Portfolio analysis of global tobacco control research funding at the National Cancer Institute, 2000-2019.

INTRODUCTION: Research in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), where the majority of global tobacco users reside, is critical to addressing the global tobacco epidemic. This analysis describes the global tobacco control research portfolio funded by the National Cancer Institute from fiscal years 2000 to 2019. METHODS: We used the National Institutes of Health Query, View, Report database to identify extramural grants relevant to global tobacco control research. Abstracts were analyzed to describe grant characteristics, including topic areas, tobacco products, countries, and regions of focus. Bibliometric and co-authorship network analyses were performed for publications associated with relevant grants. RESULTS: Of the 93 relevant grants with foreign (non-US) involvement, the majority (83.9%) supported research in upper and lower middle-income countries. The majority of grants (86.0%) focused on cigarettes, with a small subset of grants addressing smokeless tobacco, waterpipe use, or other non-cigarette products. Most grants focused on at least one of the six tobacco control policy measures in the World Health Organization MPOWER package; almost half (48.4%) focused on monitoring tobacco use and around one-third (32.3%) focused on offering tobacco cessation treatment, while other MPOWER measures received less attention in the research portfolio. While most of these grants, and the funding initiatives that supported them, emphasized research in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), only 3 of 93 grants were awarded directly to LMIC-based institutions. CONCLUSIONS: There is a critical need for research to develop and test strategies to adapt, implement, and scale up evidence-based interventions across diverse LMIC settings. This study identified gaps in research activity that should be addressed to strengthen global tobacco control research capacity.

Efficacy of Centers of Biomedical Research Excellence (CoBRE) grants to build research capacity in underrepresented states.

Federal funding for research has immediate and long-term economic impact. Since federal research funding is regionally concentrated and not geographically distributed, the benefits are not fully realized in some regions of the country. The Established (previously Experimental) Program to Stimulate Competitive Research (EPSCoR) programs at several agencies, for example, the National Science Foundation, and the Institutional Development Award (IDeA) program at the National Institutes of Health were created to increase competitiveness for funding in states with historically low levels of federal funding. The Centers of Biomedical Research Excellence (CoBRE) award program is a component of the IDeA program. The CoBRE grants support research core facilities to develop research infrastructure. These grants also support the research projects of junior investigators, under the guidance of mentoring teams of senior investigators, to develop human resources at these institutions. Few studies have assessed the effectiveness of these programs. This study examines the investment and outcomes of the CoBRE grants from 2000 through 2022. The maturation of junior investigators into independently funded principal investigators is comparable to other mentoring programs supported by NIH. The investment in research cores resulted in substantial research productivity, measured by publications. Despite the successes of individual investigators and increased research infrastructure and productivity, the geographic distribution of federal and NIH research dollars has not changed. These results will be informative in consideration of policies designed to enhance the geographic distribution of federal research dollars.

Priorities for research promoting mental health in the south and east of Asia.

Progress in promoting mental health, preventing mental illness, and improving care for people affected by mental illness is unlikely to occur if efforts remain separated from existing public health programs and the principles of public health action. Experts met recently to discuss integrating public health and mental health strategies in the south and east of Asia, especially in low- and middle-income countries. Areas of research identified as high priority were: 1) integrating mental health into perinatal care; 2) providing culturally-adjusted support for carers of people with mental and physical disorders; 3) using digital health technologies for mental health care in areas with limited resources and 4) building local research capacity. Selection of these areas was informed by their relative novelty in the region, ease of implementation, likely widespread benefit, and potential low costs. In this article, we summarise available evidence, highlight gaps and call for collaborations with research centres, leaders and persons with lived experience within and beyond the region.

A national program to advance dementia research in Vietnam.

