it might be helpful to go back to your data and highlight specific lines that can/might be used as examples in your writing. If you have used multiple different instruments to collect data (e.g. interviews and observations), you are going to want to ensure that you are using both examples within each section (if possible). This is so that you can demonstrate to more well-rounded perspective of the points you are trying to make. Once you have identified some key examples for each section, you might still have to do some further cutting/editing.

Once you have your examples firmly selected for each subsection, you want to ensure that you are including enough information. This way, the reader will understand the context and circumstances around what you are trying to ‘prove’. You must set up the examples you have chosen in a clear and coherent way.

Students often make the mistake of including quotations without any other information. It is important that you embed your quotes/examples within your own thoughts. Usually this means writing about the example both before and after. So you might say something like, “One of the main topics that my participants highlighted was the need for more teachers in elementary schools. This was a focal point for 7 of my 12 participants, and examples of their responses included: [insert example] by participant 3 and [insert example] by participant 9. The reoccurring focus by participants on the need for more teachers demonstrates [insert critical thought here]. By embedding your examples in the context, you are essentially highlighting to the reader what you want them to remember.

Aside from determining what to include, the presentation of such data is also essential. Participants, when speaking in an interview might not do so in a linear way. Instead they might jump from one thought to another and might go off topic here and there.

It is your job to present the reader with information on your theme/heading without including all the extra information. So the quotes need to be paired down to incorporate enough information for the reader to be able to understand, while removing the excess.

Finding this balance can be challenging. You have likely worked with the data for a long time and so it might make sense to you. Try to see your writing through the eyes of someone else, which should help you write more clearly.

Presentation of quantitative data

Something to consider first with numeric data is that presentation style depends what department you are submitting to. In the hard sciences, there is likely an expectation of heavy numeric input and corresponding statistics to accompany the findings. In the arts and humanities, however, such a detailed analysis might not be as common. Therefore as you write out your quantitative findings, take your audience into consideration.

Just like with the qualitative data, you must ensure that your data is appropriately organised. Again, you've likely used a software program to run your statistical analysis, and you have an outline and subheadings where you can focus your findings. There are many software programs available and it is important that you have used one that is most relevant to your field of study.

For some, Microsoft Excel may be sufficient for basic analysis. Others may rely on SPSS, Stata, R, or any of the other programs available through your institution or online. Whatever program you have used, make sure that you document what you have done and the variables that have affected your analysis.

One common mistake found in student writing is the presentation of the statistical analysis. During your analysis of the data, you are likely to have run multiple different analyses from regressions to correlations. Often, we see students presenting multiple different statistical analyses without any real understanding of what the tests mean.

Presentation of quantitative data is more than just about numbers and tables. You must explain your findings and justify why you have run/presented the tests that you have. You could also explain how they relate to the research question. However, depending on how you have organised your work, this might end up in the discussion section.

Students who are not confident with statistical analysis often have a tendency to revert back to their secondary school mathematics skills. They commonly document the mean, median, and mode for all of their results. Now, these three outcomes can be important. But having a good understanding of why you are proceeding with this strategy of analysis is going to be essential in a primarily quantitative study.

That noted, there are different expectations for an undergraduate dissertation and a PhD thesis, so knowing what these expectations are can be really helpful before you begin.

Presentation of graphs, tables, and figures

The first is the use of colour and/or variables. Depending on the presentation of your dissertation, you may be required to print out a final copy for the marker(s). In many cases, this final copy must be printed in black and white. This means that any figures or graphs that you create must be readable in a black and white (or greyscale) format.

This can be challenging because there are only so many distinct shades of grey. In a pie chart, you might show one section as purple and the other as green. Yet when printed, both the purple and the green translate to approximately the same shade of grey, making your graph suddenly unreadable.

Another common error is overwhelming the reader with graphs and tables. Let's think about your outline and subheadings. If you're including a table under each subheadings, it needs to be relevant to the information that is being discussed in that chapter. There is no correct or incorrect number of graphs that should exist within the section, but you should use your judgement about what looks appropriate.

The final mistake we see is the duplication of writing (or absence of writing) when presenting a graph. Some students will present their findings in a graph or table and then write out this information again below the graph. This defeats the entire purpose of using the graph in the first place. So avoid this at all times.

Conversely, other students sometimes include a graph or figure but nothing else. Doing this denies the reader of context or purpose of said graph or figure. At some point, a balance needs to be struck where the reader has the information they require to really understand the point being made within the section.

Analysis and synthesis in a discussion

The purpose of a discussion chapter.

The structure of your discussion chapter is really going to depend on what you are trying to do and how you have structured your findings. If you chose to structure your findings by theme, it might make sense to continue this into the analysis chapter.

Other people might structure it according to the research questions. This clearly indicates to the reader how you have addressed your study. Marking a dissertation usually requires the marker to comment on the extent to which the research questions have been addressed. So by structuring a dissertation that lays out each research question for the marker, you are making their job easier. Needless to say, this a great thing.

Like any other chapter in your thesis, an introduction is an essential component of your discussion. By this point, the reader has gone through your findings and is now looking for your interpretation. Therefore, at the end of your discussion introduction you should highlight the content that each of the subsections will cover.

A conclusion to your discussion section (or a chapter summary) is also going to be beneficial. The length of the analysis chapter is usually quite long, so a wrap up of the key points at the end can help the reader digest your work. It can also help ensure that the reader actually understands the points you are trying to highlight within your project.

Critical thinking

Without any critical thinking, you are really doing yourself a disservice. It will affect the mark that you obtain on your overall dissertation. This is why the analysis chapter is usually weighted quite heavily on the marking rubric.

We tell students about critical thinking and the importance of it on a daily basis. And yet, there does seem to be a general confusion about what critical thinking entails, i.e. what constitutes critical thinking versus what is a simple description.

Critical thinking asks you to provide your own opinion on your topic, which can be daunting at first. For much of your academic career, you've likely been asked to use research to justify a position that has already been set. Unlike critical thinking, this requires you to use other people’s ideas. But even if you're new to it, try and get to grips with what critical thinking entails and use it in your work.

Creating sub-sections

Subheadings need to be informative but not too long. It is possible to layer your subheadings, so you might have a Chapter 2, a Section 2.1 and then a 2.1.1 and 2.2.2. Usually anything after 3 numerical points does not get a number and would not appear in your table of contents.

When creating titles for your subheadings, consider how they are going to look in the table of contents. They need to fit on one line, ideally, so putting your research question as the subheading might end up being too long. Conversely, one- or two-word subheadings usually doesn't give enough information about the purpose of the section.

Finding this balance is important. But remember you can always edit your subheadings retrospectively.

Linking to previous chapters

Ideally, you will be able to concisely and effectively link your research to what has been researched previously. But this can be a challenge. You don't want to repeat what has been said in your literature review or the findings . But you need to pull examples from both of these sections in order to make the points that you need to.

So, how do you tackle this?

One way is by referring the reader back to previous chapters, sections, or subsections. This process can generally be done at the end. You can put in a place holder until you know how your sections will be numbered. For example you might write: “In Section XYZ, the theme of … was discussed. Findings from this study indicate…. (see Section XYZ for details)”. While ‘XYZ’ is obviously not going to be the same section, by using the same abbreviation, you can then search ‘XYZ’ after you have completed writing and replace each term with the appropriate number. This also makes the proofreading process easier.

If you are submitting an electronic version of this document, you may also consider hyperlinks to take the reader to the different sections. But be aware that this can be considerably more work, so you should allow for this in your timescale if it's something you wish to implement.

Let's outline the main takeaway points:

It is essential that you keep in mind the ‘describe, analyse, synthesise’ model.

The findings chapter is essentially the describe part. You need to ensure that you have clearly identified data that relates to your research questions, hypotheses, or themes of your study.

For the ‘describe’ component, you are not looking to support your work with other research, but rather to present your contribution. It is also important to consider your data in the ‘describe’ section. If you have qualitative data, ensure that you have edited the quotes and examples to a reasonable length. Pick quotes that accurately represent your theme. Try not to focus solely on one or two participants (if possible). Ensure that you are demonstrating links between multiple instruments, if you used them.

If you are using quantitative data, be careful about how many statistical tests you run. Make sure you can justify why you chose one particular test over another. When presenting graphs, use a colour scheme that's appropriate for the reader when printing in black and white. Ensure that graphs and tables are appropriately explained, but that the information provided is not duplicated.

From the ‘describe’ element, you move into the 'analysis' and 'synthesis'. These parts usually appear in the discussion and ask you to employ your critical thinking skills to demonstrate how your research fits into the bigger picture. It is often the case that your analysis holds the most weight in the marking scheme. So you should spend considerable time ensuring this section is appropriate. It needs to demonstrate how you have attempted to answer your research questions.

Finally, create an outline before you begin. While this might seem tedious at first, filling in the sections with the appropriate information will mean that you are not writing things over and over again. It'll also make sure you do not go wildly off topic. It is always beneficial to have a second set of eyes assess your work for any errors or omissions. Many students choose to contact professional editors to help with this as they hold the relevant expertise to guide you on the correct path to creating a perfect discussion section that is ready for submission.

In terms of presentation, both the findings and discussion chapters will benefit from a clear and logical introduction and chapter summary. Remember that both of these chapters are meant to inform. You are leading the reader on a journey, so make sure they stay on the path and arrive at the final destination with you!

Writing your dissertation methodology

10 tips on writing a dissertation literature review, dissertation introduction, conclusion and abstract.

• dissertation chapters
• dissertation discussion
• dissertation findings
• dissertation help
• dissertation writing service
• study skills
• writing tips

Writing Services

• Essay Plans
• Critical Reviews
• Literature Reviews
• Presentations
• Dissertation Title Creation
• Dissertation Proposals
• Dissertation Chapters
• PhD Proposals
• Journal Publication
• CV Writing Service
• Business Proofreading Services

Editing Services

• Proofreading Service
• Editing Service
• Academic Editing Service

Additional Services

• Marking Services
• Consultation Calls
• Personal Statements
• Tutoring Services

Our Company

• Frequently Asked Questions
• Become a Writer

Terms & Policies

• Fair Use Policy
• Policy for Students in England
• Privacy Policy
• Terms & Conditions
• [email protected]
• Contact Form

Payment Methods

Cryptocurrency payments.

Writing the Dissertation - Guides for Success: Results and Discussion

• Writing the Dissertation Homepage
• Overview and Planning
• Research Question
• Literature Review
• Methodology
• Results and Discussion
• The Difference
• What to Avoid

Overview of writing the results and discussion

The results and discussion follow on from the methods or methodology chapter of the dissertation. This creates a natural transition from how you designed your study, to what your study reveals, highlighting your own contribution to the research area.

Disciplinary differences

Please note: this guide is not specific to any one discipline. The results and discussion can vary depending on the nature of the research and the expectations of the school or department, so please adapt the following advice to meet the demands of your project and department. Consult your supervisor for further guidance; you can also peruse our  Writing Across Subjects guide .

Guide contents

As part of the Writing the Dissertation series, this guide covers the most common conventions of the results and discussion chapters, giving you the necessary knowledge, tips and guidance needed to impress your markers! The sections are organised as follows:

• The Difference  - Breaks down the distinctions between the results and discussion chapters.
• Results  - Provides a walk-through of common characteristics of the results chapter.
• Discussion - Provides a walk-through of how to approach writing your discussion chapter, including structure.
• What to Avoid  - Covers a few frequent mistakes you'll want to...avoid!
• FAQs  - Guidance on first- vs. third-person, limitations and more.
• Checklist  - Includes a summary of key points and a self-evaluation checklist.

Training and tools

• The Academic Skills team has recorded a Writing the Dissertation workshop series to help you with each section of a standard dissertation, including a video on writing the results and discussion   (embedded below).
• The dissertation planner tool can help you think through the timeline for planning, research, drafting and editing.
• iSolutions offers training and a Word template to help you digitally format and structure your dissertation.

Introduction

The results of your study are often followed by a separate chapter of discussion. This is certainly the case with scientific writing. Some dissertations, however, might incorporate both the results and discussion in one chapter. This depends on the nature of your dissertation and the conventions within your school or department. Always follow the guidelines given to you and ask your supervisor for further guidance.

As part of the Writing the Dissertation series, this guide covers the essentials of writing your results and discussion, giving you the necesary knowledge, tips and guidance needed to leave a positive impression on your markers! This guide covers the results and discussion as separate – although interrelated – chapters, as you'll see in the next two tabs. However, you can easily adapt the guidance to suit one single chapter – keep an eye out for some hints on how to do this throughout the guide.

Results or discussion - what's the difference?

To understand what the results and discussion sections are about, we need to clearly define the difference between the two.

The results should provide a clear account of the findings . This is written in a dry and direct manner, simply highlighting the findings as they appear once processed. It’s expected to have tables and graphics, where relevant, to contextualise and illustrate the data.

Rather than simply stating the findings of the study, the discussion interprets the findings  to offer a more nuanced understanding of the research. The discussion is similar to the second half of the conclusion because it’s where you consider and formulate a response to the question, ‘what do we now know that we didn’t before?’ (see our Writing the Conclusion   guide for more). The discussion achieves this by answering the research questions and responding to any hypotheses proposed. With this in mind, the discussion should be the most insightful chapter or section of your dissertation because it provides the most original insight.

Across the next two tabs of this guide, we will look at the results and discussion chapters separately in more detail.

Writing the results

The results chapter should provide a direct and factual account of the data collected without any interpretation or interrogation of the findings. As this might suggest, the results chapter can be slightly monotonous, particularly for quantitative data. Nevertheless, it’s crucial that you present your results in a clear and direct manner as it provides the necessary detail for your subsequent discussion.

Note: If you’re writing your results and discussion as one chapter, then you can either:

1) write them as distinctly separate sections in the same chapter, with the discussion following on from the results, or...

2) integrate the two throughout by presenting a subset of the results and then discussing that subset in further detail.

Next, we'll explore some of the most important factors to consider when writing your results chapter.

How you structure your results chapter depends on the design and purpose of your study. Here are some possible options for structuring your results chapter (adapted from Glatthorn and Joyner, 2005):

• Chronological – depending on the nature of the study, it might be important to present your results in order of how you collected the data, such as a pretest-posttest design.
• Research method – if you’ve used a mixed-methods approach, you could isolate each research method and instrument employed in the study.
• Research question and/or hypotheses – you could structure your results around your research questions and/or hypotheses, providing you have more than one. However, keep in mind that the results on their own don’t necessarily answer the questions or respond to the hypotheses in a definitive manner. You need to interpret the findings in the discussion chapter to gain a more rounded understanding.
• Variable – you could isolate each variable in your study (where relevant) and specify how and whether the results changed.

Tables and figures

For your results, you are expected to convert your data into tables and figures, particularly when dealing with quantitative data. Making use of tables and figures is a way of contextualising your results within the study. It also helps to visually reinforce your written account of the data. However, make sure you’re only using tables and figures to supplement , rather than replace, your written account of the results (see the 'What to avoid' tab for more on this).

Figures and tables need to be numbered in order of when they appear in the dissertation, and they should be capitalised. You also need to make direct reference to them in the text, which you can do (with some variation) in one of the following ways:

Figure 1 shows…

The results of the test (see Figure 1) demonstrate…

The actual figures and tables themselves also need to be accompanied by a caption that briefly outlines what is displayed. For example:

Table 1. Variables of the regression model

Table captions normally appear above the table, whilst figures or other such graphical forms appear below, although it’s worth confirming this with your supervisor as the formatting can change depending on the school or discipline. The style guide used for writing in your subject area (e.g., Harvard, MLA, APA, OSCOLA) often dictates correct formatting of tables, graphs and figures, so have a look at your style guide for additional support.

Using quotations

If your qualitative data comes from interviews and focus groups, your data will largely consist of quotations from participants. When presenting this data, you should identify and group the most common and interesting responses and then quote two or three relevant examples to illustrate this point. Here’s a brief example from a qualitative study on the habits of online food shoppers:

Regardless of whether or not participants regularly engage in online food shopping, all but two respondents commented, in some form, on the convenience of online food shopping:

"It’s about convenience for me. I’m at work all week and the weekend doesn’t allow much time for food shopping, so knowing it can be ordered and then delivered in 24 hours is great for me” (Participant A).

"It fits around my schedule, which is important for me and my family” (Participant D).

"In the past, I’ve always gone food shopping after work, which has always been a hassle. Online food shopping, however, frees up some of my time” (Participant E).

As shown in this example, each quotation is attributed to a particular participant, although their anonymity is protected. The details used to identify participants can depend on the relevance of certain factors to the research. For instance, age or gender could be included.

Writing the discussion

The discussion chapter is where “you critically examine your own results in the light of the previous state of the subject as outlined in the background, and make judgments as to what has been learnt in your work” (Evans et al., 2014: 12). Whilst the results chapter is strictly factual, reporting on the data on a surface level, the discussion is rooted in analysis and interpretation , allowing you and your reader to delve beneath the surface.

Next, we will review some of the most important factors to consider when writing your discussion chapter.

Like the results, there is no single way to structure your discussion chapter. As always, it depends on the nature of your dissertation and whether you’re dealing with qualitative, quantitative or mixed-methods research. It’s good to be consistent with the results chapter, so you could structure your discussion chapter, where possible, in the same way as your results.

When it comes to structure, it’s particularly important that you guide your reader through the various points, subtopics or themes of your discussion. You should do this by structuring sections of your discussion, which might incorporate three or four paragraphs around the same theme or issue, in a three-part way that mirrors the typical three-part essay structure of introduction, main body and conclusion.

Figure 1: The three-part cycle that embodies a typical essay structure and reflects how you structure themes or subtopics in your discussion.

This is your topic sentence where you clearly state the focus of this paragraph/section. It’s often a fairly short, declarative statement in order to grab the reader’s attention, and it should be clearly related to your research purpose, such as responding to a research question.

This constitutes your analysis where you explore the theme or focus, outlined in the topic sentence, in further detail by interrogating why this particular theme or finding emerged and the significance of this data. This is also where you bring in the relevant secondary literature.

This is the evaluative stage of the cycle where you explicitly return back to the topic sentence and tell the reader what this means in terms of answering the relevant research question and establishing new knowledge. It could be a single sentence, or a short paragraph, and it doesn’t strictly need to appear at the end of every section or theme. Instead, some prefer to bring the main themes together towards the end of the discussion in a single paragraph or two. Either way, it’s imperative that you evaluate the significance of your discussion and tell the reader what this means.

A note on the three-part structure

This is often how you’re taught to construct a paragraph, but the themes and ideas you engage with at dissertation level are going to extend beyond the confines of a short paragraph. Therefore, this is a structure to guide how you write about particular themes or patterns in your discussion. Think of this structure like a cycle that you can engage in its smallest form to shape a paragraph; in a slightly larger form to shape a subsection of a chapter; and in its largest form to shape the entire chapter. You can 'level up' the same basic structure to accommodate a deeper breadth of thinking and critical engagement.

Using secondary literature

Your discussion chapter should return to the relevant literature (previously identified in your literature review ) in order to contextualise and deepen your reader’s understanding of the findings. This might help to strengthen your findings, or you might find contradictory evidence that serves to counter your results. In the case of the latter, it’s important that you consider why this might be and the implications for this. It’s through your incorporation of secondary literature that you can consider the question, ‘What do we now know that we didn’t before?’

Limitations

You may have included a limitations section in your methodology chapter (see our Writing the Methodology guide ), but it’s also common to have one in your discussion chapter. The difference here is that your limitations are directly associated with your results and the capacity to interpret and analyse those results.

Think of it this way: the limitations in your methodology refer to the issues identified before conducting the research, whilst the limitations in your discussion refer to the issues that emerged after conducting the research. For example, you might only be able to identify a limitation about the external validity or generalisability of your research once you have processed and analysed the data. Try not to overstress the limitations of your work – doing so can undermine the work you’ve done – and try to contextualise them, perhaps by relating them to certain limitations of other studies.

Recommendations

It’s often good to follow your limitations with some recommendations for future research. This creates a neat linearity from what didn’t work, or what could be improved, to how other researchers could address these issues in the future. This helps to reposition your limitations in a positive way by offering an action-oriented response. Try to limit the amount of recommendations you discuss – too many can bring the end of your discussion to a rather negative end as you’re ultimately focusing on what should be done, rather than what you have done. You also don’t need to repeat the recommendations in your conclusion if you’ve included them here.

What to avoid

This portion of the guide will cover some common missteps you should try to avoid in writing your results and discussion.

Over-reliance on tables and figures

It’s very common to produce visual representations of data, such as graphs and tables, and to use these representations in your results chapter. However, the use of these figures should not entirely replace your written account of the data. You don’t need to specify every detail in the data set, but you should provide some written account of what the data shows, drawing your reader’s attention to the most important elements of the data. The figures should support your account and help to contextualise your results. Simply stating, ‘look at Table 1’, without any further detail is not sufficient. Writers often try to do this as a way of saving words, but your markers will know!

Ignoring unexpected or contradictory data

Research can be a complex process with ups and downs, surprises and anomalies. Don’t be tempted to ignore any data that doesn’t meet your expectations, or that perhaps you’re struggling to explain. Failing to report on data for these, and other such reasons, is a problem because it undermines your credibility as a researcher, which inevitably undermines your research in the process. You have to do your best to provide some reason to such data. For instance, there might be some methodological reason behind a particular trend in the data.

Including raw data

You don’t need to include any raw data in your results chapter – raw data meaning unprocessed data that hasn’t undergone any calculations or other such refinement. This can overwhelm your reader and obscure the clarity of the research. You can include raw data in an appendix, providing you feel it’s necessary.

Presenting new results in the discussion

You shouldn’t be stating original findings for the first time in the discussion chapter. The findings of your study should first appear in your results before elaborating on them in the discussion.

Overstressing the significance of your research

It’s important that you clarify what your research demonstrates so you can highlight your own contribution to the research field. However, don’t overstress or inflate the significance of your results. It’s always difficult to provide definitive answers in academic research, especially with qualitative data. You should be confident and authoritative where possible, but don’t claim to reach the absolute truth when perhaps other conclusions could be reached. Where necessary, you should use hedging (see definition) to slightly soften the tone and register of your language.

Definition: Hedging refers to 'the act of expressing your attitude or ideas in tentative or cautious ways' (Singh and Lukkarila, 2017: 101). It’s mostly achieved through a number of verbs or adverbs, such as ‘suggest’ or ‘seemingly.’

Q: What’s the difference between the results and discussion?

A: The results chapter is a factual account of the data collected, whilst the discussion considers the implications of these findings by relating them to relevant literature and answering your research question(s). See the tab 'The Differences' in this guide for more detail.

