Search

It is not widely known that quite a few researchers are faced with difficulties in using various resources of disaster management research in Korea. The article aims to assess how rigorously the Korean field of disaster management research resources has been managed or how it can be improved for the ultimate goal of disaster management. Descriptive content analysis has been used as the major methodology by referring to the Johari window. In doing so, electronic research resources have been systematically compared with integrated research resources via the perspective of Korean-speaking researchers and that of English-speaking researchers. The conclusion is that two researchers have to be integrated with all four research resources (open, blind, hidden, and unknown resources) by implementing assigned responsibilities as well as freely asking questions. Ultimately, this will be conducive to reducing down the impacts of disaster in Korea., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

The research supervisory role is becoming increasingly complex due to issues such as diversity of students; mismatched expectations between the student, supervisor and higher education institution and shorter and specific time-bound research outcomes. The current postgraduate research supervision culture and supervision practices should change. Moving towards person-centered research supervision practices may enhance the research environment, as healthful relationships between supervisors and postgraduate students may lead to increased postgraduate research outcomes. Using a World Café, we critically reflected on our existing research supervision practices. All healthcare educators involved in postgraduate research supervision were purposively selected to participate. During the café, we explored and shared ideas in a safe space. Twelve tips emerged, which can be implemented to move existing supervision practices towards person-centered research supervision practices. We present these twelve tips from the perspective of the four constructs of person-centeredness as outlined by McCormack and McCance - pre-requisites, environment, process, and outcomes. The use of these tips may enable both supervisors and students to flourish. Avoiding routine, ritual supervision practices and embracing person-centredness, will enable supervisors to form healthful relationships and put the postgraduate student at the heart of our supervision practices.

Nurse scientists play an indispensable role in developing new knowledge to advance the health of patients, families, and communities. Yet PhD nurse enrollment has significantly dropped, and many later career nurse scientists are nearing retirement. The purpose of this article is to outline potential strategies to enhance the PhD nurse pipeline. Potential strategies are identified at three distinct time points along the PhD trajectory: (a) prior to a PhD program (increasing the pipeline), (b) during a PhD program (enhancing graduation rates and transitioning into research-focused careers), and (c) in the postdoctoral or early career period (establishing scholarly independence and an active program of research). Talented students should be approached early on in their education to ascertain interest in a scientific research-based career, and all students could be engaged in research opportunities while in undergraduate programs. During a PhD program, supportive mentors are a key component for student success and may provide assistance in obtaining ongoing funding and scholarship support. Throughout doctoral study and into early career, less structured opportunities can be influential, including conference support, online and face-to-face training, and ongoing funding and scholarship support for postdoctoral study or fellowships. At each career stage, there should be a focus on designing scientifically sound nursing research that will impact outcomes in measurable and sustainable ways. We must not focus our attention only on student recruitment. Public messaging efforts are needed to raise awareness of the role of nurse researchers. In addition, several stakeholders play a role in increasing the PhD pipeline and producing independent nurse scientists, and they should be acknowledged in these efforts. The strategies described may be beneficial for any nurse contemplating a research career as well as for those who may serve as mentors to these individuals. More broadly, these strategies may be employed by colleges and universities, funding bodies, professional nursing societies, and healthcare organizations in the United States and abroad. Increasing the PhD pipeline, and fostering a more robust field of independent nurse scientists, will translate into improved patient outcomes., (© 2019 Sigma Theta Tau International.)

Purpose: To enhance understanding of challenges related to work-life integration in academic medicine and to inform the ongoing implementation of an existing program and the development of other interventions to promote success of physician-scientists., Method: This study is part of a prospective analysis of the effects of the Fund to Retain Clinical Scientists (FRCS), a national program launched by the Doris Duke Charitable Foundation at 10 U.S. institutions, which provides financial support to physician-scientists facing caregiving challenges. In early 2018, 28 of 33 program awardees participated in semistructured interviews. Questions were about challenges faced by physician-scientists as caregivers and their early perceptions of the FRCS. Multiple analysts reviewed deidentified transcripts, iteratively revised the coding scheme, and interpreted the data using qualitative thematic analysis., Results: Participants' rich descriptions illuminated 5 interconnected themes: (1) Time is a critical and limited resource, (2) timing is key, (3) limited time resources and timing conflicts may have a particularly adverse effect on women's careers, (4) flexible funds enable reclamation and repurposing of time resources, and (5) FRCS leaders should be cognizant of time and timing conflicts when developing program-related offerings., Conclusions: Programs such as the FRCS are instrumental in supporting individuals to delegate time-consuming tasks and to control how they spend their valuable time. Qualitative analysis suggests that access to and command of valuable time resources are crucial to career advancement, research productivity, and work-life flexibility, especially during critical time points along the physician-scientist trajectory.

