Factors Associated With Successful Research Departments

Liaw, Winston; Eden, Aimee R.; Coffman, Megan; Nagaraj, Meera; Bazemore, Andrew

doi:10.22454/fammed.2018.652014

Cited by 13 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We found that a high impact research program requires strong support for research from leadership, thematic areas of research to attract donor funding, mentorship, fostering of local, national, and international collaborations, methodological and infrastructure support, and research training and capacity building. These ndings are consistent with previous studies that have explored factors associated with successful primary care research programs and research productivity (14,(31)(32)(33)(34).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

“…A signi cant strength of this project includes the framing of the analysis using a socioecological theoretical model (17) that allowed for the examination the primary care research enterprise at three levels of in uence including at the macro level not previously explored by other theoretical/conceptual frameworks (31)(32)(33). Another strength was the inclusion of perspectives from a broad range of key informants including several international informants.…”

Section: Strengths and Limitationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Key informants perspectives on creating a high impact research department in family and community medicine: a qualitative project

Gayapersad,

O’Brien,

Meaney

et al. 2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Primary care is integral to the health system and population health. Primary care research is still in development and most academic programs lack effective research investments. High impact primary care research programs are needed to advance the field to ensure a robust primary care system for the future. The project objective was to understand key informants’ views of structures, functions, and processes required to create a high impact research program in an academic primary care department. Methods A descriptive qualitative project with key informants from research programs in primary care. Participants included international research leaders in primary care (n = 10), department of family and community researchers (n = 37) and staff (n = 9) in an academic primary care department, other university leaders (n = 3) and members of the departmental executive leadership team (1 department; 25 members). Semi-structured interviews (n = 27), and focus groups (n = 6) were audio recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using thematic analysis. We used a socioecological framework which described macro, meso, micro levels of influence. Results At the micro level despite barriers with respect to funding, protected time and lack of formal mentorship, personal motivation was a key factor. At the meso level, the organizational structure that promoted collaboration and a sense of connection emerged as a key factor. Specifically research leaders identified a research faculty development pipeline based on equity, diversity, inclusion, indigeneity, and accessibility principles with thematic areas of focus as key enablers. Lastly, at the macro level, an overarching culture and policies that promoted funding and primary care research was associated with high impact programs. Conclusion The alignment/complementarity of micro, meso, and macro level factors influenced the creation of a high impact research department in primary care. High impact research in primary care is facilitated by the development of researchers through formalized and structured mentorship/sponsorship and a department culture that promote primary care research.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

Section: Strengths and Limitationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Key informants perspectives on creating a high impact research department in family and community medicine: a qualitative project

Gayapersad,

O’Brien,

Meaney

et al. 2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Not all residencies will have access to such mentors, as has been seen in the limited number of bright spots of family medicine. 3 Nonetheless, we must develop this tribe of mentors. Whether in person or virtually, we must coalesce to create experiences that will allow residents full exposure to a research-based primary care future.…”

Section: Mentors and Role Modelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Family Medicine Researchers—Why? Who? How? When?

Harper

2021

Fam Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Our findings also suggest that at least some of the research capacity variation may be due to variation in infrastructure features, which also mirrors the conclusions of several prior studies of the variation in research productivity among academic medicine departments. 11,18 Larger departments are more likely located within institutions with more research infrastructure, while smaller departments are located within institutions that are less able to invest in research. In our analysis of the middle 50% of departments by size, few features reached statistical significance for In line with previous suggestions that CTSAs offer an avenue to increase family medicine research, 23 our findings demonstrate that aligning with a CTSA was associated with a climb on the scale.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Within the specialty of family medicine, few departments have highly productive research programs. 10,11,18 The differences between highly productive family medicine departments and less productive departments have been previously described. 11,19 Potential mechanisms for increasing family medicine departmental research productivity include increasing protected faculty time, creating access to expertise in statistics or grant preparation, and developing interdisciplinary research teams.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Infrastructure Features Associated With Increased Department Research Capacity

Seehusen

Koopman

Weidner

et al. 2023

Fam Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: Although researchers have identified factors associated with research capacity in academic medicine departments, less is known about how a department builds research capacity over time. The Association of Departments of Family Medicine’s Research Capacity Scale (RCS) can be used by departments to self-categorize into five capacity levels. Our current study aimed to describe the distribution of infrastructure features and to evaluate how the addition of infrastructure features influences movement of a department along the RCS. Method: An online survey was sent to US family medicine department chairs in August 2021. Survey questions asked chairs to categorize their department’s research capacity in 2018 and 2021 and also about the presence of infrastructure resources and changes in these features across 6 years. Results: The response rate was 54.2%. Departments identified substantial variation in research capacity. Most departments classified into the middle three levels. Departments in higher levels were more likely than those at lower levels to have any of the infrastructure resources in 2021. Department size, as measured by full time faculty, was highly associated with department level. From 2018 and 2021, 43% of responding departments climbed at least one level. Of these, more than half added three or more infrastructure features. Adding a PhD researcher was the feature most associated with increasing research capacity (P<.001). Conclusions: Most departments that increased their research capacity added multiple additional infrastructure features. For chairs of departments without a PhD researcher, this additional resource may be the most impactful investment to increase research capacity.

show abstract

Factors Associated With Successful Research Departments

Cited by 13 publications

References 10 publications

Key informants perspectives on creating a high impact research department in family and community medicine: a qualitative project

Key informants perspectives on creating a high impact research department in family and community medicine: a qualitative project

Family Medicine Researchers—Why? Who? How? When?

Infrastructure Features Associated With Increased Department Research Capacity

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About