Q: Should the discussion include recommendations for future research?

A: Your dissertation should include some recommendations for future research, but it can vary where it appears. Recommendations are often featured towards the end of the discussion chapter, but they also regularly appear in the conclusion chapter (see our Writing the Conclusion guide   for more). It simply depends on your dissertation and the conventions of your school or department. It’s worth consulting any specific guidance that you’ve been given, or asking your supervisor directly.

Q: Should the discussion include the limitations of the study?

A: Like the answer above, you should engage with the limitations of your study, but it might appear in the discussion of some dissertations, or the conclusion of others. Consider the narrative flow and whether it makes sense to include the limitations in your discussion chapter, or your conclusion. You should also consult any discipline-specific guidance you’ve been given, or ask your supervisor for more. Be mindful that this is slightly different to the limitations outlined in the methodology or methods chapter (see our Writing the Methodology guide vs. the 'Discussion' tab of this guide).

Q: Should the results and discussion be in the first-person or third?

A: It’s important to be consistent , so you should use whatever you’ve been using throughout your dissertation. Third-person is more commonly accepted, but certain disciplines are happy with the use of first-person. Just remember that the first-person pronoun can be a distracting, but powerful device, so use it sparingly. Consult your lecturer for discipline-specific guidance.

Q: Is there a difference between the discussion and the conclusion of a dissertation?

A: Yes, there is a difference. The discussion chapter is a detailed consideration of how your findings answer your research questions. This includes the use of secondary literature to help contextualise your discussion. Rather than considering the findings in detail, the conclusion briefly summarises and synthesises the main findings of your study before bringing the dissertation to a close. Both are similar, particularly in the way they ‘broaden out’ to consider the wider implications of the research. They are, however, their own distinct chapters, unless otherwise stated by your supervisor.

The results and discussion chapters (or chapter) constitute a large part of your dissertation as it’s here where your original contribution is foregrounded and discussed in detail. Remember, the results chapter simply reports on the data collected, whilst the discussion is where you consider your research questions and/or hypothesis in more detail by interpreting and interrogating the data. You can integrate both into a single chapter and weave the interpretation of your findings throughout the chapter, although it’s common for both the results and discussion to appear as separate chapters. Consult your supervisor for further guidance.

Here’s a final checklist for writing your results and discussion. Remember that not all of these points will be relevant for you, so make sure you cover whatever’s appropriate for your dissertation. The asterisk (*) indicates any content that might not be relevant for your dissertation. To download a copy of the checklist to save and edit, please use the Word document, below.

• Results and discussion self-evaluation checklist

• << Previous: Methodology
• Next: Conclusion >>
• Last Updated: Aug 14, 2024 11:12 AM
• URL: https://library.soton.ac.uk/writing_the_dissertation

How Do I Write the Discussion Chapter?

Reflecting on and Comparing Your Data, Recognising the Strengths and Limitations

• First Online: 19 October 2023

Cite this chapter

• Sue Reeves   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-3017-0559 3 &
• Bartek Buczkowski   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-4146-3664 4  

732 Accesses

The Discussion chapter brings an opportunity to write an academic argument that contains a detailed critical evaluation and analysis of your research findings. This chapter addresses the purpose and critical nature of the discussion, contains a guide to selecting key results to discuss, and details how best to structure the discussion with subsections and paragraphs. We also present a list of points to do and avoid when writing the discussion together with a Discussion chapter checklist.

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

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save.

• Get 10 units per month
• Download Article/Chapter or eBook
• 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
• Cancel anytime
• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Compact, lightweight edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Braun V, Clarke V (2013) Successful qualitative research: a practical guide for beginners. SAGE Publications, London

Google Scholar  

McGregor SLT (2018) Understanding and evaluating research: a critical guide. SAGE Publications, Los Angeles, CA

Book   Google Scholar  

PLOS (2023) Author resources. How to write discussions and conclusions. Accessed Mar 3, 2023, from https://plos.org/resource/how-to-write-conclusions/ . Accessed 3 Mar 2023

Further Reading

Cottrell S (2017) Critical thinking skills: effective analysis, argument and reflection, 3rd edn. Palgrave, London

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

University of Roehampton, London, UK

Manchester Metropolitan University, Manchester, UK

Bartek Buczkowski

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Reeves, S., Buczkowski, B. (2023). How Do I Write the Discussion Chapter?. In: Mastering Your Dissertation. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-41911-9_9

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-41911-9_9

Published : 19 October 2023

Publisher Name : Springer, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-031-41910-2

Online ISBN : 978-3-031-41911-9

eBook Packages : Biomedical and Life Sciences Biomedical and Life Sciences (R0)

Share this chapter

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

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

• Dissertation & Thesis Guides
• Basics of Dissertation & Thesis Writing
• How to Write a Dissertation Discussion Chapter: Guide & Examples
• Speech Topics
• Basics of Essay Writing
• Essay Topics
• Other Essays
• Main Academic Essays
• Research Paper Topics
• Basics of Research Paper Writing
• Miscellaneous
• Chicago/ Turabian
• Data & Statistics
• Methodology
• Admission Writing Tips
• Admission Advice
• Other Guides
• Student Life
• Studying Tips
• Understanding Plagiarism
• Academic Writing Tips

• Essay Guides
• Research Paper Guides
• Formatting Guides
• Basics of Research Process
• Admission Guides

How to Write a Dissertation Discussion Chapter: Guide & Examples

Table of contents

Use our free Readability checker

Dissertation discussion section is a chapter that interprets the results obtained from research and offers an in-depth analysis of findings. In this section, students need to analyze the outcomes, evaluate their significance, and compare them to previous research. The discussion section may also explore the limitations of the study and suggest further research perspectives.

If you are stuck with your thesis or dissertation discussion chapter, you are in the right place to complete this section successfully. This article will outline our best solutions and methods on how to write the discussion of a dissertation or thesis. We also will share advanced dissertation discussion examples to help you finalize your PhD work.  Feel like academic writing gives you hassles? Remember that you can always rely on academic experts qualified in your field to get professional dissertation help online .

What Is a Dissertation Discussion?

First and foremost, students need to have a clear understanding of what dissertation discussion is. This is not the same as your results section , where you share data from your research. You are going deeper into the explanation of the existing data in your thesis or dissertation discussion section. In other words, you illustrate practical implications of your research and how the data can be used, researched further, or limited.  What will make your discussion section of a dissertation excellent:

• clear structure
• practical implication
• elaboration on future work on this topic.

This section should go after research methodology and before the dissertation conclusion . It should be directly relevant to questions posed in your introduction.  The biggest mistake you can make is to rewrite your result chapter with other words and add some limitations and recommendation paragraphs. However, this is an entirely different type of writing you need to complete.

Purpose of a Dissertation Discussion Chapter

A dissertation discussion section is critical to explaining students’ findings and the application of data to real-life cases. As we mentioned before, this section will often be read right after the dissertation methods . It evaluates and elaborates on findings and helps to understand the importance of your performed thesis research.  A dissertation discussion opens a new perspective on further research on the same field or topic. It also outlines critical data to consider in subsequent studies. In a nutshell, this is the section where you explain your work to a broad audience.

Structure of a Dissertation Discussion Section

Let’s start your writing journey of this research part with a clear delineation of what it should include and then briefly discuss each component. Here are some basic things you need to consider for an excellent discussion chapter of dissertation :

• Brief summary It does not mean copying an introduction section. However, the first few paragraphs will make an overview of your findings and topic.
• Interpretations This is a critical component of your work — elaborate on your results and explain possible ways of using them.
• Implication Research work is not just 100+ pages of text. Students should explain and illustrate how it could be used for solving practical problems.
• Constraints This is where you outline your limitations. For instance, your research was done only on students, and it may have different results with elderly people.
• Recommendations You can also define possible ways of future research on the exact topic when writing a discussion for your thesis or dissertation. Tell readers, for example, that it would be helpful to run similar research in other specific circumstances.

How to Write a Dissertation Discussion Chapter?

One of the most commonly asked questions for our experts is how to write the discussion section of a dissertation or thesis. We understand why it can be complicated to get a clear answer. Students often think that this section is similar to the result chapter and just retells it in other words. But it is not so. Let’s go through all steps to writing a discussion in a dissertation, and share our best examples from academic papers.

1. Remind Your Research Questions & Objectives

Writing the discussion chapter of a dissertation is not a big deal if you understand its aim and each component in a text structure. First of all, you need to evaluate how your results help to answer research questions you defined in the beginning. It is not about repeating the result, you did it in previous paragraphs.  However, dissertation or thesis discussion should underline how your findings help to answer the research problem. Start writing from a brief intro by recalling research questions or hypotheses . Then, show how your results answer them or support a hypothesis in your work.

2. Sum Up Key Findings

Next part of your discussion for dissertation is to provide a short summary of previous data. But do not respite the same summary paragraphs from results or introduction of a dissertation . Here researchers should be more thoughtful and go deeper into the work’s aims.  Try to explain in a few sentences what you get from running research. For instance, starters usually write the statement that “our data proves that…” or “survey results illustrate a clear correlation between a and b that is critical for proving our working hypothesis…”.  A discussion chapter of your dissertation is not just a fixation on results but a more profound summary connected to research goals and purpose. Here is an example: Summary of Findings Example

According to the data, implementing the co-orientation theory was successful and can be used for the same circumstances in the future. As we found, most participants agreed with the importance of those theses on the five fundamental reforms. It means that the results identified a successful government work in choosing the messages to communicate about examined reforms. At the same time, the situation is not so favorable with implementing the principles of two-way symmetrical communications. According to the results, people did not feel that the government had a mutual, open, and equal dialogue with the public about the reforms.

3. Interpret the Results

The most critical part of a discussion section is to explain and enact the results you’ve got. It is the most significant part of any text. Students should be clear about what to include in these paragraphs. Here is some advice to make this elaboration structured:

• Identify correlations or patterns in the data for dissertation discussion.
• Underline how results can answer research questions or prove your hypothesis.
• Emphasize how your findings are connected to the previous topic studies.
• Point out essential statements you can use in future research.
• Evaluate the significance of your results and any unexpected data you have.
• What others can learn from your research and how this work contributes to the field.
• Consider any possible additional or unique explanation of your findings.
• Go deeper with options of how results can be applied in practice.

Writing a dissertation discussion chapter can be tough, but here is a great sample to learn from. Example of Interpretations in Disssertation Discussion

Our study underlines the importance of future research on using TikTok for political communication. As discussed above, TikTok is the most commonly used social media platform for many young voters. This means that political discussion will also move to this platform. Our research and typology of political communication content can be used in the future planning of effective political campaigns. For example, we can assume that “play videos” have enormous potential to facilitate complicated topics and provide specific agenda settings. We also identified additional affordances of TikTok used for political communication, such as built-in video editors, playlists for specific topics, a green screen for news explainers, and duets for reflection on news and discussion. It means that these features make TikTok suitable for efficient political communications.

4. Discuss How Your Findings Relate to the Literature

Here we came to the implications of your findings for the dissertation discussion. In other words, this is a few sentences on how your work is connected to other studies on the same research topic or what literature gap you are going to fill with the data and research you launched. Remember to mention how your study address the limitations you have discovered while writing a literature review .  First, outline how your hypothesis relates to theories or previous works in the field. Maybe, you challenged some theories or tried to define your own. Be specific in this section. Second, define a practical implementation of your work. Maybe, it can support recommendations or change legislation.  Discussion chapter of a thesis is a place where you explain your work, make it valuable, and incorporate additional meaning for some specific data.  Example of Implications in Disssertation Discussion

As we pointed out in the literature review, there are few works on using TikTok affordances for political communications, and this topic can be expanded in the future. Government institutions have already understood the importance of this platform for efficient communication with younger audiences, and we will see more political projects on TikTok. That is why expanding research on using TikTok for political communication will be enormous in the following years. Our work is one of the first research on the role of emerging media in war communication and can be used as a practical guide for government's strategic planning in times of emergencies.

5. Mention Possible Limitations

It is pretty tricky to conduct research without limitations. You will always have some, which does not mean that your work is not good. When you write a discussion chapter in a thesis or dissertation, focus on what may influence your results and how changing independent variables can affect your data collection methods and final outcomes.  Here are some points to consider when you structure your dissertation discussion limitation part:

• If results can change in case you change the reference group?
• What will happen with data if it changes circumstances?
• What could influence results?

Critical thinking and analysis can help you to outline possible limitations. It can be the age of the reference group, change of questionnaire in a survey, or specific use of data extraction equipment. Be transparent about what could affect your results.  Example of Complications

Although this study has provided critical first insights into the effects of multimodal disinformation and rebuttals, there are some limitations. First and most importantly, the effects of multimodal disinformation and rebuttals partially depend on the topic of the message. Although fact-checkers reduce credibility of disinformation in both settings, and attitudinal congruence plays a consistent role in conditioning responses to multimodal disinformation, visuals do not have the same impact on affecting the credibility of news on school shootings and refugees.

6. Provide Recommendations for Further Research

Writing a dissertation discussion also makes a connection to possible future research. So, other scientists may complete that. While elaborating on possible implementations of your study, you may also estimate future approaches in topic research.  Here are some points to consider while your discussion in thesis writing:

• Outline questions related to your topic that you did not answer in defined study or did not outline as research questions. There are other possible gaps to research.
• Suggest future research based on limitations. For example, if you define surveyed people’s age as a limitation, recommend running another survey for older or younger recipients.

Example of Recommendations

As we mentioned before, our study has some limitations, as the research was conducted based on data from United State citizens. However, for a better understanding of government communication practices, it would be productive to implement the same research in other countries. Some cultural differences can influence the communication strategies the government uses in times of emergency. Another possible way to examine this topic is to conduct research using a specific period of time. For future studies, it will be beneficial to expand the number of survey recipients. 

7. Conclude Your Thesis/ Dissertation Discussion

You are almost done, the last step is to provide a brief summary of a section. It is not the same as a conclusion for whole research. However, you need to briefly outline key points from the dissertation discussion.  To finalize writing the discussion section of a dissertation, go through the text and check if there is no unimportant information. Do not overload the text with relevant data you did not present in the result section. Be specific in your summary paragraphs. It is a holistic view of everything you pointed out. Provide a few sentences to systemize all you outlined in the text. Example of a Concluding Summary in a Dissertation Discussion Section

To summarize, Airbnb has expertise in communicating CSR and CSA campaigns. We defined their communication strategy about the program for Ukrainian refugees as quite successful. They applied all the principles of CSR communication best practices, used dialogic theory to engage with the public on social media, and created clear messaging on applying for the program. Airbnb examples of CSR communication can be used by other businesses to create a communication strategy for unplanned CSR campaigns. Moreover, it can be further researched how Airbnb's CSR campaign influenced the organizational reputation in the future. 

Dissertation Discussion Example

If we need to share one piece of practical advice, it would be to use thesis or dissertation discussion examples when writing your own copy. StudyCrumb provides the best samples from real students' work to help you understand the stylistic and possible structure of this part. It does not mean you need to copy and paste them into your work.  However, you can use a  dissertation discussion example for inspiration and brainstorming ideas for breaking writing blocks. Here’s a doctoral thesis discussion chapter example.

Dissertation Discussion Writing Tips

Before reading this blog, you should already know how to write a thesis discussion. However, we would share some essential tips you need to have in mind while working on the document. 

• Be consistent Your dissertation discussion chapter is a part of bigger research, and it should be in line with your whole work.
• Understand your reader You are writing an academic text that will be analyzed by professionals and experts in the same field. Be sure that you are not trying to simplify your discussion.
• Be logical Do not jump into a new line of discussion if you did not delineate it as a research question at the beginning.
• Be clear Do not include any data that was not presented in the result section.
• Consider word choice Use such terms as “our data indicate…” or “our data suggests…” instead of “the data proves.”
• Use proper format Follow the formatting rules specified by a specific paper style (e.g., APA style format , MLA format , or Chicago format ) or provided by your instructor.

Bottom Line on Writing a Dissertation Discussion Chapter

At this stage, it should not be a question for you on how to write a discussion chapter in a PhD thesis or dissertation. Let’s make it clear. It is not a result section but still a place to elaborate on data and go deeper with explanations. Dissertation discussion section includes some intro, result interpretations, limitations, and recommendations for future research. Our team encourages you to use examples before starting your own piece of writing. It will help you to realize the purpose and structure of this chapter and inspire better texts! If you have other questions regarding the PhD writing process, check our blog for more insights. From detailed instruction on how to write a dissertation or guide on formatting a dissertation appendix , we’ve got you covered.

Order dissertation discussion from our proficient writers. They will take a significant burden off of you. Instead, they will carry out high-level academic work in a short time.

FAQ About Dissertation Discussion Chapter

1. where does a discussion section go in a dissertation.

Dissertation discussion section is used to go right after the result chapter. The logic is simple — you share your data and then go to the elaboration and explanation of it. Check the sample thesis we provide to students for details on structure.

2. How long should a dissertation discussion chapter be?

It is not a surprise that dissertation discussion chapter is extremely significant for the research. Here you will go into the details of your study and interpret results to prove or not your hypothesis. It should take almost 25% of your work. 

3. What tense should I use in a dissertation discussion?

Thesis or dissertation discussion used to have some rules on using tenses. You need to use the present tense when referring to established facts and use the past tense when referring to previous studies. And check your text before submission to ensure that you did not miss something.

4. What not to include in a dissertation discussion section?

The answer is easy. Discussion section of a dissertation should not include any new findings or describe some unsupported claims. Also, do not try to feel all possible gaps with one research. It may be better to outline your ideas for future studies in recommendations.

Joe Eckel is an expert on Dissertations writing. He makes sure that each student gets precious insights on composing A-grade academic writing.

You may also like

Library Guides

Dissertations 5: findings, analysis and discussion: discussion.

• Results/Findings

Discussion in section-based dissertations

As with all other chapters, the discussion chapter differ according to the discipline and structure of your dissertation. If the dissertation is organised by sections, the discussion chapter(s) could contain the following : 

• If using a research question: state explicitly how your research answers the research question . Present arguments and demonstrate your main argument. 
• If using an hypothesis: state explicitly if your findings support or not your research hypothesis .
• Critically analyse the findings by linking them to the background research .
• Are the findings consistent with existing research, theories, established practices?
• Do they present anything unusua l? 
• Do the findings shed new light on the subject ? Assess the importance of your study and how it’s filled a gap in your field. Identify possible implications of your findings for your area and other areas of study.
• Present a critique of your research in terms of methodology, limitations etc. If the hypothesis was not supported, consider reasons why this was the case (Cottrell, 2014, p192). 

To some extent, the discussion chapter ties together and elaborates on all the preceding sections of your dissertation:

• It can be structured according to the objectives you laid out in the introduction. 
• It answers the research question presented in the introduction, or discusses whether the hypothesis, introduced in the introduction or methodology, was supported. 
• It discusses the findings and results, which were described in the results/findings section.
• It interprets and explains the findings, comparing and contrasting them with the literature presented in the literature review.
• It discusses the limitations of the methods and strength if your approach. 

• << Previous: Analysis
• Last Updated: Aug 4, 2023 2:17 PM
• URL: https://libguides.westminster.ac.uk/c.php?g=696975

CONNECT WITH US

• LEARNING SKILLS
• Writing a Dissertation or Thesis
• Results and Discussion

Search SkillsYouNeed:

Learning Skills:

• A - Z List of Learning Skills
• What is Learning?
• Learning Approaches
• Learning Styles
• 8 Types of Learning Styles
• Understanding Your Preferences to Aid Learning
• Lifelong Learning
• Decisions to Make Before Applying to University
• Top Tips for Surviving Student Life
• Living Online: Education and Learning
• 8 Ways to Embrace Technology-Based Learning Approaches
• Critical Thinking Skills
• Critical Thinking and Fake News
• Understanding and Addressing Conspiracy Theories
• Critical Analysis
• Study Skills
• Exam Skills
• How to Write a Research Proposal
• Ethical Issues in Research
• Dissertation: The Introduction
• Researching and Writing a Literature Review
• Writing your Methodology
• Dissertation: Results and Discussion
• Dissertation: Conclusions and Extras

Writing Your Dissertation or Thesis eBook

Part of the Skills You Need Guide for Students .

• Research Methods
• Teaching, Coaching, Mentoring and Counselling
• Employability Skills for Graduates

Subscribe to our FREE newsletter and start improving your life in just 5 minutes a day.

You'll get our 5 free 'One Minute Life Skills' and our weekly newsletter.

We'll never share your email address and you can unsubscribe at any time.

Writing your Dissertation:  Results and Discussion

When writing a dissertation or thesis, the results and discussion sections can be both the most interesting as well as the most challenging sections to write.

You may choose to write these sections separately, or combine them into a single chapter, depending on your university’s guidelines and your own preferences.

There are advantages to both approaches.

Writing the results and discussion as separate sections allows you to focus first on what results you obtained and set out clearly what happened in your experiments and/or investigations without worrying about their implications.This can focus your mind on what the results actually show and help you to sort them in your head.

However, many people find it easier to combine the results with their implications as the two are closely connected.

Check your university’s requirements carefully before combining the results and discussions sections as some specify that they must be kept separate.

Results Section

The Results section should set out your key experimental results, including any statistical analysis and whether or not the results of these are significant.

You should cover any literature supporting your interpretation of significance. It does not have to include everything you did, particularly for a doctorate dissertation. However, for an undergraduate or master's thesis, you will probably find that you need to include most of your work.

You should write your results section in the past tense: you are describing what you have done in the past.

Every result included MUST have a method set out in the methods section. Check back to make sure that you have included all the relevant methods.

Conversely, every method should also have some results given so, if you choose to exclude certain experiments from the results, make sure that you remove mention of the method as well.

If you are unsure whether to include certain results, go back to your research questions and decide whether the results are relevant to them. It doesn’t matter whether they are supportive or not, it’s about relevance. If they are relevant, you should include them.

Having decided what to include, next decide what order to use. You could choose chronological, which should follow the methods, or in order from most to least important in the answering of your research questions, or by research question and/or hypothesis.

You also need to consider how best to present your results: tables, figures, graphs, or text. Try to use a variety of different methods of presentation, and consider your reader: 20 pages of dense tables are hard to understand, as are five pages of graphs, but a single table and well-chosen graph that illustrate your overall findings will make things much clearer.

Make sure that each table and figure has a number and a title. Number tables and figures in separate lists, but consecutively by the order in which you mention them in the text. If you have more than about two or three, it’s often helpful to provide lists of tables and figures alongside the table of contents at the start of your dissertation.

Summarise your results in the text, drawing on the figures and tables to illustrate your points.