Community engagement is a vital aspect of addressing environmental contamination and remediation. In the United States, the Superfund Research Program (SRP) forms groups of academic researchers from the social and physical sciences into Community Engagement Cores (CECs) and Research Translation Cores (RTCs), which focus on various aspects of informing and working with communities during and through the resolution of environmental crises. While this work typically involves engaging directly with members of affected communities, no two situations are the same. In some cases, alternative approaches to community engagement can be more appropriate for community improvement than traditional approaches. In particular, when research teams become involved in contamination crises at a late point in the process, their contributions can be better directed at supporting and reinforcing the work of institutional stakeholders charged with remediating pollution. Relevant factors include issue fatigue among a local population, and contamination that is due to a major employer. Supported by literature and experience, we offer several propositions that we believe lay out conditions that warrant such an approach by academic teams, rather than their direct engagement with unaffiliated individuals in communities.

There is a lack of guidance for developing progression criteria (PC) within feasibility studies. We describe a process for co-producing PC for an ongoing feasibility study. Patient contributors, clinicians and researchers participated in discussions facilitated using the modified Nominal Group Technique (NGT). Stage one involved individual discussion groups used to develop and rank PC for aspects of the trial key to feasibility. A second stage involving representatives from each of the individual groups then discussed and ranked these PC. The highest ranking PC became the criteria used. At each stage all members were provided with a brief education session to aid understanding and decision-making. Fifty members (15 (29%) patients, 13 (25%) researchers and 24 (46%) clinicians) were involved in eight initial groups, and eight (two (25%) patients, five (62%) clinicians, one (13%) researcher) in one final group. PC relating to eligibility, recruitment, intervention and outcome acceptability and loss to follow-up were co-produced. Groups highlighted numerous means of adapting intervention and trial procedures should 'change' criteria be met. Modified NGT enabled the equal inclusion of patients, clinician and researcher in the co-production of PC. The structure and processes provided a transparent mechanism for setting PC that could be replicated in other feasibility studies.

Background: Federal Law requires approval from an Institutional Review Board prior to conducting human subjects research to ensure ethical distribution of benefits and harms. Notwithstanding this role and almost no prescriptive requirements about design or operation, there is little systematic research describing the key attributes of IRBs, as reported by IRB personnel themselves. Methods: Here, 55 IRB directors completed a survey of 77 questions. The goals of the study were to establish what a typical US IRB "looks like," determine whether IRB characteristics can be summarized by a smaller number of overarching components, determine the best predictors of IRB speed and efficiency, and determine whether IRBs differ by high-level qualitative characteristics such as institution type. The above was explored and tested using the general linear model and principal components analysis, and for the former, dependent variables of interest were, a) the time necessary for an IRB to approve a study, and b) efficiency of the review process for full board and expedited reviews. IVs of interest included multiple IRB characteristics. Results: 1) IRB characteristics can be summarized by four key components; 2) IRB speed and efficiency are most strongly determined by tendency to receive biomedical submissions, especially drug-related; and 3) IRBs do vary by institution type on some key variables. Conclusion: These results are the first step toward establishing national norms and building a working model of US IRBs to which other IRBs can compare themselves.

The paper introduces and discusses the new players that now have a growing presence on the research scene, namely the entrepreneurial researcher and the entrepreneurial university. It also discusses the current scenario of the diffusion of scientific knowledge that presents increasing problems, with difficulty in publishing results and difficulties in accessing the results of published research. It also discusses the implications of the strategy of translational research and presents and discusses some relevant ethical challenges that result from the reorganization of the relationship between science and business. In particular, it deals with conflicts of interest and the results of excessive competition between scientists and institutions in a scenario of diminished public financial support for science.

The scope of this paper is a discussion of the transformative relationship between scientific research and productive innovation, which occurred from the final quarter of the twentieth century onwards. The main characteristic of the phenomenon was an intense space-time approximation of the two activities. The human health sector has been one of the main fields where that approximation was most markedly observed. Some major conceptual bases of the reorganization are discussed, and the text examines works by Gibbons, Stokes and Lundvall-Freeman, as well as Merton, Kuhn and Bourdieu with respect to the organization of the scientific work. The paper highlights and discusses three aspects that arose from the new configuration, namely the erosion of the well-established concept of scientific knowledge as a public good, the appearance of the individual referred to as the 'entrepreneurial researcher' and the emergence of the strategy of translational research in health.

