Research Synthesis Guidelines

Systematic framework for documenting, synthesizing, and grading research evidence for MYCURE healthcare products with emphasis on Philippine healthcare context.

When This Skill Activates

Documenting user research findings
Synthesizing market analysis or competitive research
Grading evidence quality and confidence levels
Writing research reports or insights documents
Analyzing Philippine healthcare systems (LGU, FHISIS, PhilHealth)
Conducting stakeholder interviews or field studies
Evaluating healthcare workflows and pain points

Core Principles

1. Evidence-Based Decision Making

All product decisions must be grounded in research.

Why:

Healthcare products impact patient care
Assumptions can lead to dangerous design flaws
Philippine healthcare context has unique requirements
Stakeholder buy-in requires credible evidence

2. Transparent Confidence Grading

Every finding must be labeled with confidence level.

Why:

Not all evidence is equal quality
Teams need to know which findings to trust
HIGH confidence findings drive major decisions
LOW confidence findings require further investigation

3. Triangulation for Validation

Multiple sources strengthen findings.

Why:

Single sources can be biased or incomplete
Triangulation reduces error
Philippine healthcare varies by region (urban vs. rural)
Cross-validation ensures accuracy

Confidence Grading Framework

HIGH Confidence

Definition: Finding is well-supported by multiple high-quality sources with consistent evidence.

Requirements (need ALL of these):

✅ 3+ independent sources confirming the finding
✅ Primary research included (interviews, observations, surveys)
✅ Recent data (within 2 years for healthcare)
✅ Philippine-specific evidence (not extrapolated from other countries)
✅ Consistent across all sources (no major contradictions)

Example:

## Finding: Manual registration takes 12-15 minutes per patient [HIGH CONFIDENCE]

**Evidence:**
1. **Direct observation** - Observed 15 patient registrations at 3 Manila clinics,
   average time 14.2 minutes (June 2024)
2. **Stakeholder interviews** - 8 clinic administrators reported 12-15 minute average
   registration time (May-June 2024)
3. **DOH data** - Department of Health study cited 13.5 minute average for
   Metro Manila clinics (2023)

**Triangulation:** Primary observation + stakeholder reports + government data = HIGH

MEDIUM Confidence

Definition: Finding has some support but gaps in evidence quality, recency, or triangulation.

Characteristics (one or more):

⚠️ 1-2 sources (not fully triangulated)
⚠️ Secondary research only (no primary data collected)
⚠️ Dated evidence (2-5 years old)
⚠️ Extrapolated from similar contexts (other SE Asian countries)
⚠️ Minor inconsistencies between sources

Example:

## Finding: LGU health workers prefer mobile apps over desktop [MEDIUM CONFIDENCE]

**Evidence:**
1. **Industry report** - 2022 Southeast Asia digital health survey showed 68%
   preference for mobile in rural health settings (regional, not PH-specific)
2. **Anecdotal** - 2 RHU staff mentioned preferring mobile during informal
   conversations (small sample)

**Gaps:** No Philippine-specific data, small sample size, older regional data

**Recommendation:** Conduct targeted survey of Philippine LGU health workers before
making mobile-first decision

LOW Confidence

Definition: Finding is speculative, unsupported, or based on weak evidence. Requires further investigation.

Characteristics (one or more):

❌ Single source or anecdotal only
❌ No primary research
❌ Outdated (5+ years old)
❌ Not Philippine-specific (US/EU data extrapolated)
❌ Contradictory evidence exists
❌ Assumption not validated

Example:

## Finding: Clinics willing to pay ₱50,000/month for MYCURE [LOW CONFIDENCE]

**Evidence:**
1. **Assumption** - Based on perceived value, not actual willingness-to-pay data
2. **No validation** - Have not asked clinics about pricing

**Status:** HYPOTHESIS ONLY - Requires pricing research before proceeding

**Next steps:** Conduct pricing sensitivity survey with 20+ target clinics

Triangulation Methodology

Triangulation = Using multiple data sources or methods to validate findings.

Types of Triangulation

1. Data Triangulation (Most Common)

Combine different data sources:

Sources:

Primary research: Interviews, observations, surveys you conduct
Secondary research: Published studies, reports, government data
Internal data: Usage analytics, support tickets, sales feedback

Example:

Finding: Inventory mismanagement costs clinics 15-20% of medication budget

**Data triangulation:**
1. **Primary:** Interviewed 10 clinic administrators, 8 reported 15-25% loss
2. **Secondary:** DOH 2023 report cited 18% average medication wastage
3. **Internal:** MYCURE pilot clinic reduced waste from 22% to 5% with inventory tracking

**Result:** HIGH confidence - three independent data types align

2. Method Triangulation

Use different research methods:

Methods:

