Reference Citation Analysis: Find an Article, Find a Category, Find a Journal, Find a Scholar

For:	[Subscribe] [Scholar Register]

Number	Cited by Other Article(s)
1	An analysis of bibliometric data exploring factors affecting research capacity amongst HCPC registered radiographers in England. Radiography (Lond) 2019;25 Suppl 1:S33-S39. [PMID: 31481185 DOI: 10.1016/j.radi.2019.03.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/26/2018] [Revised: 02/17/2019] [Accepted: 03/23/2019] [Indexed: 11/24/2022] Abstract INTRODUCTION Pre-existing studies argue, radiographers are "apathetic" when it comes to research. However, labelling everyone as such seems a gross simplification of a multifaceted issue; especially as current evidence tends to err towards the anecdotal, subjective or is compared to similar professions. Considering this, the SCoR periodically issues a Research Strategy, recognising the necessity to embed/improve research-capacity across all levels of the profession. The aim of this study is to ascertain factors characteristically influencing research-capacity amongst HCPC-registered radiographers in England. METHODS A purposeful sample of 5 years' bibliometric data from the journal 'Radiography.' A critical and thematic analysis followed based on current peer reviewed journals and grey literature. RESULTS Of 374 eligible articles and 143 research-active authors (published 2 + articles), collaborations prominently featured (74.9%) across 19 international partnerships. HCPC registrants in England were principal investigator(s) in 49.20% of cases and registrants affiliated with the journal/publisher generally published more than non-affiliates. Preferred topic-areas included 'Education & Research' and 'Technical Practice.' Males published more than females (M = 5.13/F = 3.45). Average length of practice equalled 22.93 years. Outputs mostly originated from HEIs (62.07%), but contributions varied (mean = 10.05/std.deviation = ±17.09); modestly correlating high-REF scoring HEIs (r = 0.330); however, regional workforce ratio(s) proved the strongest indicator (r = 0.601). CONCLUSION No "one-size-fits all" approach to research-capacity applies; multiple variables affect capacity/activeness. Many seem contingent on extrinsic factors e.g. regional locale, organisational type and culture/support. Personal/professional influences included career status, length of qualification and gender. Future strategies may benefit from refinement; mindful of the dynamics influencing the heterogeneity of the current workforce. Recommendations are that future strategies/studies may benefit from more specific targeting. Collapse Key Words Bibliographic analysis Research capacity Research publication Research strategy Collapse MESH Headings Collapse Grants Collapse Affiliation(s) Collapse

Number

Cited by Other Article(s)

An analysis of bibliometric data exploring factors affecting research capacity amongst HCPC registered radiographers in England. Radiography (Lond) 2019;25 Suppl 1:S33-S39. [PMID: 31481185 DOI: 10.1016/j.radi.2019.03.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/26/2018] [Revised: 02/17/2019] [Accepted: 03/23/2019] [Indexed: 11/24/2022]

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

Pre-existing studies argue, radiographers are "apathetic" when it comes to research. However, labelling everyone as such seems a gross simplification of a multifaceted issue; especially as current evidence tends to err towards the anecdotal, subjective or is compared to similar professions. Considering this, the SCoR periodically issues a Research Strategy, recognising the necessity to embed/improve research-capacity across all levels of the profession. The aim of this study is to ascertain factors characteristically influencing research-capacity amongst HCPC-registered radiographers in England.

METHODS

A purposeful sample of 5 years' bibliometric data from the journal 'Radiography.' A critical and thematic analysis followed based on current peer reviewed journals and grey literature.

RESULTS

Of 374 eligible articles and 143 research-active authors (published 2 + articles), collaborations prominently featured (74.9%) across 19 international partnerships. HCPC registrants in England were principal investigator(s) in 49.20% of cases and registrants affiliated with the journal/publisher generally published more than non-affiliates. Preferred topic-areas included 'Education & Research' and 'Technical Practice.' Males published more than females (M = 5.13/F = 3.45). Average length of practice equalled 22.93 years. Outputs mostly originated from HEIs (62.07%), but contributions varied (mean = 10.05/std.deviation = ±17.09); modestly correlating high-REF scoring HEIs (r = 0.330); however, regional workforce ratio(s) proved the strongest indicator (r = 0.601).

CONCLUSION

No "one-size-fits all" approach to research-capacity applies; multiple variables affect capacity/activeness. Many seem contingent on extrinsic factors e.g. regional locale, organisational type and culture/support. Personal/professional influences included career status, length of qualification and gender. Future strategies may benefit from refinement; mindful of the dynamics influencing the heterogeneity of the current workforce. Recommendations are that future strategies/studies may benefit from more specific targeting.

Collapse