Conceptualizing National Advisory Boards in primary care research: application to the Two in One HIV and COVID screening and testing model.

The authors report on their development of a National Advisory Board (NAB) to guide a funded project: Two in One: HIV + COVID-19 Screening and Testing Model. This project aimed to improve primary care practitioners' capacity to routinize HIV, PrEP/PEP, and COVID-19 vaccine screenings for all their patients while relying on culturally responsive communication with their minoritized patients. To approach their monumental research and education tasks, they created a NAB, drawing from the literature on advisory boards to (a) promote board member engagement and (b) progress successfully through the six stages suggested for successful advisory boards. A midpoint survey and final focus groups with NAB members indicated mixed levels of engagement, a sense of time and work being valued, and pride in the media and academic reach of the project. The authors offer considerations for others considering forming a NAB to guide primary care research and interventions.

Bridging the gap between research evidence and its implementation in public health practice: case studies of embedded research model.

AIM: To investigate the potential of embedded research in bridging the gap between research evidence and its implementation in public health practice. METHODS: Using a case study methodology, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 4 embedded researchers, 9 public health practitioners, and 4 other stakeholders (2 teachers and 2 students) across four case study sites. Sites and individuals were purposively selected. Sites included two local authorities, one secondary school, and one sports organisation. Thematic data analysis was adopted to analyse the qualitative data. RESULTS: Four themes were identified: (1) building and maintaining relationships, (2) working with stakeholders, (3) informing practice, and (4) critical reflection. CONCLUSIONS: Embedded researchers build and maintain relationships with practitioners and other stakeholders to produce research. Evidence from the co-produced research informs future practice and research to improve service and delivery rendered to the public. Thus, embedded researchers use their role to bridge the research evidence - implementation gap in public health practice.

The Promise and Challenges of Practice-Oriented Research: A Commentary on the Special Issue.

At the centre of POR is the concept of collaboration between patients, therapists, agencies, and third-party payers. For this commentary, I review the articles of the special issue with attention to both the opportunities and challenges offered by practice-oriented research (POR). I also reviewed some previous research on practice-research networks and how that research might inform POR. The use of routine outcome monitoring (ROM), artificial intelligence (AI), and program evaluation (PE) models show promise for advancing POR. However, each comes with its challenges. The use of ROM to improve patient outcomes has research support. However, researchers have identified problems with implementing ROM because of low uptake by clinicians and because clinicians may see ROM as a potential intrusion. AI shows promise to improve patient outcomes by potentially providing therapists with immediate and nuanced data to inform interventions and interpersonal stances specific to each patient. However, the scaling up of AI runs the risk of dehumanizing psychological interventions. PE may provide a context for allowing therapists to engage in POR to address real-world processes and outcomes of mental health interventions. However, like ROM PE faces the challenge of trust among clinicians and patients who may be reluctant to participate. Despite these challenges, and because of efforts to nurture and maintain respectful collaborations, articles in this special issue highlight how POR can play a pivotal role in bridging the gap between theory and practice.

Practice-Oriented Research: An Introduction to New Developments and Future Directions.

Aimed at understanding and improving psychological therapies as they are conducted in clinical routine, practice-oriented research (POR) is now a well-established approach to the scientific foundations of mental health care services. Resting on the accumulation of a wide range of practice-based evidence related to treatment outcome and process, as well as factors associated with the participants of psychotherapy and its context, POR is ripe for new developments - regarding what to investigate and how to investigate it. This paper is the introduction of a series devoted to recent advances and future directions of POR as their pertained to routine outcome monitoring, technologies and artificial intelligence, the integration of constructs and methods from program evaluation and implementation science, and the investigation of populations with limited financial resources across various regions of the world. The series also includes commentaries from two leaders of POR.

Realidad investigadora de los enfermeros en atención primaria de salud: ¿cuál es la situación? / Research reality of nurses in primary health care: what is the situation?

