Fostering Academic-Clinical Research Partnerships

Albert, Nancy M.; Chipps, Esther; Olson, Ann C Falkenberg; Hand, Linda Liu; Harmon, Michelle M.; Heitschmidt, Mary; Klein, Colleen J.; Lefaiver, Cheryl; Wood, Teresa

doi:10.1097/nna.0000000000000744

Cited by 31 publications

(46 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…There is a dearth of evidence within many countries pertaining to the notion and mechanism of research capacity building within medical and NMAHP professions (Matus et al, 2018;Ryan et al, 2019;Sabey et al, 2019;Viney et al, 2019). Another interesting analogy is in the use of the term nurse scientist and/or nursing science (Albert et al, 2019;Jeffs et al, 2013). Certainly, within Europe (but excluding the United Kingdom), NMAHP research activity is frequently described utilising the term nurse scientist or nursing science.…”

Section: Definition and Limitationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

International Perspectivesof Nurses, Midwives and Allied Health Professionals Clinical Academic Roles: Are We at Tipping Point?

Carrick-Sen¹,

Moore²,

Davidson³

et al. 2019

IJPBLHSC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Healthcare research activity improves patient outcomes. Nurses, Midwives and Allied Health Professions (NMAHPs) make an important contribution to clinical research. Within the United Kingdom (UK), there is a 25-year history of increasing healthcare research capacity and capability through clinical academic roles. Medical colleagues were the first to introduce the role in 2005. In 2007, a national policy identified inequalities in access to and success of research training fellowships between medical and nursing healthcare professionals. This was followed by a number of national initiatives, which continue to evolve to the present day. There is evidence that the UK has reached the 'tipping point' to increase NMAHP research capacity and capability through clinical academic roles. Despite these initiatives substantial gaps remain. Outside, the UK, the term 'clinical academic' is not well understood. There is evidence of the presence of senior clinical academic roles, a clinical professor within Australia and the United States, for example, but there is a lack of opportunities and of a formulised research training pathway at a junior level. There is interest and appreciation of the NMAHP research-active clinical academic within the clinical setting in the Nordic countries and China, but the pace of change is slow due to co-existing priorities involving change and innovation. There is a need to develop and agree both national and international definitions that describes the NMAHP research-focused clinical academic role activity.

show abstract

Section: Definition and Limitationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

International Perspectivesof Nurses, Midwives and Allied Health Professionals Clinical Academic Roles: Are We at Tipping Point?

Carrick-Sen¹,

Moore²,

Davidson³

et al. 2019

IJPBLHSC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Albert et al. (2019) proposed researching social determinants of health (SDoH) through academic‐clinical partnerships reduces cost and improves health outcomes. Participants in this study indicated a scholarly interest in population health (77%), health inequities (58%), and healthcare policy (30%).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats analysis– A study of Association of Community/Public Health Nursing Educators members

Kuchler

Garner

Whitten

et al. 2020

Public Health Nursing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Professional nursing organizations are at the forefront of the healthcare industry, responding to and transforming the dynamic field of nursing. Such organizations offer members resources and opportunities for professional development which leads to advancement of the profession (Gaines, 2019). Periodically, organizations must examine membership to determine future direction. It is critical for organizational leadership to empower members with education, networking, and research opportunities. Benner et al. (2009) recommend that professional organizations serve as a medium for mentoring and directing the

show abstract

“…Telephone clinics were run by the rheumatology clinical nurse specialists who assisted the PIPPRA team in study recruitment. This experience demonstrates the importance of effective and collaborative research-clinical partnerships (Albert et al, 2019), where clinicians act as important gatekeepers to potential research participants. In MEDRA, although limited to people with access to social media accounts, recruitment through social media platforms led to a larger reach of people living with RA and recruitment was highly successful.…”

Section: Implications For Research and Policymentioning

confidence: 91%

The impact of COVID-19 on clinical research: the PIPPRA and MEDRA experience

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has had a significant impact on clinical research. This paper aims to provide an insight into how the COVID-19 pandemic, associated public health restrictions and international guidance on the conduct of clinical research impacted two clinical rheumatology research trials - the Physiotherapist-led Intervention to Promote Physical Activity in Rheumatoid Arthritis (PIPPRA) and the MEDiterranean diet in Rheumatoid Arthritis (MEDRA) projects. Methods: The March 2019 public health restrictions imposed to mitigate the risk of COVID-19 occurred at a time when PIPPRA was in the process of delivering assessment and intervention on a face-to-face basis (n=48) and MEDRA had commenced recruitment. Participants in PIPPRA and MEDRA had a diagnosis of rheumatoid arthritis, with some being immunosuppressed and thus at a higher risk for COVID-19. The decision-making processes of both trials is outlined to demonstrate the required amendments to continue in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. Results: Amendments to PIPPRA and MEDRA trial protocols were agreed and received ethical and funder approval. Both trials switched from a face-to-face delivery to a telehealth using online platforms. The PIPPRA study was paused for five months (April-August 2020), resulting in n=33 (60%) deviations from assessment protocol. MEDRA switched from face-to-face to online recruitment with 20% (n=35/44) deviation in recruitment. Of the n=18 participants who consented to participating in a face-to-face trial, just n=2 (11%) opted to engage with telehealth delivery of the intervention. MEDRA assessment and intervention deviations were 100% as no sessions were completed as planned in 2020. Conclusions: The COVID-19 pandemic has severely impacted the PIPPRA and MEDRA clinical trials. Moving face-to-face clinical research to telehealth delivery may not be the panacea it is purported to be. Our experiences may be of benefit to researchers, clinicians, and funders in seeking to continue clinical research during a global pandemic.

show abstract

Fostering Academic-Clinical Research Partnerships

Cited by 31 publications

References 27 publications

International Perspectivesof Nurses, Midwives and Allied Health Professionals Clinical Academic Roles: Are We at Tipping Point?

International Perspectivesof Nurses, Midwives and Allied Health Professionals Clinical Academic Roles: Are We at Tipping Point?

A strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats analysis– A study of Association of Community/Public Health Nursing Educators members

The impact of COVID-19 on clinical research: the PIPPRA and MEDRA experience

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About