Collaborative research in medical education: a discussion of theory and practice

Abstract

CONTEXT Medical education researchers are inherently collaborators. This paper presents a discussion of theoretical frameworks, issues and challenges around collaborative research to prepare medical education researchers to enter into successful collaborations. It gives emphasis to the conceptual issues associated with collaborative research and applies these to medical education research. Although not a systematic literature review, the paper provides a rich discussion of issues which medical education researchers might consider when undertaking collaborative studies.METHODS Building on the work of others, we have classified collaborative research in three dimensions according to: the number of administrative units represented; the number of academic fields present, and the manner in which knowledge is created. Although some literature on collaboration focuses on the more traditional positivist perspective and emphasises outcomes, other literature comes from the constructivist framework, in which research is not driven by hypotheses and the approaches emphasised, but by the interaction between investigator and subject.DISCUSSION Collaborations are more effective when participants overtly clarify their motivations, values, definitions of appropriate data and accepted methodologies. These should be agreed upon prior to commencing a study. The way we currently educate researchers should be restructured if we want them to be able to undertake interdisciplinary research. Despite calls for researchers to be educated differently, most training programmes for developing researchers have demonstrated a limited, if not contrary, response to these calls. CONCLUSIONSCollaborative research in medical education should be driven by the problem being investigated, by the new knowledge gained and by the interpersonal interactions that may be achieved. Success rests on recognising that many of the research problems we, as medical educators, address are fundamentally interdisciplinary in nature. This represents a transition to bridge the dichotomy often presented in medical education between theory building and addressing practical needs.

An evaluation of research capacity building from the Cancer Experiences Collaborative

“…There are different models for collaborative research, for example, the three-dimensional framework of O’Sullivan et al 41 which is based on: the number of different administrative units represented in the research team (institutional context); the number of academic fields present on the research team (homogeneous or heterogeneous), and the manner in which the work is performed and knowledge is created (disciplinarity). However, the question of appropriate models of collaboration for research capacity building remains unanswered and needs to be addressed.…”

Clinician–Educators as Dual Professionals: A Contemporary Reappraisal

“…27 Clinician-educators should rely on collaboration with education professionals rather than striving to embody both professions. But, rather than clinician-educators attempting to fulfill both professional roles, in the current social climate they can be more effective by concentrating on medicine and collaborating with education professionals to create the transdisciplinary model for workplace education and establish optimal conditions to impart medicine's knowledge, skills, and attitudes to learners.…”

An Agenda for Increasing Grant Funding of Emergency Medicine Education Research

“…Multi-institutional, multidisciplinary, and multiprofessional studies often involve larger sample sizes, more generalizable results, and research teams with a broader base of knowledge and expertise. [33][34][35] Topics that are common to many specialties (e.g., trainee competency assessment, procedural training) are potential targets of multidisciplinary investigations and may allow modest funds from a variety of sources to be leveraged into higher impact studies. For example, EM faculty may broaden their focus from "emergency care" to "acute care" topics, thereby leading to collaborations with departments of surgery or medical intensive care.…”