Objetivo: Examinar la actividad investigadora de los enfermeros en atención primaria de salud y conocer su divulgación. Metodología: Se trata de un estudio transversal descriptivo realizado entre el 27 mayo hasta el 29 de junio de 2022, en un Área de Gestión Sanitaria a través de un cuestionario electrónico autoadministrado. Contestaron el cuestionario 242 enfermeros. Un 5.2% posee el grado de Máster y ninguno el de Doctor. Un 8.3% ha colaborado en algún proyecto de investigación financiado, siendo la suscripción a grupos del Plan Andaluz de Investigación, Desarrollo e Innovación (PAIDI) de un 0,4%. La participación es principalmente colaborativa con sólo 1 caso como IP en proyectos financiados. La aportación a congresos u otras actividades de divulgación es de un 23% para comunicaciones orales y de un 26,1 % para comunicaciones escritas. Resultados: Sobre la publicación de resultados, un 16,5%, han publicado al menos 1 artículo científico, siendo un 1,3% en revistas de impacto (ninguna en Q1 y Q2). La temática de las publicaciones es muy diversa. La colaboración en investigaciones realizadas con otras disciplinas ha sido de un 10,4 % y en estudios de investigación realizados con otras instituciones o servicios de salud de un 11,3%. Conclusión: Se concluye que la actividad investigadora realizada en atención primaria es de bajo nivel y calidad. Existe dispersión tanto en la temática como en los perfiles enfermeros que desarrollan actividad investigadora, lo que implica inexistencia de una red consolidada en investigación en cuidados que sustente la práctica asistencial basada en la evidencia científica. (AU)

Aim: The aim of this study is to examinate the research activity of nurses in primary health care and to know his dissemination. Method: It is a descriptive cross-sectional study carried out between May 27 and June 29, 2022, in a Health Management Area Through a self-administrated questionnaire. A total of 242 nurses answered the questionnaire. A total of 5,2% have a Master ́s degree and none have a PhD. Some 8,3% have collaborated in a funded research project, with 0,4% subscribing to PAIDI groups. Participation is mostly collaborative with only 1 case as PI in funded projects. Contribution to congresses or other dissemination activities is 18.7% for oral communications and 16,5% for written communications. Results: Regarding the publication of results, 16,5% have published at least 1 scientific article, 1,3% in impact journals (none in Q1 or Q2). The subject matter of the publications is very diverse. Collaboration in research with other disciplines was 10,4%, and in research studies carried out with other institutions or health services are 11,3%. Conclusion: It is concluded that the research activity carried out in primary care is of low level and quality. There is dispersion both in the subject matter and in the nursing profiles that carry out research activity, which implies the lack of a consolidated network in research in care that supports care practice based on scientific evidence. (AU)

Development of a person-centred care approach for persons with chronic multimorbidity in general practice by means of participatory action research.

BACKGROUND: The management of persons with multimorbidity challenges healthcare systems tailored to individual diseases. A person-centred care approach is advocated, in particular for persons with multimorbidity. The aim of this study was to describe the co-creation and piloting of a proactive, person-centred chronic care approach for persons with multimorbidity in general practice, including facilitators and challenges for successful implementation. METHODS: A participatory action research (PAR) approach was applied in 13 general practices employing four subsequent co-creation cycles between 2019 and 2021. The target population included adults with ≥3 chronic conditions. Participating actors were general practitioners (GPs), practice nurses (PNs), patients (target group), the affiliated care cooperation, representatives of a health insurer and researchers. Each cycle consisted of a try-out period in practice and a reflective evaluation through focus groups with healthcare providers, interviews with patients and analyses of routine care data. In each cycle, facilitators, challenges and follow-up actions for the next cycle were identified. Work satisfaction among GPs and PNs was measured pre and at the end of the final co-creation cycle. RESULTS: Identified essential steps in the person-centred chronic care approach include (1) appropriate patient selection for (2) an extended person-centred consultation, and (3) personalised goalsetting and follow-up. Key facilitators included improved therapeutic relationships, enhanced work satisfaction for care providers, and patient appreciation of extended time with their GP. Deliberate task division and collaboration between GPs and PNs based on patient, local setting, and care personnel is required. Challenges and facilitators for implementation encompassed a prioritisation tool to support GPs appropriately who to invite first for extended consultations, appropriate remuneration and time to conduct extended consultations, training in delivering person-centred chronic care available for all general practice care providers and an electronic medical record system accommodating comprehensive information registration. CONCLUSIONS: A person-centred chronic care approach targeting patients with multimorbidity in general practice was developed and piloted in co-creation with stakeholders. More consultation time facilitated better understanding of persons' situations, their functioning, priorities and dilemma's, and positively impacted work satisfaction of care providers. Challenges need to be tackled before widespread implementation. Future evaluation on the quadruple aims is recommended.