Background: Clinical trials management can be studied using project management theory. The CYCLE pilot randomized controlled trial (RCT) was conducted to determine the feasibility of a future rehabilitation trial of early in-bed cycling in the intensive care unit (ICU). In-bed cycling is a novel intervention, not typically available in ICUs. Implementation of this intervention requires personnel with specialized clinical expertise caring for critically ill patients and use of the in-bed cycle. Our objective was to describe the implementation and conduct of our pilot RCT using a project management approach., Methods: We retrospectively reviewed activities, timelines, and personnel involved in the trial. We organized activities into four project management phases: initiation, planning, execution, and monitoring and controlling. Data sources included Methods Centre documents used for trial coordination and conduct, and the trial data set. We report descriptive statistics as counts and proportions and also medians and quartiles, and we summarize the lessons learned., Results: Seven ICUs in Canada participated in the trial. Time from research ethics board and contracts submission to first enrolment was a median (first quartile, third quartile) of 185 (146, 209) and 162 (114, 181) days, respectively. We trained 128 personnel on the CYCLE pilot RCT protocol, and 80 (63%) completed trial-related activities. Four sites required additional training after start-up due to staff turnover and leaves of absence. Over 15 months, we screened 864 patients: 256 were eligible and 66 were enrolled. Despite an 85% consent rate, 74% (190/256) of eligible patients were not randomized, largely (80% [152/190]) due to physiotherapist availability. Thirteen percent of recruitment weeks were lost due to physiotherapist staffing shortages. We highlight five key lessons learned: (1) prepare and anticipate site needs; (2) communicate regularly; (3) proactively analyse and act on process measure data; (4) develop contingency plans; (5) express appreciation to participating sites., Conclusions: Our analysis highlights the scope of relevant activities, rigorous training and monitoring, number and types of required personnel, and time required to conduct a multicentre ICU rehabilitation intervention trial. Our lessons learned can help others interested in implementing complex intervention trials, such as rehabilitation., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02377830 . Registered prospectively on 4 March 2015.

In Africa, training programmes as well as institutional policies on research integrity are lacking. Institutions have a responsibility to oversee research integrity through various efforts, including policies and training. We developed, implemented and evaluated an institutional approach to promote research integrity at African institutions, comprising a workshop for researchers ("bottom-up") and discussions with senior faculty on institutional policies ("top-down"). During the first day, we facilitated a workshop to introduce research integrity and promote best practices with regards to authorship, plagiarism, redundant publication and conflicts of interest. We used a variety of interactive teaching approaches to facilitate learning, including individual and group activities, small group discussions and case-based learning. We met with senior faculty on the following day to provide feedback and insights from the workshop, review current institutional policies and provide examples of what other research groups are doing. We evaluated the process. Participants actively engaged in discussions, recognised the importance of the topic and acknowledged that poor practices occurred at their institution. Discussions with senior researchers resulted in the establishment of a working group tasked with developing a publication policy for the institution. Our approach kick-started conversations on research integrity at institutions. There is a need for continued discussions, integrated training programmes and implementation of institutional policies and guidelines to promote good practices., Competing Interests: The authors declare no competing interest., (© Anke Rohwer et al.)

AimsIn low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) in general and sub-Sahara African (SSA) countries in particular, there is both a large treatment gap for mental disorders and a relative paucity of empirical evidence about how to fill this gap. This is more so for severe mental disorders, such as psychosis, which impose an additional vulnerability for human rights abuse on its sufferers. A major factor for the lack of evidence is the few numbers of active mental health (MH) researchers on the continent and the distance between the little evidence generated and the policy-making process., Methods: The Partnership for Mental Health Development in Africa (PaM-D) aimed to bring together diverse MH stakeholders in SSA, working collaboratively with colleagues from the global north, to create an infrastructure to develop MH research capacity in SSA, advance global MH science by conducting innovative public health-relevant MH research in the region and work to link research to policy development. Participating SSA countries were Ghana, Kenya, Liberia, Nigeria and South Africa. The research component of PaM-D focused on the development and assessment of a collaborative shared care (CSC) program between traditional and faith healers (T&FHs) and biomedical providers for the treatment of psychotic disorders, as a way of improving the outcome of persons suffering from these conditions. The capacity building component aimed to develop research capacity and appreciation of the value of research in a broad range of stakeholders through bespoke workshops and fellowships targeting specific skill-sets as well as mentoring for early career researchers., Results: In the research component of PaM-D, a series of formative studies were implemented to inform the development of an intervention package consisting of the essential features of a CSC for psychosis implemented by primary care providers and T&FHs. A cluster randomised controlled trial was next designed to test the effectiveness of this package on the outcome of psychosis. In the capacity-building component, 35 early and mid-career researchers participated in the training workshops and several established mentor-mentee relationships with senior PaM-D members. At the end of the funding period, 60 papers have been published and 21 successful grant applications made., Conclusion: The success of PaM-D in energising young researchers and implementing a cutting-edge research program attests to the importance of partnership among researchers in the global south working with those from the north in developing MH research and service in LMIC.