BACKGROUND: As Vietnam and other low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) experience a rapid increase in the number of people living with dementia, an acute need exists to strengthen research capacity to inform policy, improve care and support, and develop national dementia plans. We describe the development and early outcomes of an National Institutes of Health (NIH)/National Institute on Aging (NIA)-funded national dementia research capacity building program in Vietnam. METHODS: The research capacity building program commenced in 2019 and has three components: (1) Vietnam Alzheimer's and other dementias research Network (VAN), (2) a mentored pilot grant program, and (3) research training, networking, and dissemination activities. The pilot grant program funds Vietnamese researchers for one to two years to conduct research focusing on Alzheimer's Disease and Alzheimer's Disease Related Dementias (AD/ADRD). Grants are reviewed and scored using NIH criteria, and priority is given to pilot grants with policy relevance and potential for future funding. An international pool of high-income country (e.g., United States, Australia, and United Kingdom) mentors has been engaged and mentors paired with each funded project. Training and networking activities include workshops on AD/ADRD research topics and regular meetings in conjunction with Vietnam's annual national dementia/geriatric conferences. Dissemination is facilitated through targeted outreach and the creation of a national network of institutions. RESULTS: Over four years (2019-2023), we received 62 applications, reviewed 58 applications, and funded 21 projects (4-5 per year). Funded investigators were from diverse disciplines and institutions across Vietnam with projects on a range of topics, including biomarkers, prevention, diagnosis, neuropsychological assessment, family caregiver support, dementia education, and clinical trials. A network of 12 leading academic and research institutions nationwide has been created to facilitate dissemination. Six research training workshops have been organized and included presentations from international speakers. Grantees have published or presented their studies at both national and international levels. The mentoring program has helped grantees to build their research skills and expand their research network. CONCLUSION: This research capacity building program is the first of its kind in Vietnam and may serve as a useful model for other LMIC.

The health service perspective on determinants of success in allied health student research project collaborations: a qualitative study guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research.

BACKGROUND: A research culture in health care organisations is associated with improved healthcare performance. Allied health (AH) students undertake research training as part of their professional degree qualifications. This may include participation in research projects, sometimes undertaken in association with health services. Co-supervision of these projects by health service staff provides research capacity building opportunities and staff-centred outcomes for the individuals involved, as well as improvements in clinical knowledge and practice within the local area. Also, publications from these projects contribute to the wider evidence base. Identification of barriers and facilitators to engagement in, and conduct of, these projects may optimise systems for improved health service outcomes. METHODS: This formative evaluation used the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) to guide analysis of qualitative data obtained from semi-structured interviews with health service-employed allied health professionals, including clinicians and research fellows, who had supervised students on clinical-related research placements within the previous five years. RESULTS: Eleven AH clinicians described 18 collaborative projects with 24 students from five AH disciplines across four universities. Three health service-employed AH research fellows described their involvement in these and other student research projects. Twenty key determinant constructs were identified and mapped across all five CFIR domains. Facilitators included health service cosmopolitanism, project adaptability and implementation climate (compatibility). Health service-employed research fellows provided readiness for implementation and a facilitator for project execution. The main barriers identified were cost to staff in workload and personal time and aspects related to project complexity. Differing student characteristics affected the relative advantage of collaborative projects in positive and negative manners. CONCLUSIONS: This study describes the facilitators and barriers to the conduct of collaborative AH student research projects. Addressing these determinants when establishing each new project may enable health services to optimise communication, role delineation and project success, and thus ultimately, healthcare performance and patient care.

Efficacy of Centers of Biomedical Research Excellence (CoBRE) Grants to Build Research Capacity in Underrepresented States.

