Assessing community health research capacity across stakeholders: adapting a tool

Summary Multi-sectoral collaborative approaches with strong community engagement are essential for addressing health disparities. A valid tool for assessing organizational research and capacity for community health research stakeholders could help strengthen organizational capacity for engagement in such collaborations. This study was conducted to validate an innovative tool for assessing research activity and capacity of a spectrum of stakeholder organizations to provide support for strengthening community health research capacity in Bhutan. In-person interviews with academics (n = 10), clinicians (n = 10), government staff (n = 10), consultants (n = 2) and management of health-related civil society organizations (CSOs; n = 12 interviews/organizations, 13 individuals) were recorded and transcribed. Questions covered individual and organizational research activity and capacity, research networks and an international version of the Community Research Assessment Tool (CREAT-I). Almost all participants (84%) had participated in community health research projects. Social network analysis showed a large, interconnected cluster with a few key individuals linking across sectors. CREAT-I responses identified the highest capacity in organizational support for research among academic participants, while clinical and CSO participants reported highest capacity in practical research experiences and government participants reported highest capacity in research specific experiences. The CREAT-I tool showed strong internal reliability (Cronbach’s α = 0.91) and validity. Limited money, time and skilled staff were identified as barriers to research. The CREAT-I assesses community health research capacity of organizations, and such a tool could be useful in identifying research capacity needs, monitoring impact of research capacity-building activities and contributing to a greater capacity for multi-sectoral collaborative approaches to community health research in international settings.

Download Full-text

3575 Assessing Research Activity and Capacity of Community Based Organizations: Field Testing of the Community Research Activity Assessment Tool (CREAT)

Journal of Clinical and Translational Science ◽

10.1017/cts.2019.194 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 3 (s1) ◽

pp. 84-84

Author(s):

Mahaya Allie Walker ◽

Natasha Ray ◽

David Fiellin ◽

Debbie Humphries

Keyword(s):

Assessment Tool ◽

Field Testing ◽

Research Capacity ◽

Knowledge Generation ◽

Community Research ◽

Structured Interviews ◽

Self Administration ◽

Research Activity ◽

Research Partnerships ◽

Activity Assessment

OBJECTIVES/SPECIFIC AIMS: 1. To assess the acceptability and feasibility and of an online self-assessment version of the Community REsearch Activity Assessment Tool (CREAT), an instrument to measure research capacity of CBOs. 2. To elicit CBO perspectives on their research and knowledge generation activities. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Thirteen CBOs who had previously partnered with an academic course on practice-based community health research were contacted and asked to participate in the field testing of the CREAT and provide feedback on areas of strength and areas for potential improvement. Eleven organizations completed the field testing, which began and ended with an in-person semi-structured interview with the online self-administration of the CREAT in the middle. The semi-structured interviews were audio-recorded with questions pertaining to topics such as: strengths and challenges of previous academic research partnerships, perceptions around the importance of research within the organization, thoughts and reactions to the CREAT, and general feedback about the CREAT. Results from the self-administered CREAT were used to test a scoring algorithm. Semi-structured interviews are being transcribed, pre-post responses to questions of strengths and challenges in engaging in research partnerships will be compared, and overall qualitative transcripts will be coded using grounded theory. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Anticipated Results: The CREAT was acceptable and self-administration was feasible. Average time for completion of the online CREAT was 41 ± 13 min, and respondents did not need assistance from the interviewer to complete the online instrument. Suggestions for improvements focused on word choices and scale options. Respondents were aware of the importance of research activities for their CBOs, particularly for optimizing programmatic quality and services. Access to staff and financial resources were key barriers to strengthening research capacity, and respondents noted that engaging in research partnerships can also bring in additional resources. Interview transcription is still in progress along with the refinement of the codebook for the qualitative data collected. In alignment with objectives/goals outlined above, the results will be separated into the following four sections: CBO Research and Knowledge Generation Activities, Acceptability of the Tool, Feasibility of the Tool, and Refinement of the Tool. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: The online, self-administered CREAT instrument is acceptable and feasible for CBO respondents. Availability of a validated tool to assess research capacity of CBOs, developed and refined with input from community researchers, will support targeted research capacity building for CTSAs, community organizations and partners, thus strengthening collaborations. Translational scientists, public health systems and community health improvement depend on CBOs as partners in community-engaged research (CEnR). The CREAT will allow community members to more fully contribute their expertise to the development, implementation and evaluation of interventions, and to develop more equitable partnerships with researchers.