Interviews (qualitative depth)
Surveys (quantitative breadth)
Observation (behavioral truth)
Analytics (usage patterns)

Example:

Finding: Receptionists skip validation fields to save time

**Method triangulation:**
1. **Interview:** Receptionists admitted skipping non-required fields "to move faster"
2. **Observation:** Watched 5 receptionists skip 70% of optional fields
3. **Analytics:** Form completion data shows optional fields filled <30% of the time

**Result:** HIGH confidence - stated behavior matches observed and measured behavior

3. Philippine Healthcare Context Triangulation

Validate across different Philippine healthcare settings:

Settings:

Private clinics (urban, well-resourced)
LGU health centers (rural, limited resources)
Government hospitals (public sector)
RHUs/BHSs (barangay-level primary care)

Example:

Finding: Internet connectivity is unreliable for healthcare IT systems

**Context triangulation:**
1. **Urban private clinics:** Reliable fiber connection, 99% uptime
2. **RHUs (rural):** 2G/3G only, frequent outages, <50% reliability
3. **LGU city health offices:** DSL or fiber, 80-90% reliability

**Result:** MEDIUM-HIGH confidence - varies by setting, MYCURE must work offline

Citation Standards

Why Citations Matter

Credibility:

Allows verification of claims
Shows rigor and thoroughness
Enables future researchers to build on work
Required for stakeholder trust

Citation Format

Use this structure:

## Finding Title [CONFIDENCE LEVEL]

**Summary:** [1-2 sentence finding statement]

**Evidence:**

1. **[Source Type]** - [Name/Organization], "[Title or Description]",
   [Date], [Specific data point or quote]

2. **[Source Type]** - [Name/Organization], "[Title or Description]",
   [Date], [Specific data point or quote]

3. **[Source Type]** - [Name/Organization], "[Title or Description]",
   [Date], [Specific data point or quote]

**Triangulation assessment:** [How sources validate each other]

**Limitations:** [Any gaps, biases, or caveats]

**Implications:** [What this means for product/design decisions]

Source Types

Interviews:

**Interview** - Dr. Maria Santos (General Practitioner, Manila Clinic),
"Patient registration currently takes 15 minutes on average",
June 15, 2024, Stakeholder interview

Observations:

**Direct observation** - Field study at 3 Metro Manila clinics,
14.2 minute average registration time (n=15 patients),
June 10-12, 2024, User research

Documents:

**Government report** - Department of Health Philippines,
"Philippine Health Facility Survey 2023", Published March 2023,
Page 42: "Average patient wait time 45 minutes in public health centers"

Surveys:

**Survey** - MYCURE target market survey (n=50 clinic administrators),
"73% report using paper-based records as primary system",
Conducted May 2024

Analytics:

**Usage data** - MYCURE pilot program analytics (n=5 clinics, 6 months),
"Registration time reduced from 15min to 5min average",
Jan-June 2024

Websites:

**Online source** - PhilHealth official website,
"PhilHealth Claims Processing Guidelines",
Accessed June 20, 2024,
URL: https://www.philhealth.gov.ph/claims/

Research Report Template

---
title: "[Research Topic]"
research_type: User Research | Market Analysis | Competitive Analysis | Field Study
date_conducted: 2024-06-15
researchers: [Names]
status: draft | final
confidentiality: internal
---

# [Research Topic]

## Executive Summary

[3-5 bullet points of key findings with confidence levels]

- Finding 1 [HIGH CONFIDENCE]
- Finding 2 [MEDIUM CONFIDENCE]
- Finding 3 [HIGH CONFIDENCE]

---

## Research Methodology

**Type:** [User interviews | Surveys | Field observations | Document analysis]

**Sample:**
- Size: [Number of participants/sources]
- Description: [Who/what was studied]
- Selection: [How sample was chosen]

**Dates:** [When research conducted]

**Location:** [Where research took place]

**Limitations:**
- [Limitation 1]
- [Limitation 2]

---

## Findings

### Finding 1: [Title] [HIGH CONFIDENCE]

**Summary:** [1-2 sentence description]

**Evidence:**

1. **[Source type]** - [Citation]
2. **[Source type]** - [Citation]
3. **[Source type]** - [Citation]

**Triangulation:** [How sources validate finding]

**Implications:** [What this means for MYCURE]

---

### Finding 2: [Title] [MEDIUM CONFIDENCE]

[Same structure...]

