ArticleMedical education2026
Implementing recommendations to optimise professional support in the medical workplace: A participatory approach.
Article in Medical education, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Optimising professional support for doctors who experience work performance issues: a realist evaluation.BMJ quality & safety · 2026Article
- Implementing recommendations to optimise professional support in the medical workplace: A participatory approach.Medical education · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionThe professional support (including remediation) of practising doctors has not been widely researched, and there have been no studies to date that have implemented evidence-based recommendations about support and remediation in the medical workplace. Our goal was to bridge the gap between research and practice in respect of optimising the delivery of professional support programmes for doctors in their workplace.
methodsWe used a participatory-action research (PAR) approach to implement recommendations from a previous study, RESTORE 1, in five UK sites: two hospitals, two professional support units and a professional support body. Informed by observations and interviews, we conducted a series of workshops (12 in total, with 35 relevant stakeholders [doctors, professional support leads, coaches etc.]). These were recorded and transcribed for analysis. Analysis was deductive, using the Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (i-PARIHs) framework, the core constructs of which are innovation, recipient, context and facilitation.
resultsImportant aspects of innovation related to the perspective, language and tone of the recommendations and the finding that recipients often valued other types of evidence rather than research. In terms of the recipients, sites' motivation for engagement in the study was crucial. We identified a variety of enabling/constraining contextual factors including resources, type and role of organisation and responsibilities of the professional support programme, as well as macro-level changes. The extent to which participants adopted the recommendations (facilitation) was limited. DISCUSSION: The successful implementation of research into practice is challenging. However, new learning, shifts in relationships and increased awareness are equally valuable outcomes. 'On-the-ground' change takes time, depending on trust, relationships, partnership working and understanding context. Unfortunately, this does not align well with research systems that privilege studies with measurable outcomes produced within a set timeframe. We call for more discussion in medical education about the process of implementing research findings into practice.
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.