how to write research proposal in public health

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, generate accurate citations for free.

• Knowledge Base
• Starting the research process
• How to Write a Research Proposal | Examples & Templates

How to Write a Research Proposal | Examples & Templates

Published on October 12, 2022 by Shona McCombes and Tegan George. Revised on November 21, 2023.

A research proposal describes what you will investigate, why it’s important, and how you will conduct your research.

The format of a research proposal varies between fields, but most proposals will contain at least these elements:

Introduction

Literature review.

• Research design

Reference list

While the sections may vary, the overall objective is always the same. A research proposal serves as a blueprint and guide for your research plan, helping you get organized and feel confident in the path forward you choose to take.

Table of contents

Research proposal purpose, research proposal examples, research design and methods, contribution to knowledge, research schedule, other interesting articles, frequently asked questions about research proposals.

Academics often have to write research proposals to get funding for their projects. As a student, you might have to write a research proposal as part of a grad school application , or prior to starting your thesis or dissertation .

In addition to helping you figure out what your research can look like, a proposal can also serve to demonstrate why your project is worth pursuing to a funder, educational institution, or supervisor.

Research proposal length

The length of a research proposal can vary quite a bit. A bachelor’s or master’s thesis proposal can be just a few pages, while proposals for PhD dissertations or research funding are usually much longer and more detailed. Your supervisor can help you determine the best length for your work.

One trick to get started is to think of your proposal’s structure as a shorter version of your thesis or dissertation , only without the results , conclusion and discussion sections.

Download our research proposal template

Here's why students love Scribbr's proofreading services

Discover proofreading & editing

Writing a research proposal can be quite challenging, but a good starting point could be to look at some examples. We’ve included a few for you below.

• Example research proposal #1: “A Conceptual Framework for Scheduling Constraint Management”
• Example research proposal #2: “Medical Students as Mediators of Change in Tobacco Use”

Like your dissertation or thesis, the proposal will usually have a title page that includes:

• The proposed title of your project
• Your supervisor’s name
• Your institution and department

The first part of your proposal is the initial pitch for your project. Make sure it succinctly explains what you want to do and why.

Your introduction should:

• Introduce your topic
• Give necessary background and context
• Outline your  problem statement  and research questions

To guide your introduction , include information about:

• Who could have an interest in the topic (e.g., scientists, policymakers)
• How much is already known about the topic
• What is missing from this current knowledge
• What new insights your research will contribute
• Why you believe this research is worth doing

Prevent plagiarism. Run a free check.

As you get started, it’s important to demonstrate that you’re familiar with the most important research on your topic. A strong literature review  shows your reader that your project has a solid foundation in existing knowledge or theory. It also shows that you’re not simply repeating what other people have already done or said, but rather using existing research as a jumping-off point for your own.

In this section, share exactly how your project will contribute to ongoing conversations in the field by:

• Comparing and contrasting the main theories, methods, and debates
• Examining the strengths and weaknesses of different approaches
• Explaining how will you build on, challenge, or synthesize prior scholarship

Following the literature review, restate your main  objectives . This brings the focus back to your own project. Next, your research design or methodology section will describe your overall approach, and the practical steps you will take to answer your research questions.

To finish your proposal on a strong note, explore the potential implications of your research for your field. Emphasize again what you aim to contribute and why it matters.

For example, your results might have implications for:

• Improving best practices
• Informing policymaking decisions
• Strengthening a theory or model
• Challenging popular or scientific beliefs
• Creating a basis for future research

Last but not least, your research proposal must include correct citations for every source you have used, compiled in a reference list . To create citations quickly and easily, you can use our free APA citation generator .

Some institutions or funders require a detailed timeline of the project, asking you to forecast what you will do at each stage and how long it may take. While not always required, be sure to check the requirements of your project.

Here’s an example schedule to help you get started. You can also download a template at the button below.

Download our research schedule template

If you are applying for research funding, chances are you will have to include a detailed budget. This shows your estimates of how much each part of your project will cost.

Make sure to check what type of costs the funding body will agree to cover. For each item, include:

• Cost : exactly how much money do you need?
• Justification : why is this cost necessary to complete the research?
• Source : how did you calculate the amount?

To determine your budget, think about:

• Travel costs : do you need to go somewhere to collect your data? How will you get there, and how much time will you need? What will you do there (e.g., interviews, archival research)?
• Materials : do you need access to any tools or technologies?
• Help : do you need to hire any research assistants for the project? What will they do, and how much will you pay them?

If you want to know more about the research process , methodology , research bias , or statistics , make sure to check out some of our other articles with explanations and examples.

Methodology

• Sampling methods
• Simple random sampling
• Stratified sampling
• Cluster sampling
• Likert scales
• Reproducibility

 Statistics

• Null hypothesis
• Statistical power
• Probability distribution
• Effect size
• Poisson distribution

Research bias

• Optimism bias
• Cognitive bias
• Implicit bias
• Hawthorne effect
• Anchoring bias
• Explicit bias

Once you’ve decided on your research objectives , you need to explain them in your paper, at the end of your problem statement .

Keep your research objectives clear and concise, and use appropriate verbs to accurately convey the work that you will carry out for each one.

I will compare …

A research aim is a broad statement indicating the general purpose of your research project. It should appear in your introduction at the end of your problem statement , before your research objectives.

Research objectives are more specific than your research aim. They indicate the specific ways you’ll address the overarching aim.

A PhD, which is short for philosophiae doctor (doctor of philosophy in Latin), is the highest university degree that can be obtained. In a PhD, students spend 3–5 years writing a dissertation , which aims to make a significant, original contribution to current knowledge.

A PhD is intended to prepare students for a career as a researcher, whether that be in academia, the public sector, or the private sector.

A master’s is a 1- or 2-year graduate degree that can prepare you for a variety of careers.

All master’s involve graduate-level coursework. Some are research-intensive and intend to prepare students for further study in a PhD; these usually require their students to write a master’s thesis . Others focus on professional training for a specific career.

Critical thinking refers to the ability to evaluate information and to be aware of biases or assumptions, including your own.

Like information literacy , it involves evaluating arguments, identifying and solving problems in an objective and systematic way, and clearly communicating your ideas.

The best way to remember the difference between a research plan and a research proposal is that they have fundamentally different audiences. A research plan helps you, the researcher, organize your thoughts. On the other hand, a dissertation proposal or research proposal aims to convince others (e.g., a supervisor, a funding body, or a dissertation committee) that your research topic is relevant and worthy of being conducted.

Cite this Scribbr article

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

McCombes, S. & George, T. (2023, November 21). How to Write a Research Proposal | Examples & Templates. Scribbr. Retrieved June 18, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/research-process/research-proposal/

Is this article helpful?

Shona McCombes

Other students also liked, how to write a problem statement | guide & examples, writing strong research questions | criteria & examples, how to write a literature review | guide, examples, & templates, get unlimited documents corrected.

✔ Free APA citation check included ✔ Unlimited document corrections ✔ Specialized in correcting academic texts

• Technical Support
• Find My Rep

You are here

Writing Research Proposals in the Health Sciences A Step-by-step Guide

• Zevia Schneider
• Jeffrey Fuller
• Description

See what’s new to this edition by selecting the Features tab on this page. Should you need additional information or have questions regarding the HEOA information provided for this title, including what is new to this edition, please email [email protected] . Please include your name, contact information, and the name of the title for which you would like more information. For information on the HEOA, please go to http://ed.gov/policy/highered/leg/hea08/index.html .

For assistance with your order: Please email us at [email protected] or connect with your SAGE representative.

SAGE 2455 Teller Road Thousand Oaks, CA 91320 www.sagepub.com

Well written, comprehensive and easy to use - definitely one I will recommend.

excellent book for healthcare students

Goes through the stages of a research proposal guiding students on the expected content for each section

lovely clear text, concepts clearly set out, an excellent introductory book for health science students

A useful resource to help level 3 students to develop their academic writing. This step by step guide provides clear guidance. Students have found this very useful

Preview this book

Sage college publishing.

You can purchase this book and request an instructor sample on our US College site:

Related Products

This title is also available on SAGE Knowledge , the ultimate social sciences online library. If your library doesn’t have access, ask your librarian to start a trial .

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings
• My Bibliography
• Collections
• Citation manager

Save citation to file

Email citation, add to collections.

• Create a new collection
• Add to an existing collection

Add to My Bibliography

Your saved search, create a file for external citation management software, your rss feed.

• Search in PubMed
• Search in NLM Catalog
• Add to Search

How to prepare a research proposal in the health sciences?

Affiliations.

• 1 Servicio de Aparato Digestivo, Hospital Universitario de La Princesa, Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria Princesa (IIS-IP), Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Enfermedades Hepáticas y Digestivas (CIBEREHD), Madrid, España. Electronic address: [email protected].
• 2 Servicio de Aparato Digestivo, Hospital Universitario de La Princesa, Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria Princesa (IIS-IP), Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Enfermedades Hepáticas y Digestivas (CIBEREHD), Madrid, España.
• PMID: 33277051
• DOI: 10.1016/j.gastrohep.2020.07.028

Knowing how to properly prepare a research proposal is a real challenge - and being able to prepare an excellent research proposal is increasingly a requirement to compete for funding with assurances of success. With this in mind, we aim to share with the reader our experience (in many cases, unsuccessful) as applicants on the most important aspects of preparing a research proposal and securing its approval and funding. This article aims not only to list theoretical recommendations but also to share some personal and eminently practical suggestions on the following elements of a research proposal: the title, the abstract, the introduction, the objectives, the methodology, the work plan or schedule, the proposal's consistency and coherence, its viability, its applicability, the importance of the principal investigator and the research team, the proposal's limitations and alternatives, its budget, its references, and, finally, the research proposal's form or wording. In summary, a research proposal is a carefully written plan that includes all the scientific, ethical and logistical aspects of the study to be conducted. Writing a good research proposal requires considerable effort and a great deal of time, but it's worth it.

