Involvement in research activities and factors influencing research capacity among dietitians

Could you give me a leg up …? Models, frameworks and support structures to help aspiring clinical academic speech and language therapists

BACKGROUND

Increasing research capacity and capability for the speech and language therapy (SLT) profession is a key national strategic driver, with many speech and language therapists (SLTs) aspiring to a clinical academic (CA) career. There are known benefits but also acknowledged challenges with this career path, including limited funding opportunities and a poorly established career trajectory.

AIMS

To present models, frameworks and support structures that can be used by aspiring SLT CAs to chart research knowledge and skills, and plan career development. Organisational models are also presented to facilitate SLT CA career development and research capacity-building.

METHODS & PROCEDURES

A narrative review was conducted using a literature search of published peer-reviewed journals across four electronic databases: Medline, CINAHL, AMED and Embase, with additional search for grey literature through internet searches. Search results were screened against eligibility criteria by two researchers, with full-text articles retrieved and reviewed by four researchers independently.

RESULTS & DISCUSSION

The database search and grey literature search combined identified 610 records. Full-text screening of 66 records resulted in 19 articles or grey literature sources being included within the narrative review.

MAIN CONTRIBUTION

This paper details models, frameworks and support structures pertinent to SLTs that can be used at an individual and organizational level to assist CA skill development and career paths.

CONCLUSION & IMPLICATIONS

The national climate is looking positive for aspiring SLT CAs. The time is now to take the initiative and use the support structures available to show our CA value and develop the necessary skills outlined within these resources to fulfil our ambitions.

WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS

What is already known on the subject Interest in CA careers within the SLT profession is increasing. Whilst there are known benefits to embedding research within clinical practice, barriers exist including the strategic and operational steps individuals can take to make the career path a reality. What this study adds This narrative review has searched the literature for CA models, frameworks and support structures created for nurses, midwives and allied health professionals. These tools are presented and discussed, with special consideration and focus to the SLT profession. What are the clinical implications of this work? This paper will provide SLTs with the tools to support their personal CA career development as well as advocate for CA roles within their teams and organisations. Organisational models are also presented to support SLT managers to foster a CA path for workforce development.

Preliminary content and construct validity of a new model to differentiate research skills from evidence-based practice skills: Core, Evidence Application, Research (CEAR) Model

BACKGROUND

Research is the scientific basis for the profession of dietetics, as it must be located and applied in evidence-based practice (EBP). EBP is often presented as a foundational skill for research. CEAR - Core, Evidence Application, Research - is a newly proposed model that separates Research and Evidence Application skills into distinct domains, jointly supported by a set of Core skills, thus acknowledging that education and advancement in one domain neither requires nor precipitates education and advancement in the other. The goal was to investigate the content and construct validity of the new CEAR Model.

METHODS

A cross-sectional online survey of randomly selected dietitians in the United States was used to collect CEAR domain scores, validated measures of research or EBP skills and self-reported characteristics. Exploratory factor analysis, Cronbach's α and Pearson correlation between various tools and CEAR domains were used to assess validity and reliability. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) and multiple linear regression between CEAR domains and participant characteristics were used to assess convergent and divergent validity.

RESULTS

One hundred and fifty-four responses with a valid CEAR score were received and led to a three-factor solution, supporting the theorised differentiation of research from evidence application skills (content validity). Internal reliability for the CEAR Model overall and for each domain was high. The hypothesised correlations between existing research or EBP measurement tools and the relevant CEAR domains were found (construct validity). Known groups analysis demonstrated the expected differences in CEAR domain scores based on participant characteristics.

CONCLUSIONS

The CEAR Model demonstrates preliminary validity and internal reliability. It adds to the current literature by acknowledging the separateness of evidence application skills from research skills.

Exploring strengths and weaknesses in health services research culture and capacity

Objective Fostering a research culture and enhancing research capacity within the workforce is essential for any health service aiming to provide evidence-based care. This study aims to explore the research culture and capacity in a community health service setting and provide a comparison to previous published research in other health service settings. Methods Participants were invited to complete a survey consisting of demographics and the Research Capacity and Culture (RCC) tool. Median and interquartile ranges were calculated for each RCC item and compared to three Australian and one international comparison. Results A total of 73 staff members from Metro North Community and Oral Health service participated. The team-level scores for the RCC were overall the lowest. Comparison to previously published research using the RCC indicated marginally higher scores for individual-level items in our study across all domains. Individual-level items were very weak to weakly correlated with the team and organisation-level RCC items. Strong to very strong correlations were found between a majority of the team and organisation-level items. Conclusions Team-level scores were substantially lower when compared to individual and organisational levels. The item 'team leaders that support research' was positively correlated with various organisation-level items, indicating that if the respondent perceived the team leader as a low supporter of research the respondent perceived several organisation items also poorly. As an important stakeholder in enabling research in a health service, organisations should investigate the challenges experienced by team leaders in facilitating research and the support or training they may need.

Oral health knowledge, attitudes and practices of dietitians in Australia: A national survey

AIM

Dietitians are a well-placed profession to be providing pre-emptive oral health promotion. Despite recommendations that oral health promotion should be routinely part of dietetic practice, there is limited data informing the current practices of clinical dietitians in this area across Australia. Hence, the aim of this study was to investigate the knowledge and practices of Australian dietitians and oral health promotion.

METHODS

A cross-sectional survey was undertaken involving registered clinical dietitians in Australia using purposive and snowballing sampling (social media/dietetic organisations/public databases). Data were analysed using descriptive and inferential statistics.

RESULTS

A total of 149 dietitians participated in the national survey. Overall, dietitians were knowledgeable about oral health risk factors and preventative measures across general health domains. Majority of dietitians agreed that oral health can affect nutrition interventions (95.5%) and dietitians should be discussing oral health (88.0%). However, nearly half were not confident in providing counselling or education and felt that undergraduate training for oral health promotion was inadequate (78.2%). A small proportion (6.0%) of dietitians were already providing oral health promotion regularly. Key barriers included a lack of clear guidelines for practice, limited training opportunities and indistinct referral pathways.

CONCLUSION

Dietitians have acknowledged that oral health promotion should be incorporated into their practice. However, they are challenged by a lack of resources and training to support this in clinical practice. SO WHAT?: Capacity building dietitians to promote oral health allows opportunity for improvement in the oral health, nutritional status and quality of life of priority population groups.

Mental Health Nurses' and Allied Health Professionals' Individual Research Capacity and Organizational Research Culture: A Comparative Study

Introduction

Healthcare professionals have development needs related to their consumption, use, and practice of clinical research. Little is known about these issues in mental health services specifically.

Objectives

A survey of healthcare staff working in an NHS Mental Health and Disability Trust in England was conducted to describe research capacity and culture compared with previously reported samples, and to examine subgroup differences.

Methods

An online questionnaire was utilized. The main measure was the Research Capacity and Culture tool comprising measures of individual's perceived research skills and of team and organizational research culture. Previous studies using the same measure were systematically identified, and pooled results, weighted by sample size, were calculated. Analyses were descriptive (current sample versus previous results) and inferential (comparisons between demographic and professional groups within the current sample).

