approval sheet in research paper definition

Approval Sheet for Thesis with 5 Examples

In this blog post, we will be talking about one of the important parts of a thesis. It is the approval sheet. Without having this section in your t hesis report your thesis will not be accepted as there is no section for the committee.

Lets start with what the approval sheet is and the format and then some examples of the Approval Sheet.

Approval Sheet for Thesis

The hard work and tensions associated with heavy research work are undeniable. But more than that researchers usually have the tension of approval of their long work by appropriate authorities.

In simple terms, an approval sheet for a thesis paper means the forms that are submitted by the writer to the scholarly panel for getting approval of the work.

Relevance of Approval Sheet

For your thesis work, you need an approval sheet simply because your work needs certification and acceptance.

An approval sheet for dissertation needs to be certified by a well-known institution so that readers can trust your work.

The signature of the expert panel on your approval sheet makes you a good fit for some research jobs. Your thesis becomes credible enough to work as a researcher or analyst once you have a signed approval sheet for the dissertation with you.

Who can design the approval sheet?

Generally, researchers prepare the approval sheet and present it in front of those whose approval is needed. If it’s an academic institution where strict guidelines are followed then the researcher has to design the approval sheet by the instructions of the institution.

That ready-made design of the approval sheet by the authority is provided in the case of educational schools and universities.

Is sending approval and getting the approval the same?

The scholars who are beginners should know that sending the approval sheet for acceptance does not guarantee approval. It’s only the first step of getting approval from the authorities.

Therefore, professionally designing the approval sheet is very important. Otherwise, the panel can have a bad impression about your work and will simply deny approval even before looking at your long research work.

Ways to Design a Sheet for Instant Approval Sheet

As you have known what an approval sheet is and why it’s important, now it’s time to design one for yourself. Below you will find the detailed procedure on how to make an approval sheet!

1.   Label the title as an approval sheet.

That is, refer to the field of study on the side of the approval sheet as a headline.

For example – Approval Sheet: inclusive education focus group study method . It makes the first impression worthy as compared to other applicants’ requested sheets for approval. You can also add the institution name or title beside the approval sheet headline. It counts on your choice as well as the choice of the organization you are researching with.

2.   Compose an introductory statement following the headline.

Once they are finding it convincing in the statement about the purpose of the research work then they will continue their reading and will sign your document. Keep it formal and to the point in this section.

3.   Insert the terms and conditions section here.

In the whole approval sheet write up this part is the most sensitive. Here, carefully write about the terms and conditions otherwise the authority can reject or come into direct conflict with you. Here, mention that once the work is approved the following things will come into effect promptly.

In this part, you can talk about a commission, termination of the approval, and other conditions. Make your tone soft here and mention every condition here only for avoiding later confusion.

4.   Look at the approval sheet sample format and organize it accordingly.

Remember you can come out with the best format only after looking at some prior worker-out approval sheet formats. Follow some of the parts of their lay and bring your changes in it as per your requirement. The only tip to make the sheet attractive is by using easy and understandable language. Don’t add jargon to it. Side by side, maintain the formal tone to make it look like an official document.

5.   Make a section in the sheet for the signature part.

The most valuable section of your approval sheet is the signature block. Keep it ready at the end of the page. Also, place the name of the authorized person along with his scholarly degree and designation. Also, place the name of the person who has submitted the form. And at the top of the name of the authorized person, leave wide space for his or her signature along with the date. And once you are sure about the form’s structure, then print it in A4 size paper and keep it ready with you in a file.

Example of Approval Sheet

Approval sheet example 1, example of approval sheet for thesis 2, thesis approval sheet example 3, thesis approval sheet format 4.

You can create your approval sheet in the above format.

Leave a Comment Cancel Reply

Approval Sheet for Thesis with Examples and Format

• Post author: Rajveer
• Post last modified: March 17, 2023
• Reading time: 13 mins read

Writing thesis and stuck on approval sheet? If yes then don’t worry in this article I will tell you how you can design a perfect approval sheet. I’ll also share a few different examples and the cool thing is that the samples are downloadable in word doc format. So let’s jump into the article.

Approval Sheet for Thesis

1. add university name and logo, 2. start with the heading, 3. write a statement for the approval sheet, 4. add a section for author’s signature and date, 5. add a section for approval committee members, 6. design a signature and date section for approval committee, importance of approval sheet in thesis, check samples and select a format for your approval sheet, thesis approval sheet example 1, thesis approval sheet example 2, thesis approval sheet example 3, final suggestions on thesis approval sheet, where to add the thesis approval sheet, what is the ideal length of the thesis approval sheet statement, who writes the thesis approval sheet, why is an approval sheet necessary in a thesis.

Writing a thesis requires a lot of research and time. It is not an easy task for most of us but in the end, we need to do it. Another important and challenging task is to get approval from the authorities. Most of the researchers are apprehensive about thesis approval rejection because of their bad thesis approval sheet.

After completing the thesis, you will need to create and add the approval sheet pages for your thesis. You can submit the thesis to your college or university after getting approval from the authorities.

The approval letter is usually added on the second page of the thesis. This authorities approval improves the reputation of the thesis in the academic field for submitting it on different platforms.

So now you have understood what is the approval sheet in the thesis. It’s time to understand how you can write and design a perfect approval sheet for a thesis.

How to Write and Design Approval Sheet for Thesis

Writing and designing an approval sheet is not a difficult task. You just need to follow some guidelines and basics and you will be able to create a perfect thesis approval sheet.

Below I have shared a quick guide to creating an approval sheet for the thesis. Create a Microsoft Word document or google doc whatever you are using and get started with the quick guide below .

The first step is to add your university name and logo at the top of the page. It usually comes in the header section. You can add a logo image of your university/college and write the name in bold and center. This is the basic thing you probably already have added in other pages too so you can just copy-paste.

The next step in writing an approval sheet is to create a new MS Document or Google document and start writing with a title. Give the page a bold and focused title, “Approval Sheet.” The title is one of the parameters that will help readers to identify what the page is about.

Write a short introductory statement for thesis approval just after the heading. It includes your thesis title name and your name. Keep the statement short and simple. A maximum of 100 to 150 words statement is enough.

This statement will inform the authorities about your thesis topic. Write in a formal language without grammatical errors. If you are not a grammar expert and do a lot of grammar mistakes then try to use some grammar checker tools to avoid grammar mistakes .

After writing the statement, design a section for the thesis author’s signature and date. You can write the author’s signature on the left and the date on the right, or you can use the left side for just the signature and date.

You need to design it right after the statement. See a quick example below.

Author Signature ………………

Date ……………….

Now add the next section for the members of the approval committee. Give it a title like “Approval Committee” or “Approval Examiners”. Write a brief statement for thesis approval on behalf of the approval committee as they will sign under it.

Now you are almost done. Just add a signature and date section for the members of the approval committee.

Once you have completed all the steps and your approval sheet is ready you can add it to the second page of your thesis file.

An approval sheet is an important page in the thesis. This is an essential page to get approval from the authorities for submitting your thesis to the university/college and various other platforms. An approved thesis is a sign of confidence in your research and paper.

Thesis approval is usually given by the research and approval committee of a university or college. Once your thesis is approved you can submit the papers on any platform and people will trust your papers because of the approval from authorities.

If you have never written an approval sheet, you should look at some examples first or you can also use a pre-made template for a thesis approval sheet. The first thing you need to do is to check some approval sheet samples and get some ideas for creating your own.

By analyzing different samples your mind will open and you will be able to generate thoughts and ideas for writing your approval sheet.

Example of Approval Sheet in Thesis

I have shared some approval sheet examples with the download button in this article. You can download samples and can use them as templates.

Once you’ve checked out a few different samples, it’s time to select the template you want to use in your approval sheet.

The process of writing an approval sheet is easy. Just follow the above guide and use the template provided and you will be able to create a great approval sheet. If you face any difficulty please comment I will try to help you. Follow Acknowledgmentpedia for more helpful guides.

FAQ on Thesis Approval Sheet

The approval sheet is usually added on the second page of the thesis.

A paragraph of 100 to 150 words is sufficient for the thesis approval sheet statement.

Authors themselves need to write thesis approval sheets but if your institutions have set guidelines then you will need to follow and design the approval sheet as directed by the institution. Once the approval sheet is ready, you can submit it to the committee for approval.

An approval sheet is needed to approve the thesis for submission of the thesis to the university/college. Once the thesis is accepted, the credibility of your thesis also increases.

You Might Also Like

Acknowledgement For English Project | Quick Guide with Examples

Leave a reply cancel reply.

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Approval Sheet in Research: A Guide to Understanding and Writing

• by James Short
• October 11, 2023

Welcome to our blog post on the fascinating topic of approval sheet in research! Whether you’re a student conducting a thesis or a professional researcher embarking on a groundbreaking study, understanding the importance of an approval sheet is crucial. In this article, we will delve into the details of what an approval sheet entails and how to write one effectively.

What is an Approval Sheet in Research?

An approval sheet is a formal document that serves as a preliminary endorsement from multiple parties involved in the research process. It acts as a confirmation of the project’s feasibility and ethical considerations , ensuring that all necessary approvals have been obtained. Essentially, it outlines the agreement and understanding between the researcher and the relevant authorities, such as the institutional review board or ethics committee.

Now, let’s uncover the intricacies of introducing a company, communicating with your colleagues, and the step-by-step process of writing an approval sheet that will pave the way for your research success!

In the world of academic research, an approval sheet is like the high-five you get from your committee when they give your project the official thumbs-up. It’s that exciting moment when all your hard work pays off, and you can finally breathe a sigh of relief. But what exactly is an approval sheet, and why is it so important? Let’s dive into the nitty-gritty of this fascinating document.

The Approval Sheet: A Researcher’s Best Friend

An approval sheet, also known as a “signature page,” is a formal document that serves as evidence that your research has been evaluated and approved by the necessary authorities. It’s like getting a stamp of approval on your research journey, signaling that you’ve followed all the right steps and can move forward with confidence.

An Approval Sheet’s Vital Role

Now you might be wondering, “Why do I even need an approval sheet? Can’t I just skip it and get on with my life?” Well, my friend, the answer is a resounding no. An approval sheet is not some meaningless piece of paper that serves no purpose other than collecting dust on a shelf. It’s a critically important component of any research project and serves multiple essential functions.

Ensuring Ethical Compliance

First and foremost, an approval sheet ensures ethical compliance. It’s a way for researchers to demonstrate that their work meets all ethical and legal requirements. It shows that you’ve obtained the necessary permissions , followed ethical guidelines, and considered potential risks and benefits.

Confirming Academic Supervision

Secondly, an approval sheet confirms the involvement and guidance of your academic supervisor. It demonstrates that your project has been vetted by an experienced mentor who has deemed it worthy of pursuit. It’s like a gold star from your supervisor, saying, “This research is the bee’s knees!”

Securing Research Funding

Lastly, an approval sheet plays a significant role in securing research funding. Many funding bodies require researchers to provide evidence of ethical and academic approval before they open up their financial treasure chests. So if you’re hoping to score some lovely research grants, an approval sheet is your golden ticket.

The Anatomy of an Approval Sheet

Now that we’ve established why approval sheets are so important, let’s take a closer look at their structure. While the specific format may vary depending on your institution’s guidelines, here are some of the key components you’ll typically find in an approval sheet:

Title and Project Information

The approval sheet carries the title of your research project as well as relevant information like your name, date, and the name of your academic institution. It sets the stage for your project and provides a clear identification of what your research is all about.

Signatures of Approval

The heart and soul of the approval sheet are the signatures of the individuals who have reviewed and approved your research. This usually includes your academic supervisor, committee members, and possibly other designated authorities. Their signatures serve as a testament to the quality and integrity of your work.

Dates and Institutional Stamps

To add an extra layer of authenticity, an approval sheet often includes dates and official institutional stamps. These stamps act as seals of approval, reinforcing the legitimacy of your research.

The Sweet Taste of Success

And there you have it! That’s the lowdown on approval sheets in research. They may seem like a bureaucratic hurdle, but they play a crucial role in ensuring ethical compliance, confirming academic supervision, and securing research funding. So, the next time you’re filling out that approval sheet, remember that it’s not just a piece of paper; it’s a symbol of your hard work and dedication. Take pride in it, my fellow researchers, for it represents the sweet taste of research success.

So go forth and conquer the approval sheet game, my friends. May your research be exciting, your findings be groundbreaking, and your approval sheets be filled with signatures as plentiful as confetti at a New Year’s Eve party.

That’s it for now. Stay tuned for more captivating research revelations in this exciting world we call academia.

FAQ: What is Approval Sheet in Research?

Welcome to our comprehensive FAQ-style guide on approval sheets in research! We’ve compiled a list of the most commonly asked questions about approval sheets and provided clear and engaging answers. So sit back, relax, and let us enlighten you on this intriguing topic.

How do you introduce a company

Introducing a company is like introducing a new friend at a party – you want to make a positive and memorable impression. Here are a few tips to help you do just that:

Name Dropping Delight : Start by sharing the name of your company. Make it catchy, memorable, and relevant to your industry. Think of it as your company’s cool nickname.

Value Proposition Party : Highlight your company’s unique value proposition, emphasizing what sets you apart from the competition. Why should people choose your company as their go-to option? Let them know!

Brags and Bonuses : Showcase any notable achievements, awards, or recognition your company has received. Give your company the proverbial pat on the back it deserves.

How do you talk to your company

Ah, the art of conversation with your company. While companies aren’t known for their conversational skills, it’s essential to communicate effectively within the organization. Here are a few tips for stellar company banter:

Clear, Concise, and Cool : Communication within a company should be clear and concise. Avoid using jargon or overly technical terms that might confuse your colleagues. Keep it professional but approachable.

Feedback Frenzy : Encourage open dialogue and feedback. Your company should be an environment where ideas flourish and everyone feels comfortable expressing their thoughts. Embrace the power of constructive criticism.

Team Player Tales : Build relationships with your coworkers by actively participating in team-building activities. Engaging in friendly conversations, whether about work or hobbies, helps foster a positive and collaborative atmosphere.

How do you write an approval sheet

Ah, the dreaded approval sheet – a necessary evil in the world of research. But fear not! Follow these simple steps, and you’ll be a pro at crafting an approval sheet in no time:

Title with Flair : Start by creating a catchy title for your approval sheet, stating its purpose. Think of it as the headline that grabs attention and sets the tone for what’s to come. Be creative yet informative.

Introduction is Key : Begin with an introduction that clearly explains the research project, its objectives, and why approval is needed. Be concise, but don’t leave any crucial details out. Paint a vivid picture of what you aim to achieve.

Procedures and Protocols : Outline the procedures and methodologies you will use in your research. This section should provide a clear overview, including any ethical considerations and compliance with regulations.

Timeline Tango : Specify the timeline and milestones of your research project. When should each phase be completed, and when can stakeholders expect progress reports? Show that you’re organized and committed to meeting deadlines.