Keywords: Ciencias de la salud; Health sciences; Protocol; Protocolo; Proyecto de investigación; Research proposal.

Copyright © 2020 Elsevier España, S.L.U. All rights reserved.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

• Rules to be adopted for publishing a scientific paper. Picardi N. Picardi N. Ann Ital Chir. 2016;87:1-3. Ann Ital Chir. 2016. PMID: 28474609
• The qualitative research proposal. Klopper H. Klopper H. Curationis. 2008 Dec;31(4):62-72. doi: 10.4102/curationis.v31i4.1062. Curationis. 2008. PMID: 19653539 Review.
• Research proposal writing: breaking the myth. Nte AR, Awi DD. Nte AR, et al. Niger J Med. 2006 Oct-Dec;15(4):373-81. doi: 10.4314/njm.v15i4.37249. Niger J Med. 2006. PMID: 17111720
• Tips for writing a NAON research grant proposal. Lisanti P, Talotta D. Lisanti P, et al. Orthop Nurs. 2000 Mar-Apr;19(2):61-5. doi: 10.1097/00006416-200019020-00009. Orthop Nurs. 2000. PMID: 11062637 Review.
• How to write a research grant proposal. Tornquist EM, Funk SG. Tornquist EM, et al. Image J Nurs Sch. 1990 Spring;22(1):44-51. doi: 10.1111/j.1547-5069.1990.tb00168.x. Image J Nurs Sch. 1990. PMID: 2318494
• Search in MeSH

You are here

Writing Research Proposals in the Health Sciences A Step-by-step Guide

• Zevia Schneider
• Jeffrey Fuller
• Description

Well written, comprehensive and easy to use - definitely one I will recommend.

excellent book for healthcare students

Goes through the stages of a research proposal guiding students on the expected content for each section

lovely clear text, concepts clearly set out, an excellent introductory book for health science students

A useful resource to help level 3 students to develop their academic writing. This step by step guide provides clear guidance. Students have found this very useful

Preview this book

For instructors.

Please select a format:

Select a Purchasing Option

• Electronic Order Options VitalSource Amazon Kindle Google Play eBooks.com Kobo

Related Products

SAGE Knowledge is the premier social sciences platform for SAGE and CQ Press book, reference and video content.

The platform allows researchers to cross-search and seamlessly access a wide breadth of must-have SAGE book and reference content from one source.

MSU Libraries

Course guides.

• Need help? Ask a Librarian

Capstone Guide for MPH Students

• Introduction to Capstone Resources
• Searching from the Library Homepage
• Primary Research Option
• Secondary Research Option
• Systematic Review (Tertiary Research) Option
• Research Proposal Option
• Program Evaluation Proposal Option
• Program Proposal Option

Public Health Librarian

Guides to Writing Research Proposals

• Writing an Academic Research Proposal This article assumes that you're writing a research proposal to submit for support or funding, so it's describing something slightly different from your Capstone project. But the parts on the sections in a proposal may be useful.

• << Previous: Systematic Review (Tertiary Research) Option
• Next: Program Evaluation Proposal Option >>
• Last Updated: Jun 13, 2024 9:03 PM
• URL: https://libguides.lib.msu.edu/mphce

Unicaf: MSc Public Health for Sept 2022: Research Project 2: Proposal Design and Dissemination

• Health Promotion
• Principles of Public Health
• Epidemiology
• Research Methods: Evidence-based Practice in Public Health
• Health Protection
• Health Economics
• Public Health Leadership
• Research Project 1: Global Health
• Research Project 2: Proposal Design and Dissemination
• Books and eBooks
• Databases, Journals and Specialist Websites
• Using Images and Videos
• Referencing This link opens in a new window
• Assignment Toolkit

Welcome to your Research Project 2: Proposal Design and Dissemination  Reading and Resource List. Here you will find your essential and recommended reading, as well as suggested Journals and Online Resources. 

Please be advised that not all of your essential and recommended reading is available through the University of Suffolk. 

Essential Reading

Recommended Reading

Online Resources

Health Evidence

National Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools

National Institute for Health Research  

WHO Recommended Format for a Research Protocol

• << Previous: Research Project 1: Global Health
• Next: Subject Guide >>
• Last Updated: Sep 14, 2023 12:04 PM
• URL: https://libguides.uos.ac.uk/msc-public-health

➔ About the Library

➔ Meet the Team

➔ Customer Service Charter

➔ Library Policies & Regulations

➔ Privacy & Data Protection

Essential Links

➔ A-Z of eResources

➔ Frequently Asked Questions

➔Discover the Library

➔Referencing Help

➔ Print & Copy Services

➔ Service Updates

Library & Learning Services, University of Suffolk, Library Building, Long Street, Ipswich, IP4 1QJ

✉ Email Us: [email protected]

✆ Call Us: +44 (0)1473 3 38700

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• PMC10250258

How to write a successful grant application: guidance provided by the European Society of Clinical Pharmacy

Anita e. weidmann.

1 Department of Clinical Pharmacy, Innsbruck University, Innsbruck, Austria

Cathal A. Cadogan

2 School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland

Daniela Fialová

3 Department of Social and Clinical Pharmacy, Faculty of Pharmacy in Hradec Králové, Charles University, Hradec Králové, Czech Republic

4 Department of Geriatrics and Gerontology, 1st Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic

Ankie Hazen

5 Julius Centre for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands

Martin Henman

6 Trinity College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland

Monika Lutters

7 Kantonsspital Aarau, Aarau, Switzerland

Betul Okuyan

8 Department of Clinical Pharmacy, Faculty of Pharmacy, Marmara University, Istanbul, Turkey

Vibhu Paudyal

9 University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom

Francesca Wirth

10 Department of Pharmacy, University of Malta, Msida, Malta

Considering a rejection rate of 80–90%, the preparation of a research grant is often considered a daunting task since it is resource intensive and there is no guarantee of success, even for seasoned researchers. This commentary provides a summary of the key points a researcher needs to consider when writing a research grant proposal, outlining: (1) how to conceptualise the research idea; (2) how to find the right funding call; (3) the importance of planning; (4) how to write; (5) what to write, and (6) key questions for reflection during preparation. It attempts to explain the difficulties associated with finding calls in clinical pharmacy and advanced pharmacy practice, and how to overcome them. The commentary aims to assist all pharmacy practice and health services research colleagues new to the grant application process, as well as experienced researchers striving to improve their grant review scores. The guidance in this paper is part of ESCP’s commitment to stimulate “ innovative and high-quality research in all areas of clinical pharmacy ”.

Writing research grants is a central part of any good quality research. Once a detailed research proposal has been submitted, it is subjected to an expert peer review process. Such reviews are designed to reach a funding decision, with feedback provided to improve the study for this and any future submissions. Depending on the length of the proposal, complexity of the research and experience of the research team, a proposal can take between six to twelve months to write [ 1 ]. Ample time must be given to the writing of hypothesis/research aim, budgeting, discussion with colleagues and several rounds of feedback [ 2 ]. The draft research proposal should always be completed well before the deadline to allow for last minute delays. An application which is not fully developed should not be submitted since it will most likely be rejected [ 3 ].

Despite the large effort that goes into each grant application, success rates are low. Application success rates for Horizon 2020 were < 15% [ 4 ] and < 20% for the National Institute of Health (NIH) [ 5 – 8 ]. With these statistics in mind, it is evident that often repeated submissions are required before securing funding. Due to a paucity of specific clinical pharmacy grant awarding bodies, writing a grant application for a clinical pharmacy or pharmacy practice research project often involves multidisciplinary collaborations with other healthcare professions and focus on a specific patient population or condition. There is no guarantee of success when trying to secure funding for research. Even the most seasoned researchers will have applications rejected. The key is to never give up. This commentary provides useful pointers for the planning and execution of grant writing.

Conceptualising your research idea

Before writing a research grant proposal/application, consider what the research should achieve in the short, medium, and long term, and how the research goals will serve patients, science and society [ 9 , 10 ]. Practical implications of research, policy impact or positive impact on society and active patient/public involvement are highly valued by many research agencies as research should not be conducted “only for research”, serving the researchers’ interests. EU health policy and action strategies (CORDIS database) and other national strategies, such as national mental health strategy for grants within mental disorders, should be considered, as well as dissemination strategies, project deliverables, outcomes and lay public invitations to participate. The Science Community COMPASS has developed a useful “Message Box Tool” that can help in the identification of benefits and solutions, as well as the all-important “So What?” of the research [ 11 ]. Clearly determine what the lead researcher’s personal and professional strengths, expertise and past experiences are, and carefully select the research team to close these gaps [ 12 – 14 ].

How to find the right funding call

When trying to identify the right type of grant according to the research ambitions, one should be mindful that several types of grants exist, including small project grants (for equipment, imaging costs), personal fellowships (for salary costs, sometimes including project costs), project grants (for a combination of salary and project costs), programme grants (for comprehensive project costs and salary for several staff members), start-up grants and travel grants [ 15 ]. Types of grants include EU grants (e.g. Horizon, Norway Grant), commercial grants (e.g. healthcare agencies and insurance companies), New Health Program grants ideal for new, reimbursed clinical pharmacy service projects and national grants (e.g. FWF (Austria), ARRS (Slovenia), NKFIH (Hungary), NCN (Poland), FWO (Belgium), HRZZ (Croatia), GAČR (Czech Republic), SNSF (Switzerland), SSF (Sweden). It is worth remembering that early career researchers, normally within ten years of finishing a PhD, have a particular sub-category within most grants.