Results

N = 293 people completed the survey. The median item scores were poorer than those of pooled samples from studies reporting median item scores on 39/51 (76.5%) occasions and poorer than those pooled samples of studies reporting mean item scores on 51/51 (100.0%) occasions. Individual capability for research was in the 'less than adequate' range more than in previous samples (71.4% vs. 42.9%). For team culture items, the proportions were 84.2% vs. 78.9%, while most responses about organizational culture were in the 'adequate' range (55.6% vs. 66.7%). Staff >20 years employment had poorer perceptions of team and organizational culture.

Conclusion

Perceptions of individual research capacity and team and organizational culture were poor compared with previous studies, most of which were conducted in non-mental health settings. There is need for development of research capacity and culture in mental health services including opportunities to develop basic research skills through to strategic developments to promote clinical academic careers. There is considerable room for improvement in the way organizations support research and signpost opportunities.

Australian radiation therapist's research capacity and culture: investigating the extent of assistance required to build research capacity

Introduction

Building research capacity within the radiation therapist workforce/profession is essential to guarantee research is embedded into core practices. Assessment of current capacity levels within organisation, department and individual domains needs to occur to establish a baseline and ensure research capacity building (RCB) strategies will be targeted successfully. This exploratory study aimed to identify the areas within each domain where radiation therapists would benefit from extra research assistance, that being research support and process changes, particularly in relation to the workplace and health sector.

Methods

Practising radiation therapists (RTs) within Australia were recruited through professional organisations and invited to complete the online Research Capacity Culture Tool (RCCT). The survey was conducted using Qualtrics with data exported to SPSS.V27 for analysis. Descriptive statistics and the Industry Specific Item Interpretation for Policy and Strategy were used to analyse and report the results.

Results

Survey participation rate was 121/2640 (4.6%). Within the Organisation and Department domains, the most research assistance was required in infrastructure (n = 92–37) and support (n = 66–45) categories, respectively. Participants from private sector (Organisation: 42.7%, Department: 53.7%) and metropolitan centres (Organisation: 32.6%, Department: 47.5%) required a higher rate of assistance when compared to their counterparts in both categories. The individual domain showed similar levels of assistance required across health sectors and work locations. Workplaces showed similar levels of complexity of research activity; private sector (62.5%) recorded the highest level of no research activity.

Conclusion

This study has provided insight into how the research capacity and culture of organisations and departments in which individuals' work will influence their abilities and opportunities to perform research.

Use of Ripple Effects Mapping to assess student-perceived benefits of undergraduate research and learning objective attainment with Irish nutrition students

Ripple Effects Mapping (REM) is a qualitative data analysis approach that combines mind mapping with inductive analysis to condense data obtained from group interviews. One benefit of REM is the ability to identify unintended outcomes, or "ripples," of the intervention of interest. Ripples are visually represented by a mind map created during the REM session. Mind maps connect related concepts, typically with the main concept in the center of the map and supporting ideas radiating from a central node. This project applied REM to undergraduate course evaluation. The purpose of this study was threefold: to use REM to identify undergraduate student-perceived benefits of research projects, to assess whether REM could be used to confirm achievement of course learning objectives, and to compare the themes identified from the mind mapping component of REM to those identified by inductive analysis. Mind maps were generated with Xmind (Xmind Ltd., Hong Kong) during online sessions by two groups of students, those who completed a "mandatory" research project (n = 11) and those who chose to participate in an additional "optional" research project (n = 9). There was considerable overlap in identified themes between mind mapping and inductive analysis, with skills, relationships, career direction, and unexpected benefits identified by both techniques. Mind mapping identified several additional themes. Findings from both approaches were compared to course learning objectives, and both confirmed that all objectives were met. In situations where time is a limiting factor, mind mapping could be superior to the complete REM approach for course learning objective assessments.NEW & NOTEWORTHY This study used Ripple Effects Mapping (REM) to identify undergraduate student-perceived benefits of research projects, to assess whether REM could confirm achievement of course learning objectives for a research project-based course, and to compare themes identified from the mind mapping component of REM to those identified by inductive analysis. Mind mapping confirmed achievement of course objectives and may be a better choice compared to inductive reasoning when time is limited.

Research capacity and culture in an Australian metropolitan public mental health service: scoping the skills and experience of social workers and occupational therapists

BACKGROUND

Investment in a clinical research culture appears to be associated with benefits for consumers, staff, and overall organisational performance. The validated 55-item Research Capacity and Culture (RCC) tool was developed specifically to gauge the research capacity and culture of health professionals and workplace settings within which they work. Results of some individual studies suggest that professional discipline and workplace setting may impact RCC results however it has never been used in a dedicated public mental health setting. Therefore, this study will explore the research capacity and culture of allied mental health clinicians (Part 1). Another aim is to explore potential connections between workplace settings, locations and disciplines based on published RCC-based data to help signpost potential impediments to service improvements (Part 2).

METHODS

Part 1: An RCC-based online survey canvased Australian Social Workers and Occupational Therapists (n = 59) based in a metropolitan public mental health service. Non-parametric analyses explored links between research-related experience and participant characteristics. Part 2: Comparative analyses explored the potential influence of workplace settings and professional disciplines on published RCC results.

RESULTS

Part 1: Overall, the research capacity and experiences of mental health Social Workers and Occupational Therapists seemed modest. Discipline was statistically associated with level of research-activity experience, weighted towards occupational therapy; demographic characteristics were not. Only two items in the RCC were rated high; many more items were rated low. Part 2: Published studies exploration found no link between RCC ratings and workplace location, setting, or professional discipline. Sampling biases and use of modified, non-validated RCC versions likely impacted the results.

CONCLUSIONS

Allied mental health clinicians may not be sufficiently experienced, knowledgeable, or confident with a range of research-related activities given the emphasis on workforce research capability in policy and practice nowadays. This may be commonplace across health-based organisations. We recommend the systematic implementation of research training programs in (mental) health services, and a 'whole-of-service levels' approach be used i.e., transform policy, culture and leadership as well as provide practical resources with individual training. Potential benefits include a positive impact on organisation functioning, clinicians' confidence and practice, and improved consumer outcomes.

Perceptions of research capacity in public health organisations: comparison of NSW metropolitan and non-metropolitan Local Health Districts

Objective The aims of this study were to explore and compare the perceptions of research capacity and culture (RCC) in metropolitan and non-metropolitan New South Wales (NSW) Local Health Districts (LHDs). Methods The Research Capacity and Culture Tool was delivered online to clinicians and health managers. A 10-point Likert scale of success or skill at organisational, team and individual level of research capacity was used. An independent t -test assessed differences in domain means between non-metropolitan and metropolitan LHDs. Results A total of 1243 participants responded. Responses to the survey indicated the perception of individual's research skills were greater than the perception of RCC at both the team and organisational levels. Participants from metropolitan locations had significantly higher mean scores across all three domains compared with non-metropolitan locations (P  Conclusion Results indicated the perception of individual's research skills were greater than the team and organisational levels. Participants from metropolitan locations had significantly higher perceptions of RCC across all three domains compared with non-metropolitan locations. This was the largest study to date in Australia investigating RCC in NSW LHDs, and the first study to explore multiple professions across multiple organisations while comparing metropolitan and non-metropolitan settings. This research may inform targeted strategies for building research capacity in NSW LHDs.

