research findings report

• Affiliate Program

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

How to Write the Results/Findings Section in Research

What is the research paper Results section and what does it do?

The Results section of a scientific research paper represents the core findings of a study derived from the methods applied to gather and analyze information. It presents these findings in a logical sequence without bias or interpretation from the author, setting up the reader for later interpretation and evaluation in the Discussion section. A major purpose of the Results section is to break down the data into sentences that show its significance to the research question(s).

The Results section appears third in the section sequence in most scientific papers. It follows the presentation of the Methods and Materials and is presented before the Discussion section —although the Results and Discussion are presented together in many journals. This section answers the basic question “What did you find in your research?”

What is included in the Results section?

The Results section should include the findings of your study and ONLY the findings of your study. The findings include:

• Data presented in tables, charts, graphs, and other figures (may be placed into the text or on separate pages at the end of the manuscript)
• A contextual analysis of this data explaining its meaning in sentence form
• All data that corresponds to the central research question(s)
• All secondary findings (secondary outcomes, subgroup analyses, etc.)

If the scope of the study is broad, or if you studied a variety of variables, or if the methodology used yields a wide range of different results, the author should present only those results that are most relevant to the research question stated in the Introduction section .

As a general rule, any information that does not present the direct findings or outcome of the study should be left out of this section. Unless the journal requests that authors combine the Results and Discussion sections, explanations and interpretations should be omitted from the Results.

How are the results organized?

The best way to organize your Results section is “logically.” One logical and clear method of organizing research results is to provide them alongside the research questions—within each research question, present the type of data that addresses that research question.

Let’s look at an example. Your research question is based on a survey among patients who were treated at a hospital and received postoperative care. Let’s say your first research question is:

“What do hospital patients over age 55 think about postoperative care?”

This can actually be represented as a heading within your Results section, though it might be presented as a statement rather than a question:

Attitudes towards postoperative care in patients over the age of 55

Now present the results that address this specific research question first. In this case, perhaps a table illustrating data from a survey. Likert items can be included in this example. Tables can also present standard deviations, probabilities, correlation matrices, etc.

Following this, present a content analysis, in words, of one end of the spectrum of the survey or data table. In our example case, start with the POSITIVE survey responses regarding postoperative care, using descriptive phrases. For example:

“Sixty-five percent of patients over 55 responded positively to the question “ Are you satisfied with your hospital’s postoperative care ?” (Fig. 2)

Include other results such as subcategory analyses. The amount of textual description used will depend on how much interpretation of tables and figures is necessary and how many examples the reader needs in order to understand the significance of your research findings.

Next, present a content analysis of another part of the spectrum of the same research question, perhaps the NEGATIVE or NEUTRAL responses to the survey. For instance:

  “As Figure 1 shows, 15 out of 60 patients in Group A responded negatively to Question 2.”

After you have assessed the data in one figure and explained it sufficiently, move on to your next research question. For example:

  “How does patient satisfaction correspond to in-hospital improvements made to postoperative care?”

This kind of data may be presented through a figure or set of figures (for instance, a paired T-test table).

Explain the data you present, here in a table, with a concise content analysis:

“The p-value for the comparison between the before and after groups of patients was .03% (Fig. 2), indicating that the greater the dissatisfaction among patients, the more frequent the improvements that were made to postoperative care.”

Let’s examine another example of a Results section from a study on plant tolerance to heavy metal stress . In the Introduction section, the aims of the study are presented as “determining the physiological and morphological responses of Allium cepa L. towards increased cadmium toxicity” and “evaluating its potential to accumulate the metal and its associated environmental consequences.” The Results section presents data showing how these aims are achieved in tables alongside a content analysis, beginning with an overview of the findings:

“Cadmium caused inhibition of root and leave elongation, with increasing effects at higher exposure doses (Fig. 1a-c).”

The figure containing this data is cited in parentheses. Note that this author has combined three graphs into one single figure. Separating the data into separate graphs focusing on specific aspects makes it easier for the reader to assess the findings, and consolidating this information into one figure saves space and makes it easy to locate the most relevant results.

Following this overall summary, the relevant data in the tables is broken down into greater detail in text form in the Results section.

• “Results on the bio-accumulation of cadmium were found to be the highest (17.5 mg kgG1) in the bulb, when the concentration of cadmium in the solution was 1×10G2 M and lowest (0.11 mg kgG1) in the leaves when the concentration was 1×10G3 M.”

Captioning and Referencing Tables and Figures

Tables and figures are central components of your Results section and you need to carefully think about the most effective way to use graphs and tables to present your findings . Therefore, it is crucial to know how to write strong figure captions and to refer to them within the text of the Results section.

The most important advice one can give here as well as throughout the paper is to check the requirements and standards of the journal to which you are submitting your work. Every journal has its own design and layout standards, which you can find in the author instructions on the target journal’s website. Perusing a journal’s published articles will also give you an idea of the proper number, size, and complexity of your figures.

Regardless of which format you use, the figures should be placed in the order they are referenced in the Results section and be as clear and easy to understand as possible. If there are multiple variables being considered (within one or more research questions), it can be a good idea to split these up into separate figures. Subsequently, these can be referenced and analyzed under separate headings and paragraphs in the text.

To create a caption, consider the research question being asked and change it into a phrase. For instance, if one question is “Which color did participants choose?”, the caption might be “Color choice by participant group.” Or in our last research paper example, where the question was “What is the concentration of cadmium in different parts of the onion after 14 days?” the caption reads:

 “Fig. 1(a-c): Mean concentration of Cd determined in (a) bulbs, (b) leaves, and (c) roots of onions after a 14-day period.”

Steps for Composing the Results Section

Because each study is unique, there is no one-size-fits-all approach when it comes to designing a strategy for structuring and writing the section of a research paper where findings are presented. The content and layout of this section will be determined by the specific area of research, the design of the study and its particular methodologies, and the guidelines of the target journal and its editors. However, the following steps can be used to compose the results of most scientific research studies and are essential for researchers who are new to preparing a manuscript for publication or who need a reminder of how to construct the Results section.

Step 1 : Consult the guidelines or instructions that the target journal or publisher provides authors and read research papers it has published, especially those with similar topics, methods, or results to your study.

• The guidelines will generally outline specific requirements for the results or findings section, and the published articles will provide sound examples of successful approaches.
• Note length limitations on restrictions on content. For instance, while many journals require the Results and Discussion sections to be separate, others do not—qualitative research papers often include results and interpretations in the same section (“Results and Discussion”).
• Reading the aims and scope in the journal’s “ guide for authors ” section and understanding the interests of its readers will be invaluable in preparing to write the Results section.

Step 2 : Consider your research results in relation to the journal’s requirements and catalogue your results.

• Focus on experimental results and other findings that are especially relevant to your research questions and objectives and include them even if they are unexpected or do not support your ideas and hypotheses.
• Catalogue your findings—use subheadings to streamline and clarify your report. This will help you avoid excessive and peripheral details as you write and also help your reader understand and remember your findings. Create appendices that might interest specialists but prove too long or distracting for other readers.
• Decide how you will structure of your results. You might match the order of the research questions and hypotheses to your results, or you could arrange them according to the order presented in the Methods section. A chronological order or even a hierarchy of importance or meaningful grouping of main themes or categories might prove effective. Consider your audience, evidence, and most importantly, the objectives of your research when choosing a structure for presenting your findings.

Step 3 : Design figures and tables to present and illustrate your data.

• Tables and figures should be numbered according to the order in which they are mentioned in the main text of the paper.
• Information in figures should be relatively self-explanatory (with the aid of captions), and their design should include all definitions and other information necessary for readers to understand the findings without reading all of the text.
• Use tables and figures as a focal point to tell a clear and informative story about your research and avoid repeating information. But remember that while figures clarify and enhance the text, they cannot replace it.

Step 4 : Draft your Results section using the findings and figures you have organized.

• The goal is to communicate this complex information as clearly and precisely as possible; precise and compact phrases and sentences are most effective.
• In the opening paragraph of this section, restate your research questions or aims to focus the reader’s attention to what the results are trying to show. It is also a good idea to summarize key findings at the end of this section to create a logical transition to the interpretation and discussion that follows.
• Try to write in the past tense and the active voice to relay the findings since the research has already been done and the agent is usually clear. This will ensure that your explanations are also clear and logical.
• Make sure that any specialized terminology or abbreviation you have used here has been defined and clarified in the  Introduction section .

Step 5 : Review your draft; edit and revise until it reports results exactly as you would like to have them reported to your readers.

• Double-check the accuracy and consistency of all the data, as well as all of the visual elements included.
• Read your draft aloud to catch language errors (grammar, spelling, and mechanics), awkward phrases, and missing transitions.
• Ensure that your results are presented in the best order to focus on objectives and prepare readers for interpretations, valuations, and recommendations in the Discussion section . Look back over the paper’s Introduction and background while anticipating the Discussion and Conclusion sections to ensure that the presentation of your results is consistent and effective.
• Consider seeking additional guidance on your paper. Find additional readers to look over your Results section and see if it can be improved in any way. Peers, professors, or qualified experts can provide valuable insights.

One excellent option is to use a professional English proofreading and editing service  such as Wordvice, including our paper editing service . With hundreds of qualified editors from dozens of scientific fields, Wordvice has helped thousands of authors revise their manuscripts and get accepted into their target journals. Read more about the  proofreading and editing process  before proceeding with getting academic editing services and manuscript editing services for your manuscript.

As the representation of your study’s data output, the Results section presents the core information in your research paper. By writing with clarity and conciseness and by highlighting and explaining the crucial findings of their study, authors increase the impact and effectiveness of their research manuscripts.

For more articles and videos on writing your research manuscript, visit Wordvice’s Resources page.

Wordvice Resources

• How to Write a Research Paper Introduction 
• Which Verb Tenses to Use in a Research Paper
• How to Write an Abstract for a Research Paper
• How to Write a Research Paper Title
• Useful Phrases for Academic Writing
• Common Transition Terms in Academic Papers
• Active and Passive Voice in Research Papers
• 100+ Verbs That Will Make Your Research Writing Amazing
• Tips for Paraphrasing in Research Papers

• USC Libraries
• Research Guides

Organizing Your Social Sciences Research Paper

• 7. The Results
• 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 results section is where you report the findings of your study based upon the methodology [or methodologies] you applied to gather information. The results section should state the findings of the research arranged in a logical sequence without bias or interpretation. A section describing results should be particularly detailed if your paper includes data generated from your own research.

Annesley, Thomas M. "Show Your Cards: The Results Section and the Poker Game." Clinical Chemistry 56 (July 2010): 1066-1070.

Importance of a Good Results Section

When formulating the results section, it's important to remember that the results of a study do not prove anything . Findings can only confirm or reject the hypothesis underpinning your study. However, the act of articulating the results helps you to understand the problem from within, to break it into pieces, and to view the research problem from various perspectives.

The page length of this section is set by the amount and types of data to be reported . Be concise. Use non-textual elements appropriately, such as figures and tables, to present findings more effectively. In deciding what data to describe in your results section, you must clearly distinguish information that would normally be included in a research paper from any raw data or other content that could be included as an appendix. In general, raw data that has not been summarized should not be included in the main text of your paper unless requested to do so by your professor.

Avoid providing data that is not critical to answering the research question . The background information you described in the introduction section should provide the reader with any additional context or explanation needed to understand the results. A good strategy is to always re-read the background section of your paper after you have written up your results to ensure that the reader has enough context to understand the results [and, later, how you interpreted the results in the discussion section of your paper that follows].

Bavdekar, Sandeep B. and Sneha Chandak. "Results: Unraveling the Findings." Journal of the Association of Physicians of India 63 (September 2015): 44-46; Brett, Paul. "A Genre Analysis of the Results Section of Sociology Articles." English for Specific Speakers 13 (1994): 47-59; Go to English for Specific Purposes on ScienceDirect;Burton, Neil et al. Doing Your Education Research Project . Los Angeles, CA: SAGE, 2008; Results. The Structure, Format, Content, and Style of a Journal-Style Scientific Paper. Department of Biology. Bates College; Kretchmer, Paul. Twelve Steps to Writing an Effective Results Section. San Francisco Edit; "Reporting Findings." In Making Sense of Social Research Malcolm Williams, editor. (London;: SAGE Publications, 2003) pp. 188-207.

Structure and Writing Style

I.  Organization and Approach

For most research papers in the social and behavioral sciences, there are two possible ways of organizing the results . Both approaches are appropriate in how you report your findings, but use only one approach.

• Present a synopsis of the results followed by an explanation of key findings . This approach can be used to highlight important findings. For example, you may have noticed an unusual correlation between two variables during the analysis of your findings. It is appropriate to highlight this finding in the results section. However, speculating as to why this correlation exists and offering a hypothesis about what may be happening belongs in the discussion section of your paper.
• Present a result and then explain it, before presenting the next result then explaining it, and so on, then end with an overall synopsis . This is the preferred approach if you have multiple results of equal significance. It is more common in longer papers because it helps the reader to better understand each finding. In this model, it is helpful to provide a brief conclusion that ties each of the findings together and provides a narrative bridge to the discussion section of the your paper.

NOTE:   Just as the literature review should be arranged under conceptual categories rather than systematically describing each source, you should also organize your findings under key themes related to addressing the research problem. This can be done under either format noted above [i.e., a thorough explanation of the key results or a sequential, thematic description and explanation of each finding].

II.  Content

In general, the content of your results section should include the following:

• Introductory context for understanding the results by restating the research problem underpinning your study . This is useful in re-orientating the reader's focus back to the research problem after having read a review of the literature and your explanation of the methods used for gathering and analyzing information.
• Inclusion of non-textual elements, such as, figures, charts, photos, maps, tables, etc. to further illustrate key findings, if appropriate . Rather than relying entirely on descriptive text, consider how your findings can be presented visually. This is a helpful way of condensing a lot of data into one place that can then be referred to in the text. Consider referring to appendices if there is a lot of non-textual elements.
• A systematic description of your results, highlighting for the reader observations that are most relevant to the topic under investigation . Not all results that emerge from the methodology used to gather information may be related to answering the " So What? " question. Do not confuse observations with interpretations; observations in this context refers to highlighting important findings you discovered through a process of reviewing prior literature and gathering data.
• The page length of your results section is guided by the amount and types of data to be reported . However, focus on findings that are important and related to addressing the research problem. It is not uncommon to have unanticipated results that are not relevant to answering the research question. This is not to say that you don't acknowledge tangential findings and, in fact, can be referred to as areas for further research in the conclusion of your paper. However, spending time in the results section describing tangential findings clutters your overall results section and distracts the reader.
• A short paragraph that concludes the results section by synthesizing the key findings of the study . Highlight the most important findings you want readers to remember as they transition into the discussion section. This is particularly important if, for example, there are many results to report, the findings are complicated or unanticipated, or they are impactful or actionable in some way [i.e., able to be pursued in a feasible way applied to practice].

NOTE:   Always use the past tense when referring to your study's findings. Reference to findings should always be described as having already happened because the method used to gather the information has been completed.

III.  Problems to Avoid

When writing the results section, avoid doing the following :

• Discussing or interpreting your results . Save this for the discussion section of your paper, although where appropriate, you should compare or contrast specific results to those found in other studies [e.g., "Similar to the work of Smith [1990], one of the findings of this study is the strong correlation between motivation and academic achievement...."].
• Reporting background information or attempting to explain your findings. This should have been done in your introduction section, but don't panic! Often the results of a study point to the need for additional background information or to explain the topic further, so don't think you did something wrong. Writing up research is rarely a linear process. Always revise your introduction as needed.
• Ignoring negative results . A negative result generally refers to a finding that does not support the underlying assumptions of your study. Do not ignore them. Document these findings and then state in your discussion section why you believe a negative result emerged from your study. Note that negative results, and how you handle them, can give you an opportunity to write a more engaging discussion section, therefore, don't be hesitant to highlight them.
• Including raw data or intermediate calculations . Ask your professor if you need to include any raw data generated by your study, such as transcripts from interviews or data files. If raw data is to be included, place it in an appendix or set of appendices that are referred to in the text.
• Be as factual and concise as possible in reporting your findings . Do not use phrases that are vague or non-specific, such as, "appeared to be greater than other variables..." or "demonstrates promising trends that...." Subjective modifiers should be explained in the discussion section of the paper [i.e., why did one variable appear greater? Or, how does the finding demonstrate a promising trend?].
• Presenting the same data or repeating the same information more than once . If you want to highlight a particular finding, it is appropriate to do so in the results section. However, you should emphasize its significance in relation to addressing the research problem in the discussion section. Do not repeat it in your results section because you can do that in the conclusion of your paper.
• Confusing figures with tables . Be sure to properly label any non-textual elements in your paper. Don't call a chart an illustration or a figure a table. If you are not sure, go here .

Annesley, Thomas M. "Show Your Cards: The Results Section and the Poker Game." Clinical Chemistry 56 (July 2010): 1066-1070; Bavdekar, Sandeep B. and Sneha Chandak. "Results: Unraveling the Findings." Journal of the Association of Physicians of India 63 (September 2015): 44-46; Burton, Neil et al. Doing Your Education Research Project . Los Angeles, CA: SAGE, 2008;  Caprette, David R. Writing Research Papers. Experimental Biosciences Resources. Rice University; Hancock, Dawson R. and Bob Algozzine. Doing Case Study Research: A Practical Guide for Beginning Researchers . 2nd ed. New York: Teachers College Press, 2011; Introduction to Nursing Research: Reporting Research Findings. Nursing Research: Open Access Nursing Research and Review Articles. (January 4, 2012); Kretchmer, Paul. Twelve Steps to Writing an Effective Results Section. San Francisco Edit ; Ng, K. H. and W. C. Peh. "Writing the Results." Singapore Medical Journal 49 (2008): 967-968; Reporting Research Findings. Wilder Research, in partnership with the Minnesota Department of Human Services. (February 2009); Results. The Structure, Format, Content, and Style of a Journal-Style Scientific Paper. Department of Biology. Bates College; Schafer, Mickey S. Writing the Results. Thesis Writing in the Sciences. Course Syllabus. University of Florida.

Writing Tip

Why Don't I Just Combine the Results Section with the Discussion Section?