The text and figures should be complementary, not repeat the same information. You should refer to every table or figure in the text. Any that you don’t feel the need to refer to can safely be moved to an appendix, or even removed.

Make sure that you including information about the size and direction of any changes, including percentage change if appropriate. Statistical tests should include details of p values or confidence intervals and limits.

While you don’t need to include all your primary evidence in this section, you should as a matter of good practice make it available in an appendix, to which you should refer at the relevant point.

For example:

Details of all the interview participants can be found in Appendix A, with transcripts of each interview in Appendix B.

You will, almost inevitably, find that you need to include some slight discussion of your results during this section. This discussion should evaluate the quality of the results and their reliability, but not stray too far into discussion of how far your results support your hypothesis and/or answer your research questions, as that is for the discussion section.

See our pages: Analysing Qualitative Data and Simple Statistical Analysis for more information on analysing your results.

Discussion Section

This section has four purposes, it should:

• Interpret and explain your results
• Answer your research question
• Justify your approach
• Critically evaluate your study

The discussion section therefore needs to review your findings in the context of the literature and the existing knowledge about the subject.

You also need to demonstrate that you understand the limitations of your research and the implications of your findings for policy and practice. This section should be written in the present tense.

The Discussion section needs to follow from your results and relate back to your literature review . Make sure that everything you discuss is covered in the results section.

Some universities require a separate section on recommendations for policy and practice and/or for future research, while others allow you to include this in your discussion, so check the guidelines carefully.

Starting the Task

Most people are likely to write this section best by preparing an outline, setting out the broad thrust of the argument, and how your results support it.

You may find techniques like mind mapping are helpful in making a first outline; check out our page: Creative Thinking for some ideas about how to think through your ideas. You should start by referring back to your research questions, discuss your results, then set them into the context of the literature, and then into broader theory.

This is likely to be one of the longest sections of your dissertation, and it’s a good idea to break it down into chunks with sub-headings to help your reader to navigate through the detail.

Fleshing Out the Detail

Once you have your outline in front of you, you can start to map out how your results fit into the outline.

This will help you to see whether your results are over-focused in one area, which is why writing up your research as you go along can be a helpful process. For each theme or area, you should discuss how the results help to answer your research question, and whether the results are consistent with your expectations and the literature.

The Importance of Understanding Differences

If your results are controversial and/or unexpected, you should set them fully in context and explain why you think that you obtained them.

Your explanations may include issues such as a non-representative sample for convenience purposes, a response rate skewed towards those with a particular experience, or your own involvement as a participant for sociological research.

You do not need to be apologetic about these, because you made a choice about them, which you should have justified in the methodology section. However, you do need to evaluate your own results against others’ findings, especially if they are different. A full understanding of the limitations of your research is part of a good discussion section.

At this stage, you may want to revisit your literature review, unless you submitted it as a separate submission earlier, and revise it to draw out those studies which have proven more relevant.

Conclude by summarising the implications of your findings in brief, and explain why they are important for researchers and in practice, and provide some suggestions for further work.

You may also wish to make some recommendations for practice. As before, this may be a separate section, or included in your discussion.

The results and discussion, including conclusion and recommendations, are probably the most substantial sections of your dissertation. Once completed, you can begin to relax slightly: you are on to the last stages of writing!

Continue to: Dissertation: Conclusion and Extras Writing your Methodology

See also: Writing a Literature Review Writing a Research Proposal Academic Referencing What Is the Importance of Using a Plagiarism Checker to Check Your Thesis?

• USC Libraries
• Research Guides

Organizing Your Social Sciences Research Paper

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

The purpose of the discussion section is to interpret and describe the significance of your findings in relation to what was already known about the research problem being investigated and to explain any new understanding or insights that emerged as a result of your research. The discussion will always connect to the introduction by way of the research questions or hypotheses you posed and the literature you reviewed, but the discussion does not simply repeat or rearrange the first parts of your paper; the discussion clearly explains how your study advanced the reader's understanding of the research problem from where you left them at the end of your review of prior research.

Annesley, Thomas M. “The Discussion Section: Your Closing Argument.” Clinical Chemistry 56 (November 2010): 1671-1674; Peacock, Matthew. “Communicative Moves in the Discussion Section of Research Articles.” System 30 (December 2002): 479-497.

Importance of a Good Discussion

The discussion section is often considered the most important part of your research paper because it:

• Most effectively demonstrates your ability as a researcher to think critically about an issue, to develop creative solutions to problems based upon a logical synthesis of the findings, and to formulate a deeper, more profound understanding of the research problem under investigation;
• Presents the underlying meaning of your research, notes possible implications in other areas of study, and explores possible improvements that can be made in order to further develop the concerns of your research;
• Highlights the importance of your study and how it can contribute to understanding the research problem within the field of study;
• Presents how the findings from your study revealed and helped fill gaps in the literature that had not been previously exposed or adequately described; and,
• Engages the reader in thinking critically about issues based on an evidence-based interpretation of findings; it is not governed strictly by objective reporting of information.

Annesley Thomas M. “The Discussion Section: Your Closing Argument.” Clinical Chemistry 56 (November 2010): 1671-1674; Bitchener, John and Helen Basturkmen. “Perceptions of the Difficulties of Postgraduate L2 Thesis Students Writing the Discussion Section.” Journal of English for Academic Purposes 5 (January 2006): 4-18; Kretchmer, Paul. Fourteen Steps to Writing an Effective Discussion Section. San Francisco Edit, 2003-2008.

Structure and Writing Style

I.  General Rules

These are the general rules you should adopt when composing your discussion of the results :

• Do not be verbose or repetitive; be concise and make your points clearly
• Avoid the use of jargon or undefined technical language
• Follow a logical stream of thought; in general, interpret and discuss the significance of your findings in the same sequence you described them in your results section [a notable exception is to begin by highlighting an unexpected result or a finding that can grab the reader's attention]
• Use the present verb tense, especially for established facts; however, refer to specific works or prior studies in the past tense
• If needed, use subheadings to help organize your discussion or to categorize your interpretations into themes

II.  The Content

The content of the discussion section of your paper most often includes :

• Explanation of results : Comment on whether or not the results were expected for each set of findings; go into greater depth to explain findings that were unexpected or especially profound. If appropriate, note any unusual or unanticipated patterns or trends that emerged from your results and explain their meaning in relation to the research problem.
• References to previous research : Either compare your results with the findings from other studies or use the studies to support a claim. This can include re-visiting key sources already cited in your literature review section, or, save them to cite later in the discussion section if they are more important to compare with your results instead of being a part of the general literature review of prior research used to provide context and background information. Note that you can make this decision to highlight specific studies after you have begun writing the discussion section.
• Deduction : A claim for how the results can be applied more generally. For example, describing lessons learned, proposing recommendations that can help improve a situation, or highlighting best practices.
• Hypothesis : A more general claim or possible conclusion arising from the results [which may be proved or disproved in subsequent research]. This can be framed as new research questions that emerged as a consequence of your analysis.

III.  Organization and Structure

Keep the following sequential points in mind as you organize and write the discussion section of your paper:

• Think of your discussion as an inverted pyramid. Organize the discussion from the general to the specific, linking your findings to the literature, then to theory, then to practice [if appropriate].
• Use the same key terms, narrative style, and verb tense [present] that you used when describing the research problem in your introduction.
• Begin by briefly re-stating the research problem you were investigating and answer all of the research questions underpinning the problem that you posed in the introduction.
• Describe the patterns, principles, and relationships shown by each major findings and place them in proper perspective. The sequence of this information is important; first state the answer, then the relevant results, then cite the work of others. If appropriate, refer the reader to a figure or table to help enhance the interpretation of the data [either within the text or as an appendix].
• Regardless of where it's mentioned, a good discussion section includes analysis of any unexpected findings. This part of the discussion should begin with a description of the unanticipated finding, followed by a brief interpretation as to why you believe it appeared and, if necessary, its possible significance in relation to the overall study. If more than one unexpected finding emerged during the study, describe each of them in the order they appeared as you gathered or analyzed the data. As noted, the exception to discussing findings in the same order you described them in the results section would be to begin by highlighting the implications of a particularly unexpected or significant finding that emerged from the study, followed by a discussion of the remaining findings.
• Before concluding the discussion, identify potential limitations and weaknesses if you do not plan to do so in the conclusion of the paper. Comment on their relative importance in relation to your overall interpretation of the results and, if necessary, note how they may affect the validity of your findings. Avoid using an apologetic tone; however, be honest and self-critical [e.g., in retrospect, had you included a particular question in a survey instrument, additional data could have been revealed].
• The discussion section should end with a concise summary of the principal implications of the findings regardless of their significance. Give a brief explanation about why you believe the findings and conclusions of your study are important and how they support broader knowledge or understanding of the research problem. This can be followed by any recommendations for further research. However, do not offer recommendations which could have been easily addressed within the study. This would demonstrate to the reader that you have inadequately examined and interpreted the data.

IV.  Overall Objectives

The objectives of your discussion section should include the following: I.  Reiterate the Research Problem/State the Major Findings

Briefly reiterate the research problem or problems you are investigating and the methods you used to investigate them, then move quickly to describe the major findings of the study. You should write a direct, declarative, and succinct proclamation of the study results, usually in one paragraph.

II.  Explain the Meaning of the Findings and Why They are Important

No one has thought as long and hard about your study as you have. Systematically explain the underlying meaning of your findings and state why you believe they are significant. After reading the discussion section, you want the reader to think critically about the results and why they are important. You don’t want to force the reader to go through the paper multiple times to figure out what it all means. If applicable, begin this part of the section by repeating what you consider to be your most significant or unanticipated finding first, then systematically review each finding. Otherwise, follow the general order you reported the findings presented in the results section.

III.  Relate the Findings to Similar Studies

No study in the social sciences is so novel or possesses such a restricted focus that it has absolutely no relation to previously published research. The discussion section should relate your results to those found in other studies, particularly if questions raised from prior studies served as the motivation for your research. This is important because comparing and contrasting the findings of other studies helps to support the overall importance of your results and it highlights how and in what ways your study differs from other research about the topic. Note that any significant or unanticipated finding is often because there was no prior research to indicate the finding could occur. If there is prior research to indicate this, you need to explain why it was significant or unanticipated. IV.  Consider Alternative Explanations of the Findings

It is important to remember that the purpose of research in the social sciences is to discover and not to prove . When writing the discussion section, you should carefully consider all possible explanations for the study results, rather than just those that fit your hypothesis or prior assumptions and biases. This is especially important when describing the discovery of significant or unanticipated findings.

V.  Acknowledge the Study’s Limitations

It is far better for you to identify and acknowledge your study’s limitations than to have them pointed out by your professor! Note any unanswered questions or issues your study could not address and describe the generalizability of your results to other situations. If a limitation is applicable to the method chosen to gather information, then describe in detail the problems you encountered and why. VI.  Make Suggestions for Further Research

You may choose to conclude the discussion section by making suggestions for further research [as opposed to offering suggestions in the conclusion of your paper]. Although your study can offer important insights about the research problem, this is where you can address other questions related to the problem that remain unanswered or highlight hidden issues that were revealed as a result of conducting your research. You should frame your suggestions by linking the need for further research to the limitations of your study [e.g., in future studies, the survey instrument should include more questions that ask..."] or linking to critical issues revealed from the data that were not considered initially in your research.

NOTE: Besides the literature review section, the preponderance of references to sources is usually found in the discussion section . A few historical references may be helpful for perspective, but most of the references should be relatively recent and included to aid in the interpretation of your results, to support the significance of a finding, and/or to place a finding within a particular context. If a study that you cited does not support your findings, don't ignore it--clearly explain why your research findings differ from theirs.

V.  Problems to Avoid

• Do not waste time restating your results . Should you need to remind the reader of a finding to be discussed, use "bridge sentences" that relate the result to the interpretation. An example would be: “In the case of determining available housing to single women with children in rural areas of Texas, the findings suggest that access to good schools is important...," then move on to further explaining this finding and its implications.
• As noted, recommendations for further research can be included in either the discussion or conclusion of your paper, but do not repeat your recommendations in the both sections. Think about the overall narrative flow of your paper to determine where best to locate this information. However, if your findings raise a lot of new questions or issues, consider including suggestions for further research in the discussion section.
• Do not introduce new results in the discussion section. Be wary of mistaking the reiteration of a specific finding for an interpretation because it may confuse the reader. The description of findings [results section] and the interpretation of their significance [discussion section] should be distinct parts of your paper. If you choose to combine the results section and the discussion section into a single narrative, you must be clear in how you report the information discovered and your own interpretation of each finding. This approach is not recommended if you lack experience writing college-level research papers.
• Use of the first person pronoun is generally acceptable. Using first person singular pronouns can help emphasize a point or illustrate a contrasting finding. However, keep in mind that too much use of the first person can actually distract the reader from the main points [i.e., I know you're telling me this--just tell me!].

Analyzing vs. Summarizing. Department of English Writing Guide. George Mason University; Discussion. The Structure, Format, Content, and Style of a Journal-Style Scientific Paper. Department of Biology. Bates College; Hess, Dean R. "How to Write an Effective Discussion." Respiratory Care 49 (October 2004); Kretchmer, Paul. Fourteen Steps to Writing to Writing an Effective Discussion Section. San Francisco Edit, 2003-2008; The Lab Report. University College Writing Centre. University of Toronto; Sauaia, A. et al. "The Anatomy of an Article: The Discussion Section: "How Does the Article I Read Today Change What I Will Recommend to my Patients Tomorrow?” The Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery 74 (June 2013): 1599-1602; Research Limitations & Future Research . Lund Research Ltd., 2012; Summary: Using it Wisely. The Writing Center. University of North Carolina; Schafer, Mickey S. Writing the Discussion. Writing in Psychology course syllabus. University of Florida; Yellin, Linda L. A Sociology Writer's Guide . Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon, 2009.

Writing Tip

Don’t Over-Interpret the Results!

Interpretation is a subjective exercise. As such, you should always approach the selection and interpretation of your findings introspectively and to think critically about the possibility of judgmental biases unintentionally entering into discussions about the significance of your work. With this in mind, be careful that you do not read more into the findings than can be supported by the evidence you have gathered. Remember that the data are the data: nothing more, nothing less.

MacCoun, Robert J. "Biases in the Interpretation and Use of Research Results." Annual Review of Psychology 49 (February 1998): 259-287; Ward, Paulet al, editors. The Oxford Handbook of Expertise . Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 2018.

Another Writing Tip

Don't Write Two Results Sections!

One of the most common mistakes that you can make when discussing the results of your study is to present a superficial interpretation of the findings that more or less re-states the results section of your paper. Obviously, you must refer to your results when discussing them, but focus on the interpretation of those results and their significance in relation to the research problem, not the data itself.

Azar, Beth. "Discussing Your Findings."  American Psychological Association gradPSYCH Magazine (January 2006).

Yet Another Writing Tip

Avoid Unwarranted Speculation!

The discussion section should remain focused on the findings of your study. For example, if the purpose of your research was to measure the impact of foreign aid on increasing access to education among disadvantaged children in Bangladesh, it would not be appropriate to speculate about how your findings might apply to populations in other countries without drawing from existing studies to support your claim or if analysis of other countries was not a part of your original research design. If you feel compelled to speculate, do so in the form of describing possible implications or explaining possible impacts. Be certain that you clearly identify your comments as speculation or as a suggestion for where further research is needed. Sometimes your professor will encourage you to expand your discussion of the results in this way, while others don’t care what your opinion is beyond your effort to interpret the data in relation to the research problem.

• << Previous: Using Non-Textual Elements
• Next: Limitations of the Study >>
• Last Updated: Aug 30, 2024 10:02 AM
• URL: https://libguides.usc.edu/writingguide

Training videos   |   Faqs

Academic Phrases for Writing Results & Discussion Sections of a Research Paper

Overview |   Abstract   | Introduction | Literature Review | Materials & Methods | Results & Discussion | Conclusion & Future Work | Acknowledgements & Appendix

The results and discussion sections are one of the challenging sections to write. It is important to plan this section carefully as it may contain a large amount of scientific data that needs to be presented in a clear and concise fashion. The purpose of a Results section is to present the key results of your research. Results and discussions can either be combined into one section or organized as separate sections depending on the requirements of the journal to which you are submitting your research paper. Use subsections and subheadings to improve readability and clarity. Number all tables and figures with descriptive titles. Present your results as figures and tables and point the reader to relevant items while discussing the results. This section should highlight significant or interesting findings along with P values for statistical tests. Be sure to include negative results and highlight potential limitations of the paper. You will be criticised by the reviewers if you don’t discuss the shortcomings of your research. This often makes up for a great discussion section, so do not be afraid to highlight them.

The results and discussion section of your research paper should include the following:

• Comparison with prior studies
• Limitations of your work
• Casual arguments
• Speculations
• Deductive arguments

1. Findings

From the short review above, key findings emerge: __ We describe the results of __, which show __ This suggests that __ We showed that __ Our findings on __ at least hint that __ This is an important finding in the understanding of the __ The present study confirmed the findings about __ Another promising finding was that __ Our results demonstrated that __ This result highlights that little is known about the __ A further novel finding is that __ Together, the present findings confirm __ The implications of these findings are discussed in __ The results demonstrate two things.  First, __. Second,  __ The results of the experiment found clear support for the __ This analysis found evidence for __ Planned comparisons revealed that __ Our results casts a new light on __ This section summarises the findings and contributions made. It performs well, giving good results. This gives clearly better results than __ The results confirm that this a good choice for __ From the results, it is clear that __ In this section, we will illustrate some experimental results. This delivers significantly better results due to __ The result now provides evidence to __ It leads to good results, even if the improvement is negligible. This yields increasingly good results on data. The result of this analysis is then compared with the  __ The applicability of these new results are then tested on __ This is important to correctly interpret the results. The results are substantially better than __ The results lead to similar conclusion where __ Superior results are seen for __ From these results it is clear that __ Extensive results carried out show that this method improves __ We obtain good results with this simple method. However, even better results are achieved when using our algorithm. It is worth discussing these interesting facts revealed by the results of  __ Overall, our method was the one that obtained the most robust results. Slightly superior results are achieved with our algorithm. The result is equal to or better than a result that is currently accepted.

2. Comparison with prior studies

The results demonstrated in this chapter match state of the art methods. Here we compare the results of the proposed method with those of the traditional methods. These results go beyond previous reports, showing that __ In line with previous studies __ This result ties well with previous studies wherein __ Contrary to the findings of __ we did not find __ They have demonstrated that __ Others have shown that __ improves __ By comparing the results from __, we hope to determine __ However, in line with the ideas of __, it can be concluded that __ When comparing our results to those of older studies, it must be pointed out that __ We have verified that using __ produces similar results Overall these findings are in accordance with findings reported by __ Even though we did not replicate the previously reported __, our results suggest that __ A similar conclusion was reached by __ However, when comparing our results to those of older studies, it must be pointed out __ This is consistent with what has been found in previous __ A similar pattern of results was obtained in __ The findings are directly in line with previous findings These basic findings are consistent with research showing that __ Other results were broadly in line with __

3. Limitations of your work

Because of the lack of __ we decided to not investigate __ One concern about the findings of __ was that __ Because of this potential limitation, we treat __ The limitations of the present studies naturally include __ Regarding the limitations of __, it could be argued that __ Another limitation of this __ This limitation is apparent in many __ Another limitation in __ involves the issue of __ The main limitation is the lack of __ One limitation is found in this case. One limitation of these methods however is that they __ It presents some limitations such as __ Although widely accepted, it suffers from some limitations due to __ An apparent limitation of the method is __ There are several limitations to this approach. One limitation of our implementation is that it is __ A major source of limitation is due to  __ The approach utilised suffers from the limitation that __ The limitations are becoming clear __ It suffers from the same limitations associated with a __

4. Casual arguments

A popular explanation of __ is that __ It is by now generally accepted that __ A popular explanation is that __ As it is not generally agreed that __ These are very small and difficult to observe. It is important to highlight the fact that __ It is notable that __ An important question associated with __ is __ This did not impair the __ This is important because there is __ This implies that __ is associated with __ This is indicative for lack of __ This will not be biased by __ There were also some important differences in __ It is interesting to note that, __ It is unlikely that __ This may alter or improve aspects of __ In contrast, this makes it possible to __ This is particularly important when investigating __ This has been used to successfully account for __ This introduces a possible confound in __ This was included to verify that __

5. Speculations

However, we acknowledge that there are considerable discussions among researchers as to __ We speculate that this might be due to __ There are reasons to doubt this explanation of __ It remains unclear to which degree __ are attributed to __ However, __ does seem to improve __ This does seem to depend on __ It is important to note, that the present evidence relies on __ The results show that __ does not seem to impact the __ However, the extent to which it is possible to __ is unknown Alternatively, it could simply mean that __ It is difficult to explain such results within the context of __ It is unclear whether this is a suitable for __ This appears to be a case of __ From this standpoint, __ can be considered as __ To date, __remain unknown Under certain assumptions, this can be construed as __ Because of this potential limitation, we treat __ In addition, several questions remain unanswered. At this stage of understanding, we believe__ Therefore, it remains unclear whether __ This may explain why __

6. Deductive arguments

A difference between these __ can only be attributable to __ Nonetheless, we believe that it is well justified to __ This may raise concerns about __ which can be addressed by __ As discussed, this is due to the fact that __ Results demonstrate that this is not necessarily true. These findings support the notion that __ is not influenced by __ This may be the reason why we did not find __ In order to test whether this is equivalent across __, we __ Therefore, __ can be considered to be equivalent for __

Similar Posts

Academic Phrases for Writing Conclusion Section of a Research Paper

In this blog, we discuss phrases related to conclusion section such as summary of results and future work.

How to Write a Research Paper? A Beginners Guide with Useful Academic Phrases

This blog explains how to write a research paper and provides writing ideas in the form of academic phrases.

Academic Phrases for Writing Literature Review Section of a Research Paper

In this blog, we discuss phrases related to literature review such as summary of previous literature, research gap and research questions.

Academic Phrases for Writing Acknowledgements & Appendix Sections of a Research Paper

In this blog, we discuss phrases related to thanking colleagues, acknowledging funders and writing the appendix section.

Academic Phrases for Writing Abstract Section of a Research Paper

In this blog, we discuss phrases related to the abstract section. An abstract is a self-contained and short synopsis that describes a larger work.

Academic Writing Resources – Academic PhraseBank | Academic Vocabulary & Word Lists

In this blog, we review various academic writing resources such as academic phrasebank, academic wordlists, academic vocabulary training sites.

32 Comments

Awesome vocab given, I am really thankful. keep it up!