Signatures and Sincerity : Conclude the approval sheet with designated spaces for signatures from all involved parties, accompanied by the date. Add a heartfelt statement expressing gratitude for the support, guidance, and trust.

What is an approval sheet in research

Ah, here we arrive at the heart of the matter – the approval sheet in research. Allow us to demystify this intriguing document for you:

An approval sheet in research is a formal document that seeks endorsement from relevant parties, such as supervisors, advisors, or review boards, for a research project’s execution. It outlines the goals, procedures, timeline, and ethical considerations of the study, ensuring all necessary permissions are obtained.

Think of the approval sheet as your research project’s VIP pass, granting you permission to embark on your scholarly endeavor. Without it, you’re left wandering the research wilderness, desperately seeking approval but finding only rejection.

Now that you’re armed with this knowledge, go forth and conquer the world of research with confidence!

We hope this FAQ-style guide has shed light on the enigmatic world of approval sheets in research. From introducing your company with pizzazz to writing an awe-inspiring approval sheet, we’ve covered it all. Remember, clear communication, effective writing skills, and proper procedures are the keys to success in the research realm. Harness them wisely, and your path to approval shall be smoother than a freshly polished test tube.

So go forth, dear reader, and let your research flourish under the warm gaze of the approval sheet. May your hypotheses be robust, your insights profound, and your coffee cup never empty. Happy researching!

Note: This article is generated by an AI assistant.

• academic supervisor
• approval sheet
• best friend
• clear identification
• ensuring ethical compliance
• ethical considerations
• formal document
• research success
• signature page
• timeline tango

James Short

How much does it cost to replace a dodge charger key, is 3 octaves a good vocal range for singers in 2023, you may also like, can 35mm film be exposed to light.

• by PatrickTurner
• October 30, 2023

The Factors Affecting Communication: Breaking Down the Barriers

• by Adam Davis
• October 8, 2023

What Kind of Steel Are Forklift Tines Made Of?

• by Sandra Vargas
• October 9, 2023

Characteristics of a Fisherman: Passion, Patience, and Perseverance

• by Erin Fuentes
• October 21, 2023

The Objective Element of Social Problems: Understanding the Root Causes of Inequality and Injustice

The importance of coaching and mentoring in the workplace.

• October 7, 2023

The Graduate School

University information technology (uit), main navigation, formatting requirements: preliminary pages.

• Submission Procedure
• Policies for Theses and Dissertations
• Coauthored Theses and Dissertations
• Approval Requirements
• Publication Requirements

Copyright Page

Statement of thesis/dissertation approval, dedication, frontispiece, and epigraph, table of contents and list of figures/tables, acknowledgements.

• General Formatting Requirements
• Parts Composed of Related Chapters
• Headings and Subheadings
• Tables and Figures
• Footnote and Reference Citations
• Appendix or Appendices
• References or Selected Bibliography
• Documentation Styles
• Writing Styles
• Print Quality
• Accessibility in the PDF
• Electronic Version Submitted for Thesis Release
• Distribution of Theses and Dissertations
• Alternate Text
• Color Contrast
• Accessibility Issues in Table Construction
• Heading Space
• Double Space
• Single Space
• Previously Published, Accepted, and Submitted Articles as Chapters of a Dissertation
• Alternate Figure/Table Placement

Preliminary pages are, in order, the title page; copyright page; statement of thesis/dissertation approval; abstract; dedication (optional); frontispiece (optional); epigraph (optional); table of contents; lists of tables, figures, symbols, and abbreviations (necessary only in certain situations); and acknowledgments (optional). Table 2.1 lists all the possible preliminary sections in order and if they are required or not. 

The preliminary pages are counted in sequence (except the copyright page, which is neither counted nor numbered). Any page with a main heading on it (title page, abstract, table of contents, etc.) is counted, but no page number is typed on the page. Second pages to the abstract, table of contents, lists, and acknowledgments are numbered with lower case Roman numerals centered within the thesis margins and .5” from the bottom of the page. See the preliminary pages in this handbook for an example. 

Order of preliminary pages, indicating which are mandatory and where page numbers should be included.

Note : Page numbers in the preliminary pages appear centered on the bottom of the page in lower case Roman numerals. This differs from page numbers in the text, which appear on the top right of the page and use Arabic numerals.

SEE Sample Preliminary Pages

The title page is page i (Roman numeral) of the manuscript (page number not shown). 

The title of the thesis or dissertation is typed in all capital letters. The title should be placed in the same size and style of font as that used for major headings throughout the manuscript. If longer than 4 1/2 inches, the title should be double spaced and arranged so that it appears balanced on the page. The title should be a concise yet comprehensive description of the contents for cataloging and data retrieval purposes. Initials, abbreviations, acronyms, numerals, formulas, super/subscripts, and symbols should be used in the title with careful consideration of clarity and maximizing search results for future readers. Consult the manuscript editors if in doubt. 

The word “by” follows the title. The full legal name of the author as it appears in CIS follows after a double space. The name is not typed in all capital letters. These two lines of text are centered between the title and the statement described in the following paragraph. 

The statement “A thesis submitted to the faculty of The University of Utah in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of” appears single spaced in the middle of the title page (see Figure 2.1). For doctoral candidates, the phrasing reads “A dissertation submitted. . . ” 

The appropriate degree follows the statement. The space between the statement and the degree should be the same size that is between the author’s name and the statement. In the event the name of the degree differs from the name of the department, e.g., Master of Science in Environmental Humanities, the words “Master of Science” are placed below the statement, followed by “in” and then the degree program; the lines of the degree name and program are double spaced (see Figure 2.2). Thus, a student receiving a doctorate in history need use only the words “Doctor of Philosophy.” A student receiving a doctorate in Geophysics must put “Doctor of Philosophy in Geophysics.” 

Below the degree field, the full name of the department is listed on the title page. “The University of Utah,” is listed a double space below the department name.

The date appears on the title page a double space below “The University of Utah.” Only the month and year appear, with no punctuation separating them. The month indicates the last month in the semester the degree is granted: fall semester, December; spring semester, May; summer semester, August. 

Again, the spaces below the title, the full legal name, the statement, and the degree should be of equal size. 

The second page is the copyright page, which is uncounted and unnumbered. A copyright notice appears in every copy of the thesis or dissertation. The notice, as illustrated in Figure 2.3, is centered within the side margins and the top and bottom margins of the page. 

Copyright © Student’s Full Legal Name 2022

All Rights Reserved 

There is a double space between the two lines. 

The statement of thesis/dissertation approval is page ii (Roman numeral) of the manuscript (page number not shown). This statement is prepared as shown in Figures 2.4 (for master’s students) and 2.5 (for doctoral students). 

The statement of thesis/dissertation approval signifies that the thesis or dissertation has been approved by the committee chair and a majority of the members of the committee and by the department chair and the dean of The Graduate School. The names of any committee members who did not approve or digitally sign the forms for the thesis or dissertation are not dated. The dates entered should match the date when you received notification that the committee member electronically signed the form. 

The full name of the student, as it appears on the title page and copyright page, must be used. 

As with the digital signature forms, full legal names of committee members must be listed. The full legal names of committee members and department chair or dean can be found on your CIS page under the Committee tab. Neither degrees nor titles should be listed with the names of faculty members. No signatures are required. 

Abstract Page

The abstract is page iii, unnumbered; if there is a second page, it is page iv, and a number appears on the page. The abstract is a concise, carefully composed summary of the contents of the thesis or dissertation. In the abstract, the author defines the problem, describes the research method or design, and reports the results and conclusions. No diagrams, illustrations, subheadings, or citations appear in the abstract. The abstract is limited to 350 words (approximately 1.5 double-spaced pages). A copy of the abstract of all doctoral candidates is published in Dissertation Abstracts International. The word ABSTRACT is placed 2 inches from the top of the page in all capital letters. Following a heading space, the abstract text begins, with the first line indented the same size space as for the paragraphs in the remainder of the manuscript. The text of the abstract must be double spaced. 

If a manuscript is written in a foreign language, the abstract is in the same language, but an English version (or translation) of the abstract must precede the foreign language abstract. The two abstracts are listed as one in the table of contents. The first page of each version is unnumbered but counted. If there is a second page to each version of the abstract, the page number (lower-case Roman numeral) is centered between the left and right margins and between the bottom of the page and the top of the bottom margin. 

The dedication is an optional entry; enumeration continues in sequence, but no page number appears on the page. It follows the abstract and precedes the table of contents. Often only one or two lines, it is centered within the top and bottom margins of the page and within the thesis margins. It is not labeled “Dedication” and is not listed in the table of contents. 

Frontispiece and Epigraph

These are infrequently used entries. The frontispiece is an illustration that alerts the reader to the major theme of the thesis or dissertation. An epigraph is a quotation of unusual aptness and relevance. 

Contents or Table of Contents

The table of contents follows the abstract (or dedication if one is used). The word CONTENTS (or TABLE OF CONTENTS) is placed 2 inches from the top of the page in all capital letters. Following a heading space, the table of contents begins. The table of contents, essentially an outline of the manuscript, lists the preliminary pages beginning with the abstract (page iii). It does not list a frontispiece, dedication, or epigraph if these are used, nor is the table of contents listed in the table of contents; these pages are, however, counted. The list of figures and list of tables, if used, are included (see the Table of Contents in this handbook for a sample using numbered chapters; see Figures 2.6, 2.7, and 2.8 for additional options). 

All chapters or main sections and all first-level subheadings of the manuscript are listed in the table of contents. No lower subheadings levels are to appear in the table of contents. Beginning page numbers of each chapter or section listed are lined up with each listing by a row of evenly spaced, aligned period leaders. The numbers, titles, and subheadings of chapters or sections used in the table of contents must agree exactly in wording and capitalization with the way they appear on the actual page. 

The table of contents reflects the relationship of the chapters and subheadings. Chapter titles appear in all capital letters, as do titles of appendices. First-level subheadings can be headline style or sentence style in capitalization. Subheadings are neither underlined nor italicized in the table of contents. If the table of contents continues to a second page, it begins 1 inch from the top of the page, and it is not labeled “Table of Contents Continued.” Main headings are followed by a double space in the table of contents; all subheadings are single spaced. The words “Chapters” and “Appendices” are used as referents only, printed above the list of entries. The word “Chapter” or “Appendix” is not repeated with each entry. 

List of Figures / List of Tables

The enumeration continues in sequence; no number appears on pages with main headings (those in all caps). A list of tables, a list of figures, a list of symbols, a list of abbreviations, or a glossary may be used. All lists follow the table of contents. The title is placed 2 inches from the top edge of the page in all capital letters: LIST OF TABLES. Following a heading space, the list begins. A list of tables or a list of figures is required if there are 5 to 25 entries. Lists with fewer than 5 entries or more than 25 are not included. It is not permissible to combine a list of tables and figures. The word “Table” or “Figure” is not repeated with each entry. 

As noted for entries in the table of contents, the listing of tables and figures must agree exactly in wording, capitalization, and punctuation with the table title or figure caption. (An exception to this rule occurs if the table title appears in all capital letters on the table itself; table titles in the list of tables are not typed in all capital letters.) Capitalization styles may not be mixed. In the case of long titles or captions, the first sentence must convey the essential description of the item. The first sentence alone then is used in the list. Long captions may not be summarized. 

The table or figure number begins at the left margin and is followed by the title or caption. The page on which each table or figure appears is at the right margin. As in the table of contents, the page numbers are lined up with each entry by a row of evenly spaced, aligned periods (period leaders). If a table or figure occupies more than one page, only the initial page number is listed. If the title or caption of a table or figure appears on a part-title page preceding the table or figure, the page number in the list refers to the number of the part-title page. 

If a list continues to a second page, the second page of text begins 1 inch from the top of the page. The second page is not labeled “List of Tables Continued” or “List of Figures Continued.” Individual entries are single-spaced with a double space between each entry. 

A list of symbols and abbreviations or a glossary does not replace defining terms, symbols, or abbreviations upon their first occurrence in the text. When introducing terms, always introduce terms upon their first usage in the document. 

The enumeration continues in sequence; no number appears on the first page. Acknowledgments are optional. If a preface is used, the acknowledgments are added to the end of the preface without a separate heading. The word ACKNOWLEDGMENTS is placed 2 inches from the top of the page in all capital letters. Following a heading space, the acknowledgments begin. The text of the acknowledgments must be double spaced. In the acknowledgments, students may wish to recognize special assistance from committee members, friends, or family members who may have helped in the research, writing, or technical aspects of the thesis or dissertation. Research funding, grants, and/or permission to reprint copyrighted materials should be acknowledged. Individuals employed to prepare the manuscript are not acknowledged. 

The enumeration continues in sequence; no number appears on the first page. This is an optional entry. The word PREFACE is placed 2 inches from the top of the page in all capital letters. Following a heading space, the preface begins. The text of the preface must be double spaced. A preface includes the reasons for undertaking the study, the methods and design of the researcher, and acknowledgments. Background data and historical or other information essential to the reader’s understanding of the subject are placed in the text as an introduction, not in the preface. Theses and dissertations generally do not contain a foreword (i.e., a statement about the work by someone other than the author). 

• Library Catalogue

Formatting Your Thesis: Approval Page

On this page

• Requirements

Content and details

Signatures required, errors on a signed approval page, sample approval pages, requirements .

• Use the Approval page template linked below to create a copy or copies to be signed by your committee.
• Complete the unsigned Approval page in the library's thesis template (page ii). Examples of signed and unsigned pages appear at the bottom of this page.
• All information must be identical and accurate  on both versions of the Approval page.
• For submission, upload a .pdf of the signed Approval page to the Thesis Registration System.

Approval page template

• Do not insert the signed Approval page into the thesis as page ii.
• Check with your department's graduate program assistant to confirm committee members' information (member's name, committee role, position in department).
• If you are printing and binding multiple copies of your thesis (personal copies or departmental copies) and you wish to include signed Approval pages, ensure your committee members sign multiple pages. 
• Both signed and unsigned Approval pages must be numbered page ii.

The Approval page contains the following elements:

• Committee Type
• Committee Membership

Consult your committee and the style guide you are using for help formatting the title.

The degree should appear on one line. The discipline may be added if preferred.

• Master of Arts 
• Master of Science (Chemistry)
• Doctor of Education
• Doctor of Philosophy (History)

Committee types

• ​Examining Committee - for degrees that require a thesis defense
• Supervisory Committee - for degrees that do not require a formal thesis defense, e.g: M.Eng, M.Pub

Committee membership

Each committee member must be identified with three elements:

List of Committee Roles

Academic roles include: Professor, Associate Professor, Assistant Professor, Professor Emeritus, Professor Emerita, Adjunct Professor, Senior Lecturer, Sessional Lecturer, Limited Term Lecturer.

• If a committee member is from the home department, do not write the department on the Approval page.
• If a committee member is from a different department or institution, add this information to their academic role e.g.:

Administrative titles or honorifics (Associate Dean, Canada Research Chair, etc.) are not required on the Approval page.

