How can healthcare organisations increase doctors' research engagement? A scoping review.

PURPOSE: Clinician engagement in research has positive impacts for healthcare, but is often difficult for healthcare organisations to support in light of limited resources. This scoping review aimed to describe the literature on health service-administered strategies for increasing research engagement by medical practitioners. DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH: Medline, EMBASE and Web of Science databases were searched from 2000 to 2021 and two independent reviewers screened each record for inclusion. Inclusion criteria were that studies sampled medically qualified clinicians; reported empirical data; investigated effectiveness of an intervention in improving research engagement and addressed interventions implemented by an individual health service/hospital. FINDINGS: Of the 11,084 unique records, 257 studies were included. Most (78.2%) studies were conducted in the USA, and were targeted at residents (63.0%). Outcomes were measured in a variety of ways, most commonly publication-related outcomes (77.4%), though many studies used more than one outcome measure (70.4%). Pre-post (38.8%) and post-only (28.7%) study designs were the most common, while those using a contemporaneous control group were uncommon (11.5%). The most commonly reported interventions included Resident Research Programs (RRPs), protected time, mentorship and education programs. Many articles did not report key information needed for data extraction (e.g. sample size). ORIGINALITY/VALUE: This scoping review demonstrated that, despite a large volume of research, issues like poor reporting, infrequent use of robust study designs and heterogeneous outcome measures limited application. The most compelling available evidence pointed to RRPs, protected time and mentorship as effective interventions. Further high-quality evidence is needed to guide healthcare organisations on increasing medical research engagement.

Reimagining rural clinical education from lessons learnt during COVID.

BACKGROUND: Securing access to sufficient and focussed learning experiences is a perennial challenge for medical trainees. This challenge was accentuated during the COVID-19 pandemic lockdowns and with physical isolation processes that decreased in-person patient presentations and a shift to telehealth consultations. This situation has prompted the need to optimise the available experiences and educational responses to overcome the limitations in the number, quantum and range of available clinical learning experiences. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with medical practice teams in four rural general practices to understand how medical trainees' education in rural general practices can be sustained in such circumstances. FINDINGS: Key considerations included optimising the available experiences to assist medical trainees to generate the kinds of mental models needed by trainees to conduct medical work, and particularly, when it became even more restricted through remote or physically distanced consultations. It also identified lessons learnt during COVID-19 pandemic lockdowns to inform and improve the provision of trainees' experiences in such practices. DISCUSSION: Providing experiences for trainees to participate fully in clinical activities is imperative. A sequenced set of experiences was proposed to incrementally prepare trainees to engage in and conduct clinical consultations remotely using digital technologies. CONCLUSION: Such an approach may not always be easy or possible to enact but offers a pathway of experiences most likely to lead to positive outcomes for the trainees whilst maintaining patient care and safety considerations.

Supervisory knowing in practice across medical specialities.

Clinical supervisors play key roles in facilitating trainee learning. Yet combining that role with patient care complicates both roles. So, we need to know how both roles can effectively co-occur. When facilitating their trainees' learning through practice, supervisors draw on their skills - clinical and supervisory - and available opportunities in their practice. This process can be conceptualised as supervisory knowing in practice (or contextual knowing) and offers ways to elaborate on how facilitating trainees' learning can be optimised. The practice-based study presented and discussed here examined clinical supervisors' knowing in practice related to facilitating trainee learning, across three medical specialities. Nineteen clinical supervisors from emergency medicine, internal medicine and surgery, were interviewed about their roles and engagement with trainees. Interview transcripts were analysed in two stages. Firstly, a framework analysis, informed by interdependent learning theory was conducted, focussing on affordances and individual engagement. Secondly, drawing on practice theory, a further layer of analysis was undertaken interrogating supervisors' knowing in practice. We identified two common domains of supervisor practice used to facilitate trainee learning: (1) orientating and assessing trainees' readiness (or capabilities), (2) sequencing and enriching pedagogic practices. Yet across the speciality groups the supervisors' knowing in practice differed and were shaped by a trio of: (i) disciplinary practices, (ii) situational requirements and (iii) clinician preference. Overall, we offer a new reading of clinical supervision as practice differences generated distinct supervisory knowing in practice. These findings emphasise clinical supervision as fundamentally entwined in the speciality's practice; and reinforce alignments with patient care.