Action researchers as "orchestrators" of co-innovation: a theoretical and methodological framework.

BACKGROUND: With the increasing complexity of health care services, more comprehensive and integrated services need to be designed. Action researchers are encouraged to facilitate multiactor participation and user-centered approaches to initiate service development. However, "orchestrating" co-innovation, in which actors have diverse attitudes, agendas, positions of power, and horizons of understanding, is challenging, and a framework that supports action researchers in co-innovation studies lack. The purpose of this article was to explore how action researchers can facilitate multiactor engagement and handle possible challenges and stimulate creativity among diverse stakeholders. METHODS: We have studied and discussed two Scandinavian cases of rehabilitation innovation (for cancer patients and persons with acquired brain injury) where two research teams with action research approaches have acted in an orchestrating role to create co-innovation. RESULTS: We identified four themes that are essential for action researchers to facilitate collaborative and creative co-innovation processes: (1) relational power reflexibility, (2) resource integration, (3) joint understanding, and (4) the facilitation of creativity. These mutually dependent themes constitute a theoretical and methodological framework for of co-innovation. CONCLUSIONS: This paper offers a contribution that supports action researchers in orchestrating diverse actors and their contributions in co-innovation processes.

The effectiveness of knowledge-sharing techniques and approaches in research funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR): a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: The National Institute of Health and Care Research (NIHR), funds, enables and delivers world-leading health and social care research to improve people's health and wellbeing. To achieve this aim, effective knowledge sharing (two-way knowledge sharing between researchers and stakeholders to create new knowledge and enable change in policy and practice) is needed. To date, it is not known which knowledge sharing techniques and approaches are used or how effective these are in creating new knowledge that can lead to changes in policy and practice in NIHR funded studies. METHODS: In this restricted systematic review, electronic databases [MEDLINE, The Health Management Information Consortium (including the Department of Health's Library and Information Services and King's Fund Information and Library Services)] were searched for published NIHR funded studies that described knowledge sharing between researchers and other stakeholders. One researcher performed title and abstract, full paper screening and quality assessment (Critical Appraisal Skills Programme qualitative checklist) with a 20% sample independently screened by a second reviewer. A narrative synthesis was adopted. RESULTS: In total 9897 records were identified. After screening, 17 studies were included. Five explicit forms of knowledge sharing studies were identified: embedded models, knowledge brokering, stakeholder engagement and involvement of non-researchers in the research or service design process and organisational collaborative partnerships between universities and healthcare organisations. Collectively, the techniques and approaches included five types of stakeholders and worked with them at all stages of the research cycle, except the stage of formation of the research design and preparation of funding application. Seven studies (using four of the approaches) gave examples of new knowledge creation, but only one study (using an embedded model approach) gave an example of a resulting change in practice. The use of a theory, model or framework to explain the knowledge sharing process was identified in six studies. CONCLUSIONS: Five knowledge sharing techniques and approaches were reported in the included NIHR funded studies, and seven studies identified the creation of new knowledge. However, there was little investigation of the effectiveness of these approaches in influencing change in practice or policy.

Supporting the next generation of prevention research leaders to conduct effective research-policy partnerships.

Successful research-policy partnerships rely on shared vision, dedicated investment, and mutual benefits. To ensure the ongoing value of chronic disease prevention research, and support research translation and impact, Australia needs funding, university, and policy systems that incentivise and support emerging leaders to drive effective partnerships.

How much is invested in obesity prevention in Australia? An analysis of major research and Federal Government funding, 2013-2022.

