Research translation mentoring for emerging clinician researchers in rural and regional health settings: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Building clinician and organisation-level research translation capacity and capability is fundamental for increasing the implementation of research into health practice and policy and improving health outcomes. Research translation capacity and capability building is particularly crucial in rural and regional settings to address complex problems impacting these socially and economically disadvantaged communities. Programs to build clinicians' research translation capability typically involve training and mentoring. Little is known about the features of and influences on mentorships in the context of training for emerging clinician-researchers working in rural and regional healthcare settings. Research translation mentorships were established as part of the Supporting Translation Research in Rural and Regional settings (STaRR) program developed and delivered in Victoria, Australia from 2020 to 2021. The study sought to address the following research questions: 1) What context-specific types of support do research translation mentors provide to emerging researchers?. 2) How does the mentoring element of a rural research translational training program influence research translation capacity and capability development in rural emerging researchers and mentors, if at all?. 3) How does the mentoring element of the program influence translation capacity and capability at the organisational and regional level, if at all? METHODS: We conducted a qualitative descriptive study. Interviews with individuals involved in the STaRR program took place approximately 12 months after the program and explored participants' experiences of the mentored training. Interviews were undertaken via telephone, audio-recorded, and transcribed. Data were analysed using a team-based five-stage framework approach. RESULTS: Participants included emerging researchers (n = 9), mentors (n = 5), and managers (n = 4), from five health services and two universities. We identified four themes in the interview data: (1) Mentors play an educative role; (2) Mentoring enhanced by a collaborative environment; (3) Organisational challenges can influence mentorships, and (4) Mentorships help develop research networks and collective research and translation capacity. CONCLUSIONS: Mentorships contributed to the development of research translation capabilities. The capabilities were developed through mentors' deepened understanding of the rural and regional healthcare contexts in which their emerging researchers worked, the broadening and strengthening of rural and regional research networks, and building and sharing research translation knowledge and skills.

Design and implementation characteristics of research training for rural health professionals: a qualitative descriptive study.

BACKGROUND: Research capacity and capability of rural health professionals is essential to the delivery of evidence-based care and for informing strategies to address rural health inequities. Effective implementation of research education and training is fundamental to building rural health professional research capacity and capability. A lack of overarching guidance to inform the delivery of research education and training in rural health services can contribute to gaps in capacity-building approaches. The aim of this study was to identify characteristics of the design and implementation of current research training for rural health professionals in Victoria, Australia, to inform a future model for rural health professional research capacity and capability building. METHODS: A qualitative descriptive study was undertaken. Key informants, with extensive knowledge of research education and training in rural health services in Victoria, were invited to participate in semi-structured telephone interviews via snowballing recruitment methods. Interview transcripts were analysed inductively, with themes and codes mapped to the domains of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. RESULTS: Of the 40 key informants approached, 20 agreed to participate including 11 regional health service managers, five rural health academics and four university managers. Participants suggested that research training varied in quality and relevance to rural health professionals. Training costs and lack of tailoring to the rural context were key barriers, whereas experiential learning and flexible modes of delivery enabled training uptake. Health service and government policies, structures, and processes both enabled or stifled implementation opportunities, with rural health professional networks from different regions offering capacity for research training development, and government departmental structures hampering training coordination. Tension between research activities and clinical practice, and health professional knowledge and beliefs, shaped the delivery of training programs. Strategically planned and evaluated research training programs and education via co-design with rural health professionals and use of research champions were strongly recommended by participants. CONCLUSIONS: To optimise research training for rural health professionals and increase the quality and quantity of relevant rural health research, a systematically planned, implemented, and resourced region-wide research training model is required.

Translating research into rural health practice: a qualitative study of perceived capability-building needs.

INTRODUCTION: The timely translation of research into practice and local policy is critical to improving healthcare delivery in rural and regional settings, and remains a concern for researchers, health professionals, health managers and policymakers alike. Successful and sustained research translation does not occur without concerted effort, support and strategies to build research translation capacity and capability. Research capacity comprises individual and organisational capabilities. This study is primarily focused on individual capabilities. Health professionals working in rural and regional settings, where research activity and infrastructure are generally less mature than that seen in metropolitan areas, need additional support and skills to build their capability to engage in translation-focused research. This study aimed to explore rural health research stakeholders' perspectives on capability-building needs for emerging researchers to enable the translation of research into health practice. METHODS: A qualitative description methodology was used to conduct three online focus groups to explore participants' understanding of research translation, and their perceptions of the supports that are needed to build capability for emerging health professional researchers to undertake translation-focused research. Emerging health professional researchers (emerging researchers hereafter) are health professionals who have little or no formal training or experience undertaking research. Data were analysed by a five-stage framework approach. RESULTS: Participants included emerging researchers (n=12), research mentors (n=3) and health managers (n=4) from six rural or regional organisations, including four health services, one university and one primary health network in Victoria, Australia. Participants' conceptualisation of research translation reflected previously documented definitions; that is, research grounded in health practice and characterised by adaptation of existing research evidence to local settings via implementation. Four key themes related to research translation support for rural and regional health researchers were identified: understanding the study and translation context is vital to enacting change; engaging with stakeholders identifies research and translation priorities and suitable approaches; mentor and managerial support assists navigation of research translation activities; and access to clinical and research networks promotes research translation partnerships and collaborations. Participants highlighted the need to identify and train appropriate research mentors and health leaders who can support translation-focused research at the emerging researcher level. The need for training that targets fundamental research translation skills, including systematic processes for engaging stakeholders and collaborative priority setting, and the processes to analyse both the research study and research translation contexts, were also identified as important. CONCLUSION: Given their understanding of the local community and health context, rural and regional health professionals are ideally placed to engage in translation-focused research; however, they require multiple types of research capability development through several levels of influence. This includes support and guidance to ensure their endeavours align with and leverage organisational and regional priorities for research translation. These findings can inform approaches to research capability building through training and resource provision, and organisational infrastructure development and capacity building, to support the rapid translation of research into clinical practice.

What shapes research and research capacity building in rural health services? Context matters.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the contextual factors influencing research and research capacity building in rural health settings. DESIGN: Qualitative study using semi-structured telephone interviews to collect data regarding health professionals' research education and capacity building. Analysis involved inductive coding using Braun and Clark's thematic analysis; and deductive mapping to the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). SETTING: Victorian rural health services and university campuses. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty senior rural health managers, academics and/or research coordinators. Participants had at least three years' experience in rural public health, health-related research or health education settings. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Contextual factors influencing the operationalisation and prioritisation of research capacity building in rural health services. RESULTS: Findings reflected the CFIR domains and constructs: intervention characteristics (relative advantage); outer setting (cosmopolitanism, external policies and incentives); inner setting (implementation climate, readiness for implementation); characteristics of individuals (self-efficacy); and process (planning, engaging). Findings illustrated the implementation context and the complex contextual tensions, which either prevent or enhance research capacity building in rural health services. CONCLUSIONS: Realising the Australian Government's vision for improved health service provision and health outcomes in rural areas requires a strong culture of research and research capacity building in rural health services. Low levels of rural research funding, chronic workforce shortages and the tension between undertaking research and delivering health care, all significantly impact the operationalisation and prioritisation of research capacity building in rural health services. Effective policy and investment addressing these contextual factors is crucial for the success of research capacity building in rural health services.