Federal funding for research has immediate and long-term economic impact. Since federal research funding is regionally concentrated and not geographically distributed, the benefits are not fully realized in some regions of the country. The Established (previously Experimental) Program to Stimulate Competitive Research (EPSCoR) programs at several agencies, e.g. the National Science Foundation, and the Institutional Development Award (IDeA) program at the National Institutes of Health were created to increase competitiveness for funding in states with historically low levels of federal funding. The Centers of Biomedical Research Excellence (CoBRE) award program is a component of the IDeA program. The CoBRE grants support research core facilities to develop research infrastructure. These grants also support the research projects of junior investigators, under the guidance of mentoring teams of senior investigators, to develop human resources at these institutions. Few studies have assessed the effectiveness of these programs. This study examines the investment and outcomes of the CoBRE grants from 2000 through 2022. The maturation of junior investigators into independently funded principal investigators is comparable to other mentoring programs supported by NIH. The investment in research cores resulted in substantial research productivity, measured by publications. Despite the successes of individual investigators and increase research infrastructure and productivity, the geographic distribution of federal and NIH research dollars has not changed. These results will be informative in consideration of policies designed to enhance the geographic distribution of federal research dollars.

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.

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.

Overdue Assignment: A Case Study on Academic Writing Development for Postgraduate Health Professional Trainees in Kenya.

OBJECTIVES: Though essential for research capacity building, development of authorial identity for thesis projects and publications has been overlooked in African postgraduate residency programs. This study aims to explore authorial identity among postgraduate health professional trainees at two universities in Kenya. It also evaluated the effect of Age of Acquisition of English on confidence in writing. METHODS: This exploratory case study utilized quantitative and qualitative data. Pre- and post-workshop surveys were generated from learning objectives and evaluated confidence in writing and plagiarism awareness, both important attributes of authorial identity. As confidence in writing might be influenced by the English Age of Acquisition, the questionnaire also included items from the Language Experience and Proficiency Questionnaire. Pre- and post-workshop responses were analyzed using planned comparisons. Focus group discussions further explored authorial identity among participants and were analyzed thematically. RESULTS: A total of 57 postgraduate trainees from nine medical specialties participated in the study. Both confidence in writing and plagiarism awareness improved significantly after the workshop: confidence in writing pre-test (M = 3.20, SD = 0.59) and post-test (M = 3.97, SD = 0.61), t(56) = 6.93, P < .001, d = 0.9; plagiarism awareness pre-test (M = 3.01, SD 0.72) and post-test (M = 3.92, SD 0.65), t(56) = 6,8, P < .001, d = 0.9. The average English Age of Acquisition was 4.98 years and showed no correlation with confidence in writing. Participants recognized that authentic authorship requires hard work and suggested plagiarism is driven by inadequate writing instruction. They proposed that changing perceptions of research and writing could overcome a graduation requirement mindset among trainees. CONCLUSIONS: Interactive workshops using procedural and enculturation approaches may be useful to develop authorial identity among postgraduate health professionals in Kenya. Further research is needed on evaluating workshop effectiveness using direct indicators of learning and other curricular reforms to promote authorship.

Individual and Institutional Factors Contribute to Research Capacity Building for Early-Stage Investigators from Groups Underrepresented in Biomedical Research: A Qualitative Comparative Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Enhancement of diversity within the U.S. research workforce is a recognized need and priority at a national level. Existing comprehensive programs, such as the National Research Mentoring Network (NRMN) and Research Centers in Minority Institutions (RCMI), have the dual focus of building institutional research capacity and promoting investigator self-efficacy through mentoring and training. METHODS: A qualitative comparative analysis was used to identify the combination of factors that explain the success and failure to submit a grant proposal by investigators underrepresented in biomedical research from the RCMI and non-RCMI institutions. The records of 211 participants enrolled in the NRMN Strategic Empowerment Tailored for Health Equity Investigators (NRMN-SETH) program were reviewed, and data for 79 early-stage, underrepresented faculty investigators from RCMI (n = 23) and non-RCMI (n = 56) institutions were included. RESULTS: Institutional membership (RCMI vs. non-RCMI) was used as a possible predictive factor and emerged as a contributing factor for all of the analyses. Access to local mentors was predictive of a successful grant submission for RCMI investigators, while underrepresented investigators at non-RCMI institutions who succeeded with submitting grants still lacked access to local mentors. CONCLUSION: Institutional contexts contribute to the grant writing experiences of investigators underrepresented in biomedical research.

Strategic Team Science Promotes Collaboration and Practice-Based Research at the Research Centers in Minority Institutions.