Objective and importance of study: Overweight and obesity are the second leading risk factors for death and non-communicable disease in Australia. This study aimed to examine the Australian Federal Government funding landscape for population-level obesity prevention from 2013 to 2022. STUDY TYPE: A retrospective analysis and narrative synthesis of publicly available data on obesity prevention funding from the Federal Government and major federally funded Australian research organisations. METHODS: Searches were conducted of Australian Federal Government Budget documents and funding announcements from the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC), Australian Research Council (ARC) and Medical Research Future Fund (MRFF). Funding allocations targeting obesity prevention, or the prevention of risk factors associated with obesity, were included. These were determined by the presence of keywords related to obesity, unhealthy diet, physical activity and sedentary behaviour. Data were extracted verbatim, coded and narratively synthesised by funding source. RESULTS: From 2013 to 2022, 186 funding allocations for obesity prevention in Australia were identified, totalling approximately A$778 million. The proportion of funding allocated to obesity prevention compared to the total annual budget of each funding source was relatively low: NHMRC = 1.1%; ARC = 0.2%; MRFF = 0.8%; Federal Government = 0.1% (of health budget). Funding for obesity prevention initiatives fluctuated over time. CONCLUSIONS: Findings underscore the need for strategic and ongoing funding allocation to support obesity prevention research, implementation and sustainment of evidence-based obesity prevention initiatives in Australia.

Building prevention research science communication and knowledge translation capacity through multidisciplinary collaboration.

OBJECTIVE: To document the outcomes of a dedicated Science Communication Community of Practice (CoP) for increasing prevention-focused knowledge translation (KT) and evidence uptake. Type of program: Shared priorities and a united vision to communicate the value of prevention research led to the formation of a dedicated Science Communication CoP within an Australian public health prevention-focused research collaboration. Members of the CoP included science communication experts and early- and mid-career researchers (EMCRs) with KT-focused roles. METHODS: The CoP met monthly, with semi-structured meetings led by an experienced science communication professional. A priority of the CoP was to develop resources that could help members and external parties to communicate their findings, especially EMCRs and those working on low-resourced projects. Insights from CoP members were synthesised to document if, and how, the CoP increased communication and KT capacity. RESULTS: CoP members found that participatory dialogue - dialogue that involves sharing perspectives and listening to others in order to develop a shared understanding - helped promote a greater understanding of science communication techniques and led to KT being embedded within projects. The CoP itself resulted in shared narratives and communication outputs that could not have been produced by individual members, primarily due to a lack of dedicated resourcing. Members found that engaging in the CoP increased their use of a range of science communication skills, tactics, and methods (e.g., targeted messaging for policy and practice, use of media and social media, and event management to engage audiences and build trust). LESSONS LEARNT: The CoP helped build a greater working knowledge of science communication among its members, leading to increased KT activities. Within an environment of low resourcing for science communication, bringing researchers together with science communication experts can help promote the communication of synthesised evidence and unified messaging on 'what works for prevention'.

Self-identified rurality in a nationally representative population in the US.

INTRODUCTION: In the US, health services research most often relies on Rural-Urban Commuting Area (RUCA) classification codes to measure rurality. This measure is known to misrepresent rurality and does not rely on individual experiences of rurality associated with healthcare inequities. We aimed to determine a patient-centered RUCA-based definition of rurality. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, we conducted an online survey asking US residents, 'Do you live in a rural area?' and the rationale for their answer. We evaluated the concordance between their self-identified rurality and their ZIP code-derived RUCA designation of rurality by calculating Cohen's kappa (κ) statistic and percent agreement. RESULTS: Of the 774 participants, 456 (58.9%) and 318 (41.1%) individuals had conventional urban and rural RUCA classifications, respectively. There was only moderate agreement between perceived rurality and rural RUCA classification (κ=0.48; 95% confidence interval (CI)=0.42-0.54). Among people living within RUCA 2-3 defined urban areas (n=51), percent agreement was only 19.6%. Discordance was driven by their perception of the population density, proximity to the nearest neighbor, proximity to a metropolitan area, and the number of homes in their area. Based on our results, we reclassified RUCA 2-3 designations as rural, resulting in an increase in overall concordance (κ=0.56; 95%CI=0.50-0.62). DISCUSSION: Patient-centered rural-urban classification is required to effectively evaluate the impact of rurality on health disparities. This study presents a more patient-centric RUCA-based classification of rurality that can be easily operationalized in future research in situations in which self-reported rural status is missing or challenging to obtain. CONCLUSION: Reclassification of RUCA 2-3 as rural represents a more patient-centric definition of rurality.

