So what are we doing today? We're going to be looking just at how to make searchable research questions and their strategies for those called concept organizers. So it is hard to get focused when you are doing literature searches and of course we'll cover the types of literature searches in video one. But there are two ways to get started. One of them is by writing questions that are easy to break down into concepts and easy to search with. And then of course to do that we will use concept organizers. The other way to really get focused is by doing the structured search approach that we'll do in video two. And let's take a look at a question. So let's say that I'm interested in looking at how the quality of sleep affects strategic decision-making and risk-taking behaviors. Note that there are a few things here I did not specify. So let's think about this. Is this a focused searchable question? We've got about four things we can really look at. First of all, some big overall big picture questions like, well, how does the quality of sleep for whom or what, right? And then how do we measure the quality of sleep? Of course, what is decision-making and what are we interested in when it comes to decision-making behaviors? And what are the risk-taking behaviors we might be interested in? Let's take a look at all of them. The first one is, in a sense, the most decisive, the most exciting. So not only are we asking about how to quantify the effects of sleep, but we really need to ask on whom? Is it humans that we're worried about? Are we looking at human behavior? Are we investigating how the quality of sleep affects the behavior of human beings? And then of course, what kinds of human beings? Who? And so this is a question about population. The reason why I'm using this word will become very obvious in a few minutes when we look at the PICO organizer. Population is who you are studying and it doesn't have to be humans. It could be rodents, obviously rodents sleep. Of course, we could look at simians. We could even look at social insights. So all of that is very important. So deciding on the population is absolutely key. And that will in many ways determine how we're going to answer two, three and four. So thinking about the quality of sleep, we should definitely ask ourselves, what are we looking for? The kind of healthy sleep, let's say eight hours of sleep, or are we going to be going with instruments and that are self-reported? We have decision-making, right? So again, we have to ask ourselves, if we're studying humans, what kinds of decision-making are we studying and so forth? And there are many different kinds of scales that we could use for that. We'll talk about that in a second. And then finally, there is the measurement of risk. So there are many scales we could use for general kinds of risk behaviors. Or there are specific kinds of risk behaviors such as gambling. And they're actually very exciting scales. So having looked at all of these things, what else can we make a note of? Well, definitely the participants. Also, the selection mechanism of the participants. And are we going to have a control population, for example? And then are the participants healthy? Or do they have conditions that might affect sleep? We've got a few other things as well that we can look at. And one thing that I mentioned is really studying human decision-making processes and scales. So if you select to work with humans, you can go to the decision-making individual differences inventory. So you may want to go to the link I gave you or to the original paper describing this. So there's lots to study there. Specific times during which this study could be conducted. So do we actually need a more focused question? Was that finessing an analysis process, pardon me, sufficient? Right? Or could we write a more focused question? What would it look like? Well, so first of all, we really have to ask ourselves what review type are we doing? Right? So what is it going to be a narrative review? Is it going to be a scoping review? Because the kind of review you're doing really determines the methodology in a scoping review. You would explore each of the points that we've just analyzed. So the four points through what we call inclusion and exclusion criteria.  Now, many other review types, especially narrative reviews, do not have a protocol. And in that case, the inclusion and exclusion criteria lead you to focusing your question. Once you focus the question, you can benefit from running broader searches and narrower searches within the limits of the variables that you selected. And of course, the process that we've just conducted helps you to focus on all the important things. But in the case of a literature review for empirical work that you're conducting, you can definitely do a more focused research question and then conduct both sensitive and more precise searches. And we've talked a little bit about that. So how could we write a more focused question guided by what we've done already? Well, first of all, we select participants based on what you're interested in and we could go as fine as selecting the age bracket as well. And we look at a specific kind of the quality of sleep problem. So in our case, let's select sleep deprivation. And of course, we would define it based on a source in literature or based on a well-known reference. We would look at in this case, we would look at the quality. Quality affects outcome, right? So it's