Why didn’t I find this earlier? Thank you very much! Bless your soul!

thank you!! very useful!!!

Thank you, thank you thank you!!

I’m currently writing up my PhD thesis and as a non-native English speaker, I find this site extremely useful. Thanks for making it!

Very ve4y resourceful..well done Sam

Plesse add me to your mailing list Email: [email protected]

Hi, would like to clarify if that is “casual” or “causal”? Thanks!

Hi there, it should read “causal.”

Thanx for this. so helpful!

Very helpful. Thanks

thank you so much

• Pingback: Scholarly Paraphrasing Tool and Essay Rewriter for Rewording Academic Papers - Ref-N-Write: Scientific Research Paper Writing Software Tool - Improve Academic English Writing Skills

thankyouuuuuu

thank you very much

wow thanks for the help!!

Quite interesting! Thanks a lot!

This is ammmaazzinggg, too bad im in my last year of university this is very handy!!!

Extremely Useful. Thank-you so much.

This is an excellent collection of phrases for effective writing

Thank you so much, it has been helpful.

I found it extremely important!!!

It is a precise, brief and important guides;

It is a very important which gives a guide;

It is a very important guiding explanation for writing result and discussion;

It is a very important guiding academic phrases for writing;

thank you so much.I was in need of this.

• Pingback: Research Paper Structure – Main Sections and Parts of a Research Paper

Thank you so much!!! They are so helpful!

thank its very important.

This is timely, I needed it. Thanks

This is very helpful. Thanks.

You saved my Bachoelor thesis! Huge thanks

Leave a Reply 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.

• 91 Share Facebook
• 68 Share Twitter
• 53 Share LinkedIn
• 0.1K Share Email

Frequently asked questions

What’s the difference between results and discussion.

The results chapter or section simply and objectively reports what you found, without speculating on why you found these results. The discussion interprets the meaning of the results, puts them in context, and explains why they matter.

In qualitative research , results and discussion are sometimes combined. But in quantitative research , it’s considered important to separate the objective results from your interpretation of them.

Frequently asked questions: Dissertation

Dissertation word counts vary widely across different fields, institutions, and levels of education:

• An undergraduate dissertation is typically 8,000–15,000 words
• A master’s dissertation is typically 12,000–50,000 words
• A PhD thesis is typically book-length: 70,000–100,000 words

However, none of these are strict guidelines – your word count may be lower or higher than the numbers stated here. Always check the guidelines provided by your university to determine how long your own dissertation should be.

A dissertation prospectus or proposal describes what or who you plan to research for your dissertation. It delves into why, when, where, and how you will do your research, as well as helps you choose a type of research to pursue. You should also determine whether you plan to pursue qualitative or quantitative methods and what your research design will look like.

It should outline all of the decisions you have taken about your project, from your dissertation topic to your hypotheses and research objectives , ready to be approved by your supervisor or committee.

Note that some departments require a defense component, where you present your prospectus to your committee orally.

A thesis is typically written by students finishing up a bachelor’s or Master’s degree. Some educational institutions, particularly in the liberal arts, have mandatory theses, but they are often not mandatory to graduate from bachelor’s degrees. It is more common for a thesis to be a graduation requirement from a Master’s degree.

Even if not mandatory, you may want to consider writing a thesis if you:

• Plan to attend graduate school soon
• Have a particular topic you’d like to study more in-depth
• Are considering a career in research
• Would like a capstone experience to tie up your academic experience

The conclusion of your thesis or dissertation should include the following:

• A restatement of your research question
• A summary of your key arguments and/or results
• A short discussion of the implications of your research

The conclusion of your thesis or dissertation shouldn’t take up more than 5–7% of your overall word count.

For a stronger dissertation conclusion , avoid including:

• Important evidence or analysis that wasn’t mentioned in the discussion section and results section
• Generic concluding phrases (e.g. “In conclusion …”)
• Weak statements that undermine your argument (e.g., “There are good points on both sides of this issue.”)

Your conclusion should leave the reader with a strong, decisive impression of your work.

While it may be tempting to present new arguments or evidence in your thesis or disseration conclusion , especially if you have a particularly striking argument you’d like to finish your analysis with, you shouldn’t. Theses and dissertations follow a more formal structure than this.

All your findings and arguments should be presented in the body of the text (more specifically in the discussion section and results section .) The conclusion is meant to summarize and reflect on the evidence and arguments you have already presented, not introduce new ones.

A theoretical framework can sometimes be integrated into a  literature review chapter , but it can also be included as its own chapter or section in your dissertation . As a rule of thumb, if your research involves dealing with a lot of complex theories, it’s a good idea to include a separate theoretical framework chapter.

A literature review and a theoretical framework are not the same thing and cannot be used interchangeably. While a theoretical framework describes the theoretical underpinnings of your work, a literature review critically evaluates existing research relating to your topic. You’ll likely need both in your dissertation .

While a theoretical framework describes the theoretical underpinnings of your work based on existing research, a conceptual framework allows you to draw your own conclusions, mapping out the variables you may use in your study and the interplay between them.

A thesis or dissertation outline is one of the most critical first steps in your writing process. It helps you to lay out and organize your ideas and can provide you with a roadmap for deciding what kind of research you’d like to undertake.

Generally, an outline contains information on the different sections included in your thesis or dissertation , such as:

• Your anticipated title
• Your abstract
• Your chapters (sometimes subdivided into further topics like literature review , research methods , avenues for future research, etc.)

When you mention different chapters within your text, it’s considered best to use Roman numerals for most citation styles. However, the most important thing here is to remain consistent whenever using numbers in your dissertation .

In most styles, the title page is used purely to provide information and doesn’t include any images. Ask your supervisor if you are allowed to include an image on the title page before doing so. If you do decide to include one, make sure to check whether you need permission from the creator of the image.

Include a note directly beneath the image acknowledging where it comes from, beginning with the word “ Note .” (italicized and followed by a period). Include a citation and copyright attribution . Don’t title, number, or label the image as a figure , since it doesn’t appear in your main text.

Definitional terms often fall into the category of common knowledge , meaning that they don’t necessarily have to be cited. This guidance can apply to your thesis or dissertation glossary as well.

However, if you’d prefer to cite your sources , you can follow guidance for citing dictionary entries in MLA or APA style for your glossary.

A glossary is a collection of words pertaining to a specific topic. In your thesis or dissertation, it’s a list of all terms you used that may not immediately be obvious to your reader. In contrast, an index is a list of the contents of your work organized by page number.

The title page of your thesis or dissertation goes first, before all other content or lists that you may choose to include.

The title page of your thesis or dissertation should include your name, department, institution, degree program, and submission date.

Glossaries are not mandatory, but if you use a lot of technical or field-specific terms, it may improve readability to add one to your thesis or dissertation. Your educational institution may also require them, so be sure to check their specific guidelines.

A glossary or “glossary of terms” is a collection of words pertaining to a specific topic. In your thesis or dissertation, it’s a list of all terms you used that may not immediately be obvious to your reader. Your glossary only needs to include terms that your reader may not be familiar with, and is intended to enhance their understanding of your work.

A glossary is a collection of words pertaining to a specific topic. In your thesis or dissertation, it’s a list of all terms you used that may not immediately be obvious to your reader. In contrast, dictionaries are more general collections of words.

An abbreviation is a shortened version of an existing word, such as Dr. for Doctor. In contrast, an acronym uses the first letter of each word to create a wholly new word, such as UNESCO (an acronym for the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization).

As a rule of thumb, write the explanation in full the first time you use an acronym or abbreviation. You can then proceed with the shortened version. However, if the abbreviation is very common (like PC, USA, or DNA), then you can use the abbreviated version from the get-go.

Be sure to add each abbreviation in your list of abbreviations !

If you only used a few abbreviations in your thesis or dissertation , you don’t necessarily need to include a list of abbreviations .

If your abbreviations are numerous, or if you think they won’t be known to your audience, it’s never a bad idea to add one. They can also improve readability, minimizing confusion about abbreviations unfamiliar to your reader.

A list of abbreviations is a list of all the abbreviations that you used in your thesis or dissertation. It should appear at the beginning of your document, with items in alphabetical order, just after your table of contents .

Your list of tables and figures should go directly after your table of contents in your thesis or dissertation.

Lists of figures and tables are often not required, and aren’t particularly common. They specifically aren’t required for APA-Style, though you should be careful to follow their other guidelines for figures and tables .

If you have many figures and tables in your thesis or dissertation, include one may help you stay organized. Your educational institution may require them, so be sure to check their guidelines.

A list of figures and tables compiles all of the figures and tables that you used in your thesis or dissertation and displays them with the page number where they can be found.

The table of contents in a thesis or dissertation always goes between your abstract and your introduction .

You may acknowledge God in your dissertation acknowledgements , but be sure to follow academic convention by also thanking the members of academia, as well as family, colleagues, and friends who helped you.

A literature review is a survey of credible sources on a topic, often used in dissertations , theses, and research papers . Literature reviews give an overview of knowledge on a subject, helping you identify relevant theories and methods, as well as gaps in existing research. Literature reviews are set up similarly to other  academic texts , with an introduction , a main body, and a conclusion .

An  annotated bibliography is a list of  source references that has a short description (called an annotation ) for each of the sources. It is often assigned as part of the research process for a  paper .  

In a thesis or dissertation, the discussion is an in-depth exploration of the results, going into detail about the meaning of your findings and citing relevant sources to put them in context.

The conclusion is more shorter and more general: it concisely answers your main research question and makes recommendations based on your overall findings.

In the discussion , you explore the meaning and relevance of your research results , explaining how they fit with existing research and theory. Discuss:

• Your  interpretations : what do the results tell us?
• The  implications : why do the results matter?
• The  limitation s : what can’t the results tell us?

Results are usually written in the past tense , because they are describing the outcome of completed actions.

The results chapter of a thesis or dissertation presents your research results concisely and objectively.

In quantitative research , for each question or hypothesis , state:

• The type of analysis used
• Relevant results in the form of descriptive and inferential statistics
• Whether or not the alternative hypothesis was supported

In qualitative research , for each question or theme, describe:

• Recurring patterns
• Significant or representative individual responses
• Relevant quotations from the data

Don’t interpret or speculate in the results chapter.

To automatically insert a table of contents in Microsoft Word, follow these steps:

• Apply heading styles throughout the document.
• In the references section in the ribbon, locate the Table of Contents group.
• Click the arrow next to the Table of Contents icon and select Custom Table of Contents.
• Select which levels of headings you would like to include in the table of contents.

Make sure to update your table of contents if you move text or change headings. To update, simply right click and select Update Field.

All level 1 and 2 headings should be included in your table of contents . That means the titles of your chapters and the main sections within them.

The contents should also include all appendices and the lists of tables and figures, if applicable, as well as your reference list .

Do not include the acknowledgements or abstract in the table of contents.

The abstract appears on its own page in the thesis or dissertation , after the title page and acknowledgements but before the table of contents .

An abstract for a thesis or dissertation is usually around 200–300 words. There’s often a strict word limit, so make sure to check your university’s requirements.

In a thesis or dissertation, the acknowledgements should usually be no longer than one page. There is no minimum length.

The acknowledgements are generally included at the very beginning of your thesis , directly after the title page and before the abstract .

Yes, it’s important to thank your supervisor(s) in the acknowledgements section of your thesis or dissertation .

Even if you feel your supervisor did not contribute greatly to the final product, you must acknowledge them, if only for a very brief thank you. If you do not include your supervisor, it may be seen as a snub.

In the acknowledgements of your thesis or dissertation, you should first thank those who helped you academically or professionally, such as your supervisor, funders, and other academics.

Then you can include personal thanks to friends, family members, or anyone else who supported you during the process.

Ask our team

Want to contact us directly? No problem.  We  are always here for you.

• Email [email protected]
• Start live chat
• Call +1 (510) 822-8066
• WhatsApp +31 20 261 6040

Our team helps students graduate by offering:

• A world-class citation generator
• Plagiarism Checker software powered by Turnitin
• Innovative Citation Checker software
• Professional proofreading services
• Over 300 helpful articles about academic writing, citing sources, plagiarism, and more

Scribbr specializes in editing study-related documents . We proofread:

• PhD dissertations
• Research proposals
• Personal statements
• Admission essays
• Motivation letters
• Reflection papers
• Journal articles
• Capstone projects

Scribbr’s Plagiarism Checker is powered by elements of Turnitin’s Similarity Checker , namely the plagiarism detection software and the Internet Archive and Premium Scholarly Publications content databases .

The add-on AI detector is powered by Scribbr’s proprietary software.

The Scribbr Citation Generator is developed using the open-source Citation Style Language (CSL) project and Frank Bennett’s citeproc-js . It’s the same technology used by dozens of other popular citation tools, including Mendeley and Zotero.

You can find all the citation styles and locales used in the Scribbr Citation Generator in our publicly accessible repository on Github .

Free Download

Discussion Chapter Template

The fastest (and smartest) way to craft a strong discussion section for your dissertation, thesis or research project.

Available in Google Doc, Word & PDF format 4.9 star rating, 5000 + downloads

Step-by-step instructions

Tried & tested academic format

Fill-in-the-blanks simplicity

Pro tips, tricks and resources

What It Covers

This template covers all the core components required in the discussion chapter (or section) of a typical dissertation or thesis, including:

• The opening/ overview section
• Overview of key findings
• Interpretation of the findings
• Concluding summary

The purpose of each section is explained in plain language, followed by an overview of the key elements that you need to cover. The template also includes practical examples to help you understand exactly what’s required, along with links to additional free resources (articles, videos, etc.) to help you along your research journey.

The cleanly formatted Google Doc can be downloaded as a fully editable MS Word Document (DOCX format), so you can use it as-is or convert it to LaTeX.

download your copy

100% Free to use. Instant access.

I agree to receive the free template and other useful resources.

Download Now (Instant Access)

FAQs: Thesis Discussion Template

Faq: thesis discussion template, what types of dissertations/theses can this template be used for.

The discussion chapter template follows the standard format for academic research projects, which means it will be suitable for the majority of dissertations, theses and research projects (especially those within the sciences).

Keep in mind that the exact requirements for the discussion chapter/section will vary between universities and degree programs. For example, your university may require that the discussion chapter and conclusion chapter are merged into one, or that the results and discussion are covered together (this is often the case with qualitative research). So, be sure to double-check your university’s requirements before you finalise your structure.

Is this template for an undergrad, Master or PhD-level thesis?

This template can be used for a dissertation, thesis or research project at any level of study. Doctoral-level projects typically require the discussion chapter to be more extensive/comprehensive, but the structure will typically remain the same. Again, be sure to check your university’s requirements and norms in terms of document structure.

How long should the discussion chapter be?

This can vary a fair deal, depending on the level of study (undergrad, Master or Doctoral), the field of research, as well as your university’s specific requirements. Therefore, it’s best to check with your university or review past dissertations from your program to get an accurate estimate.

Can I share this template with my friends/colleagues?

Yes, you’re welcome to share this template in its original format (no editing allowed). If you want to post about it on your blog or social media, please reference this page as your source.

What format is the template (DOC, PDF, PPT, etc.)?

The dissertation discussion chapter template is provided as a Google Doc. You can download it in MS Word format or make a copy to your Google Drive. You’re also welcome to convert it to whatever format works best for you, such as LaTeX or PDF.

Do you have templates for the other chapters?

Yes, we do. We are constantly developing our collection of free resources to help students complete their dissertations and theses. You can view all of our template resources here .

Can Grad Coach help me with my discussion/analysis?

Yes, we can provide coaching-based assistance with your discussion chapter (or any other chapter). If you’re interested, get in touch to discuss our private coaching services .

Additional Resources

If you’re working on a dissertation or thesis, you’ll also want to check these out…

1-On-1 Private Coaching

Research Bootcamps

The Grad Coach YouTube Channel

The Grad Coach Podcast

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, automatically generate references for free.

• Knowledge Base
• Dissertation
• How to Write a Discussion Section | Tips & Examples

How to Write a Discussion Section | Tips & Examples

Published on 21 August 2022 by Shona McCombes . Revised on 25 October 2022.

The discussion section is where you delve into the meaning, importance, and relevance of your results .

It should focus on explaining and evaluating what you found, showing how it relates to your literature review , and making an argument in support of your overall conclusion . It should not be a second results section .

There are different ways to write this section, but you can focus your writing around these key elements:

• Summary: A brief recap of your key results
• Interpretations: What do your results mean?
• Implications: Why do your results matter?
• Limitations: What can’t your results tell us?
• Recommendations: Avenues for further studies or analyses

Instantly correct all language mistakes in your text

Be assured that you'll submit flawless writing. Upload your document to correct all your mistakes.

Table of contents

What not to include in your discussion section, step 1: summarise your key findings, step 2: give your interpretations, step 3: discuss the implications, step 4: acknowledge the limitations, step 5: share your recommendations, discussion section example.

There are a few common mistakes to avoid when writing the discussion section of your paper.

• Don’t introduce new results: You should only discuss the data that you have already reported in your results section .
• Don’t make inflated claims: Avoid overinterpretation and speculation that isn’t directly supported by your data.
• Don’t undermine your research: The discussion of limitations should aim to strengthen your credibility, not emphasise weaknesses or failures.

The only proofreading tool specialized in correcting academic writing

The academic proofreading tool has been trained on 1000s of academic texts and by native English editors. Making it the most accurate and reliable proofreading tool for students.

Correct my document today

Start this section by reiterating your research problem  and concisely summarising your major findings. Don’t just repeat all the data you have already reported – aim for a clear statement of the overall result that directly answers your main  research question . This should be no more than one paragraph.

Many students struggle with the differences between a discussion section and a results section . The crux of the matter is that your results sections should present your results, and your discussion section should subjectively evaluate them. Try not to blend elements of these two sections, in order to keep your paper sharp.

• The results indicate that …
• The study demonstrates a correlation between …
• This analysis supports the theory that …
• The data suggest  that …

The meaning of your results may seem obvious to you, but it’s important to spell out their significance for your reader, showing exactly how they answer your research question.

The form of your interpretations will depend on the type of research, but some typical approaches to interpreting the data include:

• Identifying correlations , patterns, and relationships among the data
• Discussing whether the results met your expectations or supported your hypotheses
• Contextualising your findings within previous research and theory
• Explaining unexpected results and evaluating their significance
• Considering possible alternative explanations and making an argument for your position

You can organise your discussion around key themes, hypotheses, or research questions, following the same structure as your results section. Alternatively, you can also begin by highlighting the most significant or unexpected results.

• In line with the hypothesis …
• Contrary to the hypothesised association …
• The results contradict the claims of Smith (2007) that …
• The results might suggest that x . However, based on the findings of similar studies, a more plausible explanation is x .

As well as giving your own interpretations, make sure to relate your results back to the scholarly work that you surveyed in the literature review . The discussion should show how your findings fit with existing knowledge, what new insights they contribute, and what consequences they have for theory or practice.

Ask yourself these questions:

• Do your results support or challenge existing theories? If they support existing theories, what new information do they contribute? If they challenge existing theories, why do you think that is?
• Are there any practical implications?

Your overall aim is to show the reader exactly what your research has contributed, and why they should care.

• These results build on existing evidence of …
• The results do not fit with the theory that …
• The experiment provides a new insight into the relationship between …
• These results should be taken into account when considering how to …
• The data contribute a clearer understanding of …
• While previous research has focused on  x , these results demonstrate that y .

Prevent plagiarism, run a free check.

Even the best research has its limitations. Acknowledging these is important to demonstrate your credibility. Limitations aren’t about listing your errors, but about providing an accurate picture of what can and cannot be concluded from your study.

Limitations might be due to your overall research design, specific methodological choices , or unanticipated obstacles that emerged during your research process.

Here are a few common possibilities:

• If your sample size was small or limited to a specific group of people, explain how generalisability is limited.
• If you encountered problems when gathering or analysing data, explain how these influenced the results.
• If there are potential confounding variables that you were unable to control, acknowledge the effect these may have had.

After noting the limitations, you can reiterate why the results are nonetheless valid for the purpose of answering your research question.

• The generalisability of the results is limited by …
• The reliability of these data is impacted by …
• Due to the lack of data on x , the results cannot confirm …
• The methodological choices were constrained by …
• It is beyond the scope of this study to …

Based on the discussion of your results, you can make recommendations for practical implementation or further research. Sometimes, the recommendations are saved for the conclusion .

Suggestions for further research can lead directly from the limitations. Don’t just state that more studies should be done – give concrete ideas for how future work can build on areas that your own research was unable to address.

• Further research is needed to establish …
• Future studies should take into account …
• Avenues for future research include …

Cite this Scribbr article

If you want to cite this source, you can copy and paste the citation or click the ‘Cite this Scribbr article’ button to automatically add the citation to our free Reference Generator.

McCombes, S. (2022, October 25). How to Write a Discussion Section | Tips & Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved 29 August 2024, from https://www.scribbr.co.uk/thesis-dissertation/discussion/

Is this article helpful?

Shona McCombes

Other students also liked, how to write a results section | tips & examples, research paper appendix | example & templates, how to write a thesis or dissertation introduction.

• Architecture and Design
• Asian and Pacific Studies
• Business and Economics
• Classical and Ancient Near Eastern Studies
• Computer Sciences
• Cultural Studies
• Engineering
• General Interest
• Geosciences
• Industrial Chemistry
• Islamic and Middle Eastern Studies
• Jewish Studies
• Library and Information Science, Book Studies
• Life Sciences
• Linguistics and Semiotics
• Literary Studies
• Materials Sciences
• Mathematics
• Social Sciences
• Sports and Recreation
• Theology and Religion
• Publish your article
• The role of authors
• Promoting your article
• Abstracting & indexing
• Publishing Ethics
• Why publish with De Gruyter
• How to publish with De Gruyter
• Our book series
• Our subject areas
• Your digital product at De Gruyter
• Contribute to our reference works
• Product information
• Tools & resources
• Product Information
• Promotional Materials
• Orders and Inquiries
• FAQ for Library Suppliers and Book Sellers
• Repository Policy
• Free access policy
• Open Access agreements
• Database portals
• For Authors
• Customer service
• People + Culture
• Journal Management
• How to join us
• Working at De Gruyter
• Mission & Vision
• De Gruyter Foundation
• De Gruyter Ebound
• Our Responsibility
• Partner publishers

Your purchase has been completed. Your documents are now available to view.