It's not unusual to find articles in scholarly social science journals where the author(s) have combined a description of the findings with a discussion about their significance and implications. You could do this. However, if you are inexperienced writing research papers, consider creating two distinct sections for each section in your paper as a way to better organize your thoughts and, by extension, your paper. Think of the results section as the place where you report what your study found; think of the discussion section as the place where you interpret the information and answer the "So What?" question. As you become more skilled writing research papers, you can consider melding the results of your study with a discussion of its implications.

Driscoll, Dana Lynn and Aleksandra Kasztalska. Writing the Experimental Report: Methods, Results, and Discussion. The Writing Lab and The OWL. Purdue University.

• << Previous: Insiderness
• Next: Using Non-Textual Elements >>
• Last Updated: May 25, 2024 4:09 PM
• URL: https://libguides.usc.edu/writingguide

• Privacy Policy

Home » Research Results Section – Writing Guide and Examples

Research Results Section – Writing Guide and Examples

Table of Contents

Research Results

Research results refer to the findings and conclusions derived from a systematic investigation or study conducted to answer a specific question or hypothesis. These results are typically presented in a written report or paper and can include various forms of data such as numerical data, qualitative data, statistics, charts, graphs, and visual aids.

Results Section in Research

The results section of the research paper presents the findings of the study. It is the part of the paper where the researcher reports the data collected during the study and analyzes it to draw conclusions.

In the results section, the researcher should describe the data that was collected, the statistical analysis performed, and the findings of the study. It is important to be objective and not interpret the data in this section. Instead, the researcher should report the data as accurately and objectively as possible.

Structure of Research Results Section

The structure of the research results section can vary depending on the type of research conducted, but in general, it should contain the following components:

• Introduction: The introduction should provide an overview of the study, its aims, and its research questions. It should also briefly explain the methodology used to conduct the study.
• Data presentation : This section presents the data collected during the study. It may include tables, graphs, or other visual aids to help readers better understand the data. The data presented should be organized in a logical and coherent way, with headings and subheadings used to help guide the reader.
• Data analysis: In this section, the data presented in the previous section are analyzed and interpreted. The statistical tests used to analyze the data should be clearly explained, and the results of the tests should be presented in a way that is easy to understand.
• Discussion of results : This section should provide an interpretation of the results of the study, including a discussion of any unexpected findings. The discussion should also address the study’s research questions and explain how the results contribute to the field of study.
• Limitations: This section should acknowledge any limitations of the study, such as sample size, data collection methods, or other factors that may have influenced the results.
• Conclusions: The conclusions should summarize the main findings of the study and provide a final interpretation of the results. The conclusions should also address the study’s research questions and explain how the results contribute to the field of study.
• Recommendations : This section may provide recommendations for future research based on the study’s findings. It may also suggest practical applications for the study’s results in real-world settings.

Outline of Research Results Section

The following is an outline of the key components typically included in the Results section:

I. Introduction

• A brief overview of the research objectives and hypotheses
• A statement of the research question

II. Descriptive statistics

• Summary statistics (e.g., mean, standard deviation) for each variable analyzed
• Frequencies and percentages for categorical variables

III. Inferential statistics

• Results of statistical analyses, including tests of hypotheses
• Tables or figures to display statistical results

IV. Effect sizes and confidence intervals

• Effect sizes (e.g., Cohen’s d, odds ratio) to quantify the strength of the relationship between variables
• Confidence intervals to estimate the range of plausible values for the effect size

V. Subgroup analyses

• Results of analyses that examined differences between subgroups (e.g., by gender, age, treatment group)

VI. Limitations and assumptions

• Discussion of any limitations of the study and potential sources of bias
• Assumptions made in the statistical analyses

VII. Conclusions

• A summary of the key findings and their implications
• A statement of whether the hypotheses were supported or not
• Suggestions for future research

Example of Research Results Section

An Example of a Research Results Section could be:

• This study sought to examine the relationship between sleep quality and academic performance in college students.
• Hypothesis : College students who report better sleep quality will have higher GPAs than those who report poor sleep quality.
• Methodology : Participants completed a survey about their sleep habits and academic performance.

II. Participants

• Participants were college students (N=200) from a mid-sized public university in the United States.
• The sample was evenly split by gender (50% female, 50% male) and predominantly white (85%).
• Participants were recruited through flyers and online advertisements.

III. Results

• Participants who reported better sleep quality had significantly higher GPAs (M=3.5, SD=0.5) than those who reported poor sleep quality (M=2.9, SD=0.6).
• See Table 1 for a summary of the results.
• Participants who reported consistent sleep schedules had higher GPAs than those with irregular sleep schedules.

IV. Discussion

• The results support the hypothesis that better sleep quality is associated with higher academic performance in college students.
• These findings have implications for college students, as prioritizing sleep could lead to better academic outcomes.
• Limitations of the study include self-reported data and the lack of control for other variables that could impact academic performance.

V. Conclusion

• College students who prioritize sleep may see a positive impact on their academic performance.
• These findings highlight the importance of sleep in academic success.
• Future research could explore interventions to improve sleep quality in college students.

Example of Research Results in Research Paper :

Our study aimed to compare the performance of three different machine learning algorithms (Random Forest, Support Vector Machine, and Neural Network) in predicting customer churn in a telecommunications company. We collected a dataset of 10,000 customer records, with 20 predictor variables and a binary churn outcome variable.

Our analysis revealed that all three algorithms performed well in predicting customer churn, with an overall accuracy of 85%. However, the Random Forest algorithm showed the highest accuracy (88%), followed by the Support Vector Machine (86%) and the Neural Network (84%).

Furthermore, we found that the most important predictor variables for customer churn were monthly charges, contract type, and tenure. Random Forest identified monthly charges as the most important variable, while Support Vector Machine and Neural Network identified contract type as the most important.

Overall, our results suggest that machine learning algorithms can be effective in predicting customer churn in a telecommunications company, and that Random Forest is the most accurate algorithm for this task.

Example 3 :

Title : The Impact of Social Media on Body Image and Self-Esteem

Abstract : This study aimed to investigate the relationship between social media use, body image, and self-esteem among young adults. A total of 200 participants were recruited from a university and completed self-report measures of social media use, body image satisfaction, and self-esteem.

Results: The results showed that social media use was significantly associated with body image dissatisfaction and lower self-esteem. Specifically, participants who reported spending more time on social media platforms had lower levels of body image satisfaction and self-esteem compared to those who reported less social media use. Moreover, the study found that comparing oneself to others on social media was a significant predictor of body image dissatisfaction and lower self-esteem.

Conclusion : These results suggest that social media use can have negative effects on body image satisfaction and self-esteem among young adults. It is important for individuals to be mindful of their social media use and to recognize the potential negative impact it can have on their mental health. Furthermore, interventions aimed at promoting positive body image and self-esteem should take into account the role of social media in shaping these attitudes and behaviors.

Importance of Research Results

Research results are important for several reasons, including:

• Advancing knowledge: Research results can contribute to the advancement of knowledge in a particular field, whether it be in science, technology, medicine, social sciences, or humanities.
• Developing theories: Research results can help to develop or modify existing theories and create new ones.
• Improving practices: Research results can inform and improve practices in various fields, such as education, healthcare, business, and public policy.
• Identifying problems and solutions: Research results can identify problems and provide solutions to complex issues in society, including issues related to health, environment, social justice, and economics.
• Validating claims : Research results can validate or refute claims made by individuals or groups in society, such as politicians, corporations, or activists.
• Providing evidence: Research results can provide evidence to support decision-making, policy-making, and resource allocation in various fields.

How to Write Results in A Research Paper

Here are some general guidelines on how to write results in a research paper:

• Organize the results section: Start by organizing the results section in a logical and coherent manner. Divide the section into subsections if necessary, based on the research questions or hypotheses.
• Present the findings: Present the findings in a clear and concise manner. Use tables, graphs, and figures to illustrate the data and make the presentation more engaging.
• Describe the data: Describe the data in detail, including the sample size, response rate, and any missing data. Provide relevant descriptive statistics such as means, standard deviations, and ranges.
• Interpret the findings: Interpret the findings in light of the research questions or hypotheses. Discuss the implications of the findings and the extent to which they support or contradict existing theories or previous research.
• Discuss the limitations : Discuss the limitations of the study, including any potential sources of bias or confounding factors that may have affected the results.
• Compare the results : Compare the results with those of previous studies or theoretical predictions. Discuss any similarities, differences, or inconsistencies.
• Avoid redundancy: Avoid repeating information that has already been presented in the introduction or methods sections. Instead, focus on presenting new and relevant information.
• Be objective: Be objective in presenting the results, avoiding any personal biases or interpretations.

When to Write Research Results

Here are situations When to Write Research Results”

• After conducting research on the chosen topic and obtaining relevant data, organize the findings in a structured format that accurately represents the information gathered.
• Once the data has been analyzed and interpreted, and conclusions have been drawn, begin the writing process.
• Before starting to write, ensure that the research results adhere to the guidelines and requirements of the intended audience, such as a scientific journal or academic conference.
• Begin by writing an abstract that briefly summarizes the research question, methodology, findings, and conclusions.
• Follow the abstract with an introduction that provides context for the research, explains its significance, and outlines the research question and objectives.
• The next section should be a literature review that provides an overview of existing research on the topic and highlights the gaps in knowledge that the current research seeks to address.
• The methodology section should provide a detailed explanation of the research design, including the sample size, data collection methods, and analytical techniques used.
• Present the research results in a clear and concise manner, using graphs, tables, and figures to illustrate the findings.
• Discuss the implications of the research results, including how they contribute to the existing body of knowledge on the topic and what further research is needed.
• Conclude the paper by summarizing the main findings, reiterating the significance of the research, and offering suggestions for future research.

Purpose of Research Results

The purposes of Research Results are as follows:

• Informing policy and practice: Research results can provide evidence-based information to inform policy decisions, such as in the fields of healthcare, education, and environmental regulation. They can also inform best practices in fields such as business, engineering, and social work.
• Addressing societal problems : Research results can be used to help address societal problems, such as reducing poverty, improving public health, and promoting social justice.
• Generating economic benefits : Research results can lead to the development of new products, services, and technologies that can create economic value and improve quality of life.
• Supporting academic and professional development : Research results can be used to support academic and professional development by providing opportunities for students, researchers, and practitioners to learn about new findings and methodologies in their field.
• Enhancing public understanding: Research results can help to educate the public about important issues and promote scientific literacy, leading to more informed decision-making and better public policy.
• Evaluating interventions: Research results can be used to evaluate the effectiveness of interventions, such as treatments, educational programs, and social policies. This can help to identify areas where improvements are needed and guide future interventions.
• Contributing to scientific progress: Research results can contribute to the advancement of science by providing new insights and discoveries that can lead to new theories, methods, and techniques.
• Informing decision-making : Research results can provide decision-makers with the information they need to make informed decisions. This can include decision-making at the individual, organizational, or governmental levels.
• Fostering collaboration : Research results can facilitate collaboration between researchers and practitioners, leading to new partnerships, interdisciplinary approaches, and innovative solutions to complex problems.

Advantages of Research Results

Some Advantages of Research Results are as follows:

• Improved decision-making: Research results can help inform decision-making in various fields, including medicine, business, and government. For example, research on the effectiveness of different treatments for a particular disease can help doctors make informed decisions about the best course of treatment for their patients.
• Innovation : Research results can lead to the development of new technologies, products, and services. For example, research on renewable energy sources can lead to the development of new and more efficient ways to harness renewable energy.
• Economic benefits: Research results can stimulate economic growth by providing new opportunities for businesses and entrepreneurs. For example, research on new materials or manufacturing techniques can lead to the development of new products and processes that can create new jobs and boost economic activity.
• Improved quality of life: Research results can contribute to improving the quality of life for individuals and society as a whole. For example, research on the causes of a particular disease can lead to the development of new treatments and cures, improving the health and well-being of millions of people.

About the author

Muhammad Hassan

Researcher, Academic Writer, Web developer

You may also like

How to Cite Research Paper – All Formats and...

Data Collection – Methods Types and Examples

Delimitations in Research – Types, Examples and...

Research Paper Format – Types, Examples and...

Research Process – Steps, Examples and Tips

Research Design – Types, Methods and Examples

Writing up a Research Report

• First Online: 04 January 2024

Cite this chapter

• Stefan Hunziker 3 &
• Michael Blankenagel 3  

436 Accesses

A research report is one big argument about how and why you came up with your conclusions. To make it a convincing argument, a typical guiding structure has developed. In the different chapters, there are distinct issues that need to be addressed to explain to the reader why your conclusions are valid. The governing principle for writing the report is full disclosure: to explain everything and ensure replicability by another researcher.

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

Access this chapter

• 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

Barros, L. O. (2016). The only academic phrasebook you’ll ever need . Createspace Independent Publishing Platform.

Google Scholar  

Field, A. (2016). An adventure in statistics. The reality enigma . SAGE.

Field, A. (2020). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics (5th ed.). SAGE.

Früh, M., Keimer, I., & Blankenagel, M. (2019). The impact of Balanced Scorecard excellence on shareholder returns. IFZ Working Paper No. 0003/2019. https://zenodo.org/record/2571603#.YMDUafkzZaQ . Accessed: 9 June 2021.

Pearl, J., & Mackenzie, D. (2018). The book of why: The new science of cause and effect. Basic Books.

Yin, R. K. (2013). Case study research: Design and methods (5th ed.). SAGE.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Wirtschaft/IFZ, Campus Zug-Rotkreuz, Hochschule Luzern, Zug-Rotkreuz, Zug, Switzerland

Stefan Hunziker & Michael Blankenagel

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Stefan Hunziker .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2024 Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, part of Springer Nature

About this chapter

Hunziker, S., Blankenagel, M. (2024). Writing up a Research Report. In: Research Design in Business and Management. Springer Gabler, Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-42739-9_4

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-42739-9_4

Published : 04 January 2024

Publisher Name : Springer Gabler, Wiesbaden

Print ISBN : 978-3-658-42738-2

Online ISBN : 978-3-658-42739-9

eBook Packages : Business and Management Business and Management (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

• Research Report: Definition, Types + [Writing Guide]

One of the reasons for carrying out research is to add to the existing body of knowledge. Therefore, when conducting research, you need to document your processes and findings in a research report. 

With a research report, it is easy to outline the findings of your systematic investigation and any gaps needing further inquiry. Knowing how to create a detailed research report will prove useful when you need to conduct research.  

What is a Research Report?

A research report is a well-crafted document that outlines the processes, data, and findings of a systematic investigation. It is an important document that serves as a first-hand account of the research process, and it is typically considered an objective and accurate source of information.

In many ways, a research report can be considered as a summary of the research process that clearly highlights findings, recommendations, and other important details. Reading a well-written research report should provide you with all the information you need about the core areas of the research process.

Features of a Research Report 

So how do you recognize a research report when you see one? Here are some of the basic features that define a research report. 

• It is a detailed presentation of research processes and findings, and it usually includes tables and graphs. 
• It is written in a formal language.
• A research report is usually written in the third person.
• It is informative and based on first-hand verifiable information.
• It is formally structured with headings, sections, and bullet points.
• It always includes recommendations for future actions. 

Types of Research Report 

The research report is classified based on two things; nature of research and target audience.

Nature of Research

• Qualitative Research Report

This is the type of report written for qualitative research . It outlines the methods, processes, and findings of a qualitative method of systematic investigation. In educational research, a qualitative research report provides an opportunity for one to apply his or her knowledge and develop skills in planning and executing qualitative research projects.

A qualitative research report is usually descriptive in nature. Hence, in addition to presenting details of the research process, you must also create a descriptive narrative of the information.

• Quantitative Research Report

A quantitative research report is a type of research report that is written for quantitative research. Quantitative research is a type of systematic investigation that pays attention to numerical or statistical values in a bid to find answers to research questions. 

In this type of research report, the researcher presents quantitative data to support the research process and findings. Unlike a qualitative research report that is mainly descriptive, a quantitative research report works with numbers; that is, it is numerical in nature. 

Target Audience

Also, a research report can be said to be technical or popular based on the target audience. If you’re dealing with a general audience, you would need to present a popular research report, and if you’re dealing with a specialized audience, you would submit a technical report. 

• Technical Research Report

A technical research report is a detailed document that you present after carrying out industry-based research. This report is highly specialized because it provides information for a technical audience; that is, individuals with above-average knowledge in the field of study. 

In a technical research report, the researcher is expected to provide specific information about the research process, including statistical analyses and sampling methods. Also, the use of language is highly specialized and filled with jargon. 

Examples of technical research reports include legal and medical research reports. 

• Popular Research Report

A popular research report is one for a general audience; that is, for individuals who do not necessarily have any knowledge in the field of study. A popular research report aims to make information accessible to everyone. 

It is written in very simple language, which makes it easy to understand the findings and recommendations. Examples of popular research reports are the information contained in newspapers and magazines. 

Importance of a Research Report 

• Knowledge Transfer: As already stated above, one of the reasons for carrying out research is to contribute to the existing body of knowledge, and this is made possible with a research report. A research report serves as a means to effectively communicate the findings of a systematic investigation to all and sundry.  
• Identification of Knowledge Gaps: With a research report, you’d be able to identify knowledge gaps for further inquiry. A research report shows what has been done while hinting at other areas needing systematic investigation. 
• In market research, a research report would help you understand the market needs and peculiarities at a glance. 
• A research report allows you to present information in a precise and concise manner. 
• It is time-efficient and practical because, in a research report, you do not have to spend time detailing the findings of your research work in person. You can easily send out the report via email and have stakeholders look at it. 

Guide to Writing a Research Report

A lot of detail goes into writing a research report, and getting familiar with the different requirements would help you create the ideal research report. A research report is usually broken down into multiple sections, which allows for a concise presentation of information.

Structure and Example of a Research Report

This is the title of your systematic investigation. Your title should be concise and point to the aims, objectives, and findings of a research report. 

• Table of Contents

This is like a compass that makes it easier for readers to navigate the research report.

An abstract is an overview that highlights all important aspects of the research including the research method, data collection process, and research findings. Think of an abstract as a summary of your research report that presents pertinent information in a concise manner. 

An abstract is always brief; typically 100-150 words and goes straight to the point. The focus of your research abstract should be the 5Ws and 1H format – What, Where, Why, When, Who and How. 

• Introduction

Here, the researcher highlights the aims and objectives of the systematic investigation as well as the problem which the systematic investigation sets out to solve. When writing the report introduction, it is also essential to indicate whether the purposes of the research were achieved or would require more work.