Date Defended / Approved

For defended theses, record the defense date.  For undefended theses, use the approved date.  

Effective March 17, 2020:

Due to the remote defense participation procedures put in place in response to COVID-19, the following amendments will be made to signature requirements for approval pages:

• Departments should continue to use their existing approval page templates
• Only the committee Chair is required to sign the page, next to their name (see the interim approval page example). Please see the requirements outlined below regarding acceptable signature types
• The Chair should note how the other committee members participated in the defense on the lines adjacent to their names (e.g. By videoconference, By teleconference, By written consultation). Initials for these remote participation lines are not required.

Interim approval page example

• Original signatures are preferred. While electronic signatures are permitted, signatures that have been typed using a signature-style font are NOT permitted.
• Approval pages must be signed by 50%+1 of the committee.

When Unable to Obtain a Committee Member's Signature:

If a committee member is absent, include a statement on their signature line and obtain an alternate signature or initials:

• By video conference or  By teleconference
• By written consultation

If the Senior Supervisor is absent, the alternate signature must be provided by the department chair, graduate program chair, or Dean of Graduate Studies.

If another committee member is absent, the defence chair or senior supervisor can provide the alternate signature.

Emails from absent member(s) giving revision requirements or approval should be kept in the student's department file.

(Updated 3/14/17 in consultation with the Dean of Graduate Studies' office)

If there are errors on a signed Approval page, you must correct the errors, print a new Approval page and obtain all signatures again.

If you cannot obtain all signatures on a single page, you may send separate pages to individual committee members and combine the pages into a single pdf for upload.

• Master's thesis
• Master's project
• Master's project - approved by written examination

For an extended essays Approval, follow the appropriate Master's project format.

• - Google Chrome

Intended for healthcare professionals

• My email alerts
• BMA member login
• Username * Password * Forgot your log in details? Need to activate BMA Member Log In Log in via OpenAthens Log in via your institution

Search form

• Advanced search
• Search responses
• Search blogs

Guide to ethical approval

• Related content
• Peer review
• Justin Nowell , specialist registrar, London Deanery
• 1 Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, St George’s Hospital, London SW17 0QT
• justin.nowell{at}stgeorges.nhs.uk

For research involving patients, whether directly or indirectly, or involving NHS facilities, the ethical review process is mandatory. Justin Nowell takes you through it

Why read about ethics?

During their career journey many health professionals do a formal period of research. You may wish to improve your personal portfolio or raise the profile of a new department. Or are you thinking about pursuing research in the NHS? If so, you need to think carefully about ethics. As a chief investigator, whether you are a general practitioner or a nurse, a physiotherapist or a professor of medicine, the process is identical. It would be wise to plan your ethics application early, well before your proposed start date. The requirement for ethical approval applies not only to interventions like clinical trials but also to a range of other activities such as questionnaires, case note reviews, telephone surveys, and collecting samples or data. Many people find the process of applying for NHS ethical approval intimidating. A galaxy of red tape is guaranteed to dampen enthusiasm even in the most ardent researchers, however brilliant their ideas. Some knowledge of the application and review process can help ease this burden. Advance preparation may also save you a lot of wasted time.

Do I need ethical approval?

Traditionally, medical students are taught that the cornerstones of good ethics comprise beneficence, non-maleficence, autonomy, justice, dignity, and truthfulness. Therefore activities that damage these six principles undermine ethics. It is not always clear how to translate such lofty ideals into improving research. The General Medical Council advises that research involving people directly or indirectly is vital in improving care and reducing uncertainty for patients now and in the future, and for improving the health of the population as a whole. GMC guidance 1 requires that if you are involved in designing, organising, or doing research you must:

Put the protection of the participants’ interests first

Act with honesty and integrity

Follow the appropriate national research governance guidelines and the guidance in Research: The role and responsibilities of doctors . 2

Ethical review from the appropriate NHS research ethics committee is required for any research involving:

Patients and users of the NHS. This includes all potential research participants recruited by virtue of the patient’s or user’s past or present treatment by, or use of, the NHS. It includes NHS patients treated under contracts with private sector institutions

Individuals identified as potential research participants because of their status as relatives or carers of patients and users of the NHS, as defined above

Access to data, organs, or other bodily material of past and present NHS patients

Fetal material and in vitro fertilisation involving NHS patients

Those who have died recently in NHS premises

The use of, or potential access to, NHS premises or facilities

NHS staff recruited as research participants by virtue of their professional role

Healthy volunteers, if done on NHS premises.

Application form

Obtaining ethical approval is divided into national and local stages. The first task is to complete an application form. This has recently changed from the National Research Ethics Service form to a new Integrated Research Application System. 3 This is much more than just a form; it is an integrated dataset designed to fulfil the requirements of a number of review bodies. Detailed guidance notes are included in the form, but completion is time consuming, so save completed sections as you go and return later.

The aim of the ethics review process is to protect participants and promote good quality research. With this in mind, there are some searching questions to answer. There are four parts A-D and some additional forms. Part A comprises the generic and core information. Answers to part A automatically generate appropriate header sections and datasets for the remainder of the application. Part A has 78 questions, although not all questions will need to be answered and the form sieve will automatically reflect this. Resist the temptation to cut and paste large sections of your protocol—it will be obvious at the review meeting if you do. You are asked to write a comprehensive lay summary and it is worth paying special attention to this task. Since 1 May 2008 lay summaries have been published, and this will soon be extended to include summary ethical opinions. 4

Part B, comprising 25 questions, asks specifically about the product or device to be tested, tissue collection, and information security measures. Part C contains an overview of all research sites. Part D is the declarations section. There are also Research Tissue Bank and Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency forms to complete if relevant.

Applicant’s checklist

After completing the application form you must complete an applicant’s checklist. The checklist specifies supporting documents to be attached, including patient information sheets, consent forms, sometimes a letter from a statistician, and investigator and subinvestigator CVs. Online guidance is available on the format of protocols and other documents, but if you are unsure ask someone experienced; patient advisory groups are helpful in drafting documents designed to inform patients.

There is no prohibition on asking individual members of your local research ethics committee for advice; several of them are likely to be local health professionals. Probably the most valuable advice is to remember to identify all documents with a date and version number.

Where to apply

If you are unsure, the National Research Ethics Service website 4 contains a list of all local research ethics office contacts, which will be able to advise where to submit and how to book a review slot. Usually this will be via your local research ethics committee. The website also contains the standard operating procedures for ethics committees.

Provided the applicant’s checklist is complete, a reference number is issued, and the forms are locked, printed, and signed. If you do make a mistake you can ring the National Research Ethics Service helpline and they can unlock the form. Deliver signed hard copy forms with supporting documents to the designated research ethics committee office. Local research ethics committees consider around five to 10 studies a month. If they are fully booked you may be asked to return for submission the following month. There is no waiting list system for the research ethics committee —it is first come, first served. If time is tight, you could opt at this stage to submit to another research ethics committee within the same domain (area served by the same strategic health authority). Check local arrangements for submission carefully, because procedures may vary slightly. In some NHS trusts the research and development department wants to scrutinise the application before submission.

Once the application form and checklist have been approved you will receive a letter from the research ethics committee stating that the application is validated and giving a date for review. Ethics committees must provide an opinion within 60 days of validating an application.

Site specific information

The final online forms are the site specific information forms, which are submitted once the application is validated. The form has two purposes: one is to obtain NHS permission (a universal requirement) and the other is to request site specific assessment. Some types of study, such as questionnaires and surveys, are designated site specific assessment exempt. For most studies, however, once ethical approval is obtained local site specific assessment approval is required using the form. This is designed to ensure that individual sites have appropriate local resources to support the study safely.

The committee has a maximum of 18 members and one third of these are lay members. The investigator will receive an invitation to the meeting, and although attendance is not compulsory, it is advisable. The committee will consider the application for up to half an hour and then call in the investigator to answer questions. If you do attend, it will expedite the process as you may be able to clarify points raised by individual research ethics committee members.

Notification of decision

After the review meeting you will be informed of the committee’s provisional opinion, subject to certain conditions or any further information that is required. If the committee has serious concerns, complete resubmission may be requested. The committee will confirm their decision in writing within 10 days.

Request for further information

The committee may request further information or revision of documents before granting a final favourable ethical opinion. You will also be reminded that further consents may be required (site specific approval for other sites, research and development, Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency) before the study can begin.

Final approval and beyond

The research ethics committee will confirm the final ethical opinion in writing. Subsequent amendments to the study protocol must be formally notified to the committee. You are obliged to start your research within 12 months of a favourable ethical review. You must provide safety and progress reports as specified. You should also notify the committee when your study ends.

Complete the online application form

Complete the applicant’s checklist

Decide where to apply and book a review slot

Make your submission

Validation and review date

Complete site specific information form

Review meeting and provisional ethical opinion

Request for further written information

Final ethical opinion

After approval

Competing interests: None declared.

• ↵ General Medical Council. Good medical practice . London: GMC, 2006 .
• ↵ General Medical Council. Research: The role and responsibilities of doctors. London: GMC, 2002 .
• ↵ Integrated Research Application System. www.myresearchproject.org.uk .
• ↵ National Research Ethics Service. www.nres.npsa.nhs.uk .

Generate accurate APA citations for free

• Knowledge Base
• APA Style 7th edition
• How to write an APA methods section

How to Write an APA Methods Section | With Examples

Published on February 5, 2021 by Pritha Bhandari . Revised on June 22, 2023.

The methods section of an APA style paper is where you report in detail how you performed your study. Research papers in the social and natural sciences often follow APA style. This article focuses on reporting quantitative research methods .

In your APA methods section, you should report enough information to understand and replicate your study, including detailed information on the sample , measures, and procedures used.

Instantly correct all language mistakes in your text

Upload your document to correct all your mistakes in minutes

Table of contents

Structuring an apa methods section.

Participants

Example of an APA methods section

Other interesting articles, frequently asked questions about writing an apa methods section.

The main heading of “Methods” should be centered, boldfaced, and capitalized. Subheadings within this section are left-aligned, boldfaced, and in title case. You can also add lower level headings within these subsections, as long as they follow APA heading styles .

To structure your methods section, you can use the subheadings of “Participants,” “Materials,” and “Procedures.” These headings are not mandatory—aim to organize your methods section using subheadings that make sense for your specific study.

Note that not all of these topics will necessarily be relevant for your study. For example, if you didn’t need to consider outlier removal or ways of assigning participants to different conditions, you don’t have to report these steps.

The APA also provides specific reporting guidelines for different types of research design. These tell you exactly what you need to report for longitudinal designs , replication studies, experimental designs , and so on. If your study uses a combination design, consult APA guidelines for mixed methods studies.

Detailed descriptions of procedures that don’t fit into your main text can be placed in supplemental materials (for example, the exact instructions and tasks given to participants, the full analytical strategy including software code, or additional figures and tables).

Are your APA in-text citations flawless?

The AI-powered APA Citation Checker points out every error, tells you exactly what’s wrong, and explains how to fix it. Say goodbye to losing marks on your assignment!

Get started!

Begin the methods section by reporting sample characteristics, sampling procedures, and the sample size.

Participant or subject characteristics

When discussing people who participate in research, descriptive terms like “participants,” “subjects” and “respondents” can be used. For non-human animal research, “subjects” is more appropriate.

Specify all relevant demographic characteristics of your participants. This may include their age, sex, ethnic or racial group, gender identity, education level, and socioeconomic status. Depending on your study topic, other characteristics like educational or immigration status or language preference may also be relevant.

Be sure to report these characteristics as precisely as possible. This helps the reader understand how far your results may be generalized to other people.

The APA guidelines emphasize writing about participants using bias-free language , so it’s necessary to use inclusive and appropriate terms.

Sampling procedures

Outline how the participants were selected and all inclusion and exclusion criteria applied. Appropriately identify the sampling procedure used. For example, you should only label a sample as random  if you had access to every member of the relevant population.

Of all the people invited to participate in your study, note the percentage that actually did (if you have this data). Additionally, report whether participants were self-selected, either by themselves or by their institutions (e.g., schools may submit student data for research purposes).

Identify any compensation (e.g., course credits or money) that was provided to participants, and mention any institutional review board approvals and ethical standards followed.

Sample size and power

Detail the sample size (per condition) and statistical power that you hoped to achieve, as well as any analyses you performed to determine these numbers.

It’s important to show that your study had enough statistical power to find effects if there were any to be found.

Additionally, state whether your final sample differed from the intended sample. Your interpretations of the study outcomes should be based only on your final sample rather than your intended sample.

Write up the tools and techniques that you used to measure relevant variables. Be as thorough as possible for a complete picture of your techniques.

Primary and secondary measures

Define the primary and secondary outcome measures that will help you answer your primary and secondary research questions.

Specify all instruments used in gathering these measurements and the construct that they measure. These instruments may include hardware, software, or tests, scales, and inventories.

• To cite hardware, indicate the model number and manufacturer.
• To cite common software (e.g., Qualtrics), state the full name along with the version number or the website URL .
• To cite tests, scales or inventories, reference its manual or the article it was published in. It’s also helpful to state the number of items and provide one or two example items.

Make sure to report the settings of (e.g., screen resolution) any specialized apparatus used.

For each instrument used, report measures of the following:

• Reliability : how consistently the method measures something, in terms of internal consistency or test-retest reliability.
• Validity : how precisely the method measures something, in terms of construct validity  or criterion validity .

Giving an example item or two for tests, questionnaires , and interviews is also helpful.

Describe any covariates—these are any additional variables that may explain or predict the outcomes.

Quality of measurements

Review all methods you used to assure the quality of your measurements.

These may include:

• training researchers to collect data reliably,
• using multiple people to assess (e.g., observe or code) the data,
• translation and back-translation of research materials,
• using pilot studies to test your materials on unrelated samples.

For data that’s subjectively coded (for example, classifying open-ended responses), report interrater reliability scores. This tells the reader how similarly each response was rated by multiple raters.

Report all of the procedures applied for administering the study, processing the data, and for planned data analyses.

Data collection methods and research design

Data collection methods refers to the general mode of the instruments: surveys, interviews, observations, focus groups, neuroimaging, cognitive tests, and so on. Summarize exactly how you collected the necessary data.

Describe all procedures you applied in administering surveys, tests, physical recordings, or imaging devices, with enough detail so that someone else can replicate your techniques. If your procedures are very complicated and require long descriptions (e.g., in neuroimaging studies), place these details in supplementary materials.

To report research design, note your overall framework for data collection and analysis. State whether you used an experimental, quasi-experimental, descriptive (observational), correlational, and/or longitudinal design. Also note whether a between-subjects or a within-subjects design was used.

For multi-group studies, report the following design and procedural details as well:

• how participants were assigned to different conditions (e.g., randomization),
• instructions given to the participants in each group,
• interventions for each group,
• the setting and length of each session(s).

