Background There are increasing opportunities for healthcare professionals outside medicine to be involved in and lead clinical research. However, there are few roles within these professions that include time for research. In order to develop such roles, and evaluate effective use of this time, the range of impacts of this clinical academic activity need to be valued and understood by healthcare leaders and managers. To date, these impacts have not been comprehensively explored, but are suggested to extend beyond traditional quantitative impact metrics, such as publications, citations and funding awards. Methods Ten databases, four grey literature repositories and a naïve web search engine were systematically searched for articles reporting impacts of clinical academic activity by healthcare professionals outside medicine. Specifically, this did not include the direct impacts of the research findings, rather the impacts of the research activity. All stages of the review were performed by a minimum of two reviewers and reported impacts were categorised qualitatively according to a modified VICTOR (making Visible the ImpaCT Of Research) framework. Results Of the initial 2704 identified articles, 20 were eligible for inclusion. Identified impacts were mapped to seven themes: impacts for patients; impacts for the service provision and workforce; impacts to research profile, culture and capacity; economic impacts; impacts on staff recruitment and retention; impacts to knowledge exchange; and impacts to the clinical academic. Conclusions Several overlapping sub-themes were identified across the main themes. These included the challenges and benefits of balancing clinical and academic roles, the creation and implementation of new evidence, and the development of collaborations and networks. These may be key areas for organisations to explore when looking to support and increase academic activity among healthcare professionals outside medicine. The modified VICTOR tool is a useful starting point for individuals and organisations to record the impact of their research activity. Further work is needed to explore standardised methods of capturing research impact that address the full range of impacts identified in this systematic review and are specific to the context of clinical academics outside medicine.
Background: HTLV-1 is a neglected sexually transmitted infection despite being the cause of disabling neurological disease HTLV-1-associated myelopathy/tropical spastic paraparesis (HAM/TSP). There is no treatment for this infection and public health policies are essential to reduce its transmission. However, there are no data to support adequate cost-effective analysis in this field. The aim of this study was to obtain health state utility values for individuals with HAM/TSP and HTLV-1 asymptomatic carriers (AC). The impact of both states on quality of life (QoL) is described and compared to other diseases. Methods: A cross-sectional observational study of 141 individuals infected with HTLV-1 (79 with HAM/TSP and 62 AC) from three Brazilian states (Rio de Janeiro, São Paulo and Alagoas) and from the United Kingdom. Participants completed a validated general health questionnaire (EQ-5D, Euroqol) from which country specific health state utility values are generated. Clinical and epidemiological data were collated. Principal findings: Health state utility value for HAM/TSP was 0.2991. QoL for 130 reported clinical conditions ranges from 0.35 to 0.847. 12% reported their quality of life as worse as death. Low QoL was associated with severity rather than duration of disease with a moderate inverse correlation between QoL and Osame’s Motor Disability Score (-0.4933) Patients who are wheelchair dependent had lowest QoL whilst those still walking unaided had the highest. AC also reported impaired QoL (0.7121) compared to general population. Conclusion: HTLV-1 and its associated neurological disease has a marked impact on QoL. This study provides robust data to support the development of cost-utility analysis of interventions for HTLV-1.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.