Writing a compelling integrated discussion: a guide for integrated discussions in article-based theses and dissertations

• Krystina B. Lewis , Ian D. Graham , Laura Boland and Dawn Stacey

Article-based theses and dissertations are increasingly being used in nursing and the health sciences as an alternate format to the traditional five-chapter monograph. A unique chapter in the article-based thesis is the integrated discussion, which differs in breadth and depth as compared to the discussion for a traditional thesis monograph or journal article. For many students and faculty, the integrated discussion is a challenging chapter to write, with minimal or no published guidance available. In this article, we offer a four-step approach with templates for planning and writing an integrated discussion. We also share several lessons learned with examples from published theses and dissertations. Writing an integrated discussion can be facilitated and written more efficiently by developing a clear and detailed outline of the chapter and broad discussion points prior to drafting the text, to achieve a higher-level synthesis, analysis, and interpretation of the overall significance of the thesis findings.

Introduction

An increasing number of university graduate programs in nursing and the health sciences offer the option of writing an article-based thesis or dissertation as an alternate format to the traditional five-chapter monograph ( De Jong, Moser, & Hall, 2005 ; Graves et al., 2018 ; Robinson & Dracup, 2008 ; Smaldone, Heitkemper, Jackman, Joanne Woo, & Kelson, 2019 ). This format has gained traction internationally to facilitate the earlier and more frequent publication of graduate student research for the timelier advancement of knowledge and impact on clinical practice ( Evans, Amaro, Herbert, Blossom, & Roberts, 2018 ; Maynard, Vaughn, Sarteschi, & Berglund, 2012 ; Smaldone et al., 2019 ). An article-based thesis, also known as the manuscript option, thesis-by manuscript, integrated thesis, or PhD by published works, typically includes one or more articles suitable for publication in peer-reviewed journals and bounded together with an introduction chapter and integrated discussion chapter ( Baggs, 2011 ). The integrated discussion is a unique chapter in an article-based thesis. Integrated (2020) is defined as “ many different parts [that] are closely connected and work successfully together ” (“Integrated,” 2020). The general purpose of the integrated discussion chapter is to provide an overall synthesis and demonstrate high level abstraction, analysis, and interpretation of the thesis findings. It is an opportunity to showcase the thesis’ findings, the student’s reflections about the findings, and its implications ( Smith, 2015 ).

Requirements and expectations for the integrated discussion chapter vary by institution and department. Supervising faculty within individual institutions may also have differing approaches and expectations. We found no general rules or expectations in the literature for writing an integrated discussion. An inquiry of select institutional guidance documents in various international jurisdictions revealed that academic institutions provide few details about this chapter. Descriptions focus more on the overall contribution of the integrated discussion chapter to the thesis, rather than guidance on how to write it ( Table 1 ).

Examples of institutional guidelines for the integrated discussion chapter in an article-based thesis.

Writing a compelling integrated discussion can be challenging, and there is a scarcity of resources, instructions, or published guidance for students and supervising faculty on this subject. Existing guidance is focused primarily on writing discussions for a single journal article or a traditional thesis monograph. Yet, the integrated discussion chapter differs in breadth and depth. In journal articles, a discussion usually consists of a statement of the main findings, interpretation of the results in the context of the broader literature, strengths and limitations of the study, and implications for potential users of the findings (clinicians, administrators, policy makers, and others), the discipline, and future research ( Makar, Foltz, Lendner, & Vaccaro, 2018 ). The discussion section of the traditional monograph thesis has a similar format to that of a journal article as it discusses a single study but is often more detailed. In comparison, the integrated discussion chapter of the article-based thesis provides students with a space in which to weave the results and discussion points from the individual articles comprising the thesis, elaborate on the logic and linkages between them, and convincingly argue for the unified, coherent, and original nature of their findings and contributions to the field-at-large. Smith (2015) refers to this as the golden thread. Grant (2011) refers to it as the logic of connectivity . Ultimately, it is about how the student links the key ideas from the individual papers and articulates the connectedness between them, so as to make readers understand the thesis’ broader meaning which make it accessible to a larger audience ( Smith, 2015 ).

The educational value of conceptualizing and writing an integrated discussion can be best classified at the highest level of Bloom’s revised taxonomy of educational objectives, to Create  — formerly known as Synthesis in Bloom’s original taxonomy — whereby parts are combined in novel ways to produce a coherent whole and to formulate new points of view ( Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001 ; Bloom, 1956 ). According to the taxonomy, the integrated discussion represents the pinnacle of cognitive tasks and processes by requiring higher-order thinking and critical reflections expected of graduate level students. Hence, the integrated discussion chapter provides the graduate student an opportunity to synthesize, integrate, and raise the discussion to a higher level of abstraction; allowing them to demonstrate the coherence between all articles reported in the thesis. It is often in the integrated discussion where thesis advisory committee members and examiners can assess the student’s depth of theoretical and applied knowledge of the subject matter, capacity for critical inquiry, and judge the overall value of the student’s conclusions and contributions to the substantive area of study ( Gould, 2016 ). Specifically in nursing, this higher-level thinking can be articulated by discussing how the knowledge generated advances nursing practice, education and research, and how it contributes to the delivery of high quality health care, and improved health and health system outcomes ( Institute of Medicine [US] Committee on the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Initiative on the Future of Nursing, 2011 ). Yet, with little guidance available on how to think about and write an integrated discussion, graduate students may miss the opportunity to engage in this higher-order thinking and critical reflections.

In this paper, we offer a practical four-step approach with templates for writing an integrated discussion for article-based theses. KBL initially developed the steps and templates as she conceptualized and wrote her integrated discussion for her PhD dissertation. The steps and templates were refined as a result of (a) her own integrated discussion writing process; (b) discussion with her thesis supervisor and thesis advisory committee members; and, (c) feedback from several graduate students who have used it successfully. As recent doctoral graduates and faculty supervisors, we are sharing this approach and our lessons learned with examples from published theses and dissertations.

Writing an integrated discussion chapter

Step 1: outlining the integrated discussion chapter.

To begin, we propose drafting an outline for the integrated discussion chapter with six major sections ( Table 2 ). First, provide an opening paragraph introducing the information to be presented in the chapter. Second, present a summary of the overall purpose of the thesis as a unified piece of work and a brief summary of each individual article prepared for publication. Each article summary should include the study aim, study design, and key results. Keep in mind that by the time supervisors, thesis advisory committee members, and examiners read the integrated discussion chapter, they have probably just finished reading the previous chapters and articles, so there is no need to repeat information in detail. Rather, the purpose of this section is to refresh the readers’ focus and to begin demonstrating how the articles logically link to each other. Third, outline the main points of the integrated discussion as clearly and concisely as possible (see Step 2 and 3 for more details). Fourth, discuss the strengths and limitations of the thesis, as a whole, if applicable. Typically, strengths and limitations are only presented at the individual article level, but if there are broader strengths or limitations that apply to the thesis, they can be discussed in this chapter. Fifth, discuss the implications of the thesis for the specific discipline (e.g., nursing, medicine, population health, epidemiology, rehabilitation) in terms of the findings’ applicability to practice, education, leadership, and/or policy. Sixth, describe implications for future research. Finally, this chapter should end with a strong, clear, and logical conclusion summarizing the entire work across all elements of the thesis. The conclusions should clearly state the original contribution(s) to the advancement of knowledge and overall significance for the field at-large.

Suggested structure for an integrated discussion.

a Approximate length based on 12-point type font, double spacing, left-justified, 1-inch margins, and format for 8 ½ × 11 paper.

Step 2. Mapping individual articles’ findings to inform the integrated discussion

The next step is to draft the main integrated discussion points. Using Template I, capture the main discussion points from each individual article ( Table 3 ). If there is only one article in the thesis, these can be generated from the literature review, guiding theoretical framework, and/or chosen methodology. This exercise is intended to facilitate the student’s thinking about how to build convincing overarching discussion points and explore the key messages they want readers to come away with after reading the thesis.

Template I to summarize individual article discussion points to identify overarching discussion points.

a If there is only one article in the thesis, additional discussion points/contributions/implications can come from the literature review, guiding theoretical framework, and/or chosen methodology. b Whether these implications are included in the individual article or not, this explicitly offers a starting point to think of the implications arising from individual articles.

The last row in this template is reserved for listing the actual and potential disciplinary implications arising from each article, which may address any of the following domains: practice, education, leadership, policy and/or research. Depending on journal requirements, these implications may be directly discussed in the individual articles. If not, this section offers the student a starting point for thinking about the disciplinary implications arising from their thesis as a whole.

Completing Template I as individual articles are finalized, and sharing it with a faculty supervisor or thesis advisory committee can facilitate discussion about the evolving integrated discussion points. It can also facilitate requisite critical thinking and reflection necessary for linking findings across the individual articles.

Step 3. Drafting the main integrated discussion points

Consider the discussion points and disciplinary implications across all individual articles of the thesis to identify commonalities or differences;

Draft main integrated discussion points, logically connecting the individual articles;

Identify findings from, ideally, two individual articles that support (or refute) the proposed main integrated discussion points (aiming for evidence from two articles helps achieve a higher level integrated discussion); and

Identify and classify theoretical and empirical literature relevant to the main integrated discussion points. Select regional, national, and international empirical studies, theoretical works, clinical practice guidelines, technical reports, and/or policy documents; highlight what the thesis adds to the field (of knowledge) and how it will enhance understanding of the subject.

Template II to build the main integrated discussion points from the individual articles and summarize implications.

a If there is only one article in the thesis, the supporting contributions/arguments can come from the literature review, guiding theoretical framework, and/or chosen methodology. b Broader literature can include empirical studies, theoretical works, practice guidelines, technical reports, and/or policy documents. c List the disciplinary implications identified across all articles. This explicitly offers a starting point to think of the disciplinary implications arising across the individual articles’ findings and discussion points.

This exercise is intended to help organize the content of the integrated discussion early in the writing process. We recommend sharing the evolving Templates I and II with the faculty supervisor or thesis advisory committee and use it as a tool for discussion before writing the integrated discussion chapter. As supervisors (DS, IDG), we also initiate Template I in discussion with our graduate students – often using a blank piece of paper. This reflective exercise may save time in the long run, as it facilitates staying focused on the key points and avoids repeating elements of the discussions within the individual papers. The more detailed the completed templates, the more content is available to transform into text.

Step 4. Writing the integrated discussion chapter

The final step is to turn the planned outline (Step 1) and the drafted main integrated discussion points (Step 3) into narrative prose. To remain focused, start by adding subheadings from the outline and lower level subheadings for each of the main integrated discussion points. A compelling integrated discussion is often preceded by multiple revisions. It should not be written when rushing to meet the thesis submission deadline as writing this chapter requires considerable reflection and introspection. For these reasons, we remind students that the integrated discussion is the last chapter their examiners will read, and it will leave a lasting impression. Getting this chapter right allows the student to demonstrate their mastery of the totality of their thesis work and sets the stage for the examination. In our experience, when an integrated discussion is well-written, the examiners’ comments indicate that the integrated discussion chapter tied all elements of the thesis together and helped them understand the thesis in its entirety.

Lessons learned

When applying this approach for writing our own integrated discussions, or when guiding graduate students through the process, we have learned several lessons. To exemplify these lessons, we offer examples of published theses and dissertations in nursing and other health professions.

Lesson 1. Use stepwise approach with templates to plan and structure the chapter

Using the attached templates and proposed stepwise approach to structure the writing process reduces the inclination to simply repeat the discussion points found in the individual articles. The templates may also help graduate students overcome procrastination resulting from not knowing where to start with the integrated discussion. Further, Templates I and II may be used to guide discussions between graduate student and faculty supervisor, allowing for progress to be monitored prior to writing. Another advantage to doing this early is that some supervisors are less familiar with the article-based thesis format and may have little experience guiding their students in writing the integrated discussion. As such, using the template to walk through this process may be helpful for both parties.

Lesson 2. Think ahead

Avoid delaying until all the individual thesis articles are written before thinking about the integrated discussion. We recommend filling out the templates as individual articles are completed. When analyzing the results for individual articles and thinking about the discussion sections for these, we often identified relevant discussion points that were too broad for the articles. Keeping a log of discussions with faculty supervisors and thesis advisory committee members throughout the thesis writing process, and keeping record of personal reflections that were beyond the scope of individual articles, may help gather ideas early. For example, when first considering her integrated discussion, Hoefel (2019) chose the Walker and Avant (2011) theory testing approach to validate the decisional needs concept and test the main hypothesis of the Ottawa Decision Support Framework ( O’Connor et al., 1998 ). For her thesis, Hoefel (2019) wrote two articles based upon this framework. Her first was a systematic review article on decisional needs of people making health decisions and the second was a sub-analysis of a systematic review on patient decision aids. Hence, evidence from these articles contributed to the higher level discussion about validating the concepts and testing the hypotheses in the framework.

Lesson 3. Dedicate sufficient time

Dedicating sufficient time to writing the integrated discussion is important. For many students, the integrated discussion is a challenging chapter to write. It calls for a different style of writing than that which is required for individual research study articles. It requires conveying abstract and conceptual ideas to generate broader insights. Prior to developing and using these templates, our experience with many students has been that it can take many months of re-writing the integrated discussion chapter for it to adequately reflect the breadth and depth of the student’s thesis work and its vital contribution to the field. We have found that our stepwise approach involves more careful planning and conceptualizing of the integrated discussion prior to drafting the chapter, and therefore results in a more efficient writing and editing process.

Lesson 4. Consider theoretical and methodological implications

Theoretical and methodological implications may be considered as integrated discussion points. A student may choose to closely examine their selected theoretical perspective in light of their thesis findings. For example, in Lewis’ (2018) integrated discussion, she provided a discourse on the use of complementary theoretical frameworks across individual studies: the Ottawa Decision Support Framework ( O’Connor et al., 1998 ) and Normalization Process Theory ( May et al., 2009 ). This provided a link between intervention development and implementation planning, proposing a novel theory-informed approach for the development of decision support interventions ( Lewis, 2018 ). Likewise, methodological implications may be discussed in cases where a student’s thesis advances methods, or to discuss the influence of chosen methodology on key findings where similar research questions are answered using distinct study designs. Wu’s (2014) integrated discussion focused on the methods used for conducting a survey for data collection. He used a set of reminders, with the last reminder being a courier package and return envelope. He then discussed how testing this reminder strategy in his thesis study contributed to survey design methods.

Lesson 5. An integrated discussion is feasible with one article

In cases where there is only one article comprising an article-based thesis, key findings from a more detailed literature review, a theoretical framework guiding the entire research project, or chosen methodology can provide the additional linkages to build the main integrated discussion points. For instance, in her Master of Nursing thesis integrated discussion, Demery Varin (2018) compared and contrasted her secondary analysis findings on the predictors of nurses’ research use in long-term care settings (as reported in one published article) with her review of the literature on the individual and contextual factors to nurses’ research use in all settings.

Lesson 6. Integrated discussions are publishable

The integrated discussion (or elements of it) may be publishable in its own right. When written well, the integrated discussion often results in an important academic contribution to the body of knowledge. Some graduate students have used the integrated discussion as the basis for a commentary paper or an updated theoretical framework paper. In her integrated discussion chapter of her doctoral thesis, Jull (2014) described the development of a collaborative framework for community-research partnerships co-produced by First Nations, Inuit, and Metis women’s community members and researchers. This framework was based on her findings and experience conducting the studies comprising her thesis. Jull et al. (2018) subsequently published a paper based on her integrated discussion.

Lesson 7. Integrated discussions can lay the foundation for subsequent research

Many students who are completing a Master’s or PhD thesis also intend to pursue further research. A well thought out and articulated integrated discussion can inform subsequent research projects, grant proposals, or programs of research. For example, Boland (2018) drew from her PhD integrated discussion to identify evidence-practice gaps and potential solutions in pediatric shared decision-making, which she used to underpin a successful Canadian Institutes of Health Research post-doctoral fellowship and guide the establishment of her research program.

In this paper, we propose an approach to writing an integrated discussion chapter for an article-based thesis. Our advice provided in this paper is intended to position graduate students to adequately plan and produce a unified, coherent, and higher-level synthesis of the articles comprising their thesis. Challenges in writing an integrated discussion include avoiding repetition of discussion points already included within the individual articles comprising the thesis and achieving a higher-level discussion to integrate findings across the individual articles. Writing an integrated discussion can be facilitated by developing a clear and detailed outline of the chapter and, in particular, by identifying broader, more overarching points of discussion, than those presented within the individual articles. We encourage graduate students, faculty supervisors and thesis advisory committees to use the templates provided and share their experiences.

Acknowledgments

The authors wish to thank the graduate students who have used this approach, reported that it was useful, and offered feedback to improve it. The authors also wish to thank the reviewers. Their critical read and constructive comments strengthened this manuscript.

Research funding: The authors received no financial support for the authorship and publication of this manuscript. IDG is a recipient of a CIHR Foundation Grant (FDN# 143237). DS holds a University Research Chair in Knowledge Translation to Patients at the University of Ottawa.

Author contributions: All authors have accepted responsibility for the entire content of this manuscript and approved its submission.

Competing interest: Authors state no conflict of interest.

Aarhus University . (2020). Guidelines for assessment of PhD dissertation and PhD defence . Retrieved from https://phd.health.au.dk/doingaphd/dissertation/assessment/guidelinesforassessmentofphddissertationandphddefence/ . Search in Google Scholar

Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (2001). A taxonomy for teaching, learning, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives . New York, NY: Longman. Search in Google Scholar

Baggs, J. G. (2011). The dissertation manuscript option, internet posting, and publication. Research in Nursing & Health , 34 (2), 89–90. https://doi.org/10.1002/nur.20420 . Search in Google Scholar PubMed

Bloom, B. S. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives, handbook I: The cognitive domain . New York: David McKay Co Inc. Search in Google Scholar

Boland, L. (2018). Implementation of shared decision making in pediatric clinical practice [PhD in Population Health]. Ottawa, Canada: University of Ottawa. Search in Google Scholar

Carter. (2009). Old lamps for new: Mnemonic techniques and the thesis. Arts and Humanities in Education , 8 , 56–68. https://doi.org/10.1177/1474022208098302 . Search in Google Scholar

De Jong, M. J., Moser, D. K., & Hall, L. A. (2005). The manuscript option dissertation: Multiple perspectives. Nurse Author & Editor , 15 (3), 3–4, 7–9. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1750-4910.2005.tb00554.x . Search in Google Scholar

Deakin University . (2019). Thesis structure options: Thesis by publication . Retrieved from https://www.deakin.edu.au/students/research/your-thesis-and-examinations/thesis-structure-options . Search in Google Scholar

Demery Varin, M. (2018). Modeling the predictors of nurses’ research use in Canadian long-term care homes [Masters of Science degree in Nursing]. Ottawa, Canada: University of Ottawa. Search in Google Scholar

Evans, S. C., Amaro, C. M., Herbert, R., Blossom, J. B., & Roberts, M. C. (2018). “Are you gonna publish that?” Peer-reviewed publication outcomes of doctoral dissertations in psychology. PloS One , 13 (2), e0192219. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0192219 . Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

Gould, J. (2016). Future of the thesis. Nature , 535 , 26–28. https://doi.org/10.1038/535026a . Search in Google Scholar PubMed

Grant, C. (2011). Diversifying and transforming the doctoral studies terrain: A student’s experience of a thesis by publication. Alternation , 18 (2), 245–267. Search in Google Scholar

Graves, J. M., Postma, J., Katz, J. R., Kehoe, L., Swalling, E., & Barbosa-Leiker, C. (2018). A national survey examining manuscript dissertation formats among nursing PhD programs in the United States. Journal of Nursing Scholarship , 50 (3), 314–323. https://doi.org/10.1111/jnu.12374 . Search in Google Scholar PubMed

Hoefel, L. (2019). 20th Anniversary update of the Ottawa Decision Support Framework: Evidence syntheses of needs assessments and trials of patient decision aids [Masters of Science degree in Nursing]. Ottawa, Canada: University of Ottawa. 10.1177/0272989X20924645 Search in Google Scholar PubMed

Institute of Medicine Committee on the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Initiative on the Future of Nursing . (2011). The future of nursing: Leading change, advancing health . Washington (DC): National Academies Press. Search in Google Scholar

Integrated. (2020). https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition/english/integrated [Accessed 3 Dec 2020]. Search in Google Scholar

Jull, J. (2014). Cultural adaptation of a shared decision-making intervention to address the needs of first Nations, Métis and Inuit women [PhD in Population Health]. Ottawa, Canada: University of Ottawa. Search in Google Scholar

Jull, J., Giles, A., Boyer, Y., & Stacey, D., & Minwaashin, Lodge. (2018). Development of a Collaborative Research Framework: An Example of a Study Conducted By and With a First Nations, Inuit and Métis Women’s Community and Its Research Partners. ACME: An International Journal for Critical Geographies , 17 (3), 671–686. https://acme-journal.org/index.php/acme/article/view/1317 . Search in Google Scholar

Lancaster University . (2020). Manual of academic regulations and procedures: Postgraduate graduate research regulations . Retrieved from https://www.lancaster.ac.uk/media/lancaster-university/content-assets/documents/student-based-services/asq/marp/PGR-Regs.pdf . Search in Google Scholar

Lewis, K. B. (2018). Development and preliminary evaluation of decision support for patients to accept or decline implantable cardioverter-defibrillator replacement at the time of battery depletion [PhD in Nursing]. Ottawa, Canada: University of Ottawa. Search in Google Scholar

Makar, G., Foltz, C., Lendner, M., & Vaccaro, A. R. (2018). How to write effective discussion and conclusion sections. Clinical Spine Surgery , 31 (8), 345–346. https://doi.org/10.1097/bsd.0000000000000687 . Search in Google Scholar PubMed

May, C. R., Mair, F., Finch, T., MacFarlane, A., Dowrick, C., Treweek, S., … Montori, V. M. (2009). Development of a theory of implementation and integration: Normalization process theory. Implementation Science , 4 , 29. https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-4-29 . Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

Maynard, B. R., Vaughn, M. G., Sarteschi, C. M., & Berglund, A. H. (2012). Social work dissertation research: Contributing to scholarly discourse or the file drawer? British Journal of Social Work , 44 , 1045–1062. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjsw/bcs172 . Search in Google Scholar

O’Connor, A. M., Tugwell, P., Wells, G. A., Elmslie, T., Jolly, E., Hollingworth, G., … Drake, E. (1998). A decision aid for women considering hormone therapy after menopause: Decision support framework and evaluation. Patient Education and Counseling , 33 (3), 267–279. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0738-3991(98)00026-3 . Search in Google Scholar PubMed

Robinson, S., & Dracup, K. (2008). Innovative options for the doctoral dissertation in nursing. Nursing Outlook , 56 (4), 174–178. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.outlook.2008.03.004 . Search in Google Scholar PubMed

Smaldone, A., Heitkemper, E., Jackman, K., Joanne Woo, K., & Kelson, J. (2019). Dissemination of PhD dissertation research by dissertation format: A retrospective cohort study. Journal of Nursing Scholarship , 51 (5), 599–607. https://doi.org/10.1111/jnu.12504 . Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

Smith, S. (2015). PhD by published work: A practical guide for success . London, UK: Palgrave. Search in Google Scholar

Stellenbosch University . (2019). General information on doctoral studies . [Available upon request]. Search in Google Scholar

University of Ottawa . (2020). Monograph thesis and thesis by article(s) – regulations . Retrieved from https://www.uottawa.ca/graduate-studies/students/theses/writing . Search in Google Scholar

University of Pennsylvania School of Nursing . (n.d.). PhD handbook . Retrieved from https://www.nursing.upenn.edu/student-services/resources/handbooks-forms-policies/phd-handbook/dissertation/ . Search in Google Scholar

Walker, L. O., & Avant, K. C. (2011). Strategies for theory construction in nursing . Boston: Prentice-Hall. Search in Google Scholar

Wu, R. C. (2014). Evaluation of a rectal cancer patient decision aid and the factors influencing its implementation in clinical practice [Masters of Science in Epidemiology]. Ottawa, Canada: University of Ottawa. 10.1186/1471-2482-14-16 Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

© 2021 Krystina B. Lewis et al., published by De Gruyter, Berlin/Boston

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

• X / Twitter

Supplementary Materials

Please login or register with De Gruyter to order this product.