Describe whether any masking was used to hide the condition assignment (e.g., placebo or medication condition) from participants or research administrators. Using masking in a multi-group study ensures internal validity by reducing research bias . Explain how this masking was applied and whether its effectiveness was assessed.

Participants were randomly assigned to a control or experimental condition. The survey was administered using Qualtrics (https://www.qualtrics.com). To begin, all participants were given the AAI and a demographics questionnaire to complete, followed by an unrelated filler task. In the control condition , participants completed a short general knowledge test immediately after the filler task. In the experimental condition, participants were asked to visualize themselves taking the test for 3 minutes before they actually did. For more details on the exact instructions and tasks given, see supplementary materials.

Data diagnostics

Outline all steps taken to scrutinize or process the data after collection.

This includes the following:

• Procedures for identifying and removing outliers
• Data transformations to normalize distributions
• Compensation strategies for overcoming missing values

To ensure high validity, you should provide enough detail for your reader to understand how and why you processed or transformed your raw data in these specific ways.

Analytic strategies

The methods section is also where you describe your statistical analysis procedures, but not their outcomes. Their outcomes are reported in the results section.

These procedures should be stated for all primary, secondary, and exploratory hypotheses. While primary and secondary hypotheses are based on a theoretical framework or past studies, exploratory hypotheses are guided by the data you’ve just collected.

Scribbr Citation Checker New

The AI-powered Citation Checker helps you avoid common mistakes such as:

• Missing commas and periods
• Incorrect usage of “et al.”
• Ampersands (&) in narrative citations
• Missing reference entries

This annotated example reports methods for a descriptive correlational survey on the relationship between religiosity and trust in science in the US. Hover over each part for explanation of what is included.

The sample included 879 adults aged between 18 and 28. More than half of the participants were women (56%), and all participants had completed at least 12 years of education. Ethics approval was obtained from the university board before recruitment began. Participants were recruited online through Amazon Mechanical Turk (MTurk; www.mturk.com). We selected for a geographically diverse sample within the Midwest of the US through an initial screening survey. Participants were paid USD $5 upon completion of the study.

A sample size of at least 783 was deemed necessary for detecting a correlation coefficient of ±.1, with a power level of 80% and a significance level of .05, using a sample size calculator (www.sample-size.net/correlation-sample-size/).

The primary outcome measures were the levels of religiosity and trust in science. Religiosity refers to involvement and belief in religious traditions, while trust in science represents confidence in scientists and scientific research outcomes. The secondary outcome measures were gender and parental education levels of participants and whether these characteristics predicted religiosity levels.

Religiosity

Religiosity was measured using the Centrality of Religiosity scale (Huber, 2003). The Likert scale is made up of 15 questions with five subscales of ideology, experience, intellect, public practice, and private practice. An example item is “How often do you experience situations in which you have the feeling that God or something divine intervenes in your life?” Participants were asked to indicate frequency of occurrence by selecting a response ranging from 1 (very often) to 5 (never). The internal consistency of the instrument is .83 (Huber & Huber, 2012).

Trust in Science

Trust in science was assessed using the General Trust in Science index (McCright, Dentzman, Charters & Dietz, 2013). Four Likert scale items were assessed on a scale from 1 (completely distrust) to 5 (completely trust). An example question asks “How much do you distrust or trust scientists to create knowledge that is unbiased and accurate?” Internal consistency was .8.

Potential participants were invited to participate in the survey online using Qualtrics (www.qualtrics.com). The survey consisted of multiple choice questions regarding demographic characteristics, the Centrality of Religiosity scale, an unrelated filler anagram task, and finally the General Trust in Science index. The filler task was included to avoid priming or demand characteristics, and an attention check was embedded within the religiosity scale. For full instructions and details of tasks, see supplementary materials.

For this correlational study , we assessed our primary hypothesis of a relationship between religiosity and trust in science using Pearson moment correlation coefficient. The statistical significance of the correlation coefficient was assessed using a t test. To test our secondary hypothesis of parental education levels and gender as predictors of religiosity, multiple linear regression analysis was used.

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

• Normal distribution
• Measures of central tendency
• Chi square tests
• Confidence interval
• Quartiles & Quantiles

Methodology

• Cluster sampling
• Stratified sampling
• Thematic analysis
• Cohort study
• Peer review
• Ethnography

Research bias

• Implicit bias
• Cognitive bias
• Conformity bias
• Hawthorne effect
• Availability heuristic
• Attrition bias
• Social desirability bias

In your APA methods section , you should report detailed information on the participants, materials, and procedures used.

• Describe all relevant participant or subject characteristics, the sampling procedures used and the sample size and power .
• Define all primary and secondary measures and discuss the quality of measurements.
• Specify the data collection methods, the research design and data analysis strategy, including any steps taken to transform the data and statistical analyses.

You should report methods using the past tense , even if you haven’t completed your study at the time of writing. That’s because the methods section is intended to describe completed actions or research.

In a scientific paper, the methodology always comes after the introduction and before the results , discussion and conclusion . The same basic structure also applies to a thesis, dissertation , or research proposal .

Depending on the length and type of document, you might also include a literature review or theoretical framework before the methodology.

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.

Bhandari, P. (2023, June 22). How to Write an APA Methods Section | With Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved August 26, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/apa-style/methods-section/

Is this article helpful?

Pritha Bhandari

Other students also liked, how to write an apa results section, apa format for academic papers and essays, apa headings and subheadings, get unlimited documents corrected.

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

What to put in approval sheet in research?  

Insight from top 5 papers.

An approval sheet in research should include a statement indicating that the research has obtained ethical approval [??] . This statement informs potential participants that the proposed research has undergone independent scrutiny and obtained approval. However, there has been some debate about the possible effects of including this statement on potential participants. It is important to consider what patients might infer from the inclusion of an ethical approval statement, as they may be influenced to agree to participate based on the belief that the research is safe [??] . Additionally, guidelines for minimum standards of ethical approval in psychological research have been developed by the British Psychological Society, providing a resource for implementing ethical practices in psychological research [??] .

Source Papers (5)

Related Questions

Lenders consider various factors when making loan approval decisions, including the applicant's demographic characteristics, financial history, and risk assessment. Studies have shown that factors such as race and gender can influence loan pricing, with nonwhite male and female borrowers often facing higher interest rates . Additionally, data mining techniques like decision tree models are utilized to assess factors like loan period, net income, and loan size to predict credit approval outcomes effectively . Machine Learning algorithms, such as Random Forest, Support Vector Machine, K-Nearest Neighbor, and Logistic Regression, analyze past data like age, income, and loan amount to identify patterns in forecasting loan defaulters, aiding in risk assessment for lenders . Furthermore, for Micro, Small, and Medium Enterprises (MSME) seeking bank loans, variables like business age, total assets turnover, owner's education level, collateral amount, and loan repayment criteria play significant roles in loan approval decisions .

Managers seek various crucial information during the loan approval process. They aim to acquire identity authentication information and credit authentication details of loan applicants to assess their creditworthiness and potential risks associated with the loan. Additionally, managers focus on obtaining credit survey results, credit scores, and other relevant financial data to determine the loan processing class and ensure accurate loan approval. Furthermore, they extract applicant information, credit scores, and loan details to evaluate the applicant's qualification level based on preset screening conditions, ultimately approving loans accordingly. By leveraging blockchain technology and efficient data management practices, managers can streamline the approval process, reduce risks, and enhance overall decision-making in the lending domain.

Loan approval processes provide valuable information such as credit scores, applicant information, loan qualification levels, identity verification, and credit authentication details. These processes aim to automate loan approval, improve processing efficiency, ensure fair lending practices, and reduce risks associated with loans. By fusing credit scores with credit survey results, loan processing classes are generated, enhancing the accuracy of loan approvals . Data management in loan approval processes is crucial for maintaining information quality, preventing data issues, and complying with regulations . Utilizing preset screening conditions and credit scores, loan qualification levels are determined, leading to faster loan approvals, risk reduction, and business development . Systems incorporating qualification and credit approvals sequentially ensure fast and accurate approval processes for loan applicants . Blockchain technology is leveraged to store credit authentication information, enabling the generation of loan approval credentials to identify fraud risks and reduce bad debt rates .

Obtaining ethical approval for research involves various ethical considerations that impact the entire research process. These considerations include ensuring voluntary informed consent, addressing risks versus benefits, and protecting participant privacy. Researchers must navigate challenges such as the waiver of consent for vulnerable populations, the presence of therapeutic misconception, and the complexities of translational genomic research. Additionally, the hierarchy between researchers and participants, statistical aspects like power, and data protection measures are crucial ethical aspects to be addressed during the ethical review process. Ethical approval serves as a safeguard to minimize risks, ensure participant welfare, and uphold ethical standards in research involving human subjects.

To approve a load, one can consider utilizing preference approval voting (PAV) or fallback voting (FV) methods, as discussed in the literature. PAV involves voters ranking candidates and indicating their approvals, while FV requires ranking only approved candidates. Both PAV and FV exhibit properties like Pareto optimality and electing the Condorcet winner when present, distinguishing them from other voting rules like approval voting. In a comparison study for three-candidate elections with a large electorate, PAV shows better performance in satisfying the Condorcet majority criteria than the Borda rule. Additionally, FV and PAV align more closely with scoring rules than with approval voting, as per the impartial anonymous culture assumption .

Trending Questions

The concept of Pancasila has evolved significantly over time, reflecting the changing dynamics of Indonesian society. Initially established as the foundational philosophy of the Indonesian state, Pancasila has adapted to address contemporary social, political, and legal challenges. ## Pancasila and Democracy Pancasila emphasizes democratic values such as people's sovereignty and social justice, promoting a culture of deliberation and consensus. This adaptability has allowed it to address political and social challenges, fostering a more just society. ## Ethical Framework Pancasila serves as an ethical system guiding individual behavior in social life. Its values—divinity, humanity, unity, populism, and justice—continue to evolve, influencing moral conduct and community integrity. ## Legal Protection and Pluralism The role of Pancasila in legal frameworks has also transformed, advocating for the rights of indigenous communities and ensuring their legal protection. This reflects a commitment to justice and welfare amidst the complexities of legal pluralism. Despite its foundational role, Pancasila faces challenges, including its erosion in legal contexts and the risk of being used as a mere symbol rather than a guiding principle. This highlights the ongoing need for critical engagement with its application in modern Indonesia.

Research administration ethics encompasses the principles and practices that guide ethical decision-making in the management of research activities. It is crucial for maintaining integrity, compliance, and public trust in research endeavors. ## Ethical Foundations in Research Administration - Research administrators must navigate complex ethical dilemmas, including conflicts of interest, data integrity, and compliance with regulations. These dilemmas often arise in various contexts, such as financial stewardship and human subjects protection. - Ethics in research is not merely about compliance; it involves fostering a culture of integrity and character within research institutions. ## Challenges and Ethical Dilemmas - Ethical issues can emerge at all stages of research, from study design to data collection and publication. Administrators must balance competing values, such as social responsibility and professional honesty. - The hexagon case illustrates how financial interests can overshadow ethical considerations, leading to misconduct and cover-ups. ## Training and Decision-Making Models - Effective training in ethical decision-making is essential for research administrators, who come from diverse backgrounds and may have varying levels of exposure to ethical issues. Models like Rest's ethical decision-making framework can help administrators navigate dilemmas. While research administration ethics is vital for upholding integrity, it is also important to recognize that ethical challenges are often influenced by external pressures, such as funding sources and institutional policies, which can complicate ethical decision-making.

Informed consent plays a crucial role in enhancing patient engagement and adherence to antiretroviral therapy (ART) among HIV-positive individuals. The process not only empowers patients but also fosters better communication between healthcare providers and patients, leading to improved health outcomes. ## Importance of Informed Consent - Informed consent ensures that patients understand their treatment options, risks, and benefits, which is essential for making informed decisions about ART. - A study in Kenya found that 70.71% of participants who signed consent forms engaged more actively with mobile health interventions, indicating a direct correlation between consent and patient engagement. ## Communication and Understanding - Effective communication during the informed consent process is vital. Research highlights that many patients struggle to comprehend consent forms, which can hinder their engagement with treatment. - Recommendations for improving communication include interactive materials and training for healthcare staff, which can enhance patient understanding and adherence. ## Patient Autonomy and Empowerment - Informed consent democratizes the clinical communication process, allowing patients to voice concerns and preferences, thus fostering a sense of autonomy that is crucial for adherence to ART. While informed consent is essential for improving patient engagement, challenges remain in ensuring that all patients fully understand the information provided. Continuous efforts to enhance communication strategies and patient education are necessary to maximize the benefits of informed consent in HIV care.

The development of chemical theories and practices is profoundly influenced by ethical values that guide chemists in their professional conduct and societal responsibilities. These values shape decision-making processes, particularly in addressing environmental and health concerns. ## Ethical Frameworks in Chemistry - **Moral Responsibility**: Chemists must navigate complex ethical dilemmas, such as the implications of chemical weapon use or environmental degradation from industrial practices. This moral complexity necessitates a strong ethical foundation to maintain public trust in scientific endeavors. - **Core Values**: The Hague Ethical Guidelines emphasize the importance of ethical conduct in chemistry, advocating for responsible use of chemical knowledge and environmental stewardship. This includes the promotion of Green Chemistry, which seeks to minimize harmful impacts on the environment. ## Environmental Considerations - **Sustainability**: The ethical obligation to preserve natural ecosystems is increasingly recognized. Chemists are encouraged to align their practices with sustainability goals, reflecting a commitment to eco-reflexive education and responsible resource management. - **Risk Assessment**: Ethical considerations in risk assessment highlight the dual nature of chemicals, which can both benefit and harm society. This necessitates a careful balance between innovation and safety. While ethical values are crucial in guiding chemical practices, some argue that the pursuit of scientific advancement can sometimes overshadow these considerations, leading to potential ethical lapses. Thus, ongoing dialogue and education in ethics remain essential for the future of chemistry.

Artificial intelligence (AI) in healthcare offers significant advancements but also poses ethical challenges that can negatively impact human ethics. These challenges include issues of trust, responsibility, privacy, and environmental impact, which are critical to consider for the ethical integration of AI in healthcare. Below, we explore these key ethical concerns. ## Trust and Responsibility - AI systems in healthcare often operate as "black boxes," making it difficult for patients and healthcare professionals to understand and trust the decisions made by these systems. This lack of transparency can lead to ethical dilemmas regarding accountability and responsibility for decisions, especially when outcomes are unfavorable . - The replacement of human decision-making with machine algorithms can result in emotional frustration for both patients and healthcare professionals, as AI lacks the human touch necessary for compassionate care . ## Privacy and Data Security - The integration of AI in healthcare raises significant concerns about patient privacy and data security. AI systems require vast amounts of data, which can lead to potential breaches of sensitive patient information if not properly managed . - Algorithmic biases in AI can result in unfair treatment or misdiagnosis, further complicating ethical considerations and potentially leading to harm . ## Environmental Impact - The environmental impact of AI systems, particularly in terms of energy consumption and carbon emissions, poses indirect risks to human health. The production and operation of AI hardware contribute to environmental degradation, which can have long-term health implications . - Ethical standards for AI in healthcare must include considerations for sustainability to minimize these negative environmental impacts . ## Ethical Governance and AI Literacy - There is a need for robust ethical governance frameworks to guide the development and implementation of AI in healthcare. This includes ensuring AI literacy among stakeholders to understand and mitigate ethical risks . - Continuous monitoring and open discussions about AI ethics are essential to maintain public trust and honor patient rights . While AI presents ethical challenges, it also offers opportunities to address healthcare shortages and improve service accessibility. However, these benefits must be balanced with ethical considerations to ensure AI's responsible and sustainable integration into healthcare systems.

