Background
Methods
Search methods
Study inclusion and exclusion criteria
Inclusion criteria | Exclusion criteria | |
---|---|---|
1. Consists of a suite of research capacity building approaches. | Yes | No. Single strategies and interventions were excluded. |
2. Specifically targets one or more allied health professions’ capacity to perform research. | Yes | No. Approaches which target only nursing or medical professionals were excluded. Approaches which only target health professionals’ capacity to use research were excluded. |
3. Includes a rigorous peer-reviewed evaluation component. | Yes | No. Theoretical, expert opinion and conference papers and grey literature were excluded. |
4. Developed for a publicly funded secondary or tertiary healthcare setting, including hospital, outpatient and/or community-based services. | Yes | No. Approaches developed exclusively for primary and private healthcare settings were excluded. |
Study selection
Data extraction and quality assessment
Results
Study | Population | Purpose and intervention | Study design | Data collection and analysis | Research capacity building approaches described in each framework | Structural levels | Assumptions | Research capacity building definition |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Bamberg, Perlesz, McKenzie & Read, 2010 [40] | Australia: Large not-for-profit community healthcare organisation | Build and enhance the capacity of a community health service to conduct their own research and evaluation | Qualitative (cooperative inquiry action research design) | Semi-structured interviews, meeting observations, reflective journals Documented changes in: - staff requests for assistance - confidence and knowledge - policy and procedures Thematic analysis | 1. Dissatisfaction with the status quo 2. Knowledge and skills 3. Available resources 4. Available time 5. Rewards or incentives 6. Participation is expected/encouraged 7. Commitment by those involved 8. Leadership | None specified | Ely’s ‘8 conditions for implementing innovation’ model support the successful implementation of a framework to produce change | None reported |
Cooke, Nancarrow, Dyas & Williams, 2008 [29] | UK: ‘Designated research teams’ from primary and community care, funded by a large Research Development Unit, including social workers, pharmacists and podiatrists | Implement and evaluate the ‘designated team approach’ for 6 clinical teams using funding, mentorship and expert support | Qualitative Evaluated against Cooke (2005)’s framework of 6 principles of research capacity building | Process and outcome measures collected on context, activities, experiences, outputs and impacts of interventions Narrative summary of results | 1. Development of appropriate research skills to apply in practice 2. Development of linkages, partnerships and collaborations 3. Support of research that is ‘close to practice’ 4. Appropriate dissemination 5. Appropriate infrastructure 6. Elements of continuity and sustainability | Individual Team Organisation Supra-organisational | Research capacity building initiatives may occur within, and across, structural levels | ‘A process of individual and institutional development which leads to higher levels of skills and greater ability to perform useful research’ (Trostle, 1992, p.1321) [3] |
Golenko, Pager & Holden, 2012 [33] | Australia: Large public healthcare organisation Nine AH senior managers of five hospital and community teams | Develop a thematic model to promote and enhance allied health research capacity at an organisational level | Qualitative | Semi-structured in-depth interviews with senior AH managers. Conceptual and relational analysis using NVivo | 1. Whole of organisational approach and support from senior managers 2. Structures, processes and systems 3. Partnerships and collaborations 4. Dedicated research centres, units and positions | Individual Team Organisation External environment | The organisation is the critical link in creating synergy across the 4 levels of research capacity building | ‘A process of individual and institutional development which leads to higher levels of skills and greater ability to perform useful research’ (Trostle, 1992, p.1321) [3] |
Holden, Pager, Golenko, Ware & Weare, 2012 [37] | Australia: Large public healthcare organisation AHPs working in a mixture of hospital and community settings | Evaluate the impact of a multi-strategy team based research capacity building intervention | Quantitative Non-randomised matched-pairs trial | Research Capacity and Culture Tool (RCC) Linear regression analysis using a random effects mixed model | 1. Tailored research skills training programs 2. Ongoing mentoring 3. Writing bursaries 4. Financial support 5. Research fellowships 6. Infrastructure support | Individual Team Organisation | Research capacity building develops individuals and institutions to higher levels of skill and ability to conduct quality research | |
