JDSE
Journal of Dental Sciences and Education

The Journal of Dental Sciences and Education deals with General Dentistry, Pediatric Dentistry, Restorative Dentistry, Orthodontics, Oral diagnosis and DentomaxilloFacial Radiology, Endodontics, Prosthetic Dentistry, Periodontology, Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Oral Implantology, Dental Education and other dentistry fields and accepts articles on these topics. Journal of Dental Science and Education publishes original research articles, review articles, case reports, editorial commentaries, letters to the editor, educational articles, and conference/meeting announcements.

eISSN: 2980-1389
Creative Commons CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 International License.
EndNote Style

Online Manuscript System

Index
Original Article
Hierarchy of research study designs: a conceptual and illustrative approach for scientific education
Abstract
Aims: To present a conceptual and illustrative approach to the hierarchy of research study designs, emphasizing their methodological relationships and educational value as tools to support scientific literacy and methodological understanding.
Methods: This conceptual and educational article was developed based on classical references in scientific methodology, evidence-based practice, and cognitive learning theories. International reporting guidelines and methodological frameworks, including CONSORT, STROBE, PRISMA, the Cochrane Handbook, and GRADE, were considered in the theoretical organization of the proposed models. Two visual representations were developed to illustrate the relationships among descriptive, observational, and interventional designs, as well as the distinction between primary and secondary studies. The figures were refined by consensus among the authors, prioritizing conceptual coherence and pedagogical applicability.
Results: The proposed visual models provide an integrated perspective on research study designs, highlighting their methodological characteristics, inferential potential, and complementary roles in knowledge production. Rather than reinforcing rigid hierarchical classifications, the models emphasize functional and conceptual relationships among different study designs. By promoting cognitive organization and reducing the complexity associated with abstract methodological concepts, these representations may facilitate critical reading and improve methodological understanding among students and novice researchers.
Conclusion: Contextualized visual resources and pedagogically oriented approaches may enhance the comprehension of research methodology and contribute to scientific literacy. The conceptual models presented herein offer an alternative framework for teaching study designs, fostering a more critical and integrated understanding of evidence generation in health sciences.

Keywords : Higher education, scientific methodology, evidence-based practice, decision-making, knowledge

Download Article
Ethical Statement

No ethics committee approval was required for this study because no human participants, patient data, photographs, or biological materials were involved.

Informed Consent

As no biological material from humans or animals was used in the study, informed consent was not required.

Author Contributions

Concept: LSCB, ICS, CCAQ, LMDM; Design: LSCB, ICS, LMDM; Control: CCAQ, LMDM; Data Collection and/or Processing: LSCB, ICS, ROS; Analysis and/or Interpretation: LSCB, ICS, ROS, LMDM; Writing the Article: LSCB, ROS, LMDM; Critical Review: LSCB, ROS, CCAQ, LMDM.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest related to this study.

Financial Disclosure

The authors received no financial support for the conduct or publication of this research.


