A meeting of minds: interdisciplinary research in the health sciences in Canada

Machine learning quantification of Amyloid-β deposits in the temporal lobe of 131 brain bank cases

Accurate and scalable quantification of amyloid-β (Aβ) pathology is crucial for deeper disease phenotyping and furthering research in Alzheimer Disease (AD). This multidisciplinary study addresses the current limitations on neuropathology by leveraging a machine learning (ML) pipeline to perform a granular quantification of Aβ deposits and assess their distribution in the temporal lobe. Utilizing 131 whole-slide-images from consecutive autopsied cases at the University of California Davis Alzheimer Disease Research Center, our objectives were threefold: (1) Validate an automatic workflow for Aβ deposit quantification in white matter (WM) and gray matter (GM); (2) define the distributions of different Aβ deposit types in GM and WM, and (3) investigate correlates of Aβ deposits with dementia status and the presence of mixed pathology. Our methodology highlights the robustness and efficacy of the ML pipeline, demonstrating proficiency akin to experts' evaluations. We provide comprehensive insights into the quantification and distribution of Aβ deposits in the temporal GM and WM revealing a progressive increase in tandem with the severity of established diagnostic criteria (NIA-AA). We also present correlations of Aβ load with clinical diagnosis as well as presence/absence of mixed pathology. This study introduces a reproducible workflow, showcasing the practical use of ML approaches in the field of neuropathology, and use of the output data for correlative analyses. Acknowledging limitations, such as potential biases in the ML model and current ML classifications, we propose avenues for future research to refine and expand the methodology. We hope to contribute to the broader landscape of neuropathology advancements, ML applications, and precision medicine, paving the way for deep phenotyping of AD brain cases and establishing a foundation for further advancements in neuropathological research.

Identifying Research Priorities to Promote the Well-Being of Family Caregivers of Canadians with Intellectual and/or Developmental Disabilities: A Pilot Delphi Study

Current programming and resources aimed at supporting the well-being of family caregivers often fail to address considerations unique to those caring for people with intellectual and/or developmental disabilities (IDDs). As a result, many caregivers of people with IDD feel isolated, stressed, and burnt out. A targeted research agenda informed by key stakeholders is needed and would allow research teams to coordinate resources, talents, and efforts to progress family caregiver well-being research in this area quickly and effectively. To address this aim, this pilot study used a Delphi design based on 2 rounds of questionnaires. In round 1, 19 stakeholders (18 females, 1 male), including 12 family caregivers, 3 rehabilitation providers, 2 researchers, and 2 organizational representatives, identified broad areas for caregiver well-being research. After collating the responses from round 1, stakeholders were asked to rank whether each area was considered a research priority in round 2. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and conventional content analysis. Eighteen stakeholders completed the round 2 survey (1 caregiver did not complete the round 2 survey), after which a consensus was reached. Stakeholders identified nine broad priorities, including system-level programs and services, models of care, health promotion, social inclusion, equity and diversity, capacity building, care planning along the lifespan, and balancing formal and natural community-based supports. Although preliminary in nature, the research priorities generated using an inclusive and systematic process may inform future efforts to promote the well-being of caregivers of Canadians with IDD.

Complex skills are required for new primary health care researchers: a training program responds

BACKGROUND

Current dimensions of the primary health care research (PHC) context, including the need for contextualized research methods to address complex questions, and the co-creation of knowledge through partnerships with stakeholders - require PHC researchers to have a comprehensive set of skills for engaging effectively in high impact research.

MAIN BODY

In 2002 we developed a unique program to respond to these needs - Transdisciplinary Understanding and Training on Research - Primary Health Care (TUTOR-PHC). The program's goals are to train a cadre of PHC researchers, clinicians, and decision makers in interdisciplinary research to aid them in tackling current and future challenges in PHC and in leading collaborative interdisciplinary research teams. Seven essential educational approaches employed by TUTOR-PHC are described, as well as the principles underlying the curriculum. This program is unique because of its pan-Canadian nature, longevity, and the multiplicity of disciplines represented. Program evaluation results indicate: 1) overall program experiences are very positive; 2) TUTOR-PHC increases trainee interdisciplinary research understanding and activity; and 3) this training assists in developing their interdisciplinary research careers. Taken together, the structure of the program, its content, educational approaches, and principles, represent a complex whole. This complexity parallels that of the PHC research context - a context that requires researchers who are able to respond to multiple challenges.

