Title: Best available evidence on Research Capacity Development
1Best available evidence on Research Capacity
Development
- Mr Andrew Booth, Reader in Evidence Based
Information Practice, ScHARR, - Ms Jo Cooke, Primary Social Care Lead, Trent
RDSU, - Dr Susan Nancarrow, Primary Care Research
Coordinator, Trent RDSU, - Ms Anna Wilkinson, Information Officer, ScHARR
2ReCap Scoping review to identify the
evidence-base for Research Capacity development
in health and social care
- Aims
- To map literature on RCD interventions identify
extent of research note gaps in evidence make
recommendations for future research. - Objectives
- To identify and characterise existing literature
- To develop comprehensive taxonomy of
interventions and to identify theoretical models
of RCD - To classify interventions to promote RCD
- To identify which RCD interventions have been
evaluated - To identify and critique measures to assess
effectiveness - To develop recommendations and identify research
agenda.
3Scoping Review1
- a preliminary assessment of the potential size
and scope of the available research literature2 - Ref 1 Arksey O'Malley (2005). Scoping Studies
Towards a Methodological Framework. International
Journal of Social Research Methodology
8(1)19-32. - Ref 2 EPPICentre. A scoping review of the
evidence for incentive schemes.. London 2005.
4Methodology
- Expert panel for interventions and taxonomy
- Comprehensive literature searches across RCD and
specific interventions - Production of evidence tables
- Supplementary search strategies
- Model construction
5Comprehensive literature search
- Medline, Embase, CINAHL, PsycLit, British Nursing
Index, Cochrane Library. - Social sciences and related databases including
ASSIA, Agricola, Caredata, Social Sciences
Citation Index, ERIC, OCLC, ESRC. - Catalogues of British Library, National Library
for Medicine and COPAC combined UK universities
catalogue.
Total 11,107 references 167 key documents 1.5
yield
6Total abstracts identified and coded Phase 1
N 6992
QUOROM Flowchart
Rejected at Coding stage n 5008
Further abstracts screened Coded
1984 Phase 2 searches 4115
N 6099
Rejected at abstract stage n 5932
Studies included (167) Models
35 Interventions 132
7Yield on Interventions (N 132)
- Training n 26
- Funding n 7
- Networks, Infrastructure Collaboration n 11
- Priority setting n 29
- Research facilitators
n 9 - Mentorship
n 34 - Leadership
n 16 - Plus
- Models of RCD
n 35
8Supplementary search strategies
- Government policy and Professional position
statements - Specific named interventions citation searches
and follow up of references - Specific models phrase searches and citation
searching (Google Scholar, Copernic) - Training/skills needs analyses/surveys
9Model construction
- Reading and analysis of existing models
- Classified as Structural, Developmental,
Hierarchical etcetera - Critiqued using a brief checklist
- Needs/Drivers
- Structures
- Interventions/Activities
- Temporal
- Outcomes
- Synthesis into a meta-model
10Farmer (2002)
11Cooke, (2005)
12Final outcomes
Needs Drivers
Intermediate Outcomes
Interventions
Environmental
Organisational
Personal
Time
Needs Assessment
The Research Capacity Prism A Meta-Model
13Seamless Handover!
14RCD Interventions
- Training
- Funding
- Mentorship
- Leadership
- Facilitation
- Networks and Collaborations
- Priority setting
15Priority setting
- Papers were selected where priorities were
developed by consensus views of informed
participants (known as interpretative assessment
Lomas et al 2003). - Relevant to RCD because its aim is to develop
applied and relevant research, thereby having an
impact on services- making more useful
research. - Present in some models of RCD
16Techniques and methods
- Formal consensus methods ( NGT, Delphi)
- Discussion and forums
- Systematic literature analysis combined with
expert opinion to identify gaps in knowledge - Mixed methods- data collection of different
sources and triangulation of findings - Transparency poor in discussion and workshop
approaches - Developing literature about working with service
users - Action linked to training and support
17Mentoring
- "a process whereby an experienced, highly
regarded person (the mentor) guides another
individual (the mentee) in the development and
examination of their own ideas, learning and
personal and professional development" SCOPME
report (1998) - Issues of reciprocity and the nature of shared
personal development. Healy and Welchert (1990) - Used to promote research and career development
18Quality of the literature
- Retrospective studies
- Identify mentors as one of an number of actors
within a research environment- more likely to be
a characteristic of a population rather than an
intervention - Difficult to unpack causal relationships in the
studies, may reflect the motivation of the
mentee. - Mainly focussed on medical staff and not other
professional groups
19ExampleSteiner et al, 2004
- Examined the association between mentorship and
subsequent research productivity and career
development in 139 primary care research fellows. - Time conducting research (p .007), published
more papers (p .003), were more likely to be the
principal investigator on a grant (p .008), and
more often provided research mentorship to others
(72.5 versus 66.7 of those with unsustained
mentorship p .008).