Determinant factors associated with the use of evidence-based dietetics practice among registered dietitian nutritionists

AIMS

There is a lack of research assessing perceived and actual evidence-based dietetics practice knowledge among registered dietitian nutritionists. This cross-sectional research examined the association between determinant factors (i.e., education attainment) and objective knowledge (i.e., quiz items) of evidence-based dietetics practices. Other determinant factors associated with perceived knowledge and skill, attitudes, behaviours and outcomes related to evidence-based dietetics practice were also assessed. Perceived knowledge items were compared to objective knowledge items to evaluate the accuracy of self-assessed evidence-based dietetics practice knowledge among dietitians in the United States.

METHODS

A modified and adapted evidence-based practice survey was emailed to registered dietitian nutritionists in the United States via the Commission on Dietetic Registration database between November and December 2020. Analysis of variance assessed the relationship between highest degree held and actual knowledge of evidence-based dietetics practices. Multiple linear regression and ordinal logistic regression determined participant-level characteristics associated with survey subscales and survey items, respectively. Pearson's correlation coefficient evaluated the relationship between subjective and objective items.

RESULTS

Four hundred and eighty-two dietitians completed the survey. Each increase in degree type was associated with an increase in objective knowledge score (all comparisons p < 0.001). Other determinants included recency of degree completion and peer-reviewed publications. Moderate positive associations (r = 0.35, p < 0.001) were found between subjective and objective measures.

CONCLUSION

Graduate-level education, recency of degree completion and peer-reviewed publications were supportive of evidence-based dietetics practice-related outcomes. Future research should evaluate the efficacy of training, particularly among those further from their highest completed degree.

Research Involvement in a Group of Registered Dietitian Nutritionists Specializing in Ketogenic Diet Therapies for Epilepsy

BACKGROUND

There is a growing need for studies on ketogenic diet (KD) therapies. Registered dietitian nutritionists (RDNs) should lead efforts to better understand nutritional risks and benefits of the KD to inform evidence-based practices.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to explore participation in research amongst RDNs practicing in KD therapies for epilepsy and identify barriers to participation.

DESIGN

This cross-sectional study collected professional experience, research involvement and output, and perceived barriers to conducting research.

PARTICIPANTS/SETTING

This study surveyed 66 RDNs practicing in KD therapies for epilepsy.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

Research involvement was assessed using the Dietitian Research Involvement Survey (DRIS) score. Research output was reported as type and number of publications. Barriers to research included lack of time, resources, administrative support, training, and/or skill.

STATISTICAL ANALYSES

Data were summarized using descriptive statistics such as means and standard deviations, medians and interquartile ranges, counts and percentages, as appropriate.

RESULTS

The median DRIS score was 31 out of 60 (range: 16-60). Thirty-two participants (48.5%) reported publishing or presenting data, and only 13.6% published a manuscript on ketogenic diet therapies as a leading author. The main barriers to participating in research were insufficient time (83.3%), insufficient funding (81.8%), and priority of work (70.8%). Research involvement scores were not affected by lack of time and resources, however scores were lower in RDNs reporting lack of interest, training, and skill in research.

CONCLUSIONS

While ketogenic RDNs participated in research, most were not leading projects or publications. To increase research involvement amongst RDNs, focus should include overcoming structural barriers while facilitating knowledge acquisition for those lower on the research continuum.

Evaluation of research capacity and culture of hospital pharmacists and pharmacy technicians in a state-wide Australian public health service: A cross-sectional survey

BACKGROUND

Integrating research with clinical practice is essential for evidence-based practice and continuous improvement in health care. Little is known about the research capacity and culture of the Australian hospital pharmacy workforce, particularly in rural areas and for pharmacy assistants/technicians.

OBJECTIVE

This paper aims to characterise the research capacity and culture of a state-wide public-hospital pharmacy service at organisation, team and individual levels, and to explore variables which influence research confidence and success.

METHOD

An online, anonymous, cross-sectional survey using the validated Research Capacity in Context tool was emailed to all pharmacists, pharmacy assistants/technicians and non-clinical staff employed by a statewide pharmacy service in South Australia. Respondent characteristics and organisation, team and individual scores of research skill/success were summarised using descriptive statistics. T-tests compared results for pharmacists and pharmacy assistants/technicians and metropolitan-based and non-metropolitan-based staff. Regression analyses explored predictors of pharmacists individual research skill/success scores.

RESULTS

A response rate of 43.4% (n = 278/641, 19 sites) was obtained. Respondents were primarily pharmacists (68%) and pharmacy assistants/technicians (28%); 91% were practicing in a metropolitan setting. 47% reported no research experience. Highest scores for research skill/success were observed at the organisational level (mean score 6.0/10) vs. team (mean score 5.6/10) and individual levels (mean score 5.1/10). Within each level specific items that scored poorly were identified. Individual research skills/success scores were higher in pharmacists vs. pharmacy assistants/technicians (mean score 5.2/10 vs. 4.2/10, p < 0.01), and were not different between staff in metropolitan vs. non-metropolitan settings (mean scores 5.2 vs. 5.0, p = 0.77). For pharmacists, undertaking undergraduate or internship research projects or postgraduate research training were associated with higher individual scores of research skills and success.

DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION

This research extends understanding of hospital pharmacy research capacity and culture, describes research skills and success in hospital pharmacy technicians/assistants for the first time and highlights low-scoring areas; these could be targeted to improve research capacity and culture at an individual, team and organisational levels.

What is known about clinician researcher careers in allied health? A scoping review of the last decade

PURPOSE

Although the benefits of clinician researchers for health services are now more clearly recognised, their career development is not well understood. Hence, the purpose of this paper, a scoping review, is to determine what has been discussed in the literature about career opportunities for allied health (AH) clinician researchers in health services.

DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH

A structured literature search was completed in December 2020 for literature published 2010-2020 in English. A total of 2,171 unique abstracts were found and screened by two reviewers and 206 articles progressed to full text screening.

FINDINGS

Forty-six studies were ultimately included; however, only two of these had aims directly related to AH clinician researcher careers, with the remainder containing only incidental data on this topic. Over half (56.5%) of the included studies were conducted in Australia, with a variety of AH professions represented. In terms of research design, 52.2% used cross-sectional survey designs, while case studies and qualitative research designs were also common. Key observations were that varying terminology and definitions were used, and there was little information about the inclusion of research in clinical positions or opportunities for formal clinical researcher positions in health services. There was some evidence to support that there are limited career opportunities after PhD completion, and that current career pathways are insufficient. There was conflicting evidence on whether engagement in research is beneficial for clinical career progression.

ORIGINALITY/VALUE

This review highlights a lack of research on this topic and outlines future directions to better support career pathways for AH clinician researchers.