Many national agencies only have one “Pharmacy” category. This results in clinical pharmacy and advanced clinical pharmacy practice projects competing with pharmaceutical chemistry, pharmaceutical biology and pharmacy technology submissions, thereby reducing the success rate as these research areas can often be very advanced in most EU countries compared to clinical and advanced pharmacy practice. A second possible submission category is “Public Health”. Several essential factors can impact the grant selection, such as research field, budget capacity, leading researcher’s experience and bilateral grants. Examples of successful clinical pharmacy funded research studies can be found in the published literature [ 16 – 20 ].

Plan, plan, plan

One key element of successful grant writing is the ability to plan and organise time. In order to develop a realistic work plan and achieve milestones, it is imperative to note deadlines and to be well-informed about the details of what is required. The development of a table or Gantt Chart that notes milestones, outcomes and deliverables is useful [ 21 ].

All funders are quite specific about what they will and will not fund. Research your potential funders well in advance. It is vital to pay attention to the aims, ambitions and guidelines of the grant awarding bodies and focus your proposal accordingly. Submitting an application which does not adhere to the guidelines may lead to very early rejection. It is helpful to prepare the grant application in such a way that the reviewers can easily find the information they are looking for [ 15 , 22 ]. This includes checking the reviewers’ reports and adding “bolded” sentences into the application to allow immediate emphasis. Reviewers’ reports are often available on the agencies’ websites. It is extremely useful to read previously submitted and funded or rejected proposals to further help in the identification of what is required in each application. Most funding agencies publish a funded project list, and the ‘Centre for Open Science (COS) Database of Funded Research’ enables tracking of funding histories from leading agencies around the world [ 23 ]. Another useful recommendation is to talk to colleagues who have been successful when applying to that particular funder. Funding agency grant officers can provide advice on the suitability of the proposal and the application process.

It is important to pay particular attention to deadlines for the grant proposal and ensure that sufficient time is allocated for completion of all parts of the application, particularly those that are not fully within one’s own control, for example, gathering any required signatures/approvals. Funders will generally not review an application submitted beyond the deadline.

Lastly, it is important to obtain insight into the decision process of grants. Research applications are sent to several reviewers, who are either volunteers or receive a small compensation to judge the application on previously determined criteria. While the judging criteria may vary from funder to funder, the key considerations are:

• Is there a clear statement of the research aim(s)/research question(s)/research objective(s)?
• Is the proposed research “state-of-the-art” in its field and has all relevant literature been reviewed?
• Is the method likely to yield valid, reliable, trustworthy data to answer question 1.?
• If the answer to the second question is ’yes’, then what is the impact of financing this study on patient care, professional practice, society etc.?
• Is there sufficient confidence that the research team will deliver this study on time with expected quality outputs and on budget?
• Does the study provide value for money?

How to write

The key to good grant proposal writing is to be concise yet engaging. The use of colour and modern web-based tools such as #hashtags, webpage links, and links to YouTube presentations are becoming increasingly popular to improve the interest of a submission and facilitate a swift decision-making process. Ensure use of the exact section headings provided in the guidance, and use the keywords provided in the funding call documentation to reflect alignment with the funding bodies’ key interests. Attention to detail cannot be overstated; the quality and accuracy of the research proposal reflect the quality and accuracy of the research [ 24 ]. Try to adopt a clear, succinct, and simple writing style, making the grant easy to read. Having a clear focus can help to boost a grant to the top of a reviewer’s pile [ 25 , 26 ]. A clearly stated scientific question, hypothesis, and rationale are imperative. The reviewer should not have to work to understand the project [ 27 ]. Allow for plenty of time to incorporate feedback from trusted individuals with the appropriate expertise and consider having reviews for readability by non-experts.

What to write

Abstract, lay summary and background/rationale.

Take sufficient time to draft the scientific abstract and summary for the lay public. These should clearly state the long-term goal of the research, the aim and specific testable objectives, as well as the potential impact of the work. The research aim is a broad statement of research intent that sets out what the project hopes to achieve at the end. Research objectives are specific statements that define measurable outcomes of the project [ 28 , 29 ].

The lay summary is important for non-subject experts to quickly grasp the purpose and aims of the research. This is important in light of the increased emphasis on patient and public involvement in the design of the research. The abstract is often given little attention by the applicants, yet is essential. If reviewers have many applications to read, they may form a quick judgement when reading the abstract. The background should develop the argument for the study. It should flow and highlight the relevant literature and policy or society needs statements which support the argument, but at the same time must be balanced. It should focus on the need for the study at the local, national and international level, highlighting the knowledge gap the study addresses and what the proposed research adds. Ensure this section is well-referenced. The innovation section addresses the ‘‘So what?’’ question and should clearly explain how this research is important to develop an understanding in this field of practice and its potential impact. Will it change practice, or will it change the understanding of the disease process or its treatment? Will it generate new avenues for future scientific study? [ 30 ].

Hypothesis/aims and objectives

For the hypothesis, state the core idea of the grant in one or two sentences. It should be concise, and lead to testable specific aims. This section is fundamental; if it is unclear or poorly written, the reviewers may stop reading and reject the application. Do not attempt to make the aims overly complex. Well-written aims should be simply stated. Criteria such as PICO (population, intervention, comparison, outcomes) [ 31 ], and FINER (feasible, interesting, novel, ethical, relevant) [ 32 ], provide useful frameworks to help in writing aim(s), research question(s), objective(s) and hypotheses. Pay attention to the distinction between aim(s), research question(s), objective(s) and hypotheses. While it is tempting to want to claim that enormously complex problems can be solved in a single project, do not overreach. It is important to be realistic [ 25 ].

Experimental design, methods and expertise

The methodology is one of the most important parts of getting a grant proposal accepted. The reviewing board should be convinced that the relevant methodology is well within the research teams’ expertise. Any evidence of potential success, such as preliminary results or pilot studies strengthen the application significantly [ 33 ]. The methodology must relate directly to the aim. Structuring this section into specific activities/ set of activities that address each research question or objective should be considered. This clarifies how each question/ objective will be addressed. Each work-package should clearly define the title of the research question/objective to be addressed, the activities to be carried out including milestones and deliverables, and the overall duration of the proposed work-package. Deliverables should be presented in table format for ease of review. Each subsequent work-package should start once the previous one has been completed to provide a clear picture of timelines, milestones and deliverables which reflect stakeholder involvement and overall organisation of the proposed project. Using relevant EQUATOR Network reporting guidelines enhances the quality of detail included in the design [ 34 ]. Key elements of this methodology are detailed in Table  1 .

Summary of the key elements of the experimental design, methods and expertise

Proposed budget

The budget should be designed based on the needs of the project and the funding agency’s policies and instructions. Each aspect of the budget must be sufficiently justified to ensure accountability to the grant awarding body [ 35 ]. Costing and justification of the time of those involved, any equipment, consumables, travel, payment for participants, dissemination costs and other relevant costs are required. The funders will be looking for value for money and not necessarily a low-cost study. Ensure that the total budget is within the allocated funding frame.

Provide a breakdown of the key work packages and tasks to be completed, as well as an indication of the anticipated duration. Include a Gantt chart (A table detailing the most general project content milestones and activities) to demonstrate that all aspects of the proposal have been well thought through [ 21 ].

Critical appraisal, limitations, and impact of the proposed research

It is important to detail any strengths and limitations of the proposed project. Omitting these will present the reviewing board with sufficient grounds to reject the proposal [ 36 ]. Provide a clear statement about the short and long-term impact of the research [ 37 , 38 ]. The reviewers will pay particular attention to the differences the study can make and how potential impact aligns with the funding bodies goals as well as national policies. This statement is essential to make an informed decision whether or not to support the application. Useful diagrams summarise the different levels of impact [ 39 ].

Table  2 provides a summary of the key elements of project grants and key questions to ask oneself.

Summary of the key elements of project grants and key questions to ask oneself.

(Adapted from [ 5 ]: Koppelmann GH, Holloway JW. Successful grant writing. Paediatr Respir Rev. 2012; 13:63–66.)

Although the grant writing process is time-consuming and complex, support is widely available at each stage. It is important to involve colleagues and collaborators to improve the proposal as much as possible and invest time in the detailed planning and execution. Even if the grant is not awarded, do not be disheartened. Use the feedback for improvement and exercise resilience and persistence in pursuing your research ambition.

The guidance in this paper is part of ESCP’s commitment to stimulate “innovative and high-quality research in all areas of clinical pharmacy”. In a previous ESCP survey, it was found that few opportunities for collaboration (especially for grant applications) was one of the key barriers for members towards conducting research [ 40 ]. ESCP promotes networking, which is essential for multi-centre grant applications, both among ESCP members and with other organisations as it recognises the need for “multi-centre research in all areas of clinical pharmacy both within countries and between countries or differing healthcare delivery systems”. ESCP is planning to relaunch its own research grant which was paused during the pandemic, and it is also planning to provide ESCP members with information about the research grants offered by other organizations. ESCP is exploring partnering with other organisations to develop research proposals in areas of common interest and, in the near future, it will ask its members about their research priorities. Taken together, these initiatives will inform ESCP’s research strategy and help it to formulate policies to address the challenges its members face.

Acknowledgements

Research works of Assoc. Prof. Fialová were also supported by the institutional program Cooperation of the Faculty of Pharmacy, Charles University.