The Conceptualization and Measurement of Research Impact in Primary Health Care: Protocol for a Rapid Scoping Review.

BACKGROUND: The generation of research evidence and knowledge in primary health care (PHC) is crucial for informing the development and implementation of interventions and innovations and driving health policy, health service improvements, and potential societal changes. PHC research has broad effects on patients, practices, services, population health, community, and policy formulation. The in-depth exploration of the definition and measures of research impact within PHC is essential for broadening our understanding of research impact in the discipline and how it compares to other health services research. OBJECTIVE: The objectives of the study are (1) to understand the conceptualizations and measures of research impact within the realm of PHC and (2) to identify methodological frameworks for evaluation and research impact and the benefits and challenges of using these approaches. The forthcoming review seeks to guide future research endeavors and enhance methodologies used in assessing research impact within PHC. METHODS: The protocol outlines the rapid review and environmental scan approach that will be used to explore research impact in PHC and will be guided by established frameworks such as the Canadian Academy of Health Sciences Impact Framework and the Canadian Health Services and Policy Research Alliance. The rapid review follows scoping review guidelines (PRISMA-ScR; Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Extension for Scoping Reviews). The environmental scan will be done by consulting with professional organizations, academic institutions, information science, and PHC experts. The search strategy will involve multiple databases, citation and forward citation searching, and manual searches of gray literature databases, think tank websites, and relevant catalogs. We will include gray and scientific literature focusing explicitly on research impact in PHC from high-income countries using the World Bank classification. Publications published in English from 1978 will be considered. The collected papers will undergo a 2-stage independent review process based on predetermined inclusion criteria. The research team will extract data from selected studies based on the research questions and the CRISP (Consensus Reporting Items for Studies in Primary Care) protocol statement. The team will discuss the extracted data, enabling the identification and categorization of key themes regarding research impact conceptualization and measurement in PHC. The narrative synthesis will evolve iteratively based on the identified literature. RESULTS: The results of this study are expected at the end of 2024. CONCLUSIONS: The forthcoming review will explore the conceptualization and measurement of research impact in PHC. The synthesis will offer crucial insights that will guide subsequent research, emphasizing the need for a standardized approach that incorporates diverse perspectives to comprehensively gauge the true impact of PHC research. Furthermore, trends and gaps in current methodologies will set the stage for future studies aimed at enhancing our understanding and measurement of research impact in PHC. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): PRR1-10.2196/55860.

Early career researchers in health policy and systems research: insights from freelancers in a non-profit organization in the Philippines.

BACKGROUND: The freelance economy has seen rapid growth worldwide in recent years and the Philippines is not an exception. Freelance workers are becoming increasingly common in healthcare and research. Early career researchers carry out most of scientific research and can play a critical role in advancing public health by bringing new perspectives and diversity to the field. Existing literature has mostly focused on the experiences of early career researchers in an institutional academic setting. This study aimed to understand the experiences of freelance early career researchers in the health policy and systems space in the Philippines. METHODS: This qualitative study collected data from 18 to 22 March 2022 through virtual interview and focus group discussions. Themes and codes were created based on the topic guide developed. New themes and codes were generated as they emerged. Two researchers coded the data using both a priori and emergent codes. Any coding conflicts were resolved through discussions until intercoder agreement was reached. Interpretation and conclusions from the data were developed by 2 researchers with consideration for its context and relationship between themes. RESULTS: Fifteen current and former freelance researchers participated in the study. Most are female, under 35 years old, and with an undergraduate degree as the highest educational attainment. The findings highlight insights and challenges faced by early career researchers in aspects of: (1) work arrangement, (2) tasks, (3) expectations from senior researchers, (4) development in the health policy and systems field, (5) relationship with peers, and (6) motivations for continuing to work as a freelance health policy and systems researcher. CONCLUSION: This study reveals the challenges freelance early career researchers face, highlighting the need for enhanced support and recognition amidst rapidly evolving workforce demands and complex health dilemmas. Recommendations include structured mentorship, professional development, innovative funding models, and the establishment of a supportive network. Advocacy for policies ensuring freelancer inclusion in the economy and policy-making is crucial. Future research should investigate their experiences further, including their roles, transitions, and the impacts of funding trends, to foster their development and integration into public health research and policy.