BACKGROUND: This paper reports on the implementation and evaluation of a strategy to promote collaborations and team science among investigators at the Research Centers in Minority Institutions (RCMI). The strategy presented in this paper was a hands-on workshop that allowed the application of strategic team science through structured dialogue, asset sharing, and systematic exploration of opportunities for collaboration. METHODS: The workshop was attended by more than 100 participants, including RCMI and non-RCMI investigators, practice-based research network (PBRN) supplement program directors, and an NIH Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities Program Officer. RESULTS: A post-workshop survey was administered to collect participant feedback, assess the relevance of the workshop to the participants' professional development goals, and gauge the applicability of the tool as a support strategy to promote collaborative research. Most of the participants acknowledged that the session met the conference objectives (95.8%), and 93.7% noted that the workshop, to a high degree, met their personal goals and objectives. During the workshop, participants shared 35 resources they were willing and able to offer for prospective collaborative projects. CONCLUSION: The experience reported and evaluated in this paper paves the way to understanding methods for disseminating effective strategies for inter-institutional collaborations for the sustainable growth and operation of PBRNs.

Describing the evidence-base for research engagement by health care providers and health care organisations: a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Having a research-engaged health and medical workforce is associated with improvements in clinical outcomes for patients. As such, there has been significant government investment internationally to support health care organisations and services to increase staff engagement with research. OBJECTIVES: This scoping review sought to provide an overview of the literature describing strategies employed to increase research engagement by health care providers and organisations, and to undertake a qualitative analysis to generate a list of research engagement strategies. METHODS: A scoping review using systematic search strategies was undertaken to locate peer-review publications and grey literature related to research engagement by health care providers and organisations. Research engagement was defined as a 'deliberate set of intellectual and practical activities undertaken by health care staff and organisations to conduct research'. A database search of electronic records was performed with no limit on publication date. Publications were included regardless of study type (excluding systematic reviews) and categorised as either databased (presenting data or new analysis of existing data) and non-databased (no new data or analyses). Databased publications were further classified according to study type, study design and setting. A qualitative synthesis using a Framework Approach was undertaken with all studies that described a strategy to improve research engagement. RESULTS: A total of 152 publications were included in this study with 54% categorised as non-databased. Of the databased articles, the majority (72%) were descriptive studies describing prevalence of correlates of research engagement, 17 (25%) described intervention studies where only two were controlled studies. The following research engagement strategies were identified: i) dual skilled team/staff, ii) resources or physical infrastructure, iii) incentives, iv) leadership support of research, v) education/training, vi) networks, vii) forming partnerships or collaborations and viii) overall leadership structure of entity. CONCLUSIONS: The literature on research engagement is primarily opinion-based and descriptive in nature. To provide the evidence needed to inform strategies, this needs to progress beyond descriptive to more rigorous well-designed intervention research.

Building a 'Virtual Library': continuing a global collaboration to strengthen research capacity within Nepal and other low- and middle-income countries.

To fill the gap in health research capacity-building efforts, we created the 'Virtual Library' (VL) - a web-based repository of context-relevant resources for health researchers in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). This paper describes the participatory process used to systematically develop the VL, and describes how our interprofessional team - representing both an LMIC (Nepal) and a high-income country (HIC) (USA, US) - engaged in shared meaning-making. A team of researchers and clinicians representing a range of subdisciplines from Nepal and the US created a replicable search strategy and standardized Resource Screening Guide (RSG) to systematically assess resources to be included within the VL. Descriptive methods were used to summarize findings from the RSG and lessons learned from the collaborative process. Collectively, 14 team members reviewed 564 potential resources (mean = 40, SD = 22.7). Mean RSG score was 7.02/10 (SD = 2). More than 76% of resources met each of the four quality criteria (relevant; reputable, accessible; understandable). Within the published VL, 298 resources were included, organized by 15 topics and 45 sub-topics. Of these, 223 resources were evaluated by the RSG; 75 were identified by team member expertise. The collaborative process involved regular meetings, iterative document revisions, and peer review. Resource quality was better than expected, perhaps because best practices/principles related to health research are universally relevant, regardless of context. While the RSG was essential to systematize our search and ensure reproducibility, team member expertise was valuable. Pairing team members during peer-review led to bi-directional knowledge sharing and was particularly successful. This work reflects a highly collaborative global partnership and offers a model for future health research capacity-building efforts. We invite engagement with the Virtual Library as one supportive pillar of infrastructure to develop individual and institutional research capacity.