Developing residents' feedback literacy in emergency medicine: Lessons from design-based research.

Objectives: Residents in emergency medicine have reported dissatisfaction with feedback. One strategy to improve feedback is to enhance learners' feedback literacy-i.e., capabilities as seekers, processors, and users of performance information. To do this, however, the context in which feedback occurs needs to be understood. We investigated how residents typically engage with feedback in an emergency department, along with the potential opportunities to improve feedback engagement in this context. We used this information to develop a program to improve learners' feedback literacy in context and traced the reported translation to practice. Methods: We conducted a year-long design-based research study informed by agentic feedback principles. Over five cycles in 2019, we interviewed residents and iteratively developed a feedback literacy program. Sixty-six residents participated and data collected included qualitative evaluation surveys (n = 55), educator-written reflections (n = 5), and semistructured interviews with residents (n = 21). Qualitative data were analyzed using framework analysis. Results: When adopting an agentic stance, residents reported changes to the frequency and tenor of their feedback conversations, rendering the interactions more helpful. Despite reporting overall shifts in their conceptions of feedback, they needed to adjust their feedback engagement depending on changing contextual factors such as workload. These microsocial adjustments suggest their feedback literacy develops through an interdependent process of individual intention for feedback engagement-informed by an agentic stance-and dynamic adjustment in response to the environment. Conclusions: Resident feedback literacy is profoundly contextualized, so developing feedback literacy in emergency contexts is more nuanced than previously reported. While feedback literacy can be supported through targeted education, our findings raise questions for understanding how emergency medicine environments afford and constrain learner feedback engagement. Our findings also challenge the extent to which this contextual feedback know-how can be "developed" purposefully outside of the everyday work.

The role of feedback in supporting trainees who underperform in clinical environments.

Introduction: Underperformance in clinical environments can be costly and emotional for all stakeholders. Feedback is an important pedagogical strategy for working with underperformance - both formal and informal strategies can make a difference. Feedback is a typical feature of remediation programs, and yet there is little consensus on how feedback should unfold in the context of underperformance. Methods: This narrative review synthesises literature at the intersections of feedback and underperformance in clinical environments where service, learning and safety need to be considered. We do so with a critical eye towards generating insights for working with underperformance in the clinical environment. Synthesis and discussion: There are compounding and multi-level factors that contribute to underperformance and subsequent failure. This complexity overwrites simplistic notions of 'earned' failure through individual traits and deficit. Working with such complexity requires feedback that goes beyond educator input or 'telling'. When we shift beyond feedback as input to process, we recognise that these processes are fundamentally relational, where trust and safety are necessary for trainees to share their weaknesses and doubts. Emotions are always present and they signal action. Feedback literacy might help us consider how to engage trainees with feedback so that they take an active (autonomous) role in developing their evaluative judgements. Finally, feedback cultures can be influential and take effort to shift if at all. A key mechanism running through all these considerations of feedback is enabling internal motivation, and creating conditions for trainees to feel relatedness, competence and autonomy. Broadening our perceptions of feedback, beyond telling, might help create environments for learning to flourish.

Can a novel constructivist theory-informed feedback intervention reduce prescribing errors ? A pre-post study.