Background: A growing literature explores the coproduction of research knowledge. Barriers to coproduction in mental health research have been identified, especially for the people from marginalized communities. There is an established body of participatory research that has potential to inform coproduction in mental health research., Objectives: To explore and articulate how learning from community participatory approaches to research enable barriers to knowledge coproduction to be overcome in mental health research., Setting: An evaluation of a primary care mental health service, led by an experienced survivor researcher, supported by a health service researcher and involving a team of community co-researchers., Design: Cycles of reflective writing (first-person narrative) by the authors, and feedback from the co-researcher team, on their experiences of undertaking the evaluation were used to explore the ways in which community actors, including those from marginalized communities, might be meaningfully involved in producing research knowledge about mental health services., Results: A space was created where community co-researchers, including those from traditionally marginalized communities, felt safe and empowered to move beyond essentialized "service user" identities and bring a range of skills and expertise to the evaluation. There was meaningful rebalancing of power between traditional university and community roles, although the issues around leadership remained complex and more could be done to explore how our different experiences of race and mental health shape the research we do., Conclusions: Potential was demonstrated for participatory research approaches to inform coproduction of knowledge in mental health research that fully reflects the diversity of identity and experience., (© 2019 The Authors Health Expectations published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Community engagement is increasingly recognized as a valuable tool in clinical and translational research; however, the impact of engagement is not fully understood. No standard nomenclature yet exists to clearly define how research changes when community stakeholders are engaged across the research spectrum. This severely limits our ability to assess the value of community engagement in research. To address this gap, we developed a taxonomy for characterizing and classifying changes in research due to community engagement., Methods: Using an iterative process, we (a) identified areas of potential impact associated with community engagement from author experience, (b) categorized these in taxonomic bins based on research stages, (c) conducted semi-structured interviews with researchers and community stakeholders, (d) validated the codebook in a sample dataset and (e) refined the taxonomy based on the validation. Community stakeholders were involved in every step of the process including as members of the primary study team., Results: The final taxonomy catalogues changes into eleven domains corresponding to research phases. Each domain includes 2-4 dimensions depicting concepts within the domain's scope and, within each dimension, 2-10 elements labelling activities through which community engagement could change research., Conclusions: Community engagement has great potential to enhance clinical and translational research. This taxonomy provides a common vocabulary and framework for understanding the impact of community engagement and suggests metrics for assessing the value of community engagement in research., (© 2019 The Authors Health Expectations published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Looked after children and care leavers (denoted as LAC) are often described as a 'hard to reach' group of young people, and their voices are rarely sought to inform academic research., Methods: This paper reports on experiences and reflections of a group of children and young people and academic researchers who developed a Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) group that was set up in the context of an ongoing health service intervention trial with LAC., Setting and Participants: Eighteen qualitative semi-structured interviews were conducted with seven LAC, the participation officer within a North East Children in Care Council and the four researchers involved in developing and facilitating the PPI group. PPI sessions (n = 9) each approximately 1 hour in length were conducted over an 18-month period., Analysis: The qualitative interviews were transcribed verbatim. Thematic analysis was used to analyse the data, and direct quotes are used within the paper., Main Outcomes: The LAC used the PPI group to produce a 5-minute video to highlight why they think young people should be involved in research. Overall findings suggested that it was feasible to develop a research-related PPI group with LAC. Findings from the research were used to co-develop 'top tips' of working with vulnerable young people such as looked after children., Conclusion: This paper has shown that PPI with LAC can be done if a co-production approach to research is taken. It also suggests that assumptions regarding the capabilities of young people as researchers need to be re-evaluated., (© 2019 The Authors Health Expectations published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Competing Interests: LGC is employed by the Pan American Health Organization, Washington, DC. BH and PL are employed by the Special Programme for Research and Training in Tropical Diseases (TDR), co-sponsored by UNICEF, UNDP, the World Bank and WHO and hosted at the World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland, and were instrumental in the development of the Effective Project Planning and Evaluation course and materials, and implementation of the Planning for Success Initiative. The other authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Background: Partnerships between academic researchers and health system leadership are often promoted by health research funding agencies as an important strategy in helping ensure that funded research is relevant and the results used. While potential benefits of such partnerships have been identified, there is limited guidance in the scientific literature for either healthcare organisations or researchers on how to select, build and manage effective research partnerships. Our main research objective was to explore the health system perspective on partnerships with researchers with a focus on issues related to the design and organisation of the health system and services. Two structured web reviews were conducted as one component of this larger study., Methods: Two separate structured web reviews were conducted using structured data extraction tools. The first review focused on sites of health research bodies and those providing information on health system management and knowledge translation (n = 38) to identify what guidance to support partnerships might be available on websites commonly accessed by health leaders and researchers. The second reviewed sites from all health 'regions' in Canada (n = 64) to determine what criteria and standards were currently used in guiding decisions to engage in research partnerships; phone follow-up ensured all relevant information was collected., Results: Absence of guidance on partnerships between research institutions and health system leaders was found. In the first review, absence of guidance on research partnerships and knowledge coproduction was striking and in contrast with coverage of other forms of collaboration such as patient/community engagement. In the second review, little evidence of criteria and standards regarding research partnerships was found. Difficulties in finding appropriate contact information for those responsible for research and obtaining a response were commonly experienced., Conclusion: Guidance related to health system partnerships with academic researchers is lacking on websites that should promote and support such collaborations. Health region websites provide little evidence of partnership criteria and often do not make contact information to research leaders within health systems readily available; this may hinder partnership development between health systems and academia.