CONCLUSION

We present this description of ways to teach and learn the advanced complex skills necessary for successful PHC researchers with a view to supporting the potential uptake of program components in other settings.

Interdisciplinary trainee networks to promote research on aging: Facilitators, barriers, and next steps

Interdisciplinary education and research foster cross disciplinary collaboration. The study of age and aging is complex and needs to be carried out by scholars from myriad disciplines, making interdisciplinary collaboration paramount. Non-formal, extracurricular, and interdisciplinary networks are increasingly filling gaps in academia's largely siloed disciplinary training. This study examines the experiences of trainees (undergraduate, graduate, and post-graduate students) who belonged to one such network devoted to interdisciplinary approaches to education and research on aging. Fifty-three trainees completed the survey. Among respondents, some faculties (e.g., Health Sciences) were disproportionately represented over others (e.g., Business, Engineering, and Humanities). Most trainees valued their participation in the interdisciplinary network for research on aging. They also valued expanding their social and professional network, the nature of which was qualitatively described in open-text responses. We then relate our findings to three types of social capital: bonding; bridging; and linking. Finally, we conclude with recommendations for the intentional design and/or refinement of similar networks to maximize value to trainees, provide the skills necessary for interdisciplinary collaboration, and foster egalitarian and representative participation therein.

A framework for interprofessional team collaboration in a hospital setting: Advancing team competencies and behaviours

Healthcare teams that practice collaboratively enhance the delivery of person-centred care and improve patient and systems outcomes. Many organizations have adopted existing interprofessional frameworks that define the competencies of individual health professionals that are required to meet practice standards and advance interprofessional goals. However, to support the collective efforts of team members to deliver optimal care within complex hospital settings, healthcare organizations may benefit from adopting team-based competencies for interprofessional collaboration. The Sunnybrook framework for interprofessional team collaboration was intentionally created as a set of collective team competencies. The framework was developed using a comprehensive literature search and consensus building by a multi-stakeholder working group and supported by a broad consultation process that included patient representation, organizational development and leadership, and human resources. The six core competencies are actionable and include associated team behaviours that can be easily referenced by teams and widely implemented across the hospital.

Translating interprofessional collaboration competencies to an international research team

INTRODUCTION

While there has been strong emphasis on enhancing interprofessional education and interprofessional care in the published literature, there is relatively little literature focused on advancing interprofessional research. In extrapolating from the current frameworks of interprofessional collaboration (IPC), it becomes clear that the core competencies of IPC are transferable to research teams. The aim of this paper is to present our experience of an international research team framed within core competencies for IPC.

METHODS

A simplified narrative inquiry approach was used to share the experience of an international research team framed within six core competencies of IPC.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

By way of our international research collaboration, we demonstrate the translation of key core competencies for IPC. We share key learnings and mitigation strategies for the successful outcomes of the research team.

CONCLUSION

To embark on a successful international research collaboration requires integrating IPC core competencies across the entire research continuum. In addition to the core competencies of collaboration, enablers to success also include digital collaborative forums, existing professional relationships and research projects that offer global meaning and value.

A critical realist synthesis of cross-disciplinary health policy and systems research: defining characteristic features, developing an evaluation framework and identifying challenges

BACKGROUND

Health policy and systems research (HPSR) is an inherently cross-disciplinary field of investigation. However, conflicting conceptualisations about inter-, multi- and transdisciplinary research have contributed to confusion about the characteristics of cross-disciplinary approaches in HPSR. This review was conducted to (1) define the characteristic features of context-mechanism-outcome (CMO) configurations in cross-disciplinary HPSR, (2) develop criteria for evaluating cross-disciplinarity and (3) synthesise emerging challenges of the approach.

METHOD

The paper is a critical realist synthesis conducted in three phases, as follows: (1) scoping the literature, (2) searching for and screening the evidence, and (3) extracting and synthesising the evidence. Five databases, namely the International Bibliography of the Social Sciences and Web of Science, PubMed central, Embase and CINHAL, and reference lists of studies that qualified for inclusion in the review were searched. The search covered peer-reviewed original research, reviews, commentary papers, and institutional or government reports published in English between January 1998 and January 2020.

