Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27927657›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2016

Building capacity to use and undertake research in health organisations: a survey of training needs and priorities among staff.

Helen Barratt, Naomi J Fulop

Abstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
–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

16 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
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

2 authors.

Helen BarrattDepartment of Applied Health Research, University College London, London, UK.
Naomi J FulopDepartment of Applied Health Research, University College London, London, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesEfforts to improve healthcare and population health depend partly on the ability of health organisations to use research knowledge and participate in its production. We report the findings of a survey conducted to prioritise training needs among healthcare and public health staff, in relation to the production and implementation of research, across an applied health research collaboration.

designA questionnaire survey using a validated tool, the Hennessy-Hicks Training Needs Assessment Questionnaire. Participants rated 25 tasks on a five-point scale with regard to both their confidence in performing the task, and its importance to their role.

settingA questionnaire weblink was distributed to a convenience sample of 35 healthcare and public health organisations in London and South East England, with a request that they cascade the information to relevant staff.

participants203 individuals responded, from 20 healthcare and public health organisations.

interventionsNone. OUTCOME MEASURES: Training needs were identified by comparing median importance and performance scores for each task. Individuals were also invited to describe up to three priority areas in which they require training.

resultsAcross the study sample, evaluation; teaching; making do with limited resources; coping with change and managing competing demands were identified as key tasks. Assessing the relevance of research and learning about new developments were the most relevant research-related tasks. Participants' training priorities included evaluation; finding, appraising and applying research evidence; and data analysis. Key barriers to involvement included time and resources, as well as a lack of institutional support for undertaking research.

conclusionsWe identify areas in which healthcare and public health professionals may benefit from support to facilitate their involvement in and use of applied health research. We also describe barriers to participation and differing perceptions of research between professional groups.

Indexed as

Capacity BuildingEfficiency, OrganizationalEnglandHealth Services ResearchHumansInservice TrainingNeeds AssessmentPublic HealthQuality ImprovementResearch PersonnelEvidence useKnowledge translationResearch participationTraining

Identifiers

PMID27927657
PMCPMC5168601

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.