There is a need for multiprofessional comprehensive studies to better understand the relationship between design and provision of primary care and long-term care and health outcomes. The PRIMORE (PRImary care MultiprOfessional REsearcher network) project aims at bringing together researchers with different backgrounds and from a wide range of professional groups within the fields of primary care research and long-term care research to develop and share knowledge for the benefit of research on municipal health and care services, and eventually, the quality of municipal health and care in Europe. Main activities of the project will be network development, capacity building, providing a platform where multiprofessional primary care research activities can take place and publishing position papers.

Childhood obesity is a significant public health challenge, yet research priorities for childhood obesity prevention are not established. Coproduction of priorities leads to research which may be more translatable to the domains of policy and practice. The aim of the present study was to identify knowledge gaps and research priorities in addition to facilitators and barriers to knowledge translation in childhood obesity prevention. The nominal group technique involving consensus building with researchers, policymakers, and practitioners was employed during workshops at a national obesity conference held over 2 days in May 2017. Seventy-seven people participated in the first round of research prioritization on Day 1, while 14 stakeholders participated on Day 2. The top five research priorities identified were as follows: (i) Evaluate (including economic evaluation) current programs to inform practice and policy; (ii) How to change culture toward addressing the determinants of health; (iii) Implementation science: process; (iv) How to integrate obesity prevention into existing service structures; (v) How to enhance opportunities for habitual physical activity, including free play and active travel. Key themes emerging from this research prioritization exercise were the importance of funding and resources, coproduction of research, and a focus on both implementation research and social determinants within the field of childhood obesity prevention. The coproduced research priorities may help to shape the research agendas of funders and researchers, and aid in the conduct of policy-relevant research and the translation of research into practice in childhood obesity prevention., (© Society of Behavioral Medicine 2018. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: Innovative ways of planning and conducting research have emerged recently, based on the concept of collective intelligence. Collective intelligence is defined as shared intelligence emerging when people are mobilized within or outside an organization to work on a specific task that could result in more innovative outcomes than those when individuals work alone. Crowdsourcing is defined as "the act of taking a job traditionally performed by a designated agent and outsourcing it to an undefined, generally large group of people in the form of an open call.", Objective: This qualitative study aimed to identify the barriers to mobilizing collective intelligence and ways to overcome these barriers and provide good practice advice for planning and conducting collective intelligence projects across different research disciplines., Methods: We conducted a multinational online open-ended question survey and semistructured audio-recorded interviews with a purposive sample of researchers who had experience in running collective intelligence projects. The questionnaires had an interactive component, enabling respondents to rate and comment on the advice of their fellow respondents. Data were analyzed thematically, drawing on the framework method., Results: A total of 82 respondents from various research fields participated in the survey (n=65) or interview (n=17). The main barriers identified were the lack of evidence-based guidelines for implementing collective intelligence, complexity in recruiting and engaging the community, and difficulties in disseminating the results of collective intelligence projects. We drew on respondents' experience to provide tips and good practice advice for governance, planning, and conducting collective intelligence projects. Respondents particularly suggested establishing a diverse coordination team to plan and manage collective intelligence projects and setting up common rules of governance for participants in projects. In project planning, respondents provided advice on identifying research problems that could be answered by collective intelligence and identifying communities of participants. They shared tips on preparing the task and interface and organizing communication activities to recruit and engage participants., Conclusions: Mobilizing collective intelligence through crowdsourcing is an innovative method to increase research efficiency, although there are several barriers to its implementation. We present good practice advice from researchers with experience of collective intelligence across different disciplines to overcome barriers to mobilizing collective intelligence., (©Van Thu Nguyen, Bridget Young, Philippe Ravaud, Nivantha Naidoo, Mehdi Benchoufi, Isabelle Boutron. Originally published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research (http://www.jmir.org), 02.07.2019.)