RESULTS

A total of 7792 titles were identified in the online search and 137 publications, comprising pilot studies as well as anecdotal and empirical literature were selected for the final review. The review draws attention to the fact that cross-disciplinary HPSR is not defined by individual characteristics but by the combination of a particular type of research question and setting (context), a specific way of researchers working together (mechanism), and research output (outcome) that is superior to what could be achieved under a monodisciplinary approach. This CMO framework also informs the criteria for assessing whether a given HPSR is truly cross-disciplinary. The challenges of cross-disciplinary HPSR and their accompanying coping mechanisms were also found to be context driven, originating mainly from conceptual disagreements, institutional restrictions, communication and information management challenges, coordination problems, and resource limitations.

CONCLUSION

These findings have important implications. First, the CMO framework of cross-disciplinary HPSR can provide guidance for researchers engaging in new projects and for policy-makers using their findings. Second, the proposed criteria for evaluating theory and practice of cross-disciplinary HPSR may inform the systematic development of new research projects and the structured assessment of existing ones. Third, a better understanding of the challenges of cross-disciplinary HPSR and potential response mechanisms may help researchers to avoid these problems in the future.

Diverse perspectives on interdisciplinarity from Members of the College of the Royal Society of Canada

Various multiple-disciplinary terms and concepts (although most commonly “interdisciplinarity,” which is used herein) are used to frame education, scholarship, research, and interactions within and outside academia. In principle, the premise of interdisciplinarity may appear to have many strengths; yet, the extent to which interdisciplinarity is embraced by the current generation of academics, the benefits and risks for doing so, and the barriers and facilitators to achieving interdisciplinarity, represent inherent challenges. Much has been written on the topic of interdisciplinarity, but to our knowledge there have been few attempts to consider and present diverse perspectives from scholars, artists, and scientists in a cohesive manner. As a team of 57 members from the Canadian College of New Scholars, Artists, and Scientists of the Royal Society of Canada (the College) who self-identify as being engaged or interested in interdisciplinarity, we provide diverse intellectual, cultural, and social perspectives. The goal of this paper is to share our collective wisdom on this topic with the broader community and to stimulate discourse and debate on the merits and challenges associated with interdisciplinarity. Perhaps the clearest message emerging from this exercise is that working across established boundaries of scholarly communities is rewarding, necessary, and is more likely to result in impact. However, there are barriers that limit the ease with which this can occur (e.g., lack of institutional structures and funding to facilitate cross-disciplinary exploration). Occasionally, there can be significant risk associated with doing interdisciplinary work (e.g., lack of adequate measurement or recognition of work by disciplinary peers). Solving many of the world’s complex and pressing problems (e.g., climate change, sustainable agriculture, the burden of chronic disease, and aging populations) demands thinking and working across long-standing, but in some ways restrictive, academic boundaries. Academic institutions and key support structures, especially funding bodies, will play an important role in helping to realize what is readily apparent to all who contributed to this paper—that interdisciplinarity is essential for solving complex problems; it is the new norm. Failure to empower and encourage those doing this research will serve as a great impediment to training, knowledge, and addressing societal issues.

Interdisciplinary working in public health research: a proposed good practice checklist

Background

Guidance on how different disciplines from the natural, behavioural and social sciences can collaborate to resolve complex public health problems is lacking. This article presents a checklist to support researchers and principle investigators to develop and implement interdisciplinary collaborations.

Methods

Fourteen individuals, representing 10 disciplines, participated in in-depth interviews to explore the strengths and challenges of working together on an interdisciplinary project to identify the determinants of substance use and gambling disorders, and to make recommendations for future interdisciplinary teams. Data were analysed thematically and a checklist was derived from insights offered by participants during interview and discussion among the authors on the implications of findings.

Results

Participants identified 18 scientific, interactional and structural strengths and challenges of interdisciplinary research. These findings were used to develop an 18-item BASICS checklist to support future interdisciplinary collaborations. The five domains of the checklist are: (i) Blueprint, (ii) Attitudes, (iii) Staffing, (iv) Interactions and (v) Core Science.

Conclusion

Interdisciplinary work has the potential to advance public health science but the numerous challenges should not be underestimated. Use of a checklist, such as BASICS, when planning and managing projects may help future collaborations to avoid some of the common pitfalls of interdisciplinary research.

