What are the experiences, preparation, and support needs of early career clinical educators within an Australian tertiary health service?: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: There is increasing demand for professional practice placement opportunities, supported by health professional educators, to enable future health workforce development. Early career health professionals performing the educator role is one strategy that can help meet this demand. However, there is a need to consider how best to prepare and support early career health professionals to become educators. This study aimed to explore the experiences and perspectives of early career occupational therapy clinical educators including their preparation and support needs. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were completed with ten early career occupational therapists who had supervised their first or second student on a professional practice placement. The participants worked within an Australian tertiary hospital and health service in various clinical settings. Interviews were completed within six weeks of placement completion and lasted approximately one hour. They were recorded and transcribed verbatim and reflexive inductive thematic analysis was undertaken to identify key themes. RESULTS: Ten occupational therapists, who had been working for an average of two years and two months, consented to participate. Initially, participants expressed mixed emotions about taking on the clinical educator role. They then described their adjustment to the role responsibilities, challenges encountered, and the development of the educator-student relationship. Participants found that the experience of supervising a student enhanced their educator, clinical, and professional skills and confidence. The important support elements of tailored educator preparation, placement design, and timely access to relevant resources and experienced staff were identified. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated how early career health professionals can possess desirable educator attributes, such as enthusiasm for taking on the role and cultivating collaborative learning relationships with their students. The experience of being an educator also presents a professional development opportunity for early career health professionals. Insights gained about the specific preparation and support needs of early career clinical educators warrant consideration by organisations and staff involved in the provision of student professional practice placements. Overall, this study's findings signify the importance of engaging and investing in early career health professionals to support student clinical education and to develop our current and future healthcare workforce.

Building the field of food systems research: commentary on a research funder's role.

BACKGROUND: The Food, Environment, and Health (FEH) program of the International Development Research Centre (IDRC) aims to improve the health of low- and middle-income country populations by generating evidence, innovations, and policies that reduce the health and economic burdens of preventable chronic and infectious diseases. A predominant focus of the FEH program is research related to consumer food environments that promote or enable healthy and sustainable shifts in consumption. An evaluation of the FEH program, led by the University of Toronto, provided an opportunity to analyse the approach and role of a development funder in building the field of food systems research. DISCUSSION: In this commentary, we provide an external evaluator's perspective on the IDRC's contributory role in building the field of food systems research, based on a secondary analysis of findings from a recent FEH program evaluation. We used the field-building framework outlined in Di Ruggiero et al. (Health Res Policy System, 2017) to highlight the strengths and challenges of the FEH's approach to field-building and determined that the program aligns with six of the seven features of the framework. The FEH program has enhanced support and awareness for food systems research, provided organized funding and capacity-building opportunities, multilevel activity to support research and its use, and strong scientific leadership, and set significant standards and exemplars. However, we also found that not all sociopolitical environments have fully recognized or valued food systems research and its use for policy change. CONCLUSION: The FEH program's field-building approach can be situated within the field-building framework, and it has been successful in laying the groundwork for building the field of food systems, particularly consumer food environments research. However, supportive external environments and further investments may be needed to achieve a critical mass of capacity, continue building communities of practice, and influence policy. The FEH program approach may serve as an exemplar and comparator for other research funding agencies looking to develop strategic research programming in the field of food systems research.

Evaluating the integration of strategic priorities within a complex research-for-development funding program.

This paper examines the application of Complexity Theory constructs to a research-for-development program evaluation and presents an overview of the implications and promising approaches for evaluating complex programs. We discuss lessons learned from an evaluation completed for the International Development Research Centre's Food, Environment and Health (FEH) program, which investigated the integration and outcomes of five strategic program priorities: partnerships, southern leadership, gender and equity, scale, and environmental sustainability. We present interpretations from a secondary, thematic content analysis that categorized evaluation findings across four complexity constructs: emergence, unpredictability, contradiction and self-organization. Viewing the evaluation through these constructs surfaced some important features of the FEH program to date, specifically its evolving approach, adaptiveness to emergent issues, non-linear outcomes, and self-organizing agents, which had several implications for the evaluative process. We conclude that the most appropriate evaluation designs for complex funding programs are participatory (to explore all stakeholders' influence), adaptive (to capture the unexpected) and assess external contexts. The application of complexity constructs may be useful for evaluators to gain a deeper understanding of how program contexts change in the face of complexity and why some evaluation methods work more effectively than others.