20Training
- Wide ranging to include increasing skills and
knowledge. - Individuals and teams
- Incorporated into professional training, research
training and short courses - May be related to one particular area of practice
- May require completion of project.
- Locations varied academic, health care
organisations, association with research
programmes
21Literature identified
- 207 papers identfied-26 evaluations studies
identified - Mainly retrospective surveys, two case control
designs, and one cohort design - 2 systematic reviews on critical appraisal
- Some had other RCD support (stipend/ mentors)
22Training continued
- Systematic reviews showed changes in knowledge
and attitudes - Case control design on 1 year research
methodology course. The course showed changes in
productivity, activity and commitment, and
application of research findings to practice
(Adamsen et al 2003) - Long term follow up of research course for cancer
nurses- showed high levels of career progression-
but cause or effect? - Realistic issues around writing for publication
workshop
23Outcomes and RCD
- Focus of three general areas of change related to
capacity development - Productivity and improvement in desired function
- Learning, accommodation, and adaptation to
change. This includes looking for differences in
attitudes, values and beliefs - Engagement, participation and empowerment
24Issues that impact on outcomes
- Choice and relevance of outcome measurement
reflects purpose of RCD - Health gain and service improvement
- The pursuit of knowledge including professional
knowledge, and to promote intellectual
excellence. - Economic gain and wealth.
25Outcomes identified in the literature
- Academic productivity
- Research activity
- Return on investment
- Income generated
- Sustainability
- Implementation/ impact of research findings
- Personal Professional Development
- Skills and knowledge development
- Attitudes to research
- Career progression
- Job Satisfaction
- Equity
- Linkages and networking
- Infrastructure within organisation
26Outcomes and interventions
- Most used outcome across all interventions
include - research productivity, increased knowledge and
skills, and increased involvement in research/
research activity. - Training, funding and mentorship
- Career progression
- Mentorship and leadership
- Satisfaction and retention rates
27Outcomes and interventions
- Networks in addition included
- network configuration
- return on investment
- improved profile
- enhanced access to research participants.
- The costs of collaborations/ networks poorly
explored
28Methodological issues
- Intermediate and long tem outcomes
- Process as outcomes or proxy outcome
- Different structural levels and outcome
measurement - Few examples explore outcomes and the inter-
relationship between different structural levels - Environmental and contextual factors influence
the effectiveness - Environmental and contextual factors may
influence what is seen as a pertinent outcome
29Conclusions
- RCD is often a series of joined-together, complex
interventions, not a magic bullet - Need for clarity around the purpose of RCD, its
interventions, and outcomes. - Need to explore indicators to show short term
change that is likely to be sustainable - Many of the activities defined as RCD may
actually be indicators of capacity building,
rather than the cause (eg research mentorship)
30Conclusions (cont)
- RCD philosophies reflect the concepts of
empowerment and participation, yet most commonly
used outcome are those around productivity - i.e. what gets measured is that which is easy to
measure
31Recommendations
- Use of a consistent framework or approach to RCD
planning and evaluation - Need for a range of outcomes and outcome
indicators that reflect the purposes of Research
Capacity - Use of methodological approaches that reflect the
underlying concepts of empowerment and
participation (eg action research)
32Recommendations (cont)
- Need to recognise the stages in RCD at different
structural levels - Greater need for comparative research and studies
which measure change over a longer time frame
33Questions?
- Andrew Booth
- A.Booth_at_sheffield.ac.uk
- Jo Cooke
- J.M.Cooke_at_sheffield.ac.uk
- Susan Nancarrow
- S.Nancarrow_at_sheffield.ac.uk
- Anna Wilkinson
- A.J.Wilkinson_at_sheffield.ac.uk