not a specific outcome we're looking at, but rather in general, how does the person come out based on the decisions, right? So we are looking at scales that will allow us to determine the quality. So is it better or worse for maximizing in this case the amount of winnings in their gambling behaviors? So our question now looks like this, how does the quality of gambling decisions change as a function of stimulant use for healthy sleep deprived adults? So why are we looking at stimulant use? Well, we know that the quality of sleep is going to change the quality of the decisions possibly worse. And we know that stimulant use can improve cognitive function, right? So we want to see whether or not gambling decisions change when we give our participants stimulants after they've been sleep deprived. You may want to look, for example, at a specific gambling inventory. So you may be looking at performance in gambling measured by, let's say, the specific idle gambling task inventory. And how does that change as a function of caffeine or other stimulant intake for healthy sleep deprived participants aged 18 to 65? So you see how you can move from a specific but still fairly open literature search question to a question that is really very precise that you're interested in. So now let's grab a concept map organizer. It's the simplest organizer that helps us to break down the concept in our question into the most significant concepts. So let's take a look at this. How does the quality of gambling decisions change as a function of stimulant use for healthy sleep deprived adults? Well, we know we've got at least four things going here for us. So we've got a population that's going to be a healthy adult, but the very first thing we encounter here is the quality of gambling decisions. So I'm going to just put in gambling decisions because a word like quality is difficult to pin down and it's fairly common. Now, what are we doing? What's the intervention? Aha, another word that we'll show up in a moment. Well, it's it's stimulant. It's the use of stimulant right to improve or to change the quality of decisions. So we've got our the thing that we're measuring gambling decisions. We've got our intervention stimulant use. Now we've got our population, right? So we've got healthy adults and there is a condition that they have, which is sleep deprivation. The next thing we want to do with our organizer is to think about broader and narrower concepts or synonyms that can be used to describe the four that we've selected here. So we can look at risk taking, which is much broader. We can look at gambling addiction, a specific kind of behavior. I don't think that would work too well because we're looking about healthy adults, right? Or we can just look at general gambling behaviors as opposed to decision making. Now, when we're looking at stimulants here, we can get very interesting and very creative because they're different kinds of stimulants that we may have easy access to caffeine and here are a couple of specific unfair needs. So we also want to know a little bit more about sleep deprivation and here it is fairly specific, but we may want to again go broader for sleep quality, sleeplessness and chronic lack of sleep. How does that differ from sleep deprivation? So now what we can do is once we've split up these parts of a question into a simple organizer, we can use an organizer that helps us with research decision making and these are incredibly common in healthcare research. So I really want you to be exposed to this because as you move on and start working in healthcare context, the PICO or PICO organizer is extremely common and you will also find it if you do systematic or scoping reviews. So the main thing about the PICO organizer reminds you about making sure you've got a population, making sure you're thinking about the control and then thinking also about the type of study. So these are the basic questions that the PICO organizer asks you to make it easier for you to analyze and break down your research question. So here's what we've done to our question. So for the population, we've got our healthy adults and we still need to know more about the selection and recruitment mechanisms. We've got our intervention, which is administering stimulants. We've got our control, which is the group that gets the placebo and the gate. They're both healthy sleep deprived participants and we want to see what our outcome is and that is how the performance on the gambling tasks as measured by one of the infantories changes with the use of stimulant versus placebo for these sleep deprived individuals. And the type of study in this case, it is going to definitely be some sort of quantitative empirical study just to make it more interesting as some of you might be going into qualitative healthcare and qualitative type work later on a type of analysis tool for research questions that is very popular in qualitative health health research is the spider. The spider stands for sample phenomenon of interest design. So that's research design evaluation and research type. So our sample again is our healthy adult individuals and that are recruited a certain way again when a certain age bracket. We've got a phenomenon of interest. So the effect of stimulants or placebos on gambling decisions for our sleep deprived adults. Now, when we look at the outcomes, so when we do our evaluation, we really want to know whether there is altered cognitive