ArticleJournal of multidisciplinary healthcare2021
Evaluation of Research Capacity and Culture of Health Professionals Working with Women, Children and Families at an Australian Public Hospital: A Cross Sectional Observational Study.
Article in Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluation of the research capacity and culture within the allied health workforce in Northern New South Wales Local Health District: a cross-sectional observational study.BMC health services research · 2025Observational
- Measuring growth in research capacity and capability of allied health professionals at a regional Australian public health service: 2011-2023.BMC health services research · 2025Article
- The development and validation of the Research for Practice Tool (R4PT) for nursing and midwifery.BMC health services research · 2025Article
- Structure and growth of a Danish research infrastructure and support unit for health research - OPEN (Open Patient data Explorative Network).BMC health services research · 2025Article
- Embedding a culture of research in Canadian community hospitals: a qualitative study.Health research policy and systems · 2024Article
- Research-related knowledge, understanding and practice in public mental health: the voices of social workers and occupational therapists.Health research policy and systems · 2024Article
- Evaluating the perceived impact and legacy of master's degree level research in the allied health professions: a UK-wide cross-sectional survey.BMC medical education · 2024Article
- Investigating the research capacity and productivity of Canadian sports chiropractors.The Journal of the Canadian Chiropractic Association · 2023Article
- Exploring individual character traits and behaviours of clinical academic allied health professionals: a qualitative study.BMC health services research · 2023Article
- Allied health professionals' research capacity: open to interpretation?BMC health services research · 2023Article
- 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
- Mental Health Nurses' and Allied Health Professionals' Individual Research Capacity and Organizational Research Culture: A Comparative Study.SAGE open nursingArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThere is limited evidence for use of the Research Capacity and Culture tool across multidisciplinary health professionals. We explored using the Research Capacity and Culture tool among multidisciplinary health professionals at an Australian secondary hospital.
methodsA cross-sectional observational study where online and paper-based surveys of the Research Capacity and Culture tool were disseminated between November 2020 and January 2021. Descriptive analyses of demographic variables and Likert scale items were summarized using median and inter-quartile ranges. Differences between organization, team and individual domains were checked using a Friedman test. Post-hoc Wilcoxon signed rank tests determined specific differences between domains.
resultsSeventy-six multidisciplinary health professionals (female, 89.3%) reported overall perceptions of research success/skills highest in the organization (median 6), followed by the team (median 5) and individual domains (median 3.5). Only 21.3% agreed that research activities were a part of their role description. Mean scores across professions were highest for Medicine (5.47), Midwifery (4.52), Nursing (4.47) and Allied Health (3.56), respectively, for the team domain. Individual domain scores across all professions were below 50%. Commonly reported barriers to research were "lack of time for research," "other work roles taking priority" and "a lack of skill." "Developing skills" was the most common personal motivator.
conclusionMultidisciplinary health professionals reported the highest overall perception of research success/skills in the organization domain. Medical health professionals perceived research success/skills highest compared to nursing, midwifery and allied health professionals.
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.