Download Full-text

The RCCM 2009 Survey: Mapping Doctoral and Postdoctoral CAM Research in the United Kingdom

Evidence-based Complementary and Alternative Medicine ◽

10.1093/ecam/nep184 ◽

2011 ◽

Vol 2011 ◽

pp. 1-4 ◽

Cited By ~ 4

Author(s):

Nicola Robinson ◽

George Lewith

Keyword(s):

Research Capacity ◽

Research Quality ◽

Research Assessment ◽

Full Time ◽

Research Activity ◽

High Quality Research ◽

Strategic Approach ◽

Rigorous Research ◽

The Usa ◽

The Uk

Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM) is widely available in the UK and used frequently by the public, but there is little high quality research to sustain its continued use and potential integration into the NHS. There is, therefore, a need to develop rigorous research in this area. One essential way forward is to train and develop more CAM researchers so that we can enhance academic capacity and provide the evidence upon which to base strategic healthcare decisions. This UK survey identified 80 research active postgraduates registered for MPhils/PhDs in 21 universities and were either current students or had completed their postgraduate degree during the recent UK Research Assessment Exercise (RAE) 2001–2008. The single largest postgraduate degree funder was the university where the students registered (26/80). Thirty-two projects involved randomized controlled trials and 33 used qualitative research methods. The UK RAE also indicates a significant growth of postdoctoral and tenured research activity over this period (in 2001 there were three full time equivalents; in 2008 there were 15.5) with a considerable improvement in research quality. This mapping exercise suggests that considerable effort is currently being invested in developing UK CAM research capacity and thus inform decision making in this area. However, in comparative international terms UK funding is very limited. As in the USA and Australia, a centralized and strategic approach by the National Institute of Health Research to this currently uncoordinated and underfunded activity may benefit CAM research in the UK.

Download Full-text

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

Australian Journal of Primary Health ◽

10.1071/py12081 ◽

2014 ◽

Vol 20 (1) ◽

pp. 4 ◽

Cited By ~ 9

Author(s):

Emma L. Friesen ◽

Elizabeth J. Comino ◽

Jennifer Reath ◽

Alison Derrett ◽

Maree Johnson ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Health Services ◽

Community Health ◽

Academic Writing ◽

Health Research ◽

Design Research ◽

Research Capacity ◽

Research Unit ◽

Community Health Services ◽

Project Teams ◽

South West

The Primary and Community Health Research Unit was established in 2010 in south-west Sydney to build research capacity in primary and community health services and help generate evidence to underpin clinical activities. In 2011, six project teams participated in a 12-month researcher mentoring program, undertaking projects in quality improvement and service evaluation. Project teams were linked with academic mentors and participated in four research skill development workshops covering research design, research ethics, statistical analysis and academic writing. All project teams presented their work at two or more research conferences, and all are preparing manuscripts for publication in peer-reviewed journals. The Primary and Community Health Research Unit’s approach to research capacity building in primary and community health services appears to be effective in supporting novice researchers to undertake research in their clinical settings. Sustainability is dependent on securing ongoing funding. Further analysis is needed to identify strengths and weaknesses of this approach.

Download Full-text

Publication outputs from a Primary and Community Health Research Unit, 2011–14

Australian Journal of Primary Health ◽

10.1071/py14152 ◽

2015 ◽

Vol 21 (2) ◽

pp. 118 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Emma L. Friesen ◽

Elizabeth J. Comino

Keyword(s):

Community Health ◽

Health Research ◽

Research Capacity ◽

Research Unit ◽

Local Health ◽

Higher Education Research ◽

Research Capacity Building ◽

Conference Paper ◽

Project Completion ◽

Conference Presentations

Publication of research is a goal of research capacity building initiatives. We reviewed the publications generated by practitioner researchers involved with the Primary and Community Health Research Unit (PCHRU), within the Division of Community Health in South Western Sydney Local Health District (SWSLHD), between 2011 and 2014. Publications were categorised using the Higher Education Research Data Collection Specifications. Published outputs included five refereed articles, one refereed full conference paper and 25 non-published conference presentations. A further 11 refereed articles in draft form were located. The majority of publications were considered ‘not published’ and not widely discoverable. Evidence for expected timeframes for project completion, including support for publication of research, is needed.