View From the Penthouse: Epistemological Bumps and Emergent Metaphors as Method for Team Reflexivity

Research in health care occurs within interdisciplinary teams that include clinician-researchers who have multiple epistemological orientations. Rigor in collaborative projects requires reflexive attention to how the paradigmatic questions raised by diverse epistemological orientations, and the ethical stances of each researcher, shape findings. This methodological article draws on three events during an ethnography of stigma in psychiatry to define and illustrate how we used double hermeneutics in data analysis. This allowed us to examine the metaphors that emerged from what we are conceptualizing as "epistemological bumps." This heightened the team's awareness of the epistemological horizons and mixing that occurred, as well as revealing what mattered to each researcher, during the crafting of our research decisions and findings. We argue that interdisciplinary research on complex processes in health care requires this close examination of team experiences and moral stakes during collaborative analysis, and offer conceptual suggestions for reflexivity and rigor.

Integrated knowledge translation (IKT) in health care: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Integrated knowledge translation (IKT) refers to collaboration between researchers and decision-makers. While advocated as an approach for enhancing the relevance and use of research, IKT is challenging and inconsistently applied. This study sought to inform future IKT practice and research by synthesizing studies that empirically evaluated IKT and identifying knowledge gaps.

METHODS

We performed a scoping review. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library from 2005 to 2014 for English language studies that evaluated IKT interventions involving researchers and organizational or policy-level decision-makers. Data were extracted on study characteristics, IKT intervention (theory, content, mode, duration, frequency, personnel, participants, timing from initiation, initiator, source of funding, decision-maker involvement), and enablers, barriers, and outcomes reported by studies. We performed content analysis and reported summary statistics.

RESULTS

Thirteen studies were eligible after screening 14,754 titles and reviewing 106 full-text studies. Details about IKT activities were poorly reported, and none were formally based on theory. Studies varied in the number and type of interactions between researchers and decision-makers; meetings were the most common format. All studies reported barriers and facilitators. Studies reported a range of positive and sub-optimal outcomes. Outcomes did not appear to be associated with initiator of the partnership, dedicated funding, partnership maturity, nature of decision-maker involvement, presence or absence of enablers or barriers, or the number of different IKT activities.

CONCLUSIONS

The IKT strategies that achieve beneficial outcomes remain unknown. We generated a summary of IKT approaches, enablers, barriers, conditions, and outcomes that can serve as the basis for a future review or for planning ongoing primary research. Future research can contribute to three identified knowledge gaps by examining (1) how different IKT strategies influence outcomes, (2) the relationship between the logic or theory underlying IKT interventions and beneficial outcomes, and (3) when and how decision-makers should be involved in the research process. Future IKT initiatives should more systematically plan and document their design and implementation, and evaluations should report the findings with sufficient detail to reveal how IKT was associated with outcomes.

Finding a Place for Systems-Based, Collaborative Research in Emerging Disease Research in Asia

The need to adequately predict, prevent and respond to infectious diseases emerging unexpectedly from human-animal-environmental systems has driven interest in multisectoral, socio-economic, systems-based, collaborative (MSC) research approaches such as EcoHealth and One Health. Our goals were to document how MSC research has been used to address EIDs in Asia, and to explore how MSC approaches align with current priorities for EID research in Asia. We gathered priorities for EID research from the peer-reviewed and grey literature, documented organizational descriptions of MCS research approaches, and analysed a series of EID MSC projects. We found that priority areas for EID research in Asia included (1) understanding host-pathogen-environment interactions; (2) improving tools and technologies; (3) changing people's behaviour; and (4) evaluating the effectiveness of interventions. We found that the unifying characteristics of MSC research were that it was action-oriented and sought to inspire change under real-world conditions at the complex interface of human and natural systems. We suggest that MSC research can be considered a type of 'pragmatic research' and might be most useful in describing change in complex human-animal-environmental systems, accelerating research-to-action, and evaluating effectiveness of interventions in 'real world' settings.

Do guidelines offer implementation advice to target users? A systematic review of guideline applicability

OBJECTIVE

Providers and patients are most likely to use and benefit from guidelines accompanied by implementation support. Guidelines published in 2007 and earlier assessed with the Appraisal of Guidelines, Research and Evaluation (AGREE) instrument scored poorly for applicability, which reflects the inclusion of implementation instructions or tools. The purpose of this study was to examine the applicability of guidelines published in 2008 or later and identify factors associated with applicability.

