Research governance: implications for health library and information professionals

Abstract

The Research Governance Framework for Health and Social Care published by the Department of Health in 2001 provides a model of best practice and a framework for research in the health and social care sector. This article reviews the Department of Health Research Governance Framework, discusses the implications of research governance for library and information professionals undertaking research in the health‐ and social‐care sector and recommends strategies for best practice within the information profession relating to research governance. The scope of the Framework document that covers both clinical and non‐clinical research is outlined. Any research involving, amongst other issues, patients, NHS staff and use or access to NHS premises may require ethics committee approval. Particular reference is made to the roles, responsibilities and professional conduct and the systems needed to support effective research practice. Issues such as these combine to encourage the development of a quality research culture which supports best practice. Questions arise regarding the training and experience of researchers, and access to the necessary information and support. The use of the Framework to guide research practice complements the quality issues within the evidence‐based practice movement and supports the ongoing development of a quality research culture. Recommendations are given in relation to the document's five domains of ethics, science, information, health and safety and finance and intellectual property. Practical recommendations are offered for incorporating research governance into research practice in ways which conform to the Framework’s standards and which are particularly relevant for research practitioners in information science. Concluding comments support the use of the Research Governance Framework as a model for best practice.

Information professionals' participation in interdisciplinary research: a preliminary study of factors affecting successful collaborations

“…The participants interviewed in this pilot study are employed in organisations with similar approaches to supporting engagement in research. Previously published literature has highlighted the importance of overt organisational supports, and the development of a culture of research in fostering research capacity and participation . Support can come in many forms and may include funded professional learning, protected research time, and the promotion of ‘research culture’[s] within organisations, where information professionals are expected to engage in research as a requirement for retention and advancement .…”

“…Information professionals may take their cue from the value that they perceive that their organisations place on certain activities and not on others. Key to the further development of this research study will be to identify and interview individuals operating within organisations where tangible supports, such as dedicated research time, are in place and explore the impact these supports may have on the development and application of research skills …”

Research or evaluation? Does it matter?

“…The principal reason for this is not some professional epiphany triggering greater awareness. Instead this distinction reflects a pragmatic response to the perceived bureaucratic red tape of requirements for research governance 5 . Put simply a research proposal requires health service governance approval, whereas a service evaluation does not.…”

The impact of research governance in healthcare and higher education organizations

“…It is notable that those groups with the least resources (such as nurses), and in particular need of developing their research capability and evidence base for practice, are most likely to be disadvantaged by the Research Governance Framework. It is for such reasons that Sen (2003) argues that experienced researchers should encourage novices through mentoring schemes. In addition, it may be that different types of research (such as that involving staff, rather than patients) should be subjected to different levels of scrutiny.…”