CONTEXT: Medical interns (interns) find prescribing challenging and many report lacking readiness when commencing work. Errors in prescribing puts patients' safety at risk. Yet error rates remain high, despite education, supervision and pharmacists' contributions. Feedback on prescribing may improve performance. Yet, work-based prescribing feedback practices focus on rectifying errors. We aimed to explore if prescribing can be improved using a theory-informed feedback intervention. METHODS: In this pre-post study, we designed and implemented a constructivist-theory informed prescribing feedback intervention, informed by Feedback-Mark 2 Theory. Interns commencing internal medicine terms in two Australian teaching hospitals were invited to engage in the feedback intervention. Their prescribing was evaluated by comparing errors per medication order of at least 30 orders per intern. Pre/baseline (weeks 1-3) were compared with post intervention (weeks 8-9). Interns' baseline prescribing audit findings were analysed and discussed at individualised feedback sessions. These sessions were with a clinical pharmacologist (Site 1) and a pharmacist educator (Site 2). RESULTS: Eighty eight intern's prescribing over five 10-week terms was analysed from two hospitals. The frequency of prescribing errors significantly reduced at both sites after the intervention, across all five terms (p < 0.001).There were initially 1598 errors in 2750 orders (median [IQR] 0.48 [0.35-0.67] errors per order) and after the intervention 1113 errors in 2694 orders (median [IQR] 0.30 [0.17-0.50] errors per order). CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest interns' prescribing practices may improve as a result of constructivist -theory learner centred, informed feedback with an agreed plan. This novel intervention, contributed, to a reduction in interns' prescribing errors. This study suggests new strategies for improving prescribing safety should include the design and implementation of theory-informed feedback interventions.

Research as care: practice-based knowledge translation as transformative learning through video-reflexive ethnography.

Collaborative approaches to knowledge translation seek to make research useful and applicable, by centring the perspectives and concerns of healthcare actors (rather than researchers) in problem formulation and solving. Such research thus involves multiple actors, in interaction with pre-existing ecologies of knowledge and expertise. Although collaboration is emphasised, conflict, dissonance, and other tensions, may arise from the multiplicity of perspectives and power dynamics involved. Our article examines knowledge translation in this space, as both empirical focus and research methodology. Drawing from practice theory and critical pedagogy, we describe knowledge translation as a situated and social process of transformative learning, enabled by reflexive dialogue about practice, and supported by care. With examples from five studies across two countries, we show that practice-based knowledge translation can be mediated by researchers, using video-reflexive ethnography. We describe the importance (and features) of practices of care in these studies, that created psychological safety for transformative learning. We argue that attempts to transform and improve healthcare must account for sustained and reciprocal care, both for, and between, those made vulnerable in the process, and that knowledge translation can, and should, be a process of capacity strengthening, with care as a core principle and practice.

How do dietetics students learn about sustainability? A scoping review.

AIM: Globally, sustainability and planetary health are emerging as areas of critical importance. In 2015, the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development was adopted by the United Nations member states. Since then, the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization and the Commonwealth Secretariat have published guidelines for educators to embed sustainability content into curricula. This scoping review aims to identify how student dietitians learn about sustainability, how learning opportunities are evaluated, their outcomes, and whether these guidelines have translated into teaching activities contained in dietetic degrees. METHODS: A scoping review was used to address the aims. Eight electronic databases and Google Scholar were searched from inception to March 2022 for articles describing dietetics students' participation in learning activities focused on sustainability. Data that addressed the research aims were charted independently by two researchers, then narratively synthesised. RESULTS: Twelve articles met the inclusion criteria. A range of teaching approaches and evaluation methods were used, from passive learning in lectures to experiential learning activities. A change in knowledge or behaviour was found for experiential learning activities (n = 5). For articles published after 2015 (n = 9), two mentioned the Sustainable Development Goals and no articles referenced the published guidelines. CONCLUSIONS: A paucity of evidence exists describing how dietetics students learn about sustainability and their learning outcomes. Of the 12 articles published, varied teaching approaches and evaluation methods have resulted in inconsistencies in the reporting of outcomes. The minimal reference to the Sustainable Development Goals and published guidelines suggests a slow translation of knowledge to practice.

The influence of psychological safety on feedback conversations in general practice training.