In the introduction section, the researcher specifies the research problem and also outlines the significance of the systematic investigation. Also, the researcher is expected to outline any jargons and terminologies that are contained in the research.  

• Literature Review

A literature review is a written survey of existing knowledge in the field of study. In other words, it is the section where you provide an overview and analysis of different research works that are relevant to your systematic investigation. 

It highlights existing research knowledge and areas needing further investigation, which your research has sought to fill. At this stage, you can also hint at your research hypothesis and its possible implications for the existing body of knowledge in your field of study. 

• An Account of Investigation

This is a detailed account of the research process, including the methodology, sample, and research subjects. Here, you are expected to provide in-depth information on the research process including the data collection and analysis procedures. 

In a quantitative research report, you’d need to provide information surveys, questionnaires and other quantitative data collection methods used in your research. In a qualitative research report, you are expected to describe the qualitative data collection methods used in your research including interviews and focus groups. 

In this section, you are expected to present the results of the systematic investigation. 

This section further explains the findings of the research, earlier outlined. Here, you are expected to present a justification for each outcome and show whether the results are in line with your hypotheses or if other research studies have come up with similar results.

• Conclusions

This is a summary of all the information in the report. It also outlines the significance of the entire study. 

• References and Appendices

This section contains a list of all the primary and secondary research sources. 

Tips for Writing a Research Report

• Define the Context for the Report

As is obtainable when writing an essay, defining the context for your research report would help you create a detailed yet concise document. This is why you need to create an outline before writing so that you do not miss out on anything. 

• Define your Audience

Writing with your audience in mind is essential as it determines the tone of the report. If you’re writing for a general audience, you would want to present the information in a simple and relatable manner. For a specialized audience, you would need to make use of technical and field-specific terms. 

• Include Significant Findings

The idea of a research report is to present some sort of abridged version of your systematic investigation. In your report, you should exclude irrelevant information while highlighting only important data and findings. 

• Include Illustrations

Your research report should include illustrations and other visual representations of your data. Graphs, pie charts, and relevant images lend additional credibility to your systematic investigation.

• Choose the Right Title

A good research report title is brief, precise, and contains keywords from your research. It should provide a clear idea of your systematic investigation so that readers can grasp the entire focus of your research from the title. 

• Proofread the Report

Before publishing the document, ensure that you give it a second look to authenticate the information. If you can, get someone else to go through the report, too, and you can also run it through proofreading and editing software. 

How to Gather Research Data for Your Report  

• Understand the Problem

Every research aims at solving a specific problem or set of problems, and this should be at the back of your mind when writing your research report. Understanding the problem would help you to filter the information you have and include only important data in your report. 

• Know what your report seeks to achieve

This is somewhat similar to the point above because, in some way, the aim of your research report is intertwined with the objectives of your systematic investigation. Identifying the primary purpose of writing a research report would help you to identify and present the required information accordingly. 

• Identify your audience

Knowing your target audience plays a crucial role in data collection for a research report. If your research report is specifically for an organization, you would want to present industry-specific information or show how the research findings are relevant to the work that the company does. 

• Create Surveys/Questionnaires

A survey is a research method that is used to gather data from a specific group of people through a set of questions. It can be either quantitative or qualitative. 

A survey is usually made up of structured questions, and it can be administered online or offline. However, an online survey is a more effective method of research data collection because it helps you save time and gather data with ease. 

You can seamlessly create an online questionnaire for your research on Formplus . With the multiple sharing options available in the builder, you would be able to administer your survey to respondents in little or no time. 

Formplus also has a report summary too l that you can use to create custom visual reports for your research.

Step-by-step guide on how to create an online questionnaire using Formplus  

• Sign into Formplus

In the Formplus builder, you can easily create different online questionnaires for your research by dragging and dropping preferred fields into your form. To access the Formplus builder, you will need to create an account on Formplus. 

Once you do this, sign in to your account and click on Create new form to begin. 

• Edit Form Title : Click on the field provided to input your form title, for example, “Research Questionnaire.”
• Edit Form : Click on the edit icon to edit the form.
• Add Fields : Drag and drop preferred form fields into your form in the Formplus builder inputs column. There are several field input options for questionnaires in the Formplus builder. 
• Edit fields
• Click on “Save”
• Form Customization: With the form customization options in the form builder, you can easily change the outlook of your form and make it more unique and personalized. Formplus allows you to change your form theme, add background images, and even change the font according to your needs. 
• Multiple Sharing Options: Formplus offers various form-sharing options, which enables you to share your questionnaire with respondents easily. You can use the direct social media sharing buttons to share your form link to your organization’s social media pages.  You can also send out your survey form as email invitations to your research subjects too. If you wish, you can share your form’s QR code or embed it on your organization’s website for easy access. 

Conclusion  

Always remember that a research report is just as important as the actual systematic investigation because it plays a vital role in communicating research findings to everyone else. This is why you must take care to create a concise document summarizing the process of conducting any research. 

In this article, we’ve outlined essential tips to help you create a research report. When writing your report, you should always have the audience at the back of your mind, as this would set the tone for the document. 

Connect to Formplus, Get Started Now - It's Free!

• ethnographic research survey
• research report
• research report survey
• busayo.longe

You may also like:

21 Chrome Extensions for Academic Researchers in 2022

In this article, we will discuss a number of chrome extensions you can use to make your research process even seamless

Assessment Tools: Types, Examples & Importance

In this article, you’ll learn about different assessment tools to help you evaluate performance in various contexts

How to Write a Problem Statement for your Research

Learn how to write problem statements before commencing any research effort. Learn about its structure and explore examples

Ethnographic Research: Types, Methods + [Question Examples]

Simple guide on ethnographic research, it types, methods, examples and advantages. Also highlights how to conduct an ethnographic...

Formplus - For Seamless Data Collection

Collect data the right way with a versatile data collection tool. try formplus and transform your work productivity today..

• How it works

How to Write the Dissertation Findings or Results – Steps & Tips

Published by Grace Graffin at August 11th, 2021 , Revised On October 9, 2023

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;

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

Do dissertations scare you? Struggling with writing a flawless dissertation? Well, congratulations, you have landed in the perfect place. In this blog, we will take you through the detailed process of writing a dissertation. Sounds fun? We thought so!

Anyone who supports you in your research should be acknowledged in dissertation acknowledgments. Learn more on how to write dissertation acknowledgements.

This article is a step-by-step guide to how to write statement of a problem in research. The research problem will be half-solved by defining it correctly.

USEFUL LINKS

LEARNING RESOURCES

COMPANY DETAILS

• How It Works

• Skip to main content
• Skip to primary sidebar
• Skip to footer
• QuestionPro

• Solutions Industries Gaming Automotive Sports and events Education Government Travel & Hospitality Financial Services Healthcare Cannabis Technology Use Case NPS+ Communities Audience Contactless surveys Mobile LivePolls Member Experience GDPR Positive People Science 360 Feedback Surveys
• Resources Blog eBooks Survey Templates Case Studies Training Help center

Home Market Research

Research Reports: Definition and How to Write Them

Reports are usually spread across a vast horizon of topics but are focused on communicating information about a particular topic and a niche target market. The primary motive of research reports is to convey integral details about a study for marketers to consider while designing new strategies.

Certain events, facts, and other information based on incidents need to be relayed to the people in charge, and creating research reports is the most effective communication tool. Ideal research reports are extremely accurate in the offered information with a clear objective and conclusion. These reports should have a clean and structured format to relay information effectively.

What are Research Reports?

Research reports are recorded data prepared by researchers or statisticians after analyzing the information gathered by conducting organized research, typically in the form of surveys or qualitative methods .

A research report is a reliable source to recount details about a conducted research. It is most often considered to be a true testimony of all the work done to garner specificities of research.

The various sections of a research report are:

• Background/Introduction
• Implemented Methods
• Results based on Analysis
• Deliberation

Learn more: Quantitative Research

Components of Research Reports

Research is imperative for launching a new product/service or a new feature. The markets today are extremely volatile and competitive due to new entrants every day who may or may not provide effective products. An organization needs to make the right decisions at the right time to be relevant in such a market with updated products that suffice customer demands.

The details of a research report may change with the purpose of research but the main components of a report will remain constant. The research approach of the market researcher also influences the style of writing reports. Here are seven main components of a productive research report:

• Research Report Summary: The entire objective along with the overview of research are to be included in a summary which is a couple of paragraphs in length. All the multiple components of the research are explained in brief under the report summary.  It should be interesting enough to capture all the key elements of the report.
• Research Introduction: There always is a primary goal that the researcher is trying to achieve through a report. In the introduction section, he/she can cover answers related to this goal and establish a thesis which will be included to strive and answer it in detail.  This section should answer an integral question: “What is the current situation of the goal?”.  After the research design was conducted, did the organization conclude the goal successfully or they are still a work in progress –  provide such details in the introduction part of the research report.
• Research Methodology: This is the most important section of the report where all the important information lies. The readers can gain data for the topic along with analyzing the quality of provided content and the research can also be approved by other market researchers . Thus, this section needs to be highly informative with each aspect of research discussed in detail.  Information needs to be expressed in chronological order according to its priority and importance. Researchers should include references in case they gained information from existing techniques.
• Research Results: A short description of the results along with calculations conducted to achieve the goal will form this section of results. Usually, the exposition after data analysis is carried out in the discussion part of the report.

Learn more: Quantitative Data

• Research Discussion: The results are discussed in extreme detail in this section along with a comparative analysis of reports that could probably exist in the same domain. Any abnormality uncovered during research will be deliberated in the discussion section.  While writing research reports, the researcher will have to connect the dots on how the results will be applicable in the real world.
• Research References and Conclusion: Conclude all the research findings along with mentioning each and every author, article or any content piece from where references were taken.

Learn more: Qualitative Observation

15 Tips for Writing Research Reports

Writing research reports in the manner can lead to all the efforts going down the drain. Here are 15 tips for writing impactful research reports:

• Prepare the context before starting to write and start from the basics:  This was always taught to us in school – be well-prepared before taking a plunge into new topics. The order of survey questions might not be the ideal or most effective order for writing research reports. The idea is to start with a broader topic and work towards a more specific one and focus on a conclusion or support, which a research should support with the facts.  The most difficult thing to do in reporting, without a doubt is to start. Start with the title, the introduction, then document the first discoveries and continue from that. Once the marketers have the information well documented, they can write a general conclusion.
• Keep the target audience in mind while selecting a format that is clear, logical and obvious to them:  Will the research reports be presented to decision makers or other researchers? What are the general perceptions around that topic? This requires more care and diligence. A researcher will need a significant amount of information to start writing the research report. Be consistent with the wording, the numbering of the annexes and so on. Follow the approved format of the company for the delivery of research reports and demonstrate the integrity of the project with the objectives of the company.
• Have a clear research objective: A researcher should read the entire proposal again, and make sure that the data they provide contributes to the objectives that were raised from the beginning. Remember that speculations are for conversations, not for research reports, if a researcher speculates, they directly question their own research.
• Establish a working model:  Each study must have an internal logic, which will have to be established in the report and in the evidence. The researchers’ worst nightmare is to be required to write research reports and realize that key questions were not included.

Learn more: Quantitative Observation

• Gather all the information about the research topic. Who are the competitors of our customers? Talk to other researchers who have studied the subject of research, know the language of the industry. Misuse of the terms can discourage the readers of research reports from reading further.
• Read aloud while writing. While reading the report, if the researcher hears something inappropriate, for example, if they stumble over the words when reading them, surely the reader will too. If the researcher can’t put an idea in a single sentence, then it is very long and they must change it so that the idea is clear to everyone.
• Check grammar and spelling. Without a doubt, good practices help to understand the report. Use verbs in the present tense. Consider using the present tense, which makes the results sound more immediate. Find new words and other ways of saying things. Have fun with the language whenever possible.
• Discuss only the discoveries that are significant. If some data are not really significant, do not mention them. Remember that not everything is truly important or essential within research reports.

Learn more: Qualitative Data

• Try and stick to the survey questions. For example, do not say that the people surveyed “were worried” about an research issue , when there are different degrees of concern.
• The graphs must be clear enough so that they understand themselves. Do not let graphs lead the reader to make mistakes: give them a title, include the indications, the size of the sample, and the correct wording of the question.
• Be clear with messages. A researcher should always write every section of the report with an accuracy of details and language.
• Be creative with titles – Particularly in segmentation studies choose names “that give life to research”. Such names can survive for a long time after the initial investigation.
• Create an effective conclusion: The conclusion in the research reports is the most difficult to write, but it is an incredible opportunity to excel. Make a precise summary. Sometimes it helps to start the conclusion with something specific, then it describes the most important part of the study, and finally, it provides the implications of the conclusions.
• Get a couple more pair of eyes to read the report. Writers have trouble detecting their own mistakes. But they are responsible for what is presented. Ensure it has been approved by colleagues or friends before sending the find draft out.

Learn more: Market Research and Analysis

MORE LIKE THIS

What Are My Employees Really Thinking? The Power of Open-ended Survey Analysis

May 24, 2024

I Am Disconnected – Tuesday CX Thoughts

May 21, 2024

20 Best Customer Success Tools of 2024

May 20, 2024

AI-Based Services Buying Guide for Market Research (based on ESOMAR’s 20 Questions) 

Other categories.

• Academic Research
• Artificial Intelligence
• Assessments
• Brand Awareness
• Case Studies
• Communities
• Consumer Insights
• Customer effort score
• Customer Engagement
• Customer Experience
• Customer Loyalty
• Customer Research
• Customer Satisfaction
• Employee Benefits
• Employee Engagement
• Employee Retention
• Friday Five
• General Data Protection Regulation
• Insights Hub
• Life@QuestionPro
• Market Research
• Mobile diaries
• Mobile Surveys
• New Features
• Online Communities
• Question Types
• Questionnaire
• QuestionPro Products
• Release Notes
• Research Tools and Apps
• Revenue at Risk
• Survey Templates
• Training Tips
• Uncategorized
• Video Learning Series
• What’s Coming Up
• Workforce Intelligence

How To Present Your Market Research Results And Reports In An Efficient Way

Table of Contents

1) What Is A Market Research Report?

2) Market Research Reports Examples

3) Why Do You Need Market Research Reports

4) How To Make A Market Research Report?

5) Types Of Market Research Reports

6) Challenges & Mistakes Market Research Reports

Market research analyses are the go-to solution for many professionals, and for good reason: they save time, offer fresh insights, and provide clarity on your business. In turn, market research reports will help you to refine and polish your strategy. Plus, a well-crafted report will give your work more credibility while adding weight to any marketing recommendations you offer a client or executive.

But, while this is the case, today’s business world still lacks a way to present market-based research results efficiently. The static, antiquated nature of PowerPoint makes it a bad choice for presenting research discoveries, yet it is still widely used to present results. 

Fortunately, things are moving in the right direction. There are online data visualization tools that make it easy and fast to build powerful market research dashboards. They come in handy to manage the outcomes, but also the most important aspect of any analysis: the presentation of said outcomes, without which it becomes hard to make accurate, sound decisions. 

Here, we consider the benefits of conducting research analyses while looking at how to write and present market research reports, exploring their value, and, ultimately, getting the very most from your research results by using professional market research software .

Let’s get started.

What Is a Market Research Report?

A market research report is an online reporting tool used to analyze the public perception or viability of a company, product, or service. These reports contain valuable and digestible information like customer survey responses and social, economic, and geographical insights.

On a typical market research results example, you can interact with valuable trends and gain insight into consumer behavior and visualizations that will empower you to conduct effective competitor analysis. Rather than adding streams of tenuous data to a static spreadsheet, a full market research report template brings the outcomes of market-driven research to life, giving users a data analysis tool to create actionable strategies from a range of consumer-driven insights.

With digital market analysis reports, you can make your business more intelligent more efficient, and, ultimately, meet the needs of your target audience head-on. This, in turn, will accelerate your commercial success significantly.

Your Chance: Want to test a market research reporting software? Explore our 14-day free trial & benefit from interactive research reports!

How To Present Your Results: 4 Essential Market Research Report Templates

When it comes to sharing rafts of invaluable information, research dashboards are invaluable.

Any market analysis report example worth its salt will allow everyone to get a firm grip on their results and discoveries on a single page with ease. These dynamic online dashboards also boast interactive features that empower the user to drill down deep into specific pockets of information while changing demographic parameters, including gender, age, and region, filtering the results swiftly to focus on the most relevant insights for the task at hand.

These four market research report examples are different but equally essential and cover key elements required for market survey report success. You can also modify each and use it as a client dashboard .

While there are numerous types of dashboards that you can choose from to adjust and optimize your results, we have selected the top 3 that will tell you more about the story behind them. Let’s take a closer look.

1. Market Research Report: Brand Analysis

Our first example shares the results of a brand study. To do so, a survey has been performed on a sample of 1333 people, information that we can see in detail on the left side of the board, summarizing the gender, age groups, and geolocation.

**click to enlarge**

At the dashboard's center, we can see the market-driven research discoveries concerning first brand awareness with and without help, as well as themes and celebrity suggestions, to know which image the audience associates with the brand.

Such dashboards are extremely convenient to share the most important information in a snapshot. Besides being interactive (but it cannot be seen on an image), it is even easier to filter the results according to certain criteria without producing dozens of PowerPoint slides. For instance, I could easily filter the report by choosing only the female answers, only the people aged between 25 and 34, or only the 25-34 males if that is my target audience.

Primary KPIs:

a) Unaided Brand Awareness

The first market research KPI in this most powerful report example comes in the form of unaided brand awareness. Presented in a logical line-style chart, this particular market study report sample KPI is invaluable, as it will give you a clear-cut insight into how people affiliate your brand within their niche.

As you can see from our example, based on a specific survey question, you can see how your brand stacks up against your competitors regarding awareness. Based on these outcomes, you can formulate strategies to help you stand out more in your sector and, ultimately, expand your audience.

b) Aided Brand Awareness

This market survey report sample KPI focuses on aided brand awareness. A visualization that offers a great deal of insight into which brands come to mind in certain niches or categories, here, you will find out which campaigns and messaging your target consumers are paying attention to and engaging with.