Undertaking a research project improves confidence in research skills among student dietitians

BACKGROUND

Research is a cornerstone of evidence-based dietetic practice. Research skills are often taught at university through experiential learning during a final-year research project. The aim of this study was to investigate attitudes towards research and confidence in research skills among student dietitians before and after a research project.

METHODS

A questionnaire survey of student dietitians' attitudes to research and confidence in research skills was undertaken before and after completing a research project at two universities in London, United Kingdom. Dichotomous data were compared before and after the research project using a McNemar's test. Factors associated with 'high confidence' or 'improved confidence' in overall research skills at the end of the research project were investigated using multivariable logistic regression.

RESULTS

160 student dietitians completed a questionnaire before and after their research project. The majority had positive attitudes to research both before and after their research project. There was an increase in numbers with 'high confidence' in overall research skills before (13, 8.1%) and after (79, 49.4%) the research project (P<0.001), and 113 (70.6%) reported 'improved confidence' in overall research skills. The only factor associated with 'high confidence' in overall research skills was having 'high levels of involvement in the overall research process' (OR 6.13, 95% CI 2.03-18.49, P=0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Student dietitians have positive attitudes towards research and undertaking a research project significantly improves confidence in their research skills. Higher level of involvement in the research project is the single most significant factor associated with high confidence in research skills. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

An observational cohort study to determine the impact of research capacity building strategies implemented in an Australian metropolitan hospital occupational therapy department

INTRODUCTION

Research capacity building enhances the abilities of individuals and is critical within health systems for quality patient care and promotes a culture of excellence within the occupational therapy profession. A research capacity building toolkit was proposed identifying strategies to support allied health professionals to undertake research. This study evaluated participant-reported outcomes of research capacity building toolkit implementation in an occupational therapy department.

METHODS

An observational pre-post-cohort study at a tertiary hospital with volunteer occupational therapists using the standardised Research Capacity in Context Tool (RCCT) and an author-designed quality improvement (QI) survey was employed. The RCCT measures research capacity and culture at organisation, team and individual levels. Semi-structured interviews were used to elicit reflections regarding participant experience.

RESULTS

All levels of the toolkit were implemented successfully. The response rate was 59% (n = 36) at baseline and 49.1% (n = 26) at follow-up. Eighty-five percent of participants held direct clinical roles. Nine clinicians participated in the interviews. There were significant improvements in the estimate mean for the organisation (6.51 [2019] compared with 8.13 [2020], p = <0.001) and the team (5.52 [2019] compared with 7.15 [2020], p = 0.001). The individual level did not significantly change with an estimate mean of 4.20 in 2019 increasing slightly to 4.84 in 2020 (p = 0.128). This was supported by the QI survey where improvements were noted in the department but not at an individual level. The qualitative findings verified the components of the toolkit including 'supporting clinicians in research', 'working together', 'valuing research for excellence' and reflected the importance of 'individual attributes'.

CONCLUSION

The toolkit supported the implementation of specific strategies to enhance research capacity and culture. Improvements within the organisation and team were evident; however, these were not seen at an individual level. Further research about the contribution of individual-related factors and processes to the building of research capacity is required.

Evaluation of Research Capacity and Culture of Health Professionals Working with Women, Children and Families at an Australian Public Hospital: A Cross Sectional Observational Study

Background

There is limited evidence for use of the Research Capacity and Culture tool across multidisciplinary health professionals. We explored using the Research Capacity and Culture tool among multidisciplinary health professionals at an Australian secondary hospital.

Methods

A cross-sectional observational study where online and paper-based surveys of the Research Capacity and Culture tool were disseminated between November 2020 and January 2021. Descriptive analyses of demographic variables and Likert scale items were summarized using median and inter-quartile ranges. Differences between organization, team and individual domains were checked using a Friedman test. Post-hoc Wilcoxon signed rank tests determined specific differences between domains.

Results

Seventy-six multidisciplinary health professionals (female, 89.3%) reported overall perceptions of research success/skills highest in the organization (median 6), followed by the team (median 5) and individual domains (median 3.5). Only 21.3% agreed that research activities were a part of their role description. Mean scores across professions were highest for Medicine (5.47), Midwifery (4.52), Nursing (4.47) and Allied Health (3.56), respectively, for the team domain. Individual domain scores across all professions were below 50%. Commonly reported barriers to research were “lack of time for research,” “other work roles taking priority” and “a lack of skill.” “Developing skills” was the most common personal motivator.

Conclusion

Multidisciplinary health professionals reported the highest overall perception of research success/skills in the organization domain. Medical health professionals perceived research success/skills highest compared to nursing, midwifery and allied health professionals.

Statistical methods and software used in nutrition and dietetics research: A review of the published literature using text mining

AIM

Dietitians must be statistically literate to effectively interpret the scientific literature underpinning the discipline. Despite this, no study has been conducted that objectively identifies common statistical methods and packages specific to current nutrition and dietetics literature. This study aimed to identify statistical methods and software frequently used in nutrition and dietetics research.

METHODS

A text mining approach using the bag-of-words method was applied to a random sample of articles obtained from all journals in the 'Nutrition and Dietetics' subject category within the SCImago Journal and Country Rank portal and published in 2018. A list of 229 statistical terms and 19 statistical software packages was developed to define the search terms to be mined. Statistical information from the methods section of included articles was extracted into Microsoft Excel (2016) for data cleaning. Statistical analyses were conducted in R (Version 3.6.0) and Microsoft Excel (2016).

RESULTS

Seven hundred and fifty-seven journal articles were included. Numerical descriptive statistics were the most common statistical method group, appearing in 83.2% of articles (n = 630). This was followed by specific hypothesis tests (68.8%, n = 521), general hypothesis concepts (58.4%, n = 442), regression (44.4%, n = 336), and ANOVA (30.8%, n = 233). IBM SPSS statistics was the most common statistical software package, reported in 41.7% of included articles.

CONCLUSION

These findings provide useful information for educators to evaluate current statistics curricula and develop short courses for continuing education. They may also act as a starting point for dietitians to educate themselves on typical statistical methods they may encounter.

Health research capacity of professional and technical personnel in a first-class tertiary hospital in northwest China: multilevel repeated measurement, 2013-2017, a pilot study

Objectives

To explore the health research capacity (HRC) and factors associated with professional and technical personnel (PTP) in a first-class tertiary hospital in northwest China.

Methods

We collected the repeated measurement data from a first-class tertiary hospital in northwest China between 2013 and 2017. HRC of PTP was assessed by a comprehensive evaluation system and measured by research capacity score (RCS). The participants were divided into research group (RCS >0) and comparison group (RCS = 0); participants of the comparison group were selected by two-stage stratified random sampling. Multilevel model for repeated measures was used to investigate the potential factors associated with HRC.

