Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37426703›Full record

ArticleSSM. Qualitative research in health2023

Why the trial researcher matters: Day-to-day work viewed through the lens of normalization process theory.

Lindsay Dalgarno, Linda Birt, Christine Bond, Jeanette Blacklock, Annie Blyth, Jacqueline Inch, Frances Notman, Amrit Daffu-O'Reilly, Maureen Spargo, Laura Watts and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in SSM. Qualitative research in health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

12 authors.

Lindsay DalgarnoInstitute of Applied Health Sciences, University of Aberdeen, Scotland, UK.
Linda BirtSchool Health Sciences, University of East Anglia, UK.
Christine BondInstitute of Applied Health Sciences, University of Aberdeen, Scotland, UK.
Jeanette BlacklockSchool of Healthcare, University of Leicester, UK.
Annie BlythSchool of Pharmacy, University of East Anglia, UK.
Jacqueline InchInstitute of Applied Health Sciences, University of Aberdeen, Scotland, UK.
Frances NotmanInstitute of Applied Health Sciences, University of Aberdeen, Scotland, UK.
Amrit Daffu-O'ReillySchool of Healthcare, University of Leeds, UK.
Maureen SpargoSchool of Pharmacy, Queen's University, Belfast, UK.
Laura WattsSchool of Pharmacy, University of East Anglia, UK.
David WrightSchool of Healthcare, University of Leicester, UK.
Fiona PolandSchool Health Sciences, University of East Anglia, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Researchers working in the field, the places where research-relevant activity happens, are essential to recruitment and data collection in randomised controlled trials (RCTs). This study aimed to understand the nature of this often invisible work. Data were generated through an RCT of a pharmacist-led medication management service for older people in care homes. The study was conducted over three years and employed seven Research Associates (RA) working in Scotland, Northern Ireland, and England. Weekly research team meetings and Programme Management Group meetings naturally generated 129 sets of minutes. This documentary data was supplemented with two end-of-study RA debriefing meetings. Data were coded to sort the work being done in the field, then deductively explored through the lens of Normalization Process Theory to enable a greater understanding of the depth, breadth and complexity of work carried out by these trial delivery RAs. Results indicate RAs helped stakeholders and participants make sense of the research, they built relationships with participants to support retention, operationalised complex data collection procedures and reflected on their own work contexts to reach agreement on changes to trial procedures. The debrief discussions enabled RAs to explore and reflect on experiences from the field which had affected their day-to-day work. The learning from the challenges faced in facilitating care home research may be useful to inform future research team preparation for complex interventions. Scrutinising these data sources through the lens of NPT enabled us to identify RAs as linchpins in the successful conduct of a complex RCT study.

Indexed as

Care homesDocumentary evidencePharmacistsQualitative researcher experienceResearch activityTrials

Identifiers

PMID37426703
PMCPMC10323713

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.