By gaining access to this level of insight, you can conduct effective competitor research and gain valuable inspiration for your products, promotional campaigns, and marketing messages.

c) Brand image

When it comes to research reporting, understanding how others perceive your brand is one of the most golden pieces of information you could acquire. If you know how people feel about your brand image, you can take informed and very specific actions that will enhance the way people view and interact with your business.

By asking a focused question, this visual of KPIs will give you a definitive idea of whether respondents agree, disagree, or are undecided on particular descriptions or perceptions related to your brand image. If you’re looking to present yourself and your message in a certain way (reliable, charming, spirited, etc.), you can see how you stack up against the competition and find out if you need to tweak your imagery or tone of voice - invaluable information for any modern business.

d) Celebrity analysis

This indicator is a powerful part of our research KPI dashboard on top, as it will give you a direct insight into the celebrities, influencers, or public figures that your most valued consumers consider when thinking about (or interacting with) your brand.

Displayed in a digestible bar chart-style format, this useful metric will not only give you a solid idea of how your brand messaging is perceived by consumers (depending on the type of celebrity they associate with your brand) but also guide you on which celebrities or influencers you should contact.

By working with the right influencers in your niche, you will boost the impact and reach of your marketing campaigns significantly, improving your commercial awareness in the process. And this is the KPI that will make it happen.

2. Market Research Results On Customer Satisfaction

Here, we have some of the most important data a company should care about: their already-existing customers and their perception of their relationship with the brand. It is crucial when we know that it is five times more expensive to acquire a new consumer than to retain one.

This is why tracking metrics like the customer effort score or the net promoter score (how likely consumers are to recommend your products and services) is essential, especially over time. You need to improve these scores to have happy customers who will always have a much bigger impact on their friends and relatives than any of your amazing ad campaigns. Looking at other satisfaction indicators like the quality, pricing, and design, or the service they received is also a best practice: you want a global view of your performance regarding customer satisfaction metrics .

Such research results reports are a great tool for managers who do not have much time and hence need to use them effectively. Thanks to these dashboards, they can control data for long-running projects anytime.

Primary KPIs :

a) Net Promoter Score (NPS)

Another pivotal part of any informative research presentation is your NPS score, which will tell you how likely a customer is to recommend your brand to their peers.

Centered on overall customer satisfaction, your NPS Score can cover the functions and output of many departments, including marketing, sales, and customer service, but also serve as a building block for a call center dashboard . When you’re considering how to present your research effectively, this balanced KPI offers a masterclass. It’s logical, it has a cohesive color scheme, and it offers access to vital information at a swift glance. With an NPS Score, customers are split into three categories: promoters (those scoring your service 9 or 10), passives (those scoring your service 7 or 8), and detractors (those scoring your service 0 to 6). The aim of the game is to gain more promoters. By gaining an accurate snapshot of your NPS Score, you can create intelligent strategies that will boost your results over time.

b) Customer Satisfaction Score (CSAT)

The next in our examples of market research reports KPIs comes in the form of the CSAT. The vast majority of consumers that have a bad experience will not return. Honing in on your CSAT is essential if you want to keep your audience happy and encourage long-term consumer loyalty.

This magnificent, full report KPI will show how satisfied customers are with specific elements of your products or services. Getting to grips with these scores will allow you to pinpoint very specific issues while capitalizing on your existing strengths. As a result, you can take measures to improve your CSAT score while sharing positive testimonials on your social media platforms and website to build trust.

c) Customer Effort Score (CES)

When it comes to presenting research findings, keeping track of your CES Score is essential. The CES Score KPI will give you instant access to information on how easy or difficult your audience can interact with or discover your company based on a simple scale of one to ten.

By getting a clear-cut gauge of how your customers find engagement with your brand, you can iron out any weaknesses in your user experience (UX) offerings while spotting any friction, bottlenecks, or misleading messaging. In doing so, you can boost your CES score, satisfy your audience, and boost your bottom line.

3. Market Research Results On Product Innovation

This final market-driven research example report focuses on the product itself and its innovation. It is a useful report for future product development and market potential, as well as pricing decisions.

Using the same sample of surveyed people as for the first market-focused analytical report , they answer questions about their potential usage and purchase of the said product. It is good primary feedback on how the market would receive the new product you would launch. Then comes the willingness to pay, which helps set a price range that will not be too cheap to be trusted nor too expensive for what it is. That will be the main information for your pricing strategy.

a) Usage Intention

The first of our product innovation KPI-based examples comes in the form of usage intention. When you’re considering how to write a market research report, including metrics centered on consumer intent is critical.

This simple yet effective visualization will allow you to understand not only how users see your product but also whether they prefer previous models or competitor versions . While you shouldn’t base all of your product-based research on this KPI, it is very valuable, and you should use it to your advantage frequently.

b) Purchase Intention

Another aspect to consider when looking at how to present market research data is your audience’s willingness or motivation to purchase your product. Offering percentage-based information, this effective KPI provides a wealth of at-a-glance information to help you make accurate forecasts centered on your product and service offerings.

Analyzing this information regularly will give you the confidence and direction to develop strategies that will steer you to a more prosperous future, meeting the ever-changing needs of your audience on an ongoing basis.

c) Willingness To Pay (WPS)

Our final market research example KPI is based on how willing customers are to pay for a particular service or product based on a specific set of parameters. This dynamic visualization, represented in an easy-to-follow pie chart, will allow you to realign the value of your product (USPs, functions, etc.) while setting price points that are most likely to result in conversions. This is a market research presentation template that every modern organization should use to its advantage.

4. Market Research Report On Customer Demographics 

This particular example of market research report, generated with a modern dashboard creator , is a powerful tool, as it displays a cohesive mix of key demographic information in one intuitive space.

By breaking down these deep pockets of consumer-centric information, you can gain the power to develop more impactful customer communications while personalizing every aspect of your target audience’s journey across every channel or touchpoint. As a result, you can transform theoretical insights into actionable strategies that will result in significant commercial growth. 

Every section of this responsive marketing research report works in unison to build a profile of your core audience in a way that will guide your company’s consumer-facing strategies with confidence. With in-depth visuals based on gender, education level, and tech adoption, you have everything you need to speak directly to your audience at your fingertips.

Let’s look at the key performance indicators (KPIs) of this invaluable market research report example in more detail.

a) Customer By Gender

This KPI is highly visual and offers a clear-cut representation of your company’s gender share over time. By gaining access to this vital information, you can deliver a more personalized experience to specific audience segments while ensuring your messaging is fair, engaging, and inclusive.

b) Customers by education level

The next market analysis report template is a KPI that provides a logical breakdown of your customers’ level of education. By using this as a demographic marker, you can refine your products to suit the needs of your audience while crafting your content in a way that truly resonates with different customer groups.

c) Customers by technology adoption

Particularly valuable if you’re a company that sells tech goods or services, this linear KPI will show you where your customers are in terms of technological know-how or usage. By getting to grips with this information over time, you can develop your products or services in a way that offers direct value to your consumers while making your launches or promotions as successful as possible.

d) Customer age groups

By understanding your customers’ age distribution in detail, you can gain a deep understanding of their preferences. And that’s exactly what this market research report sample KPI does. Presented in a bar chart format, this KPI will give you a full breakdown of your customers’ age ranges, allowing you to build detailed buyer personas and segment your audience effectively.

Why Do You Need Market Research Reports?

As the adage goes, “Look before you leap“ – which is exactly what a research report is here for. As the headlights of a car, they will show you the pitfalls and fast lanes on your road to success: likes and dislikes of a specific market segment in a certain geographical area, their expectations, and readiness. Among other things, a research report will let you:

• Get a holistic view of the market : learn more about the target market and understand the various factors involved in the buying decisions. A broader view of the market lets you benchmark other companies you do not focus on. This, in turn, will empower you to gather the industry data that counts most. This brings us to our next point.
• Curate industry information with momentum: Whether you’re looking to rebrand, improve on an existing service, or launch a new product, time is of the essence. By working with the best market research reports created with modern BI reporting tools , you can visualize your discoveries and data, formatting them in a way that not only unearths hidden insights but also tells a story - a narrative that will gain a deeper level of understanding into your niche or industry. The features and functionality of a market analysis report will help you grasp the information that is most valuable to your organization, pushing you ahead of the pack in the process.
• Validate internal research: Doing the internal analysis is one thing, but double-checking with a third party also greatly helps avoid getting blinded by your own data.
• Use actionable data and make informed decisions: Once you understand consumer behavior as well as the market, your competitors, and the issues that will affect the industry in the future, you are better armed to position your brand. Combining all of it with the quantitative data collected will allow you to more successful product development. To learn more about different methods, we suggest you read our guide on data analysis techniques .
• Strategic planning: When you want to map out big-picture organizational goals, launch a new product development, plan a geographic market expansion, or even a merger and acquisition – all of this strategic thinking needs solid foundations to fulfill the variety of challenges that come along.
• Consistency across the board: Collecting, presenting, and analyzing your results in a way that’s smarter, more interactive, and more cohesive will ensure your customer communications, marketing campaigns, user journey, and offerings meet your audience’s needs consistently across the board. The result? Faster growth, increased customer loyalty, and more profit.
• Better communication: The right market research analysis template (or templates) will empower everyone in the company with access to valuable information - the kind that is relevant and comprehensible. When everyone is moving to the beat of the same drum, they will collaborate more effectively and, ultimately, push the venture forward thanks to powerful online data analysis techniques.
• Centralization: Building on the last point, using a powerful market research report template in the form of a business intelligence dashboard will make presenting your findings to external stakeholders and clients far more effective, as you can showcase a wealth of metrics, information, insights, and invaluable feedback from one centralized, highly visual interactive screen. 
• Brand reputation: In the digital age, brand reputation is everything. By making vital improvements in all of the key areas above, you will meet your customers’ needs head-on with consistency while finding innovative ways to stand out from your competitors. These are the key ingredients of long-term success.

How To Present Market Research Analysis Results?

Here we look at how you should present your research reports, considering the steps it takes to connect with the outcomes you need to succeed:

• Collect your data 

As with any reporting process, you first and foremost need to collect the data you’ll use to conduct your studies. Businesses conduct research studies to analyze their brand awareness, identity, and influence in the market. For product development and pricing decisions, among many others. That said, there are many ways to collect information for a market research report. Among some of the most popular ones, we find: 

• Surveys: Probably the most common way to collect research data, surveys can come in the form of open or closed questions that can be answered anonymously. They are the cheapest and fastest way to collect insights about your customers and business. 
• Interviews : These are face-to-face discussions that allow the researcher to analyze responses as well as the body language of the interviewees. This method is often used to define buyer personas by analyzing the subject's budget, job title, lifestyle, wants, and needs, among other things. 
• Focus groups : This method involves a group of people discussing a topic with a mediator. It is often used to evaluate a new product or new feature or to answer a specific question that the researcher might have. 
• Observation-based research : In this type of research, the researcher or business sits back and watches customers interact with the product without any instructions or help. It allows us to identify pain points as well as strong features. 
• Market segmentation : This study allows you to identify and analyze potential market segments to target. Businesses use it to expand into new markets and audiences. 

These are just a few of the many ways in which you can gather your information. The important point is to keep the research objective as straightforward as possible. Supporting yourself with professional BI solutions to clean, manage, and present your insights is probably the smartest choice.

2. Hone in on your research:

When looking at how to source consumer research in a presentation, you should focus on two areas: primary and secondary research. Primary research comes from your internal data, monitoring existing organizational practices, the effectiveness of sales, and the tools used for communication, for instance. Primary research also assesses market competition by evaluating the company plans of the competitors. Secondary research focuses on existing data collected by a third party, information used to perform benchmarking and market analysis. Such metrics help in deciding which market segments are the ones the company should focus its efforts on or where the brand is standing in the minds of consumers. Before you start the reporting process, you should set your goals, segmenting your research into primary and secondary segments to get to grips with the kind of information you need to work with to achieve effective results.

3. Segment your customers:

To give your market research efforts more context, you should segment your customers into different groups according to the preferences outlined in the survey or feedback results or by examining behavioral or demographic data.

If you segment your customers, you can tailor your market research and analysis reports to display only the information, charts, or graphics that will provide actionable insights into their wants, needs, or industry-based pain points. 

• Identify your stakeholders:

Once you’ve drilled down into your results and segmented your consumer groups, it’s important to consider the key stakeholders within the organization that will benefit from your information the most. 

By looking at both internal and external stakeholders, you will give your results a path to effective presentation, gaining the tools to understand which areas of feedback or data are most valuable, as well as most redundant. As a consequence, you will ensure your results are concise and meet the exact information needs of every stakeholder involved in the process.

• Set your KPIs:

First, remember that your reports should be concise and accurate - straight to the point without omitting any essential information. Work to ensure your insights are clean and organized, with participants grouped into relevant categories (demographics, profession, industry, education, etc.). Once you’ve organized your research, set your goals, and cleaned your data, you should set your KPIs to ensure your report is populated with the right visualizations to get the job done. Explore our full library of interactive KPI examples for inspiration.

• Include competitor’s analysis 

Whether you are doing product innovation research, customer demographics, pricing, or any other, including some level of insights about competitors in your reports is always recommended as it can help your business or client better understand where they stand in the market. That being said, competitor analysis is not as easy as picking a list of companies in the same industry and listing them. Your main competitor can be just a company's division in an entirely different industry. For example, Apple Music competes with Spotify even though Apple is a technology company. Therefore, it is important to carefully analyze competitors from a general but detailed level. 

Providing this kind of information in your reports can also help you find areas that competitors are not exploiting or that are weaker and use them to your advantage to become a market leader. 

• Produce your summary:

To complement your previous efforts, writing an executive summary of one or two pages that will explain the general idea of the report is advisable. Then come the usual body parts:

• An introduction providing background information, target audience, and objectives;
• The qualitative research describes the participants in the research and why they are relevant to the business;
• The survey research outlines the questions asked and answered;
• A summary of the insights and metrics used to draw the conclusions, the research methods chosen, and why;
• A presentation of the findings based on your research and an in-depth explanation of these conclusions.
• Use a mix of visualizations:

When presenting your results and discoveries, you should aim to use a balanced mix of text, graphs, charts, and interactive visualizations.

Using your summary as a guide, you should decide which type of visualization will present each specific piece of market research data most effectively (often, the easier to understand and more accessible, the better).

Doing so will allow you to create a story that will put your research information into a living, breathing context, providing a level of insight you need to transform industry, competitor, or consumer info or feedback into actionable strategies and initiatives.

• Be careful not to mislead 

Expanding on the point above, using a mix of visuals can prove highly valuable in presenting your results in an engaging and understandable way. That being said, when not used correctly, graphs and charts can also become misleading. This is a popular practice in the media, news, and politics, where designers tweak the visuals to manipulate the masses into believing a certain conclusion. This is a very unethical practice that can also happen by mistake when you don’t pick the right chart or are not using it in the correct way. Therefore, it is important to outline the message you are trying to convey and pick the chart type that will best suit those needs. 

Additionally, you should also be careful with the data you choose to display, as it can also become misleading. This can happen if you, for example, cherry-pick data, which means only showing insights that prove a conclusion instead of the bigger picture. Or confusing correlation with causation, which means assuming that because two events happened simultaneously, one caused the other. 

Being aware of these practices is of utmost importance as objectivity is crucial when it comes to dealing with data analytics, especially if you are presenting results to clients. Our guides on misleading statistics and misleading data visualizations can help you learn more about this important topic. 

• Use professional dashboards:

To optimize your market research discoveries, you must work with a dynamic business dashboard . Not only are modern dashboards presentable and customizable, but they will offer you past, predictive, and real-time insights that are accurate, interactive, and yield long-lasting results.

All market research reports companies or businesses gathering industry or consumer-based information will benefit from professional dashboards, as they offer a highly powerful means of presenting your data in a way everyone can understand. And when that happens, everyone wins.

Did you know? The interactive nature of modern dashboards like datapine also offers the ability to quickly filter specific pockets of information with ease, offering swift access to invaluable insights.

• Prioritize interactivity 

The times when reports were static are long gone. Today, to extract the maximum value out of your research data, you need to be able to explore the information and answer any critical questions that arise during the presentation of results. To do so, modern reporting tools provide multiple interactivity features to help you bring your research results to life. 

For instance, a drill-down filter lets you go into lower levels of hierarchical data without generating another graph. For example, imagine you surveyed customers from 10 different countries. In your report, you have a chart displaying the number of customers by country, but you want to analyze a specific country in detail. A drill down filter would enable you to click on a specific country and display data by city on that same chart. Even better, a global filter would allow you to filter the entire report to show only results for that specific country. 

Through the use of interactive filters, such as the one we just mentioned, you’ll not only make the presentation of results more efficient and profound, but you’ll also avoid generating pages-long reports to display static results. All your information will be displayed in a single interactive page that can be filtered and explored upon need.  

• Customize the reports 

This is a tip that is valuable for any kind of research report, especially when it comes to agencies that are reporting to external clients. Customizing the report to match your client’s colors, logo, font, and overall branding will help them grasp the data better, thanks to a familiar environment. This is an invaluable tip as often your audience will not feel comfortable dealing with data and might find it hard to understand or intimidating. Therefore, providing a familiar look that is also interactive and easier to understand will keep them engaged and collaborative throughout the process. 

Plus, customizing the overall appearance of the report will also make your agency look more professional, adding extra value to your service. 

• Know your design essentials 

When you’re presenting your market research reports sample to internal or external stakeholders, having a firm grasp on fundamental design principles will make your metrics and insights far more persuasive and compelling.

By arranging your metrics in a balanced and logical format, you can guide users toward key pockets of information exactly when needed. In turn, this will improve decision-making and navigation, making your reports as impactful as possible.

For essential tips, read our 23 dashboard design principles & best practices to enhance your analytics process.

• Think of security and privacy 

Cyberattacks are increasing at a concerning pace, making security a huge priority for organizations of all sizes today. The costs of having your sensitive information leaked are not only financial but also reputational, as customers might not trust you again if their data ends up in the wrong hands. Given that market research analysis is often performed by agencies that handle data from clients, security and privacy should be a top priority.  

To ensure the required security and privacy, it is necessary to invest in the right tools to present your research results. For instance, tools such as datapine offer enterprise-level security protocols that ensure your information is encrypted and protected at all times. Plus, the tool also offers additional security features, such as being able to share your reports through a password-protected URL or to set viewer rights to ensure only the right people can access and manipulate the data. 