Download Full-text

Increasing Residency Research Output While Cultivating Community Research Collaborations

Family Medicine ◽

10.22454/fammed.2018.734196 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 50 (6) ◽

pp. 460-464 ◽

Cited By ~ 3

Author(s):

Sally P. Weaver

Keyword(s):

Residency Program ◽

Health Research ◽

Research Output ◽

Community Research ◽

Research Activity ◽

Residency Programs ◽

Resident Research ◽

Research Collaborations ◽

Health Related Research ◽

Research Curriculum

Background and Objectives: Having a research curriculum in addition to hosting a resident research day stimulates research activity in residency programs. Research collaborations outside an individual residency program may also promote research in residency. This paper describes a community-wide health research forum that engages faculty and residents in research while bringing together potential research collaborators from the community. Methods: A yearly research forum has been held at a large community-based family medicine residency program for the past 10 years. This forum invites both residency faculty and residents to present scholarly works, and also invites researchers from the community to present health-related research. Presenters outside the residency come from hospital systems, the local university, other residency programs, and community private physicians. Results: Peer-reviewed research publications have increased greatly since the advent of the research forum in 2006, with six publications from 1997-2006 and 26 from 2007-2016. Greater increases in numbers of peer reviewed presentations were also seen. Collaborative research has occurred between residency faculty and multiple departments at the local university including the business school, social work, public health, physiology, and statistics. There are now 28 collaborative projects completed or in progress. Conclusions: Development and implementation of a regional health research event has been a success in increasing faculty and resident research productivity. The even greater success however, is the progress made in advancing research collaborations between the local university and the residency program.

Download Full-text

Open methods: bringing transparency to research metrics

Septentrio Conference Series ◽

10.7557/5.3240 ◽

2014 ◽

Author(s):

Mike Taylor

Keyword(s):

Peer Review ◽

Expert Opinion ◽

Quantitative Information ◽

Research Community ◽

Civil Society Organizations ◽

Research Assessment ◽

Research Activity ◽

Library Resources ◽

Research Metrics

>> See video of presentation (24 min.) Digital technologies, growth and globalization of the research community, and societal demand to address the Grand Challenges of our times, are driving changes in the dynamics of research, an evolution sometimes referred to as “Science 2.0”. They impact the entire research workflow, from securing resource, through conducting research, to disseminating the results using more routes than ever before, to peers, industry and society. This broad transmission of the results and benefits of research also paves the way for citizens and civil society organizations to be much more directly and actively involved as “agenda gatekeepers”, with a role in steering research, and perhaps even as funders themselves.These changes result in a more complex research ecosystem, populated by more stakeholders with ever higher expectations. The resources to support this ecosystem are not infinite, and these changes also drive the development of additional approaches into evaluating research alongside the well-established practices of peer review, and of securing expert opinion and narratives. This has driven a growing interest in the use of research metrics, alongside qualitative inputs, in making allocation decisions.In just the same way as the changes leading to Science 2.0 are driven bottom-up, Elsevier believes that the most effective way to embed quantitative insights along the existing qualitative is by endorsing a community-built solution. We are bringing our technical expertise and global reach to bear to facilitate democratic initiatives. One example of this is our engagement with the Snowball Metrics program [1], in which universities agree amongst themselves on metrics that give them useful strategic insights, rather than accept metrics that funders find useful and which are often, in effect, imposed. The initiative tests the methods on all available data sources to ensure they are robust and commonly understood and will support apples-to-apples benchmarking, and publish the metrics “recipes” for free so that they can be used by anyone, for their own purposes and, if applicable, under their own business models.Such engagements have shaped Elsevier’s position on research metrics and their use in research assessment. We recognise the need for a much broader range of research metrics than has traditionally been available: publication and citation metrics remain valuable, but must be complemented by those in other areas such as collaboration, deposition and reuse of research data, and benefit to society. Our vision is to be able to provide quantitative information about the entire research workflow, and we are engaging on several fronts to make this vision a reality.At the same time, we have also learnt about how the research community expects research metrics to be used in a responsible way, and our approach embraces this [2]. We recognize that metrics never reflect 100% of research activity, and that they should always be used together with qualitative inputs: peer review, expert opinion and narrative. The methods underlying any metric should be open to build trust, and to stimulate debate and improvement where needed, so that these same methods can be applied to all data available, whether they are open or proprietary. This consistent approach will bring the greatest benefit to the research community.ReferencesSnowball Metrics Recipe Book: http://www.snowballmetrics.com/wp-content/uploads/snowball-recipe-book_HR.pdf.Elsevier’s position on the role of metrics in research assessment: http://www.elsevier.com/online-tools/research-intelligence/resource-library/resources/response-to-hefces-call-for-evidence-independent-review-of-the-role-of-metrics-in-research-assessment.

