Research is a selection criterion for nearly every advanced training position and a question in nearly every interview. It is also where candidates most often damage an otherwise strong interview, by claiming more than they have done or proposing more than they could deliver. This guide is about getting it right.
What the panel is actually asking
Three questions sit behind the research question. Have you done any research, and did you learn from it? Do you understand what research in this unit looks like? And will you use the research time this position carries, or will it vanish into service work? Heads of unit have been burned by trainees who promised a project and delivered nothing, and they ask the question to find out which kind of trainee you are.
Describing what you have done
Describe your research the way you would describe a case: the question, what you did, what it found, and what it taught you. Be specific about your own part. If you were the second author who collected the data, say so; the panel can read the author list and will ask. If your research was an audit, call it an audit and say what changed as a result. If you have published nothing, say what you have done instead and what you learned from it.
Three things that cost marks: overstating your role, describing a project you do not understand well enough to be probed on, and listing outputs without saying what any of them found.
Proposing what you would do
If the position carries research time, have a realistic proposal. Realistic means a question you could answer with the unit's patients and data in the time available, a named collaborator or supervisor, and an output you could describe: an abstract, a paper, a protocol for a larger study. Know what the unit already researches, because proposing something they do, or something they could never support, both read as homework not done.
If you do not want to lead research, say so and say what you would do instead: recruit to the unit's trials, supervise basic trainees' projects, run the unit's audit programme, complete a quality improvement project with a measured result. Heads of unit value a trainee who will reliably do that over one who promises a trial and delivers nothing.
The follow up questions
- What was your contribution to that paper?
- What did it find, and did it change anything?
- What would you do with one day a week of research time?
- Who would supervise you here?
- What are the barriers to research in a hospital like this, and how would you work around them?
Prepare a one minute answer to each. The barriers question rewards realism: time, ethics approval, data access, statistical support, competing service demands, and what you have seen work elsewhere.
Teaching, the sibling question
Research and teaching are usually asked together, and the same honesty applies. One teaching example with evidence it worked beats a list of sessions. Say what you would teach the unit's basic trainees and how you would fit it around the service.
In a sentence
Describe the research you have done truthfully and specifically, propose what you could deliver and no more, and show you know what research in this unit looks like. The panel is choosing a colleague, and they would rather have an honest contributor than an inflated one.