• Keep on improving & evolving

Each time you gather or gain new marketing research reports or market research analysis report intel, you should aim to refine your existing dashboards to reflect the ever-changing landscape around you.

If you update your reports and dashboards according to the new research you conduct and new insights you connect with, you will squeeze maximum value from your metrics, enjoying consistent development in the process.

Types of Market Research Reports: Primary & Secondary Research

With so many market research examples and such little time, knowing how to best present your insights under pressure can prove tricky.

To squeeze every last drop of value from your market research efforts and empower everyone with access to the right information, you should arrange your information into two main groups: primary research and secondary research.

A. Primary research

Primary research is based on acquiring direct or first-hand information related to your industry or sector and the customers linked to it.

Exploratory primary research is an initial form of information collection where your team might set out to identify potential issues, opportunities, and pain points related to your business or industry. This type of research is usually carried out in the form of general surveys or open-ended consumer Q&As, which nowadays are often performed online rather than offline . 

Specific primary research is definitive, with information gathered based on the issues, information, opportunities, or pain points your business has already uncovered. When doing this kind of research, you can drill down into a specific segment of your customers and seek answers to the opportunities, issues, or pain points in question.

When you’re conducting primary research to feed into your market research reporting efforts, it’s important to find reliable information sources. The most effective primary research sources include:

• Consumer-based statistical data
• Social media content
• Polls and Q&A
• Trend-based insights
• Competitor research
• First-hand interviews

B. Secondary research

Secondary research refers to every strand of relevant data or public records you have to gain a deeper insight into your market and target consumers. These sources include trend reports, market stats, industry-centric content, and sales insights you have at your disposal.  Secondary research is an effective way of gathering valuable intelligence about your competitors. 

You can gather very precise, insightful secondary market research insights from:

• Public records and resources like Census data, governmental reports, or labor stats
• Commercial resources like Gartner, Statista, or Forrester
• Articles, documentaries, and interview transcripts

Another essential branch of both primary and secondary research is internal intelligence. When it comes to efficient market research reporting examples that will benefit your organization, looking inward is a powerful move. 

Existing sales, demographic, or marketing performance insights will lead you to valuable conclusions. Curating internal information will ensure your market research discoveries are well-rounded while helping you connect with the information that will ultimately give you a panoramic view of your target market. 

By understanding both types of research and how they can offer value to your business, you can carefully choose the right informational sources, gather a wide range of intelligence related to your specific niche, and, ultimately, choose the right market research report sample for your specific needs.

If you tailor your market research report format to the type of research you conduct, you will present your visualizations in a way that provides the right people with the right insights, rather than throwing bundles of facts and figures on the wall, hoping that some of them stick.

Taking ample time to explore a range of primary and secondary sources will give your discoveries genuine context. By doing so, you will have a wealth of actionable consumer and competitor insights at your disposal at every stage of your organization’s development (a priceless weapon in an increasingly competitive digital age). 

Dynamic market research is the cornerstone of business development, and a dashboard builder is the vessel that brings these all-important insights to life. Once you get into that mindset, you will ensure that your research results always deliver maximum value.

Common Challenges & Mistakes Of Market Research Reporting & Analysis

We’ve explored different types of market research analysis examples and considered how to conduct effective research. Now, it’s time to look at the key mistakes of market research reporting.  Let’s start with the mistakes.

The mistakes

One of the biggest mistakes that stunt the success of a company’s market research efforts is strategy. Without taking the time to gather an adequate mix of insights from various sources and define your key aims or goals, your processes will become disjointed. You will also suffer from a severe lack of organizational vision.

For your market research-centric strategy to work, everyone within the company must be on the same page. Your core aims and objectives must align throughout the business, and everyone must be clear on their specific role. If you try to craft a collaborative strategy and decide on your informational sources from the very start of your journey, your strategy will deliver true growth and intelligence.

• Measurement

Another classic market research mistake is measurement – or, more accurately, a lack of precise measurement. When embarking on market intelligence gathering processes, many companies fail to select the right KPIs and set the correct benchmarks for the task at hand. Without clearly defined goals, many organizations end up with a market analysis report format that offers little or no value in terms of decision-making or market insights.

To drive growth with your market research efforts, you must set clearly defined KPIs that align with your specific goals, aims, and desired outcomes.

• Competition

A common mistake among many new or scaling companies is failing to explore and examine the competition. This will leave you with gaping informational blindspots. To truly benefit from market research, you must gather valuable nuggets of information from every key source available. Rather than solely looking at your consumers and the wider market (which is incredibly important), you should take the time to see what approach your direct competitors have adopted while getting to grips with the content and communications.

One of the most effective ways of doing so (and avoiding such a monumental market research mistake) is by signing up for your competitors’ mailing lists, downloading their apps, and examining their social media content. This will give you inspiration for your own efforts while allowing you to exploit any gaps in the market that your competitors are failing to fill.

The challenges

• Informational quality

We may have an almost infinite wealth of informational insights at our fingertips, but when it comes to market research, knowing which information to trust can prove an uphill struggle.

When working with metrics, many companies risk connecting with inaccurate insights or leading to a fruitless informational rabbit hole, wasting valuable time and resources in the process. To avoid such a mishap, working with a trusted modern market research and analysis sample is the only way forward.

• Senior buy-in

Another pressing market research challenge that stunts organizational growth is the simple case of senior buy-in. While almost every senior decision-maker knows that market research is an essential component of a successful commercial strategy, many are reluctant to invest an ample amount of time or money in the pursuit.

The best way to overcome such a challenge is by building a case that defines exactly how your market research strategies will offer a healthy ROI to every key aspect of the organization, from marketing and sales to customer experience (CX) and beyond.

• Response rates

Low interview, focus group, or poll response rates can have a serious impact on the success and value of your market research strategy. Even with adequate senior buy-in, you can’t always guarantee that you will get enough responses from early-round interviews or poll requests. If you don’t, your market research discoveries run the risk of being shallow or offering little in the way of actionable insight.

To overcome this common challenge, you can improve the incentive you offer your market research prospects while networking across various platforms to discover new contact opportunities. Changing the tone of voice of your ads or emails will also help boost your consumer or client response rates.

Bringing Your Reports a Step Further

Even if it is still widespread for market-style research results presentation, using PowerPoint at this stage is a hassle and presents many downsides and complications. When busy managers or short-on-time top executives grab a report, they want a quick overview that gives them an idea of the results and the big picture that addresses the objectives: they need a dashboard. This can be applied to all areas of a business that need fast and interactive data visualizations to support their decision-making.

We all know that a picture conveys more information than simple text or figures, so managing to bring it all together on an actionable dashboard will convey your message more efficiently. Besides, market research dashboards have the incredible advantage of always being up-to-date since they work with real-time insights: the synchronization/updating nightmare of dozens of PowerPoint slides doesn’t exist for you anymore. This is particularly helpful for tracking studies performed over time that recurrently need their data to be updated with more recent ones.

In today’s fast-paced business environment, companies must identify and grab new opportunities as they arise while staying away from threats and adapting quickly. In order to always be a step further and make the right decisions, it is critical to perform market research studies to get the information needed and make important decisions with confidence.

We’ve asked the question, “What is a market research report?”, and examined the dynamics of a modern market research report example, and one thing’s for sure: a visual market research report is the best way to understand your customer and thus increase their satisfaction by meeting their expectations head-on. 

From looking at a sample of a market research report, it’s also clear that modern dashboards help you see what is influencing your business with clarity, understand where your brand is situated in the market, and gauge the temperature of your niche or industry before a product or service launch. Once all the studies are done, you must present them efficiently to ensure everyone in the business can make the right decisions that result in real progress. Market research reports are your key allies in the matter.

To start presenting your results with efficient, interactive, dynamic research reports and win on tomorrow’s commercial battlefield, try our dashboard reporting software and test every feature with our 14-day free trial !

Numbers, Facts and Trends Shaping Your World

Read our research on:

Full Topic List

Regions & Countries

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

Read Our Research On:

When Online Content Disappears

38% of webpages that existed in 2013 are no longer accessible a decade later, table of contents.

• Webpages from the last decade
• Links on government websites
• Links on news websites
• Reference links on Wikipedia
• Posts on Twitter
• Acknowledgments
• Collection and analysis of Twitter data
• Data collection for World Wide Web websites, government websites and news websites
• Data collection for Wikipedia source links
• Evaluating the status of pages and links
• Definition of links

Pew Research Center conducted the analysis to examine how often online content that once existed becomes inaccessible. One part of the study looks at a representative sample of webpages that existed over the past decade to see how many are still accessible today. For this analysis, we collected a sample of pages from the Common Crawl web repository for each year from 2013 to 2023. We then tried to access those pages to see how many still exist.

A second part of the study looks at the links on existing webpages to see how many of those links are still functional. We did this by collecting a large sample of pages from government websites, news websites and the online encyclopedia Wikipedia .

We identified relevant news domains using data from the audience metrics company comScore and relevant government domains (at multiple levels of government) using data from get.gov , the official administrator for the .gov domain. We collected the news and government pages via Common Crawl and the Wikipedia pages from an archive maintained by the Wikimedia Foundation . For each collection, we identified the links on those pages and followed them to their destination to see what share of those links point to sites that are no longer accessible.

A third part of the study looks at how often individual posts on social media sites are deleted or otherwise removed from public view. We did this by collecting a large sample of public tweets on the social media platform X (then known as Twitter) in real time using the Twitter Streaming API. We then tracked the status of those tweets for a period of three months using the Twitter Search API to monitor how many were still publicly available. Refer to the report methodology for more details.

The internet is an unimaginably vast repository of modern life, with hundreds of billions of indexed webpages. But even as users across the world rely on the web to access books, images, news articles and other resources, this content sometimes disappears from view.

A new Pew Research Center analysis shows just how fleeting online content actually is:

• A quarter of all webpages that existed at one point between 2013 and 2023 are no longer accessible, as of October 2023. In most cases, this is because an individual page was deleted or removed on an otherwise functional website.

• For older content, this trend is even starker. Some 38% of webpages that existed in 2013 are not available today, compared with 8% of pages that existed in 2023.

This “digital decay” occurs in many different online spaces. We examined the links that appear on government and news websites, as well as in the “References” section of Wikipedia pages as of spring 2023. This analysis found that:

• 23% of news webpages contain at least one broken link, as do 21% of webpages from government sites. News sites with a high level of site traffic and those with less are about equally likely to contain broken links. Local-level government webpages (those belonging to city governments) are especially likely to have broken links.
• 54% of Wikipedia pages contain at least one link in their “References” section that points to a page that no longer exists.

To see how digital decay plays out on social media, we also collected a real-time sample of tweets during spring 2023 on the social media platform X (then known as Twitter) and followed them for three months. We found that:

• Nearly one-in-five tweets are no longer publicly visible on the site just months after being posted. In 60% of these cases, the account that originally posted the tweet was made private, suspended or deleted entirely. In the other 40%, the account holder deleted the individual tweet, but the account itself still existed.
• Certain types of tweets tend to go away more often than others. More than 40% of tweets written in Turkish or Arabic are no longer visible on the site within three months of being posted. And tweets from accounts with the default profile settings are especially likely to disappear from public view.

How this report defines inaccessible links and webpages

There are many ways of defining whether something on the internet that used to exist is now inaccessible to people trying to reach it today. For instance, “inaccessible” could mean that:

• The page no longer exists on its host server, or the host server itself no longer exists. Someone visiting this type of page would typically receive a variation on the “404 Not Found” server error instead of the content they were looking for.
• The page address exists but its content has been changed – sometimes dramatically – from what it was originally.
• The page exists but certain users – such as those with blindness or other visual impairments – might find it difficult or impossible to read.

For this report, we focused on the first of these: pages that no longer exist. The other definitions of accessibility are beyond the scope of this research.

Our approach is a straightforward way of measuring whether something online is accessible or not. But even so, there is some ambiguity.

First, there are dozens of status codes indicating a problem that a user might encounter when they try to access a page. Not all of them definitively indicate whether the page is permanently defunct or just temporarily unavailable. Second, for security reasons, many sites actively try to prevent the sort of automated data collection that we used to test our full list of links.

For these reasons, we used the most conservative estimate possible for deciding whether a site was actually accessible or not. We counted pages as inaccessible only if they returned one of nine error codes that definitively indicate that the page and/or its host server no longer exist or have become nonfunctional – regardless of how they are being accessed, and by whom. The full list of error codes that we included in our definition are in the methodology .

Here are some of the findings from our analysis of digital decay in various online spaces.

To conduct this part of our analysis, we collected a random sample of just under 1 million webpages from the archives of Common Crawl , an internet archive service that periodically collects snapshots of the internet as it exists at different points in time. We sampled pages collected by Common Crawl each year from 2013 through 2023 (approximately 90,000 pages per year) and checked to see if those pages still exist today.

We found that 25% of all the pages we collected from 2013 through 2023 were no longer accessible as of October 2023. This figure is the sum of two different types of broken pages: 16% of pages are individually inaccessible but come from an otherwise functional root-level domain; the other 9% are inaccessible because their entire root domain is no longer functional.

Not surprisingly, the older snapshots in our collection had the largest share of inaccessible links. Of the pages collected from the 2013 snapshot, 38% were no longer accessible in 2023. But even for pages collected in the 2021 snapshot, about one-in-five were no longer accessible just two years later.

We sampled around 500,000 pages from government websites using the Common Crawl March/April 2023 snapshot of the internet, including a mix of different levels of government (federal, state, local and others). We found every link on each page and followed a random selection of those links to their destination to see if the pages they refer to still exist.

Across the government websites we sampled, there were 42 million links. The vast majority of those links (86%) were internal, meaning they link to a different page on the same website. An explainer resource on the IRS website that links to other documents or forms on the IRS site would be an example of an internal link.

Around three-quarters of government webpages we sampled contained at least one on-page link. The typical (median) page contains 50 links, but many pages contain far more. A page in the 90th percentile contains 190 links, and a page in the 99th percentile (that is, the top 1% of pages by number of links) has 740 links.

Other facts about government webpage links:

• The vast majority go to secure HTTP pages (and have a URL starting with “https://”).
• 6% go to a static file, like a PDF document.
• 16% now redirect to a different URL than the one they originally pointed to.

When we followed these links, we found that 6% point to pages that are no longer accessible. Similar shares of internal and external links are no longer functional.

Overall, 21% of all the government webpages we examined contained at least one broken link. Across every level of government we looked at, there were broken links on at least 14% of pages; city government pages had the highest rates of broken links.

For this analysis, we sampled 500,000 pages from 2,063 websites classified as “News/Information” by the audience metrics firm comScore. The pages were collected from the Common Crawl March/April 2023 snapshot of the internet.

Across the news sites sampled, this collection contained more than 14 million links pointing to an outside website. 1 Some 94% of these pages contain at least one external-facing link. The median page contains 20 links, and pages in the top 10% by link count have 56 links.

Like government websites, the vast majority of these links go to secure HTTP pages (those with a URL beginning with “https://”). Around 12% of links on these news sites point to a static file, like a PDF document. And 32% of links on news sites redirected to a different URL than the one they originally pointed to – slightly less than the 39% of external links on government sites that redirect.

When we tracked these links to their destination, we found that 5% of all links on news site pages are no longer accessible. And 23% of all the pages we sampled contained at least one broken link.

Broken links are about as prevalent on the most-trafficked news websites as they are on the least-trafficked sites. Some 25% of pages on news websites in the top 20% by site traffic have at least one broken link. That is nearly identical to the 26% of sites in the bottom 20% by site traffic.

For this analysis, we collected a random sample of 50,000 English-language Wikipedia pages and examined the links in their “References” section. The vast majority of these pages (82%) contain at least one reference link – that is, one that directs the reader to a webpage other than Wikipedia itself.

In total, there are just over 1 million reference links across all the pages we collected. The typical page has four reference links.

The analysis indicates that 11% of all references linked on Wikipedia are no longer accessible. On about 2% of source pages containing reference links, every link on the page was broken or otherwise inaccessible, while another 53% of pages contained at least one broken link.

For this analysis, we collected nearly 5 million tweets posted from March 8 to April 27, 2023, on the social media platform X, which at the time was known as Twitter. We did this using Twitter’s Streaming API, collecting 3,000 public tweets every 30 minutes in real time. This provided us with a representative sample of all tweets posted on the platform during that period. We monitored those tweets until June 15, 2023, and checked each day to see if they were still available on the site or not.

At the end of the observation period, we found that 18% of the tweets from our initial collection window were no longer publicly visible on the site . In a majority of cases, this was because the account that originally posted the tweet was made private, suspended or deleted entirely. For the remaining tweets, the account that posted the tweet was still visible on the site, but the individual tweet had been deleted.

Which tweets tend to disappear?

Tweets were especially likely to be deleted or removed over the course of our collection period if they were:

• Written in certain languages. Nearly half of all the Turkish-language tweets we collected – and a slightly smaller share of those written in Arabic – were no longer available at the end of the tracking period.
• Posted by accounts using the site’s default profile settings. More than half of tweets from accounts using the default profile image were no longer available at the end of the tracking period, as were more than a third from accounts with a default bio field. Tweets from these accounts tend to disappear because the entire account has been deleted or made private, as opposed to the individual tweet being deleted.
• Posted by unverified accounts.

We also found that removed or deleted tweets tended to come from newer accounts with relatively few followers and modest activityon the site. On average, tweets that were no longer visible on the site were posted by accounts around eight months younger than those whose tweets stayed on the site.

And when we analyzed the types of tweets that were no longer available, we found that retweets, quote tweets and original tweets did not differ much from the overall average. But replies were relatively unlikely to be removed – just 12% of replies were inaccessible at the end of our monitoring period.

Most tweets that are removed from the site tend to disappear soon after being posted. In addition to looking at how many tweets from our collection were still available at the end of our tracking period, we conducted a survival analysis to see how long these tweets tended to remain available. We found that:

• 1% of tweets are removed within one hour
• 3% within a day
• 10% within a week
• 15% within a month

Put another way: Half of tweets that are eventually removed from the platform are unavailable within the first six days of being posted. And 90% of these tweets are unavailable within 46 days.

Tweets don’t always disappear forever, though. Some 6% of the tweets we collected disappeared and then became available again at a later point. This could be due to an account going private and then returning to public status, or to the account being suspended and later reinstated. Of those “reappeared” tweets, the vast majority (90%) were still accessible on Twitter at the end of the monitoring period.

