Search

The 7th biennial National Conference of APAHC, the Association of Psychologists in Academic Health Centers, was held in Atlanta, Georgia, February 5-7, 2015. Speakers were invited to contribute manuscripts based on their conference presentations, and many submitted manuscripts for this special edition of the Journal of Clinical Psychology in Medical Settings. Some papers will appear in the December 2015 issue of JCPMS; others will appear in the March 2016 issue. All papers have undergone a rigorous peer review process. The Conference Co-Chairs, Drs. Laura Shaffer and Amit Shahane, are Guest Editors for the special issue. In this article, they provide an overview of the conference's major themes, and also discuss some aspects of conference planning. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose One of the major issues faced by academic health science centers (AHSCs) is the need for mechanisms to foster the integration of research, clinical, and educational activities to achieve the vision of evidence-informed decision making (EIDM) and optimal client care. The paper aims to discuss this issue.Design/methodology/approach This paper synthesizes literature on organizational learning and collaboration, evidence-informed organizational decision making, and learning-based organizations to derive insights concerning the nature of effective workplace learning in AHSCs.Findings An evidence-informed model of collaborative workplace learning is proposed to aid the alignment of research, clinical, and educational functions in AHSCs. The model articulates relationships among AHSC academic functions and sub-functions, cross-functional activities, and collaborative learning processes, emphasizing the importance of cross-functional activities in enhancing collaborative learning processes and optimizing EIDM and client care. Cross-functional activities involving clinicians, researchers, and educators are hypothesized to be a primary vehicle for integration, supported by a learning-oriented workplace culture. These activities are distinct from interprofessional teams, which are clinical in nature. Four collaborative learning processes are specified that are enhanced in cross-functional activities or teamwork: co-constructing meaning, co-learning, co-producing knowledge, and co-using knowledge.Practical implications The model provides an aspirational vision and insight into the importance of cross-functional activities in enhancing workplace learning. The paper discusses the conceptual and empirical basis to the model, its contributions and limitations, and implications for AHSCs.Originality/value The model’s potential utility for health care is discussed, with implications for organizational culture and the promotion of cross-functional activities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Academic health centers are poised to improve health through their clinical, education, and research missions. However, these missions often operate in silos. The authors explored stakeholder perspectives at diverse institutions to understand challenges and identify alignment strategies. Methods: Authors used an exploratory qualitative design and thematic analysis approach with data obtained from electronic surveys sent to participants at five U.S. academic health centers (2017‐18), with four different types of medical school/health system partnerships. Participants included educators, researchers, system leaders, administrators, clinical providers, resident/fellow physicians, and students. Investigators coded data using constant comparative analysis, met regularly to reconcile uncertainties, and collapsed/combined categories. Results: Of 175 participants invited, 113 completed the survey (65%). Three results categories were identified. First, five higher‐order themes emerged related to aligning missions, including (a) shared vision and strategies, (b) alignment of strategy with community needs, (c) tension of economic drivers, (d) coproduction of knowledge, and (e) unifying set of concepts spanning all missions. Second, strategies for each mission were identified, including education (new competencies, instructional methods, recruitment), research (shifting agenda, developing partnerships, operations), and clinical operations (delivery models, focus on patient factors/needs, value‐based care, well‐being). Lastly, strategies for integrating each dyadic mission pair, including research‐education, clinical operations education, and research‐clinical operations, were identified. Conclusions: Academic health centers are at a crossroads in regard to identity and alignment across the tripartite missions. The study's results provide pragmatic strategies to advance the tripartite missions and lead necessary change for improved patient health. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Psychologists play key roles in academic health centers. This article is an outgrowth of a presentation at the 2015 Conference of the Association of Psychologists in Academic Health Centers addressing various strategies by which psychologists can effectively adapt to and develop successful careers in medical schools, academic health centers, and teaching hospitals. The authors encourage early career and mid-career psychologists in academic health centers to be active, engaged members of their institutions and to participate in multiple aspects of the research, educational, and clinical missions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Good laboratory practices (GLP) increase the quality and traceability of results in health sciences research. However, factors such as high staff turnover, insufficient resources, and a lack of training for managers may limit their implementation in research and academic laboratories. This Scoping Review aimed to identify digital tools for managing academic health sciences and experimental medicine laboratories and their relationship with good practices. Following the PRISMA-ScR 2018 criteria, a search strategy was conducted until April 2021 in the databases PUBMED, Web of Sciences, and Health Virtual Library. A critical appraisal of the selected references was conducted, followed by data charting. The search identified twenty-one eligible articles, mainly originated from high-income countries, describing the development and/or implementation of thirty-two electronic management systems. Most studies described software functionalities, while nine evaluated and discussed impacts on management, reporting both improvements in the workflow and system limitations during implementation. In general, the studies point to a contribution to different management issues related to GLP principles. In conclusion, this review identified evolving evidence that digital laboratory management systems may represent important tools in compliance with the principles of good practices in experimental medicine and health sciences research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]