---

## Recommendations

### Immediate Actions (HIGH Confidence Findings)

1. **Recommendation 1** - Based on Finding 1
   - Action: [Specific next step]
   - Owner: [Who should do it]
   - Timeline: [When]

### Further Investigation Needed (LOW/MEDIUM Confidence)

1. **Research Gap 1** - Finding 3 needs validation
   - Method: [How to validate]
   - Timeline: [When to conduct]

---

## Appendices

### Appendix A: Interview Guide
[Interview questions used]

### Appendix B: Raw Data
[Survey results, observation notes, etc.]

### Appendix C: Sources
[Full bibliography of secondary sources]

Philippine Healthcare Context

Key Systems to Understand

FHISIS (Field Health Service Information System):

DOH reporting system for LGU health centers
Monthly reporting requirements
Specific data formats and fields
Research implications: MYCURE must support FHISIS export

PhilHealth:

National health insurance
Claims processing requirements
Accreditation standards
Research implications: Integration needs for billing

LGU Health Structure:

Provincial Health Office (PHO)
City/Municipal Health Office (CHO/MHO)
Rural Health Units (RHUs)
Barangay Health Stations (BHS)
Research implications: Varying resource levels, connectivity, literacy

Research Considerations

Urban vs. Rural:

Infrastructure varies dramatically
Internet connectivity: Urban 90%+ vs. Rural 30-50%
Staff technical literacy: Urban high vs. Rural mixed
Don't extrapolate urban findings to rural contexts

Public vs. Private:

Resource levels differ significantly
Public: Government budget constraints, high volume
Private: Better resources, lower volume
Research both sectors separately

Regional Variations:

Metro Manila ≠ Provinces ≠ BARMM
Language: English/Filipino in NCR, regional languages in provinces
Validate findings across multiple regions

Quality Checklist

Before finalizing research:

[ ] All findings graded (HIGH/MEDIUM/LOW)
[ ] HIGH confidence = 3+ sources triangulated
[ ] Citations complete with dates and specifics
[ ] Philippine-specific data (not extrapolated)
[ ] Recent evidence (within 2 years preferred)
[ ] Methodology documented (reproducible)
[ ] Limitations acknowledged (no overclaiming)
[ ] Recommendations actionable (tied to findings)
[ ] Executive summary for stakeholders
[ ] Raw data preserved in appendices

Common Pitfalls

❌ Don't Do This

Treating all evidence equally:

Finding: Clinics want mobile-first design

Evidence: Read blog post about mobile trends

Confidence: HIGH ← WRONG

Extrapolating without validation:

Finding: Philippine clinics will behave like US clinics

Evidence: US healthcare IT study

Confidence: MEDIUM ← WRONG (should be LOW)

Ignoring contradictory evidence:

Finding: All clinics prefer cloud-based

Evidence: 5 clinics said yes
[Ignored: 3 clinics said no due to connectivity]

Confidence: HIGH ← WRONG (cherry-picking)

✅ Do This

Grade honestly:

Finding: Clinics may prefer mobile-first design

Evidence: General mobile trends blog post (not healthcare-specific)

Confidence: LOW

Next step: Conduct targeted survey of Philippine clinics

Validate locally:

Finding: Philippine LGU health workers face connectivity challenges

Evidence:
1. Interview: 10 RHU staff in Bulacan reported frequent outages
2. Observation: Visited 5 RHUs, saw 3G-only connectivity
3. DOH report: 2023 study cited 40% of rural health centers lack reliable internet

Confidence: HIGH (triangulated, Philippine-specific, recent)

Summary

Research synthesis framework:

Grade every finding: HIGH/MEDIUM/LOW confidence
Triangulate: 3+ sources for HIGH confidence
Cite rigorously: Enable verification
Context matters: Philippine healthcare is unique
Be honest: Acknowledge limitations and gaps

Confidence requirements:

HIGH: 3+ sources, primary research, recent, PH-specific, consistent
MEDIUM: 1-2 sources, some gaps in quality/recency
LOW: Single source, outdated, assumptions, contradictory

Use research to drive decisions:

HIGH confidence → Act with confidence
MEDIUM confidence → Proceed with caution, validate further
LOW confidence → Do NOT base major decisions, research more

Remember: In healthcare, bad research leads to bad products. Bad products harm patients. Grade honestly, cite thoroughly, validate rigorously.

research-synthesis-guidelines

Research Synthesis Guidelines

When This Skill Activates

Core Principles

1. Evidence-Based Decision Making

2. Transparent Confidence Grading

3. Triangulation for Validation

Confidence Grading Framework

HIGH Confidence

MEDIUM Confidence

LOW Confidence

Triangulation Methodology

Types of Triangulation

1. Data Triangulation (Most Common)

2. Method Triangulation

3. Philippine Healthcare Context Triangulation

Citation Standards

Why Citations Matter

Citation Format

Source Types

Research Report Template

Philippine Healthcare Context

Key Systems to Understand

Research Considerations

Quality Checklist

Common Pitfalls

❌ Don't Do This

✅ Do This

Summary