• For our analysis of news sites, we did not collect or check the functionality of internal-facing on-page links – those that point to another page on the same root domain. ↩

Sign up for our weekly newsletter

Fresh data delivery Saturday mornings

Sign up for The Briefing

Weekly updates on the world of news & information

• Internet & Technology
• Online Search
• Public Knowledge

Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure in the U.S.

A quarter of u.s. teachers say ai tools do more harm than good in k-12 education, teens and video games today, americans’ views of technology companies, 6 facts about americans and tiktok, most popular, report materials.

1615 L St. NW, Suite 800 Washington, DC 20036 USA (+1) 202-419-4300 | Main (+1) 202-857-8562 | Fax (+1) 202-419-4372 |  Media Inquiries

Research Topics

• Email Newsletters

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

Copyright 2024 Pew Research Center

Along with Stanford news and stories, show me:

• Student information
• Faculty/Staff information

We want to provide announcements, events, leadership messages and resources that are relevant to you. Your selection is stored in a browser cookie which you can remove at any time using “Clear all personalization” below.

Dear Stanford Community,

As you know, last December a Special Committee of the University’s Board of Trustees initiated a review of allegations of misconduct related to my scientific research and papers that I authored or coauthored. I have consistently denied any allegations, including those based on anonymous and unsubstantiated sources, that I engaged in fraud or any other unethical conduct related to my research and papers.

The Findings on the Issue of Research Misconduct

Today, after a comprehensive and months-long review process that included input from an independent Scientific Panel, the Special Committee has issued a report detailing its conclusions.

I am gratified that the Panel concluded I did not engage in any fraud or falsification of scientific data. Specifically, the Panel did not find that I engaged in research misconduct regarding the twelve papers reviewed, nor did it find I had knowledge of or was reckless regarding research misconduct in my lab.

As I have emphatically stated, I have never submitted a scientific paper without firmly believing that the data were correct and accurately presented. Today’s report supports that statement.

Stepping Down as President

Although the report clearly refutes the allegations of fraud and misconduct that were made against me, for the good of the University, I have made the decision to step down as President effective August 31.

The Panel’s report identified some areas where I should have done better, and I accept the report’s conclusions. Specifically, the report discusses steps I took to address issues that arose with some publications. I agree that in some instances I should have been more diligent when seeking corrections, and I regret that I was not. The Panel’s review also identified instances of manipulation of research data by others in my lab. Although I was unaware of these issues, I want to be clear that I take responsibility for the work of my lab members.

I expect there may be ongoing discussion about the report and its conclusions, at least in the near term, which could lead to debate about my ability to lead the University into the new academic year.

Stanford is greater than any one of us. It needs a president whose leadership is not hampered by such discussions. I therefore concluded that I should step down before the start of classes. This decision is rooted in my respect for the University and its community and my unwavering commitment to doing what I believe is in the best interests of Stanford.

Leadership Transition and Ongoing Role as Stanford Faculty Member

I communicated my decision to the Board of Trustees, and they accepted my view that a leadership transition in time for the start of the next school year is the best course of action. I am confident the Board will appoint a superb leader as the next President of our beloved institution.

While I will be stepping down as President, I will remain on the Stanford faculty and look forward to continuing to conduct my scientific research on brain development and neurodegeneration under the auspices of one of the world’s preeminent educational institutions.

Assessment and Actions Regarding Research Papers in Question

In the 32 years I have headed a research laboratory, I have published 74 papers of which I am a principal author, and over 150 of which I am a non-principal author.

Of the twelve papers that were part of the Special Committee’s review, seven are ones of which I am a non-principal author and where the images in question were generated in the principal author’s lab. With respect to those papers, the Panel’s conclusions support that I did not have knowledge of any errors or manipulation of research data.

The remaining five papers are ones of which I am a principal author. In a separate document available on my website , I provide information on the Panel’s conclusions and corrective actions I believe it is necessary for me to take with respect to these five papers, but I want to briefly touch on two points.

First, four of the five papers are ones that I have known for some time have issues. While I took steps in the past to address these issues, I agree with the Panel that in some cases those steps were insufficient.

Second, with respect to three of those four papers, which are more than two decades old, new information from the Special Committee’s review has revealed that the person responsible for the issues engaged in manipulation of research data in that trio of papers. Evidence of manipulation of research data by another individual in one figure in a fifth paper published two decades ago has also recently come to light. The Panel concluded I had no knowledge of the data manipulation before any of these papers were published or, indeed, until recently, and that it would not have been reasonable to expect me to have detected it at the time.

With the knowledge I have now, it is clear that the issues with these five papers require me to retract the trio of papers and correct the other two.

These findings have also caused me to further reassess the processes and controls I have in place. While I continually maintain a critical eye on all the science in my lab, I have also always operated my lab on trust – trust in my students and postdocs, and trust that the data they were presenting to me was real and accurate. Going forward, I will be further tightening controls, including, for example, more systematically matching processed images to original raw data, both in the course of each scientific study and especially when bringing a study to publication. I will vigorously apply this and other best practices to ensure that these kinds of problems do not recur.

I have been in this role for nearly seven years, and it has been the greatest honor and most fulfilling experience of my career. I will always cherish my time as Stanford’s President, and I am proud of what we accomplished together during my tenure.

I am especially proud of our partnership to develop a Long-Range Vision for Stanford as a Purposeful University, focused on education, knowledge, solutions and sustainability, and on supporting a diverse and inclusive community. From this flowed, among other things, the new Stanford Doerr School of Sustainability; a new undergraduate curriculum focused on citizenship; robust expansion of our financial aid programs; creation of impact accelerators for medicine, education, social problems and sustainability; establishment of institutes to help shape the digital future; and foundational support for our scholars in all fields to remain at the cutting edge of their disciplines. The Vision has inspired our broader community, triggering more philanthropic support in the past few years than was raised in our last major campaign. I look forward to seeing how our community continues to pursue excellence in these areas and others in coming years.

There is so much for which I am grateful, and I have many to thank. I first want to thank the Board of Trustees for giving me the extraordinary opportunity to lead Stanford – and for the diligence and professionalism with which the Scientific Panel, the Special Committee, and the Special Committee’s outside legal counsel conducted the review. I also want to extend a heartfelt thank you to Provost Drell and the entire Stanford leadership team for their partnership and support these last seven years, which have been marked by so many accomplishments. Most of all, I want to thank the entire Stanford community – for your brilliance, dedication, and the wonderful contributions you each have made to this institution as students, professors, staff members, and more. I am confident that Stanford will continue to be a pioneer and a force for good in the world, and I remain eternally grateful and devoted to the institution that we all love.

I look forward to continuing my relationship with all of you and those who become part of the Stanford community in the future.

Marc Tessier-Lavigne

• Open access
• Published: 16 May 2024

Experiences of UK clinical scientists (Physical Sciences modality) with their regulator, the Health and Care Professions Council: results of a 2022 survey

• Mark McJury 1  

BMC Health Services Research volume  24 , Article number:  635 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

995 Accesses

Metrics details

In healthcare, regulation of professions is an important tool to protect the public. With increasing regulation however, professions find themselves under increasing scrutiny. Recently there has also been considerable concern with regulator performance, with high profile reports pointing to cases of inefficiency and bias. Whilst reports have often focused on large staff groups, such as doctors, in the literature there is a dearth of data on the experiences of smaller professional groups such Clinical Scientists with their regulator, the Health and Care Professions Council.

This article reports the findings of a survey from Clinical Scientists (Physical Sciences modality) about their experiences with their regulator, and their perception of the quality and safety of that regulation.

Between July–October 2022, a survey was conducted via the Medical Physics and Engineering mail-base, open to all medical physicists & engineers. Questions covered typical topics of registration, communication, audit and fitness to practice. The questionnaire consisted of open and closed questions. Likert scoring, and thematic analysis were used to assess the quantitative and qualitative data.

Of 146 responses recorded, analysis was based on 143 respondents. Overall survey sentiment was significantly more negative than positive, in terms of regulator performance (negative responses 159; positive 106; significant at p  < 0.001). Continuous Professional Development audit was rated median 4; other topics were rated as neutral (fitness to practice, policies & procedures); and some as poor (value).

Conclusions

The Clinical Scientist (Physical Sciences) professional registrants rated the performance of their regulator more negatively than other reported assessments (by the Professional Standards Authority). Survey respondents suggested a variety of performance aspects, such as communication and fitness to practice, would benefit from improvement. Indications from this small dataset, suggest a larger survey of HCPC registrants would be useful.

Peer Review reports

In Healthcare, protection of patients and the public is a core principle. Part the framework of protections, includes regulation of professions [ 1 ]. This aims to mitigate risks such as the risk from bogus practitioners – insufficiently trained people acting as fully-trained professional practitioners, see Fig.  1 .

Recent UK media report on a bogus healthcare practitioner [ 2 ]

Regulation of professions ensures that titles (e.g. Doctor, Dentist, Clinical Scientist) are protected in law. The protected title means someone may only use that title, if they are on the national register, managed by the regulator – the Health and Care Professions Council (HCPC). It is a criminal offence to use a protected title if you are not entitled to do so [ 3 ]. There are a large number of regulators in healthcare – see Table  1 . Most of the regulators manage a register for one profession, except the HCPC which regulates 15 professions.

To be included on the register, a candidate must meet the regulators criteria for knowledge and training, and a key element to remain, is to show evidence of continuous professional development (CPD). Being on the register ensures that a practitioner has met the appropriate level of competence and professional practice.

For many healthcare workers, being on the HCPC register is a compulsory requirement to be appointable to a post. They must pay the necessary annual fees, and abide by the policies drawn-up by the regulator, and generally professions have no choice of regulator – these are statutory bodies, setup by government.

Recently, there has been considerable public dissatisfaction with the activity & performance of some regulators, notably Ofwat [ 4 ], and Ofgem [ 5 ]. Healthcare workers should expect a high level of professionalism, efficiency, and integrity from a regulator, as the regulator’s performance directly affects staff and public safety.

In terms of the regulation of UK Clinical Scientists, there is a dearth of data regarding experiences with the HCPC and views on the quality of regulation provided.

Findings are reported here from a 2022 survey of Medical Physicists and Engineers (one of the 16 job roles or ‘modalities’ under the umbrella of Clinical Scientist). The research aim was to assess experiences, and the level of ‘satisfaction’ with the regulator. For the remainder of this report, the term Clinical Scientist will be taken to mean Clinical Scientist (Medical Physicist/Engineer). The survey was designed to gather & explore data about opinions and experiences regarding several key aspects of how the HCPC performs its role, and perception of the quality & safety of regulation delivered.

A short survey questionnaire was developed, with questions aimed to cover the main regulatory processes, including registration & renewal, CPD audit, and fitness-to-practice. There were also questions relating more generally to HCPC’s performance as an organisation, e.g. handling of personal data. Finally, participants were asked to rate the HCPC’s overall performance and what they felt was the ‘value’ of regulation. The survey questions are listed in the Supplementary file along with this article.

Questions were carefully worded and there was a balance of open and closed questions. A five-point Likert score was used to rate closed questions. The survey was anonymous, and the questions were not compulsory, allowing the responders to skip irrelevant or difficult questions. The survey also aimed to be as short & concise as possible, to be a minimal burden to busy clinical staff & hopefully maximise response rate. There were a small number of questions at the start of the survey, to collect basic demographics on the respondents (role, grade, UK nation etc.).

The survey was advertised on the online JISC-hosted UK Medical Physics and Engineering (UKMPE) mail-base. This offered convenient access for the majority of Clinical Scientists. The survey was advertised twice, to allow for potential work absence, holiday/illness etc. It was active from the end of July 2002 until October 2022, when responses appeared to saturate.

The data is a combination of quantitative rating scores, and qualitative text responses. This allows a mixed-methods approach to data analysis, combining quantitative assessment of the Likert scoring, and (recursive) thematic analysis of the free-text answers [ 6 ]. Thematic analysis is a standard tool, and has been reported as a useful & appropriate for assessing experiences, thoughts, or behaviours in a dataset [ 7 ]. The survey questions addressed the main themes, but further themes were identified using an inductive, data-driven approach. Qualitative data analysis (QDA) was performed using NVivo (QSR International).

Two survey questions attempted to obtain an overall perception of HCPC’s performance: the direct one (Q12), and a further question’Would you recommend HCPC as a regulator…?’. This latter question doesn’t perhaps add anything more, and in fact a few respondents suggested it was a slightly awkward question, given professions do not have a choice of regulator – so that has been excluded from the analysis.

Study conduct was performed in accordance with relevant guidelines and regulations [ 8 , 9 ]. Before conducting the survey of Clinical Scientists, the survey was sent to their professional body, the Institute of Physics and Engineering in Medicine (IPEM). The IPEM Professional Standards Committee reviewed the survey questions [ 10 ]. Written informed consent was obtained from participants.

Data analysis

Data was collected via an MS form, in a single excel sheet and stored on a secure network drive. The respondents were anonymised, and the data checked for errors. The data was then imported into NVivo v12.

Qualitative data was manually coded for themes, and auto-coded for sentiment. An inductive approach was used to develop themes.

The sample size of responses allowed the use of simple parametric tests to establish the level of statistical significance.

Survey demographics

A total of 146 responses were collected. Two respondents noted that they worked as an HCPC Partner (a paid role). They were excluded from the analysis due to potential conflict of interest. One respondent’s responses were all blank aside from the demographic data, so they were also excluded from further analysis.

Analysis is based on 143 responses, which represents ~ 6% of the UK profession [ 11 ]. It is arguable whether it is representative of the profession at this proportion of response – but these responses do offer the only sizeable pool of data currently available. The survey was aimed at those who are on the statutory register as they are most likely to have relevant interactions & experiences of the HCPC, but a small number of responses were also received from Clinical Technologists (Medical Technical Officers-MTOs) and Engineers (CEs) and these have been included in the analysis. Figure  2 shows the breakdown in respondents, by nation.

Proportion of respondents, by nation

Of the respondents, 91% are registered Clinical Scientists, and would therefore have a broad range of experience with HCPC and its processes. Mean time on the register was 12 yrs. Respondents show a large range in seniority, and their roles are shown in Fig.  3 (CS-Clinical Scientist; CE-Clinical Engineer; MTO-Medical Technical Officer/Technician; CS-P are those working in private healthcare settings, so not on Agenda for Change (AfC) pay bands).

Breakdown in respondents, by role and pay banding

These data can be compared with the most recent HCPC ‘snapshot’ of the CS registrants (find here: Registrants by profession snapshot—1967 to 2019 | ( https://www.hcpc-uk.org/resources/data/2019/registrant-snapshot/ )).

The perception of overall regulator performance, can be assessed in two ways – one interview question directly asked for a rating score, and the overall survey sentiment also offers additional insight.

The score for overall performance was a median of 3 (mean 2.7; response rate 90%) which suggests neutral satisfaction.

Respondents were not asked directly to explain this overall performance rating – themes were extracted from the questionnaire as a whole.

The auto-coded sentiment scores generated in the NVivo software are shown in Table  2 . There is a significantly stronger negative sentiment than positive for HCPC performance – moderate, strong and total sentiment scores are all higher for negative sentiment. The normal test for a single proportion (109), shows the negative and positive sentiment differences have statistical significance with p  < 0.001. Whilst the PSA assessment of HCPC performance in 2022–23 shows 100% performance for 4 out of 5 assessment areas, survey data here from regulated professionals suggests considerably less satisfaction with HCPC. This raises associated questions about the relevance and validity of PSA assessment.

A large number of respondents seem to question the value of regulation. Whilst many accepted the value for it in terms of protecting the safety of the public, many questioned its relevance & benefit to themselves. Many respondents also queried the payment model where although the main beneficiaries of regulation are the public & the employer, it is the registrants actually pay the fees for registration. There was very little mention in survey responses, of benefit in terms of protected-title. These issues were amalgamated into Theme 1— Value of regulation , with the two sub-themes Value in monetary terms (value-for-money) and Value in professional terms (benefit and relevance to the individual professional) (see Table  3 ).

In the survey, several aspects of HCPC organisational performance were scored – handling of personal data, registration and renewal, engagement with the profession, audit, and the quality and usefulness of HCPC policies. These formed Theme 2 and its sub-themes.

A third theme Registrant competence and vulnerability , was developed to focus on responses to questions related to the assessment of registrant competence and Fitness To Practice (FTP) processes.

Finally, the survey also directly asked respondents if they could suggest improvements which would have resulted in higher scoring for regulation quality and performance. These were grouped into Theme 4.

Theme 1 – Value of regulation

Value in monetary terms.

The Likert score for value-for-money was a median of 2 (mean 2.3; response rate 100%) which suggests dissatisfaction. This is one of the few survey questions to elicit a 100% response rate – a clear signal of its importance for registrants.

There was a high number of responses suggesting fees are too expensive (and a significantly smaller number suggesting good value). This ties in with some respondents explaining that the ‘benefit’ from registration is mainly for the employer (an assurance of high quality, well-trained staff). Several respondents point to little ‘tangible’ benefit for registrants and query whether the payment model is fair and if the employer should pay registrant fees.

“Expensive fees for what appears to be very little support.” Resp094

“It seems that I pay about £100 per year to have my name written on a list. It is unclear to me what the HCPC actually does in order to justify such a high fee.” Resp014

“I get, quite literally, nothing from it. It’s essentially a tax on work.” Resp008

Several respondents suggested that as registration was mandated by the employer, it was in essence an additional ‘tax’ on their employment, which was highlighted previously by Unison [ 12 ]. A comparator for payment model, are the checks preformed on potential staff who will be working with children and vulnerable adults. In general, these ‘disclosure’ checks are paid for by the employer, however the checks are not recurrent cost for each individual, but done once at recruitment.

Value in professional terms & relevance

This was not a direct question on the questionnaire, but emerged consistently in survey responses. Aside from value-for-money, the value of regulation can also refer to more general benefit and relevance for a professional, for example in protecting a professional title or emphasising the importance of a role. Many respondents commented, in relation to the ‘value’ of regulation, about the relevance of the HCPC to them and their job/role.

The largest number of responses highlighted the lack of clarity about HCPC’s role, and also to note its lack of relevance felt by a significant proportion of respondents.