DESIGN

Systematic review of studies that used AGREE to assess guidelines published in 2008 or later.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched from 2008 to July 2014, and the reference lists of eligible items. Two individuals independently screened results for English language studies that reviewed guidelines using AGREE and reported all domain scores, and extracted data. Descriptive statistics were calculated across all domains. Multilevel regression analysis with a mixed effects model identified factors associated with applicability.

RESULTS

Of 245 search results, 53 were retrieved as potentially relevant and 20 studies were eligible for review. The mean and median domain scores for applicability across 137 guidelines published in 2008 or later were 43.6% and 42.0% (IQR 21.8-63.0%), respectively. Applicability scored lower than all other domains, and did not markedly improve compared with guidelines published in 2007 or earlier. Country (UK) and type of developer (disease-specific foundation, non-profit healthcare system) appeared to be associated with applicability when assessed with AGREE II (not original AGREE).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite increasing recognition of the need for implementation tools, guidelines continue to lack such resources. To improve healthcare delivery and associated outcomes, further research is needed to establish the type of implementation tools needed and desired by healthcare providers and consumers, and methods for developing high-quality tools.

How does context influence collaborative decision-making for health services planning, delivery and evaluation?

Background

Collaboration among researchers (clinician, non-clinician) and decision makers (managers, policy-makers, clinicians), referred to as integrated knowledge translation (IKT), enhances the relevance and use of research, leading to improved decision-making, policies, practice, and health care outcomes. However IKT is not widely practiced due to numerous challenges. This research explored how context influenced IKT as a means of identifying how IKT could be strengthened.

Methods

This research investigated IKT in three health services programs for colon cancer screening, prostate cancer diagnosis, and the treatment of pancreatic cancer. Qualitative methods were used to explore contextual factors that influenced how IKT occurred, and its impact. Data were collected between September 1, 2012 and May 15, 2013 from relevant documents, observation of meetings, and interviews with researchers and decision-makers, analyzed using qualitative methods, and integrated.

Results

Data were analyzed from 39 documents, observation of 6 meetings, and 36 interviews. IKT included interaction at meetings, joint undertaking of research, and development of guidelines. IKT was most prevalent in one program with leadership, clear goals, dedicated funding and other infrastructural resources, and an embedded researcher responsible for, and actively engaged in IKT. This program achieved a variety of social, research and health service outcomes despite mixed individual views about the value of IKT and the absence of a programmatic culture of IKT. Participants noted numerous challenges including lack of time and incentives, and recommendations to support IKT. A conceptual framework of factors that influence IKT and associated outcomes was generated, and can be used by others to plan or evaluate IKT.

Conclusions

The findings can be applied by researchers, clinicians, managers or policy-makers to plan or improve collaborative decision-making for health services planning, delivery, evaluation or quality improvement. Further research is needed to explore whether these findings are widespread, and further understand how IKT can be optimized.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12913-014-0545-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

The paucity of ethical analysis in allergology

While a growing body of research is uncovering the aetiology and effective treatments for allergy, research that assess the broader ethical implications of this disease is lacking significantly. This article will demonstrate both the paucity of academic research concerning ethical implications in allergy and explain why ethical analysis is integral to formulating effective health strategies for allergic disease. An exhaustive literature search of publications in French and English identified less than 35 academic articles focussed on the topic of ethics and allergy; this is a miniscule number when compared to the amount of articles published on ethical issues related to other chronic illnesses, such as obesity. It is important to demonstrate to allergy specialists the need for, and utility of, further incorporating ethical analyses in allergology; the current success of Ethical, Legal, Social Implications (ELSI) research programmes in human genetics and nanotechnology will serve as notable examples. Indeed, future research and innovation in allergy will undoubtedly encounter ethical dilemmas and the allergology community should play a significant role in helping to address these issues. However, incorporating ethical analyses in allergology does not imply that the allergology community must acquire extensive knowledge in bioethics; instead, interdisciplinary research that incorporates expertise from allergology and bioethics would enable allergy specialists to advance critical knowledge development in this largely overlooked domain of study.