INTRODUCTION: Fostering trainee psychological safety is increasingly being recognised as necessary for effective feedback conversations. Emerging literature has explored psychological safety in peer learning, formal feedback and simulation debrief. Yet, the conditions required for psychologically safe feedback conversations in clinical contexts, and the subsequent effects on feedback, have not been explored. METHODS: We conducted a qualitative study using interviews and longitudinal audio-diaries with 12 rural general practice trainees. The data were analysed using framework thematic analysis to identify factors across the data and as individual participant case studies with illustrative vignettes of dynamic interleaving of factors in judgements about feedback conversations. FINDINGS: Findings identify the influence of intrapersonal (e.g. confidence and comfort to seek help), interpersonal (e.g. trust and relationship) and sociocultural factors (e.g. living and working in a rural community) that contribute to psychological safety in the context of everyday feedback conversations. Multiple factors interplayed in feedback conversations where registrars could feel safe and unsafe within one location and even at the one time. DISCUSSION: Participants felt psychologically safe to engage their educators in sanctioned systems of conversation related to the immediate care of the patient and yet unsafe to engage in less patient related performance conversations despite the presence of multiple positive interpersonal factors. The concept of a safe 'container' (contained space) is perhaps idealised when it comes to feedback conversations about performance in the informal and emergent spaces of postgraduate training. More research is needed into understanding how clinical environments can sanction feedback conversations in clinical environments.

Using knowledge brokering activities to promote allied health clinicians' engagement in research: a qualitative exploration.

INTRODUCTION: Engaging clinicians in research can improve healthcare organisational performance, patient and staff satisfaction. Emerging evidence suggests that knowledge brokering activities potentially support clinicians' research engagement, but it is unclear how best they should be used. OBJECTIVES: This study explores how embedded researchers utilised knowledge brokering activities to engage research interested clinicians in research. DESIGN: A longitudinal qualitative interview based study was co-designed to investigate how experienced research fellows utilise knowledge brokering activities to facilitate allied health clinicians' engagement in research. SETTING: In one large tertiary level, regional Australian health service, research fellows were matched with research interested clinicians. METHODS: Qualitative analysis of three longitudinal semi-structured interviews for each research fellow was undertaken. Initial descriptions of their utilisation of knowledge brokering activities were deductively coded. Reflexive thematic analysis was utilised to generate a shared explanation of clinicians' engagement in research. RESULTS: Three research fellows facilitated 21 clinicians' participation in and leadership of clinical research projects over 12 months. They utilised all ten key knowledge brokering activities with each clinician, with differing patterns and examples. Research fellows described using linkage and exchange activities of communicating and collaborating with key stakeholders, and they tailored knowledge management products for individual's engagement. Further, they described a broader learning journey where they clarified and monitored individuals' capabilities, motivation and their contextual support for research engagement. CONCLUSION: When research fellows chose and tailored knowledge brokering activities to align and extend clinicians' research capabilities and motivation, they created individualised learning curriculums to support clinicians' participation in and leadership of local research projects. Health and academic leaders should consider structuring embedded researcher positions to include knowledge brokering roles and activities, specifically for research interested clinicians who are ready to participate in and lead research projects.

Relationship Between Research Culture and Research Activity of Medical Doctors: A Survey and Audit.

PURPOSE: To describe the research capacity and culture, and research activity (publications and new projects) of medical doctors across a health service and determine if the research activity of specialty groups correlated with their self-reported "team" level research capacity and culture. METHODS: Cross-sectional, observational survey and audit of medical doctors at a tertiary health service in Queensland. The Research Capacity and Culture (RCC) validated survey was used to measure self-reported research capacity/culture at organisation, team and individual levels, and presence of barriers and facilitators to research. An audit of publications and ethically approved research projects was used to determine research activity. RESULTS: Approximately, 10% of medical doctors completed the survey (n= 124). Overall, median scores on the RCC were 5 out of 10 for organisational level, 5.5 for specialty level, and 6 for individual level capacity and culture; however, specialty-level scores varied significantly between specialty groups (range 3.1-7.8). Over 80% of participants reported lack of time and other work roles taking priority as barriers to research. One project was commenced per year for every 12.5 doctors employed in the health service, and one article was published for every 7.5. There was a positive association between a team's number of publications and projects and their self-reported research capacity and culture on the RCC. This association was stronger for publications. CONCLUSION: Health service research capacity building interventions may need a tailored approach for different specialty teams to accommodate for varying baselines of capacity and activity. When evaluating these initiatives, a combination of research activity and subjective self-report measures may be complementary.

