Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24894592›Full record

ArticleBMJ quality & safety2014

Moving improvement research closer to practice: the Researcher-in-Residence model.

Martin Marshall, Christina Pagel, Catherine French, Martin Utley, Dominique Allwood, Naomi Fulop, Catherine Pope, Victoria Banks, Allan Goldmann

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ quality & safety, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 81 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
81citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

81 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. BMJ open · 2017
    Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Teamwork and relational infrastructure: a qualitative study of modern UK general practice.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Can the Development of Orphan Drugs Include Wider Patient Engagement? A Citizens' Jury to Explore a Promissory Notion.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2025
    Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Technostress, technosuffering, and relational strain: a multi-method qualitative study of how remote and digital work affects staff in UK general practice.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2025
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Challenges to quality in contemporary, hybrid general practice a multi-site longitudinal case study.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2025
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

21 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Martin MarshallUCL, London, UK Improvement Science London, London, UK.
Christina PagelClinical Operational Research Unit and Department of Applied Health Research, UCL, London, UK.
Catherine FrenchDepartment of Applied Health Research, UCL, London, UK.
Martin UtleyClinical Operational Research Unit, UCL, London, UK.
Dominique AllwoodImprovement Science London, London, UK.
Naomi FulopDepartment of Applied Health Research, UCL, London, UK.
Catherine PopeFaculty of Health Sciences, University of Southampton, London, UK.
Victoria BanksGreat Ormond Street Hospital for Children, London, UK.
Allan GoldmannCardiac Critical Care Unit, Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children, London, UK.

Funding

Department of Health DRF-2010-03-42Medical Research Council MR/K02325X/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The traditional separation of the producers of research evidence in academia from the users of that evidence in healthcare organisations has not succeeded in closing the gap between what is known about the organisation and delivery of health services and what is actually done in practice. As a consequence, there is growing interest in alternative models of knowledge creation and mobilisation, ones which emphasise collaboration, active participation of all stakeholders, and a commitment to shared learning. Such models have robust historical, philosophical and methodological foundations but have not yet been embraced by many of the people working in the health sector. This paper presents an emerging model of participation, the Researcher-in-Residence. The model positions the researcher as a core member of a delivery team, actively negotiating a body of expertise which is different from, but complementary to, the expertise of managers and clinicians. Three examples of in-residence models are presented: an anthropologist working as a member of an executive team, operational researchers working in a front-line delivery team, and a Health Services Researcher working across an integrated care organisation. Each of these examples illustrates the contribution that an embedded researcher can make to a service-based team. They also highlight a number of unanswered questions about the model, including the required level of experience of the researcher and their areas of expertise, the institutional facilitators and barriers to embedding the model, and the risk that the independence of an embedded researcher might be compromised. The Researcher-in-Residence model has the potential to engage both academics and practitioners in the promotion of evidence-informed service improvement, but further evaluation is required before the model should be routinely used in practice.

Indexed as

Evidence-Based PracticeHealth Services ResearchQuality ImprovementCommunity-Based Participatory ResearchDelivery of Health CareHumansModels, OrganizationalResearch PersonnelWorkforceDecision makingHealthcare quality improvementHealth services researchImplementation scienceManagement

Identifiers

PMID24894592
PMCPMC4173968

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.