• To save this word, you'll need to log in. Log In

approval sheet

Definition of approval sheet

Love words.

You must — there are over 200,000 words in our free online dictionary, but you are looking for one that’s only in the Merriam-Webster Unabridged Dictionary.

Start your free trial today and get unlimited access to America's largest dictionary, with:

• More than 250,000 words that aren't in our free dictionary
• Expanded definitions, etymologies, and usage notes
• Advanced search features

Dictionary Entries Near approval sheet

approval rating

Cite this Entry

“Approval sheet.” Merriam-Webster.com Dictionary , Merriam-Webster, https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/approval%20sheet. Accessed 29 Aug. 2024.

Subscribe to America's largest dictionary and get thousands more definitions and advanced search—ad free!

Can you solve 4 words at once?

Word of the day.

See Definitions and Examples »

Get Word of the Day daily email!

Popular in Grammar & Usage

Plural and possessive names: a guide, 31 useful rhetorical devices, more commonly misspelled words, why does english have so many silent letters, your vs. you're: how to use them correctly, popular in wordplay, 8 words for lesser-known musical instruments, it's a scorcher words for the summer heat, 7 shakespearean insults to make life more interesting, birds say the darndest things, 10 words from taylor swift songs (merriam's version), games & quizzes.

Definition & Meaning

Approval sheet – Definition & Meaning

An approval sheet is a document that is attached to a manuscript or a proposal that indicates that the document has been reviewed and approved by the appropriate parties. It is a formal way of acknowledging that the document has met the necessary requirements and is ready for submission.

Definitions

Meaning in different dictionaries, associations, the same root words, example sentences.

The origin of the approval sheet can be traced back to the formalities of academic research. It is a common practice for students to submit their research papers to their professors for review and approval. The approval sheet was created to ensure that the research paper met the necessary academic standards and was ready for submission.

The meaning of an approval sheet is consistent across different dictionaries. It is defined as a document that indicates that a manuscript or proposal has been reviewed and approved by the appropriate parties. It is a formal way of acknowledging that the document has met the necessary requirements and is ready for submission.

The approval sheet is associated with academic research, grant proposals, and other formal documents that require review and approval before submission. It is also associated with quality control processes in industries such as manufacturing and construction.

The synonyms of an approval sheet include sign-off sheet, authorization form, and approval document.

The antonyms of an approval sheet include rejection slip, disapproval document, and denial form.

The same root words as an approval sheet include approval, approve, and approbation.

• The approval sheet indicated that the research paper had been reviewed and approved by the professor.
• The construction project could not proceed until the approval sheet had been signed off by the quality control team.
• The grant proposal was rejected because the approval sheet had not been completed correctly.

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Written Samples

15 sample letters of approval for research.

Research is the backbone of innovation, discovery, and progress.

Whether in academia, industry, or government, obtaining approval for a research project is a crucial step in bringing ideas to life.

A well-crafted letter of approval not only grants permission to proceed with the research but also sets the stage for a productive and impactful study.

Sample Letters of Approval for Research

In this article, we will explore 15 sample letters that demonstrate the art of communicating research approval effectively.

From addressing ethical considerations to outlining expectations and support, these letters showcase the key elements that make an approval letter a valuable tool for researchers and institutions alike.

Whether you are a seasoned researcher seeking funding or a committee member tasked with reviewing proposals, these samples will provide insight and inspiration for crafting compelling and comprehensive approval letters.

Subject: Approval of Research Proposal – “The Impact of Social Media on Adolescent Mental Health”

Dear Dr. Johnson,

I am pleased to inform you that your research proposal titled “The Impact of Social Media on Adolescent Mental Health” has been approved by the Institutional Review Board (IRB). After careful consideration of your study design, methodology, and ethical safeguards, we have determined that your research meets the necessary criteria for approval.

Your research aims to provide valuable insights into the relationship between social media use and mental health outcomes among adolescents, which aligns with our institution’s mission to promote the well-being of young individuals. We commend your comprehensive approach to ensuring participant confidentiality and obtaining informed consent.

As you proceed with your research, please ensure that you adhere to the approved protocol and any applicable regulations. If you encounter any changes or adverse events during your study, promptly notify the IRB for further guidance.

We wish you the best of luck in conducting your research and look forward to learning about your findings. If you require any further assistance or have any questions, please don’t hesitate to contact the IRB at [email protected] .

Dr. Sarah Thompson

  Chair, Institutional Review Board University of Excellence

Subject: Approval of Grant Proposal – “Developing Novel Therapies for Alzheimer’s Disease”

Dear Dr. Patel,

On behalf of the National Institutes of Health (NIH), I am delighted to inform you that your grant proposal titled “Developing Novel Therapies for Alzheimer’s Disease” has been approved for funding. Your proposal stood out among a highly competitive pool of applicants, and we are confident that your research has the potential to make significant contributions to the field of Alzheimer’s disease research.

Your innovative approach to identifying new therapeutic targets and developing targeted interventions aligns with the NIH’s mission to improve public health and advance medical knowledge. We are impressed by your team’s expertise and the collaborative nature of your proposed research.

The grant award includes a total funding amount of $1,500,000 over a period of five years. Please review the attached grant agreement for detailed information on the terms and conditions of the award, including reporting requirements and budget guidelines.

We look forward to supporting your research endeavors and witnessing the impact of your work. If you have any questions or require further assistance, please contact the NIH Grants Management Office at [email protected] .

Congratulations on this well-deserved achievement!

Best regards,

Dr. Michael Chen

Director, National Institutes of Health

Subject: Approval of Research Protocol – “Evaluating the Effectiveness of Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction in Healthcare Professionals”

Dear Dr. Nguyen,

I am writing to inform you that the Institutional Review Board (IRB) has reviewed and approved your research protocol titled “Evaluating the Effectiveness of Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction in Healthcare Professionals.” After a thorough evaluation of your study design, participant selection criteria, and data collection methods, we have determined that your research meets the necessary ethical and scientific standards.

Your research addresses a critical issue facing healthcare professionals, particularly in light of the ongoing challenges posed by the COVID-19 pandemic. We commend your efforts to investigate the potential benefits of mindfulness-based interventions in reducing stress and promoting well-being among this essential workforce.

As you proceed with your study, please ensure that you adhere to the approved protocol and obtain informed consent from all participants. If you encounter any modifications or adverse events during your research, promptly notify the IRB for further guidance.

We wish you success in conducting your research and look forward to learning about your findings. If you require any further assistance or have any questions, please don’t hesitate to contact the IRB at [email protected] .

Dr. Emily Davis

Chair, Institutional Review Board Memorial Hospital

Subject: Approval of Research Proposal – “Investigating the Role of Microplastics in Marine Ecosystems”

Dear Dr. Kim,

I am pleased to inform you that your research proposal titled “Investigating the Role of Microplastics in Marine Ecosystems” has been approved by the Environmental Research Council (ERC). After careful consideration of your study objectives, methodology, and potential environmental impact, we have determined that your research aligns with the ERC’s mission to promote sustainable and responsible environmental practices.

Your research aims to shed light on a critical issue facing our oceans and marine life, and we commend your comprehensive approach to understanding the sources, distribution, and effects of microplastics in marine ecosystems. Your proposed collaboration with international research institutions and the use of cutting-edge technology demonstrate your commitment to conducting high-quality and impactful research.

As you proceed with your study, please ensure that you adhere to the approved research plan and any applicable environmental regulations. If you encounter any changes or unforeseen challenges during your research, promptly notify the ERC for further guidance and support.

We are excited to support your research efforts and look forward to the valuable insights and recommendations that will arise from your work. If you require any further assistance or have any questions, please don’t hesitate to contact the ERC at [email protected] .

Dr. David Lee

Director, Environmental Research Council

Subject: Approval of Clinical Trial Protocol – “Evaluating the Safety and Efficacy of a Novel Cancer Immunotherapy”

On behalf of the Clinical Research Ethics Committee (CREC), I am pleased to inform you that your clinical trial protocol titled “Evaluating the Safety and Efficacy of a Novel Cancer Immunotherapy” has been approved. After a thorough review of your study design, participant eligibility criteria, and safety monitoring plan, we have determined that your research meets the necessary ethical and scientific standards for human subjects research.

Your research represents a promising step forward in the development of innovative cancer treatments, and we commend your dedication to advancing the field of oncology. Your proposed trial design, which incorporates state-of-the-art immunotherapy techniques and rigorous safety measures, demonstrates your commitment to ensuring the well-being of study participants.

As you proceed with your clinical trial, please ensure that you adhere to the approved protocol and obtain informed consent from all participants. If you encounter any modifications, adverse events, or unanticipated problems during your research, promptly notify the CREC for further guidance and oversight.

We wish you success in conducting your clinical trial and look forward to the potential breakthrough findings that may emerge from your work. If you require any further assistance or have any questions, please don’t hesitate to contact the CREC at [email protected] .

Dr. Olivia Nguyen

Chair, Clinical Research Ethics Committee University Hospital

Subject: Approval of Research Proposal – “Exploring the Impact of Remote Work on Employee Well-being and Productivity”

I am writing to inform you that your research proposal titled “Exploring the Impact of Remote Work on Employee Well-being and Productivity” has been approved by the Human Resources Research Committee (HRRC). After careful consideration of your study objectives, methodology, and potential implications for organizational practices, we have determined that your research aligns with our company’s values and commitment to employee well-being.

Your research addresses a timely and relevant issue, particularly in light of the ongoing shift towards remote work arrangements. We commend your comprehensive approach to investigating the effects of remote work on various aspects of employee well-being, including mental health, work-life balance, and job satisfaction, as well as its impact on productivity and organizational performance.

As you proceed with your study, please ensure that you adhere to the approved research plan and maintain the confidentiality of all employee data. If you encounter any changes or challenges during your research, promptly notify the HRRC for further guidance and support.

We are excited to support your research efforts and look forward to the valuable insights and recommendations that will arise from your work. Your findings have the potential to inform our company’s policies and practices regarding remote work and contribute to the overall well-being of our employees.

If you require any further assistance or have any questions, please don’t hesitate to contact the HRRC at [email protected] .

Sarah Thompson

Director, Human Resources ABC Corporation

Subject: Approval of Grant Proposal – “Investigating the Neurological Basis of Language Acquisition in Infants”

On behalf of the National Science Foundation (NSF), I am delighted to inform you that your grant proposal titled “Investigating the Neurological Basis of Language Acquisition in Infants” has been approved for funding. Your proposal stood out among a highly competitive pool of applicants, and we are confident that your research has the potential to make significant contributions to the field of developmental neuroscience.

Your innovative approach to studying the neural mechanisms underlying language acquisition in infants, combined with your expertise in advanced neuroimaging techniques, demonstrates your commitment to advancing our understanding of this critical developmental process. We are impressed by your proposed collaboration with international research institutions and the interdisciplinary nature of your research team.

The grant award includes a total funding amount of $800,000 over three years. Please review the attached grant agreement for detailed information on the terms and conditions of the award, including reporting requirements and budget guidelines.

We look forward to supporting your research endeavors and witnessing the impact of your work on the field of developmental neuroscience. If you have any questions or require further assistance, please contact the NSF Grants Management Office at [email protected] .

Director, National Science Foundation

Subject: Approval of Research Protocol – “Evaluating the Effectiveness of Virtual Reality Therapy for Anxiety Disorders”

I am pleased to inform you that the Institutional Review Board (IRB) has reviewed and approved your research protocol titled “Evaluating the Effectiveness of Virtual Reality Therapy for Anxiety Disorders.” After a thorough evaluation of your study design, participant selection criteria, and data collection methods, we have determined that your research meets the necessary ethical and scientific standards.

Your research addresses a promising area of mental health treatment, particularly in light of the increasing accessibility and sophistication of virtual reality technology. We commend your efforts to investigate the potential benefits of virtual reality therapy in reducing anxiety symptoms and improving the overall quality of life for individuals with anxiety disorders.

We wish you success in conducting your research and look forward to learning about your findings. Your work has the potential to contribute to the advancement of innovative mental health interventions and improve the lives of individuals struggling with anxiety disorders.

If you require any further assistance or have any questions, please don’t hesitate to contact the IRB at [email protected] .

Chair, Institutional Review Board Harmony Mental Health Clinic

Subject: Approval of Research Proposal – “Investigating the Socioeconomic Determinants of Health Disparities in Urban Communities”

I am writing to inform you that your research proposal titled “Investigating the Socioeconomic Determinants of Health Disparities in Urban Communities” has been approved by the Public Health Research Council (PHRC). After careful consideration of your study objectives, methodology, and potential implications for public health policy, we have determined that your research aligns with our organization’s mission to promote health equity and address social determinants of health.

Your research addresses a critical issue facing many urban communities, and we commend your comprehensive approach to investigating the complex interplay between socioeconomic factors and health outcomes. Your proposed use of mixed methods, including quantitative surveys and qualitative interviews, demonstrates your commitment to capturing the diverse experiences and perspectives of community members.

As you proceed with your study, please ensure that you adhere to the approved research plan and maintain the confidentiality and privacy of all participants. If you encounter any changes or challenges during the course of your research, promptly notify the PHRC for further guidance and support.

We are excited to support your research efforts and look forward to the valuable insights and recommendations that will arise from your work. Your findings have the potential to inform public health interventions and policies aimed at reducing health disparities and promoting health equity in urban communities.

If you require any further assistance or have any questions, please don’t hesitate to contact the PHRC at [email protected] .

Director, Public Health Research Council

Subject: Approval of Clinical Trial Protocol – “Evaluating the Efficacy and Safety of a Novel Drug for Parkinson’s Disease”

On behalf of the Clinical Trials Review Committee (CTRC), I am pleased to inform you that your clinical trial protocol titled “Evaluating the Efficacy and Safety of a Novel Drug for Parkinson’s Disease” has been approved. After a thorough review of your study design, participant eligibility criteria, and safety monitoring plan, we have determined that your research meets the necessary ethical and scientific standards for human subjects research.

Your research represents a promising step forward in the development of new treatments for Parkinson’s disease, and we commend your dedication to improving the lives of individuals affected by this debilitating condition. Your proposed trial design, which incorporates rigorous efficacy and safety assessments, demonstrates your commitment to ensuring the well-being of study participants.