The Global Antibiotic Research & Development Partnership (GARDP) has launched a project, REVIVE, to connect and support the antimicrobial research and development (R&D) community. REVIVE's educational activities include a webinar series and sessions and presentations at key conferences. REVIVE also aims to connect antimicrobial researchers with each other and with current and retired experts in the field, and to develop a comprehensive repository of relevant resources for the R&D community., (© The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Society for Antimicrobial Chemotherapy. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to explore health researchers' involvement of policy or decision makers in knowledge translation activities in Malawi., Design/methodology/approach: The case study collected quantitative through questionnaire from health researchers from the University of Malawi. The study used inferential statistics for the analysis of the quantitative data. Pearson χ 2 test was used to establish the relationship between categorical data and determine whether any observed difference between the data sets arose by chance. The Kruskal-Wallis H test was used to determine if there were statistically significant differences between independent variable and dependent variables. Data has been presented in a form of tables showing means, standard deviation and p -values., Findings: Health researchers sometimes involve policy or decision makers in government-sponsored meetings ( M =2.5, SD=1.17). They rarely involve policy or decision makers in expert committee or group meetings ( M =2.4, SD=1.20). Researchers rarely involve policy or decision makers in conferences and workshops ( M =2.4, SD=1.31). Rarely do researchers involve policy or decision makers in formal private or public networks ( M =2.4, SD=1.17). In events organised by the colleges researchers rarely involve policy or decision makers ( M =2.3, SD=1.11); and rarely share weblinks with policy or decision makers ( M =2.0, SD=1,17). On average, health researchers occasionally conduct deliberate dialogues with key health policy makers and other stakeholders ( M =2.5, SD=1.12). The researchers rarely established and maintained long-term partnerships policy or decision makers ( M =2.2, SD=1.20). They rarely involve policy or decision makers in the overall direction of the health research conducted by themselves or the Colleges ( M =2.1, SD=1.24)., Research Limitations/implications: The study recommends that there should be deliberate efforts by health researchers and policy makers to formally engage each other. Individuals need technical skills, knowledge of the processes and structures for engaging with health research evidence to inform policy and decision making. At the institutional level, the use of research evidence should be embedded within support research engagement structures and linked persons., Practical Implications: Formal interactions in a form of expert meetings and technical working groups between researchers and policy makers can facilitate the use of health research evidence in policy formulation., Social Implications: In terms of framework there is need to put in place formal interaction frameworks between health researchers and policy makers within the knowledge translation and exchange., Originality/value: There is dearth of literature on the levels of involvement and interaction between health researchers and health policy or decision makers in health policy, systems and services research in Malawi. This study seeks to bridge the gap with empirical evidence.

Despite the presence of experienced and multidisciplinary staff is now essential due to the increasing complexity of clinical research, many national collective health contracts do not yet contemplate the new professional figures. This instability risks causing an alarming professional gap, especially for non-profit clinical research. For this reason, we would try to evaluate the extent to which the problem is widespread among Italian clinical research coordinators, verifying how much the Italian institutes have permanently integrated this professional figure into organic plant, through stable and specific employment contracts. In November 2016, when the Italian Government has declared for the first time its intention to prevent further renewal of contracts with atypical employment, we conducted a survey with the intent of mapping the extent of the contractual issues related to the figure of the clinical research coordinator. Two years later, we repeated the survey to see if something was changed and if it was any improvement in the employment situation. In November 2016, only a small fraction of the respondents (13.8%) was hired with a permanent contract, while the majority (73.2%) were employed with an atypical one. Regarding the impossibility to renew the atypical contracts due to the new Government provisions starting from January 2017: the 67.5% of the respondents stated that the issue would directly affect him. Two years later, the situation looks even worse: only the 11.5% of the respondents are hired on a permanent contract, while there is a very high percentage (74.8%) of atypical contracts, with even some coordinators who say they have been working for several months as unpaid volunteers. It is interesting to note that over 30% of staff with atypical contracts work in research institutes and research-related scientific societies, with a strong interest in non-profit clinical research. Adopt Clinical Trials Units officially and contractually recognized would be essential to bring back our nation on the top of the world health systems ranking, but yet the Italian research-dedicated infrastructures continue to be a ghost reality, deeply characterized by a continuous professional turnover and by the lack of long-term prospects. In the absence of a permanent solution, Italy is unlikely to reach the required standards, denying patients of possible therapeutic available options. Our non-profit research will pay the most for it.

Empowerment is core to health promotion; however, there is a lack of consensus in the wider literature as to how to define it and at what level it may occur. Definitional inconsistency inevitably leads to challenges in measuring empowerment; yet if it is as important as is claimed, this must be addressed. This paper discusses the complexities of measuring empowerment and puts forward a number of recommendations for researchers and policy makers as to how this can be achieved noting some of the tensions that may arise between theoretical considerations, research and practice. We argue that empowerment is a culturally and socially defined construct and that this should be taken into account in attempts to measure it. Finally we conclude that, in order to build up the evidence base for empowerment, there is a need for research clearly defining what it is and how it is being measured.

This paper analyzes capacity building in practice, addressing the expectations, imaginaries and experiences of health researchers from Mozambique and Angola. The empirical data stems from the Erasmus+ funded project "University Development and Innovation - Africa (UDI-A)", a consortium established between European and African institutions to promote the mobility and empowerment of African academics, the establishment of North/South research partnerships and the strengthening of African institutions. Through qualitative research methods - semi-structured interviews and a focus group with African participants, and participant observation - this article analyzes the experiences of African academics working in the health field, their perceptions of capacity building and aspirations during their stay in Portugal in 2018. By addressing some of their concerns and achievements, this paper reflects on the performativity of capacity building methodologies, exploring a wide range of issues that emerge within the framework of North/South partnerships, inquiring whether it would be possible to decolonize capacity-building methodologies.