Results

A total of 924 PTP were included (308 in the research group and 616 in the comparison group). This study found consistent growth in RCS and associated 95% CIs for the hospital during 2013 and 2017. The linear multilevel model showed PTP with a doctorate degree had higher RCS than those with a master’s degree (β, 1.74; P <0.001), bachelor’s degree (β, 2.02; P <0.001) and others without a degree (β, 2.32; P <0.001). Furthermore, the PTP with intermediate (β, 0.13; P = 0.015), vice-high (β, 0.27; P = 0.001) and senior (β, 0.63; P <0.001) professional titles had higher RCS than those with junior positions. Compared with PTP in the administration, those in paediatrics had higher RCS (β, 0.28; P = 0.047) though similar to PTP in other departments. PTP with an administrative position had a higher RCS than those in non-administrative positions (β, 0.26; P <0.001). The RCS increased with the research fund (β, 0.15; P <0.001). However, no associations were found between RCS and sex, age, ethnic, graduate school or technical type.

Conclusions

HRC with associated variation of PTP for the hospital in northwest China increasingly improved and degree, professional title, administrative position, and research fund were related to HRC of PTP. Multi-central prospective studies are needed to clarify the potential relationship of related factors and HRC of PTP.

What influences allied health clinician participation in research in the public hospital setting: a qualitative theory-informed approach

OBJECTIVES

Using theoretical frameworks from implementation science, we aimed to systematically explore the barriers and enablers to research active allied health professionals (AHP) participating and leading research in the hospital setting.

DESIGN

A qualitative interview study informed by behaviour change theory.

SETTING

Single Australian tertiary hospital and health service.

PARTICIPANTS

We recruited a convenience sample of 21 AHPs working within a hospital who were seeking to actively participate in/or lead research within their workplace.

DATA COLLECTION

Semistructured interviews explored perceived barriers and enablers to research participation, informed by the 14 domains of the theoretical domains framework (TDF). Transcribed interviews were deductively coded and mapped to the TDF. A deeper level of inductive coding was used to identify emergent themes that influenced behaviour change, according to the three key constructs of: capability, opportunity and motivation (COM-B).

RESULTS

Barriers and enablers to research participation were identified within nine predominant domains of the TDF. Most enablers to engaging in research related to the motivation or opportunity constructs of the COM-B. These enablers included positive beliefs about the consequences of research participation, enabling social influences, peer support and motivation for skill development and to inform practice. Predominant barriers related to environmental context and resources (eg, reduced funding or time), emotional responses of being overwhelmed and perceptions of reduced capability.

CONCLUSION

This study identified key barriers and enablers to behaviour change related to AHPs participating and/or leading research. Motivation and opportunities to participate in research may be enabled by maximising social influence opportunities, reiterating beliefs about positive consequences of research and considering AHP's emotional responses. Implementation science frameworks may provide a more systematic and holistic understanding of factors which influence research participation including enhancing knowledge, motivation and opportunity.

Knowledge Translation in Dietetics: A Survey of Dietitians' Awareness and Confidence

This study aimed to determine dietitians' familiarity with knowledge translation (KT), confidence in undertaking KT, and preferences for receiving KT training. An online questionnaire was designed and disseminated to all dietitians working across hospital and health services in Queensland, Australia, for completion over a 6-week period (April-May 2018). Of the 124 respondents, 69% (n = 85) reported being familiar with KT, but only 28% (n = 35) reported being confident in applying KT to their practice. Higher confidence was reported with problem identification, evidence appraisal, and adapting evidence to local context, compared with implementation, evaluation, and dissemination. Almost all respondents reported an interest in learning more about KT (n = 121, 98%), with a preference for easily accessible and short "snippets" of training aimed at beginner-intermediate level. Lack of management support, difficulty attending multi-day courses, cost, travel requirements, and lack of quarantined time were reported barriers to attending KT training. There is a high awareness and interest but low confidence in undertaking KT amongst dietitians. This highlights an opportunity for workforce development to prepare dietitians to be skilled and confident in KT. Training and support needs to be low-cost and multi-modal to meet diverse needs.

Assessment of Health Research Capacity in Western Sydney Local Health District (WSLHD): A Study on Medical, Nursing and Allied Health Professionals

Background

Research should inform clinical decision-making and evidence-based practice for all health professionals. To build research capacity among all health professionals, there is a need to measure the levels of research capacity and identify the gaps and needs of health-care professionals. The aim of the study was to better understand the research culture and capacity of health professionals (medical, nursing and allied health) in Western Sydney Local Health District, Sydney, Australia.

Methods

A research capacity and culture tool (RCCT) survey was electronically distributed to all health staff in WSLHD. Data were collected between November 2016 and January 2017. Participants were surveyed through a 10-point Likert scale that measured research capacity at the individual, team and organisational levels.

Results

A total of 393 health staff responded to the study: allied health practitioners (46.3%), nursing staff (35.4%) and medical practitioners (18.3%). Females made 76% of the sample, and 54% were aged between 35 and 54 years. Individual responses were different across professions, with an average median score for medical 6.3 (95% CI 5.8-6.9), allied health 5.3 (95% CI 4.9-5.7) and nursing 4.5 (95% CI 4.1-5.0) after adjustment for age and gender. Team responses for medical staff (average median score 5.9 95% CI 5.3-6.4) were higher than allied health (4.1 95% CI 3.7-4.6) and nursing (4.3 95% CI 3.8-4.8), after adjusting for age and gender. However, there were no differences between the three professions for the organisational responses. Allied health and nursing staff were less confident in obtaining research funding, submitting ethics applications, writing for publication and mentoring colleagues about research.

Conclusion

This study demonstrates the individual research capacity for medical, allied health and nursing professionals are different. Research capacity building needs to be individually tailored to the specific needs of each profession. This research will inform future capacity building activities and training for health professionals in a large public health organisation of Sydney, Australia.

A Feasibility Study Of Administering The Electronic Research And Development Culture Index To The Multidisciplinary Workforce In A UK Teaching Hospital

Purpose

The study aims were: (i) to convert the Research and Development Culture Index (a validated rating instrument for assessing the strength of organizational Research and Development culture) into electronic format (eR&DCI), and (ii) to test the format and assess the feasibility of administering it to the multidisciplinary (allied health professionals, doctors and nurses) workforce in a National Health Service Hospital (NHS) in the United Kingdom (UK) by trialing it with the workforce of the tertiary Children’s Hospital within the organization.

Population and methods

The eR&DCI was emailed to all professional staff (n=907) in the Children’s Hospital. Data were analyzed using IBM SPSS Statistics 22.

Results

The eR&DCI was completed by 155 respondents (doctors n=38 (24.52%), nurses n=79 (50.96%) and allied health professionals (AHPs) n=38 (24.52%)). The response rate varied by professional group: responses were received from 79 out of 700 nurses (11%); 38 out of 132 doctors (29%) and 38 out of 76 AHPs (50%). Index scores demonstrated a positive research culture within the multidisciplinary workforce. Survey responses demonstrated differences between the professions related to research training and engagement in formal research activities.

