ArticleAsia Pacific family medicine2013
Research consultation clinic: impetus towards facilitating primary care research.
Article in Asia Pacific family medicine, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Building the capacity for psycho-Oncology research: a survey of the research barriers and training needs within the International Psycho-Oncology Society.Journal of psychosocial oncology research and practice · 2020Article
- Attitudes, barriers, and enablers towards conducting primary care research in Banda Aceh, Indonesia: a qualitative research study.Asia Pacific family medicine · 2018Article
- PAIR UP for primary care excellence: perspectives from a primary healthcare provider in Singapore.Singapore medical journal · 2014Review
- [Bibliometric map of research carried out in Primary Care in Spain during the period 2013-2017].Atencion primariaObservational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn Singapore, SingHealth Polyclinics (SHP) is an accredited Family Medicine (FM) training centre which managed 1.8 million primary care patient-visits in 2012. To promote research in the institution, research consultation clinics (RCC) are being introduced in 2010 to enable free face-to-face consultation between experienced and novice researchers on specific research topics. Each RCC session allows about an hour or more for the SHP staff, medical undergraduates and general practitioners to seek advice and clarification on key research areas, ranging from research question refinement, study design and execution, data analysis, result presentation to publication. The consultants comprise of two FM researchers with postgraduate research qualification.
aimThis article aims to review the implementation of RCC from 2010 to 2012 and its impact on research activities and outcome indicators in the same period of time.
methodsThe study comprised of two segments. Part I was a three-year retrospective review of the RCC administrative record. The total number of RCC sessions, hours utilised, participants' profiles, the number of research studies initiated by them and their research presentations at local and overseas scientific meetings/conferences were computed. Part 2 was an anonymous web-based questionnaire survey fielded to RCC participants to collect their feedback on the RCC service and their self-reported initiation and completion of research study after the RCC consultation.
resultsThe RCC sessions increased from 17 to 40 sessions, resulting in increment of 2 to 14 research presentations and from 2 to 6 initiations of new research studies per annum from 2010-2012. The response rate to the questionnaire survey was 70.3%, with the majority of multi-disciplinary respondents rated the RCC service to be accessible, adequate and were satisfied with its quality. Study design, data management and study execution were ranked as important areas of research for consultation. 79% of them had started a research project and 36% had completed their studies.
conclusionsThe RCC is a feasible model to catalyse multi-disciplinary research in primary care institutions. Further study is needed to evaluate its relevance when research advances and novice researchers become experienced investigators to take on more complex projects.
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.