Researcher development program of the primary health care research, evaluation and development strategy

Abstract

The Research Development Program (RDP) was initiated in 2004 under the Primary Health CareResearch, Evaluation and Development (PHCRED) Strategy to increase the number and range of people with knowledge and skills in primary health care research and evaluation.RDP Fellows were invited to participate in an online survey about the effect the program had on their research knowledge, attitudes and practiceThe response rate was 42% (105/248). Most were female (88%) with 66% aged between 31 and 50 years. Over two thirds (72%) were health practitioners.Activities undertaken during the RDP ranged from literature reviews, developing a research question, preparing ethics submissions, attending and presenting at conferences and seminars, preparing papers and reports, and submitting grant applications.Despite the fact that only 52% agreed that the RDP time was adequate, 94% agreed that the RDP was a valuable experience, with 89% expressing interest in undertaking further research.These results indicate that this program has had a positive effect on the RDP Fellows in terms of their knowledge about research, their attitude to research, and the way they use research in their work.-3 - IntroductionIt is recognised that having a strong primary health care sector improves population health (Starfield et al. 2005). Primary health care research plays an important part in energising and validating the health care system (Stewart et al. 2010). This area of research, being relatively new, needs support to build the capacity of the workforce and the research methodology so that it becomes an independent and competitive field of research to provide a robust body of knowledge.Primary health care research and evaluation is vital in ensuring the quality and accountability of the primary health care sector (Farmer and Weston 2002). Internationally, a number of programs have been launched to increase research within the primary health care sector. For example, in Scotland, primary care research networks provided primary care practitioners with grants to buy time to undertake a research training course with a view to developing a research proposal (Hannay 2006). The UK has developed primary care research networks to provide avenues for diverse health practitioners to engage in research (Thomas et al. 2001). Canada has developed a national training program for primary health care practitioners that provide hands on research training as well as access to discussion groups and online workshops (Stewart et al. 2010). In the US a 10 week training program provided to doctor of pharmacy (PharmD) students was shown to increase the likelihood of students pursuing a research career path (Johnson et al. 2008).Indeed, practitioners who receive some form of research training are more likely to participate in future research (Ried et al. 2008) and are also more likely to publish their research (Brand et al. 2008). A study investigating why general practitioners became involved in a research project indicated that the practitioners were motivated b...

Building research capacity in south-west Sydney through a Primary and Community Health Research Unit

“…The PHCRED strategy included scholarships and paid research placements in academic settings (Askew et al 2008;McIntyre et al 2011), research grants and an information exchange to support dissemination of research findings (Yen et al 2010), and resulted in increased research output (Askew et al 2008;McIntyre et al 2011). Studies also suggest the PHCRED strategy resulted in additional benefits to participants, including staff development, impact on knowledge production and impact on policy (Kalucy et al 2009;Reed et al 2011).…”

“…PCHRU's experience is consistent with recent studies suggesting barriers to undertaking research are more likely to be extrinsic and external to the individuals or teams wanting to undertake research . 'Lack of time' to conduct research is common across Australian studies on research capacity building (Comino and Kemp 2008;McIntyre et al 2011;, and occurred even where clinicians were employed in part-time, paid research positions through the PHCRED program . High levels of staff turnover and vacancy, and large numbers of part-time staff prevalent across the primary and community health workforce, are known workforce barriers to undertaking and completing research (Productivity Commission 2005).…”

“…These include targeting individual clinicians and small clinical teams that express an interest in research (Askew et al 2008;McIntyre et al 2011;, supporting clinicians to lead research in projects of interest in their clinical settings (Brauer et al 2007;Naylor et al 2007), offering targeted research-skills training and establishing links between clinical and academic researchers (Askew et al 2008;Soós et al 2010;McIntyre et al 2011;Holden et al 2012;. Such approaches appear to address intrinsic (individual) and team-level factors shown to increase motivation for undertaking research .…”

“…The Researcher Mentoring Program framework, which included offering targeted research skills training and establishing links between each project team and a university-based mentor, reflects approaches to research capacity building in primary and community health settings elsewhere in Australia (Askew et al 2008;Soós et al 2010;McIntyre et al 2011;Holden et al 2012; and internationally (Cooke 2005;Pickstone et al 2008). The Researcher Mentoring Program fostered 'clinician-led' research, which has proven successful in other studies on building research capacity (Brauer et al 2007;.…”

“…Several strategies to build research capacity in these disciplines have been reported in the UK , the USA (Frontera et al 2006) and Australia (Askew et al 2008;McIntyre et al 2011). However, few published studies have discussed participation in research by clinicians in community-based settings in the Australian context (Yallop et al 2006;Comino and Kemp 2008;Owen et al 2008;Holden et al 2012).…”