Researcher practitioner engagement in health research: The development of a new concept

Engaging primary care professionals in OECD's international PaRIS survey: a documentary analysis

Healthcare professionals have first-hand experience with patients in clinical practice and the dynamics in the healthcare system, which can be of great value in the design, implementation, data analysis and dissemination of research study results. Primary care professionals are particularly important as they provide first contact, accessible, coordinated, comprehensive and continuous people-focused care. However, in-depth examination of the engagement of health professionals in health system research and planning activities-how professionals are engaged and how this varies across national contexts- is limited, particularly in international initiatives. There is a need to identify gaps in the planning of engagement activities to inform the design and successful implementation of future international efforts to improve the responsiveness of health systems to the changing needs of patients and professionals. The aim of this study was to explore how primary care professionals were engaged in the design and implementation plans of an international health policy study led by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). The OECD's international PaRIS survey measures and disseminates information on patient-reported outcome and experience measures (PROMs and PREMs) of people living with chronic conditions who are managed in primary care. A documentary analysis of 17 written national implementation plans (country roadmaps) was conducted between January and June 2023. Two reviewers independently performed the screening and data abstraction and resolved disagreements by discussion. We reported the intended target primary care professionals, phase of the study, channel of engagement, level of engagement, and purpose of engagement. All 17 countries aimed to engage primary care professionals in the execution plans for the international PaRIS survey. While organisations of primary care professionals, particularly of family doctors, were the most commonly targeted group, variation was found in the timing of engagement activities during the different phases of the study and in the level of engagement, ranging from co-development (half of the countries co-developed the survey together with primary care professionals) to one-off consultations with whom. International guidance facilitated the participation of primary care professionals. Continuous collaborative efforts at the international and national levels can foster a culture of engagement with primary care organisations and individual professionals and enhance meaningful engagement of primary care professionals.

'After they see what you have, they contact you': a qualitative study of national team football players', coaches' and clinicians' experiences in engaging with a context-specific injury surveillance system

BACKGROUND

Sports injury surveillance systems aid injury prevention, but their development without considering end-users' perspectives has led to low adherence and honesty in self-reporting by players, compromising their effectiveness. Context-specific injury surveillance systems have been proposed to address these challenges, but there is a limited understanding of stakeholders' perceptions and experiences in using them.

OBJECTIVE

Following the implementation of a context-specific injury surveillance system with 100% player adherence over 60 weeks, the study aimed to investigate Under-21 Maltese national football team players', coaches' and clinicians' experiences of how and why they engaged with the system.

METHOD

Seventeen semi-structured interviews with Under-21 Maltese male national football team players (n = 12), their coaches (n = 3) and clinicians (n = 2) were conducted. Data were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Participants highlighted questionnaire-related factors that motivated engagement with the context-specific injury surveillance system (theme 1) and factors influencing further engagement with the system based on stakeholders' actions (theme 2). Perceived outcomes experienced as a result of engaging with the injury surveillance system (theme 3), in turn, motivated players to continue reporting and engaging with the system.

CONCLUSION

To encourage players' sustained reporting, injury-related information collected from well-designed questionnaires should serve to stimulate communication and teamwork among stakeholders, to prevent injuries and enhance performance.

Perspectives on reporting non-verbal interactions from the contemporary research focus group

BACKGROUND

The main defining attribute that delineates focus groups from other methods of collecting data is that data are generated through participants communicating with each other rather than solely with the group moderator. The way in which interactions take place across group interviews and focus groups varies, yet both are referred to as focus groups, resulting in a broad umbrella term for its numerous manifestations.

AIM

To reflect on how focus groups are adopted and reported, including the use of the term 'focus group'.

DISCUSSION

The authors recognise that the term 'focus group' is sometimes used synonymously with 'group interview' but argue that this practice must be challenged. They suggest using terms that indicate the type of space and synchronicity of the focus group, prefixed with 'in-person' or 'conventional' to identify traditional focus groups. They also suggest separating virtual group interviews into 'synchronous' and 'asynchronous', based on whether the participants and researchers can engage with each other in real time.

CONCLUSION

There is a need for qualitative researchers to reach a consensus about the nature of focus groups and group interviews, as well as where their differences and similarities lie.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

The authors hope to encourage nurse researchers to think about these issues when labelling, planning, analysing and reporting studies involving focus groups.