Enhancing research capacity across healthcare and higher education sectors: development and evaluation of an integrated model

Abstract

BackgroundWith current policy in healthcare research, in the United Kingdom and internationally, focused on development of research excellence in individuals and teams, building capacity for implementation and translation of research is paramount among the professionals who use that research in daily practice. The judicious use of research outcomes and evaluation of best evidence and practice in healthcare is integrally linked to the research capacity and capabilities of the workforce. In addition to promoting high quality research, mechanisms for actively enhancing research capacity more generally must be in place to address the complexities that both undermine and facilitate this activity.MethodsA comprehensive collaborative model for building research capacity in one health professional group, speech and language therapy, was developed in a region within the UK and is presented here. The North East of England and the strong research ethos of this profession in addressing complex interventions offered a fertile context for developing and implementing a model which integrated the healthcare and university sectors. Two key frameworks underpin this model. The first addresses the individual participants’ potential trajectory from research consciousness to research participative to research active. The second embeds a model developed for general practitioners into a broader framework of practice-academic partnership and knowledge and skills exchange, and considers external drivers and impacts on practice and patient outcomes as key elements.Results and discussionThe integration of practice and academia has been successful in building a culture of research activity within one healthcare profession in a region in the UK and has resulted, to date, in a series of research related outcomes. Understanding the key components of this partnership and the explicit strategies used has driven the implementation of the model and are discussed here.ConclusionsA strong, equitable collaboration between clinical and academic partners working towards a common outcome can enhance the use of research within the healthcare workforce and contribute actively to the research process. A set of propositions are specified to facilitate both transferability of this partnership model to other professional groups and clinical teams and evaluation of the model components.

Radiation therapists' and radiation oncology medical physicists' perceptions of work and the working environment in Australia: a qualitative study

“…To enhance RTs’ and ROMPs’ roles, it may be beneficial for organisations to provide more opportunities for clinical staff to be actively involved in research and support them to lead projects relating to evidence‐based practice in the clinical environment (Whitworth et al . ). The current workplace modelling for radiation therapy in Australia indicates that each department should have at least one RT in a research‐active position (Radiation Therapy Advisory Panel ).…”

Enhancing collaborative practice-based research in an academic health science center

“…[2,24] (4) Establish and strengthen partnerships with scientists in other disciplines and academic departments. [21,26] (5) Identify and evaluate metrics. [12,24] Specific recommended actions are outlined in Table 5.…”

Evaluating International Research Ethics Capacity Development: An Empirical Approach

“…The methods and tools presented in this paper build on previously published approaches for single-program evaluation in research and research ethics (Ali et al, 2012; Hyder et al, 2007; Webster et al, 2011; Whitworth et al, 2012) and single-institution assessment in research ethics (Hyder et al, 2013). The previously described published models for evaluating research capacity development offered by Whitworth et al and Webster et al provide good examples of how programs can utilize multidimensional conceptual models for embedded program evaluation.…”

“…Seemingly relevant models seek to capture individual characteristics and training processes that influence trainee engagement with research, as well as the interactions between individuals’ research accomplishments and “external drivers” such as institutional, political, social, economic, and cultural factors (Webster et al, 2011; Whitworth, Haining, & Stringer, 2012). For example, Whitworth et al propose an evaluation model that uses two frameworks to assess (1) the “individual participant’s engagement in the research process” (their level of research activity), and (2) the “practice-academic partnership” (the institutional and value-based environment that influences the development and application of research knowledge and skills) (Whitworth et al, 2012). The principal strength of this model is its consideration of the overlapping terrains of individual, program, and external level factors that influence capacity development.…”