Background Research capacity building (RCB) initiatives have gained steady momentum in health settings across the globe to reduce the gap between research evidence and health practice and policy. RCB strategies are typically multidimensional, comprising several initiatives targeted at different levels within health organisations. Research education and training is a mainstay strategy targeted at the individual level and yet, the evidence for research education in health settings is unclear. This review scopes the literature on research education programs for nurses and allied health professionals, delivered and evaluated in healthcare settings in high-income countries. Methods The review was conducted systematically in accordance with the Joanna Briggs Institute scoping review methodology. Eleven academic databases and numerous grey literature platforms were searched. Data were extracted from the included full texts in accordance with the aims of the scoping review. A narrative approach was used to synthesise findings. Program characteristics, approaches to program evaluation and the outcomes reported were extracted and summarised. Results Database searches for peer-reviewed and grey literature yielded 12,457 unique records. Following abstract and title screening, 207 full texts were reviewed. Of these, 60 records were included. Nine additional records were identified on forward and backward citation searching for the included records, resulting in a total of 69 papers describing 68 research education programs. Research education programs were implemented in fourteen different high-income countries over five decades. Programs were multifaceted, often encompassed experiential learning, with half including a mentoring component. Outcome measures largely reflected lower levels of Barr and colleagues’ modified Kirkpatrick educational outcomes typology (e.g., satisfaction, improved research knowledge and confidence), with few evaluated objectively using traditional research milestones (e.g., protocol completion, manuscript preparation, poster, conference presentation). Few programs were evaluated using organisational and practice outcomes. Overall, evaluation methods were poorly described. Conclusion Research education remains a key strategy to build research capacity for nurses and allied health professionals working in healthcare settings. Evaluation of research education programs needs to be rigorous and, although targeted at the individual, must consider longer-term and broader organisation-level outcomes and impacts. Examining this is critical to improving clinician-led health research and the translation of research into clinical practice.

Background Group home frontline staff have a critical role in implementing service policies, yet research typically examines implementation issues from an organisational perspective. The aim of this study was to explore the self‐perception of frontline staff about their role in group homes for people with intellectual disability. Method Constructivist grounded theory methodology guided the study. Data were collected with frontline staff through semistructured interviews and participant observations. Coding and sorting methods were used to analyse participants’ self‐perception. Results Frontline staff felt they were valuable contributors who knew the service setting and residents well. Despite this staff felt powerless in their roles, excluded from organisational dialogue, stressed and exhausted. Conclusions Frontline staff have critical insight into service implementation although disability service organisations may limit their capacity to contribute to this. Further action could explore new ways to better nurture frontline staff engagement in organisational dialogue.

Objective: To determine the contextual factors influencing research and research capacity building in rural health settings.Design: Qualitative study using semi-structured telephone interviews to collect data regarding health professionals' research education and capacity building.Analysis involved inductive coding using Braun and Clark's thematic analysis; and deductive mapping to the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Setting: Victorian rural health services and university campuses. Participants: Twenty senior rural health managers, academics and/or research coordinators. Participants had at least three years' experience in rural public health, health-related research or health education settings. Main outcome measures: Contextual factors influencing the operationalisation and prioritisation of research capacity building in rural health services. Results: Findings reflected the CFIR domains and constructs: intervention characteristics (relative advantage); outer setting (cosmopolitanism, external policies and incentives); inner setting (implementation climate, readiness for implementation); characteristics of individuals (self-efficacy); and process (planning, engaging). Findings illustrated the implementation context and the complex contextual tensions, which either prevent or enhance research capacity building in rural health services. Conclusions: Realising the Australian Government's vision for improved health service provision and health outcomes in rural areas requires a strong culture of research and research capacity building in rural health services. Low levels of rural research funding, chronic workforce shortages and the tension between undertaking research and delivering health care, all significantly impact the operationalisation and prioritisation of research capacity building in rural health | 411 WONG SHEE et al.

Background: Paperwork can transform organisational aims into action in group homes, but it can also be problematic for staff. The aim of this study was to explore frontline staff perspectives on paperwork in group homes for people with intellectual disability. Methods: Constructivist grounded theory methodology guided the study. Data were collected from 29 participants through semi-structured interviews, participant observations and journaling. Coding and sorting methods were used to analyse participants' perspectives. Results: Staff have nuanced paperwork perspectives. They described and evaluated paperwork in terms of its value and fit with resident-focused practice. They identified gaps in paperwork and reimagined its design and use. Conclusions: Frontline staffs' reflection suggests some paperwork hinders them from supporting residents well. This suggests organisations could consult better with staff to design paperwork that has a goodness of fit to their practice. Further research could explore how staff manage the limiting characteristics of paperwork.

ObjectivesTo explore and synthesise the evidence relating to features of quality in rural health student placements.DesignScoping review.Data sourcesMEDLINE, CINAHL, Embase, ProQuest, Informit, Scopus, ERIC and several grey literature data sources (1 January 2005 to 13 October 2020).Study selectionThe review included peer-reviewed and grey literature from Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development listed countries that focused on quality of health student placements in regional, rural and remote areas.Data extractionData were extracted regarding the methodological and design characteristics of each data source, and the features suggested to contribute to student placement quality under five categories based on a work-integrated learning framework.ResultsOf 2866 resulting papers, 101 were included for data charting and content analysis. The literature was dominated by medicine and nursing student placement research. No literature explicitly defined quality in rural health student placements, although proxy indicators for quality such as satisfaction, positive experiences, overall effectiveness and perceived value were identified. Content analysis resulted in four overarching domains pertaining to features of rural health student placement quality: (1) learning and teaching in a rural context, (2) rural student placement characteristics, (3) key relationships and (4) required infrastructure.ConclusionThe findings suggest that quality in rural health student placements hinges on contextually specific features. Further research is required to explore these findings and ways in which these features can be measured during rural health student placements.

No abstract

Staff purposefully managed paperwork rather than simply following procedures. Disability service organizations could develop flexible paperwork procedures and include frontline perspectives in paperwork development.

The National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) has transformed the nature of funding available to health and human service organisations to provide services to people with disability in Australia. However, there is relatively scant literature on the rural implementation of the NDIS, particularly how rural NDIS service providers are affected by the NDIS. Researchers conducted semi‐structured interviews with 20 health professionals employed by rural providers, and analysed data using rural and remote health and organisational change frameworks to understand how rural providers were impacted by and responded to the NDIS. The findings suggest rural providers were impacted to differing extents and responded to the NDIS in different ways. Participants reported that disability and community health services were affected more than hospitals and private allied health practices. Impacted rural providers responded by changing the nature and types of services, service processes and their workforce, and redefining organisational characteristics. Impacted rural providers may require additional support to continue providing services, and those less impacted may require other incentives to better engage with the NDIS. Rural proofing of NDIS policy could reveal suitable supports and incentives to ensure rural people with disability can access required services.