Journal and Issue

Articles in the same issue.

• Essay Editor

Dissertation vs. Thesis: Understanding Differences & Similarities

Many graduate students hear two important words a lot: "dissertation" and "thesis." These words can be confusing because they seem alike. But they're actually quite different, and knowing the difference can help you with your research and studies.

This guide will help explain dissertations and theses. We want to make things clear so you can feel more sure about your schoolwork. Let's look at the main differences between dissertations and theses to help you understand your school path better.

Thesis and Dissertations — Definitions

First, let's explain what is a dissertation vs thesis.

A thesis is a big research project usually needed for a master's degree. It shows a student’s knowledge about a subject and ability to do research. A thesis often looks at what other people have written and uses it to form their own ideas.

A dissertation is new research done for a doctoral degree. It tries to add new knowledge to a field of study. Dissertations need to be original, detailed and well-supported. They're often published as books or as several articles in academic journals.

Interestingly, these meanings can be different in different places. In the United States, people usually write dissertations for Ph.D. programs and theses for master's degrees. But in Europe, it's the other way around — dissertations are for master's programs, and theses are for Ph.D.s.

Differences between Thesis and Dissertations

Now that we know the basics, let's look at the main differences between a thesis and a dissertation:

• Purpose: A thesis shows you know a lot about a subject. A dissertation adds new knowledge to a field.
• Scope: Theses usually focus on a smaller area. Dissertations look at bigger, broader topics.
• Length: Theses are usually shorter (80-100 pages). Dissertations are longer (150-200+ pages).
• New Ideas: Both involve research, but dissertations are expected to bring new findings or theories.
• Presentation: Dissertations often need a formal presentation. Theses might or might not need one.
• Readers: Theses are usually for a school committee. Dissertations are for more academic readers.
• Research Depth: Theses look deeply at existing work. Dissertations do new research and also look at existing work.

When working on these big projects, tools like Aithor can help organize your thoughts and keep your writing sounding natural and academic throughout your thesis or dissertation.

Differences Between Thesis and Dissertation Across Academic Levels

The difference between theses and dissertations can change depending on the school level:

Undergraduate Level

At this level, a thesis is usually a focused study showing what a student can do with a specific topic. Dissertations are less common for undergraduates but might involve broader research.

Master's Level

A master's thesis shows a student knows a lot about a subject by looking at and combining existing research. A master's dissertation is less common but involves new research that adds to the field.

Doctoral Level

For Ph.D.s, the difference between a thesis and a dissertation is bigger. A doctoral thesis vs dissertation comparison shows that a dissertation involves a lot of research, collecting data, and creating new theories. It aims to make a big step forward in the field and is very important for getting a Ph.D.

Similarities Between Dissertation and Thesis

Even though they're different, thesis versus dissertation comparisons also show some things that are the same:

1. Structure

Both usually have these parts:

• Introduction
• Literature Review
• Research methods/materials
• Bibliography

2. Supervision

Both are done with help from a teacher who guides the student through the research process.

3. Other Similarities

• Both are long research projects needed to get a degree.
• They both need to explain research using proper academic writing.
• Both need a clear question or idea to research.
• Students must show they know a lot about their subject in both.
• Thinking carefully and working on your own are important for both.

If students find it hard to write so much for theses and dissertations, tools like Aithor can help keep long documents consistent and suggest ways to make the writing clearer and more academic.

Final Notes

Knowing the difference between thesis and dissertation is really important for graduate students. While they have some things in common, their different purposes and requirements make them distinct. Whether you're working on a thesis or a dissertation, remember that both let you show what you know and add to your field of study.

If you're worried about writing a thesis or dissertation, don't stress. Aithor can help you organize your ideas, build your arguments, and improve your writing. This can make the process easier and less stressful. With the right tools and attitude, you can write an impressive academic paper that you'll be proud of for a long time.

Related articles

Paraphrasing vs plagiarism: do they really differ.

Academic assignments require much knowledge and skill. One of the most important points is rendering and interpreting material one has ever studied. A person should avoid presenting word-for-word plagiarism but express his or her thoughts and ideas as much as possible. However, every fine research is certain to be based on the previous issues, data given, or concepts suggested. And here it's high time to differentiate plagiarism and paraphrasing, to realize its peculiarities and cases of usage. ...

Top 10 Use Cases for AI Writers

Writing is changing a lot because of AI. But don't worry — AI won't take human writers' jobs. It's a tool that can make our work easier and help us write better. When we use AI along with our own skills, we can create good content faster and better. AI can help with many parts of writing, from coming up with ideas to fixing the final version. Let's look at the top 10 ways how to use AI for content creation and how it can make your writing better. What Is AI Content Writing? AI content writin ...

How To Write Essays Faster Using AI?

Creating various topical texts is an obligatory assignment during studies. For a majority of students, it seems like a real headache. It is quite difficult to write a smooth and complex work, meeting all the professors' requirements. However, thanks to modern technologies there appeared a good way of getting a decent project – using AI to write essays. We'd like to acquaint you with Aithor, an effective tool of this kind, able to perform fine and elaborated texts, and, of course, inspiration, i ...

Plagiarism: 7 Types in Detail

Your professor says that it is necessary to avoid plagiarism when writing a research paper, essay, or any project based on the works of other people, so to say, any reference source. But what does plagiarism mean? What types of it exist? And how to formulate the material to get rid of potential bad consequences while rendering original texts? Today we try to answer these very questions. Plagiarism: Aspect in Brief Plagiarism is considered to be a serious breach, able to spoil your successful ...

How to Write a Dialogue in an Essay: Useful Tips

A correct usage of dialogues in essays may seem quite difficult at first sight. Still there are special issues, for instance, narrative or descriptive papers, where this literary technique will be a good helper in depicting anyone's character. How to add dialogues to the work? How to format them correctly? Let's discuss all relevant matters to master putting conversation episodes into academic essays. Essay Dialogue: Definition & Purpose A dialogue is a literary technique for presenting a con ...

What is Citation and Why Should You Cite the Sources When Writing Content

When we write something for school, work, or just for fun, we often use ideas and facts from other places. This makes us ask: what is a citation in writing? Let's find out what this means and why it's really important when we write. What is Citation? Citation in research refers to the practice of telling your readers where you got your information, ideas, or exact words from. It's like showing them the path to the original information you used in your writing. When you cite something, you us ...

Can Plagiarism Be Detected on PDF?

Plagiarism has been a challenge for a long time in writing. It's easy to find information online, which might make some people use it without saying where it came from. But plagiarism isn't just taking someone else's words. Sometimes, we might do it by accident or even use our own old work without mentioning it. When people plagiarize, they can get into serious trouble. They might lose others' trust or even face legal problems. Luckily, we now have tools to detect plagiarism. But what about PDF ...

What Is Self-Plagiarism & How To Avoid It

Have you ever thought about whether using your own work again could be seen as copying? It might seem strange, but self-plagiarism is a real issue in school and work writing. Let's look at what this means and learn how to avoid self-plagiarism so your work stays original and ethical. What is self-plagiarism? Self-plagiarism, also called auto-plagiarism or duplicate plagiarism, happens when a writer uses parts of their old work without saying where it came from. This isn't just about copying w ...

• Open access
• Published: 27 August 2024

Facilitators and barriers to interprofessional collaboration among health professionals in primary healthcare centers in Qatar: a qualitative exploration using the “Gears” model

• Alla El-Awaisi 1 ,
• Ola Hasan Yakti 2 ,
• Abier Mohamed Elboshra 1 ,
• Kawthar Hasan Jasim 1 ,
• Alzahraa Fathi AboAlward 1 ,
• Raghad Walid Shalfawi 3 ,
• Ahmed Awaisu 1 ,
• Daniel Rainkie 4 ,
• Noora Al Mutawa 3 , 5 &
• Stella Major 6  

BMC Primary Care volume  25 , Article number:  316 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

2 Altmetric

Metrics details

The number of patients seeking medical care is increasing, necessitating more access to primary healthcare services. As several of these patients usually present with complex medical conditions, the need for interprofessional collaboration (IPC) among health professionals in primary care is necessary. IPC is essential for facing the increasing and challenging healthcare demands. Therefore, the facilitators of and the barriers to IPC should be studied in the hope that the results will be used to promote such endeavors.

This study aimed to explore the perspectives of different health professionals regarding the facilitators of and the barriers to IPC in the primary healthcare settings in Qatar.

A qualitative study using focus groups was conducted within the Primary Health Care Corporation (PHCC) in Qatar. Several health professionals were invited to participate in the focus groups. The focus groups were uniprofessional for general practitioners (GPs), nurses, and dentists, while they were interprofessional for the other health professionals. Focus groups were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim and validated by the research team. The data were analyzed by deductive thematic analysis using the “Gears” Conceptual Model as a coding framework.

Fourteen focus groups were conducted involving 58 participants (including 17 GPs, 12 nurses, 15 pharmacists, 3 dentists, and 11 allied health professionals) working in PHCC in Qatar. The findings revealed a spectrum of factors influencing IPC, categorized into four main domains: Macro, Meso, Micro, and individual levels, with each accompanied by relevant barriers and facilitators. Key challenges identified included a lack of communication skills, insufficient professional competencies, and power imbalances, among others. To address these challenges, recommendations were made to implement dedicated training sessions on IPC, reduce hierarchical barriers among different health professionals, and enhance the effectiveness of existing systems. Conversely, it was emphasized that projects and campaigns focused on IPC, alongside the development of enhanced communication skills and the presence of supportive leadership, as essential for facilitating effective IPC in PHCCs.

The interplay between the meso, macro, micro, and individual levels highlight the significance of a multifaceted approach to interventions, aiming to enhance the successes of IPC. While initiatives like interprofessional education training are underway, numerous challenges persist before achieving improved collaboration and more efficient integration of IPC in the PHCC setting.

Peer Review reports

Introduction

The World Health Organization (WHO) projects a global deficit of health professionals in comparison to the needs, expected to exceed 18 million by 2030, which will impede the provision of optimal healthcare services. In their “Global strategy on human resources for health: Workforce 2030”, they highlighted the need to equip health professionals with the skills needed to practice collaboratively in interprofessional teams [ 1 ]. One of the best solutions to face this strain on the healthcare system and to provide better management of the complex health challenges is to implement and promote the concept of interprofessional collaboration (IPC) as these demands often are beyond the expertise of any single profession [ 2 , 3 , 4 ]. According to the WHO, IPC occurs when “multiple healthcare workers from different professional backgrounds provide comprehensive services by working with patients, their families, caregivers, and communities to deliver the highest quality of care across settings” [ 2 ]. IPC recently has become one of the core demands of accreditors, funding institutions, policymakers, and practicing health professionals, recognizing its potential to improve the quality of care and address the increasing demand for healthcare services [ 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 ].

Research has consistently highlighted the positive impact of IPC on healthcare work processes, patient safety, and patient outcomes across various disease states such as diabetes, heart failure and asthma, which were treated in hospital, primary care, and community settings [ 9 , 10 , 11 ]. Research has concluded that a high degree of IPC has led to better subjective outcomes, including overall satisfaction, treatment success, and willingness to recommend the healthcare institution to others. Additionally, objective outcomes such as reduced mortality rate, readmissions, and hospital length of stay have been noted. Furthermore, collaboration has been associated with improved decision-making and increased innovation [ 12 , 13 ]. It has also been demonstrated that as the relationship and level of connectedness between physicians and other health professionals increase; hospitalization costs and readmission rates decrease [ 14 ].

Primary healthcare is the foundation of any country’s healthcare system. It is not only considered the primary point of contact with the healthcare system, but it also serves as the vehicle for ensuring continuity of care across settings. The increase in the number of people with multiple chronic diseases that are associated with considerable social, functional, and emotional impairment and an increase in the healthcare demand, leading to an increase in the needed services [ 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 ]. Consequently, policymakers on an international scale have persistently advocated for the greater integration of interprofessional team-based care in primary healthcare settings and the development of influencing factors that explicitly acknowledge the value of this collaborative approach [ 19 , 20 ]. Several studies in the literature have highlighted the positive outcomes associated with effective collaboration within primary healthcare settings [ 21 , 22 , 23 ]. This has led to an internationally movement towards team-based primary healthcare, to enhance the integration of services and to emphasize health promotion and chronic disease management [ 19 ]. Ineffective collaboration leads to an increased risk of preventable errors, lack of efficiency, and loss of motivation, resulting in suboptimal patient care based on nurses’ opinions [ 24 ].

While IPC efforts are usually initiated by policymakers, research have demonstrated that health professionals’ play a vital role in providing high-quality IPC. Therefore, it is of crucial importance to consider the perspectives of health professionals working in primary healthcare settings regarding IPC when designing and implementing IPC projects [ 25 ]. Numerous studies have examined IPC across various countries. For example, a systematic review was conducted to explore facilitators and barriers to IPC implementation in primary healthcare settings. This review included studies conducted in Great Britain, the United States, the Netherlands, Australia, Spain, Brazil, Canada, and New Zealand. The findings of this review indicated that allied health professionals generally hold positive perceptions of IPC within primary healthcare contexts [ 26 , 27 ]. However, limited research has been conducted to investigate healthcare IPC practice in Qatar, particularly in primary healthcare settings. Given the recent expansion of scope of practice in primary care in Qatar [ 28 ], it is essential to explore the current practices in primary healthcare in Qatar in terms of IPC facilitators and barriers, and determining the necessary steps to achieve optimal collaboration within the Qatari healthcare system.

This study is a continuation of a previous study that explored the perspective of 1415 health professionals in primary healthcare settings through a self-administered questionnaire [ 28 ]. Results of the study showed that health professionals generally have a positive attitude and readiness toward IPC. Interprofessional differences were noted regarding their readiness to be involved in IPC, where physicians had slightly more positive readiness towards understanding their professional identity compared to other health professionals. Health professionals with previous IPC or interprofessional education (IPE) experiences revealed greater, but non-significant positive attitudes toward IPC compared to those without previous experiences. Participants suggested that facilitators and barriers for IPC in primary healthcare settings are conceptual rather than physical. Facilitators included personal belief in IPC benefit, higher professional satisfaction, interprofessional respect, appreciation of other health professionals’ role, institutional support, and leadership. Barriers identified included lack of time, leadership, support, and limited resources.

In an effort to understand the health professionals’ perception of the facilitators and barriers for IPC in primary healthcare in Qatar, the current study will explore the factors affecting the IPC in primary healthcare in Qatar using the “Gears” conceptual model [ 7 ]. The Gears model offers a taxonomy of factors influencing IPC within Interprofessional Primary Care Teams (IPCTs). These factors are categorized into levels: policymakers (macro gear), organizational managers (meso gear), healthcare teams (micro gear), and health professionals (individual gear). Most of the factors identified by the “Gears model” are within the micro gear, or those affecting the individual. These involve formal processes such as quality audits and group problem-solving; social processes pertained to open communication and supportive colleagues; team attitudes such as feeling part of the team; and team structure such as team size and having a collaboration champion or facilitator. Macro gears/policy factors are those that change less frequently and are pertained to regulations regarding the general scope of practice, funding, etc. Meso gears/ organizational factors are those that change more often and affect more than one team in the organization, those are concerned with the information systems, organizational culture, etc. Individual factors include the individual health professional characteristics such as belief in IPC care and personal flexibility.

The aim of this study is to identify factors facilitating or impeding IPC in primary healthcare in Qatar by exploring the perspectives of health professionals working in primary healthcare qualitatively. These include GPs, nurses, pharmacists, dentists, and allied health professionals (lab technicians, physiotherapists, dieticians, and radiographers). Findings from this study will be used to find ways to enhance and promote collaborative practice in primary healthcare in Qatar.

Study design

In this qualitative study design, data were collected through semi-structured focus groups. A qualitative approach was used to explore comprehensively the lived experiences of health professional’s perspective as it allows for investigating a phenomenon from the people who have experienced it. It gives a deeper insight and answers to what, how, and why questions [ 12 ].

Study setting

The study was conducted among health professionals working in the Primary Health Care Corporation (PHCC) in Qatar. PHCC was established in 1978 to provide comprehensive primary healthcare services and became an independent body in 2012 with full administrative and financial autonomy. At the present time, the PHCC provides PHC through 27 PHC centers distributed across the country. Each center is staffed with health professionals who provide a broad range of services, focusing on health promotion and disease prevention. PHCC has adopted and implemented family medicine model of care and offers a wide range of services, including general medicine, dentistry, ophthalmology, optometry, ENT, dermatology, mental health, preventive and lifestyle services such as wellness, premarital care, cancer screening, gym and geriatric, physiotherapy and radiology services [ 29 ]. In February 2018, a local continuous professional development (CPD) program was initiated by PHCC Workforce Training Department (WFTD) for implementing learning activities across the 27 PHCC health centers using interprofessional and collaborative approaches.

Study participants and sampling

The study comprised 58 participants, including 17 general practitioners, 12 nurses, 3 dentists, 15 pharmacists, and 11 allied health professionals (e.g., laboratory technologists, radiologists, optometrists, and audiologists) working in PHCC in Qatar. A purposive sampling strategy was employed to select health professionals with experience or understanding of IPC, aiming to maximize participant recruitment and ensure representation of the study population’s views [ 16 ]. Sampling continued until thematic saturation was reached, indicating no further emergent ideas from discussions [ 17 ].

Participants’ recruitment

Emails were sent to the health professionals working at PHCC in Qatar inviting them to participate in the study focus groups that were planned to be conducted at Qatar University or PHCC headquarters. Recruitment of participants was facilitated through WFTD which took the responsibility of recruiting and arranging appropriate focus group schedule that can suit study participants. An invitation email was sent with consent form and participant information sheet to participants prior to the focus groups.

Data collection

The topic guide was developed through discussions with the research team, a review of previous literature, and based on phase 1 quantitative results [ 28 ] (please see supplementary file). A pilot interview was conducted with minor adjustments and included a few health professionals working in PHCC. Because no significant changes were made it was included in the final analysis. The focus group were uniprofessional (i.e. homogenous groups) for GPs, nurses and dentist and interprofessional (i.e. heterogeneous groups) for the remaining health professionals and varied in duration between 90 and 120 min. The discussions were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim.

Data analysis

A deductive thematic analysis was conducted of data, which is an analytical method in which authors use existing themes, categories, or domains to categorize new data under such categories [ 30 ]. Participants’ ideas were categorized under four main domains adapted from the “Gears model” [ 7 ]. The gears model outlines the factors affecting IPC within IPCTs under four main factor domains: macro, meso, micro, and individual factors. AME, AA, KJ, RS reviewed and validated the transcripts. They then independently reviewed couple of transcripts to generate codes in discussion with the lead author (AE). Coding for the rest of the transcripts was validated by one faculty member from the research team. A final discussion took place with all authors to agree on themes and subthemes.

Reflexivity

During the data collection and analysis process, the research team engaged in reflexive practices to mitigate potential biases. The team consisted of various individuals with diverse backgrounds, including faculty members with pharmacy, nursing and medical backgrounds, three of whom were practicing health professionals, along with four pharmacy students and one alumna. The team offered a broad spectrum of perspectives and insights for data generation and analysis. These faculty members had an understanding of IPE and had previously conducted workshops on interprofessional collaboration for health professionals at PHCC. With a background in IPC, participants’ ideas were more easily understood, facilitating deeper engagement, and enabling the comprehension of their perspectives more readily, thus ensuring a comprehensive interpretation of the data. Throughout the research process, attention was paid to the potential influence of professional backgrounds, with reflexive practices employed to mitigate biases and ensure the integrity of the findings.

Data collection were mostly led by the principal investigator, with support from students adhering to a pre-defined topic guide to minimize personal biases. To further enhance trustworthiness of the study, students independently coded the data, which was validated by a faculty member of the research team. The team met several times to review and compare codes and themes, refining the analysis iteratively until consensus was reached. Each stage of the research process was overseen by the principal investigator, ensuring the rigor and robustness of the study.

Fourteen focus groups were conducted between September 2019 and February 2020, involving 58 health professionals working in primary healthcare centers in Qatar (17 general practitioners, 12 nurses 15 pharmacists, 3 dentists, and 11 allied health professionals). The baseline characteristics of the participants are summarized in Table  1 . Four domains, 10 themes, and 14 sub-themes were identified from the focus groups. The domains, themes, and sub-themes are summarized in Table  2 .

Gears domain 1: macro factors

Facilitators, theme 1: the influence of organizational policies on ipc.

Several factors were identified by health professionals pertaining to the policies that can affect IPC. These factors were mainly related to the rules and regulations set by the organization’s managers or government bodies, which typically influence the general scopes of practice, funding mechanisms, and remuneration of providers. Consensus was reached that these regulations play a significant role in fostering IPC among health professionals.

“Actually , we have very well prepared and organized policies. Policies related to teamwork , which align with best-practices and international guidelines. The policies at our PHCC facilitate collaboration… but how to use it? Is everybody aware of its use?” [Laboratory technologist 1].

No major barriers were identified under the macro factors.

Gear’s domain 2: meso factors

Theme 2.1: leveraging technology for enhanced communication.

Participants unanimously agreed that the current health information system, specifically CERNER, serve as a strong facilitator for enhancing communication among health professionals. It enables seamless sharing of patients’ details documented by other health professionals.