performance as a result of the stimulant intake for our sleep deprived adults and that will be measured with a task test or indicator. And finally for a research type, we want quantitative research, but spider is also very used for either mixed methods or qualitative research. And that's why I've also offered it to you as a stand as a good second, second try after the very famous and very widely used Pico organizer. But so this is it. This tells you first of all that you're you're never alone with your research question. There are ways for you to try to break it down and tease out what we interest you about it and what are the important points about it that may be implied like the population. What we're going to do now is to do a tiny, tiny recap of some of the search terminology because you've heard me mention searches that are focused searches that are precise or sensitive. So I just want to run through that very quickly. And by the way, I will provide a fillable word document with all three concept map, the Pico organizer and a spider so you can play around with your research question. So let's do a very, very brief search strategy recap. So remember that searches that are inclusive and really try to tease out all the literature on the topic are called sensitive and precise searches on the other hand return a few well defined results on a topic that's usually well known. So in your case, when you're doing a major literature review, you do need to run some sensitive searches to really explore your topic. But very often you still run precise searches before, during and after to get at a concept to get maybe at something that you know has a very definite answer. So you never run just one search. You use both now to improve the sensitivity of a search that seems to be too precise using Boolean operator or is always the best strategy as well as using several different databases. If you want to improve precision using the and operator and using further limits are always the best strategies. Now, let's look at a couple of these examples. So if you're just running a search for alcohol and homicide, what happens when you expand alcohol to alcoholic, alcoholism and all of these related terms or intoxicated intoxication or drunk drunkenness or integrated integration and so forth. And then you end it with homicide. What do you think you're going to get? Is it going to be a more precise search? Or is it going to be a sensitive search? So remember when you're using or or is more and every time you get more results, you get sensitivity. So this is a more sensitive search strategy. Now, what about this? If you're looking for alcohol and violence and you change your search to look for alcohol and violence in Canada. Well, you're actually making the search more precise because you're adding more limits. Every time you add a limit, you make a search more precise and you get fewer results that are more focused. Now, if you are looking for alcohol and homicide, but you want to look for a phrase called intoxication related homicide. So very specific phrase. You are making your search more precise because you are excluding all other variants of a phrase and only look at precision.


European leaders have said there can be no negotiations with Britain on a country's departure from the EU until London has formally declared its intention to quit the bloc. In his first address to the British Parliament since the referendum, Prime Minister David Cameron said on Monday that he would leave the timing of Britain's exit up to his successor. And after he came back from the negotiations with the EU 27, he surprisingly said that just quite the opposite of what has been decided by the EU 27, that there won't be any formal or informal discussions on how to proceed unless until London has formally declared its intention to quit the bloc. Investors fled into perceived safe havens in the past four weeks, otherwise it was yesterday the largest and second-strongest day in the S&P 500 in the past two months. So it was a strong day on abating immediate fears of negative outcomes from the Brexit. But if you look at the development of government bonds in the past four weeks, you see that safe havens have been quite in demand. The total amount of negative yielding debt around the globe has risen by an eighth in volume in the past four weeks alone. And it is now 1.3 billion higher at 11.7 billion, the British billion that is the number with the 12 zeros attached to it. That is the result of investors fleeing into what they regard a safe haven for their money. They accept small losses to await bigger ones elsewhere. But this also means if there were some positive signal for the markets, at least some of this money could go back to the risk markets like equities, which in turn could lead to a sharply rising equity prices. Right now, markets are favoring gold and commodity stocks as they are in a sweet spot of a probably delayed rate hike by the Federal Reserve, which leads to prospects of lower rates for longer. Fun fact about all of this is that the FTSE 100 is building a base formation for anybody who is into technical analysis. This is a potential inverted head and shoulders pattern and its target will lead the FTSE 100 16% higher than yesterday's closing price. The question is, will that rush into stocks be the result of ever more monetary money flooding, or will it be the result of a return of confidence on behalf of investors who will soon know?