Mid-career nurse scientists in academia are at risk for burnout and departing scientific careers, particularly those in research-intensive academic settings. With the shortage of nursing faculty and the public health need for high-quality nursing research, it is critical to retain current research-focused individuals in nursing. In this paper, we discuss definitions and expectations of mid-career scientists, challenges and barriers faced by mid-career scientists, and opportunities for mid-career scientists, informed by both nursing and non-nursing literature. Finally, we focus on definitions and expectations, challenges, and opportunities specifically related to mid-career nurse scientists in research-intensive academic settings., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: Clinical researchers are now encouraged to include patient partners in all research projects. Nevertheless, published accounts of patient engagement in complex research projects, such as those involving critically ill and dying patients, are lacking. Whether this absence is due to the relatively new emergence of patient engagement research methods or fundamental challenges regarding family engagement in challenging research contexts is unclear. We describe our experiences with forming a researcher-family partnership in a deceased organ donation research project involving the prospective observation of potential and actual deceased organ donors dying in the intensive care unit., Methods: We used the Guidance for Reporting Involvement of Patients and the Public evidence-based, consensus-informed reporting guidelines to organize our narrative., Results: We were able to initiate and sustain a research consultant relationship with the mother of a deceased organ donor for over two years. Challenges faced included: constraints on money and time, communication preferences, and the emotional stress of participating in difficult conversations. Positive outcomes included: improvement of data collection tools, new opportunities for access to research populations, and motivation to include family partnership in future grant proposals., Conclusions: Family engagement in deceased organ donation research is feasible and contributes positively to study progress and outcomes. Patient and family engagement in challenging research contexts may require special attention to the emotional challenges of participation. We hope that our experience will encourage clinical researchers working in deceased organ donation and similarly complex domains to consider including patient partners in their projects.

Purpose: To identify orientations in Italian nursing research regarding nursing practice, highlighting strengths, needs for improvement, as well as suggestions and recommendations for promoting the future development of nursing knowledge., Method: An extensive review of the literature was conducted (scoping review) by consulting the following databases: PubMed, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Biosis and Scopus, for the time interval between January 2006 and July 2016., Results: Out of a total of 5635 publications, 35 were identified as relevant to the research question. These highlighted the changes implemented by nurses in Italy through their professional actions according to the best available evidence, especially since 2011/2012. Many publications relate to the implementation of new technical procedures or educational systems for patients, but there is a lack of studies that examine the effectiveness of nursing care and its effects on patients. Many studies do not belong within a program of research or larger projects, and virtually none involve participation in international research teams. With regard to the clinical environments in which the studies were conducted, the majority involved hospitals and the focus was mainly on patients in an acute phase of an illness. Few studies have investigated persons with chronic illnesses, the elderly or have been conducted in long-term care settings such as nursing homes. Another finding identified in this review is the prevalence of quantitative studies, with descriptive study designs, the use of questionnaires that were often created ad hoc, and the recruitment of samples from 'convenience' populations. These findings highlight the need to further review orientations in the Italian nursing research literature, focusing attention on emerging clinical priorities. This should be done through a process that balances the needs of nurses and with those the patients., Conclusions: Italian nursing researchers tend to focus their investigations on technical and educational topics. Theoretical or philosophical frameworks are almost completely missing in the literature, highlighting the need for more work in this area. In most cases, Italian researchers do not seem to follow research tracks based on research priorities, highlighting the need to review practice settings to identify areas that need to be developed, explored or consolidated. For Italian nurses, research is an area that is still under development and consolidation, but with strong potential for the future.

Background: Clinician-scientists (CSs) are physicians who work in daily care and have an academic role in research or education. They may act as knowledge brokers and help to connect research and clinical practice. There is no data available on CSs' brokering activities and the perceived barriers and facilitators to optimising their role in general practice (GP) and elderly care medicine (EM)., Aim: To identify the brokering activities of CSs in these fields and the barriers and facilitators they come across whilst sharing knowledge and connecting people in research and frontline health care., Design and Setting: Qualitative interview study among 17 Dutch senior CSs., Method: Interview data were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim and thematic interpretative analysis was used to identify themes., Results: CSs facilitate collaboration between researchers and practitioners. They exchange knowledge on both sides, make use of extensive networks and constantly and actively involve care in research and research in care. CSs come across barriers as well as facilitators that influence their brokering activities. Some barriers and facilitators are at the individual level, other are related more to the job context and workplace., Conclusions: This study reveals barriers to overcome and facilitators to develop related to the brokering role of CSs. To make the best use of CSs, brokering activities and the added value of CSs should be recognised and supported. Awareness of what CSs need to function effectively in demanding work settings could be important for the future impact of the role on the fields of GP and EM.