“I find the CERNER system software amazing , because you can get to see the history of the patients and previous appointments records. Everything is well documented” [Dentist 3].

Theme 2.2: communication hindered by limitations in healthcare information system utilization

Several participants noted that current system (CERNER) is not fully utilized for documenting and reporting of medical or medication errors which can serve as a barrier. As an example, one participant expressed reluctance to utilize the system and filing an OVA (incidental report) for fear of retaliation in case the reporter is identified.

“If I were to write OVA (incidental report) for him/her , he/she will get angry at me. So , there’s no use. Actually , the purpose is to report in order for others to learn from them , but there is no clear pathway that there will be no consequences for us reporters” [Nurse 2].

Furthermore, another HCP mentioned that the current information system might be a barrier, as not all health professionals have equal access to the system.

“The pharmacist is not allowed to enter a recommendation into the system; they have their own system” [GP 5].

Theme 2.3: barriers in organizational dynamics hindering IPC

Sub-theme 2.3.1: hierarchy hinders collaborative spirit.

One of the primary obstacles to collaboration within the institution is perceived to be the presence of a hierarchical structure. This perception is based not only in the observable existence of a grading system that categorizes health professionals according to their profession and seniority, but also in the benefits associated with higher hierarchical positions.

“The hierarchy is influenced by salary differences” [GP 4].

Participants in the study observed that this hierarchical system leads to disparities, which undermine their willingness to collaborate. As an example, pharmacists expressed feeling of being treated differently compared to GPs, who are routinely offered opportunities to attend international conferences. The lack of such opportunities for pharmacists and other health professionals further reinforces the perception of hierarchy within the institution.

“I have tried to attend a conference; I have a right to enhance my education. Why does this apply to the GP and not to the pharmacist?” [Pharmacist 8]. “He -the GP- thinks that the pharmacist as being of lower status , and he is the only one to have the authority to write and make decisions” [Pharmacist 9].

Sub-theme 2.3.2: blame culture instils apprehension among health professionals

Another significant factor that had a considerable impact on collaborative efforts was the existence of a culture of blame within the PHCC organization. This culture of blame surfaced frequently during discussions among health professionals and was found to hinder effective collaboration among team members. Some perceived the level of blame not to be equitable.

“What if I did a mistake? And what if the mistake was done by the GP? The blame wouldn’t be equal. We would receive more blame” [Nurse 3]. “I still believe that some of us should refrain from perpetuating a blame culture or name-calling. After all , all of us are human beings. We are prone to making errors” [GP 10]. “We need to promote a culture of no blame. When things go wrong or mistakes occur , we should view them as collective challenges rather than assigning fault to individuals and subjecting them to humiliation. This approach will significantly transform the overall attitude within the environment” [GP 2].

Sub-theme 2.3.3: Lack of feedback contributes to the perception that health professionals’ efforts are undervalued

Some health professionals have expressed concerns regarding the lack of feedback on their performance, interventions, and error reports, particularly within Datix, a patient safety software utilized for healthcare risk reporting. This absence of feedback is perceived as a significant impediment to IPC, as it fosters the perception that the efforts of health professionals are not adequately acknowledged or valued.

“The risk management team should gather data and determine the significance of incidents reported through Datix , which is serious or recurring. If a mistake is repeated , they will ask or make an investigation about this issue. However , aside from these instances , no action is taken. No feedback is provided” [Pharmacist 1].

Gears domain 3: micro factor

Theme 3.1: expanding the scope of practice of team members enhances collaboration.

Given that IPC heavily relies on teamwork, the topic of collaborative efforts and teamwork surfaced frequently during focus groups.

“ The most important thing in primary healthcare practice is the teamwork. We underscore its importance , as it permeates our daily operations” [GP 6].

Expanding the scope of practice of healthcare team members has the potential to foster enhanced collaboration between team members. For example, pharmacists who participated in the discussions expressed that the inclusion of a clinical pharmacist within PHCC would enhance collaboration. This is attributed to the direct involvement of the clinical pharmacist with the interprofessional team, which obviates the need for external prompting to initiate collaborative efforts.

Theme 3.2: effective communication channels foster collaboration

Effective collaboration among participants was found to significantly hinge on the establishment of robust communication channels. This encompasses both formal features and tools, ranging from cordial and conversational telephonic exchanges to more structured modes of communication, such as the sharing of electronic patient records. Several participants cited instances of proficient communication that had led to successful collaboration outcomes.

“Every colleague should be encouraged to express their concerns , whether in written form or verbally , as it facilitates communication” [Dentist 3]. “Many doctors respect our opinion and express gratitude , acknowledging that we draw their attention to certain points“ [Pharmacist 9].

The majority of participants highlighted the importance of communication tools provided by the institution, including telephones, the CERNER system, and email platforms. Participants expressed their appreciation for these communication channels, noting that they effectively save time and enable seamless collaboration, even when they are attending to patients in different locations.

“It’s not difficult because we have our colleagues , whom we can contact directly by phone” [Dentist 1].

Theme 3.3: formal team processes have a significant role in facilitating collaboration

Sub-theme 3.3.1: supportive leaders empower team members to collaborate.

Leaders who demonstrate appreciation and dedication play a crucial role in fostering positive experiences of IPC. Regular interprofessional meetings organized by these leaders ensure that the environment is conducive to collaboration, and support empowering health professionals to initiate and engage in collaborative endeavor.

“So , if we have any issues , we talk to our supervisor , who then reports it to the health center manager. She is really supportive” [Pharmacist 3].

Sub-theme 3.3.2: engagement in interprofessional initiatives enhances collaboration among team members

Participants emphasized that their involvement in workplace initiatives, such as projects, campaigns, seminars, and workshops, played a crucial role in promoting IPC. According to health professionals, these initiatives were beneficial as they provided them with diverse professional perspectives, opinions, and ideas, which in turn enhanced their chances of success in their collaborative efforts.

“In our health center , we initiated a project to improve the practice of antibiotic prescribing. We were collaborating with GPs to know from them how to write and put a protocol to lessen the misuse of antibiotic” [Pharmacist 2].

Participants also recognized that engaging in collaborative research activities involving multiple team members was an effective facilitator for enhancing patient safety.

“I conducted research on medication use reviews , actively engaging with general practitioners’ clinics. I would regularly visit these clinics to share information about the study. During these interactions , I explained my criteria , encouraging them to refer eligible patients to the pharmacy” [Pharmacist 6].

Furthermore, vaccination campaigns were considered essential by several pharmacists as they provided opportunities for collaboration with other disciplines including educational outreach events. Several pharmacists reported on their involvement in these campaigns and the subsequent positive impact on collaboration dynamics. Specifically, one pharmacist highlighted a reduction in the uptake of pneumococcal vaccine among eligible patients and assumed a proactive role by gathering information from various GPs regarding the decreased prescription of such vaccines.

“We did a project in collaboration with GPs , regarding vaccinating high risk patients with pneumococcal vaccine” [Pharmacist 4]. “During the immunization week , I held a seminar about immunization. I taught them -nurses- individually how to use each vaccine properly and why we are using it” [Pharmacist 2].

Moreover, participants found case-based discussions and interprofessional training sessions with other health professionals valuable for collaboration. These sessions allowed discussion of each profession’s role and facilitated idea exchange.

“ As part of our interprofessional education efforts , we conduct weekly lectures and brief discussions for an hour… sometimes , new nurses and physiotherapists attend these lectures…… We discuss how we can help promote the collaboration between all of us for better care for the patients” [GP 9].

Sub-theme 3.3.3: optimizing accessible healthcare environments

Experiences related to the impact of the environment on collaboration were generally positively perceived. For instance, the close proximity of a nurse diabetic educator to the pharmacy facilitated direct communication between pharmacists and educators, enabling them to address any concerns more efficiently. Moreover, having practitioners co-located in a single setting, rather than dispersed in various locations within the center, was deemed more advantageous.

“We have it , diabetic educator , clinical pharmacist , and GP all in one place , so they all work together for assessment of patient and education , particularly high-risk patient” [Pharmacist 4].

Theme 3.4: time constraints impede collaboration and affect patient outcomes

Participants identified time constraints as a significant challenge to collaboration, with health professionals struggling to allocate sufficient time for documentation, communication, and knowledge-sharing, potentially impacting patient outcomes.

“We can’t afford the luxury of opening CERNER each time since we are already occupied with other tasks” [Pharmacist 5]. “Even when there is an issue …. we should learn from it. We are not learning. We just want to finish this issue and just move on because there is no time. There is too much work” [Laboratory technologist 1].

Theme: 3.5: lack of clarity in scope of practice leads to misunderstandings and hinders collaboration

A number of health professionals expressed concerns regarding the potential misunderstanding of their scope of practice, leading to requests to perform tasks beyond their designated role which impact the collaborative culture leading to frustration.

“Nurses are responsible for taking vital signs , following the patient’s care plan , and managing medications , but cleaning is not part of their role although some doctors mistakenly believe it to be so” [Nurse 3]. “At times , we notice that some GPs are unaware of the difference between a technician and a radiologist” [Laboratory technologist 1].

Gears domain 4: individual factors

Theme 4.1: prior exposure to ipe enhances appreciation for ipc.

The study observed that health professionals who had prior experience with IPE exhibited a greater appreciation towards collaborative work.

“We learned and practiced IPE during our education. However , in practical settings , there is still a need for a comprehensive understanding of IPE and its implementation. While there are individual efforts to apply it , full implementation has not been achieved yet” [Pharmacist 3].

Theme 4.2: health professionals’ factors

Subtheme 4.2.1: effective communication skills drive enhanced collaboration among health professionals.

Effective communication was deemed crucial by participants in healthcare settings. Nurses felt valued and integral to the team when equipped with proper communication skills, while GPs found direct communication with other health professionals to be advantageous, enhancing their practice.

“Quite a few times , I’ve reached out to the on-site ophthalmologist by phone. When there’s a concern about a patient , whether its suspected cornea issues or the need to rule out certain conditions , a simple phone call often results in them accommodating the patient. The ophthalmologist has consistently been responsive and helpful in these interactions” [GP 6].

Subtheme 4.2.2: positive interpersonal qualities among health professionals enhance collaboration

The collaboration within the team is influenced by health professionals’ interpersonal qualities which was identified as a significant factor, with approachability and friendliness being crucial in facilitating collaboration.

“The difference here is that I find everybody to be approachable and friendly [GP 6]. Very friendly environment. You can approach the nurses , the doctors—everyone is accessible” [GP 10].

Furthermore, respect and trust were highly valued facilitators of IPC and were discussed in conjunction with other facilitators.

“Mutual respect among all health professionals will facilitate smoother and more effective collaboration” [Nurse 3]. “We must respect each other. Just because I am a GP , it doesn’t mean my opinion is the only opinion or the correct one” [GP 3].

Theme 4.3: patient perceptions impact IPC

Patient perceptions were found to exert a considerable impact on the dynamics of collaboration between nurses, GPs, and other health professionals. Participants reported that patients tended to perceive nurses as occupying a subordinate position relative to GPs, and consequently, were less forthcoming in discussing healthcare concerns with them.

“ You are the nurse; you know less than the doctor” [Nurse 4]. “ Patients typically highly value recommendations from physicians. However , when they seek advice or education from nurses or pharmacists , they sometimes may not value it as much as they would if it came from a physician ” [Pharmacist 7].

Additionally, participants believe patients regard GPs as the key health professionals, and preferred to communicate exclusively with them. This perception placed an additional workload on GPs, leading to potential consequences on their capacity to collaborate effectively with other health professionals.

“We need to educate patients more about the roles each team member plays and how we all work together as a team. When a patient comes in , they often see the doctor as the leader but it’s important for them to understand the contributions of all team members” [GP 5].

Theme 4.4: impact of of perceived approachability and ego on IPC

On the other hand, encountered challenges in communicating with GPs, including when they perceived a sense of ego, or if they were less approachable. Nurses expressed reluctancy to approach pharmacists or GPs whom they felt would not respect them.

“ Being approachable is one of the most important things especially when it comes to the team. For example , some of the nurses would know a lot of information about the patient but if you’re not an approachable GP , they will not come and voluntarily divulge the information” [GP 6]. “Ego. When you are dealing with people these things are barriers and the best solution is always communication” [Nurse 6].

Similarly, GPs encountered similar challenges in communicating with other health professionals if they perceived them as unfriendly or unapproachable. However, they differed from the nurses in that they seemed to encounter these challenges within their own field of practice rather than in interactions with other health professionals.

Theme 5: enhancing IPC through equity, training, and support

The study participants put forth several proposals to enhance IPC in their workplace. A key recommendation was to ensure equity among health professionals, such that all members had full and equal access to patient files. This would enable effective IPC by keeping all team members abreast of the patient’s evolving health status and treatment plan. Participants recognized that institutional and leadership support would be necessary to achieve this equity. Additionally, due to the acknowledged limitations posed by workload and time constraints, many participants suggested that the recruitment of additional staff could facilitate IPC processes. Further, the participants proposed the need for more frequent training sessions to improve communication skills, enhance system and documentation writing, and provide IPC disease management, role clarification, and professional competencies education.

“When they send you for training you will be empowered” [Nurse 2].

Finally, health professionals emphasized the importance of a supportive system that offers constructive feedback to identify weaknesses and facilitate continuous improvement of practice. In addition, health professionals remarked on the impact of managerial support on collaboration and performance.

“When we receive support from the health center manager during our practice , we find that collaboration improves , leading to better outcomes” [Pharmacist 2].

This qualitative focus group study explored facilitators of and barriers to IPC as perceived by health professionals (including GPs, nurses, pharmacists, dentists, and allied health professionals) from various backgrounds in primary healthcare in Qatar using the “Gears” conceptual model. Overall, the majority of health professionals who participated in this study have acknowledged and appreciated the importance of IPC work within their institutions, which is consistent with other published studies [ 27 , 31 , 32 ].

Facilitators under the micro-gear domain focused on healthcare teams. Participants agreed that the diversity of health professionals within the same PHCC is a major facilitator for better collaboration. They also agreed that the presence of different communication channels (e.g. telephones, CERNER, etc.) is another facilitator. Supportive leaders in the team were acknowledged to have a positive influence on attitudes toward IPC. IPE activities were identified as positively influencing attitudes towards toward IPE and IPC. These findings are consistent with those of other studies. There was an agreement among several studies regarding the importance of open communication and various communication strategies and tools in facilitating IPC [ 33 , 34 ]. For example, Müller et al. [ 33 ], in their study where authors interviewed several clinical executive managers, found that participants agreed that multilateral communication is one of the enablers for effective IPC. Facilitators within the individual-gear, includes Individual contextual factors contributing to IPC such as previous exposure to IPC, patient related factors, and characteristics of health professionals. Previous exposure to IPC emerged as a significant facilitator for both health professionals and patients. Communication skills were identified as crucial in supporting exposure to IPC. Participants highlighted the importance of accessible communication methods, such as availability by phone or in person conversations, eliminating roadblocks to IPC. Furthermore, the approachability of health professionals, characterized by their openness to information sharing and their trust and respect for the competency, knowledge, and skills of other health professionals was a key facilitator to IPC.

Regarding the meso-gear facilitators, participants valued the importance of receiving ongoing, and timely feedback based on practice experiences to consolidate learning and minimize recurrence of errors. They advocated for utilizing data from platforms such as Datix; an Incident Reporting System (IRS), which is a valuable resource among all team members involved in patient care. Participants recommend a wider use of such data for learning, in interprofessional team meetings. This aligns with evidence from the literature which suggests that critical to the success of any IRS is the quality of the feedback given to reporters to enable learning, encourage reporting, and give reporters evidence that the information they are providing is being used appropriately [ 35 , 36 ]. Space and proximity are reported as excellent opportunity for teams to work together and share perspectives in the care for the patient [ 37 ]. As new PHCC centers are created to serve the growing needs of Qatar’s population, leaders can benefit from including members of the care teams, in the final design discussions, so that space and proximity can continue to remain optimal and facilitate interprofessional practice and team centered patient care.

The least number of factors were identified under the macro-gears. These relate to governance and regulations, which were considered as a major facilitator for better IPC in the primary healthcare setting in Qatar. The participants in this study had reflected on the existing policy and regulatory facilitators that foster collaborative practice in PHC setting in Qatar, but did not discuss barriers to policies and regulations. The study findings reaffirm the potential role and influence of government policies and regulations in facilitating IPC in primary care settings from the perspective of the health professionals. Additionally, organizational-level policies were also perceived as key facilitators. This aligns with the macro-level factors of the Gears conceptual model, which allows the conceptualization of the intricate relationships between this and the other domains of the model from the perspective of the health professionals. Previous studies have documented the influence of policy and regulation in promoting collaborative practice and IPE. One international review has summarized the global policies and legal factors influencing the behaviors of health professionals towards successful implementation of collaborative practice [ 38 ]. These factors largely influence the scope of practice of various health professions and how the different professions work collaboratively, funding mechanisms, and reimbursement systems for health services.

In Qatar, health professions and practices are regulated by the Department of Healthcare Professions under the Ministry of Public Health (MoPH) [ 39 ], which is considered a key aspect of professional practice [ 38 ]. Although there are no umbrella laws to regulate multiple health professions under a single statute, which is a major drawback to an effective and conducive implementation of collaborative practice in various settings, having a unified regulatory and legal structure has been shown to foster a culture of equity among different health professionals [ 40 ]. An important aspect of policy and professional regulation is the scope of practice, which should typically clarify roles and represent specific areas of competence for each particular health profession. Participants indicated the presence of scope of practice for various professions in the State of Qatar. Previous studies and reports have highlighted the importance of restructuring the scope of practice of health professions towards effective IPC and to remove barriers to healthcare provision. This will allow health professionals to practice within the scope of their practices and to the full extent of their professional competence without encroaching other professions’ scope of practice, which will ultimately lead to effective collaborative practice [ 41 , 42 ]. In addition, funding and reimbursement are macro-level aspects that can significantly impact IPC [ 40 , 43 ]. In the present study, there was a consensus that these regulatory factors play a key role in facilitating the IPC among the health professionals in primary care settings in Qatar.

Barriers pertaining to the healthcare teams, or the micro-gear, are the lack of understanding of other professionals’ scope of practice, and the lack of time. This is not different from what is reported in the literature, where lack of time and poor understanding of other health professionals ' roles were considered, besides other barriers, major hinderers for IPC in one review paper that collected multiple articles that studied the enablers and hinderers of IPC [ 34 ]. For the individual-gear barriers, health professionals identified that the hierarchy entrenched within the healthcare system contributed a major barrier to collaboration. Within the studied context, GPs are seen as the pinnacle health professional by patients. Therefore, patients are reluctant to provide information to health professionals other than the GP. This ultimately reduces the effectiveness of the healthcare system as the scope of practice of the remainder of the interprofessional team are constrained to meet patient needs. This might limit other health professionals’ roles, and hence they might be less able to exchange care. This idea might go with the concept of the “patient-doctor dyad” that has been reported in the literature, where authors described that one of the hinderers of IPC is the patient’s desire to be mainly seen and examined by GPs, which is often prioritized over collaborative care [ 44 , 45 , 46 ]. Pharmacists, in this study, described that patients also might ignore pharmacists’ recommendations if it was not aligned with the GPs’ recommendations. While IPC may beget IPC, participants remarked that there was difficulty bringing IPC to life in their PHCC context. Knowledge of IPC must be accompanied by a shift in organizational culture, supported by policies and performance review, led by champions, and guided by exemplars of IPC.

Two subthemes were considered under the meso-factors, which are mainly regarding the information system and the organizational culture. Our results indicate that although a health information system (HIS) is operating within the primary healthcare center (PHCC) system, however, not all members of the team use nor rely on it, to complete their duties in patient care. This fragmentation of data systems poses a threat to team unity and excludes some team members (in this context the pharmacists) from being on the same page as the rest. Efforts to merge all data subunits and enable all team members to access the HIS, can enhance work time efficiency (a micro challenge) that participants reported for pharmacists to require in order to be on the same page as the other care providers in the team and is supported by research which stresses the benefits of a health information system which enables the participation of all staff who are directly concerned with patient care in that setting [ 47 , 48 ].

In the interest of optimizing patient safety, whilst participants in this study valued the opportunity for a shared HIS to serve as a platform where errors could be recorded, our data indicates that health care team members did not feel safe enough to do so. According to Smiley and colleagues [ 49 ] the fear of being fired and subjected to judicial inquiry and prosecution make many nurses conceal errors. This aligns with our participants’ reported concerns about the prevalence of “blame culture” and how this results in individuals feeling personally and professionally vulnerable. Blame culture in health care organizations is mainly associated with the approach used by management when dealing with medical errors and accidents [ 50 , 51 ]. Efforts to embrace a culture that promotes transparency and accountability, and management approach which as described by Catino [ 52 ] relates the causal factors of a given event to the whole organization rather than the individual, are priorities for the PHCC organizational leadership to consider.

Furthermore, hierarchy in privileges, such as varied levels of access to professional development opportunities, threatens team unity, and in turn generates a sense where some professions feel less valued for working in their roles. Educators postulate that if individuals from different professions learn together, they will be able to more effectively work together in teams to achieve desired outcomes [ 53 ]. Integrating CPD in interprofessional decision support with quality improvement and patient safety initiatives will likely enhance the uptake and ability to sustain these educational initiatives [ 54 ]. For instance, the “Schwartz Center Rounds” in the US and UK provide a forum in which professional and nonprofessional staff across healthcare disciplines can discuss challenging psychosocial and emotional aspects of a patient’s care and the impact of these challenges on the care team. These rounds do not focus solely on decision-making, but attendees report significantly enhanced appreciation of colleagues’ roles and contributions, communication, and teamwork [ 55 ]. In this way, the professional learning needs can meet not only the individual profession, but also translate into opportunities for teams to problem solve together and in turn improve safer patient care.

In general, the current study results on facilitators and barriers to IPC align well with those identified by a review study by [ 34 ] that summarized the facilitators and barriers for interprofessional care in primary healthcare. Common facilitators in both studies are the lack of time and training for the health professionals, lack of understanding of others’ roles, and poor communication. It is interesting to note that fears relating to professional identity were identified as a hinderer in the review; however, it was not mentioned by any HCP in the current study. This could be due to the proper understanding of the self-role of the HCP in this study. IPC enablers identified by the review were all reported in this study (i.e. communication tools, co-location of HCP, and recognition of other professionals’ roles and contributions).

