ArticleBMC family practice2012
Evaluating a team-based approach to research capacity building using a matched-pairs study design.
Article in BMC family practice, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
27 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Research capacity building frameworks for allied health professionals - a systematic review.BMC health services research · 2018Pooled it
- Tools and instruments for needs assessment, monitoring and evaluation of health research capacity development activities at the individual and organizational level: a systematic review.Health research policy and systems · 2015Pooled it
- Strategies for research engagement of clinicians in allied health (STRETCH): a mixed methods research protocol.BMJ open · 2017Trial
- Research Capacity and Culture of Podiatrists in Canada (Quebec) and France: A Parallel Cross-Sectional Study.Journal of foot and ankle research · 2026Article
- Collaborations between health services and educational institutions to develop research capacity in health services and health service staff: a systematic scoping review.BMC health services research · 2024Article
- Evaluating the research capacity and culture amongst staff at a tertiary level teaching hospital in Rwanda.PloS one · 2024Article
- Challenges and strategies for conducting research in primary health care practice: an integrative review.BMC health services research · 2023Review
- A framework for sustainable capacity-building for collaborative North-South translational health research and training in a resource-constrained setting.Health research policy and systems · 2023Review
- Describing the evidence-base for research engagement by health care providers and health care organisations: a scoping review.BMC health services research · 2023Article
- Research capacity and culture in an Australian metropolitan public mental health service: scoping the skills and experience of social workers and occupational therapists.BMC medical education · 2022Article
- Research training incorporating education and mentoring for rural and regional allied health professionals: An evaluation study.The Australian journal of rural health · 2022Article
- Allied health professionals' perceptions of research in the United Kingdom national health service: a survey of research capacity and culture.BMC health services research · 2022Article
- Research education and training for nurses and allied health professionals: a systematic scoping review.BMC medical education · 2022Article
- Research capacity-building for clinicians: understanding how the research facilitator role fosters clinicians' engagement in the research process.Health research policy and systems · 2022Article
- Effectiveness of an Academic-Practice Team Approach on Research Capacity Building of Nurses and Public Health Professionals.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- Relationship Between Research Culture and Research Activity of Medical Doctors: A Survey and Audit.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2021Article
- Proliferation of the WReN spider, an instrument to measure health professionals' experience of research: a bibliographic study.BMC medical education · 2019Article
- A Feasibility Study Of Administering The Electronic Research And Development Culture Index To The Multidisciplinary Workforce In A UK Teaching Hospital.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2019Article
- Evaluation of the research capacity and culture of allied health professionals in a large regional public health service.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2019Article
- 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?BMC health services research · 2017Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThere is a continuing need for research capacity building initiatives for primary health care professionals. Historically strategies have focused on interventions aimed at individuals but more recently theoretical frameworks have proposed team-based approaches. Few studies have evaluated these new approaches. This study aims to evaluate a team-based approach to research capacity building (RCB) in primary health using a validated quantitative measure of research capacity in individual, team and organisation domains.
methodsA non-randomised matched-pairs trial design was used to evaluate the impact of a multi-strategy research capacity building intervention. Four intervention teams recruited from one health service district were compared with four control teams from outside the district, matched on service role and approximate size. All were multi-disciplinary allied health teams with a primary health care role. Random-effects mixed models, adjusting for the potential clustering effect of teams, were used to determine the significance of changes in mean scores from pre- to post-intervention. Comparisons of intervention versus control groups were made for each of the three domains: individual, team and organisation. The Individual Domain measures the research skills of the individual, whereas Team and Organisation Domains measure the team/organisation's capacity to support and foster research, including research culture.
resultsIn all three domains (individual, team and organisation) there were no occasions where improvements were significantly greater for the control group (comprising the four control teams, n = 32) compared to the intervention group (comprising the four intervention teams, n = 37) either in total domain score or domain item scores. However, the intervention group had a significantly greater improvement in adjusted scores for the Individual Domain total score and for six of the fifteen Individual Domain items, and to a lesser extent with Team and Organisation Domains (two items in the Team and one in the Organisation domains).
conclusionsA team-based approach to RCB resulted in considerable improvements in research skills held by individuals for the intervention group compared to controls; and some improvements in the team and organisation's capacity to support research. More strategies targeted at team and organisation research-related policies and procedures may have resulted in increased improvements in these domains.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.