Reflection on RSP Part 1's Value and Application:
Problem-Driven Approach: The emphasis on "identifying your public health problem" resonated strongly with my work on childhood lead poisoning in Ethiopia. This stage forced me to articulate why lead poisoning, often overlooked for more prevalent diseases, is a critical public health issue in the specific context of Addis Ababa's industrial areas. It highlighted that a problem isn't just a general concern, but one with measurable impact and potential for intervention.
The Power of the Literature Review: The dedicated focus on the literature review (RSP2) underscored its non-negotiable role. For my lead poisoning project, this phase was crucial for:
Justifying the research: Demonstrating that while lead poisoning is a global problem, specific data from Ethiopia (especially on children in these industrial-adjacent schools) was scarce, thus warranting new research.
Informing my PECOT question: Understanding existing exposures, outcomes, and comparison groups in similar contexts helped me refine my broad idea into a precise, answerable question.
Guiding methodology: By reviewing how others measured blood lead levels or cognitive function in LMICs, I gained insights into feasible and appropriate methods for the Ethiopian context.
The Nuance of Research Questions (PICO/PECOT): The distinction between "I" (Intervention) and "E" (Exposure) for observational studies was particularly insightful. It clarified that not all research aims to test an intervention; many public health studies, especially initially, are about identifying exposures and their associations. My lead poisoning project, being largely a prevalence and association study, fits perfectly into the PECOT framework.
Ethical Foundation: The early introduction to research ethics is paramount. For a study involving vulnerable children in a low-resource setting like Ethiopia, considerations like informed consent (especially from parents/guardians, given varying literacy levels), confidentiality, minimizing harm, and ensuring local benefit are not just theoretical but practical necessities that must be designed into the study from the outset.
Building Block Mentality: RSP Part 1 clearly lays the groundwork. Without a well-defined problem, a thorough understanding of existing literature, and a precise research question, any subsequent steps in study design or data collection would be aimless and potentially flawed. It instilled the understanding that research is a sequential, logical progression, where each initial step is an indispensable prerequisite for the next.