Conclusion

This is the first study to assess the feasibility of assessing the strength of an organization’s multidisciplinary workforce research and development (R&D) culture by surveying that workforce using the eR&DCI. We converted the index to “Online Surveys” and successfully administered it to the entire multidisciplinary workforce in the Children’s Hospital. We met our criteria for feasibility: ability to administer the survey and a response rate comparable with similar studies. Uptake could have been increased by also offering the option of the paper-based index for self-administration. Results of the survey are informing delivery of the research strategy in the Children’s Hospital. This methodology has potential application in other healthcare contexts.

The potential of a lecture series in changing intent and experience among health professionals to conduct research in a large hospital: a retrospective pre-post design

BACKGROUND

Promoting research capacity within public health can encourage and engage employees to undertake research, utilising their understanding of the complex needs that exist within the public health system to provide more relevant research outcomes. Despite this, there are a number of reasons cited by health care professionals as to why research is not undertaken, and a lack of support for research participation results in missed opportunities for experienced clinical and public health staff to gain research experience, expand the evidence base, and promote and support research. The aim of this study is to identify if education in research, delivered through a series of lectures at a large tertiary referral hospital, results in an increase in the experience and intent to conduct research.

METHODS

A series of six lectures to aid in the understanding and development of research were delivered to health employees, health care professionals, students and their associates within a large public Australian hospital. Following these lectures, a validated instrument was developed and asked respondents to assess their research activity, research training history, and experience in conducting research using a retrospective pre/post- test design.

RESULTS

Over half (57.1%) of respondents (n = 49) reported no previous researcher education training prior to the lectures. Following the lectures, reported researcher experience increased significantly in the areas of writing a research protocol, using qualitative research methods, publishing research, writing and presenting a research report, analysing and interpreting results, using quantitative research methods, generating research ideas, and applying for research funding. At 6 months following the lecture series intent to be involved in further research was seen in the areas of submitting an ethics application, analysing qualitative and quantitative research data, and research funding applications.

CONCLUSIONS

Six one hour face to face research lectures can improve self-reported levels of intention to become involved in research as well as research experience amongst hospital health care professionals at 6 months. This traditional modality of education should still be considered as relevant strategy in building research capacity as measured innovatively using a retrospective pre/post test methodology.

Research culture and capacity in community health services: results of a structured survey of staff

Developing research capacity is recognised as an important endeavour. However, little is known about the current research culture, capacity and supports for staff working in community-based health settings. A structured survey of Division of Community Health staff was conducted using the research capacity tool. The survey was disseminated by email and in paper format. Quantitative data were analysed using descriptive statistics. Qualitative data were analysed thematically. In total, 109 usable responses were received, giving a response rate of 26%. Respondents were predominately nurses (n=71, 65.7%), with ~50% reporting post-graduate vocational qualifications. The highest levels of skills or organisational success were in using evidence to plan, promote and guide clinical practice. Most participants were unsure of organisational and team level skills and success at generating research. Few reported recent experience in research-generating activities. Barriers to undertaking research included lack of skills, time and access to external support and funding. Lack of skills and success in accessing external funding and resources to protect research time or to 'buy-in' technical expertise appeared to exacerbate these barriers. Community health staff have limited capacity to generate research with current levels of skill, funding and time. Strategies to increase research capacity should be informed by knowledge of clinicians' research experience and interests, and target development of skills to generate research. Resources and funding are needed at the organisational and team levels to overcome the significant barriers to research generation reported.

Evaluation of the research capacity and culture of allied health professionals in a large regional public health service

Purpose

The first aim of this study was to evaluate the current research capacity and culture among allied health professionals (AHPs) working in a large regional health service. The second aim of this study was to undertake principal component analyses (PCAs) to determine key components influencing our research capacity and culture.

Patients and methods

As part of a cross-sectional observational study, the Research Capacity and Culture (RCC) tool was administered to AHPs working in Gold Coast Health to measure self-reported research capacity and culture across Organization, Team, and Individual domains, including barriers to and motivators for performing research. An exploratory PCA was performed to identify key components influencing research capacity and culture in each of the three domains, and the results were compared with the findings of a previous study performed in a large metropolitan health district.

Results

This study found moderate levels of research capacity and culture across all domains, with higher scores (median, IQR) reported for the Organization domain (7,5–8) compared to the Team (6,3–8) and Individual domains (5,2–7). Two components were identified in each domain. Components in the Organization domain included “research culture” and “research infrastructure”; components in the Team domain included “valuing and sharing research” and “supporting research”; and components in the Individual domain included “skills for conducting research” and “skills for searching and critiquing the literature”. These components were found to be highly correlated with each other, with correlations between components within each domain ranging from 0.459 to 0.702.

Conclusion

The results of this study reinforce the need for an integrated “whole of system” approach to research capacity building. Ongoing investment in tailored support and infrastructure is required to maintain current areas of strengths and build on identified areas of weakness at the level of organizations, teams, and individual AHPs, and consideration should also be given as to how support across these three levels is integrated.

Not enough time for research? Use of supported funding to promote allied health research activity

Purpose

The current project evaluated the impact of a short-term, supported funding initiative that allowed staff from allied health (AH) professions to undertake research activity within rostered employment time. Specifically, the project will report on outcomes pertaining to individual research capacity, research output, and overall satisfaction with the initiative.

Participants and methods

Sixteen AH clinicians (n=16) from six AH professions participated in the evaluation of the initiative, with data being collected within a service improvement framework. Clinicians received up to 4 weeks of protected time relieved from their clinical duties to undertake research activities, including writing for publication, undertaking a systematic review, data analysis, and preparation of ethics applications. An AH Research Fellow provided additional support and mentorship, including the development of an implementation plan. Evaluation included pre–post measures of individual research capacity using a 15-item self-report Research Capacity and Culture (RCC) survey, a post-implementation satisfaction survey, and monitoring of research output achieved.

Results

Statistically significant improvements (p<0.05) were found on 14 out of 15 items on the RCC tool, with meaningful improvements in securing funding, analyzing qualitative data, writing for publication, literature searching skills, and providing advice to less experienced researchers. Overall satisfaction with the initiative was high, with positive comments from AH professionals (AHPs) regarding the initiative. Research output arising from the initiative included eleven manuscripts being submitted, with six currently in publication and others under review.

Conclusion

The preliminary findings support the feasibility of implementing a local, clinical funding model to promote individual research capacity and research output for AHPs. The short-term funding should be supported by local mentorship and guidance. Local barriers and suggestions to optimize implementation, including integrating within existing research infrastructure and using flexible “backfill” options, will also be described.

Key factors influencing allied health research capacity in a large Australian metropolitan health district

Objective

The aim of this study was to identify key factors affecting research capacity and engagement of allied health professionals working in a large metropolitan health service. Identifying such factors will assist in determining strategies for building research capacity in allied health.

Materials and methods

A total of 276 allied health professionals working within the Sydney Local Health District (SLHD) completed the Research Capacity in Context Tool (RCCT) that measures research capacity and culture across three domains: organization, team, and individual. An exploratory factor analysis was undertaken to identify common themes within each of these domains. Correlations were performed between demographic variables and the identified factors to determine possible relationships.

