Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32103975›Full record

ArticleJournal of multidisciplinary healthcare2020

Assessment of Health Research Capacity in Western Sydney Local Health District (WSLHD): A Study on Medical, Nursing and Allied Health Professionals.

Sharon A Lee, Karen Byth, Janelle A Gifford, Madhan Balasubramanian, Carolyn A Fozzard, Tony Skapetis, Victoria M Flood

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
6.5field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 47 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Sharon A LeeWestern Sydney Local Health District, Research and Education Network, Westmead, NSW 2145, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-8128-7776
Karen BythWestern Sydney Local Health District, Research and Education Network, Westmead, NSW 2145, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-1253-6393
Janelle A GiffordFaculty of Medicine and Health, Sydney School of Health Sciences, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW 2141, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-2852-1564
Madhan BalasubramanianWestern Sydney Local Health District, Research and Education Network, Westmead, NSW 2145, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-2798-5850
Carolyn A FozzardWestern Sydney Local Health District, Research and Education Network, Westmead, NSW 2145, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-3111-1825
Tony SkapetisFaculty of Medicine and Health, Sydney Dental School, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW 2005, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-0401-9908
Victoria M FloodWestern Sydney Local Health District, Research and Education Network, Westmead, NSW 2145, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-5310-7221
The University of Sydney · AUSydney Local Health District · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundResearch should inform clinical decision-making and evidence-based practice for all health professionals. To build research capacity among all health professionals, there is a need to measure the levels of research capacity and identify the gaps and needs of health-care professionals. The aim of the study was to better understand the research culture and capacity of health professionals (medical, nursing and allied health) in Western Sydney Local Health District, Sydney, Australia.

methodsA research capacity and culture tool (RCCT) survey was electronically distributed to all health staff in WSLHD. Data were collected between November 2016 and January 2017. Participants were surveyed through a 10-point Likert scale that measured research capacity at the individual, team and organisational levels.

resultsA total of 393 health staff responded to the study: allied health practitioners (46.3%), nursing staff (35.4%) and medical practitioners (18.3%). Females made 76% of the sample, and 54% were aged between 35 and 54 years. Individual responses were different across professions, with an average median score for medical 6.3 (95% CI 5.8-6.9), allied health 5.3 (95% CI 4.9-5.7) and nursing 4.5 (95% CI 4.1-5.0) after adjustment for age and gender. Team responses for medical staff (average median score 5.9 95% CI 5.3-6.4) were higher than allied health (4.1 95% CI 3.7-4.6) and nursing (4.3 95% CI 3.8-4.8), after adjusting for age and gender. However, there were no differences between the three professions for the organisational responses. Allied health and nursing staff were less confident in obtaining research funding, submitting ethics applications, writing for publication and mentoring colleagues about research.

conclusionThis study demonstrates the individual research capacity for medical, allied health and nursing professionals are different. Research capacity building needs to be individually tailored to the specific needs of each profession. This research will inform future capacity building activities and training for health professionals in a large public health organisation of Sydney, Australia.

Indexed as

allied healthnursingresearch capacity

Identifiers

PMID32103975
PMCPMC7024741
OpenAlexW3004862031

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.