Open access funding provided by University of Innsbruck and Medical University of Innsbruck. This work was conducted without external funding.

Conflicts of interest

The authors have not disclosed any competing interests.

Publisher’s Note

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

• How it works

Sample Masters Public Health Dissertation Proposal

Here is a sample that showcases why we are one of the world’s leading academic writing firms. This assignment was created by one of our expert academic writers and demonstrated the highest academic quality. Place your order today to achieve academic greatness.

View a different grade

Critical Analysis of Factors Affecting Public Health Promotion: A Case Study of Saudi Arabia

This research will be conducted to fulfil the study’s aim to analyse the influence of public health on health promotion intervention within the case of Saudi Arabia as a developing country. To fulfil the research’s aim and objectives, the researcher will use a qualitative approach and secondary data sources regarding public health promotion intervention in Saudi Arabia.

The researcher will examine relevant secondary sources and then present a systematic overview of the literature to understand the impact of public health on the public health promotion intervention in the region of Saudi Arabia.

Introduction

From the overview of past literature, it can be found that there is an increased interest of researchers and practitioners concerning public health and its promotion (Baum, 2016). The information and know-how regarding public health are important because public health programs and public health interventions are based on this knowledge and research (Boulware et al., 2016).

Now, several different elements tend to impact public health and programs related to public health. The governmental and health organisations have shifted their focus from removing and preventing the disease towards the socio-economic, behavioural, and environmental factors that significantly impact public health (Wiene et al., 2017).

From the research point of view, there have been very few researches in the past that have been carried out in this regard. Different countries aim to improve public health by introducing effective programs and interventions (Watts et al., 2015). The health sector continually works towards ensuring that their public health-related goals are met efficiently to make a significant mark.

The promotion of public health is undeniably an essential aspect of public health. Several types of research have been carried out in this regard (Rosenbaum, 2011). Health promotion is carried out to raise awareness among the public regarding the negative consequences of a disease or notify the public regarding living a healthy lifestyle.

Health promotion is an expression in practical terms as a source that lets the public lead a productive life regarding social, economic, and individual perspectives. Health is a source for a routine life, not an object that can be ignored easily (Anderson et al., 2005). According to WHO, public health is a fundamental human right, and all individuals should have the right to get rudimentary resources (WHO, 2018).

The interventions for the promotion of public health are carried out to ensure that public health is not at stake and that the public is aware of the importance of their health (Nutley, Smith, & Davies, 2000). Through public health intervention, the government can control several health problems.

Regarding Saudi Arabia’s public health, WHO has notified that more than 60% of the population is inactive, which is quite alarming concerning the individuals’ health (WHO, 2011). Physical activity is of great importance because it mainly decreases the many common diseases like diabetes, hypertension, cancer, and heart disease.

It also prevents one of the major problems regarding health, i.e., obesity (Frohlich & Potvin, 2008). It has been established that with time, the health sector of Saudi Arabia has been experiencing growth. However, there are still specific problems faced (Almalki, FitzGerald, & Clark, 2011).

One of the major problems of the health sector of Saudi Arabia is that there is a language barrier among physicians, doctors, and patients. Although some research has been carried out in the context of public health and its impact on health promotion intervention, there is still a need for more research to evaluate public health in terms of promotion.

Yet, according to Sharaf (2010), social media platforms, particularly Twitter, have inculcated new prospects for definitely influencing audiences’ health at large. As Saudi Arabia is coined to be the country with the highest number of Twitter users, practitioners believe that Twitter can contribute to the propagation of health promotion ideas.

According to Mckenzie (2016), with the help of developing different health intervention promotion programs, public health is improving daily. The researcher needs to carry out more research to ensure that public health is impacted efficiently. The country’s major goal is to ensure that the public is provided with high-quality healthcare services.

The well-being of society is promoted. According to Peltzer (2011), the health care promotional campaigns and interventions are focused more on developed nations than developing nations. Several different factors tend to have a significant impact on the health promotion intervention. Socio-economic factors play a critical role in people’s lives, affecting each individual’s health in many ways.

Every country has its characteristics that dominate other factors compared to other places according to specific policies and particular laws. But few general ones can be easily recognised in all parts of the world.

Aim and Objectives

The present research’s main aim is to analyse the influence of public health on the health promotion intervention within the case of Saudi Arabia as a developing country. The objectives of the study are as follows,

• To study the concept and significance of public health interventions.
• To identify factors affecting health promotion interventions concerning public health in the case of Saudi Arabia.
• To analyse the influence of public health on the health promotion intervention in the case of Saudi Arabia.
• To suggest effective recommendations for improving the health promotion intervention from the influence of public health in Saudi Arabia.

Research Question

Based on the preliminary overview of the literature review on this topic, the research question that is going to be answered by this research is:

How can public health be determined through various factors affecting public health promotion in the context of Saudi Arabia?

Problem Statement

This research will be carried out to analyse the impact of public health on public health promotion intervention, specifically in Saudi Arabia. In terms of the public health of Saudi Arabia, the company is experiencing significant improvement; however, they are still lacking in providing high-quality health care advice through public health promotion intervention. One of the important problems prevalent in the region is a language barrier among physicians, doctors, and patients.

The Rationale of the Research

The study has established that certain researches have been carried out concerning public health and its impact on evaluating the health promotion intervention. This particular research is significant because it focuses on analysing how public health in the region of Saudi Arabia impacts their health promotion intervention.

There are not many academic types of research carried out on Saudi Arabia’s public health. This research will contribute positively towards the existing body of literature mainly inclined towards Western countries’ general health (Glanz & Bishop, 2010). One of the significant hindrances with the effective provision of public health to a country’s citizens is that there is no consistent framework of public health that promotes the evaluation of public health promotion intervention (Frieden, 2010).

This research is particularly significant because it will look into different factors that combine to form the public health of Saudi Arabia. Moreover, it will also address the issues faced by the country regarding the implementation and evaluation of their health campaigns. The major rationale behind this research is that there are very few research studies carried out.

Structure of the Research

The following study comprises five significant sections: introduction, literature review, methodology, findings and conclusion, and recommendations. The first chapter of the study highlights the research study’s topic, the research problem, aims and objectives of the study, rationale, and significance. It provides a brief introduction to the analysis.

The second chapter of this study was a literature review. In this chapter, the researcher identifies the study variables and includes different theories and backgrounds concerning the view and opinions of various researchers. It consists of a theoretical framework and the development of a hypothesis.

The third chapter of the study was methodology. This section identified the methods and techniques used in a research study to examine the results. Data collection methods and techniques are described in this chapter, along with ethical considerations and limitations.

The fourth chapter of the study was findings and analysis. This chapter analyses and evaluates the data obtained from different sources based on other techniques and methods. A significant portion of this section includes an analysis of results and discussion.

The last chapter of the study is the conclusion and recommendations. It concludes the entire research along with summarised findings of the study.

Literature Review

Public health intervention and promotion.

Public Health is known for inhibiting the disease, health promotions, healthily improving lifestyle, and systematised society effort.  The central focus is on the health betterment of the population and doing interventions to prevent disease. The protection, promotion, prolonging of public life, and betterment of society’s health are the main goals of public health (Brownson, 2017).

The progress in the social machinery by health promotions satisfies the people regarding maintenance and betterment of health. Better cure of advanced and severe diseases is required, specifically in developing countries. The interventions of Public health regarding the reduction in risk factors related to health are significant. The preventions are done of medicines to preserve or promote health and decrease the suffering when health is impaired (Gostin, 2016).

There are significant disciplines in which health sectors mostly perform to promote health. A healthy nutrient balances health and any disease, and reproductive health is taken care of the most because it includes mental, physical, and social health that should be healthy. In environmental health, the approach is to classify the particular biological or physical aspects that present all health risks.

It can be replaced and modified to protect people from it, like sanitisation of water, disposal of waste management, etc. (Frieden, 2010). The combination of health education and economics is beneficial for health promotions and their interventions. It helps in the substitution use of resources and their effective utilisation in the health service sector.

Many types of research have been done that focus on the distribution, frequency, biostatistics, and causes of disease. Such researches are an action to attain more information about the technical or scientific overview of public health. The health service sector management tries to work together and utilise the available resources to achieve the goal (Fleming, 2014).

Health promotion is the central part of public health, defined as the betterment of health in the population. It presents wide-ranging environmental and social conditions directed towards changing the negative aspects of such states to ease their effect on individual and public health. It enables individuals to elevate control over the factors of health and thus improve their health.

Contribution in health promotion is vital to endure promotions’ actions and efforts (Naidoo, 2016). Health promotion is an expression in practical terms as a source which let public to lead a productive life regarding social, economic and individual prospective because health is a source for a routine life, not an object that can be ignored easily.

It emphasises the physical capabilities of a person. WHO has recognised public health as a fundamental human right, and all individuals should have the right to get rudimentary resources (Lupton, 2014). The prospective health concept applies that the organisations that rule social, physical, and economic conditions should take responsibility for their activities in terms of their effect on the public and health (Leischik, 2016).

After the research many years, health promotion is now getting in trend. It became clear that health promotion interventions should be seen in the framework of difficult interrelationships encircling the public, societies, and health care sectors (Duplaga, 2015) and (Sitko, 2016). The approaches have found out that the effective interventions and consequent promotions that are in practice.

The interventions of health promotions should be for the betterment of local practice. The advanced interventions in public health lead to many issues and challenges regarding promotions. Interventions are commonly recognised by combining factors of a supplied intervention like theory and all with factors present in the local context such as funding etc. Interventions help a lot in controlling and preventing health problems (Kok, 2012).