Results

Research capacity and culture success/skill levels were reported to be higher within the organization and team domains compared to the individual domain (median [interquartile range, IQR] 6 [5–8], 6 [5–8], 5 [3–7], respectively; Friedman χ²(2)=42.04, p<0.001). Exploratory factor analyses were performed to identify factors that were perceived by allied health respondents to affect research capacity. Factors identified within the organization domain were infrastructure for research (eg, funds and equipment) and research culture (eg, senior manager’s support for research); within the team domain the factors were research orientation (eg, dissemination of results at research seminars) and research support (eg, providing staff research training). Within the individual domain, only one factor was identified which was the research skill of the individual (eg, literature evaluation, submitting ethics applications and data analysis, and writing for publication).

Conclusion

The reported skill/success levels in research were lower for the individual domain compared to the organization or team domains. Key factors were identified in each domain that impacted on allied health research capacity. As these factors were different in each domain, various strategies may be required at the level of the organization, team, and individual to support and build allied health research capacity.

Understanding Faculty and Trainee Needs Related to Scholarly Activity in a Large, Nonuniversity Graduate Medical Education Program

CONTEXT

Graduate medical education (GME) programs must develop curriculum to ensure scholarly activity among trainees and faculty to meet accreditation requirements and to support evidence-based medicine.

OBJECTIVE

Test whether research-related needs and interests varied across four groups: primary care trainees, specialty trainees, primary care faculty, and specialty faculty.

DESIGN

We surveyed a random sample of trainees and faculty in Kaiser Permanente Southern California's GME programs. We investigated group differences in outcomes using Fisher exact and Kruskal-Wallis tests.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Research experiences, skills, barriers, motivators, and interests in specific research skills development.

RESULTS

Participants included 47 trainees and 26 faculty (response rate = 30%). Among primary care faculty, 12 (71%) reported little or no research experience vs 1 (11%) for specialty faculty, 14 (41%) for primary care trainees, and 1 (8%) for specialty trainees (p < 0.001). Submission of research to the institutional review board, an abstract to a conference, or a manuscript for publication in the previous year varied across groups (p = 0.001, p = 0.003, and p < 0.001, respectively). Overall self-reported research skills also differed across groups (p < 0.001). Primary care faculty reported the lowest skill level. Research barriers that differed across groups included other work roles taking priority; desire for work-life balance; and lack of managerial support, research equipment, administrative support, and funding.

CONCLUSION

Faculty and trainees in primary care and specialties have differing research-related needs that GME programs should consider when designing curricula to support scholarly activity. Developing research skills of primary care faculty is a priority to support trainees' scholarly activity.

A cross sectional observational study of research activity of allied health teams: is there a link with self-reported success, motivators and barriers to undertaking research?

BACKGROUND

Team-based approaches to research capacity building (RCB) may be an efficient means to promote allied health research participation and activity. In order to tailor such interventions, a clearer understanding of current patterns of research participation within allied health teams is needed. Different self-report measures exist which evaluate a team's research capacity and participation, as well as associated barriers and motivators. However, it remains unclear how such measures are associated with a team's actual research activity (e.g., journal publications, funding received). In response, this observational study aimed to identify the research activity, self-reported success, and motivations and barriers to undertaking research of eight allied health professional (AHP) teams and to explore whether any relationships exist between the self-reported measures and actual research activity within each team.

METHODS

A total of 95 AHPs from eight teams completed the research capacity and culture survey to evaluate team success, barriers and motivators to undertaking research, and an audit of research activity from January 2013 to August 2014 was undertaken within each team. Kendell's correlation coefficients were used to determine the association between research activity (i.e., number of journal publications, ethically approved projects and funding received) and the self-reported measures.

RESULTS

Seven out of eight teams rated their teams as having average success in research and demonstrated some form of research activity including at least two ethically approved projects. Research activity varied between teams, with funding received ranging from $0 to over $100,000, and half the teams not producing any journal publications. Team motivators demonstrated a stronger association with research activity compared to barriers, with the motivator "enhancing team credibility" being significantly associated with funding received. No significant association between self-reported research success and actual research activity was identified.

CONCLUSIONS

Preliminary findings suggest that self-report measures of research success may not always correspond to actual research activity, and a combination of both these measures may be useful when planning RCB interventions. Variation in activity between teams and organisations should also be considered when tailoring RCB interventions. Reinforcing intrinsically motivating rewards of research may also be useful in promoting research participation for some teams.

Research culture in a regional allied health setting

Research evidence is required to guide best practice, inform policy and improve the health of communities. Current indicators consider allied health research culture to be low. This study aimed to measure the allied health research culture and capacity in a Victorian regional health service. The Research Capacity and Culture tool was used to evaluate research capacity and culture across individual, team and organisation domains. One-way ANOVA was used to determine differences between allied health professions, whereas responses to open-ended questions were themed using open coding. One hundred thirty-six allied health professionals completed the survey. There were statistically significant differences in the organisation domain between social work, physiotherapy and occupational therapy professions; in the team domain, between social work and all other professions. Motivators for conducting research included providing a high-quality service, developing skills and increasing job satisfaction. Barriers included other work roles taking priority, a lack of time and limited research skills. Multi-layered strategies including establishing conjoint research positions are recommended to increase allied health research culture in this regional area.

Attitudes towards and experiences with research: Differences between dietetics students and professionals in Australia and the United States

AIM

Research conducted by dietitians is encouraged by national and international organisations, yet research output remains low. The attitudes towards and experiences with research and research methods course work of students and practitioners in Australia and the United States were examined.

METHODS

A cross-sectional online survey was conducted. Participants were contacted by email; 173 Australian (N = 50 students; 123 practitioners) and 499 US (N = 231 students; 268 practitioners) respondents completed the survey.

RESULTS

A smaller proportion of American students (74%) indicated that they would consider conducting research in the future compared to Australian students (84%) (P < 0.001). More Australian than American practitioners indicated interest in conducting research in their current position (87% vs 66%; P < 0.001). Research training did not increase future research plans, but respondents who had conducted research either as a student or at work responded more favourably to conducting research in the future (P < 0.001). In general, Australian respondents were more supportive of and more experienced with research.

CONCLUSIONS

Unlike classroom training, past research experiences supported plans for future research. Further work needs to investigate how the culture of the profession can be changed to support more dietitian-conducted research.

The role and impact of research positions within health care settings in allied health: a systematic review

Background

Embedding dedicated research positions within healthcare settings is a potential strategy to build allied health research capacity, with different health care organisations investing in such positions. The aim of this review was to gather evidence regarding the nature of the role of the research position in allied health professional (AHP) healthcare settings and the impact that these positions have on building research capacity.

Methods

A systematic review was undertaken searching eight databases (Medline CINAHL, Cochrane, OTSeeker, Speechbite, PEDro, Web of Science, and Proquest) using English language restrictions. Both authors independently screened abstracts, reviewed full-text articles, extracted data and performed quality assessments using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. Studies were included that reported the evaluation and/or components of the role of a dedicated research position with AHPs in any healthcare setting. A thematic analysis approach was used to synthesise findings.