Strengths and limitations

One strength of this study is the use of the “Gears model” to understand facilitators and barriers at each level within the IPCTs. Identifying the facilitators and barriers at each level of the work environment makes it easier for decision-makers to identify the gaps and the points that need improvement specific for each level, and hence will help implement appropriate, and probably more efficient, interventions suitable for each level to improve IPC within the PHCC settings. The current study included a high diversity of health professionals and did not focus on certain professions, which aligns with what interprofessional work is all about. This study, as mentioned before, is a continuation of a previous quantitative study done on more than 1400 health professionals to assess their attitude toward IPC. Although the previous study showed that health professionals have a positive attitude toward IPC, which was evident by the survey, the current study examined these quantitative findings from a qualitative lens. This provided a clearer insight to ensure a comprehensive understanding of what shapes these perspectives.

Limitations of the study might include the lack of anonymity in focus groups, which might increase the social desirability. Second, although the study included multiple professions, most participants were GPs, pharmacists, or nurses. Moreover, some HCP were not present (e.g. pharmacy technicians, and physiotherapists), which could limit the generalizability of the current study to these professions.

The interplay between the meso, macro, micro, and individual gears showcases the importance of a multifaceted approach to interventions to amplify the successes of IPC. Policies such as data sharing and collaborative key performance indicators support the interaction between the meso and individual gears. The individual assists the macro and meso gears through communication and trust in the scope of practice of the other team members. Simultaneously, health professionals must advocate for their colleagues to patients. Patients have a direct connection to the micro and individual gears which ultimately affect the care being provided to them.

Data availability

No datasets were generated or analysed during the current study.

World Health Organization. Global strategy on human resources for health: workforce 2030. 2016.

World Health Organization. Framework for action on interprofessional education and collaborative practice. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2010.

Google Scholar  

Bodenheimer T, Chen E, Bennett HD. Confronting the growing burden of chronic disease: can the U.S. health care workforce do the job? Health affairs. (Project Hope). 2009;28(1):64–74.

Article   Google Scholar  

Freeth D. Sustaining interprofessional collaboration. J Interprof Care. 2001;15(1):37–46.

Article   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Zwarenstein M, Goldman J, Reeves S. Interprofessional collaboration: effects of practice-based interventions on professional practice and healthcare outcomes. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2009(3):Cd000072.

Tremblay D, Roberge D, Touati N, Maunsell E, Berbiche D. Effects of interdisciplinary teamwork on patient-reported experience of cancer care. BMC Health Serv Res. 2017;17(1):218.

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Mulvale G, Embrett M, Razavi SD. Gearing up’ to improve interprofessional collaboration in primary care: a systematic review and conceptual framework. BMC Fam Pract. 2016;17:83.

Gaboury I, Bujold M, Boon H, Moher D. Interprofessional collaboration within Canadian integrative healthcare clinics: key components. Soc Sci Med. 2009;69(5):707–15.

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Patel PH, Welsh C, Foggs MB. Improved asthma outcomes using a coordinated care approach in a large medical group. Dis Manag. 2004;7(2):102–11.

Renders CM, Valk GD, Griffin S, Wagner EH, Eijk JT, Assendelft WJ. Interventions to improve the management of diabetes mellitus in primary care, outpatient and community settings. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2001;2000(1):Cd001481.

PubMed   Google Scholar  

McAlister FA, Stewart S, Ferrua S, McMurray JJ. Multidisciplinary strategies for the management of heart failure patients at high risk for admission: a systematic review of randomized trials. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2004;44(4):810–9.

Propp KM, Apker J, Zabava Ford WS, Wallace N, Serbenski M, Hofmeister N. Meeting the complex needs of the health care team: identification of nurse-team communication practices perceived to enhance patient outcomes. Qual Health Res. 2010;20(1):15–28.

Pike AW, McHugh M, Canney KC, Miller NE, Reiley P, Seibert CP. A new architecture for quality assurance: nurse-physician collaboration. J Nurs Care Qual. 1993;7(3):1–8.

Uddin S, Hossain L, Kelaher M. Effect of physician collaboration network on hospitalization cost and readmission rate. Eur J Public Health. 2012;22(5):629–33.

Busse R, Scheller-Kreinsen D, Zentner A. Tackling chronic disease in Europe: strategies, interventions and challenges. WHO Regional Office Europe; 2010.

Campbell-Scherer D. Multimorbidity: a challenge for evidence-based medicine. Evid Based Med. 15. England2010. pp. 165-6.

Wijlhuizen GJ, Perenboom RJ, Garre FG, Heerkens YF, van Meeteren N. Impact of multimorbidity on functioning: evaluating the ICF Core Set approach in an empirical study of people with rheumatic diseases. J Rehabil Med. 2012;44(8):664–8.

van Oostrom SH, Picavet HS, de Bruin SR, Stirbu I, Korevaar JC, Schellevis FG, et al. Multimorbidity of chronic diseases and health care utilization in general practice. BMC Fam Pract. 2014;15:61.

Hutchison B, Levesque J-F, Strumpf E, Coyle N. Primary health care in Canada: systems in motion. Milbank Q. 2011;89(2):256–88.

Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-, Term C. Patients first: Action Plan for health care. Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care Toronto, ON; 2015.

Shaffer J, Wexler LF. Reducing low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels in an ambulatory care system. Results of a multidisciplinary collaborative practice lipid clinic compared with traditional physician-based care. Arch Intern Med. 1995;155(21):2330–5.

Chan DS, Callahan CW, Moreno C. Multidisciplinary education and management program for children with asthma. Am J health-system Pharmacy: AJHP : Official J Am Soc Health-System Pharmacists. 2001;58(15):1413–7.

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Gucciardi E, Espin S, Morganti A, Dorado L. Exploring interprofessional collaboration during the integration of diabetes teams into primary care. BMC Fam Pract. 2016;17:12.

Busari JO, Moll FM, Duits AJ. Understanding the impact of interprofessional collaboration on the quality of care: a case report from a small-scale resource limited health care environment. J Multidisciplinary Healthc. 2017;10:227–34.

Schepman S, Bakker D, Batenburg R. The role of health care professionals in collaboration in primary health care. Int J Integr Care. 2019;19:496.

Supper I, Catala O, Lustman M, Chemla C, Bourgueil Y, Letrilliart L. Interprofessional collaboration in primary health care: a review of facilitators and barriers perceived by involved actors. J Public Health. 2015;37(4):716–27.

CAS   Google Scholar  

Seaton J, Jones A, Johnston C, Francis K. Allied health professionals’ perceptions of interprofessional collaboration in primary health care: an integrative review. J Interprof Care. 2021;35(2):217–28.

El-Awaisi A, Awaisu A, Aboelbaha S, Abedini Z, Johnson J, Al-Abdulla SA. Perspectives of Healthcare Professionals toward Interprofessional Collaboration in primary care settings in a Middle Eastern Country. J Multidiscip Healthc. 2021;14:363–79.

PHCC. Primary Health Care Corporation Corporate Strategic Plan (2019–2023): a healthier future for our families. Primary Health Care Corporation; 2019.

Kyngäs HA, Mikkonen K, Kääriäinen M. The application of content analysis in Nursing Science Research. The application of content analysis in Nursing Science Research; 2020.

Bosch B, Mansell H. Interprofessional collaboration in health care: lessons to be learned from competitive sports. Can Pharmacists J / Revue des Pharmaciens Du Can. 2015;148(4):176–9.

Sangaleti C, Schveitzer MC, Peduzzi M, Zoboli ELCP, Soares CB. Experiences and shared meaning of teamwork and interprofessional collaboration among health care professionals in primary health care settings: a systematic review. JBI Evid Synthesis. 2017;15(11):2723–88.

Müller C, Zimmermann L, Körner M. Förderfaktoren Und Barrieren Interprofessioneller Kooperation in Rehabilitationskliniken – Eine Befragung Von Führungskräften. Rehabilitation (Stuttg). 2014;53(06):390–5.

Rawlinson C, Carron T, Cohidon C, Arditi C, Hong QN, Pluye P, et al. An overview of reviews on Interprofessional Collaboration in primary care: barriers and facilitators. Int J Integr Care. 2021;21(2):32.

Anderson JE, Kodate N, Walters R, Dodds, AJIjfqihc. Can incident reporting improve safety? Healthc Practitioners’ Views Eff Incident Report. 2013;25(2):141–50.

Waring, JJJSs. Medicine. Beyond blame: cultural barriers to medical incident reporting. 2005;60(9):1927–35.

Oandasan IF, Conn LG, Lingard L, Karim A, Jakubovicz D, Whitehead C et al. The impact of space and time on interprofessional teamwork in Canadian primary health care settings: implications for health care reform. 2009;10(2):151–62.

Girard MA. Interprofessional education and collaborative practice policies and law: an international review and reflective questions. Hum Resour Health. 2021;19(1):9.

Ministry of Public Health. Department of Healthcare Professions 2020 [ https://dhp.moph.gov.qa/en/Pages/Home.aspx

San Martín-Rodríguez L, Beaulieu M-D, D’Amour D, Ferrada-Videla, MJJoic. Determinants Success Collaboration: Rev Theoretical Empir Stud. 2005;19(sup1):132–47.

Dower C, Moore J, Langelier MJHA. It is time to restructure health professions scope-of-practice regulations to remove barriers to care. 2013;32(11):1971–6.

Safriet BJJYJoR. Closing the gap between can and may in health-care providers’ scopes of practice: a primer for policymakers. 2002;19:301.

Guindo LA, Wagner M, Baltussen R, Rindress D, van Til J, Kind P et al. From efficacy to equity: literature review of decision criteria for resource allocation and healthcare decisionmaking. 2012;10(1):1–13.

O’Reilly P, Lee SH, O’Sullivan M, Cullen W, Kennedy C, MacFarlane A. Assessing the facilitators and barriers of interdisciplinary team working in primary care using normalisation process theory: an integrative review. PLoS ONE. 2017;12(5):e0177026.

Hills M, Mullett J, Carroll S. Community-based participatory action research: transforming multidisciplinary practice in primary health care. Rev Panam Salud Publica. 2007;21(2–3):125–35.

Shaw A, de Lusignan S, Rowlands G. Do primary care professionals work as a team: a qualitative study. J Interprof Care. 2005;19(4):396–405.

Stavropoulou C, Doherty C, Tosey PJTMQ. How effective are incident-reporting systems for improving patient safety? A systematic literature review. 2015;93(4):826–66.

Herzer KR, Mirrer M, Xie Y, Steppan J, Li M, Jung C et al. Patient safety reporting systems: sustained quality improvement using a multidisciplinary team and good catch awards. 2012;38(8):339–AP1.

Smiley RA, McCarthy CJJNR. A mixed-methods study of gender differences in nurse reporting and nurse discipline. 2016;7(3):33–40.

Edie Brous RN JJJoNL. The criminalization of unintentional error: implications for TAANA. 2008;12(1):5.

Gorini A, Miglioretti M, Pravettoni, GJJoeicp. A new perspective on blame culture: an experimental study. 2012;18(3):671–5.

Catino, MJJoc. management c. A review of literature: individual blame vs. organizational function logics in accident analysis. 2008;16(1):53–62.

Association of American Medical Colleges. Interprofessional Education 2010 [ https://www.aamc.org/what-we-do/mission-areas/medical-education/interprofessional-education

Lown BA, Kryworuchko J, Bieber C, Lillie DM, Kelly C, Berger B et al. Continuing professional development for interprofessional teams supporting patients in healthcare decision making. 2011;25(6):401–8.

Lown BA, Manning CFJAM. The Schwartz Center rounds: evaluation of an interdisciplinary approach to enhancing patient-centered communication, teamwork, and provider support. 2010;85(6):1073–81.

Download references

Acknowledgements

Thanks to Dr. Jessie Johnson from the University of Calgary-Qatar for her initial support with this project. Also, we would like to thank all health professionals from primary health care who volunteered to participate in this study.

This publication was supported by Qatar University Student Grant [QUST-1-CPH-2020-25]/ [QUST-2-CPH-2019-3]. The findings achieved herein are solely the responsibility of the author[s].

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Clinical Pharmacy and Practice, College of Pharmacy, QU Health, Qatar University, Doha, Qatar

Alla El-Awaisi, Abier Mohamed Elboshra, Kawthar Hasan Jasim, Alzahraa Fathi AboAlward & Ahmed Awaisu

Hamad Medical Cooperation, Doha, Qatar

Ola Hasan Yakti

Primary Health Care Corporation, Doha, Qatar

Raghad Walid Shalfawi & Noora Al Mutawa

College of Pharmacy, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Canada

Daniel Rainkie

Department of Clinical Academic Education, College of Medicine, QU Health, Qatar University, Doha, Qatar

Noora Al Mutawa

Division of Medical Education, Weill Cornell Medicine – Qatar, Doha, Qatar

Stella Major

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

AE contributed to the conception of this research idea, study design, data collection, data analysis, and including supporting all stages of this paper. AME, KJ, AAZ, RS accompanied AE in the focus groups. AME, KJ, AAZ, RS, AA, DR, NA, SM supported with the study design, study conceptualization, analysis, and interpretation of findings. OY supported with the data validation, analysis, and interpretation of findings. All authors contributed to drafting the manuscript and reviewed and approved the final version of the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Alla El-Awaisi .

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate.

Ethics approval was obtained from the PHCC Research Committee (PHCC/RC/18/12/001) and the Qatar University Institutional Review Board (QU-IRB 1084-EA/19). All participants received information leaflet about the study and that their participation in the qualitative study would be voluntarily and will be treated confidentially. All participants signed and dated the written informed consent form. The study was carried out in accordance to the relevant guidelines and regulations.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

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

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary Material 1

Rights and permissions.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if you modified the licensed material. You do not have permission under this licence to share adapted material derived from this article or parts of it. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

El-Awaisi, A., Yakti, O.H., Elboshra, A.M. et al. Facilitators and barriers to interprofessional collaboration among health professionals in primary healthcare centers in Qatar: a qualitative exploration using the “Gears” model. BMC Prim. Care 25 , 316 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12875-024-02537-8

Download citation

Received : 08 December 2023

Accepted : 22 July 2024

Published : 27 August 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s12875-024-02537-8

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

• Interprofesisonal collaboration
• Interprofessional education
• Collaborative practice
• Primary care
• “Gears” Conceptual Model
• Perpsectives
• Qualitative
• Middle East

BMC Primary Care

ISSN: 2731-4553

• General enquiries: [email protected]

• Alzheimer's disease & dementia
• Arthritis & Rheumatism
• Attention deficit disorders
• Autism spectrum disorders
• Biomedical technology
• Diseases, Conditions, Syndromes
• Endocrinology & Metabolism
• Gastroenterology
• Gerontology & Geriatrics
• Health informatics
• Inflammatory disorders
• Medical economics
• Medical research
• Medications
• Neuroscience
• Obstetrics & gynaecology
• Oncology & Cancer
• Ophthalmology
• Overweight & Obesity
• Parkinson's & Movement disorders
• Psychology & Psychiatry
• Radiology & Imaging
• Sleep disorders
• Sports medicine & Kinesiology
• Vaccination
• Breast cancer
• Cardiovascular disease
• Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease
• Colon cancer
• Coronary artery disease
• Heart attack
• Heart disease
• High blood pressure
• Kidney disease
• Lung cancer
• Multiple sclerosis
• Myocardial infarction
• Ovarian cancer
• Post traumatic stress disorder
• Rheumatoid arthritis
• Schizophrenia
• Skin cancer
• Type 2 diabetes
• Full List »

share this!

August 28, 2024

This article has been reviewed according to Science X's editorial process and policies . Editors have highlighted the following attributes while ensuring the content's credibility:

fact-checked

peer-reviewed publication

trusted source

New findings on tuberculosis could change how we treat inflammatory disorders

by Katherine Fenz, Rockefeller University

Tuberculosis (TB) is a confounding scourge. It's the leading cause of death from infectious disease in the world, and yet it's estimated that those deaths represent perhaps 5% of infections with Mycobacterium tuberculosis (Mtb). Antibiotics can take credit for saving the lives of some of those with Mtb, but a chasm nevertheless persists between the prevalence of infection and the targeted severity of its impact. A growing body of evidence suggests genetic vulnerabilities to TB account for that gap.

Now researchers from The Rockefeller University have found another rare mutation that leaves its carriers much more likely to become ill with TB—but, curiously, not with other infectious diseases. This finding, recently published in Nature , may upend long held assumptions about the immune system .

It's long been known that an acquired deficiency of a pro-inflammatory cytokine called TNF is linked to an increased risk of developing TB. The current study, led by Rockefeller's Stéphanie Boisson-Dupuis and Jean-Laurent Casanova, revealed a genetic cause of TNF deficiency, as well as the underlying mechanism: a lack of TNF incapacitates a specific immune process in the lungs, leading to severe—but surprisingly targeted—illness.

The findings suggest that TNF, long considered a key galvanizer of the immune response, might actually play a much narrower role—a discovery with far-reaching clinical implications.

"The past 40 years of scientific literature have attributed a wide variety of pro-inflammatory functions to TNF," says Casanova, head of the St. Giles Laboratory of Human Genetics of Infectious Diseases. "But beyond protecting the lungs against TB, it may have a limited role in inflammation and immunity."

Casanova's lab has been studying the genetic causes of TB for more than two decades through field work in several countries and a wide network of collaborating physicians across the world. They maintain an ever-growing database of whole-exome sequences from a global pool of patients—more than 25,000 people to date. Of those, some 2,000 have had TB.

Over the years they've identified several rare genetic mutations that render some people vulnerable to TB . For example, mutations in a gene called CYBB can disable an immune mechanism called the respiratory burst, which produces chemicals called reactive oxygen species (ROS). Despite its pulmonary-sounding name, the respiratory burst takes place in immune cells throughout the body.

ROS help pathogen-consuming white blood cells called phagocytes (from the Greek for "eating") to destroy the invaders they've devoured. If ROS aren't produced, those pathogens can thrive unchecked, leading to debilitating complications. As a result, carriers of this CYBB mutation become vulnerable to not just TB but to a wide variety of infectious diseases.

For the current study, the team suspected that a similar inborn error of immunity may lay behind the severe, recurring TB infections experienced by two people in Colombia—a 28-year-old woman and her 32-year-old cousin—who had been repeatedly hospitalized with significant lung conditions. In each cycle, they initially responded well to anti-TB antibiotics, but within a year, they were sick again.

Puzzlingly, however, their long-term health records showed that their immune systems functioned normally, and that they were otherwise healthy.

A telling deficiency

To find out why they were particularly prone to getting TB, the researchers performed whole-exome sequencing on the two, as well as a genetic analysis of their respective parents and relatives.

The two were the only members of their extended family with a mutation in the TNF gene, which encodes for proteins linked to the regulation of a variety of biological processes. Short for " tumor necrosis factor ," increased TNF production is also associated with a variety of conditions, including septic shock, cancer, rheumatoid arthritis, and cachexia, which causes dangerous weight loss.

The protein is largely secreted by a type of phagocyte called a macrophage, which relies on the ROS molecules generated by the respiratory burst to finish off pathogens they've consumed.

In these two patients, the TNF gene failed to function, preventing the respiratory burst from occurring, and thus the creation of ROS molecules. As a result, the patients' alveolar macrophages, located in their lungs, were overrun with Mtb.

"We knew that the respiratory burst was important for protecting people against various types of mycobacteria, but now we know that TNF is actually regulating the process," says Boisson-Dupuis. "And when it's missing in alveolar macrophages, people will be susceptible to airborne TB."

She adds, "It's very surprising that the people we studied are adults who have never been sick with other infectious diseases, despite being repeatedly exposed to their microbes. They are apparently selectively at risk for TB."

Treatment potential

The discovery also solves a long-standing mystery about why TNF inhibitors, which are used to treat autoimmune and inflammatory diseases, raise the chances of contracting TB. Without TNF, a key part of the defense against it is defunct.

The findings may lead to a radical reassessment of TNF's role in immune function—and new treatment possibilities.

"TNF is required for immunity against Mtb, but it seems to be redundant for immunity against many other pathogens," Casanova says. "So the question is, what other pro-inflammatory cytokines are doing the jobs we thought TNF was doing? If we can discover that, we may be able to block these cytokines rather than TNF to treat diseases where inflammation plays a role."

Explore further

Feedback to editors

Not just a 'bad guy': Researchers discover neuroprotective function of Tau protein

4 hours ago

Study shows how common genetic variants in Black Americans increase Alzheimer's risk

6 hours ago

Silicon exoskeletons for blood cells: Engineered blood cells successfully transfused between species

Neuroscientists explore the intersection of music and memory

7 hours ago

Scientists discover a new cardiovascular risk factor and identify a drug able to reduce its effects

Norovirus study shows how bile acids in breast milk affect newborn gut health

8 hours ago

Immunotherapy research offers new hope for children with primary liver carcinomas

Study unveils novel treatment for blocking SARS-CoV-2 entry into cells

9 hours ago

Novel pathway could lead to potential treatment for metabolic liver disease

Music study links dulled emotional reactions in anhedonia with prolonged activity of the brain's attentional networks

Related stories.

Newly discovered genetic malfunction causes rare lung disease

Feb 6, 2024

Scientists discover a population of macrophages that participate in alveolar regeneration

Aug 2, 2024

Patient with unusually severe infection reveals a rare type of immune deficiency

Jan 29, 2020

How one patient's rare mutation helped solve a mycobacterial mystery

Mar 10, 2021

Genetic mutation identified as culprit in rare infectious disease

May 28, 2018

Missing immune molecule may explain why some HPV patients sprout giant horn-like growths

Sep 14, 2021

Recommended for you

Navigating the digestive tract: Study offers first detailed map of the small intestine

Aug 29, 2024

Gene therapy gets a turbo boost from researchers

High-resolution brain tumor mapping reveals possible reason why some patients don't respond to new drug

Mechanical stress in the borderzone: A new source of cardiac inflammation

Let us know if there is a problem with our content.

Use this form if you have come across a typo, inaccuracy or would like to send an edit request for the content on this page. For general inquiries, please use our contact form . For general feedback, use the public comments section below (please adhere to guidelines ).

Please select the most appropriate category to facilitate processing of your request

Thank you for taking time to provide your feedback to the editors.

Your feedback is important to us. However, we do not guarantee individual replies due to the high volume of messages.

E-mail the story

Your email address is used only to let the recipient know who sent the email. Neither your address nor the recipient's address will be used for any other purpose. The information you enter will appear in your e-mail message and is not retained by Medical Xpress in any form.

Newsletter sign up

Get weekly and/or daily updates delivered to your inbox. You can unsubscribe at any time and we'll never share your details to third parties.

More information Privacy policy

Donate and enjoy an ad-free experience

We keep our content available to everyone. Consider supporting Science X's mission by getting a premium account.

E-mail newsletter