Community Conversations: Stakeholder-Identified Research Priorities to Foster Community Participation for Individuals With Intellectual and Developmental Disability.

To identify future research priorities and meaningful outcomes focused on community-level interventions for children and youth with intellectual and developmental disabilities and families, a group underrepresented in research, we established a diverse patient-centered outcomes research (PCOR) community. We focused on engaging regionally and nationally-diverse stakeholders-individuals, families, healthcare professionals, community, and policy experts-in research development activities that would build partnerships and research capacity. This community of stakeholders also represented the matrix of systems, services, and programs that people frequent in their communities (e.g., cultural arts, worship, sports and recreation, and transportation). We present the engagement process and methods for including individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities as stakeholders in research planning and processes. The results of planning, completing, and evaluating three face-to-face research capacity-building meetings and their subsequent stakeholder engagement activities include: (1) individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities and their families clearly expressed a desire to be included and to feel good about their participation in community settings, (2) many of our stakeholders wanted action and change to happen in their communities now, and often did not realize or understand that research takes time, (3) organizations expressed a need for mentoring related to best practices for access and inclusive programming. Overarching issues around societal inclusion, equal opportunities, and life chances for individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities and their families were front and center across communities and multi-stakeholder groups, and achieving change remains valued and a high priority.

Fostering Sustainable Biomedical Research Training in Mozambique: A Spin-Off of the Medical Education Partnership Initiative.

Background: The further development of research capacity in low- and middle-income countries is critical to the delivery of evidence-based healthcare, the design of sound health policy and effective resource allocation. Research capacity is also critical for the retention of highly skilled faculty and staff and for institutional internationalization. Objectives: We summarize the accomplishments, challenges and legacy of a five-year program to train biomedical researchers entitled "Enhanced Advanced Biomedical Research Training for Mozambique (EABRTM)". Methods: A program conducted from 2015-2021 built upon the Medical Education Partnership Initiative to develop research capacity at Eduardo Mondlane University (UEM) and allied institutions. The project included design and implementation of postgraduate training programs and bolstered physical and human research infrastructure. Findings: The program supported development and implementation of UEM's first doctoral (Bioscience and Public Health) and master (Biosciences) programs with 31 and 23 students enrolled to date, respectively. Three master programs were established at Lúrio University from which 176/202 (87.1%) and 107/202 (53.0%) students obtained a Postgraduate Diploma or master's degree, respectively. Scholarships were awarded to 39 biomedical researchers; 13 completed master degrees, one completed a PhD and five remain in doctoral studies. Thirteen administrative staff and four biomedical researchers were trained in research administration and in biostatistics, respectively. A total of 119 courses and seminars benefited 2,142 participants. Thirty-five manuscripts have been published to date in peer-reviewed international journals of which 77% are first-authored by Mozambicans and 44% last-authored by Africans. Sustainability was achieved through 59 research projects awarded by international agencies, totaling $16,363,656.42 and funds ($ 7,319,366.11) secured through 2025. Conclusions: The EABRTM program substantially increased research and mentorship capacity and trained a new generation of biostatisticians and research administrators. These programmatic outcomes significantly increased the confidence of early stage Mozambican researchers in their ability to successfully pursue their career goals.

The EGPRN Research Strategy for general practice in Europe.

