Understanding the collaborative experience between researchers and health care practitioners:Implications for gerontological nursing practice

The health care field is a new arena for collaborative research carried out by practitioner-researcher teams. Although the current literature discusses factors supportive of such teams, most evidence is anecdotal or descriptive of pilot projects. In this article, the authors use survey and interview data to document health care practitioners' views on collaborative research with an experienced researcher/ mentor. Topics covered include a description of the research project and process, positive and negative aspects of doing research, expectations, recommendations to colleagues starting research, and desirable characteristics in practitioners and researchers on collaborative research teams. Of all attributes mentioned, personal traits and skills were among the most frequently mentioned for both practitioners and researchers, followed by research knowledge and attitudes for practitioners, and teaching skills for researchers. The article also addresses factors important to the success of collaborative research: how to develop a project, characteristics of collaborative team members, team functioning, and institutional support. Copyright © 2000 Taylor & Francis.

It's all about relationships:A qualitative study of health researchers' perspectives of conducting interdisciplinary health research

Background. Interdisciplinary research has been promoted as an optimal research paradigm in the health sciences, yet little is known about how researchers experience interdisciplinarity in practice. This study sought to determine how interdisciplinary research was conceptualized and operationalized from the researcher's perspective and to better understand how best to facilitate interdisciplinary research success. Methods. Key informant interviews were conducted with health researchers with expertise or experience in conducting interdisciplinary research. Interviews were completed either in person or over the telephone using a semi-structured interview guide. Data collection occurred simultaneously with data analysis so that emerging themes could be explored in subsequent interviews. A content analysis approach was used. Results. Nineteen researchers took part in this study. Interdisciplinary research was conceptualized disparately between participants, and there was modest attention towards operationalization of interdisciplinary research. There was one overriding theme, "It's all about relationships", that emerged from the data. Within this theme, there were four related subthemes: 1) Involvement in interdisciplinary research; 2) Why do I do interdisciplinary research?; 3) Managing and fostering interdisciplinary relationships; and 4) The prickly side to interdisciplinary research. Together, these themes suggest that the choice to conduct interdisciplinary research, though often driven by the research question, is highly influenced by interpersonal and relationship-related factors. In addition, researchers preferred to engage in interdisciplinary research with those that they had already established relationships and where their role in the research process was clearly articulated. A focus on relationship building was seen as a strong facilitator of interdisciplinary success. Conclusion. Many health researchers experienced mixed reactions towards their involvement in interdisciplinary research. A well thought-out rationale for interdisciplinary research, and strategies to utilize the contribution of each researcher involved were seen as facilitators towards maximizing the benefits that could be derived from interdisciplinary research. © 2008 Nair et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

Focus group interviews:a guide for palliative care researchers and clinicians

The focus group interview is an increasingly common qualitative research method used by health professionals. General approaches to conducting focus groups have been published. There has, however, been minimal exploration of issues regarding the use of focus groups with palliative care populations and data analysis procedures have been underreported. The aim of this paper is to provide a guide for conducting focus groups drawing on palliative care examples. A succinct outline of why, when and how to use focus groups is offered. Key ethical and practical issues are explored as well as considerations for data analysis. This guide offers researchers and clinicians fundamental strategies for the use of focus groups within the palliative care context.

Finding Your Feet in the Field: Critical Reflections of Early Career Researchers on Field Research in Transitional Societies

Fieldwork that takes place in conflict or transitional regions is becoming increasingly popular amongst early-career and more seasoned researchers, but is an area that retains an air of mystery and remains an exotic form of knowledge gathering. There exists a paucity of personal reflection on the challenges associated with conducting fieldwork in conflicted or transitional regions and a limited amount of insight into the practical steps taken in advance of and when immersed in the field. Such reticence to share honest fieldwork experiences, particularly the more challenging research that takes place in conflict or transitional settings aids in creating a culture of silence. This paper attempts to counteract this silence by drawing on the challenges experienced by two early career researchers conducting fieldwork in Uganda and Palestine, focusing on the practical steps taken in advance of entering the field, and the challenges faced whilst engaged in fieldwork. Specific challenges are highlighted throughout, including: physical access to areas in conflict; engaging with reluctant research participants; the emotional impact of fieldwork on the researcher; maintaining confidentiality; researching with vulnerable victims; and ensuring appropriate knowledge exchange between researchers and participants. The paper concludes by emphasising the requirement for greater reflection on the inherently personal challenges associated with conducting fieldwork in conflicted or transitional settings and highlights the view that fieldwork is a privileged position that carries great responsibilities which must be upheld to ensure the sustainability of future research. This paper hopes to contribute to the wider debate on conducting fieldwork and the challenges associated with working in conflicted or transitional regions.

Making the case for change: what researchers need to consider when designing behaviour change interventions aimed at improving medication dispensing.