Hulcombe, Sturgess, Souvlis & Fitzgerald, 2014 [9] | Australia: Public hospital and health services Allied health, oral health and scientist practitioners | Develop an organisational research capacity building framework | Descriptive qualitative Evaluation strategy based on program logic methodology | Literature review, stakeholder consultation Changes in no. of: - new researchers - research proposals - applications for grant funding - peer reviewed publications Qualitative analysis | 1. Leadership and governance 2. Supporting researchers 3. Translation of evidence into practice | ‘A funded, dynamic intervention… to augment ability to carry out research or achieve objectives in the field of research over the long-term, with aspects of social change as an ultimate outcome’ (Condell & Begley, 2007, p.273) [47] | ||
Whitworth, Haining & Stringer, 2012 [41] | UK: Speech and language therapists (SLT) and academics in healthcare and higher education | Develop a model for building research capacity | Historical descriptive with qualitative evaluation | Literature review Evaluation of - funded research activity - skill development - change in research culture, increase in research confidence Qualitative analysis | 1. Whole system approach 2. Accommodating diversity 3. Reducing barriers 4. Enabling collaboration 5. Providing feedback and mentoring 6. Facilitating networking | Research conscious Research participative Research active | The need to embed, influence and contribute to research is a common driver for all health and social care professional groups | Increased capability to engage in research is fundamental to translation of research into practice and to support excellence in healthcare research |
Risk of bias within studies
Screening (yes/no/unclear) | Methodological quality criteria - Quantitative non-randomised (yes/no/unclear) | |||||
Study | Clear research question | Relevant data | 3.1 Selection bias minimised | 3.2 Appropriate measurements | 3.3 Comparable participants | 3.4 Outcome data for 80% or above |
Holden et al., 2012 [37] | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Unclear |
Screening (yes/no/unclear) | Methodological quality criteria - Qualitative (yes/no/unclear) | |||||
Study | Clear research question | Relevant data | 1.1 Relevant sources of data | 1.2 Relevant data analysis | 1.3 Consideration of context | 1.4 Consideration of researchers’ influence |
Bamberg et al., 2010 [40] | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Unclear |
Cooke et al., 2008 [29] | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
Golenko et al., 2012 [33] | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
Hulcombe et al., 2014 [9] | Yes | Yes | Yes | Unclear | Yes | Unclear |
Whitworth et al., 2012 [41] | Yes | Yes | Yes | Unclear | Yes | Unclear |
Data analysis
Supporting clinicians in research | Working together | Valuing research for excellence |
---|---|---|
- Education and training - Opportunities to get involved - Research friendly workplace - Mentoring/coaching - Access to resources - Protected time and funding - Reward and recognition - Support to undertake post-graduate study including HDR - Skill mix of teams | - Collaborations and partnerships with other teams, services and organisations - Shared purpose and drivers - Coordinated approach including team-based research projects - Shared expertise | - Visible support for research - Research as core business - Prioritisation of research that is ‘close to’/relevant to practice - Integration of local research findings back into practice |
Theme 1: supporting clinicians in research
-
relevant education and training for undertaking aspects of the research process such as writing grant and ethics applications;
-
opportunities to learn and apply skills in practice including assisting with collecting data for research projects, identifying research questions, leading small research projects and participating in journal clubs;
-
a research friendly workplace which accommodates and values individual clinicians’ research interests, motivations, abilities, time commitments and career paths;
-
mentoring and coaching from more experienced researchers;
-
access to resources including library, software, desk and computer use;
-
protected time and funding including support to apply for external research funding;
-
a system of reward and recognition through the provision of greater career opportunities, research career pathways and financial incentives;
-
support to undertake formal post-graduate study including higher degrees by research (HDR);
-
mix of clinicians with different levels of research skills within each team.
Theme 2: working together
-
strategic collaborations, partnerships, linkages and networks within and between teams, services and organisations including universities and industry;
-
shared purpose / drivers for research;
-
coordinated and team-based projects;
-
opportunities to share research expertise with others in the team and wider networks.
Theme 3: valuing research for excellence
-
demonstrating visible support of and endorsement of research at the management level, including developing structured processes and systems for research and restructuring clinical roles to include some time for research;
-
prioritising research as part of a health service’s core business by including research in the service’s vision, mission, strategic plans, key performance indicators and role descriptions;
-
prioritising research projects which are close to / relevant to practice and in line with strategic priorities,
-
reporting, disseminating and applying locally developed research findings to inform practice.