The European General Practice Research Network (EGPRN) has recently published an updated research strategy with the overall aim being to promote relevant research of the highest quality within general practice/family medicine (GP/FM). The Research Strategy indicates a global direction and serves as a basis for more detailed plans in individual countries that will take into account the characteristics of a country, its specific needs and the level of current research capacity. This paper aims to provide a summary of the EGPRN Research Strategy.The Research Strategy suggests that it is necessary to consider what the knowledge deficits are and to set research priorities. Research capacity building (RCB) is required at all levels. Research in GP/FM will also have to reflect the changes in the profession. An innovative and sustainable-oriented approach to conducting research is needed. Use of existing toolkits and engagement with patient platforms and representative groups are necessary to ensure meaningful user involvement. Knowledge transfer and exchange (KTE) is an important component to ensure a process of exchange between researchers and knowledge users.Working to improve leadership, to support the creation of a research culture in GP/FM and to increase national and international networking are considered as fundamental to ensuring a portfolio of high-quality research and for improving the impact of GP/FM research. The recommendations in the Research Strategy are based on a review of the literature on general practice research from 2010 to 2019 and are set in the context of a theoretical framework.

Research Ready Grant Program (RRGP) protocol: a model for collaborative multidisciplinary practice-research partnerships.

BACKGROUND: Little attention has been given to the process of implementing or evaluating a structured academic-clinician (university-health service) research capacity-building (RCB) model within healthcare settings. We have developed a model for collaborative multidisciplinary practice-research partnerships called the Research Ready Grant Program (RRGP). The RRGP is informed by Cooke's (BMC Fam Pract 6:44, 2005) RCB framework and principles. The aim of the study outlined in this protocol is to conduct a process and outcome evaluation of the programme. We will explore how the RRGP's structured mentor model contributes to RCB of clinician-led multidisciplinary research teams. We will identify key factors at the organization, team and individual levels that affect research capacity of health professionals working in one regional health service district. This protocol describes the RRGP design and outlines the methods we will employ to evaluate an RCB programme, the RRGP, delivered in a regional health service in Australia. METHODS: The study will adopt an exploratory concurrent mixed-methods approach designed to evaluate the process of implementing an RCB model across one regional hospital and health service. Both quantitative and qualitative data collection methods over a 12-month period will be implemented. Data triangulation will be applied to capture the complex issues associated with implementing collaborative multidisciplinary practice-research partnerships. DISCUSSION: The RRGP is an innovative RCB model for clinicians in their workplace. It is expected that the programme will facilitate a culture of collaborative multidisciplinary research and strengthen hospital-university partnerships.

Experiences of hospital allied health professionals in collaborative student research projects: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Active engagement in research by healthcare organisations and clinicians is associated with improvements in healthcare performance. Barriers to research engagement by clinician allied health (AH) professionals include competing priorities from high clinical workloads, lack of research skills and confidence, and lack of supportive research relationships. Collaboration with universities on joint clinical research projects is well recognised as a means of building health service research capacity. Research projects undertaken by students as part of their qualifying degree represent one such opportunity. However, there are few reports evaluating these collaborations from the health service perspective. METHODS: A qualitative study using semi-structured interviews and thematic analysis to explore the experiences of AH professionals in the co-supervision of students completing research placements as part of their professional degree course. RESULTS: Fourteen health service employees from six allied health disciplines described collaborations on research projects with 24 students from four different universities. Student placements and projects varied widely in length of placement, extent of collaboration, supervision structure and study design. Three overarching themes were identified in the AH professional co-supervision experience: 1) Professional growth; 2) Mismatch with expectations; and 3) Focus on the student. Project outcomes were categorised from the health system perspective. These were 1) Healthcare performance improvements, including local increases in staff clinical practice knowledge and wider contributions to the evidence base; 2) Research capacity gains within the health service, including research knowledge and skill development, collaborative linkages and opportunity for future research; and 3) Staff-centred outcomes including increased job satisfaction. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the potential for AH professional supervision of students on research placements to contribute to healthcare performance improvements and research capacity gains within health services, alongside providing personal benefits for the AH professionals involved. Early consultation with a health service-employed research specialist may support health professional and student learning, team collaboration and project coordination for these student projects.