Overview of Saudi Arabia’s Public Health Intervention and Promotion

The WHO reports show that 60% of the overall population of Saudi Arabia is physically inactive, which is not suitable for health at all.  According to recent studies, physical activity is one of the significant health-promoting practices (Kraus, 2015). Physical activity mainly decreases the many common diseases like diabetes, hypertension, cancer, and heart disease.

It also prevents one of the major problems regarding health, i.e., obesity.  It improves an individual’s mental health by decreasing depression and anxiety, showing the inverse relation of health outcomes with the amount of physical activity performed (Alahmed, 2017).

The health sector of Saudi Arabia has ranked the growth of health care services at the overall rate of care, due to which betterment has been seen in the health range of Saudi Arabia (Almalki, 2011).  Besides such improvements, the major issue in Saudi Arabia’s health sector is the language hurdle among the physician and their patients.   Many interventions have been taken to solve this issue by health promotions using posters, leaflets, or other ways (Vyas, 2012).

After facing constant failure, alternative techniques have been applied, i.e., spreading awareness by using promotional items in health promotions, which was beneficial to give important messages to the public (Al Aboud, 2013). It succeeds whenever implemented correctly, which was also seen in TB patients (Alahmed, 2017).

Factors Affecting Public Health Promotion Intervention

Public Health revolves around the study of highlighting the issues that affect human health. It focuses on the preventive measures of diseases and prolonging humans’ lives by bringing awareness through different campaigns and promotions that could improve the public’s health. The research has been done to work on the public health sector as it is one of the significant elements that influence any country’s environment.

It is also essential to look out for the reasons that can affect the promotions and interventions to maintain public health stability. Social determinants include the status and affiliations that determine health (Shaw, 2008). In socio-economic factors, social attributes play a critical role in people’s lives, affecting each individual’s health in many ways.

The socio-economic factors are one of the major influences for public health in any country, whereas; cultural factors are based on the thoughts and behaviours shared by a group of people in any country. Culture always has a significant impact on all aspects of life. It contributes to every individual in an integrated pattern of values and morals.

In political factors, government policies and programs also profoundly affect health interventions in many ways (Mackenbach, 2014). At the same time, national health factors are about taking account of public health to local needs and includes the development level for the entire health sector.

Income is one of the main features that can affect public health promotion. It is directly proportional to individuals’ health related to the amount of money that a person is earning. When the making is high, the health is automatically influenced better, but if it is low, it can affect the quality of the food you take or the health services that are not affordable (Abel-Smith, 2016).

It can also be described as an example that not everyone can afford to see experienced doctors of sickness or other major health issues due to their high fees.  It also goes in a way that they cannot purchase better foods to remain healthy. Income also influences the location one chose to live in as the surrounding influences health at a higher level. It can be perceived as lower earnings can lead to poorer health choices and increased health risks (Stoddart, 2017).

It is a crucial element that determines people’s social and economic position related to health outcomes. Education helps learn about the positive and negative aspects of health classified as better or poor health status. It elaborates the benefits of a healthy diet, increases the knowledge, and guides in making good choices compared to those who are not well educated or more aware of effective food products (Rosen, 2015).

The factor of employment contributes to health promotion intervention to enhance social status and self-esteem, leading to community life participation by bringing more opportunities that improve health and well-being. Career also surrounds being physically active or getting exhausted and tired due to long work hours that affect an individual’s health. The nature of the job is considered in this sector that can be classified as working at a farm, factory, chemicals or radiology, sports, and a proper organisation (Garthwaite, 2014).

Social Inequalities

There can be many cultures within a society, and it differs in views and norms that affect health in various ways. One major factor that developing countries face is social inequality which means all the people do not meet human needs. The lack of food, water, shelter, and clothing influences the health of the individuals. It affects the lifestyle and causes serious health problems as well. The easy access to these factors does create a difference in human beings’ lives as these are the most critical elements to survive (Berkman, 2014).

Early Marriages

Developing countries like India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, and others have some of the most disturbing factors that destroy a person’s health: early marriages. Children are forced to marry at the early stages in many rural areas in these developing countries, which is not suitable for their future health (García-Moreno, 2015). Since the people in rural areas are not so educated or aware of these things, it results in early pregnancies, labour complications, and severe infections that could lead to life-ending diseases.

Another factor that comes under the cultural environment is family. It means the number of people in a family that does make a difference at a greater rate. People in rural areas in developing countries usually have many children with very few gaps. They do not know the preventive measures or the effect of such fast pregnancies on health. Moreover, they also face financial issues due to less income, which cannot provide quality food and daily life necessities.

Poverty has been a critical factor in health determinants as it is directly linked with poor health. The less fortunate people are affected at so many levels that destroy their health. They are deprived of basic knowledge, money, and access to the services of health. Poor people cannot get treatment for diseases or see doctors due to a lack of money (Poverty and Health, 2014). Usually, only one member earns for the family that brings too much of a burden. Therefore, when everyday life’s basic needs are not easy for them to get, health is mostly the last thing to be given attention to for poor people.

Environment

The physical environment plays a great role in affecting people’s health positively or negatively. Clean air and water are two substantial means towards a healthy lifestyle. Lack of access to clean water and sanitation as well as polluted air develops major health issues. It also includes noise pollution, access to green and open space, transportation, housing, and food. Moreover, climate seasons influence the health of infants. They all are of equal importance in environmental conditions that directly affect health. Developing countries face air and noise pollution and the limited amount of clean water, which creates trouble for them, if not right away then in the future (Lü, 2015).

The living area of a person or improper untidy housing develops certain health conditions. Poor housing is associated with significant diseases like respiratory and skin infection, morbidity and mortality, and psychological effects. The overcrowded places usually do not consider a healthy lifestyle, whereas; homelessness develops sleep deprivation, mental health disorders, chronic stress, nutritional and psychic disorders.

Age and Gender

This has a significant part, like other factors, in determining health. People develop various health problems at different stages of life. For example, the diseases found in infants like pneumonia, diarrhoea, and skin rashes would not be quickly adopted by elders. In this manner, gender differences like men and women rarely have the same types of diseases. There are few common diseases found in women, like thyroid or kidney issues, whereas; men are mostly heart problems. This variance is the reason for distinctive lifestyles acquired by both of them.

Hire an Expert Dissertation Proposal Writer

Orders completed by our expert writers are

• Formally drafted in the academic style
• 100% Plagiarism-free & 100% Confidential
• Never resold
• Include unlimited free revisions
• Completed to match exact client requirements

Influence of Public Health on the Health Promotion Intervention

Health Promotions has progressed a lot in the past years, but some of its procedures are limited due to the assessment methods (Peltzer, 2011). Research is much needed in the evaluation of health importance and interventions.  Health promotions focus on developing more significant results that create demanding and expensive interventions for both the physician and the patient.

Such interventions are being studied deeply using a high level of standardised protocols (McKenzie, 2016). The effectiveness of health promotions does not show the positive or negative outcomes of busy, understaffed public health clinics and huge health sectors (Baum, 2016).

The medical trend focuses on the surgical interference that gives instant outcomes. As compared to the health promotions, less research is done on their interventions. There is little research on interventions that report the population. The interventions that show adequate randomised trials results are not effective when applied to the common public (Schmidt 2015).

According to the RE-AIM model, the intellectualising is done on the general population’s health that affects the applied interventions in health promotions as five elements that include efficacy, implementation, learning, reach, and management (Ward, 2018).

When health sector interventions have been taken in health promotions, their main focus is constantly developing countries. Like in Malawi, it has been applied, and their outcome was good. Health promotions are also designed specifically for children and young people. It depends on the requirement of public health. It helps in dealing with the mortality or morbidity issue and others also (Eldredge, 2016).

Overall, developing countries show the interventions in health promotions, and their applications differ a lot according to sustainability and effectiveness. If the government supports health promotions rightfully, it puts a high level of impact on public health.

In Ethiopia, hygiene practices are very poor, and the sanitary situation is insufficient, resulting in the elevation of transmissible diseases in the population and worsen public health.  Health promotion interventions are done to spread knowledge and apply hygiene practices in rural schools of Ethiopia and improve their hygiene characteristics (Vivas, 2010).

Children were targeted for promotions because they are more approachable for adopting healthy attitudes by them it will spread among the families and community (Lopez-Quintero, 2009).

Brazil is also considered a developing country, in which health promotions have been implemented many times in the past and present. Currently, the major concern is heart diseases, hygiene, and unhealthy lifestyle issue. The health promotions did interventions for the betterment of living and unhealthy situation of people.

The infectious disease in Brazil was a high level of public health issue in the country before. Still, after many interventions regarding health promotions, including campaigns, such disease decreased from the government. Now circulatory diseases are the main reason for mortality. All of the issues needed basin sanitation awareness and health education.

The particular activities of health promotions include improving physical activity practices, reducing smoking, decreasing death and morbidity rate due to any disease or accident, reducing alcohol intake, adopting healthy habits, and inhibiting violence (Horta, 2017). Health promotion was also done in schools, leading to positive outcomes and a lot of betterment. The growth of the Brazilian Unified Health System has been influenced by Brazil’s public health sector (Ramos, 2014).

Research Methodology

Research philosophy.

Research philosophy describes the set of beliefs that the researcher has while carrying out the research. It provides the significance of how the data will be analysed and used in the research. The research philosophies are categorised into different types that can be used according to the researcher’s analysis and feasibility. The research philosophies that are commonly used in the study are positivism, interpretivism, and realism (Merriam and Tisdell, 2015)

The study in hand has used the interpretivism philosophy for conducting the research. This philosophy is based on the social sciences and focuses on the disciplines and the school of thought that the respondents carry out in the research. On the other hand, the positivism philosophy is based on realistic data and carries out the information found in reality.

