Practitioner Engagement in Activities of the National Dental Practice-Based Research Network (PBRN): 7-Year Results

Abstract

To 1) quantify practitioner activities of the National Dental Practice-Based Research Network (Network) for which Continuing Education (CE) credits were received (study training, videos, webinars, meetings, and symposia); 2) quantify practitioner coauthoring Network publications and presentations; and 3) test whether practitioner characteristics were associated with participation in these activities. Methods: A retrospective analysis of 4361 practitioners who enrolled in the Network between April 12, 2012 and October 12, 2018. Results: Overall, 59% (n = 2586) of practitioners earned CE credit from the Network; among these, 68% (n = 1757) from a video, 38% (n = 993) attended an annual Network meeting, 31% (n = 798) due to training for a Network clinical study, 9% (n = 226) attended a national symposium, and 7% (n = 170) participated in a Network webinar. Members of 2 large group practices earned on average more CEs than practitioners from other practice settings. Four percent (n = 159) of practitioners coauthored a Network presentation or publication. Practitioners who received their dental degree before 2000, were general practitioners, or were members of 2 large group practices, were more likely to have coauthored a publication or presentation. Conclusion: This Network used a broad range of activities to engage community practitioners. These activities were successful in sustaining a high level of practitioner engagement in clinical research and its relevance to everyday clinical practice.

Recruitment strategies and retention rates for five National Dental PBRN studies

“…Practice-based research networks (PBRNs) accelerate science and support the translation of research into routine clinical practice [12]. However, PBRNs have constraints not faced in other research settings; specifically, studies can only require a modest amount of the patients' and practitioners' time and cannot unduly disrupt patient flow [13][14][15]. The National Dental PBRN Network (Network) has operated since 2005 and was integrated as a fully national Network in 2012; the Network is funded through the National Institutes of Health [16].…”

“…The National Dental PBRN Network (Network) has operated since 2005 and was integrated as a fully national Network in 2012; the Network is funded through the National Institutes of Health [16]. The goal of the Network has been to enroll a broad range of practitioners and practice types to optimize generalizability [14][15][16]. It has achieved this by developing a robust National infrastructure to support high rates of sustained participation among enrolled members [14][15][16].…”

“…The goal of the Network has been to enroll a broad range of practitioners and practice types to optimize generalizability [14][15][16]. It has achieved this by developing a robust National infrastructure to support high rates of sustained participation among enrolled members [14][15][16].…”

“…Furthermore, the Network has also used various activities to engage practitioner members. These include providing continuing education credits for attending study training, webinars, seminars, symposiums, and annual meetings, engaging in presentations, publications, and Quick Polls [15]. These activities effectively sustained a high level of practitioner engagement in clinical research and its relevance to everyday clinical practice [15].…”

Structure, function, and productivity from the National Dental Practice-Based Research Network

“…There is no broad consensus about which metrics to quantify productivity across PBRNs and other research networks. The National Dental PBRN has reported productivity based on the metrics of practitioner engagement (e.g., practitioner participation in studies, webinars, network activities that provide continuing education credit, presentations and publications, and practitioner meetings) [16,17], but has not reported other measures of overall network scientific productivity, such as the number of peer-reviewed publications and impact as measured by RCR. Therefore, this article aims to: (1) describe the new organizational structure and function of the Network and (2) quantify the Network's scientific productivity.…”