Are we there yet? A scoping review of factors that increase academic research capacity in schools of nursing and midwifery.

AIMS: 1. To identify approaches and strategies that can build research capacity among academics from the disciplines of nursing and midwifery working in tertiary education institutions. 2. To identify evidence-informed strategies that enable academic transformation of professional identity from clinician to researcher. BACKGROUND: Nurses and midwives are core to leading health practice and system change through research. Despite manifold efforts to build research capacity among nurse academics over the past two decades, there is scant evidence about what specific strategies are effective and few robust evaluations of any capacity building strategies. DESIGN: This scoping review was guided by Arksey and O'Malley's framework to identify key concepts and map the available evidence specifically related to volume, nature and characteristics. METHODS: The authors followed a scoping review framework and used a PRISMA flowchart to report findings. Electronic data bases (CINAHL, ERIC, Medline and Scopus) were searched between April and June 2020. Literature published between 2000 and 2020 was searched. The Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) was used for data coding and extraction and all included papers were subsequently thematically analysed. RESULTS: Fourteen studies from seven countries met the inclusion criteria and were comprised of literature reviews (n = 4) case studies (n = 3) qualitative survey (n = 1) and intervention studies (n = 6). Four themes were identified as follows: academic identity, organisational changes, leadership and research skills development. CONCLUSIONS: Rigorous evaluation of research capacity building strategies for academics from the disciplines of nursing and midwifery is a significant gap in the literature. To promulgate research among nurse and midwife academics, strong, supportive leadership and a range of inclusive and targeted approaches are needed. Significant work remains in terms of negotiating with the broader university to operationalise supportive systems and structures. Clarifying how self-concept has an impact on building and maintaining a research identity for nurse and midwife academics is an area worthy of further study. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: Strong, supportive leadership with inclusive and targeted research skills development is key to reorienting academic nursing and midwifery research culture.

Research education and training for nurses and allied health professionals: a systematic scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Research capacity building (RCB) initiatives have gained steady momentum in health settings across the globe to reduce the gap between research evidence and health practice and policy. RCB strategies are typically multidimensional, comprising several initiatives targeted at different levels within health organisations. Research education and training is a mainstay strategy targeted at the individual level and yet, the evidence for research education in health settings is unclear. This review scopes the literature on research education programs for nurses and allied health professionals, delivered and evaluated in healthcare settings in high-income countries. METHODS: The review was conducted systematically in accordance with the Joanna Briggs Institute scoping review methodology. Eleven academic databases and numerous grey literature platforms were searched. Data were extracted from the included full texts in accordance with the aims of the scoping review. A narrative approach was used to synthesise findings. Program characteristics, approaches to program evaluation and the outcomes reported were extracted and summarised. RESULTS: Database searches for peer-reviewed and grey literature yielded 12,457 unique records. Following abstract and title screening, 207 full texts were reviewed. Of these, 60 records were included. Nine additional records were identified on forward and backward citation searching for the included records, resulting in a total of 69 papers describing 68 research education programs. Research education programs were implemented in fourteen different high-income countries over five decades. Programs were multifaceted, often encompassed experiential learning, with half including a mentoring component. Outcome measures largely reflected lower levels of Barr and colleagues' modified Kirkpatrick educational outcomes typology (e.g., satisfaction, improved research knowledge and confidence), with few evaluated objectively using traditional research milestones (e.g., protocol completion, manuscript preparation, poster, conference presentation). Few programs were evaluated using organisational and practice outcomes. Overall, evaluation methods were poorly described. CONCLUSION: Research education remains a key strategy to build research capacity for nurses and allied health professionals working in healthcare settings. Evaluation of research education programs needs to be rigorous and, although targeted at the individual, must consider longer-term and broader organisation-level outcomes and impacts. Examining this is critical to improving clinician-led health research and the translation of research into clinical practice.