1. Greenhalgh T. How to Read a Paper: The Basics of Evidence-Based Medicine. 5th ed. Wiley-Blackwell; 2014.
2. Sackett DL, Straus SE, Richardson WS, Rosenberg W, Haynes RB. Evidence-Based Medicine: How to Practice and Teach EBM. 2nd ed. Churchill Livingstone; 2000.
3. Guyatt GH, Rennie D, Meade MO, Cook DJ. Users’ Guides to the Medical Literature: A Manual for Evidence-Based Clinical Practice. 3rd ed. McGraw-Hill Education; 2015.
4. Ioannidis JPA. Why most published research findings are false. PLoS Med. 2005;2(8):e124. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124
5. Higgins JPT, Green S, eds. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Version 5.1.0 (updated March 2011). The Cochrane Collaboration; 2011.
6. Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Vist GE, et al; GRADE Working Group. GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ. 2008;336(7650):924-926. doi:10.1136/bmj.39489.470347.AD
7. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG; PRISMA Group. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med. 2009;6(7):e1000097. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097
8. Schulz KF, Altman DG, Moher D; CONSORT Group. CONSORT 2010 statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomized trials. BMJ. 2010;340:c332. doi:10.1136/bmj.c332
9. von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, et al. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. Lancet. 2007;370(9596):1453-1457. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(07)61602-X
10. Grimes DA, Schulz KF. An overview of clinical research: the lay of the land. Lancet. 2002;359(9300):57-61. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(02)07283-5
11. Grimes DA, Schulz KF. Bias and causal associations in observational research. Lancet. 2002;359(9302):248-252. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(02)07451-2
12. Mann CJ. Observational research methods. Research design II: cohort, cross sectional, and case-control studies. Emerg Med J. 2003;20(1):54-60. doi:10.1136/emj.20.1.54
13. Concato J, Shah N, Horwitz RI. Randomized, controlled trials, observational studies, and the hierarchy of research designs. N Engl J Med. 2000;342(25):1887-1892. doi:10.1056/NEJM200006223422507
14. Mayer RE. Multimedia Learning. 2nd ed. Cambridge University Press; 2009.
15. Sweller J. Cognitive load theory. Psychol Learn Motiv. 2011;55:37-76. doi:10.1016/B978-0-12-387691-1.00002-8
16. Norman G. Teaching basic science to optimize transfer. Med Teach. 2009;31(9):807-811. doi:10.1080/01421590903049814
17. Tufte ER. The Visual Display of Quantitative Information. 2nd ed. Graphics Press; 2001.
18. Cook MP. Visual representations in science education: the influence of prior knowledge and cognitive load theory on instructional design principles. Sci Educ. 2006;90(6):1073-1091. doi:10.1002/sce.20164
19. Kuhn TS. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. 3rd ed. University of Chicago Press; 1996.
20. Latour B. Science in Action: How to Follow Scientists and Engineers Through Society. Harvard University Press; 1987.
21. Popper K. The Logic of Scientific Discovery. Routledge; 2002.
22. Morin E. Ciência com Consciência. 8th ed. Bertrand Brasil; 2005.
23. Hochman B, Nahas FX, Oliveira Filho RS, Ferreira LM. Desenhos de pesquisa. Acta Cir Bras. 2005;20(suppl 2):2-9. doi:10.1590/S0102-86502005000800002
24. Harrison JE. Evidence-based orthodontics: where do I find the evidence? J Orthod. 2000;27(1):71-78. doi:10.1093/ortho/27.1.71
25. Pandis N. The evidence pyramid and introduction to randomized controlled trials. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2011;140(3):446-447. doi:10.1016/j.ajodo.2011.04.016
26. Cerqueira AR, Alves AS, Monteiro-Soares M, Hailey D, Loureiro D, Baptista S. Visual Thinking Strategies in medical education: a systematic review. BMC Med Educ. 2023;23(1):536. doi:10.1186/s12909-023-04470-3
27. Knapp P, Benhebil N, Evans E, Moe-Byrne T. The effectiveness of video animations in the education of healthcare practitioners and student practitioners: a systematic review of trials. Perspect Med Educ. 2022;11(6):309-315. doi:10.1007/s40037-022-00736-6
28. Oudbier J, Spaai G, Timmermans K, Boerboom T. Enhancing the effectiveness of flipped classroom in health science education: a state-of-the-art review. BMC Med Educ. 2022;22(1):34. doi:10.1186/s12909-021-03052-5
29. Yeung AWK, Parvanov ED, Hribersek M, et al. Digital teaching in medical education: scientific literature landscape review. JMIR Med Educ. 2022;8(1):e32747. doi:10.2196/32747
Article available in :
Volume 4, Issue 4, 2026
Page : 128-133
https://doi.org/10.51271/JDSE-0087
Article Information
Received : 05 Haz 2026
Accepted : 13 Ağu 2026
Published : 28 Eki 2026
Corresponding Author :

Luísa Schubach da Costa Barreto: Department of Social and Preventive Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro (UERJ), Rio de Janeiro, Brasil

[email protected]
Citation : da Costa Barreto LS, da Silva IC, dos Santos RO, Abdo Quintão CC, de Menezes LM. Hierarchy of research study designs: a conceptual and illustrative approach for scientific education. J Dent Sci Educ. 2026;4(4):128-133. doi:10.51271/JDSE-0087

Read: 2
Download : 2
Cited: 0
_Footer