“Not sure I have seen any value in my registration except that it is a requirement for my role” Resp017

“I really fail to understand what (sic) the benefits of registration.” Resp018

“They do not promote the profession. I see no evidence of supporting the profession. I pay to have the title and I am not aware of any other benefits.” Resp038

Theme 2 – HCPC performance

Communication & handling data.

The survey questionnaire did not have a specific question relating to communication, therefore no specific Likert scores are available. Rather, communication was a sub-theme which emerged in survey responses. The response numbers related to positive (1) and negative experiences (50) clearly suggest an overall experience of poor communication processes (and statistically significant at p  < 0.001 for a normal proportion test).

One respondent noted they had ‘given up’ trying to communicate with HCPC electronically. Several respondents also noted issues with conventional communication—letters from HCPC going to old addresses, or being very slow to arrive.

“…I have given up on contacting by electronic means.” Resp134

When trying to renew their registration, communication with HCPC was so difficult that two respondents noted they raised a formal complaint.

A number of respondents noted that when they eventually got through to the HCPC, staff were helpful, so the main communication issue may relate to insufficiently resourced lines of communication (phones & email) or the need for a more focussed first point of contact e.g. some form of helpdesk or triaging system.

“Recently long wait to get through to speak to someone… Once through staff very helpful.” Resp126

This topic overlaps with the next (Processing Registration & renewals) in that both involve online logins, website use etc.

Security & data handling was rated as neutral (median 3, mean 3.4; response rate 91%). Although responses were balanced in terms of satisfaction, a significant number noted a lack of knowledge about HCPC processes. There are almost equal proportions of respondents reporting no issues, some problems with handling of personal data, or insufficient knowledge to express an opinion.

Registration and renewal

The score for processing registrations & renewals, was a median of 4 (mean 3.5; response rate 92%) which suggests modest satisfaction.

The overall rating also suggests that the issues may have been experienced by a comparative minority of registrants and that for most, renewal was straightforward.

“They expected people to call their phone number, which then wasn’t picked up. They didn’t reply to emails except after repeated attempts and finally having to resort to raising a complaint.” Resp023

“Difficult to get a timely response. Difficult to discuss my situation with a human being…” Resp044

Although the Likert score is positive, the themes in responses explaining the rating, are more mixed. Many respondents mentioned either having or knowing others who had issues with registration renewal, and its online processes including payments. A few respondents mentioned that the process was unforgiving of small errors. One respondent, for example, missed ticking a box on the renewal form, was removed from the register and experienced significant difficulties (poor communication with HCPC) getting the issue resolved.

Some respondents noted issues related to a long absence from work (e.g. maternity/illness etc.) causing them to miss registration deadlines – for some, this seems to have resulted in additional fees to renew registration. It seems rather easy for small errors (on either side) to result in registrants being removed from the register. For registrants, this can have very serious consequences and it can then be difficult and slow to resolve this, sometimes whilst on no pay. There have also been other reported instances of renewal payment collection errors [ 13 ].

“I had been off work… and had missed their renewal emails…I was told that there would be no allowances for this situation, and I would have to pay an additional fee to re-register…” Resp139.

Some respondents raised the issue of exclusion – certain staff groups not being included on the register—such as Clinical Technologists and Clinical Engineers. This desire for inclusion, also points to a perception of value in being on the register. One respondent raised an issue of very difficult and slow processing of registration for a candidate from outside the UK.

“Staff member who qualified as medical physicist abroad…has had a dreadful, drawn out and fruitless experience.” Resp135

Overall, many respondents noted difficulties in renewing registration and issues with HCPC’s online processes. Some of these issues (e.g. website renewal problems) may have been temporary and are now resolved, but others (e.g. available routes for registration) remain to be resolved.

Audit process & policies

In the survey, 12% respondents reported having been audited by HCPC regarding their CPD (response rate 97%). This is well above the level of 2.5% of each profession, which HCPC aims to review at each renewal [ 14 ], and similar values reported by some professional bodies [ 15 ]. The participants seem representative, although two respondents mentioned their perception of low audit rates. Data on CPD audit is available here: https://www.hcpc-uk.org/about-us/insights-and-data/cpd/cpd-audit-reports/

Respondents rated the process of being audited as a median of 4 (mean 3.7), which is the joint highest score on the survey, pointing to satisfaction with the process. From the responses, the overall perception could be summed up as straight-forward, but time-consuming. Without regular record-keeping, unfortunately most audits will be time-consuming – the HCPC more so, as it is not an annual audit, but covers the two preceding years.

Some respondents did find the process not only straight-forward, but also useful (related to feedback received). However, responses regarding feedback were mixed, with comments on both good, and poor feedback from HCPC.

“Not difficult but quite long-winded” Resp008

“Very stressful and time consuming” Resp081

“While it was a lot of work the process seemed very thorough and well explained.” Resp114

The HCPC’s policies & procedures were rated as a median of 3 (mean 3.2; response rate 98%). This neutral score could suggest a mixture of confidence in HCPC practise. This score may also reflect the fact that the majority of respondents had either not read, or felt they had no need to read the policies, and so are largely unfamiliar with them.

The reasons for this lack of familiarity are also explained by some respondents – four commented that the policies & procedures are rather too generic/vague. Three respondents noted that they felt the policies were not sufficiently relevant to their clinical roles to be useful. This may be due to the policies being written at a level to be applicable to registrants from all 16 modalities – and perhaps a limitation of the nature of HCPC as a very large regulator. Familiarity seemed mainly to be restricted to policies around registration, and CPD. There were slightly lower response levels for positive sentiment (6), than negative sentiment (9).

“I’ve never had cause to read them.” Resp115

“Detached from the real clinical interface for our professions…” Resp083

HCPC split their policies into ‘corporate’- which relate to organisational issues (e.g. equality & diversity; find them here: Our policies and procedures | ( https://www.hcpc-uk.org/about-us/corporate-governance/freedom-of-information/policies/#:~:text=Our%20main%20policies%20and%20procedures%201%20Customer%20feedback,scheme%20...%207%20Freedom%20of%20Information%20Policy%20 )) and those more relevant to professions (e.g. relating to the register; find them here: Resources | ( https://www.hcpc-uk.org/resources/?Query=&Categories=76 )).

One respondent noted not only that the policies were ‘as you might expect’, but felt the policies were less demanding than those from other similar bodies such as the CQC ( https://www.cqc.org.uk/publications ).

“…Other regulatory bodies (such as the CQC for example) have policies and procedures that are a lot more challenging to comply with.” Resp022

Theme 3 – Registrant competence and vulnerability

In this survey, 3.5% (5/143) of respondents noted some involvement with the HCPC’s Fitness to Practice service. These interactions were rated at a median of 3 (mean 2.8) suggesting neutral sentiment.

Firstly, we can immediately see the level of interaction with the FTP team is very small. CS registrants represent approx. 2% of HCPC registrants, and the level of CS referrals to FTP in 2020–21 was 0.2% [ 16 ].

The data is a very small sample, but responses vary strongly, so it is worth digging a little further into the granularity of individual responses. Response scores were 1, 1, 2, 5, 5 – which are mainly at the extremes of the rating spectrum. The majority of respondents described poor experiences with the FTP team: errors, a process which was ‘extremely prolonged’, involved slow/poor communication, and processes which were ‘entirely opaque’.

“It is slow, the process was badly managed… and the system was entirely opaque,” Resp37

“They were hard to contact and I didn't feel they listened…no explanation, apology or assurance it would not happen again. It left my colleague disillusioned and me very angry on their behalf…” Resp044

Some respondents commented that the team were not only difficult to contact, but also didn’t seem to listen. At the end of a process which involved errors from HCPC, one respondent noted were ‘no explanation, apologies or assurance that it would not happen again’, leaving the registrant ‘disillusioned’. These experiences do not fit with the HCPC’s stated goal to be a compassionate regulator, see Fig.  4 . Arguably it is more difficult to change a culture of behaviour and beliefs, than to publish a corporate goal or statement of vision.

HCPC’s vision statement & purpose [ 17 ]

Some survey respondents have noted the necessity of regulation for our profession.

“Ultimately I am very grateful that I can register as a professional.” Resp024

Theme 4 – Suggestions for improved regulation

Following the question relating to overall performance, respondents were invited to suggest things which might improve their rating for HCPC’s performance and value. These suggestions were also combined with those which appeared in earlier survey responses.

Although we are in a current cost-of-living crisis, responses did not query simply high absolute cost of fees, but also queried the value/benefit of HCPC regulation for registrants. Many responses expressed doubt as to the added value & relevance of HCPC registration for them. They seem to point to a desire for more tangible benefit from their fees. Perhaps, given the costs and levels of scrutiny, registrants want some definite benefit to balance the scales .

“Cost less and do more for the people who are on the register.” Resp089

“Vastly reduced cost. Employer paying registrant fees.” Resp074

A significant number of responses pointed out that the main benefits of registration are for the public, and for employers – but that it is the registrants who pay for registration. Many queries why this should be, and whether there should be a different payment model, where for example employers pay.

Similarly, some respondents felt that the HCPC’s unusual position of regulating a large swathe of healthcare professions was not necessarily helpful for their profession or others.

Communication and response times are obviously an issue of concern for registrants, and improvements are needed based on the low satisfaction levels reported here. This is also linked to a wish for increased engagement with the CS profession.

“Engagement with the workforce, specialism specific development, reduced fees” Resp025

Some responses suggested they would be comforted by increased accountability / governance of HCPC including improved FTP efficiency.

“More accountability to registrants” Resp130

Finally, improvement in terms of additional registration routes for Engineers & Technical staff were also suggested. It may be damaging to work-place moral, if two professionals doing roles of a similar nature are not being governanced is the same way and if there is not parity of their gross salary due to mandatory professional fees & reductions.

Value-for-money : This will vary between individuals depending on many variables, such as upbringing & environment, salary, lifestyle priorities, political persuasion, and so on. However, many of these factors should balance in a large sample. In general, it can be suggestive of satisfaction (or lack of) with a service. The score here suggesting dissatisfaction, echoes with other reports on HCPC’s spending, and financial irregularities [ 18 , 19 ].

In the survey findings, respondents have voiced dissatisfaction with registration value for money. In fact, HCPC’s registration fees are not high when compared to the other healthcare professions regulators. Table 1 shows data from 2021–22 for regulator annual registration fees. However, the HCPC has risen from having the lowest regulator fees in 2014–5, to its current position (9 th of 13) slightly higher in the table. Perhaps more concerning than the absolute level of fees, are when large increases are proposed [ 12 , 20 , 21 , 22 ].

However, fees have regularly increased to current figure of £196.48 for a two-year cycle. During a consultation process in 2018, the Academy for Healthcare Clinical Scientists (AHCS) wrote an open letter to the HCPC, disputing what they felt was a disproportionate fee increase [ 23 ]. Further fee rises have also been well above the level of inflation at the time.

HCPC expenditure (which is linked to registration fees) has arguably been even more controversial than fee increases – noted by several respondents. A freedom of information (FOI) request in 2016 showed HCPC’s spending of £17,000 for their Christmas party [ 18 ] – which amounts to just over £76 per person. This cost was close to the annual registration fee (at that time) for registrants.

In 2019, regulation of social workers in England moved from HCPC, to Social Work England. This resulted in a loss of over 100,000 registrants, and a loss in registration fee income. HCPC raised fees to compensate, but a freedom of information (FoI) request in 2020 [ 18 ] showed that even though there was an associated lowering in workload associated with the loss of 100 k registrants, the HCPC had no redundancies, suggesting the loss of income was compensated mainly by the fees increase.

Inherent value & relevance

One of HCPC’s aims is to promote ‘the value of regulation’ [ 24 ]. However, not only is there dissatisfaction with value-for-money, the second highest response suggests a lack of inherent value (or benefit) from regulation to the individual registrant. In some ways, there is a lack of balance – registrants are under increasing scrutiny, but feel there is little direct benefit, to provide balance.

This also suggests that HCPC’s aim or message is not getting through to the CS profession. It’s not clear what the HCPC 2021–22 achieved milestone – ‘Embedded our registrant experiences research into employee learning and development and inductions’ has actually achieved.

A large number of responses pointed to the lack of clarity about HCPC’s role, and also to note its lack of relevance for respondents. Some of this is understandable – until recently, many CS registrants will have little interaction with HCPC. They would typically get one email reminder each year to renew their registration and pay those fees, and hear little else from the HCPC. That is beginning to change, and HCPC have recently begun to send more regular, direct emails/updates to registrants.

However, for many registrants, the HCPC appears not to be clearly communicating its role, or the relevance/importance of regulation. As mentioned above, this also links in to previous mentions of the lack of any tangible benefit for registrants. Some note little more relevance other than the mandatory aspects of regulation.

Finally, relevance is also queried in relation to the limited access for some professional groups to a professional register. The current situation of gaps in registration for some groups, results in two situations – firstly, for Clinical Scientists and Clinical Engineers/Technologists, one group has to compulsorily pay a fee to be allowed/approved to do their job and the other does not; also, the public are routinely helped and assisted by Clinical Scientists and Clinical Engineers/Technologists – but only one group is regulated to ensure public safety.

HCPC Communication

This was highlighted by respondents as often poor. Recently in the media, there has been a concern raised by The College of Paramedics (CoP) about communications issues with HCPC—changes to the HCPC policy on the use of social media [ 25 ]. They raised particular concerns about the use of social media content and ‘historical content’ in the context of investigations of fitness-to practice.

There have previously been some concerns raised on the UKMPE mail-base regarding handling of personal data, and lack of efficiency in addressing the issue [ 26 ]. Several messages detailed HCPC communicating unencrypted registrant passwords in emails and sending personal data to the incorrect registrant. Some on the forum noted that they had reported this problem over a period of several years to HCPC, suggesting HCPC’s response to these serious issues was extremely slow. Several responses noted these previous issues.

Registration processes

Although responses here show some satisfaction, there have been reports in the media of significant issues with registration (such as removing registrants from the register in error) with associated impact for patients and the public [ 27 , 28 ]. Similarly, there were reports on the UKMPE mail-base of significant issues with registration renewals being problematic [ 26 ]. In Scotland, NHS.net email accounts ceased to be supported in July-Sept 2020 and the associated lack of access to email accounts and messages used for HCPC communication and registration, caused a major issue in registration renewal. This coincided with COVID lockdowns and a period of unusually difficult communication with HCPC. If NHS staff lose registration (irrespective of the reason), respondents noted that some Human Resources (HR) departments were quick to suspend staff from work, and in some cases withhold pay. That spike in difficulties is likely the cause of the most common responses suggesting issues with a complicated process.

In safe-guarding public safety, a key task for a healthcare regulator is assessing the competence of registrants. This is done via a small set of related activities. Registrants must return regular evidence of CPD, and these are audited for 2.5% registrants. This process is simple and routine, and as seen in Theme 2 responses here suggest registrants are reasonably satisfied with this process.

More formal and in-depth competence assessment happens when a complaint is raised against a registrant, either by a work colleague/management, a member of the public or occasionally by the HCPC itself. The process is complex, lengthy and can end in a registrant attending a court hearing [ 29 ].

It is usual for registrants to continue in their normal job during FTP investigations – effectively the public remains at risk from a registrant if their competence is eventually proven to be below the regulators standards, so there is a need for investigations to be efficient both in timeliness, and outcome.

Obviously, being under investigation can be highly stressful, and has the potential for the registrant to be ‘struck off’ the register, and lose their job if registration is mandated (e.g. NHS posts). There are many reports of the process & experience either provoking or increasing underlying mental health challenges [ 30 , 31 , 32 ]. Along with efficiency, a regulator needs to behave compassionately. Investigations of highly-skilled professionals engaging in complex work activities, is also necessarily complex and requires a high degree of knowledge and experience from the regulator’s investigational panel.

The Professional Standards Authority (PSA) regulate the HCPC, and publish annual reviews of their performance ( https://www.professionalstandards.org.uk/publications/performance-reviews ) (see Table  4 ). HCPC performance as reported by PSA, seems to be generally higher than noted by survey respondents here. For 2022–23, aside from one area, the HCPC has scored 100% for performance, which seems at odds with these survey responses [ 33 ]. The FTP team is notable in repeatedly performing very poorly compared to most other sections of the HCPC (even though the majority of the HCPC budget goes to FTP activity, see Fig.  4 ). The HCPC Annual Report 2018–9 [ 34 ] highlighted the completion of the first phase of the Fitness-To-Practice Improvement Plan. This delivered “A root and branch review of this regulatory function… a restructure, tightened roles and processes and the introduction of a new Threshold Policy”, but this seems to have no impact on the performance reported by the PSA for the next few years shown in Table  4 . However, the most recent data does suggest improvement, and HCPC continues to develop FTP team practice [ 17 ].

HCPC expenditure for the year 2020–21 [ 17 ]

There are other reports of poor experiences with this team [ 35 , 36 ], and in one report the FTP team’s processes have been noted as being rather inhumane [ 35 ].

Regulation is an important part of public protection, but how effectively it is managed & enforced is also a concern, given it involves increased scrutiny of registrants. A topical comparator is the current dissatisfaction by a large section of the public about several other government regulators allowing seemingly poor performance to go unchecked [ 4 , 5 ].

It is arguable, that registrants remain on the register as long as the HCPC allows them. Several respondents in this survey noted being removed from the register through HCPC administrative error. Removal could also happen through poor judgement/decision-making – the FTP team handle large numbers of very complex investigational cases – 1603 concluded cases for the year 2021–22 and 1024 hearings [ 16 ]. Every justice system is subject to a level of error – guilty parties can be erroneously ‘cleared’, and vice-versa. It is essential therefore, that policies & procedures relating to FTP are fit for purpose—that the FTP team work effectively and humanely, and that there is genuine & effective governance of HCPC to ensure accountability. In this survey, some respondents seem to be saying that currently this seems not to be the case.

It might have been anticipated that the greatest concern is costs, especially in the current cost-of-living crisis. The recent HCPC consultation to increase fees [ 37 ] seems particularly tone-deaf and has caused concern across the professions [ 21 , 22 ].

Above findings show respondents are interested in lower fees, but also increased benefit for their fees. Some respondents pointed out that whilst registrants pay for registration, benefit is mainly for the public and employers. The HCPC is a statutory body, its funding model will have been designed/decided upon by government, and may be unlikely to change. However, there are a variety of potential regulation models [ 38 ], and so change is possible. A review of the financial model for regulation may be welcome.