Becoming clinical supervisors: identity learnings from a registrar faculty development program.

This article shares our experiences and surprises as we developed, implemented and evaluated a 12-week faculty development program for registrars as clinical supervisors over three cohorts. The program has consistently been rated highly by participants. Yet, following a comprehensive curriculum review, we were surprised that our goal of encouraging identity development in clinical supervisors seemed to be unmet. Whilst our evaluation suggests that the program made important contributions to the registrars' knowledge, application and readiness as clinical supervisors, challenges linked to developing a supervisor identity and managing the dual identity of supervisor and clinician remain. In this article we describe our program and argue for the importance of designing faculty development programs to support professional identity formation. We present the findings from our program evaluation and discuss the surprising outcomes and ongoing challenges of developing a cohesive clinical educator identity. Informed by recent evidence and workplace learning theory we critically appraise our program, explain the mechanisms for the unintended outcomes and offer suggestions for improving curricular and pedagogic practices of embedded faculty development programs. A key recommendation is to not only consider identity formation of clinical supervisors from an individualist perspective but also from a social perspective.

What influences allied health clinician participation in research in the public hospital setting: a qualitative theory-informed approach.

OBJECTIVES: Using theoretical frameworks from implementation science, we aimed to systematically explore the barriers and enablers to research active allied health professionals (AHP) participating and leading research in the hospital setting. DESIGN: A qualitative interview study informed by behaviour change theory. SETTING: Single Australian tertiary hospital and health service. PARTICIPANTS: We recruited a convenience sample of 21 AHPs working within a hospital who were seeking to actively participate in/or lead research within their workplace. DATA COLLECTION: Semistructured interviews explored perceived barriers and enablers to research participation, informed by the 14 domains of the theoretical domains framework (TDF). Transcribed interviews were deductively coded and mapped to the TDF. A deeper level of inductive coding was used to identify emergent themes that influenced behaviour change, according to the three key constructs of: capability, opportunity and motivation (COM-B). RESULTS: Barriers and enablers to research participation were identified within nine predominant domains of the TDF. Most enablers to engaging in research related to the motivation or opportunity constructs of the COM-B. These enablers included positive beliefs about the consequences of research participation, enabling social influences, peer support and motivation for skill development and to inform practice. Predominant barriers related to environmental context and resources (eg, reduced funding or time), emotional responses of being overwhelmed and perceptions of reduced capability. CONCLUSION: This study identified key barriers and enablers to behaviour change related to AHPs participating and/or leading research. Motivation and opportunities to participate in research may be enabled by maximising social influence opportunities, reiterating beliefs about positive consequences of research and considering AHP's emotional responses. Implementation science frameworks may provide a more systematic and holistic understanding of factors which influence research participation including enhancing knowledge, motivation and opportunity.

Outcomes of a funding initiative to promote allied health research activity: a qualitative realist evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Providing funding for clinicians to have protected time to undertake research can address a commonly cited barrier to research - lack of time. However, limited research has evaluated the impact or mechanisms of such funding initiatives. In the current economic environment, it is important that funding is used efficiently and judiciously and that mechanisms and contexts that may assist with maximising outcomes of funding initiatives are identified. This study aimed to describe the medium-term outcomes of a funding initiative to promote allied health research activity and to identify the key mechanisms and contexts that facilitated these outcomes. METHODS: We used a qualitative research design informed by a realist evaluation, to conduct 10 semi-structured interviews with allied health professionals who had participated in a funding initiative 1-3 years ago. Questions explored outcomes, mechanisms and contexts of the funding initiative. Data was thematically coded into context-mechanism-outcome configurations. RESULTS: Medium term outcomes included increased individual research opportunities, influence on team research culture and impact on clinical work/practice. Other outcomes included increased clinician confidence, knowledge and skill, and research outputs. However, some participants still had difficulties progressing research. Four context-mechanism-outcome configurations were identified to explain which contexts and mechanisms produced these outcomes. Examples of contexts included perception of managerial support, undertaking a research-based higher degree and joint applications, while mechanisms included accessing infrastructure and resources as well as individual researcher factors like motivation. CONCLUSION: Providing funding to allied health professionals to undertake and complete research can lead to important outcomes, including increased research opportunities, capacity and culture, increased research outputs, and changes to clinical practice. Outcomes are influenced by unique contexts and mechanisms and these should be considered in future implementation of similar funding initiatives.