How can scientists bring research to use: the HENVINET experience

BACKGROUND

Health concerns have driven the European environmental policies of the last 25 years, with issues becoming more complex. Addressing these concerns requires an approach that is both interdisciplinary and engages scientists with society. In response to this requirement, the FP6 coordination action "Health and Environment Network" HENVINET was set up to create a permanent inter-disciplinary network of professionals in the field of health and environment tasked to bridge the communication gap between science and society. In this paper we describe how HENVINET delivered on this task.

METHODS

The HENVINET project approached the issue of inter-disciplinary collaboration in four ways. (1) The Drivers-Pressures-State-Exposure-Effect-Action framework was used to structure information gathering, collaboration and communication between scientists in the field of health and the environment. (2) Interactive web-based tools were developed to enhance methods for knowledge evaluation, and use these methods to formulate policy advice. (3) Quantification methods were adapted to measure scientific agreement. And (4) Open architecture web technology was used to develop an information repository and a web portal to facilitate collaboration and communication among scientists.

RESULTS

Twenty-five organizations from Europe and five from outside Europe participated in the Health and Environment Network HENVINET, which lasted for 3.5 years. The consortium included partners in environmental research, public health and veterinary medicine; included medical practitioners and representatives of local administrations; and had access to national policy making and EEA and WHO expertise. Dedicated web-based tools for visualisation of environmental health issues and knowledge evaluation allowed remote expert elicitation, and were used as a basis for developing policy advice in five health areas (asthma and allergies; cancer; neurodevelopmental disorders; endocrine disruption; and engineered nanoparticles in the environment). An open searchable database of decision support tools was established and populated. A web based social networking tool was developed to enhance collaboration and communication between scientists and society.

CONCLUSIONS

HENVINET addressed key issues that arise in inter-disciplinary research on health and environment and in communicating research results to policy makers and society. HENVINET went beyond traditional scientific tools and methods to bridge the communication gap between science and policy makers. The project identified the need for a common framework and delivered it. It developed and implemented a variety of novel methods and tools and, using several representative examples, demonstrated the process of producing politically relevant scientific advice based on an open participation of experts. It highlighted the need for, and benefits of, a liaison between health and environment professionals and professionals in the social sciences and liberal arts. By adopting critical complexity thinking, HENVINET extended the traditional approach to environment and health research, and set the standard for current approaches to bridge the gap between science and society.

The guideline implementability research and application network (GIRAnet): an international collaborative to support knowledge exchange: study protocol

BACKGROUND

Modifying the format and content of guidelines may facilitate their use and lead to improved quality of care. We reviewed the medical literature to identify features desired by different users and associated with guideline use to develop a framework of implementability and found that most guidelines do not contain these elements. Further research is needed to develop and evaluate implementability tools.

METHODS

We are launching the Guideline Implementability Research and Application Network (GIRAnet) to enable the development and testing of implementability tools in three domains: Resource Implications, Implementation, and Evaluation. Partners include the Guidelines International Network (G-I-N) and its member guideline developers, implementers, and researchers. In phase one, international guidelines will be examined to identify and describe exemplar tools. Indication-specific and generic tools will populate a searchable repository. In phase two, qualitative analysis of cognitive interviews will be used to understand how developers can best integrate implementability tools in guidelines and how health professionals use them for interpreting and applying guidelines. In phase three, a small-scale pilot test will assess the impact of implementability tools based on quantitative analysis of chart-based behavioural outcomes and qualitative analysis of interviews with participants. The findings will be used to plan a more comprehensive future evaluation of implementability tools.

DISCUSSION

Infrastructure funding to establish GIRAnet will be leveraged with the in-kind contributions of collaborating national and international guideline developers to advance our knowledge of implementation practice and science. Needs assessment and evaluation of GIRAnet will provide a greater understanding of how to develop and sustain such knowledge-exchange networks. Ultimately, by facilitating use of guidelines, this research may lead to improved delivery and outcomes of patient care.