As you proceed with your clinical trial, please ensure that you adhere to the approved protocol and obtain informed consent from all participants. If you encounter any modifications, adverse events, or unanticipated problems during your research, promptly notify the CTRC for further guidance and oversight.

We wish you success in conducting your clinical trial and look forward to the potential breakthrough findings that may emerge from your work. Your research has the potential to advance our understanding of Parkinson’s disease and contribute to the development of innovative treatment options.

If you require any further assistance or have any questions, please don’t hesitate to contact the CTRC at [email protected] .

Chair, Clinical Trials Review Committee University Hospital

Subject: Approval of Research Proposal – “Exploring the Effects of Climate Change on Crop Yields and Food Security”

I am pleased to inform you that your research proposal titled “Exploring the Effects of Climate Change on Crop Yields and Food Security” has been approved by the Agricultural Research Institute (ARI). After careful consideration of your study objectives, methodology, and potential implications for agricultural practices and policy, we have determined that your research aligns with our organization’s mission to promote sustainable and resilient food systems.

Your research addresses a critical issue facing global agriculture, and we commend your comprehensive approach to investigating the complex interplay between climate change, crop yields, and food security. Your proposed use of advanced modeling techniques and collaborations with international research institutions demonstrates your commitment to conducting rigorous and impactful research.

As you proceed with your study, please ensure that you adhere to the approved research plan and maintain open communication with the ARI regarding any changes or challenges that may arise. We encourage you to share your findings and recommendations with relevant stakeholders, including farmers, policymakers, and the scientific community.

We are excited to support your research efforts and look forward to the valuable insights and solutions that will emerge from your work. Your findings have the potential to inform agricultural practices, policies, and interventions aimed at mitigating the impacts of climate change and ensuring global food security.

If you require any further assistance or have any questions, please don’t hesitate to contact the ARI at [email protected] .

Director, Agricultural Research Institute

Subject: Approval of Grant Proposal – “Investigating the Neural Mechanisms of Addiction and Developing Targeted Interventions”

On behalf of the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA), I am delighted to inform you that your grant proposal titled “Investigating the Neural Mechanisms of Addiction and Developing Targeted Interventions” has been approved for funding. Your proposal stood out among a highly competitive pool of applicants, and we are confident that your research has the potential to make significant contributions to the field of addiction neuroscience.

Your innovative approach to studying the neural circuits and mechanisms underlying addiction, combined with your proposed development of targeted interventions, demonstrates your commitment to advancing our understanding of this complex disorder and improving treatment outcomes. We are impressed by your multidisciplinary research team and the potential for translational impact.

The grant award includes a total funding amount of $1,200,000 over four years. Please review the attached grant agreement for detailed information on the terms and conditions of the award, including reporting requirements and budget guidelines.

We look forward to supporting your research endeavors and witnessing the impact of your work on the field of addiction neuroscience and treatment. If you have any questions or require further assistance, please contact the NIDA Grants Management Office at [email protected] .

Director, National Institute on Drug Abuse

Subject: Approval of Research Protocol – “Evaluating the Effectiveness of a School-Based Intervention for Promoting Mental Health in Adolescents”

I am writing to inform you that the Institutional Review Board (IRB) has reviewed and approved your research protocol titled “Evaluating the Effectiveness of a School-Based Intervention for Promoting Mental Health in Adolescents.” After a thorough evaluation of your study design, participant selection criteria, and data collection methods, we have determined that your research meets the necessary ethical and scientific standards.

Your research addresses a critical issue facing adolescent mental health, particularly in the context of school settings. We commend your efforts to investigate the potential benefits of a comprehensive school-based intervention in promoting mental well-being, reducing the stigma surrounding mental health, and increasing access to support services for students.

As you proceed with your study, please ensure that you adhere to the approved protocol and obtain informed consent from all participants and their legal guardians. If you encounter any modifications or adverse events during your research, promptly notify the IRB for further guidance.

We wish you success in conducting your research and look forward to learning about your findings. Your work has the potential to contribute to the development of effective school-based interventions and improve the mental health outcomes of adolescents.

If you require any further assistance or have any questions, please don’t hesitate to contact the IRB at [email protected] .

Chair, Institutional Review Board University of Excellence

Subject: Approval of Research Proposal – “Investigating the Potential of Renewable Energy Technologies in Rural Communities”

I am pleased to inform you that your research proposal titled “Investigating the Potential of Renewable Energy Technologies in Rural Communities” has been approved by the Sustainable Energy Research Foundation (SERF). After careful consideration of your study objectives, methodology, and potential implications for energy access and sustainability, we have determined that your research aligns with our organization’s mission to promote clean and affordable energy solutions.

Your research addresses a critical issue facing many rural communities, and we commend your comprehensive approach to investigating the technical, social, and economic feasibility of implementing renewable energy technologies in these settings. Your proposed collaborations with local communities and stakeholders demonstrate your commitment to conducting participatory and socially responsible research.

As you proceed with your study, please ensure that you adhere to the approved research plan and maintain open communication with the SERF regarding any changes or challenges that may arise. We encourage you to share your findings and recommendations with relevant stakeholders, including policymakers, energy providers, and community organizations.

We are excited to support your research efforts and look forward to the valuable insights and solutions that will emerge from your work. Your findings have the potential to inform energy policies, infrastructure development, and community empowerment initiatives aimed at promoting sustainable energy access in rural areas.

If you require any further assistance or have any questions, please don’t hesitate to contact the SERF at [email protected] .

Director, Sustainable Energy Research Foundation

Subject: Approval of Clinical Trial Protocol – “Evaluating the Efficacy and Safety of a Novel Gene Therapy for Rare Genetic Disorders”

On behalf of the Rare Diseases Clinical Trials Consortium (RDCTC), I am pleased to inform you that your clinical trial protocol titled “Evaluating the Efficacy and Safety of a Novel Gene Therapy for Rare Genetic Disorders” has been approved. After a thorough review of your study design, participant eligibility criteria, and safety monitoring plan, we have determined that your research meets the necessary ethical and scientific standards for human subjects research.

Your research represents a groundbreaking step forward in the development of innovative treatments for rare genetic disorders, and we commend your dedication to improving the lives of individuals and families affected by these conditions. Your proposed trial design, which incorporates cutting-edge gene therapy techniques and rigorous safety measures, demonstrates your commitment to advancing the field of rare disease research.

As you proceed with your clinical trial, please ensure that you adhere to the approved protocol and obtain informed consent from all participants or their legal representatives. If you encounter any modifications, adverse events, or unanticipated problems during your research, promptly notify the RDCTC for further guidance and oversight.

We wish you success in conducting your clinical trial and look forward to the potential breakthrough findings that may emerge from your work. Your research has the potential to pave the way for the development of life-changing treatments for individuals with rare genetic disorders.

If you require any further assistance or have any questions, please don’t hesitate to contact the RDCTC at [email protected] .

Chair, Rare Diseases Clinical Trials Consortium

Receiving a letter of approval for research is a significant milestone for any researcher or research team.

It validates the importance and feasibility of the proposed study and provides the green light to proceed with the investigation.

These letters not only grant permission but also offer support, guidance, and expectations for the conduct of the research.

By exploring these 15 sample letters of approval for research, we have gained insight into the key elements that make an approval letter effective and impactful.

From highlighting the alignment with institutional missions to outlining the terms and conditions of funding, these letters serve as a roadmap for researchers as they embark on their scientific endeavors.

Whether you are a researcher seeking approval for your study or a committee member tasked with reviewing proposals, these sample letters offer valuable guidance and inspiration.