Download Full-text

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

Australian Health Review ◽

10.1071/ah14209 ◽

2015 ◽

Vol 39 (3) ◽

pp. 303 ◽

Cited By ~ 19

Author(s):

Cylie Williams ◽

Koki Miyazaki ◽

Donna Borkowski ◽

Carol McKinstry ◽

Matthew Cotchet ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Public Health ◽

Health Workforce ◽

Health Research ◽

Allied Health ◽

Research Capacity ◽

The Self ◽

Research Activity ◽

Research Skills ◽

Extrinsic Factors ◽

Research Activities

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. What is known about the topic? Some allied health disciplines (occupational therapy, dietetics and podiatry) have previously been surveyed about their research capabilities, capacity and culture. Those surveys identified individual skill and success in undertaking early phase research activities, such as finding and critiquing the literature. However, there were limitations to research activity identified, such as a lack of success or skill in the later phase of research projects to undertake analysis of data, writing for publication and mentoring less experienced clinicians in research. What does this paper add? The present study explored the effect of extrinsic factors on undertaking research activity within the allied health workforce. It determined that there are several factors that affect the organisation and team levels of research capacity and culture, but these factors were different to the self-reported individual success or skills. The results can assist organisations to make strategic decisions about how to engage allied health clinicians in research activities. What are the implications for practitioners? The results of the present study give a platform for the Victorian allied health workforce to grow in its engagement in research activities and use of evidence. This knowledge is important to decision makers and funding bodies, as well as to the Australian allied health workforce.

Download Full-text

Health research capacity in Nepal: Analysis of the trend and the role of local researchers

Tropical Doctor ◽

10.1177/0049475520982770 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 004947552098277

Author(s):

Madhu Kharel ◽

Alpha Pokharel ◽

Krishna P Sapkota ◽

Prasant V Shahi ◽

Pratisha Shakya ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Health Research ◽

Fold Increase ◽

Research Capacity ◽

Rapid Review ◽

Evidence Based ◽

Middle Income ◽

Middle Income Countries ◽

Health Related ◽

Evidence Based Decision Making

Evidence-based decision-making is less common in low- and middle-income countries where the research capacity remains low. Nepal, a lower-middle-income country in Asia, is not an exception. We conducted a rapid review to identify the trend of health research in Nepal and found more than seven-fold increase in the number of published health-related articles between 2000 and 2018. The proportion of articles with Nepalese researchers as the first authors has also risen over the years, though they are still only in two-thirds of the articles in 2018.

Download Full-text

A North–South-South partnership in higher education to develop health research capacity in the Democratic Republic of the Congo: the challenge of finding a common language

Health Research Policy and Systems ◽

10.1186/s12961-021-00728-8 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 19 (1) ◽

Author(s):

Christiane Horwood ◽

Sphindile Mapumulo ◽

Lyn Haskins ◽

Vaughn John ◽

Silondile Luthuli ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Higher Education ◽

Low Income ◽

Health Research ◽

Democratic Republic ◽

Academic Staff ◽

Research Capacity ◽

Nutritional Epidemiology ◽

Low Income Countries ◽

Republic Of The Congo ◽

English Speaking

Abstract Background Globally, increasing numbers of higher education institutions (HEIs) in non-English-speaking countries have adopted English as a medium of instruction (EMI), because of the perception that this provides opportunities to attract high-calibre students and academic staff, and engage with the international research community. We report an evaluation of a North–South-South collaboration to develop health research capacity in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) by establishing a postgraduate programme in nutritional epidemiology at the Kinshasa School of Public Health (KSPH), where EMI was adopted. We report experiences and perceptions of stakeholders, facilitators and students about using EMI. Methods In-depth qualitative interviews were conducted between October and December 2019 among convenience sampled stakeholders (8), facilitators (11) and students (12) involved in the programme from all three partner institutions (University of Kinshasa; University of KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa; University of Bergen, Norway). Interviews were conducted in participants’ language of preference (English or French), audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and translated into English when required. Analysis employed a thematic approach. Results Most participants viewed EMI positively, reporting that studying in English created opportunities to access relevant literature, improve interactions with the scientific community and advance their careers. As a result of adopting EMI, some students had opportunities to present research findings at international conferences and publish their research in English. English-speaking researchers from partner institutions were able to participate in supervision of students’ research. However, inadequate English competency, particularly among students, was challenging, with some students reporting being unable to understand or interact in class, which negatively affected their academic performance. Further, EMI created barriers at KSPH among academic staff who were not proficient in English, leading to poor participation among non-English-speaking staff and lack of integration with other postgraduate programmes. Participants suggested additional English language support for EMI. Conclusion Partnerships between HEIs could be a powerful tool to develop research capacity in low-income countries in line with United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. EMI could be a solution to language barriers faced by many such partnerships, but wide-ranging support to develop English proficiency among staff and students is essential to ensure that the challenges do not outweigh the benefits.

Download Full-text