Developing occupational therapists' capabilities for decision-making capacity assessments: how does a support role facilitate workplace learning?

INTRODUCTION: Healthcare practitioners are required to develop capabilities in an effective and efficient manner. Yet, developing capabilities in healthcare settings can be challenging due to the unpredictable nature of practice and increasing workloads. Unsurprisingly, healthcare practitioner development is often situated outside of practice, for example in formal teaching sessions. Supporting practitioners to develop capabilities through engagement with day-to-day practice, whilst advantageous in terms of authenticity and being highly valued, remains a key challenge for healthcare educators. This qualitative interview study aimed to explain, from the learner's perspective, how a dedicated support role develops occupational therapists' capability to contribute to decision-making capacity assessments. METHODS: Individual semi-structured interviews were conducted with a purposive sample of 12 occupational therapists. Informed by workplace learning theory, interview transcripts were analyzed using thematic analysis process. RESULTS: Participants provided rich descriptions of how they developed in their capability to engage in decision-making capacity assessments. Participants reported that their learning was facilitated by the dedicated support role in three key ways: 1) structuring a journey of learning, 2) providing tailored guidance, and 3) fostering a supportive learning environment. DISCUSSION: Participants valued the authentic workplace learning opportunities afforded by the dedicated support role. Findings suggest that capabilities, such as decision-making capacity assessment, can be developed through practice when enriched by a dedicated support role. However, further research examining the sustainability and transferability of this model and its application to other capabilities are warranted.

How do trainee doctors learn about research? Content analysis of Australian specialist colleges' intended research curricula.

OBJECTIVES: Patients do better in research-intense environments. The importance of research is reflected in the accreditation requirements of Australian clinical specialist colleges. The nature of college-mandated research training has not been systematically explored. We examined the intended research curricula of Australian trainee doctors described by specialist colleges, their constructive alignment and the nature of scholarly project requirements. DESIGN: We undertook content analysis of publicly available documents to characterise college research training curricula. SETTING: We reviewed all publicly accessible information from the websites of Australian specialist colleges and their subspecialty divisions. We retrieved curricula, handbooks and assessment-related documents. PARTICIPANTS: Fifty-eight Australian specialist colleges and their subspecialty divisions. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Two reviewers extracted and coded research-related activities as learning outcomes, activities or assessments, by research stage (using, participating in or leading research) and competency based on Bloom's taxonomy (remembering, understanding, applying, analysing, evaluating, creating). We coded learning and assessment activities by type (eg, formal research training, publication) and whether it was linked to a scholarly project. Requirements related to project supervisors' research experience were noted. RESULTS: Fifty-five of 58 Australian college subspecialty divisions had a scholarly project requirement. Only 11 required formal research training; two required an experienced research supervisor. Colleges emphasised a role for trainees in leading research in their learning outcomes and assessments, but not learning activities. Less emphasis was placed on using research, and almost no emphasis on participation. Most learning activities and assessments mapped to the 'creating' domain of Bloom's taxonomy, whereas most learning outcomes mapped to the 'evaluating' domain. Overall, most research learning and assessment activities were related to leading a scholarly project. CONCLUSIONS: Australian specialist college research curricula appear to emphasise a role for trainees in leading research and producing research deliverables, but do not mandate formal research training and supervision by experienced researchers.