DPI Project Milestone: outline of 10 strategic points
This is the first pass, so it will be wrong in places — and that is fine. What it must not be is internally inconsistent, because every later document inherits this structure.
Editorial process
Last reviewed · August 15, 2026
An outline, and it has to be internally consistent
The ten points are a compression of the whole project into a page, and the brief says they must be clear, simple, correct and aligned so the project is doable, valuable and credible. At the outline stage the pressure is different from the final draft: you are originating rather than reconciling, and it is entirely acceptable for individual points to be provisional. What is not acceptable is inconsistency between them, because the outline is the skeleton every later document hangs on. Work top-down. The topic constrains the literature, the literature establishes the problem, the problem generates the clinical question, and the question determines the method — each point should be derivable from the one above it. There is a sequencing decision worth making deliberately at this stage: whether to start from a problem you have observed or from a topic you find interesting. The first is safer: an observed problem comes with local evidence and someone who cares about it.
Two of the ten do most of the work and repay disproportionate attention. The problem statement is one: at outline stage it is usually a topic in disguise, and the test is whether it has a population, a magnitude and a gap between what happens and what should. The clinical question is the other, because everything downstream is derived from it — if the question is comparative your method must produce a comparison, and if it asks about experience no amount of outcome data answers it. Being honest about doability matters here too, and it is easier now than later: the outline is where a project that requires two hundred patients you will never see, or an outcome nobody records, should be caught and narrowed. A point that is provisional should be marked as provisional rather than written with false confidence, since your committee can help with an acknowledged uncertainty and cannot help with one you have concealed.
Likely learning objectives
Inferred from the brief — check these against your own rubric.
- 01Derive each strategic point from the one above it.
- 02Distinguish a problem statement from a topic.
- 03Test doability at the earliest possible stage.
- 04Mark provisional points as provisional.
Read the full question
Review every instruction before using the planning guidance that follows.
Course-wide instructions that accompany this question
Name: Assignment Rubric Grid View List View Excellent Good Fair Poor Summarize your interpretation of the frequency data provided in the output for respondent’s age, highest school grade completed, and family income from prior month. 32 (32%) – 35 (35%) The response accurately and clearly explains, in detail, a summary of the frequency distributions for the variables presented. The response accurately and clearly explains, in detail, the number of times the value occurs in the data. The response accurately and clearly explains, in detail, the appearance of the data, the range of data values, and an explanation of extreme values in describing intervals that sufficiently provides an analysis that fully supports the categorization of each variable value. The response includes relevant, specific, and appropriate examples that fully support the explanations provided for each of the areas described. 28 (28%) – 31 (31%) The response accurately summarizes the frequency distributions for the variables presented. The response accurately explains the number of times the value occurs in the data. The response accurately explains the appearance of the data, the range of data values, and explains extreme values in describing intervals that provides an analysis which supports the categorization of each variable value. The response includes relevant, specific, and accurate examples that support the explanations provided for each of the areas described. 25 (25%) – 27 (27%) The response inaccurately or vaguely summarizes the frequency distributions for the variables presented. The response inaccurately or vaguely explains the number of times the value occurs in the data. The response inaccurately or vaguely explains the appearance of the data, the range of data values, and inaccurately or vaguely explains extreme values. An analysis that may support the categorization of each variable value is inaccurate or vague. The response includes inaccurate and irrelevant examples that may support the explanations provided for each of the areas described. 0 (0%) – 24 (24%) The response inaccurately and vaguely summarizes the frequency distributions for the variables presented, or it is missing. The response inaccurately and vaguely explains the number of times the value occurs in the data, or it is missing. The response inaccurately and vaguely explains the appearance of the data, the range of data values, and an explanation of extreme values, or it is missing. An analysis that does not support the categorization of each variable values is provided, or it is missing. The response includes inaccurate and vague examples that do not support the explanations provided for each of the areas described, or it is missing. Summarize your interpretation of the descriptive statistics provided in the output for respondent’s age, highest school grade completed, race and ethnicity, currently employed, and family income from prior month. 