Barriers and facilitators to general practitioners participating in implementation research: a mixed methods systematic review protocol

Abstract

Objective: The aim of the review is to critically appraise and synthesize quantitative and qualitative evidence on the barriers and facilitators to general practitioners participating in implementation research for the purposes of evaluating translation of evidence into practice. Introduction: General practice is a distinct medical specialty that requires its own specific research; therefore, general practitioner participation in research is key in translating new knowledge into practice. However, recruiting general practitioners to research as participants is challenging. Understanding general practitioner behavior in relation to their participation in implementation research is critical. Inclusion criteria: Implementation studies that include general practitioners in primary health care settings will be considered. This review will consider quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods studies from developed countries investigating barriers and facilitators to general practitioners participating in implementation research. Methods: The review will be conducted in accordance with JBI methodology for mixed methods systematic reviews. The main databases accessed will be MEDLINE and Scopus, and include studies published in English between 2008 and the present. Two independent reviewers will read and screen relevant articles, assess for quality, extract study characteristics, and synthesize data. This review is taking an integrated approach involving transformed quantitative data. Primary outcome measures will include study details and outcomes related to the research question. Qualitative and transformed quantitative data will be mapped to the Theoretical Domains Framework at extraction phase. Synthesis will include identified barriers and facilitators categorized using the Theoretical Domains Framework indicators to provide future research and implementation recommendations for recruiting general practitioners to implementation research. Systematic review registration number: PROSPERO (CRD42020176759)

Standardizing Generalist Definitions to Improve Evidence in General Medicine: Addressing Diverse Interpretations and Lack of Consistency

“…The definition of generalist varied in studies targeting GM, FM, and PC from several countries worldwide, including Japan. Definitions included physicians providing initial patient care, 12–16 those without organ-specific specialization, 17 those who completed specific certifications or training in FM or GM, 11 , 18–21 and physicians registered or affiliated with specific countries or regions. 22–28 Several studies focused on physicians affiliated with particular databases or organizations.…”

Barreras para el desarrollo de investigación en medicina familiar en Iberoamérica: Revisión sistemática

“…La identificación de barreras que impactan en la generación de conocimiento es un tema de interés actual, debido a la importancia que tiene en la atención a la salud 43,44 . Realizar investigación en medicina familiar representa un reto frente a la alta demanda asistencial que implica la profesión; no obstante, su desarrollo es crucial en la generación de conocimiento para implementar políticas y programas de salud sustentados en la evidencia, por lo que su promoción debe ser prioritaria y convertirse en un eje dentro de los sistemas de salud 43,[45][46][47]…”