Utilising implementation science in building research and evaluation capacity in community health

Bamberg, John; Perlesz, Amaryll; McKenzie, Pamela J.; Read, Sharon

doi:10.1071/py10027

Cited by 11 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A range of strategies are required that include motivators and enablers and also measures to reduce the barriers to research. Several studies in the literature have reported success with RCB strategies that use multistrategy, multilevel coordinated approaches 13,21,42. Results of this study add to this literature by suggesting that strategies that target those AHPs who express an intention to do research may be more efficient and effective than strategies that target the entire workforce.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 52%

Motivators, enablers, and barriers to building allied health research capacity

Pager

Holden²,

Golenko³

2012

JMDH

158

269

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeA sound, scientific base of high quality research is needed to inform service planning and decision making and enable improved policy and practice. However, some areas of health practice, particularly many of the allied health areas, are generally considered to have a low evidence base. In order to successfully build research capacity in allied health, a clearer understanding is required of what assists and encourages research as well as the barriers and challenges.Participants and methodsThis study used written surveys to collect data relating to motivators, enablers, and barriers to research capacity building. Respondents were asked to answer questions relating to them as individuals and other questions relating to their team. Allied health professionals were recruited from multidisciplinary primary health care teams in Queensland Health. Eighty-five participants from ten healthcare teams completed a written version of the research capacity and culture survey.ResultsThe results of this study indicate that individual allied health professionals are more likely to report being motivated to do research by intrinsic factors such as a strong interest in research. Barriers they identified to research are more likely to be extrinsic factors such as workload and lack of time. Allied health professionals identified some additional factors that impact on their research capacity than those reported in the literature, such as a desire to keep at the “cutting edge” and a lack of exposure to research. Some of the factors influencing individuals to do research were different to those influencing teams. These results are discussed with reference to organizational behavior and theories of motivation.ConclusionSupporting already motivated allied health professional individuals and teams to conduct research by increased skills training, infrastructure, and quarantined time is likely to produce better outcomes for research capacity building investment.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 52%

Motivators, enablers, and barriers to building allied health research capacity

Pager

Holden²,

Golenko³

2012

JMDH

158

269

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A total of 8492 unique records were assessed for eligibility by screening titles and abstracts. Of these, 20 were reviewed in full-text and six were included in the review [ 9 , 29 , 33 , 37 , 40 , 41 ]. Figure 1 illustrates the number of studies which were screened based on title/abstract and full-text, with reasons for exclusion documented.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Research capacity building frameworks for allied health professionals – a systematic review

Matus

Walker

Mickan

2018

BMC Health Serv Res

132

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundBuilding the capacity of allied health professionals to engage in research has been recognised as a priority due to the many benefits it brings for patients, healthcare professionals, healthcare organisations and society more broadly. There is increasing recognition of the need for a coordinated multi-strategy approach to building research capacity. The aim of this systematic review was to identify existing integrated models and frameworks which guide research capacity building for allied health professionals working in publicly funded secondary and tertiary healthcare organisations.MethodsA systematic review was undertaken searching five databases (Medline, CINAHL, Embase, AustHealth and Web of Science) using English language restrictions. Two authors independently screened and reviewed studies, extracted data and performed quality assessments using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. Content and thematic analysis methods were used to code and categorise the data.ResultsA total of 8492 unique records were screened by title and abstract, of which 20 were reviewed in full-text. One quantitative study and five qualitative studies were included, each of which describing a research capacity building framework. Three interconnected and interdependent themes were identified as being essential for research capacity building, including ‘supporting clinicians in research’, ‘working together’ and ‘valuing research for excellence’.ConclusionsThe findings of this systematic review have been synthesised to develop a succinct and integrated framework for research capacity building which is relevant for allied health professionals working in publicly funded secondary and tertiary healthcare organisations. This framework provides further evidence to suggest that research capacity building strategies are interlinked and interdependent and should be implemented as part of an integrated ‘whole of system’ approach, with commitment and support from all levels of leadership and management. Future directions for research include using behaviour change and knowledge translation theories to guide the implementation and evaluation of this new framework.Trial registrationThe protocol for this systematic review has been registered with PROSPERO. The registration number is CRD42018087476.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s12913-018-3518-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

show abstract

“…Eight papers [ 11 , 24 – 30 ] were rated strong and 11 papers were rated moderate [ 31 – 41 ]. Most of the moderate ratings were due to theories, models or frameworks being implied versus explicitly stated.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Theories, models and frameworks used in capacity building interventions relevant to public health: a systematic review

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundThere is limited research on capacity building interventions that include theoretical foundations. The purpose of this systematic review is to identify underlying theories, models and frameworks used to support capacity building interventions relevant to public health practice. The aim is to inform and improve capacity building practices and services offered by public health organizations.MethodsFour search strategies were used: 1) electronic database searching; 2) reference lists of included papers; 3) key informant consultation; and 4) grey literature searching. Inclusion and exclusion criteria are outlined with included papers focusing on capacity building, learning plans, professional development plans in combination with tools, resources, processes, procedures, steps, model, framework, guideline, described in a public health or healthcare setting, or non-government, government, or community organizations as they relate to healthcare, and explicitly or implicitly mention a theory, model and/or framework that grounds the type of capacity building approach developed. Quality assessment were performed on all included articles. Data analysis included a process for synthesizing, analyzing and presenting descriptive summaries, categorizing theoretical foundations according to which theory, model and/or framework was used and whether or not the theory, model or framework was implied or explicitly identified.ResultsNineteen articles were included in this review. A total of 28 theories, models and frameworks were identified. Of this number, two theories (Diffusion of Innovations and Transformational Learning), two models (Ecological and Interactive Systems Framework for Dissemination and Implementation) and one framework (Bloom’s Taxonomy of Learning) were identified as the most frequently cited.ConclusionsThis review identifies specific theories, models and frameworks to support capacity building interventions relevant to public health organizations. It provides public health practitioners with a menu of potentially usable theories, models and frameworks to support capacity building efforts. The findings also support the need for the use of theories, models or frameworks to be intentional, explicitly identified, referenced and for it to be clearly outlined how they were applied to the capacity building intervention.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s12889-017-4919-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

show abstract

Utilising implementation science in building research and evaluation capacity in community health

Cited by 11 publications

References 14 publications

Motivators, enablers, and barriers to building allied health research capacity

Motivators, enablers, and barriers to building allied health research capacity

Research capacity building frameworks for allied health professionals – a systematic review

Theories, models and frameworks used in capacity building interventions relevant to public health: a systematic review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About