Strategies for collaboration in the interdisciplinary field of emerging zoonotic diseases

The integration of the veterinary, medical and environmental sciences necessary to predict, prevent or respond to emerging zoonotic diseases requires effective collaboration and exchange of knowledge across these disciplines. There has been no research into how to connect and integrate these professions in the pursuit of a common task. We conducted a literature search looking at the experiences and wisdom resulting from collaborations built in health partnerships, health research knowledge transfer and exchange, business knowledge management and systems design engineering to identify key attributes of successful interdisciplinary (ID) collaboration. This was followed by a workshop with 16 experts experienced in ID collaboration including physicians, veterinarians and biologists from private practice, academia and government agencies. The workshop participants shared their perspectives on the facilitators and barriers to ID collaboration. Our results found that the elements that can support or impede ID collaboration can be categorized as follows: the characteristics of the people, the degree to which the task is a shared goal, the policies, practices and resources of the workplace, how information technology is used and the evaluation of the results. Above all, personal relationships built on trust and respect are needed to best assemble the disciplinary strength of the professions. The challenge of meeting collaborators outside the boundaries of one's discipline or jurisdiction may be met by an independent third party, an ID knowledge broker. The broker would know where the knowledge could be found, would facilitate introductions and would help to build effective ID teams.

Interdisciplinary collaboration in the pursuit of science to improve psychosocial cancer care

OBJECTIVE

Drawing on her substantial research experience in oncology and nursing, the 2009 Fox Award winner, Dr McCorkle, describes ways to advance the science of psychosocial oncology through collaboration.

METHODS

Critical literature illustrating barriers to collaboration and successful collaborative process are reviewed and compared to the author's personal experiences.

RESULTS

Currently, many researchers are beginning to see the need for collaboration, and yet many infrastructures, universities, and centers continue to create isolated researchers and research environments. Despite the need, there is a dearth of practical and tangible guidelines as well as theoretical defenses for performing collaborative research. This article addresses these gaps with such insights as the need for a team of experts built on humility and trust, pre- and post-study networks across disciplines and settings, consistent meetings of staff as well as resources to support them, intervention monitoring techniques, and the crucial necessity for a stable institutionalized infrastructure that fosters collaboration, research and mentoring despite inevitable personnel turnover.

CONCLUSIONS

These insights that stem from the distinctive nursing lens provide crucial methods for advancing the science and addressing the uniquely interdisciplinary nature of oncology.

Researchers' experience with project management in health and medical research: results from a post-project review

Background

Project management is widely used to deliver projects on time, within budget and of defined quality. However, there is little published information describing its use in managing health and medical research projects. We used project management in the Alcohol and Pregnancy Project (2006-2008) http://www.ichr.uwa.edu.au/alcoholandpregnancy and in this paper report researchers' opinions on project management and whether it made a difference to the project.

Methods

A national interdisciplinary group of 20 researchers, one of whom was the project manager, formed the Steering Committee for the project. We used project management to ensure project outputs and outcomes were achieved and all aspects of the project were planned, implemented, monitored and controlled. Sixteen of the researchers were asked to complete a self administered questionnaire for a post-project review.

Results

The project was delivered according to the project protocol within the allocated budget and time frame. Fifteen researchers (93.8%) completed a questionnaire. They reported that project management increased the effectiveness of the project, communication, teamwork, and application of the interdisciplinary group of researchers' expertise. They would recommend this type of project management for future projects.

Conclusions

Our post-project review showed that researchers comprehensively endorsed project management in the Alcohol and Pregnancy Project and agreed that project management had contributed substantially to the research. In future, we will project manage new projects and conduct post-project reviews. The results will be used to encourage continuous learning and continuous improvement of project management, and provide greater transparency and accountability of health and medical research. The use of project management can benefit both management and scientific outcomes of health and medical research projects.

A relational conceptual framework for multidisciplinary health research centre infrastructure

Although multidisciplinary and team-based approaches are increasingly acknowledged as necessary to address some of the most pressing contemporary health challenges, many researchers struggle with a lack of infrastructure to facilitate and formalise the requisite collaborations. Specialised research centres have emerged as an important organisational solution, yet centre productivity and sustainability are frequently dictated by the availability and security of infrastructure funds.

Despite being widely cited as a core component of research capacity building, infrastructure as a discrete concept has been rather analytically neglected, often treated as an implicit feature of research environments with little specification or relegated to a narrow category of physical or administrative inputs. The terms research infrastructure, capacity, and culture, among others, are deployed in overlapping and inconsistent ways, further obfuscating the crucial functions of infrastructure specifically and its relationships with associated concepts.

The case is made for an expanded conceptualisation of research infrastructure, one that moves beyond conventional 'hardware' notions. Drawing on a case analysis of NEXUS, a multidisciplinary health research centre based at the University of British Columbia, Canada, a conceptual framework is proposed that integrates the tangible and intangible structures that interactively underlie research centre functioning.