The realism philosophy is commonly observed in scientific research and collects data based on experiments and scientific tests. The researcher may face problems with interpretivism philosophy because the respondents are not observed to provide justified opinions for theirs. The problems may also be faced in interpreting views carried out by the researcher (Teherani et al., 2015). Concerning the attitudes and behaviours, interpretivism philosophy is highly suitable for the research that is being observed.

The following study will use interpretivism to identify the impact of public health on health promotion interventions within Saudi Arabia because the research is purely based on qualitative analysis; therefore, interpretivism philosophy helps to understand the in-depth information about variables.

Research Approach

According to the study of Sekaran and Bougie (2016) research approach is stated as the pattern that has been selected for conducting the research. The research approaches are mainly divided into inductive and deductive approaches that provide research patterns to get significant results.

Both the approaches have their existence and vary based on the hypothesis and models used in the research. The inductive approach provides the research pattern that starts with observation and tests conducted by the researcher. It moves on to the identification of patterns used in the research and finalises the theory.

On the other hand, the deductive approach is based on the theory that has been selected. The researcher carries out the hypothesis and develops observations and tests for accepting or rejecting the idea based on the theory. The statement and tests confirm and reject the hypothesis that carries out the result of the research carried out.

For the research in hand, the approach that has been used is the deductive approach as it has used the theory that has been used before and has developed. The researcher has also conducted tests and observations to identify whether the hypothesis can be accepted or rejected. The deductive approach justifies the research carried out and is correct (Silverman, 2016). Moreover, the researcher may not lead to falsification and gets the justified results of the approaches used.

The following study will use the inductive research approach because the underlying factors of public health promotions and their impact on health promotion interventions were analysed through systematic analysis of information. The deductive approach provides a structured way of examining Saudi Arabia’s case to assess the impact.

Type of Investigation

Marshall and Rossman (2014) have identified three types of research investigation under which the research is carried out. The types of investigation methods used in the researches are exploratory, explanatory, and descriptive research. The experimental research refers to the explore the new techniques and phenomenon that has not been used before.

As the name identifies, it provides the significance of starting the research from the groundwork. Exploratory research is aimed to find something new and carry out the research in a new direction. Descriptive research tends to explore and explain the phenomenon in detail. It provides additional information regarding the topic and fills the missing part of the research. It carries out the gap analysis and gets the work done until the gap is filled (Lewis, 2015).

Another type of investigation method followed by the researchers is explanatory research. It is also known as causal research and determines the identification of cause and effect relationships. The explanatory research is determined to explain the phenomenon that has been used before in previous researches.

It explains the description of topics and determines the causes and effects of the particular topic on another (McCusker and Gunaydin, 2015). The following research is based on the cause and effect relationship, and hence the type of investigation used in the next study is explanatory research. The cause and effect relationship used in the explanatory research has provided the best fit for the relationship between the variables.

For the following study, the researcher will use the descriptive method of investigation to examine the relationship between public health and health promotion interventions. The explanatory study will provide information about how public health impacts the various health promotion activities.

Research Design

The studies of Choy, (2014) have determined the types of research design used in the following research. The design is categorised into three main types that are qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods. All three types are used according to the needs and requirements of the selected topic. Qualitative research is dependent upon the collection of behavioural data.

The data is collected and analysed in the form of statements and descriptions used to carry out the results. Another commonly used research design is the quantitative method. The data is collected in numeric and numbers that are analysed using statistical tools and techniques. Another commonly used method is mixed (Merriam and Tisdell, 2015).

The following research will use qualitative research design methods to examine how public health affects health promotion intervention. Using the qualitative method, the researcher will shed light on the existing articles and journals collected by different researchers and scholars.

Data Collection Method

The identified data collection methods used in the researches are categorised into primary and secondary research. The researcher collects data from the respondents based on the primary and secondary methods of collecting data. Both the methods have their ways of collecting data. The data collection for the primary research is interviews, questionnaires, experiments, and observation.

On the other hand, is the data collected from previous studies. The research, based on secondary data, uses the information available on the internet and carries out the data analysis (Mertens, 2014).

The study in hand has used the primary method of data collection. The data has been collected based on the qualitative methods and has gathered the information from the primary sources, including questionnaire surveys, interviews, and first-hand observation of the researcher. The researcher has faced some constraints while carrying out the primary data that is limited time and cost used for the research. Respondents are not ready to provide detailed information regarding their feelings and practices (Silverman, 2016).

The data collection method selected for this study is the secondary method of data collection. The researcher will use the second method to conduct a systematic review and answer the study’s research questions. The study will also select articles from 2010 to 2018, and a health-related database will be used for examining the information.

Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria

Inclusion criteria refer to the characteristics of the study’s characteristics that are included in particular research. On the other hand, exclusion criteria refer to specific characteristics or elements that disqualify the subjects from being included in the research. The inclusion criteria of this research are different studies related to public health and public health promotion.

Majorly the studies taken into account are those carried out in the region of Saudi Arabia and other parts of the Middle East. The exclusion criteria for the research are the studies that do not belong to credible journals and publishers.

Sampling Method, Technique, and Sample Size

Sampling is an integral part of the research and determines the population selected for carrying out the research. The selected population for collecting the data is known as the sample. The sampling method is further divided into non-probability and probability sampling. Probability sampling provides an equal chance to all the sample population for getting the responses. On the other hand is the non-probability sampling does not provide an equal chance to all the respondents (Silverman, 2016).

The following study is based on non-probability sampling. The technique that has been used in the study is convenience sampling. The researcher has carried out the respondents’ information based on convenience for gathering data through a systematic review of articles and journals.  From 2010 to 2018, the articles will be selected for obtaining information about health promotions and interventions therefore, an article out from this domain will not be used.

Data Analysis Method

According to Smith, (2015), data analysis is a critical stage of the research process. The tool that has been used in the following research is thematic analysis because the study is based on qualitative techniques. The interviews gathered by the researcher and the observations have been analysed using the method of thematic analysis.

The thematic analysis is based on the pinpointing and examination of the patterns within the data that has been collected. On the other hand, the tool for quantitative analysis is SPSS. As the study is qualitative, so the data has been analysed using themes and defining them according to the research. The researcher will use content analysis to analyse the information obtained from different sources and critically examine the data about health promotion interventions, particularly in Saudi Arabia.

The researcher will conduct a systematic review through existing studies and with the help of a descriptive approach. A systematic literature review is going to be carried out in five steps (Khan et al. 2003). The research question has been framed in the first step, after which relevant publications regarding the research questions are identified. The next step covers the assessment of the quality of the study. The next step is related to summarising the evidence that has been collected. Lastly, the findings collected from different relevant articles are interpreted.

Ethical Considerations

It is an integral part of the research and identifies the researcher’s ethical considerations while carrying out the research. For the following research, the researcher has ensured the respondents that the data collected is valid and authentic. The confidentiality of the respondent’s information has been considered. The researcher has avoided any sort of unethical activity while carrying out the research.

If you need assistance with writing your dissertation proposal, our professional dissertation proposal writers are here to help!

Abel-Smith, B. (2016).  An introduction to health: policy, planning and financing . Routledge.

Al Aboud, K., Jameel, W., Al Asmari, Z., Al Osaimy, H., Al Sobiani, A., Salam, S. A., & Al Zahrani, Y. (2013). Use of Public Health Promotion Items to Improve Health in Saudi Arabia.  Central Asian Journal of Global Health ,  2 (2).

Alahmed, Z., & Lobelo, F. (2017). Physical activity promotion in Saudi Arabia: A critical role for clinicians and the health care system.  Journal of Epidemiology and Global Health .

Almalki, M., FitzGerald, G., & Clark, M. (2011). Health care system in Saudi Arabia: an overview/Aperçu du système de santé en Arabie saoudite.  Eastern Mediterranean health journal ,  17 (10), 784.

Anderson, L. M., Brownson, R. C., Fullilove, M. T., Teutsch, S. M., Novick, L. F., Fielding, J., & Land, G. H. (2005). Evidence-based public health policy and practice: promises and limits.  American Journal of Preventive Medicine ,  28 (5), 226-230.

Baum, F. (2016).  The new public health  (No. Ed. 4). Oxford University Press.

Berkman, L. F., Kawachi, I., & Glymour, M. M. (Eds.). (2014).  Social epidemiology . Oxford University Press.

Boulware, L. E., Cooper, L. A., Ratner, L. E., LaVeist, T. A., & Powe, N. R. (2016). Race and trust in the health care system.  Public health reports .

Brinkmann, S., 2014. Interview. In Encyclopedia of critical psychology (pp. 1008-1010). Springer, New York.

Brownson, R. C., Deshpande, A. D., & Gillespie, K. N. (2017).  Evidence-based public health . Oxford university press.

Choy, L.T., 2014. The strengths and weaknesses of research methodology: comparison and complimentary between qualitative and quantitative approaches. IOSR Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 19(4), pp.99-104.

Duplaga, M. (2015). The evolving concept of health promotion: definitions, outcomes and classification of interventions.  Zdr Publiczne Zarządzanie ,  2015 , 141149.

Eldredge, L. K. B., Markham, C. M., Ruiter, R. A., Kok, G., & Parcel, G. S. (2016).  Planning health promotion programs: an intervention mapping approach . John Wiley & Sons.

Fleming, M. L., & Parker, E. (2014).  Introduction to public health . Elsevier Australia.