Results

A total of 360 abstracts were initially screened, with 58 full text articles being reviewed. Eight unique studies were included in the thematic analysis clarifying either the nature of role of the research position (n = 7) or impact of the position (n = 4). Studies included mixed methods (n = 3), descriptive case study (n = 4), and observational (n = 1) designs. The majority of studies reported the research positions to provide academic support to individual clinicians and their teams, while developing their own research projects. Other studies reported support for research capacity building at a service and organisational level. Positive changes from these research positions was reported via increased individual research skills and participation and research outputs, improvements in research culture, attitudes and team and organisational level skills.

Conclusion

Emerging evidence suggests that research positions embedded within healthcare settings can influence individual and team based research skills and research participation of AHPs. Future research is needed to further investigate the sustainability of changes arisen from research positions and what mechanisms of the positions have the greatest impact. Healthcare managers should consider how to support potential components of the research position roles identified in the literature, as well consider evaluating their impact on research capacity, cultural and attitudinal changes of AHP staff in addition to traditional research metrics.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12913-016-1606-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Research culture in allied health: a systematic review

Research evidence is required to guide optimal allied health practice and inform policymakers in primary health care. Factors that influence a positive research culture are not fully understood, and nor is the impact of a positive research culture on allied health professionals. The aim of this systematic review was to identify factors that affect allied health research culture and capacity. An extensive search of 11 databases was conducted in June 2015. Studies were included if they were published in English, had full-text availability and reported research findings relating to allied health professions. Study quality was evaluated using the McMaster Critical Review Forms. Fifteen studies were eligible for inclusion. A meta-analysis was not performed because of heterogeneity between studies. Allied health professionals perceive that their individual research skills are lower in comparison to their teams and organisation. Motivators for conducting research for allied health professionals include developing skills, increasing job satisfaction and career advancement. Barriers include a lack of time, limited research skills and other work roles taking priority. Multilayered strategies, such as collaborations with external partners and developing research leadership positions, aimed at addressing barriers and enablers, are important to enhance allied health research culture and capacity.

Survey of research activity among multidisciplinary health professionals

Objective The aim of the present study was to describe the research activities being undertaken by health service employees within one Australian health service and explore their experiences with undertaking research. Methods The present mixed-methods study was conducted across one health service in Queensland, Australia, and included a cross-sectional online survey and interviews with healthcare service employees. The anonymous survey was a self-administered online questionnaire, distributed to all 6121 employees at the health service via email, asking about research activity and engagement. Willing participants were also interviewed on their perceptions and experiences with research and capacity building. Results In all, 151 participants responded to the survey and 22 participated in interviews. Three-quarters of respondents reported actively participating in research over the past 6 years and several research outputs, such as publications, conference presentations and competitive grant funding, were displayed. Four concepts emerged from interview findings, namely collaborative partnerships, skilled mentorship, embedding research and organisational support, which represented the overall theme 'opportunities for a research-infused health service'. Conclusion Employees of the health service recognised the importance of research and had a range of research skills, knowledge and experience. They also identified several opportunities for building research capacity in this service. What is known about the topic? Building research capacity among healthcare professionals is important for enabling the conduct of high-quality research in healthcare institutions. However, building research capacity is complex and influenced by the uniqueness of organisational context. In order to successfully build research capacity among employees at any health service, current research activity, skills and experience, as well as staff perceptions around building research capacity in that setting, should first be explored. What does this paper add? Healthcare services should incorporate teaching and research with clinical care to optimise outcomes for consumers. Support for research can be diminished in favour of clinical care and reduced emphasis on the importance of research can negatively influence research activity and expansion of clinician-led research. Highlighting the perceptions and experience of clinicians with enabling research and capacity building is a context-specific but necessary process to ensure that strategies, processes and resources are targeted to maintain support for research activity while overcoming barriers. What are the implications for practitioners? Participants in this study identified several ways to build research capacity in their health service, many of which may be applicable to other settings and contexts. Building research collaborations and academic partnerships are important to enable and drive research. Structural processes, such as organisational support and opportunities for skilled mentorship, may be necessary to build health service employees' research knowledge, skills and confidence. Finally, embedding research into everyday practice is important to foster a positive research culture within health services.

Research capacity and culture of the Victorian public health allied health workforce is influenced by key research support staff and location

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the present study was to identify and understand the self-rated research capacity and culture of the allied health workforce. METHODS. The present study was a cross-sectional survey. The Research Capacity and Culture tool was disseminated to all Victorian public health allied health departments. General demographic data were also collected, including the presence of an organisational allied health research lead.

RESULTS

Five hundred and twenty fully completed surveys were returned by participants; all allied health disciplines and all grades were represented. One hundred and eighty-six participants had an organisational allied health research lead and 432 were located in a metropolitan-based health service. There were significant differences (P < 0.05) within all organisational and team research skills between those with and without a research lead, together with those in different service locations (metropolitan vs non-metropolitan). Higher self-ratings in individual research skills (P < 0.05) were primarily associated with more senior and metropolitan-located clinicians.

CONCLUSION

The allied health workforce identifies as a group that is ready to build the evidence to support clinical practice yet requires a whole-systems approach to do so. The results of the present study suggest that the development of key people to build capacity at a higher organisational level has a flow-down effect on research capacity and culture.

The research capacity and culture of Australian podiatrists

Background

Best practice clinical health care is widely recognised to be founded on evidence based practice. Enhancing evidence based practice via the rapid translation of new evidence into every day clinical practice is fundamental to the success of health care and in turn health care professions. There is little known about the collective research capacity and culture of the podiatry profession across Australia. Thus, the aim of this study was to investigate the research capacity and culture of the podiatry profession within Australia and determine if there were any differences between podiatrists working in different health sectors and workplaces.

Method

All registered podiatrists were eligible to participate in a cross-sectional online survey. The Australian Podiatry Associations disseminated the survey and all podiatrists were encouraged to distribute it to colleagues. The Research Capacity and Culture (RCC) tool was used to collect all research capacity and culture item variables using a 10-point scale (1 = lowest; 10 = highest). Additional demographic, workplace and health sector data variables were also collected. Mann–Whitney-U, Kruskal–Wallis and logistic regression analyses were used to determine any difference between health sectors and workplaces. Word cloud analysis was used for qualitative responses of individual motivators and barriers to research culture.

Results

There were 232 fully completed surveys (6% of Australian registered podiatrists). Overall respondents reported low success or skills (Median rating < 4) on the majority of individual success or skill items. Podiatrists working in multi-practitioner workplaces reported higher individual success or skills in the majority of items compared with sole practitioners (p < 0.05). Non-clinical and public health sector podiatrists reported significantly higher post-graduate study enrolment or completion, research activity participation, provisions to undertake research and individual success or skill than those working privately.

Conclusions

This study suggests that podiatrists in Australia report similar low levels of research success or skill to those reported in other allied health professions. The workplace setting and health sector seem to play key roles in self reported research success and skills. This is important knowledge for podiatrists and researchers aiming to translate research evidence into clinical practice.