There is a growing emphasis on behavior change in intervention development programmes aimed at improving public health and healthcare professionals' practice. A number of frameworks and methodological tools have been established to assist researchers in developing interventions seeking to change healthcare professionals' behaviors. The key features of behavior change intervention design involve specifying the target group (i.e. healthcare professional or patient cohort), the target behavior and identifying mediators (i.e. barriers and facilitators) of behavior change. Once the target behavior is clearly specified and understood, specific behavior change techniques can then be used as the basis of the intervention to target identified mediators of behavior change. This commentary outlines the challenges for pharmacy practice-based researchers in targeting dispensing as a behavior when developing behavior change interventions aimed at pharmacists and proposes a definition of dispensing to consider in future research.

Assessment of Intervention Fidelity and Recommendations for Researchers Conducting Studies on the Diagnosis and Treatment of Chronic Cough in the Adult: CHEST Guideline and Expert Panel Report

BACKGROUND: Successful management of chronic cough has varied in the primary research studies in the reported literature. One of the potential reasons relates to a lack of intervention fidelity to the core elements of the diagnostic and/or therapeutic interventions that were meant to be used by the investigators.

METHODS: We conducted a systematic review to summarize the evidence supporting intervention fidelity as an important methodologic consideration in assessing the effectiveness of clinical practice guidelines used for the diagnosis and management of chronic cough. We developed and used a tool to assess for five areas of intervention fidelity. Medline (PubMed), Scopus, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were searched from January 1998 to May 2014. Guideline recommendations and suggestions for those conducting research using guidelines or protocols to diagnose and manage chronic cough in the adult were developed and voted upon using CHEST Organization methodology.

RESULTS: A total of 23 studies (17 uncontrolled prospective observational, two randomized controlled, and four retrospective observational) met our inclusion criteria. These articles included 3,636 patients. Data could not be pooled for meta-analysis because of heterogeneity. Findings related to the five areas of intervention fidelity included three areas primarily related to the provider and two primarily related to the patients. In the area of study design, 11 of 23 studies appeared to be underpinned by a single guideline/protocol; for training of providers, two of 23 studies reported training, and zero of 23 reported the use of an intervention manual; and for the area of delivery of treatment, when assessing the treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease, three of 23 studies appeared consistent with the most recent guideline/protocol referenced by the authors. For receipt of treatment, zero of 23 studies mentioned measuring concordance of patient-interventionist understanding of the treatment recommended, and zero of 23 mentioned measuring enactment of treatment, with three of 23 measuring side effects and two of 23 measuring adherence. The overall average intervention fidelity score for all 23 studies was poor (20.74 out of 48).

CONCLUSIONS: Only low-quality evidence supports that intervention fidelity strategies were used when conducting primary research in diagnosing and managing chronic cough in adults. This supports the contention that some of the variability in the reporting of patients with unexplained or unresolved chronic cough may be due to lack of intervention fidelity. By following the recommendations and suggestions in this article, researchers will likely be better able to incorporate strategies to address intervention fidelity, thereby strengthening the validity and generalizability of their results that provide the basis for the development of trustworthy guidelines.

Destination Open Access: Getting Researchers On Board

This Open Access (OA) Poster - ‘Destination Open Access: Getting Researchers on Board’, was devised by the Queen’s University Belfast’s OA Team. It outlines the advocacy strategy undertaken to strengthen researchers’ uptake of OA at the University. Research funders, such as the Higher Education Funding Council of England (HEFCE), are increasingly mandating that researchers make their work publically available via an institutional repository. It is therefore imperative that researchers and departments fully engage with open access to ensure future funding.

The team’s advocacy strategy centres around collaboration with the Heads of Schools, Subject Librarians, the Research and Enterprise Office and, most importantly, the researchers themselves. The team regularly organises training sessions and events, on understanding OA, funder compliance and using the institutional repository. We also run outreach activities, such as practical drop-in sessions, promotional give-aways, OA updates to library staff and direct communications to schools. Finally, the team maintain a strong online presence via LibGuides, LibAnswers, the Library Blog and Twitter. We utilise these platforms to highlight topical OA issues, to advertise events, to provide support materials and to interact with researchers.

Statistics indicate that researchers are increasingly engaging with the OA training, communications and outreach events. Since August 2014 over 1200 researchers have attended advocacy sessions. Additionally, the numbers of papers uploaded to the repository each year has steadily increased and there are now over 3, 000 full-text OA research outputs in the Queen’s Research Portal.

This reflects positively on the team’s established approach of working with researchers to develop an OA culture within the University. Whilst it is clear that an open access strategy is essential, support for the open access ethos must come from individual researchers and Schools in order for the University to reach its desired destination of maximum uptake of open access.