Frieden, T. R. (2010). A framework for public health action: the health impact pyramid.  American journal of public health ,  100 (4), 590-595.

Frohlich, K. L., & Potvin, L. (2008). Transcending the known in public health practise: the inequality paradox: the population approach and vulnerable populations.  American journal of public health ,  98 (2), 216-221.

García-Moreno, C., Zimmerman, C., Morris-Gehring, A., Heise, L., Amin, A., Abrahams, N., … & Watts, C. (2015). Addressing violence against women: a call to action.  The Lancet ,  385 (9978), 1685-1695.

Garthwaite, C., Gross, T., & Notowidigdo, M. J. (2014). Public health insurance, labour supply, and employment lock.  The Quarterly Journal of Economics ,  129 (2), 653-696.

Glanz, K., & Bishop, D. B. (2010). The role of behavioural science theory in the development and implementation of public health interventions. Annual review of public health, 31, 399-418.

Gostin, L. O., & Wiley, L. F. (2016).  Public health law: power, duty, restraint . Univ of California Press.

Horta, R. L., Andersen, C. S., Pinto, R. O., Horta, B. L., Oliveira-Campos, M., Andreazzi, M. A. R. D., & Malta, D. C. (2017). Health promotion in the school environment in Brazil.  Revista de saude publica ,  51 , 27.

Khan, K. S., Kunz, R., Kleijnen, J., & Antes, G. (2003). Five steps to conducting a systematic review. Journal of the royal society of medicine, 96(3), 118-121.

Kok, M. O., Vaandrager, L., Bal, R., & Schuit, J. (2012). Practitioner opinions on health promotion interventions that work: Opening the ‘black box of a linear evidence-based approach.  Social science & medicine ,  74 (5), 715-723.

Kraus, W. E., Bittner, V., Appel, L., Blair, S. N., Church, T., Després, J. P., … & Vafiadis, D. K. (2015). American Heart Association Physical Activity Committee of the Council on Lifestyle and Metabolic Health, Council on Clinical Cardiology, Council on Hypertension, and Council on Cardiovascular and Stroke Nursing. The National Physical Activity Plan: a call to action from the American Heart Association: a science advisory.  Circulation ,  131 (21), 1932-40.

Leischik, R., Dworrak, B., Strauss, M., Przybylek, B., Schöne, D., Horlitz, M., Mügge, A. and Dworrak, T., 2016. Plasticity of health.  German Journal of Medicine ,  1 , pp.1-17.

Lewis, S., 2015. Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. Health promotion practice, 16(4), pp.473-475.

Lopez-Quintero, C., Freeman, P., & Neumark, Y. (2009). Hand washing among school children in Bogota, Colombia.  American Journal of Public Health ,  99 (1), 94-101.

Lü, J., Liang, L., Feng, Y., Li, R., & Liu, Y. (2015). Air pollution exposure and physical activity in China: current knowledge, public health implications, and future research needs.  International journal of environmental research and public health ,  12 (11), 14887-14897.

Lupton, D. (2014). Health promotion in the digital era: a critical commentary.  Health promotion international ,  30 (1), 174-183.

Macfarlane, A. (2005). What are the main factors that influence disease prevention and health promotion programmes in children and adolescents?  Copenhagen, WHO Regional Office for Europe (Health Evidence Network report .

Mackenbach, J. P. (2014). Political determinants of health.

Mackey, A. and Gass, S.M., 2015. Second language research: Methodology and design. Routledge.

Marshall, C. and Rossman, G.B., 2014. Designing qualitative research. Sage publications.

McCusker, K. and Gunaydin, S., 2015. Research using qualitative, quantitative or mixed methods and choice based on the research. Perfusion, 30(7), pp.537-542.

McKenzie, J. F., Neiger, B. L., & Thackeray, R. (2016). Planning, implementing & evaluating health promotion programs: A primer. Pearson.

McKenzie, J. F., Neiger, B. L., & Thackeray, R. (2016).  Planning, implementing & evaluating health promotion programs: A primer . Pearson.

Merriam, S.B. and Tisdell, E.J., 2015. Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. John Wiley & Sons.

Mertens, D.M., 2014. Research and evaluation in education and psychology: Integrating diversity with quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods. Sage publications.

Ministry of Health. Survey of Health Information in Kingdom of Saudi Arabia 2013.

Naidoo, J., & Wills, J. (2016).  Foundations for Health Promotion-E-Book . Elsevier Health Sciences.

Peltzer, K., & Pengpid, S. (2011). Health Behaviuor Interventions In Developing Countries.  Malawi Medical Journal ,  26 (2), 50-50.

Poverty and Health, (2014). Retrieved from <http://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/health/brief/poverty-health> (Accessed on 19/04/2018)

Ramos, L. R., Malta, D. C., Gomes, G. A. D. O., Bracco, M. M., Florindo, A. A., Mielke, G. I., … & Hallal, P. C. (2014). Prevalence of health promotion programs in primary health care units in Brazil.  Revista de saude publica ,  48 (5), 837-844.

Rosen, G. (2015).  A history of public health . JHU Press.

Rosenbaum, S. (2011). The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act: implications for public health policy and practice.  Public health reports ,  126 (1), 130-135.

Schmidt, H., Gostin, L. O., & Emanuel, E. J. (2015). Public health, universal health coverage, and Sustainable Development Goals: can they coexist?.

Sekaran, U. and Bougie, R., 2016. Research methods for business: A skill-building approach. John Wiley & Sons.

Sharaf, F. (2010). Impact of health education on compliance among patients of chronic diseases in Al Qassim, Saudi Arabia.  International journal of health sciences, 4(2),  139.

Shaw, D. (2008). Social determinants of health.  Clinical Medicine ,  8 (2), 225-226.

Silverman, D. ed., 2016. Qualitative research. Sage.

Sitko, S. J., Kowalska-Bobko, I., Mokrzycka, A., Zabdyr-Jamróz, M., Domagała, A., Magnavita, N., … & Golinowska, S. (2016). Institutional analysis of health promotion for older people in Europe-concept and research tool.  BMC health services research ,  16 (5), 327.

Smith, J.A. ed., 2015. Qualitative psychology: A practical guide to research methods. Sage.

Stoddart, G. L., & Evans, R. G. (2017). Producing health, consuming health care. In  Why are some people healthy and others not?  (pp. 27-64). Routledge.

Taylor, S.J., Bogdan, R. and DeVault, M., 2015. Introduction to qualitative research methods: A guidebook and resource. John Wiley & Sons.

Teherani, A., Martimianakis, T., Stenfors-Hayes, T., Wadhwa, A. and Varpio, L., 2015. Choosing a qualitative research approach. Journal of graduate medical education, 7(4), pp.669-670.

Vivas, A., Gelaye, B., Aboset, N., Kumie, A., Berhane, Y., & Williams, M. A. (2010). Knowledge, attitudes, and practices (KAP) of hygiene among school children in Angolela, Ethiopia.  Journal of preventive medicine and hygiene ,  51 (2), 73.

Vyas, A. N., Landry, M., Schnider, M., Rojas, A. M., & Wood, S. F. (2012). Public health interventions: reaching Latino adolescents via short message service and social media.  Journal of medical Internet research ,  14 (4).

Ward, S., Chow, A. F., Humbert, M. L., Bélanger, M., Muhajarine, N., Vatanparast, H., & Leis, A. (2018). Promoting physical activity, healthy eating and gross motor skills development among preschoolers attending childcare centres: Process evaluation of the Healthy Start-Départ Santé intervention using the RE-AIM framework.  Evaluation and program planning ,  68 , 90-98.

Watts, N., Adger, W. N., Agnolucci, P., Blackstock, J., Byass, P., Cai, W., … & Cox, P. M. (2015). Health and climate change: policy responses to protect public health.  The Lancet ,  386 (10006), 1861-1914.

Weine, S., Eisenman, D. P., Kinsler, J., Glik, D. C., & Polutnik, C. (2017). Addressing violent extremism as public health policy and practice.  Behavioral sciences of terrorism and political aggression ,  9 (3), 208-221.

WHO, (2011). Health care system in Saudi Arabia: an overview. Retrieved from  http://www.emro.who.int/emhj-volume-17/volume-17-issue-10/article-11.html  (Accessed on 4/20/18)

WHO, (2018). Public health services. Retrieved from  https://www.who.int/europe/health-topics  (Accessed on 4/20/18)

World Health Organization. (2009). Milestones in health promotion: Statements from global conferences.

World Health Organization. (2012). Health Behaviour in School-aged Children (HBSC) study: international report from the 2009/2010 survey.  Copenhagen: WHO .

Yoshikawa, H., Aber, J. L., & Beardslee, W. R. (2012). The effects of poverty on the mental, emotional, and behavioural health of children and youth: implications for prevention.  American Psychologist ,  67 (4), 272.

Frequently Asked Questions

How to write a masters dissertation proposal.

To write a Masters dissertation proposal:

• Choose a relevant topic.
• Provide context and background.
• State research questions and objectives.
• Outline the methodology.
• Include a literature review.
• Specify the significance of the study.