Regulator size

Some aspects of HCPC performance, policies, and distribution of spending, is related to the nature of it being the largest and only multi-professional regulator in the healthcare sector. Data from the HCPC suggests (see Fig.  5 ) that the majority of spending relates to FTP activity. Data also points to Clinical Scientists having very low levels of FTP investigation compared to others in HCPC [ 16 ]. This suggests that a significant proportion of CS registrant fees are used to investigate other professions. It’s possible (perhaps simplistically) that if, like many other healthcare professions such as doctors & dentists who’s regulator is concerned only with that single profession, if CSs were regulated separately, their registrant fees may be reduced. This model of single-profession regulation may also mitigate against other disadvantages of the HCPC’s practice, such as the ‘generic’ policies aiming to apply to a pool of 15 professions.

Although there is a very low level of data for this topic, the concerned raised by registrants are serious in nature. There also seems to be issues in handling of complaints related to this service and advocacy for registrants. Certainly, there is a clear governance path via PSA, to the Health Secretary. However, this does not offer a route for individual complaints to be raised and addressed. Unlike complaints from the public in other areas, there is no recourse to an ombudsman for registrants. The only option for individual registrants, is the submission of a formal complaint to the HCPC itself, which is dealt with internally. Comments from survey respondents suggest this process does not guarantee satisfaction. Indeed, one of the respondents who mentioned submitting a complaint, made it clear they remained unhappy with HCPC’s response. Overall, there seems to be a lack of clear & effective advocacy for registrants.

“…the HCPC’s stance appeared to be guilty until proven innocent… At no point did I feel the HCPC cared that their (sic) was an individual involved....” Resp044.

FTP processes affect a comparatively small number of CS registrants, compared to other professions. However, it seems clear that the majority of those who have interacted with the FTP team have had poor experiences, and respondents have suggested improvements are needed. The reason for FTP investigations, is protection of staff and the public. If processes are slow, and investigations prolonged, or decisions flawed, the public may be exposed to increased levels of risk, as healthcare practitioners who may be lacking in competence continue to practice. The data in Table  4 shows concerning but improving trends in FTP performance levels.

Limitations

There are two main limitations to this work. Firstly, due to time constraints, there was no pilot work done when designing the survey questionnaire. This may have helped, as noted earlier, a few responses pointed to some awkwardness with one survey question. Although no pilot work was done, the questionnaire was reviewed by the IPEM Professional Standards Committee, as noted in the Acknowledgements section.

The other obvious limitation is the low response rate (~ 6% of UK Medical Physicists). Circulation of the survey was performed via the only online forum for the profession currently available. The survey was advertised multiple times to ensure visibility to staff who may have missed it initially due to leave etc. However, the forum does reach 100% of the profession, and some addressees may have filters set to send specific posts to junk folders etc. The professional body IPEM declined to offer support in circulating the survey (believing the issues involved would affect/be of interest only to a small minority of members.)

The low response rate also has a particular impact on the pool of responses relating to FTP issues, which inherently affect low numbers of registrants.

However, the importance of some of the findings here (e.g. expressed dissatisfaction with regulation in terms of value; the poor experience of some members with the Registration, Communication and FTP teams) and the low sample surveyed, both justify the need for a larger follow-on survey, across all of Clinical Science.

In Healthcare, regulation of professions is a key aspect of protecting the public. However, to be effective, regulation must be performed professionally, impartially, and associated concerns or complaints investigated efficiently and respectfully.

This report presents findings from a survey aimed at collecting a snap-shot of the experiences of Clinical Scientists with their regulator, and their perception of the quality and safety of that regulation performance.

Overall survey sentiment scores showed a significantly more negative responses than positive. Survey comments relate not only to current issues, but to previous problems and controversial issues [ 18 , 26 ]. It seems that some respondents have at some point lost confidence and trust in the HCPC, and survey responses suggest there has not been enough engagement and work done by HCPC to repair and rebuild this trust.

In the midst of a cost of living crisis, costs are a large concern for many. The HCPC fees are neither the highest not lowest amongst the healthcare regulators. Spending is transparent, and details can be found in any of the HCPC’s annual reports.

A repeating sub-theme in responses, was a lack of tangible value for the registrant, and that the employer should pay the costs of registration, where registration is mandated by the job.

Many respondents have suggested that they feel there should be more proactive engagement from HCPC with the profession. Most respondents were not familiar with or felt the HCPC policies are relevant/important to them.

Survey data showed moderate satisfaction with registration processes for the majority of respondents. Some respondents also noted a lack of registration route for engineering & technical healthcare staff. CPD processes also achieved a score indicating registrant satisfaction. This generated the highest ratings in the survey. Communication scored poorly and many respondents suggests there needs to be improved levels of communication in terms of response times and access to support.

The CS profession experiences low levels of interaction with the FTP service. However, those interactions which were recorded in the survey, show some poor experiences for registrants. There also seems to be a lack of advocacy/route for complaints about HCPC from individual registrants. There may need to be more engagement between registrants and their professional body regarding HCPC performance, and more proactivity from the stake-holder, IPEM.

Some of the findings reported here relate to important issues, but the survey data are based on a low response rate. A larger survey across all of Clinical Science is being planned.

Availability of data and materials

To protect confidentiality of survey respondents, the source data is not available publicly, but are available from the author on reasonable request.

Abbreviations

Agenda for Change

Academy for Healthcare Clinical Scientists

Continuous professional development

Clinical Engineer

Clinical Scientist

College of Paramedics

Clinical Technologist

Freedom of Information

Fitness-to-practice

Health and Care Professions Council

Human resources

Institute of Physics and Engineering in Medicine

Joint Information Systems Committee

Medical Technical Officer

Professional Standards Authority

Professional Standards Committee

Qualitative data analysis

UK Medical Physics and Engineering

Professional Standards Authority. Professional healthcare regulation in the UK. https://www.professionalstandards.org.uk/news-and-blog/blog/detail/blog/2018/04/10/professional-healthcare-regulation-explained#:~:text=Regulation%20is%20simply%20a%20way,may%20face%20when%20receiving%20treatment . Accessed 26 Jul 2023

Evening Standard. Bogus surgeon treated hundreds. https://www.standard.co.uk/hp/front/bogus-surgeon-treated-hundreds-6326549.html . Accessed 26 Jul 2023.

HCPC . About registration: protected titles. http://www.hcpc-uk.org/aboutregistration/protectedtitles/ . Accessed 27 Jul 23.

The Guardian. Public patience is wearing thin. Ofwat must wield the big stick | Nils Pratley |  https://www.theguardian.com/business/nils-pratley-on-finance/2022/dec/08/public-patience-is-wearing-thin-ofwat-must-wield-the-big-stick . Accessed 19 Jul 2023.

TrustPilot. Reviews of Ofgem. Ofgem Reviews | Read Customer Service Reviews of ofgem.com (trustpilot.com). Accessed 19 Jul 2023.

Braun V, Clarke V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual Res Psychol. 2006;3(2):77–101.

Article   Google Scholar  

Kiger ME, Varpio L. Thematic analysis of qualitative data: AMEE Guide No. 131. Med Teach. 2020;42(8):846–54.

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Declaration of Helsinki. 2013. https://www.wma.net/policies-post/wma-declaration-of-helsinki-ethical-principles-for-medical-research-involving-human-subjects/ . Accessed 12 Sept 2023.

UK Data Protection Act. 2018. https://www.gov.uk/data-protection . Accessed 15 Sept 2023.

Rowbottom C. Private communication on behalf of the IPEM Professional Standards Committee; 2022.

IPEM Workforce Team. Clinical scientist & engineer workforce data. Personal communication. 2022.

Unison. HCPC fee increase is an unjustified ‘tax on practising.’ https://www.unison.org.uk/news/press-release/2019/02/hcpc-fee-increase-unjustified-tax-practising/ . Accessed 27 Jul 2023.

HCPC. Direct debit collection errors. https://www.hcpc-uk.org/news-and-events/news/2020/early-direct-debit-collections/?dm_i=2NJF,141CO,7C0ZNI,4A8IE,1 . Accessed 27 Jul 23.

HCPC. CPD audit rates. https://www.hcpc-uk.org/cpd/cpd-audits/ . Accessed 21 Jul 2023.

IPEM. CPD audit rates. https://www.ipem.ac.uk/your-career/cpd-career-development/cpd-audit/ . Accessed 21 Jul 2023.

HCPC. Fitness to practice annual report 2020–21. https://www.hcpc-uk.org/about-us/insights-and-data/ftp/fitness-to-practise-annual-report-2020-21/ . Accessed 23 Jul 2023.

HCPC. Annual report and accounts, 2020–21. https://www.hcpc-uk.org/resources/reports/2022/annual-report-and-accounts-2020-21/ . Accessed 19 Jul 2023.

Wikipedia. The health and care professions council. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_and_Care_Professions_Council . Accessed 2 Jul 23.

HCPC. Annual report 2005–06. https://www.hcpc-uk.org/resources/reports/2006/annual-report-2005-06/ . Accessed 19 Jul 2023.

British Dental Association. BDA very disappointed by HCPC decision to raise registration fees by 18%. https://www.bda.uk.com/resource/bda-very-disappointed-by-hcpc-decision-to-raise-registration-fees-by-18.html . Accessed 27 Jul 2023.

British Psychological Society. HCPC fees consultation – share your views. https://www.bps.org.uk/news/hcpc-fee-consultation-share-your-views . Accessed 27 Jul 23.

IBMS. IBMS response to the HCPC registration fees consultation. https://www.ibms.org/resources/news/ibms-response-to-hcpc-registration-fees-consultation/ . Accessed 17 Jul 23.

Association of HealthCare Scientists. Open letter to HCPC. https://www.ahcs.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/HCPC-Open-Letter.pdf . Accessed 27 Jul 23.

HCPC. Corporate plan 2022–23. https://www.hcpc-uk.org/resources/reports/2022/hcpc-corporate-plan-2022-23/ . Accessed 23 Jul 2023.

College of Paramedics. Our formal response to the HCPC consultation. https://collegeofparamedics.co.uk/COP/News/2023/Our%20formal%20response%20to%20the%20HCPC%20consultation.aspx . Accessed 27 Jul 23.

JISC Mail - MPE mailbase. JISCMail - Medical-physics-engineering list at www.jiscmail.ac.uk . Accessed 19 July 2023.

The Guardian. Thousands miss out on treatment as physiotherapists are taken off UK register. https://www.theguardian.com/society/2022/may/14/thousands-miss-out-on-treatment-as-physiotherapists-are-struck-off-uk-register . Accessed 27 Jul 2023.

HSJJobs.com. https://www.hsjjobs.com/article/thousands-of-clinicians-unable-to-work-after-registration-blunder . Accessed 27 Jul 2023.

HCPC. How we investigate. https://www.hcpc-uk.org/concerns/how-we-investigate/ . Accessed 21 Nov 2023.

Sirriyeh R, Lawton R, Gardner P, Armitage G. Coping with medical error: a systematic review of papers to assess the effects of involvement in medical errors on healthcare professionals’ psychological well-being. Br Med J Qual Saf. 2010;19:6.

Google Scholar  

Bourne T, Wynants L, Peters M, van Audenhove C, Timmerman D, van Calster B, et al. The impact of complaints procedures on the welfare, health and clinical practise of 7926 doctors in the UK: a cross-sectional survey. BMJ Open. 2015;5:e006687.

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Jones-Berry S. Suicide risk for nurses during fitness to practice process. Ment Health Pract. 2016;19:8.

Professional Standards Authority. HCPC performance review 2022–23. https://www.professionalstandards.org.uk/publications/performance-review-detail/periodic-review-hcpc-2022-23 . Accessed 25 Jul 2023

HCPC. Annual report and accounts, 2018–19. https://www.hcpc-uk.org/resources/reports/2019/hcpc-annual-report-and-accounts-2018-19/ . Accessed 19 Jul 2023.

Maben J, Hoinville L, Querstret D, Taylor C, Zasada M, Abrams R. Living life in limbo: experiences of healthcare professionals during the HCPC fitness to practice investigation process in the UK. BMC Health Serv Res. 2021;21:839–54.

Leigh J, Worsley A, Richard C, McLaughlin K. An analysis of HCPC fitness to practise hearings: fit to practise or fit for purpose? Ethics Soc Welfare. 2017;11(4):382–96.

HCPC. Consultation changes to fees. https://www.hcpc-uk.org/news-and-events/consultations/2022/consultation-on-changes-to-fees/ . Accessed 27 Jul 23

Department of Health. Review of the regulation of public health professions. London: DoH; 2010.

Download references

Acknowledgements

The author wishes to kindly acknowledge the input of Dr Carl Rowbottom (IPEM Professional Standards Committee), in reviewing the survey questions. Thanks also to Dr Nina Cockton for helpful advice on ethics and recruitment issues.

There were no sources of funding required for this work.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

University of Glasgow, Level 2, ICE Building, Queen Elizabeth University Hospital Campus, 1345 Govan Road, Glasgow, G51 4TF, UK

Mark McJury

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

All work to collect, analyse & publish this survey, are the work of the author Dr Mark McJury.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mark McJury .

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate.

As this study relates to low risk, survey data, formal ethics committee approval is not required (exemption obtained from NHSGGC REC04 REC Officer Dr Judith Godden [email protected]). As the survey responses were from members of a professional body (The Institute of Medical Physics and Engineering in Medicine (IPEM) it was consulted. Its Professional Standards Committee (PSC) reviewed the survey and raised no objections. The survey questions were assessed for bias and approved unchanged (acknowledged in the manuscript). Written informed consent was obtained from all participants in the study.

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.

Supplementary Information

Additional file 1..

The survey questionnaire has been provided as a supplementary file.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

McJury, M. Experiences of UK clinical scientists (Physical Sciences modality) with their regulator, the Health and Care Professions Council: results of a 2022 survey. BMC Health Serv Res 24 , 635 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-024-10956-7

Download citation

Received : 06 September 2023

Accepted : 05 April 2024

Published : 16 May 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-024-10956-7

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

• Regulation of professions
• Clinical scientists
• Medical physicists

BMC Health Services Research

ISSN: 1472-6963

• General enquiries: [email protected]

Key Takeaways from G2’s Spring 2024 Grid® Report for TMS

May 20, 2024

by Daniel Rivera

In this post

What does the report tell us, how to choose the right tms.

In today's fast-paced world, efficient delivery is no longer a bonus; it's an expectation. Despite the volatile nature of supply chain distribution in recent years, buyers are still investing in transportation management systems (TMS) to find solutions focused on scalability and visibility.

G2 publishes seasonal reports for our Supply Chain & Logistics categories to assist software buyers with their f reight and logistics management needs.

In this article, we will examine some G2 data and share some key takeaways from the recently published Spring 2024 Grid® Report for Transport Management Systems .

When looking at the report, some of the industry leaders to watch are Descartes Aljex , GoComet , and MyCarrierTMS . 

All distinguish themselves from the rest of the pack on our Grid® with impressive G2 scores—the G2 score of the top performer being nearly 30 points higher than that of the sixth-placed Leader. 

When analyzing our TMS list, we see that our top three leaders are worth considering. They have an impressive number of reviews and market presence, along with very high satisfaction scores, which should come as no surprise since they’ve held onto their lead since the Fall. 

However, some competitors in the market have been making massive strides. One is Cargobase , a current High Performer with a strong lead. Additionally, they have our fourth-highest satisfaction score overall and have held multiple positions in our Grid® Report rankings over the last few seasons. 

Tip: To learn more about the G2 score, check out our methodology page .

TMS user adoption and ROI findings

As highlighted in the report, on average, TMS users do not see a return on investment (ROI) until 14 months after adoption. 

As shown in the image below, on average, it takes nearly 3 months to go live, followed by another 14 months to see a positive ROI for buyers. This means the entire journey could take up to 17 months on average.

One of the report's most exciting insights is an average user adoption rate of 80%. This indicates that virtually every buyer sees the benefits of utilizing TMS products. 

Whether seeking to enhance route efficiency, consolidate shipments, or choose the most economical carrier, users are supporting their supply chain with an array of advantages.

Before making a selection, there are some important questions to consider:

• What is driving the majority of TMS buyers to invest? While the report indicates that many are experiencing benefits from the application, it's important to remain mindful of the gaps in your supply chain and what functionalities are essential for your success.
• Should you make a long-term commitment to ensure a positive ROI? It's clear that 17 months may be a long time to consider when exploring TMS products; buyers can look for solutions that offer shorter payback periods.
• What additional features and integrations does the solution offer? TMS products offer several integrations, so it’s important to consider what tools are already being utilized. With TMS's ability to integrate with other systems, such as ERP systems and warehouse management software , it is essential to enable workflow automation and seamless data exchange across your entire supply chain SaaS ecosystem.

Transportation management is the key to a healthy supply chain

Transportation management is often a fundamental part of avoiding unnecessary disruptions.

It is highly likely that your potential ROI may take some time, so it is crucial to make the right TMS choice for your needs. A TMS should be adaptable and scalable to the ever-changing dynamics of the market so that it grows alongside your business.

When exploring the solution for you, ask questions, focus on your pain points, and don’t be afraid to be transparent about the health of your current supply chain.

Make informed decisions confidently by discovering the pros & cons of using software reviews for ERP selection !

Edited by Jigmee Bhutia

Daniel is a Market Research Analyst at G2 focusing on our Supply Chain & Logistics Software categories. Before joining G2, Daniel’s background started in marketing & sales, followed by a pivot into the Transportation, Logistics, and Supply Chain space. These diverse sets of experiences have grown his passion for innovation, uniquely planting him in a position to reform client processes, build software expertise, and seek growth opportunities. Outside of the office, he enjoys being creative, whether through photography, cooking, or design Daniel’s always seeking to learn something new.

Route to success!

Optimize your transportation network with ease and discover which products are making waves this season.

Recommended Articles

Application Research

Introducing G2’s New Online Newsroom Software Category

G2's Public Relations (PR) Software category just got a little bigger with the recent addition...

by Alanna Iwuh

Introducing the Recurring Revenue Finance Category on G2

On December 23rd, 2022, G2 launched its new Recurring Revenue Finance category, which falls...

by Nathan Calabrese

Introducing G2's Latest Category: Rebate Management Software

We usually see discounts offered on items at a store or while shopping online. These are...

by Subhransu Sahu