Hypothesis based research?

[Concubine]

Hi everyone,

I just wanted to get some opions on using my current work as "hypothesis based research". The University of Utah requires a certain amount of research as part of the application. They have you list your "hypothesis based research" experience and I have to have a letter of reccomendation from the person that supervised me in this research.

My current job is at a microbiological testing laboratory that tests for pharmaceutical and medical device companies. As a Study Director, my work focuses on ensuring medical devices or pharmaceutical products are compliant with regulations and standards, developing scientifically sound methods to find out if products actually work as they are supposed to, testing or supervising testing of the products to these methods, and ensuring that each test is performed with quality/integrity. My specific tests include (but are not limited to) "Antimicrobial Susceptibility/Potency" (study example: Does this product have antimicrobial properties? If so, how strong and against what organisms?), particulate testing (study example: How many particulates will a deployment of this coronary stent generate in a patient's vascular system? or Does this drug contain the less than the current standard limits for suspended particulate matter?), and "Microbial Ingress" (study example: Does this needleless access device protect against common I.V. line infections?). This is not conventional academic research, in that these studies usually last anywhere from one day to three months and are not supervised by a proffessor or in an academic setting, but by myself and those above me. Many of the tests are simply run to a current standard testing procedure with really no research and the results are simply reported out (kind of like taking a sample, having a machine do the work, and simply reporting out the results). Others require R/D to develop and are much more complicated. I've worked there for 2 years now, so it's a pretty significant amount of hours to put on the application. Do you think I'm justified as listing this as hypothesis based?

Thanks!

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Concubine]

Anyone?

 

[EyeballLove]

Isn't all research hypothesis-driven? I'm confused😕

 

[littlealex]

I wouldn't call it hypothesis driven reason. I mean... there's no hypothesis. You're not specifically trying to solve a problem to generate new knowledge.

The guy testing a machine to find out how it works and the guy testing the machine to check for safety regulations have two very different jobs.

 

[Concubine]

Thats what I'm assuming. I just needed a little confidence boost because the lady over the phone (when I was checking on the status of my letters) said I would need to have my letter writer that supervised this clearly state it is "hypothesis based". I will have to contact my supervisor and have her alter the letter...

 

[EyeballLove]

I wouldn't call it hypothesis driven reason. I mean... there's no hypothesis. You're not specifically trying to solve a problem to generate new knowledge.

The guy testing a machine to find out how it works and the guy testing the machine to check for safety regulations have two very different jobs.

Oh. Thanks littlealex 🙂

 

[EyeballLove]

One more Q, if the research one is doing really isn't "hypothesis-driven"...then it's probably not research...that person is probably just working as a lab helper and ordering things😕😕

 

[EyeballLove]

I wouldn't call it hypothesis driven reason. I mean... there's no hypothesis. You're not specifically trying to solve a problem to generate new knowledge.

The guy testing a machine to find out how it works and the guy testing the machine to check for safety regulations have two very different jobs.

I just re-read the OP's description of the research, and I have to agree with you, littlealex, it's definitely not hypothesis-driven research. Sorry to OP🙁

 

[Concubine]

I wouldn't call it hypothesis driven reason. I mean... there's no hypothesis. You're not specifically trying to solve a problem to generate new knowledge.

The guy testing a machine to find out how it works and the guy testing the machine to check for safety regulations have two very different jobs.

To ellaborate, this is not exactly the right context. Although some of it is as you have said, a large bulk of it is actually part of a submission process for the medical device company or drug company to submit to the FDA. For example, the company has to prove to the FDA that their device or product inhibits the microbes it's intended to treat, or that their device does not give out too many particulates, before they can actually market the device. We, as an idependent laboratory, provide testing to prove or dissapprove this.

 

[MassTransport]

No, this reads more like quality assurance. You could spin it, though. See what your boss says.

 

[Jolie South]

No, this reads more like quality assurance. You could spin it, though. See what your boss says.

i agree. you're not really discovering anything. you're just finding better ways to assure that devices already invented work properly.

 

[Concubine]

No, this reads more like quality assurance. You could spin it, though. See what your boss says.

Actually, we have quality assurance people seperate from what I do. Maybe an actual typical example might provide more insight. I'll have a client call me up, they have devoloped a new device that treats staph infection and are looking for a way to show it works. I will write up a protocol or test method to test this, then supervise the technicians doing the test.

 

[Concubine]

If I can't use it, I'll just use my academic research from back in school that will meet the requirements.

 

[MassTransport]

This is pretty much what QA does, or the more encompassing field of quality management, if you like. I can see a way to stretch it into a form of hypothesis-based research, but there is always the risk that Utah will politely disagree. If you can wrangle a strong letter from your more traditional work, I would use that instead.

What's the name of your department?

 

[Concubine]

Actually, we have quality assurance people seperate from what I do. Maybe an actual typical example might provide more insight. I'll have a client call me up, they have devoloped a new device that treats staph infection and are looking for a way to show it works. I will write up a protocol or test method to test this, then supervise the technicians doing the test.

Could I spin this to say It's hypothesis based research in that I am writing a procedure with a hypothesis (This device inhibits staph), objectively performing the test, then providing a report that yes it does or no it does not inhibit staph.

 

[Concubine]

Also, Utah's description clarifies that it does not have to be academic.

 

[Concubine]

This is pretty much what QA does, or the more encompassing field of quality management, if you like. I can see a way to stretch it into a form of hypothesis-based research, but there is always the risk that Utah will politely disagree. If you can wrangle a strong letter from your more traditional work, I would use that instead.

What's the name of your department?

The name is Pharmaceuticals. The people I am usually dealing with are engineers, physicians, academic researchers, etc..

 

[MassTransport]

The issue isn't whether hypothesis-based research has to be academic, it's whether or not your work is considered hypothesis-based research. Who you are in contact with has no bearing on that. It seems like you have doubts and are trying to allay them here, but from what you've told me, I would not think that it's hypothesis-based.

Ultimately, the decision is up to you. It seems that Utah is crazy strict with their EC requirements.

 

[Concubine]

The issue isn't whether hypothesis-based research has to be academic, it's rather whether your work is considered hypothesis-based research or not. Who you are in contact with has no bearing on that. It seems like you have doubts and are trying to allay them here, but from what you've told me, I would not think that it's hypothesis-based.

Ultimately, the decision is up to you. It seems that Utah is crazy strict with their EC requirements.

Thanks for the insight guys, I did have doubts that I could use it as strictly hypothesis based research. I have no doubt that I can list some of it, since at least 20% of my job is developing new tests and testing methods (sometimes novel). Your input has just assured me that I probably should bank more on my academic research for the rest of it. Thanks!

 

[Concubine]

Thanks for the insight guys, I did have doubts that I could use it as strictly hypothesis based research. I have no doubt that I can list some of it, since at least 20% of my job is developing new tests and testing methods (sometimes novel). Your input has just assured me that I probably should bank more on my academic research for the rest of it. Thanks!

and yes, utah is crazy. Out of all 22 applications, utah has been the most difficult. They are so meticulous about listing every hour for the last four years for research, volunteering, etc. Too bad it's the school I most want to get into.