• Search Menu
• Sign in through your institution
• Browse content in Arts and Humanities
• Browse content in Archaeology
• Anglo-Saxon and Medieval Archaeology
• Archaeological Methodology and Techniques
• Archaeology by Region
• Archaeology of Religion
• Archaeology of Trade and Exchange
• Biblical Archaeology
• Contemporary and Public Archaeology
• Environmental Archaeology
• Historical Archaeology
• History and Theory of Archaeology
• Industrial Archaeology
• Landscape Archaeology
• Mortuary Archaeology
• Prehistoric Archaeology
• Underwater Archaeology
• Zooarchaeology
• Browse content in Architecture
• Architectural Structure and Design
• History of Architecture
• Residential and Domestic Buildings
• Theory of Architecture
• Browse content in Art
• Art Subjects and Themes
• History of Art
• Industrial and Commercial Art
• Theory of Art
• Biographical Studies
• Byzantine Studies
• Browse content in Classical Studies
• Classical History
• Classical Philosophy
• Classical Mythology
• Classical Numismatics
• Classical Literature
• Classical Reception
• Classical Art and Architecture
• Classical Oratory and Rhetoric
• Greek and Roman Epigraphy
• Greek and Roman Law
• Greek and Roman Archaeology
• Greek and Roman Papyrology
• Late Antiquity
• Religion in the Ancient World
• Social History
• Digital Humanities
• Browse content in History
• Colonialism and Imperialism
• Diplomatic History
• Environmental History
• Genealogy, Heraldry, Names, and Honours
• Genocide and Ethnic Cleansing
• Historical Geography
• History by Period
• History of Agriculture
• History of Education
• History of Emotions
• History of Gender and Sexuality
• Industrial History
• Intellectual History
• International History
• Labour History
• Legal and Constitutional History
• Local and Family History
• Maritime History
• Military History
• National Liberation and Post-Colonialism
• Oral History
• Political History
• Public History
• Regional and National History
• Revolutions and Rebellions
• Slavery and Abolition of Slavery
• Social and Cultural History
• Theory, Methods, and Historiography
• Urban History
• World History
• Browse content in Language Teaching and Learning
• Language Learning (Specific Skills)
• Language Teaching Theory and Methods
• Browse content in Linguistics
• Applied Linguistics
• Cognitive Linguistics
• Computational Linguistics
• Forensic Linguistics
• Grammar, Syntax and Morphology
• Historical and Diachronic Linguistics
• History of English
• Language Acquisition
• Language Variation
• Language Families
• Language Evolution
• Language Reference
• Lexicography
• Linguistic Theories
• Linguistic Typology
• Linguistic Anthropology
• Phonetics and Phonology
• Psycholinguistics
• Sociolinguistics
• Translation and Interpretation
• Writing Systems
• Browse content in Literature
• Bibliography
• Children's Literature Studies
• Literary Studies (Asian)
• Literary Studies (European)
• Literary Studies (Eco-criticism)
• Literary Studies (Modernism)
• Literary Studies (Romanticism)
• Literary Studies (American)
• Literary Studies - World
• Literary Studies (1500 to 1800)
• Literary Studies (19th Century)
• Literary Studies (20th Century onwards)
• Literary Studies (African American Literature)
• Literary Studies (British and Irish)
• Literary Studies (Early and Medieval)
• Literary Studies (Fiction, Novelists, and Prose Writers)
• Literary Studies (Gender Studies)
• Literary Studies (Graphic Novels)
• Literary Studies (History of the Book)
• Literary Studies (Plays and Playwrights)
• Literary Studies (Poetry and Poets)
• Literary Studies (Postcolonial Literature)
• Literary Studies (Queer Studies)
• Literary Studies (Science Fiction)
• Literary Studies (Travel Literature)
• Literary Studies (War Literature)
• Literary Studies (Women's Writing)
• Literary Theory and Cultural Studies
• Mythology and Folklore
• Shakespeare Studies and Criticism
• Browse content in Media Studies
• Browse content in Music
• Applied Music
• Dance and Music
• Ethics in Music
• Ethnomusicology
• Gender and Sexuality in Music
• Medicine and Music
• Music Cultures
• Music and Religion
• Music and Culture
• Music and Media
• Music Education and Pedagogy
• Music Theory and Analysis
• Musical Scores, Lyrics, and Libretti
• Musical Structures, Styles, and Techniques
• Musicology and Music History
• Performance Practice and Studies
• Race and Ethnicity in Music
• Sound Studies
• Browse content in Performing Arts
• Browse content in Philosophy
• Aesthetics and Philosophy of Art
• Epistemology
• Feminist Philosophy
• History of Western Philosophy
• Metaphysics
• Moral Philosophy
• Non-Western Philosophy
• Philosophy of Science
• Philosophy of Action
• Philosophy of Law
• Philosophy of Religion
• Philosophy of Language
• Philosophy of Mind
• Philosophy of Perception
• Philosophy of Mathematics and Logic
• Practical Ethics
• Social and Political Philosophy
• Browse content in Religion
• Biblical Studies
• Christianity
• East Asian Religions
• History of Religion
• Judaism and Jewish Studies
• Qumran Studies
• Religion and Education
• Religion and Health
• Religion and Politics
• Religion and Science
• Religion and Law
• Religion and Art, Literature, and Music
• Religious Studies
• Browse content in Society and Culture
• Cookery, Food, and Drink
• Cultural Studies
• Customs and Traditions
• Ethical Issues and Debates
• Hobbies, Games, Arts and Crafts
• Natural world, Country Life, and Pets
• Popular Beliefs and Controversial Knowledge
• Sports and Outdoor Recreation
• Technology and Society
• Travel and Holiday
• Visual Culture
• Browse content in Law
• Arbitration
• Browse content in Company and Commercial Law
• Commercial Law
• Company Law
• Browse content in Comparative Law
• Systems of Law
• Competition Law
• Browse content in Constitutional and Administrative Law
• Government Powers
• Judicial Review
• Local Government Law
• Military and Defence Law
• Parliamentary and Legislative Practice
• Construction Law
• Contract Law
• Browse content in Criminal Law
• Criminal Procedure
• Criminal Evidence Law
• Sentencing and Punishment
• Employment and Labour Law
• Environment and Energy Law
• Browse content in Financial Law
• Banking Law
• Insolvency Law
• History of Law
• Human Rights and Immigration
• Intellectual Property Law
• Browse content in International Law
• Private International Law and Conflict of Laws
• Public International Law
• IT and Communications Law
• Jurisprudence and Philosophy of Law
• Law and Politics
• Law and Society
• Browse content in Legal System and Practice
• Courts and Procedure
• Legal Skills and Practice
• Legal System - Costs and Funding
• Primary Sources of Law
• Regulation of Legal Profession
• Medical and Healthcare Law
• Browse content in Policing
• Criminal Investigation and Detection
• Police and Security Services
• Police Procedure and Law
• Police Regional Planning
• Browse content in Property Law
• Personal Property Law
• Restitution
• Study and Revision
• Terrorism and National Security Law
• Browse content in Trusts Law
• Wills and Probate or Succession
• Browse content in Medicine and Health
• Browse content in Allied Health Professions
• Arts Therapies
• Clinical Science
• Dietetics and Nutrition
• Occupational Therapy
• Operating Department Practice
• Physiotherapy
• Radiography
• Speech and Language Therapy
• Browse content in Anaesthetics
• General Anaesthesia
• Browse content in Clinical Medicine
• Acute Medicine
• Cardiovascular Medicine
• Clinical Genetics
• Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics
• Dermatology
• Endocrinology and Diabetes
• Gastroenterology
• Genito-urinary Medicine
• Geriatric Medicine
• Infectious Diseases
• Medical Oncology
• Medical Toxicology
• Pain Medicine
• Palliative Medicine
• Rehabilitation Medicine
• Respiratory Medicine and Pulmonology
• Rheumatology
• Sleep Medicine
• Sports and Exercise Medicine
• Clinical Neuroscience
• Community Medical Services
• Critical Care
• Emergency Medicine
• Forensic Medicine
• Haematology
• History of Medicine
• Browse content in Medical Dentistry
• Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery
• Paediatric Dentistry
• Restorative Dentistry and Orthodontics
• Surgical Dentistry
• Medical Ethics
• Browse content in Medical Skills
• Clinical Skills
• Communication Skills
• Nursing Skills
• Surgical Skills
• Medical Statistics and Methodology
• Browse content in Neurology
• Clinical Neurophysiology
• Neuropathology
• Nursing Studies
• Browse content in Obstetrics and Gynaecology
• Gynaecology
• Occupational Medicine
• Ophthalmology
• Otolaryngology (ENT)
• Browse content in Paediatrics
• Neonatology
• Browse content in Pathology
• Chemical Pathology
• Clinical Cytogenetics and Molecular Genetics
• Histopathology
• Medical Microbiology and Virology
• Patient Education and Information
• Browse content in Pharmacology
• Psychopharmacology
• Browse content in Popular Health
• Caring for Others
• Complementary and Alternative Medicine
• Self-help and Personal Development
• Browse content in Preclinical Medicine
• Cell Biology
• Molecular Biology and Genetics
• Reproduction, Growth and Development
• Primary Care
• Professional Development in Medicine
• Browse content in Psychiatry
• Addiction Medicine
• Child and Adolescent Psychiatry
• Forensic Psychiatry
• Learning Disabilities
• Old Age Psychiatry
• Psychotherapy
• Browse content in Public Health and Epidemiology
• Epidemiology
• Public Health
• Browse content in Radiology
• Clinical Radiology
• Interventional Radiology
• Nuclear Medicine
• Radiation Oncology
• Reproductive Medicine
• Browse content in Surgery
• Cardiothoracic Surgery
• Gastro-intestinal and Colorectal Surgery
• General Surgery
• Neurosurgery
• Paediatric Surgery
• Peri-operative Care
• Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery
• Surgical Oncology
• Transplant Surgery
• Trauma and Orthopaedic Surgery
• Vascular Surgery
• Browse content in Science and Mathematics
• Browse content in Biological Sciences
• Aquatic Biology
• Biochemistry
• Bioinformatics and Computational Biology
• Developmental Biology
• Ecology and Conservation
• Evolutionary Biology
• Genetics and Genomics
• Microbiology
• Molecular and Cell Biology
• Natural History
• Plant Sciences and Forestry
• Research Methods in Life Sciences
• Structural Biology
• Systems Biology
• Zoology and Animal Sciences
• Browse content in Chemistry
• Analytical Chemistry
• Computational Chemistry
• Crystallography
• Environmental Chemistry
• Industrial Chemistry
• Inorganic Chemistry
• Materials Chemistry
• Medicinal Chemistry
• Mineralogy and Gems
• Organic Chemistry
• Physical Chemistry
• Polymer Chemistry
• Study and Communication Skills in Chemistry
• Theoretical Chemistry
• Browse content in Computer Science
• Artificial Intelligence
• Computer Architecture and Logic Design
• Game Studies
• Human-Computer Interaction
• Mathematical Theory of Computation
• Programming Languages
• Software Engineering
• Systems Analysis and Design
• Virtual Reality
• Browse content in Computing
• Business Applications
• Computer Security
• Computer Games
• Computer Networking and Communications
• Digital Lifestyle
• Graphical and Digital Media Applications
• Operating Systems
• Browse content in Earth Sciences and Geography
• Atmospheric Sciences
• Environmental Geography
• Geology and the Lithosphere
• Maps and Map-making
• Meteorology and Climatology
• Oceanography and Hydrology
• Palaeontology
• Physical Geography and Topography
• Regional Geography
• Soil Science
• Urban Geography
• Browse content in Engineering and Technology
• Agriculture and Farming
• Biological Engineering
• Civil Engineering, Surveying, and Building
• Electronics and Communications Engineering
• Energy Technology
• Engineering (General)
• Environmental Science, Engineering, and Technology
• History of Engineering and Technology
• Mechanical Engineering and Materials
• Technology of Industrial Chemistry
• Transport Technology and Trades
• Browse content in Environmental Science
• Applied Ecology (Environmental Science)
• Conservation of the Environment (Environmental Science)
• Environmental Sustainability
• Environmentalist Thought and Ideology (Environmental Science)
• Management of Land and Natural Resources (Environmental Science)
• Natural Disasters (Environmental Science)
• Nuclear Issues (Environmental Science)
• Pollution and Threats to the Environment (Environmental Science)
• Social Impact of Environmental Issues (Environmental Science)
• History of Science and Technology
• Browse content in Materials Science
• Ceramics and Glasses
• Composite Materials
• Metals, Alloying, and Corrosion
• Nanotechnology
• Browse content in Mathematics
• Applied Mathematics
• Biomathematics and Statistics
• History of Mathematics
• Mathematical Education
• Mathematical Finance
• Mathematical Analysis
• Numerical and Computational Mathematics
• Probability and Statistics
• Pure Mathematics
• Browse content in Neuroscience
• Cognition and Behavioural Neuroscience
• Development of the Nervous System
• Disorders of the Nervous System
• History of Neuroscience
• Invertebrate Neurobiology
• Molecular and Cellular Systems
• Neuroendocrinology and Autonomic Nervous System
• Neuroscientific Techniques
• Sensory and Motor Systems
• Browse content in Physics
• Astronomy and Astrophysics
• Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics
• Biological and Medical Physics
• Classical Mechanics
• Computational Physics
• Condensed Matter Physics
• Electromagnetism, Optics, and Acoustics
• History of Physics
• Mathematical and Statistical Physics
• Measurement Science
• Nuclear Physics
• Particles and Fields
• Plasma Physics
• Quantum Physics
• Relativity and Gravitation
• Semiconductor and Mesoscopic Physics
• Browse content in Psychology
• Affective Sciences
• Clinical Psychology
• Cognitive Neuroscience
• Cognitive Psychology
• Criminal and Forensic Psychology
• Developmental Psychology
• Educational Psychology
• Evolutionary Psychology
• Health Psychology
• History and Systems in Psychology
• Music Psychology
• Neuropsychology
• Organizational Psychology
• Psychological Assessment and Testing
• Psychology of Human-Technology Interaction
• Psychology Professional Development and Training
• Research Methods in Psychology
• Social Psychology
• Browse content in Social Sciences
• Browse content in Anthropology
• Anthropology of Religion
• Human Evolution
• Medical Anthropology
• Physical Anthropology
• Regional Anthropology
• Social and Cultural Anthropology
• Theory and Practice of Anthropology
• Browse content in Business and Management
• Business Strategy
• Business History
• Business Ethics
• Business and Government
• Business and Technology
• Business and the Environment
• Comparative Management
• Corporate Governance
• Corporate Social Responsibility
• Entrepreneurship
• Health Management
• Human Resource Management
• Industrial and Employment Relations
• Industry Studies
• Information and Communication Technologies
• International Business
• Knowledge Management
• Management and Management Techniques
• Operations Management
• Organizational Theory and Behaviour
• Pensions and Pension Management
• Public and Nonprofit Management
• Social Issues in Business and Management
• Strategic Management
• Supply Chain Management
• Browse content in Criminology and Criminal Justice
• Criminal Justice
• Criminology
• Forms of Crime
• International and Comparative Criminology
• Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice
• Development Studies
• Browse content in Economics
• Agricultural, Environmental, and Natural Resource Economics
• Asian Economics
• Behavioural Finance
• Behavioural Economics and Neuroeconomics
• Econometrics and Mathematical Economics
• Economic Systems
• Economic Methodology
• Economic History
• Economic Development and Growth
• Financial Markets
• Financial Institutions and Services
• General Economics and Teaching
• Health, Education, and Welfare
• History of Economic Thought
• International Economics
• Labour and Demographic Economics
• Law and Economics
• Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics
• Microeconomics
• Public Economics
• Urban, Rural, and Regional Economics
• Welfare Economics
• Browse content in Education
• Adult Education and Continuous Learning
• Care and Counselling of Students
• Early Childhood and Elementary Education
• Educational Equipment and Technology
• Educational Strategies and Policy
• Higher and Further Education
• Organization and Management of Education
• Philosophy and Theory of Education
• Schools Studies
• Secondary Education
• Teaching of a Specific Subject
• Teaching of Specific Groups and Special Educational Needs
• Teaching Skills and Techniques
• Browse content in Environment
• Applied Ecology (Social Science)
• Climate Change
• Conservation of the Environment (Social Science)
• Environmentalist Thought and Ideology (Social Science)
• Management of Land and Natural Resources (Social Science)
• Natural Disasters (Environment)
• Pollution and Threats to the Environment (Social Science)
• Social Impact of Environmental Issues (Social Science)
• Sustainability
• Browse content in Human Geography
• Cultural Geography
• Economic Geography
• Political Geography
• Browse content in Interdisciplinary Studies
• Communication Studies
• Museums, Libraries, and Information Sciences
• Browse content in Politics
• African Politics
• Asian Politics
• Chinese Politics
• Comparative Politics
• Conflict Politics
• Elections and Electoral Studies
• Environmental Politics
• Ethnic Politics
• European Union
• Foreign Policy
• Gender and Politics
• Human Rights and Politics
• Indian Politics
• International Relations
• International Organization (Politics)
• Irish Politics
• Latin American Politics
• Middle Eastern Politics
• Political Methodology
• Political Communication
• Political Philosophy
• Political Sociology
• Political Theory
• Political Behaviour
• Political Economy
• Political Institutions
• Politics and Law
• Politics of Development
• Public Administration
• Public Policy
• Qualitative Political Methodology
• Quantitative Political Methodology
• Regional Political Studies
• Russian Politics
• Security Studies
• State and Local Government
• UK Politics
• US Politics
• Browse content in Regional and Area Studies
• African Studies
• Asian Studies
• East Asian Studies
• Japanese Studies
• Latin American Studies
• Middle Eastern Studies
• Native American Studies
• Scottish Studies
• Browse content in Research and Information
• Research Methods
• Browse content in Social Work
• Addictions and Substance Misuse
• Adoption and Fostering
• Care of the Elderly
• Child and Adolescent Social Work
• Couple and Family Social Work
• Direct Practice and Clinical Social Work
• Emergency Services
• Human Behaviour and the Social Environment
• International and Global Issues in Social Work
• Mental and Behavioural Health
• Social Justice and Human Rights
• Social Policy and Advocacy
• Social Work and Crime and Justice
• Social Work Macro Practice
• Social Work Practice Settings
• Social Work Research and Evidence-based Practice
• Welfare and Benefit Systems
• Browse content in Sociology
• Childhood Studies
• Community Development
• Comparative and Historical Sociology
• Disability Studies
• Economic Sociology
• Gender and Sexuality
• Gerontology and Ageing
• Health, Illness, and Medicine
• Marriage and the Family
• Migration Studies
• Occupations, Professions, and Work
• Organizations
• Population and Demography
• Race and Ethnicity
• Social Theory
• Social Movements and Social Change
• Social Research and Statistics
• Social Stratification, Inequality, and Mobility
• Sociology of Religion
• Sociology of Education
• Sport and Leisure
• Urban and Rural Studies
• Browse content in Warfare and Defence
• Defence Strategy, Planning, and Research
• Land Forces and Warfare
• Military Administration
• Military Life and Institutions
• Naval Forces and Warfare
• Other Warfare and Defence Issues
• Peace Studies and Conflict Resolution
• Weapons and Equipment

Review and approval process

Approvals process for books.

Oxford University Press (OUP) welcomes proposals from all authors: researchers and professionals at any stage in their career (including first-time authors). Our publishing is driven by quality and committed to diversity, equity, and inclusion.

We offer advice on submitting a proposal . At any point, you can contact the Editor at the Press you consider best aligned with the topic or discipline for which you are considering submitting a proposal. 

If the initial editorial assessment is positive, your proposal and accompanying material will be sent out for peer review . Where reviews are sufficiently supportive, the next step is for your proposal and reviews to be discussed at an internal publishing meeting before being sent to the OUP Delegates. Delegates are trusted senior professors based at the University of Oxford, or at leading institutions elsewhere. It is the Delegates who ultimately approve the publication of each academic or professional title, safeguarding the quality of OUP’s publishing.

When a proposal has been approved by the Delegates your editor will be able to offer you a contract for the project.

If you have any feedback or concerns about the approvals process for your proposal, we encourage you to contact the relevant Head of Acquisition. Their contact details are available here . 

Peer review of proposals

Peer review is an essential part of our publishing process and a fundamental principle of scholarly discourse. and the validation and communication of research findings and outputs.  

Peer review provides for the assessment of research by appropriately qualified peers and stakeholders, taking account of current knowledge, know-how, and prevailing standards for the conduct of research, of the quality of research, and with the objectives of both validating the research and facilitating its improvement.

This note covers the peer review of a proposal as part of the approvals process for books. 

Following an initial editorial assessment that the proposal should proceed to peer review, our standard treatment of book proposals is to follow a review process whereby the reviewers will receive the full proposal, including information about the author as well as any sample chapters and original thesis submitted, and the author will be provided with an anonymised set of reviewer reports for consideration. 

At the proposal stage, we do not ordinarily undertake peer review in which the proposing author is made anonymous to the reviewers and, with the type of research which leads to book projects, it can be difficult to accomplish with any certainty. If there are reasons why the author wishes to remain anonymous during the review process, this can be discussed with the Editor following submission of the proposal. 

Reviewers may be asked to comment on specific aspects of the proposal based on the initial editorial assessment and discussions with the author. As a standard component of our peer review process, we will ask all reviewers to consider whether the proposal, in keeping with our commitment to diversity, equity, and inclusion, is appropriately inclusive and diverse in terms coverage and contributions.

Selection of reviewers

OUP believes that the selection of reviewers is of fundamental importance to the quality of the review process. Editors will use their knowledge of the area and existing contacts to identify and prioritise a list of potential reviewers. Our policy is to avoid reviewers who may have a conflict of interests, and to that end we will aim to avoid approaching reviewers who are in the same faculty or who are recent colleagues of the proposing author.

OUP will aim to provide a suitable balance of reviewers reflecting different aspects of the work, whether different cross- or sub-disciplinary expertise, or the ability to reflect on different potential use cases. We will also look to maintain a good balance of reviewers in keeping with our desire to support diversity, equity, and inclusion .

