Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T04:37:57.390Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The ‘Designated Research Team’ approach to building research capacity in primary care

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 October 2006

Jo Cooke
Affiliation:
Trent Research and Development Unit (formerly Trent Focus), The University of Sheffield, Portobello, Sheffield, UK
Susan Nancarrow
Affiliation:
Trent Research and Development Unit (formerly Trent Focus), The University of Sheffield, Portobello, Sheffield, UK
Vicky Hammersley
Affiliation:
Division of Community Health Sciences, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK
Lisa Farndon
Affiliation:
Podiatry Services, Sheffield South West Primary Care Trust, Sheffield, UK
Wesley Vernon
Affiliation:
Sheffield South West PCT, Sheffield, UK
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Trent Focus, a Research and Development Support Unit, have introduced the ‘Designated Research Team’ (DRT) approach to building research capacity. This approach funds protected time to develop research ideas and skills for a team with limited research experience. This paper uses the example of a successful team of podiatry researchers to illustrate the approach to, and outcomes of, a DRT. It draws on documentary analysis of meeting notes and annual reports, and team members' views collected during a recorded reflective session of the team at the end of the funding period. The DRT were successful in achieving agreed outcomes, including completing the project, submitting and publishing in peer reviewed journals, and presenting at conferences. They were also able to attract further funding, and engage with international collaborations and research activity. The unique contribution of this paper is that it focuses on facilitating factors to building research capacity based on a practice example. These include: enabling protected time, effective managerial support, applied and timely research training at relevant levels to expertise, immediate access to supervision and mentorship, a critical mass of research expertise within the team, and an encouraging workplace environment. Importantly, research undertaken was seen as a means to improve practice and the status of the professional group. ‘Accessible’ academic support including outreach work and attitudes of the team members and supervisors towards teaching and learning were important. Process factors enabling success include the use of project management techniques, clear delegation of tasks, effective lines of communication and accountability, and high levels of social capital and commitment between team members. The paper highlights ways forward to using these facilitating factors to build further research capacity, and to use this approach to highlight other areas of research capacity outcome measures.

Type
Original Article
Copyright
2006 Arnold