45 (45%) – 50 (50%) The response accurately and clearly summarizes in detail the interpretation of the descriptive statistics provided. The response accurately and clearly evaluates in detail each of the variables presented, including an accurate and complete description of the sample size, the mean, the median, standard deviation, and the size and spread of the data. 40 (40%) – 44 (44%) The response accurately summarizes the interpretation of the descriptive statistics provided. The response accurately explains evaluates each of the variables presented, including an accurate description of the sample size, the mean, the median, standard deviation, and the size and spread of the data. 35 (35%) – 39 (39%) The response inaccurately or vaguely summarizes the interpretation of the descriptive statistics provided. The response inaccurately or vaguely evaluates each of the variables presented, including an inaccurate or vague description of the sample size, the mean, the median, the standard deviation, and the size and spread of the data. 0 (0%) – 34 (34%) The response inaccurately and vaguely summarizes the interpretation of the descriptive statistics provided, or it is missing. The response inaccurately and vaguely evaluates each of the variables presented, including an inaccurate and vague description of the sample size, the mean, the median, the standard deviation, and the size and spread of the data, or it is missing. Written Expression and Formatting – Paragraph Development and Organization: Paragraphs make clear points that support well-developed ideas, flow logically, and demonstrate continuity of ideas. Sentences are carefully focused—neither long and rambling nor short and lacking substance. A clear and comprehensive purpose statement and introduction is provided which delineates all required criteria. 5 (5%) – 5 (5%) Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity. A clear and comprehensive purpose statement, introduction, and conclusion is provided which delineates all required criteria. 4 (4%) – 4 (4%) Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 80% of the time. Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment is stated, yet is brief and not descriptive. 3 (3%) – 3 (3%) Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 60%–79% of the time. Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment is vague or off topic. 0 (0%) – 2 (2%) Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity < 60% of the time. No purpose statement, introduction, or conclusion was provided. Written Expression and Formatting – English writing standards: Correct grammar, mechanics, and proper punctuation 5 (5%) – 5 (5%) Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors. 4 (4%) – 4 (4%) Contains a few (1 or 2) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. 3 (3%) – 3 (3%) Contains several (3 or 4) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. 0 (0%) – 2 (2%) Contains many (≥ 5) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the reader’s understanding. Written Expression and Formatting – The paper follows correct APA format for title page, headings, font, spacing, margins, indentations, page numbers, parenthetical/in-text citations, and reference list. 5 (5%) – 5 (5%) Uses correct APA format with no errors. 4 (4%) – 4 (4%) Contains a few (1 or 2) APA format errors. 3 (3%) – 3 (3%) Contains several (3 or 4) APA format errors. 0 (0%) – 2 (2%) Contains many (≥ 5) APA format errors. Total Points: 100 Name: Assignment Rubric
Turn the brief into deliverables
- 01All ten points, derived top-down.
- 02A problem statement with population, magnitude and gap.
- 03A clinical question that determines the method.
- 04An honest assessment of doability.
- 05Provisional points identified as such.
Topic, problem, question, method
Topic and literature
Establish the area and what the literature already shows.
The problem statement
State a specific, evidenced problem with a population and a gap.
The clinical question
Operationalise the problem into an answerable question.
Method and measurement
Derive the approach and what will be measured.
Doability
Assess whether the project can be run where you are.
Evidence enough to justify each point
Recommended databases
- Your DPI Proposal Template
- CINAHL
- PubMed Central
- Your own site's data
Search sequence
- 1.Check whether local data exists for the problem before writing the statement.
- 2.Search the literature to confirm the problem is recognised beyond your setting.
- 3.Establish how many eligible patients your site actually sees.
- 4.Test whether the outcome you want is already being recorded.
Reference shortlist
These are authoritative starting points, not a ready-made bibliography. A qualified reviewer must confirm that each source fits the assignment and supports the claim beside which it is cited.
Nothing here is cleared for citation until you have read it.
- 01
Human Subjects Research Design
StatPearls, NCBI Bookshelf · 2023
On how a question determines design, which is the derivation the outline has to hold.
- 02
Epidemiology Of Study Design
StatPearls, NCBI Bookshelf · 2023
The design catalogue the method point selects from.
- 03
Explanation and elaboration of the SQUIRE (Standards for Quality Improvement Reporting Excellence) Guidelines, V.2.0: examples of SQUIRE elements
BMJ Quality & Safety · 2016
Shows what a rationale must contain, which is what separates a problem statement from a topic.
- 04
County Health Rankings & Roadmaps
University of Wisconsin Population Health Institute and Robert Wood Johnson Foundation · 2025
Local comparative data, useful for establishing a problem's magnitude where you are.
Review before submission
Common mistakes
- Writing a topic where a problem statement is required.
- Choosing a method before the question is settled.
- Committing to a scale the setting cannot support.
- Writing provisional points with false confidence.
Submission checklist
- Can each point be derived from the one above it?
- Does your problem statement have a number and a place?
- Would your method actually answer your question?
- Is the project doable in your setting and timeframe?
Use this guide to plan and review your own work. Follow your institution's rules and read our academic-integrity policy.
Written by
Aaron Bishop
MA, Education
assignment interpretation and research-methods coaching across disciplines
Aaron leads the EssayCrackers editorial desk. He works on how assignment briefs are read — what a rubric is actually asking for, and where students most often answer a different question than the one set.
Reviewed by
Dr. Nathan Cole
PhD, Rhetoric & Composition
Argumentation and thesis development
Nathan teaches first-year composition and directs a university writing center. He reviews EssayCrackers guides for argumentative soundness and citation accuracy.