USEFUL LINKS

LEARNING RESOURCES

COMPANY DETAILS

• How It Works

• Fact sheets
• Facts in pictures
• Publications
• Questions and answers
• Tools and toolkits
• HIV and AIDS
• Hypertension
• Mental disorders
• Top 10 causes of death
• All countries
• Eastern Mediterranean
• South-East Asia
• Western Pacific
• Data by country
• Country presence 
• Country strengthening 
• Country cooperation strategies 
• News releases
• Feature stories
• Press conferences
• Commentaries
• Photo library
• Afghanistan
• Cholera 
• Coronavirus disease (COVID-19)
• Greater Horn of Africa
• Israel and occupied Palestinian territory
• Disease Outbreak News
• Situation reports
• Weekly Epidemiological Record
• Surveillance
• Health emergency appeal
• International Health Regulations
• Independent Oversight and Advisory Committee
• Classifications
• Data collections
• Global Health Estimates
• Mortality Database
• Sustainable Development Goals
• Health Inequality Monitor
• Global Progress
• Data collection tools
• Global Health Observatory
• Insights and visualizations
• COVID excess deaths
• World Health Statistics
• Partnerships
• Committees and advisory groups
• Collaborating centres
• Technical teams
• Organizational structure
• Initiatives
• General Programme of Work
• WHO Academy
• Investment case
• WHO Foundation
• External audit
• Financial statements
• Internal audit and investigations 
• Programme Budget
• Results reports
• Governing bodies
• World Health Assembly
• Executive Board
• Member States Portal

Strategic Advisory Group on the Global Digital Health Certification Network

Issued on:  18 June 2024

Deadline: 9 July 2024

The World Health Organization (WHO) is seeking experts to serve as members of the Strategic Advisory Group on the Global Digital Health Certification Network (GDHCN). This “Call for experts” provides information about the advisory group in question, the expert profiles being sought, the process to express interest, and the process of selection.

WHO's Global Digital Health Certification Network (GDHCN) is a mechanism to support verification of Digital Health Certificates that are exchanged between participants of the GDHCN utilizing Public Key Infrastructure (PKI). These Digital Health Certificates may include:

• vaccination or testing certificates;
• routine immunization cards;
• home-based records;
• the International Patient Summary (IPS);
• health worker credentials;
• health insurance cards; and
• other types of health documents.

Through the use of open international digital health and information technology standards, and according to the Administrative and Operational Framework, the GDHCN provides mechanisms to verify the provenance of such of Digital Health Certificates.

Functions of the Strategic Advisory Group on the Global Digital Health Certification Network

In its capacity as an advisory body to WHO, the AG shall have the following functions:

• To advise WHO on the further evolution and uptake of open standards for the Public Key Infrastructure within the GDHCN;
• To recommend priorities to WHO for use cases that may be operationalized by the GDHCN through new Trust Domains;
• To identify and assess relevant open standards for Verifiable Digital Health Certificates for use within the GDHCN for prioritized use cases;
• To review, provide feedback and make recommendations to the GDHCN technical documentation;
• To advice WHO on the coordination with relevant Standards Development Organizations (SDOs) in the development or iteration of relevant open standards; and
• To support WHO, advise on and suggest strategies and activities which would promote the uptake of the GDHCN based on existing experiences, resources from WHO and relevant international entities.

Operations of the Strategic Advisory Group on the Global Digital Health Certification Network

• Open sessions: Open sessions shall be convened for the sole purpose of the exchange of non-confidential information and views, and may be attended by Observers (as defined in paragraph III.3 below).
• Closed sessions: The sessions dealing with the formulation of recommendations and/or advice to WHO shall be restricted to the members of the AG and essential WHO Secretariat staff.
• The quorum for AG meetings shall be two thirds of the members.
• WHO may, at its sole discretion, invite external individuals from time to time to attend the open sessions of an advisory group, or parts thereof, as “observers”. Observers may be invited either in their personal capacity, or as representatives from a governmental institution / intergovernmental organization, or from a non-state actor. WHO will request observers invited in their personal capacity to complete a confidentiality undertaking and a declaration of interests form prior to attending a session of the advisory group. Invitations to observers attending as representatives from non-state actors will be subject to internal due diligence and conflict of interest considerations in accordance with FENSA. Observers invited as representatives may also be requested to complete a confidentiality undertaking. Observers shall normally attend meetings of the AG at their own expense and be responsible for making all arrangements in that regard. At the invitation of the Chairperson, observers may be asked to present their personal views and/or the policies of their organization. Observers will not participate in the process of adopting decisions and recommendations of the AG.
• The AG may decide to establish smaller working groups (sub-groups of the AG) to work on specific issues. Their deliberations shall take place via teleconference or video-conference. For these sub-groups, no quorum requirement will apply; the outcome of their deliberations will be submitted to the AG for review at one of its meetings.
• AG members are expected to attend meetings. If a member misses two consecutive meetings, WHO may end his/her appointment as a member of the AG.
• Reports of each meeting shall be submitted by the AG to WHO (the Chief Scientist of the responsible Division). All recommendations from the AG are advisory to WHO, who retains full control over any subsequent decisions or actions regarding any proposals, policy issues or other matters considered by the AG.
• The AG shall normally make recommendations by consensus. If, in exceptional circumstances, a consensus on a particular issue cannot be reached, minority opinions will be reflected in the meeting report.
• Active participation is expected from all AG members, including in working groups, teleconferences, and interaction over email. AG members may, in advance of AG meetings, be requested to review meeting documentation and to provide their views for consideration by the AG.
• WHO shall determine the modes of communication by the AG, including between WHO and the AG members, and the AG members among themselves.
• AG members shall not speak on behalf of, or represent, the AG or WHO to any third party.
• The working language of the AG will be English.

Who can express interest?

The Strategic Advisory Group on the Global Digital Health Certification Network (GDHCN) will be multidisciplinary, with members who have a range of technical knowledge, skills and experience relevant to technical operations of the GDHCN.

The AG shall have up to 20 members, who shall serve in their personal capacities to represent the broad range of disciplines relevant to the GDHCN. In the selection of the AG members, consideration shall be given to attaining an adequate distribution of technical expertise, geographical representation and gender balance.   

WHO welcomes expressions of interest from individuals with experience in the deployment and operations of digital public health infrastructure for the exchange of Digital Health Certificates in the following areas:

• Computably enforceable data sharing policies;
• Open technical specifications that support appropriate data privacy and protection measures;
• Digital (health) wallets and linkages with other verifiable credentials;
• Cybersecurity best practices for digital health;
• Open digital health semantic and syntactic standards inclusive of HL7® FHIR, the International Patient Summary (IPS), and the WHO Family of International Classifications (WHO-FIC).

Individuals shall be able to actively participate utilizing the working language of the Strategic Advisory Group on the Global Digital Health Certification Network, which will be English.

Submitting your expression of interest

To register your interest in being considered for the [name of the advisory group], please submit the following documents 9 Jul7 2024, 23:59h Geneva time to [email protected] using the subject line “Expression of interest for the AG on the GDHCN”:

• A cover letter, indicating your motivation to apply and how you satisfy the selection criteria. Please note that, if selected, membership will be in a personal capacity. Therefore do not use the letterhead or other identification of your employer);
• Your curriculum vitae; and
• A signed and completed Declaration of Interests (DOI) form for WHO Experts, available at https://www.who.int/about/ethics/declarations-of-interest .

After submission, your expression of interest will be reviewed by WHO.  Due to an expected high volume of interest, only selected individuals will be informed. 

Important information about the selection processes and conditions of appointment

Members of WHO advisory groups (AGs) must be free of any real, potential or apparent conflicts of interest. To this end, applicants are required to complete the WHO Declaration of Interests for WHO Experts, and the selection as a member of a AG is, amongst other things, dependent on WHO determining that there is no conflict of interest or that any identified conflicts could be appropriately managed (in addition to WHO’s evaluation of an applicant’s experience, expertise and motivation and other criteria).

All AG members will serve in their individual expert capacity and shall not represent any governments, any commercial industries or entities, any research, academic or civil society organizations, or any other bodies, entities, institutions or organizations. They are expected to fully comply with the Code of Conduct for WHO Experts ( https://www.who.int/about/ethics/declarations-of-interest ). AG members will be expected to sign and return a completed confidentiality undertaking prior to the beginning of the first meeting.

At any point during the selection process, telephone interviews may be scheduled between an applicant and the WHO Secretariat to enable WHO to ask questions relating to the applicant’s experience and expertise and/or to assess whether the applicant meets the criteria for membership in the relevant AG.

The selection of members of the AGs will be made by WHO in its sole discretion, taking into account  the following (non-exclusive) criteria: relevant technical expertise; experience in international and country policy work; communication skills; and ability to work constructively with people from different cultural backgrounds and orientations .The selection of AG members will also take account of the need for diverse perspectives from different regions, especially from low and middle-income countries, and for gender balance.

If selected by WHO, proposed members will be sent an invitation letter and a Memorandum of Agreement. Appointment as a member of a AG will be subject to the proposed member returning to WHO the countersigned copy of these two documents.

WHO reserves the right to accept or reject any expression of interest, to annul the open call process and reject all expressions of interest at any time without incurring any liability to the affected applicant or applicants and without any obligation to inform the affected applicant or applicants of the grounds for WHO's action. WHO may also decide, at any time, not to proceed with the establishment of the AG, disband an existing TAG or modify the work of the AG.

WHO shall not in any way be obliged to reveal, or discuss with any applicant, how an expression of interest was assessed, or to provide any other information relating to the evaluation/selection process or to state the reasons for not choosing a member.

WHO may publish the names and a short biography of the selected individuals on the WHO internet.

AG members will not be remunerated for their services in relation to the AG or otherwise. Travel and accommodation expenses of AG members to participate in AG meetings will be covered by WHO in accordance with its applicable policies, rules and procedures.

The appointment will be limited in time as indicated in the letter of appointment.

If you have any questions about this “Call for experts”, please write to [email protected] well before the applicable deadline. 

Related Highlight

• Terms of Reference for the Strategic Advisory Group on the Global Digital Health Certification Network