The Methods to My Madness

Hey readers!

It's been a productive few days -- here's what I've been up to! This past week, I've been working on my Methods Assignment, where we were given the task of honing in on the methods of 4 (I did 5) sources, examining their methods, and applying their findings to my initial idea of my methods. Since I turned it in yesterday, here's what some exciting new information I found.

Dab, Squidward...Dab!

Although going into this project, I definitely knew I'd need a quantitative method to perform tests to optimize the HemaDrop preparation method to create uniform thin solid films of blood. I was like Squidward in this parade: I knew what I wanted to do (dab, aka develop a solid experimental design), but I need some instigation.

Nonetheless, studying the methods of others allowed me to determine specifically the type of experimental procedure I want to conduct. Additionally, sources, like Acharya et al and Dar et al, emphasized the importance of using controls in experimental studies. In this way, I can prove causation from the results from using hyper-hydrophilic films by manipulating variables in a controlled manner.

Triggered...

Additionally, the important aspect of all procedures was the emphasis on consistent, reproducible sample preparation. For this, I definitely need to establish a clear protocol for sample preparation. Another aspect I realized about my methods was that to check sample variability, more participants should be used than just me. In this way, I can greatly increase the validity of my study. To get these participants, I will need to adapt our current IRB approval and consent forms to apply directly to my project. I feel good about this, as I was part of the IRB approval process at ASU, so I have some level of experience. The laboratories we work at are already Biosafety Level 2, which is required for obtaining human blood samples. In this way, my research will also be ethical. I will most likely use fellow interns as participants (convenience sampling), as they will be willing to be pricked (even though it's painless) and at the lab anyways.

That's me crossing over my methods section and nailing the 3-pointer.

An unexpected part of my methods that I uncovered with the methods assignment was that I definitely want to incorporate qualitative observations into my methods. As seen in Acharya's thesis, specific criteria like phase separation, cracking, cratering, and lack of uniformity can be used to classify samples and explain quantitative results. This will really give my research a holistic perspective that would otherwise be lacking.

I also realized that our procedure for capillary sampling can be much more streamlined. Although we did use the correct grade lancet for pricking finger tips, specific procedures, like those outlined in Fan et al, which employ rubefacients (dilate the capillaries) and capillary tubes, increase the validity of the results, as those are the standard of care for obtaining microliters of blood from patients.

Capillary sampling in action!

By following a more standardized procedure, our results can be more standardized and replicable.

Now... what am I worried about?? 

Rip...

A major concern that I have with my research right now is making sure I have enough time to collect data and perform all my experiments within a few weeks. I'm trying to fix this by planning out a clear schedule with Dr. Herbots and getting ahead on testing by starting in January (probably). By next week, I should have a clear picture of my research plan and get a headstart on my proposal!

Well, in the meantime, let's keep loving blood and doing some fun research!

Cheers,
Yash

(604)