Background: Aboriginal women and families are under-represented in Australian research on pregnancy and childbirth. The Aboriginal Families Study aimed to investigate the views and experiences of a representative sample of women giving birth to an Aboriginal baby in South Australia between July 2011 and June 2013, using methods designed to respect Aboriginal culture and communities., Methods: A team of 12 Aboriginal researchers facilitated community engagement and recruitment of Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal mothers of Aboriginal infants in urban, regional and remote areas of South Australia over a two-year period., Results: A total of 344 women took part, around a quarter of all Aboriginal women giving birth in South Australia in the study period (39% urban, 35% regional and 25% from remote areas). Participants were representative in relation to maternal age (mean age of 25 years, range=15-43 years). Over half of women (56%) first heard about the study via a member of the fieldwork team making contact with them through community connections. Other major sources of recruitment were: Aboriginal health services/programs (20%) and public maternity hospitals (16%). Almost all of the women (95%) recruited via community networks of the fieldwork team completed the questionnaire. In contrast, 51% of women recruited via public hospitals completed the questionnaire (odds ratio=0.1, 95% confidence interval 0.0-0.1, p<0.001)., Conclusions: Aboriginal researchers' community knowledge and leadership is critical to the conduct of successful Aboriginal health research. High levels of participation in research by 'harder to reach' populations are achievable when researchers take time to build relationships and work in partnership with communities., (Copyright © 2018 Australian College of Midwives. All rights reserved.)

The increasing complexity that characterizes the world of clinical trials, both in terms of procedures and bureaucracy, has made it necessary to create dedicated infrastructures composed of experienced and qualified personnel, who constantly work to ensure high ethical and qualitative standards. A key role in these infrastructures is played by the clinical research coordinator, a key figure able to manage the workflow required, placing himself as a reference for the coordination of the various activities and professional figures involved. The literature has widely demonstrated how the presence of this professional figure is a valid contribution both from a documentary and administrative point of view as well as a crucial resource for what concerns the indicators of ethics and quality of research. Despite that, there is no yet an institutional recognition of the professional figure, neither a specific economical agreement within the National Health System. The lack of institutional recognition is causing a worrying phenomenon of migration of qualified personnel towards contract research organizations and pharmaceutical companies. That could be detrimental to the competitiveness of Italian clinical research and hinder the possibility of offering innovative experiments therapies to patients, with serious ethical consequences.

Background: The objective is to show variations in the number of non-tenured personnel (NTP) in a public health research centre (IRCCS) between 30th June 2016 and 31st December 2017. In this time interval, the issue of NTP was at the centre of governmental discussions., Methods: Data collection was performed from CVs and scientific publications of NTP working at the Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori (INT). We compared the characteristics of NTP entering or leaving INT and those of NTP who remained in the considered time interval., Results: NTP in INT counted 465 members of staff at 30th June 2016 and 472 at 31st December 2017. 75% of these works in the research. 26% of NTP left INT and their position resulted entirely substituted by other NTP. NTP staff who left are mainly aged under 40 and show fewer publications than those who stayed. Newly acquired NTP are younger and show a fewer number of publications compared to the personnel who left., Conclusions: 1 out of 4 NTP members of staff moved to a new job during a period in which the uncertain future of NTP research staff was under the spotlight. It appears that IRCCS are progressively being identified as suitable for hands-on, post university internships from which researchers would then choose to move, in search of a new job in public or private centres, with a consequent decline of IRCCS' role in health research.

Background: The red tape and delays around research ethics and governance approvals frequently frustrate researchers yet, as the lesser of two evils, are largely accepted as unavoidable. Here we quantify aspects of the research ethics and governance approvals for one interview- and questionnaire-based study conducted in England which used the National Health Service (NHS) procedures and the electronic Integrated Research Application System (IRAS). We demonstrate the enormous impact of existing approvals processes on costs of studies, including opportunity costs to focus on the substantive research, and suggest directions for radical system change., Main Text: We have recorded 491 exchanges with 89 individuals involved in research ethics and governance approvals, generating 193 pages of email text excluding attachments. These are conservative estimates (e.g. only records of the research associate were used). The exchanges were conducted outside IRAS, expected to be the platform where all necessary documents are provided and questions addressed. Importantly, the figures exclude the actual work of preparing the ethics documentation (such as the ethics application, information sheets and consent forms). We propose six areas of work to enable system change: 1. Support the development of a broad range of customised research ethics and governance templates to complement generic, typically clinical trials orientated, ones; 2. Develop more sophisticated and flexible frameworks for study classification; 3. Link with associated processes for assessment, feedback, monitoring and reporting, such as ones involving funders and patient and public involvement groups; 4. Invest in a new generation IT infrastructure; 5. Enhance system capacity through increasing online reviewer participation and training; and 6. Encourage researchers to quantify the approvals processes for their studies., Conclusion: Ethics and governance approvals are burdensome for historical reasons and not because of the nature of the task. There are many opportunities to improve their efficiency and analytic depth in an age of innovation, increased connectivity and distributed working. If we continue to work under current systems, we are perpetuating, paradoxically, an unethical system of research approvals by virtue of its wastefulness and impoverished ethical debate.