Nominating reviewers

Whilst OUP will normally expect to identify and select appropriate reviewers, the proposing author can provide a note of reviewers they consider would be well-placed to review the work should they wish. OUP does not commit to approach any reviewers suggested by a proposing author but may take these suggestions into account in planning the review process.

Blocking reviewers

Blocking reviewers is to be avoided where possible, and it is rarely requested or invoked. However, if there is a reason why a proposing author wishes that certain individuals are not approached for review, they can notify the Editor, providing some indication as to why they consider that individual either unsuitable or unable to provide a fair review, or why providing that reviewer with the proposal might lead to other detrimental consequences for the proposed work. 

Conflicts of interest

All reviewers will be asked at the earliest opportunity whether they have any conflict of interests which may affect their ability to provide a fair and honest review whether regarding the author or the topic. 

Anonymity of reviewers

We will take steps to create an anonymised version of each review before the reviews are provided to the author. We will remind reviewers that if they wish to ensure their anonymity, they should be careful not to include any comments which might make them identifiable (for example, first-person comments referencing their own work or mentions of a faculty or institution).  Editors will, where required, make adjustments to the peer review to remove any obvious evidence of the reviewer’s identity. 

Remuneration of reviewers

OUP provides an honorarium for peer reviews for book proposals which may also be taken in the form of credit for OUP products.

Review timescales and expectations

We recognise that there is a balance to be struck between the timely advancement of a book proposal and allowing a reasonable time for a reviewer to complete their review to an appropriate standard. The time required to complete peer reviews is dependent both on the time needed to secure appropriate reviewers and the time they, in turn, require to complete their reviews. We will update authors on progress with the peer review process. Authors can indicate if they are working within particular timeframes for a publishing decision. 

Editorial assessment of reviews

On receipt, the editor will read the reviewer feedback and determine whether the review is comprehensive and of a suitable quality and whether, taken together, the reviews provide an appropriate level of feedback on the project’s quality, its aims, scope, and approach, and its weaknesses and strengths. Peer reviewers will also consider the expertise of the author and their ability to deliver on the project as envisaged, as well as the value of the work to its intended audience and its potential reception. The editorial assessment of the peer reviews may result in follow-up requests to reviewers for clarification or further detail on specific points, or the commissioning of additional reviews, either at the suggestion of reviewers to cover particular dimensions of the research or to provide further evidence where reviews are inconclusive or take markedly different positions on the quality of the proposal. Where an editor is concerned about preserving the substantive content of a review, they might choose to agree a version for use with the reviewer prior to distribution.

As a matter of principle, whilst a proposal remains under consideration, we consider that all reviews should be provided to the proposing author. The editor may redact comments if they are felt to be rude or inappropriate in tone or substance whilst seeking to retain the substantive value of the comments.   Whilst the review process is ongoing, a review which has been commissioned and submitted will only be withheld from the proposing author in extreme circumstances and would be documented and qualified in the in-house proposal.  

Editorial decision on proceeding with the proposal

The editorial assessment of the peer reviews may lead to one of three main types of decision. 

First, it may be clear that the work as proposed has fundamental flaws and the proposal will be rejected. In such circumstances the Editor will determine whether information from reviews can be shared with the proposing author to help them understand the decision and determine what they wish to do with the project.

Secondly, the reviews may determine that there are significant issues with the work as proposed with regard to purpose, scope and methodology, or substance, and that it cannot be taken forward in its current form. In this instance, the editor will provide the reviews and ask the proposing author to consider whether they wish to submit a revised proposal.

Otherwise, the reviews will provide a critical set of questions and suggestions for the author, which will help them reflect on the project and proposal. In responding to the peer review feedback, the author may choose to adjust the proposal or to provide further context and explanation of the decisions and rationale informing the proposed approach. 

Provision of review feedback

When the editor is confident that a suitable set of reviews is available, the reviews will be anonymised and sent to the proposing author for their consideration with an invitation for the author to provide their response to the reviews. The author will be asked to indicate how long they will require to consider the reviews and provide a response.

Response to reviews

The author’s response to the reviews can take a number of forms including inline comments, a separate schedule by reviewer, or a thematic response, but should involve a clear statement of the extent to which the reviews have been of assistance, where the author agrees or disagrees with the reviewer feedback, any further work they wish to undertake to determine how to address any of the comments made, and any material changes they intend to make to the structure or substance of the work as a result. If there are reasonably significant alterations to be made the author may provide a revised table of contents and synopsis for the work.

Editorial decision on author’s response to reviews

Ideally, the response to the reviews will mean that the Press can be confident of the quality and value of the project and that, where appropriate, the author has taken advantage of the reviews to improve the quality of the work as proposed. In these circumstances, the editor can proceed with internal approval of the proposal and provide a pack of the relevant proposal and review documents to the Press publishing meeting and to the Delegates Meeting.

There will also be good reasons why some reviewer comments are distinguished or rejected and, where the author explains why they have taken this view in their response to the reviews, the editor can proceed with internal approval highlighting the differing positions and the rationale for the author’s preferred approach.

In circumstances where there is a more fundamental difference of opinion between the author and the reviewers, the Press will take a view on how to proceed. This may involve a further round of consultation with the reviewers or the commissioning of additional reviews, it may be that outstanding or unresolved issues lead to the proposal being rejected, or it may lead to the proposing author being asked to reconsider and resubmit their proposal.

Raising concerns about the conduct or quality of reviews

If you have any concerns about the peer review process, we encourage you to raise these with the editor, or to contact the relevant Head of Acquisition, where they will be treated in confidence.

• About Oxford Academic
• Publish journals with us
• University press partners
• What we publish
• New features  
• Open access
• Institutional account management
• Rights and permissions
• Get help with access
• Accessibility
• Advertising
• Media enquiries
• Oxford University Press
• Oxford Languages
• University of Oxford

Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide

• Copyright © 2024 Oxford University Press
• Cookie settings
• Cookie policy
• Privacy policy
• Legal notice

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sign In or Create an Account

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.

37+ SAMPLE Approval Sheet Templates in PDF | MS Word | Google Docs | Google Sheets | Excel | Apple Numbers | Apple Pages

Approval sheet templates | ms word | google docs | google sheets | excel | apple numbers | apple pages, 37+ sample approval sheet templates, what is an approval sheet, yes or no: examples of when to use approval sheets, how to make an approval sheet, what is the approval process, what is an approval sheet in the thesis, does sending approval sheets ensure an approval.

Overtime Approval Sheet Template

Sample Thesis Research Paper Approval Sheet

Document Narrative Report Approval Sheet

Sample Approval Business Plan Sheet

Customer Practical Research Approval Sheet

Product Satisfaction Approval Proposal Sheet

Sample Final Dissertation Feasibility Study Approval Sheet

Project Design Approval Sheet

Sample of Approval Action Research Sheet Example

Thesis Tagalog Signature Approval Checklist

Basic Panel Approval Sheet

Topic Work Immersion Approval Sheet

Qualitative Research Project Topic Approval Sheet

Sample Customer Acceptance Approval Sheet

Specification Internship Report Approval Sheet

Electronics Approval Sheet Research Format

Product Data Expense Approval Sheet

Meal Pattern Menu Approval Manual Sheet

Standards Quantitative Research Department Approval Sheet

Contract Approval Questionnaire Sheet

Dissertation Approval Sheet Template

Internal Approval Sheet

Thesis Prospectus Approval Sheet

Approval Sheet Revisement Record Template

Manuscript Approval Sheet

Simple Approval Sheet Template

Certifiicate of Occupancy Approval Sheet

Formal Approval Sheet Template

Best Practice Approval Sheet

Title and Approval Sheet

Travel Information Approval Sheet

Review and Approval Sheet

University Contract Approval Sheet

School Approval Sheet Template

Approval Sheet Format

Dissertation Signature Approval Sheet

Printable Approval Sheet Template

Major Project Approval Sheet

Why is the approval sheet important, who prepares approval sheets, step 1: write the specific header or title, step 2: insert the introductory statement, step 3: stipulate the terms, step 4: organize the format, step 5: certify the sheet with signature blocks, share this post on your network, you may also like these articles, balancing chemical equations worksheet.

Balancing chemical equations is a fundamental skill in chemistry. Our comprehensive guide to the Balancing Chemical Equations Worksheet provides clear explanations, step-by-step instructions, and practical examples to help you…

Answer Sheet

An answer sheet is a vital tool used in various settings, from academic examinations to business surveys, capturing responses succinctly. This guide delves into the practicalities and design of…

browse by categories

• Questionnaire
• Description
• Reconciliation
• Certificate
• Spreadsheet

Information

• privacy policy
• Terms & Conditions

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

APPROVAL-SHEET.docx

Related Papers

Marlowe Ingles

This sample critique paper may guide novice researchers on how such paper can be made.

nemjee savla

Ms. Daidey Maingi

margery carreon

Reihaneh Shirani

International Journal of Game Theory

Bhaskar Dutta

shukri shukri

My past work contact me through +254792716104

anil kalisetti

saud allehyani

yeshi janexo

specification hand out

Loading Preview

Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.

RELATED PAPERS

Vetus Papovic

Muhammad Abdulsater

Mahfuzul Islam

Vetjiua Hengari

Randy A Musa

Composites Science and Technology

Bernard Drouin

Jaymark Camacho

Lexie Casey

Melanie Moses

suresh nethaji M , Uvan Mca

JOSEPH OFFIONG

Evidence review work group

Susanne Hempel

Thomas Macken

Proceedings of the May 19-22, 1980, national computer conference on - AFIPS '80

Dennis Tsichritzis

Kamolwan Boonpang

Diego Masaquiza

Kundan Prasad

International Journals for Researchers [ER Publication, WOAR Journals, IJEAS and IJEART]

Olga N Ivanova

Alexander Yusti

Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine

Kristi Bache

RELATED TOPICS

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

• Skip to main content
• Skip to FDA Search
• Skip to in this section menu
• Skip to footer links

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.

U.S. Food and Drug Administration

•   Search
•   Menu
• News & Events
• FDA Newsroom
• Press Announcements

FDA Approves and Authorizes Updated mRNA COVID-19 Vaccines to Better Protect Against Currently Circulating Variants

FDA News Release

Today, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved and granted emergency use authorization (EUA) for updated mRNA COVID-19 vaccines (2024-2025 formula) to include a monovalent (single) component that corresponds to the Omicron variant KP.2 strain of SARS-CoV-2. The mRNA COVID-19 vaccines have been updated with this formula to more closely target currently circulating variants and provide better protection against serious consequences of COVID-19, including hospitalization and death. Today’s actions relate to updated mRNA COVID-19 vaccines manufactured by ModernaTX Inc. and Pfizer Inc.

In early June, the FDA advised manufacturers of licensed and authorized COVID-19 vaccines that the COVID-19 vaccines (2024-2025 formula) should be monovalent JN.1 vaccines. Based on the further evolution of SARS-CoV-2 and a rise in cases of COVID-19, the agency subsequently determined and advised manufacturers that the preferred JN.1-lineage for the COVID-19 vaccines (2024-2025 formula) is the KP.2 strain, if feasible.

“Vaccination continues to be the cornerstone of COVID-19 prevention,” said Peter Marks, M.D., Ph.D., director of the FDA’s Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research. “These updated vaccines meet the agency’s rigorous, scientific standards for safety, effectiveness, and manufacturing quality. Given waning immunity of the population from previous exposure to the virus and from prior vaccination, we strongly encourage those who are eligible to consider receiving an updated COVID-19 vaccine to provide better protection against currently circulating variants.”

The updated mRNA COVID-19 vaccines include Comirnaty and Spikevax, both of which are approved for individuals 12 years of age and older, and the Moderna COVID-19 Vaccine and Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine, both of which are authorized for emergency use for individuals 6 months through 11 years of age.

What You Need to Know

• Unvaccinated individuals 6 months through 4 years of age are eligible to receive three doses of the updated, authorized Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine or two doses of the updated, authorized Moderna COVID-19 Vaccine.
• Individuals 6 months through 4 years of age who have previously been vaccinated against COVID-19 are eligible to receive one or two doses of the updated, authorized Moderna or Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccines (timing and number of doses to administer depends on the previous COVID-19 vaccine received).
• Individuals 5 years through 11 years of age regardless of previous vaccination are eligible to receive a single dose of the updated, authorized Moderna or Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccines; if previously vaccinated, the dose is administered at least 2 months after the last dose of any COVID-19 vaccine.
• Individuals 12 years of age and older are eligible to receive a single dose of the updated, approved Comirnaty or the updated, approved Spikevax; if previously vaccinated, the dose is administered at least 2 months since the last dose of any COVID-19 vaccine.
• Additional doses are authorized for certain immunocompromised individuals ages 6 months through 11 years of age as described in the Moderna COVID-19 Vaccine and Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine fact sheets.

Individuals who receive an updated mRNA COVID-19 vaccine may experience similar side effects as those reported by individuals who previously received mRNA COVID-19 vaccines and as described in the respective prescribing information or fact sheets. The updated vaccines are expected to provide protection against COVID-19 caused by the currently circulating variants. Barring the emergence of a markedly more infectious variant of SARS-CoV-2, the FDA anticipates that the composition of COVID-19 vaccines will need to be assessed annually, as occurs for seasonal influenza vaccines.

For today’s approvals and authorizations of the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines, the FDA assessed manufacturing and nonclinical data to support the change to include the 2024-2025 formula in the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines. The updated mRNA vaccines are manufactured using a similar process as previous formulas of these vaccines. The mRNA COVID-19 vaccines have been administered to hundreds of millions of people in the U.S., and the benefits of these vaccines continue to outweigh their risks.

On an ongoing basis, the FDA will review any additional COVID-19 vaccine applications submitted to the agency and take appropriate regulatory action.

The approval of Comirnaty (COVID-19 Vaccine, mRNA) (2024-2025 Formula) was granted to BioNTech Manufacturing GmbH. The EUA amendment for the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine (2024-2025 Formula) was issued to Pfizer Inc.

The approval of Spikevax (COVID-19 Vaccine, mRNA) (2024-2025 Formula) was granted to ModernaTX Inc. and the EUA amendment for the Moderna COVID-19 Vaccine (2024-2025 Formula) was issued to ModernaTX Inc.

Related Information

• Comirnaty (COVID-19 Vaccine, mRNA) (2024-2025 Formula)
• Spikevax (COVID-19 Vaccine, mRNA) (2024-2025 Formula)
• Moderna COVID-19 Vaccine (2024-2025 Formula)
• Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine (2024-2025 Formula)
• FDA Resources for the Fall Respiratory Illness Season
• Updated COVID-19 Vaccines for Use in the United States Beginning in Fall 2024
• June 5, 2024, Meeting of the Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee

The FDA, an agency within the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, protects the public health by assuring the safety, effectiveness, and security of human and veterinary drugs, vaccines and other biological products for human use, and medical devices. The agency also is responsible for the safety and security of our nation’s food supply, cosmetics, dietary supplements, radiation-emitting electronic products, and for regulating tobacco products.