We-Care-Well: exploring the personal recovery of mental health caregivers through Participatory Action Research.

Family caregivers play a critical role in supporting the recovery journeys of their loved ones, yet the recovery journeys of family caregivers have not been well-explored. Using a Participatory Action Research approach, we explore the personal recovery journeys of family caregivers for individuals with mental illness. This case study involved piloting and exploring the impact of a novel online workshop series offered to mental health caregivers at Ontario Shores Center for Mental Health Sciences. Recovery courses and workshops conventionally engage patients living with mental health conditions. In the current case, the recovery model is adapted to the needs and experiences of their family caregivers, resulting in a pilot workshop series called "We Care Well". Through participant-led discussions, interactive and take-home activities, and experiential learning, caregivers co-created workshop content and engaged in peer-learning on seven personal recovery-oriented topics. This included: self-care, resilience-building, non-violent communication, storytelling, and mental health advocacy. Throughout the sessions, participants implemented their learnings into their caregiving roles, and shared their experiences with the group to progress through their own recovery journeys. The We Care Well series was found to be an effective intervention to adapt and apply the personal recovery framework to mental health caregivers. PAR, and co-design are viable approaches to engage caregivers in mental health research, and can facilitate knowledge exchange, as well as relationship building with peers and program facilitators.

[Focusing on intersectorality-strategies and current research projects for the care of geriatric people]. / Intersektoralität im Fokus ­ Strategien und aktuelle Forschungsprojekte zur Versorgung geriatrischer Personen.

In view of the demographic change, the need for intersectoral care of the aging population has already been identified. The strategies for implementation are diverse and address different approaches, each of which requires different sectors to overlap. This article provides an overview of already completed and ongoing projects for the care of geriatric patients. It becomes apparent that the development of networks as an indispensable basis for intersectoral care cannot be measured in terms of direct intervention effects and therefore makes it difficult to prove the cost-benefit. It is also evident that some research projects fail to be implemented into standard care due to financial and staff shortages.Do we need a rethinking in Germany or less innovation-related funding lines for better implementation and research of existing concepts? International role models such as Japan show that cost reduction for the care of the aging population should be considered in the long term, which requires increased financial volumes in the short term. For a sustainable implementation of cross-sectoral approaches into everyday life, research should therefore reorganize tight and/or entrenched structures, processes, and financing. By linking the countless existing projects and integrating ideas from different sectors, future demands of intersectoral geriatric care may be achieved.

Leveraging Generative AI Tools to Support the Development of Digital Solutions in Health Care Research: Case Study.

BACKGROUND: Generative artificial intelligence has the potential to revolutionize health technology product development by improving coding quality, efficiency, documentation, quality assessment and review, and troubleshooting. OBJECTIVE: This paper explores the application of a commercially available generative artificial intelligence tool (ChatGPT) to the development of a digital health behavior change intervention designed to support patient engagement in a commercial digital diabetes prevention program. METHODS: We examined the capacity, advantages, and limitations of ChatGPT to support digital product idea conceptualization, intervention content development, and the software engineering process, including software requirement generation, software design, and code production. In total, 11 evaluators, each with at least 10 years of experience in fields of study ranging from medicine and implementation science to computer science, participated in the output review process (ChatGPT vs human-generated output). All had familiarity or prior exposure to the original personalized automatic messaging system intervention. The evaluators rated the ChatGPT-produced outputs in terms of understandability, usability, novelty, relevance, completeness, and efficiency. RESULTS: Most metrics received positive scores. We identified that ChatGPT can (1) support developers to achieve high-quality products faster and (2) facilitate nontechnical communication and system understanding between technical and nontechnical team members around the development goal of rapid and easy-to-build computational solutions for medical technologies. CONCLUSIONS: ChatGPT can serve as a usable facilitator for researchers engaging in the software development life cycle, from product conceptualization to feature identification and user story development to code generation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04049500; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04049500.