A relational approach holds potential to allow for more comprehensive accounting of the returns on infrastructure investment. For those developing new research centres or seeking to reinvigorate existing ones, this framework may be a useful guide for both centre design and evaluation.

Perspectives of clinician and biomedical scientists on interdisciplinary health research

BACKGROUND

Interdisciplinary health research is a priority of many funding agencies. We surveyed clinician and biomedical scientists about their views on the value and funding of interdisciplinary health research.

METHODS

We conducted semistructured interviews with 31 biomedical and 30 clinician scientists. The scientists were selected from the 2000-2006 membership lists of peer-review committees of the Canadian Institutes of Health Research. We investigated respondents' perspectives on the assumption that collaboration across disciplines adds value to health research. We also investigated their perspectives on funding agencies' growing support of interdisciplinary research.

RESULTS

The 61 respondents expressed a wide variety of perspectives on the value of interdisciplinary health research, ranging from full agreement (22) to complete disagreement (11) that it adds value; many presented qualified viewpoints (28). More than one-quarter viewed funding agencies' growing support of interdisciplinary research as appropriate. Most (44) felt that the level of support was unwarranted. Arguments included the belief that current support leads to the creation of artificial teams and that a top-down process of imposing interdisciplinary structures on teams constrains scientists' freedom. On both issues we found contrasting trends between the clinician and the biomedical scientists.

INTERPRETATION

Despite having some positive views about the value of interdisciplinary research, scientists, especially biomedical scientists, expressed reservations about the growing support of interdisciplinary research.

Exploring mentorship as a strategy to build capacity for knowledge translation research and practice: protocol for a qualitative study

Background

Research funders, educators, investigators and decision makers worldwide have identified the need to improve the quality of health care by building capacity for knowledge translation (KT) research and practice. Peer-based mentorship represents a vehicle to foster KT capacity. The purpose of this exploratory study is to identify mentoring models that could be used to build KT capacity, consult with putative mentee stakeholders to understand their KT mentorship needs and preferences, and generate recommendations for the content and format of KT mentorship strategies or programs, and how they could be tested through future research.

Methods

A conceptual framework was derived based on mentoring goals, processes and outcomes identified in the management and social sciences literature, and our research on barriers and facilitators of academic mentorship. These concepts will inform data collection and analysis. To identify useful models by which to design, implement and evaluate KT mentorship, we will review the social sciences, management, and nursing literature from 1990 to current, browse tables of contents of relevant journals, and scan the references of all eligible studies. Eligibility screening and data extraction will be performed independently by two investigators. Semi-structured interviews will be used to collect information about KT needs, views on mentorship as a knowledge sharing strategy, preferred KT mentoring program elements, and perceived barriers from clinician health services researchers representing different disciplines. Qualitative analysis of transcripts will be performed independently by two investigators, who will meet to compare findings and resolve differences through discussion. Data will be shared and discussed with the research team, and their feedback incorporated into final reports.

Discussion

These findings could be used by universities, research institutes, funding agencies, and professional organizations in Canada and elsewhere to develop, implement, and evaluate mentorship for KT research and practice. This research will establish a theoretical basis upon which we and others can compare the cost-effectiveness of interventions that enhance KT mentorship. If successful, this program of research may increase knowledge about, confidence in, and greater utilization of KT processes, and the quality and quantity of KT research, perhaps ultimately leading to better implementation and adoption of recommended health care services.

What does it mean to be a family physician?: Exploratory study with family medicine residents from 3 countries

OBJECTIVE

To explore the conceptions that family medicine residents from 3 countries have of the roles and responsibilities of family physicians in order to gain a better understanding of challenges that might transcend the specific contexts of different health care systems.

DESIGN

Qualitative study using focus groups.

SETTING

Resident training programs in France, Belgium, and Canada.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 57 residents in the last year of training.

METHOD

Ten focus groups were conducted in 3 countries: 2 in France, 3 in Belgium, and 5 in Canada. All focus groups were held in different cities, with residents registered in different universities in France and Canada and with residents from the same university in Belgium. The study was informed by Abbott's conceptual framework on the system of professions. Each 90-minute focus group was moderated by the same researchers. The transcripts were analyzed according to the immersion-crystallization method.

MAIN FINDINGS

Respondents shared common conceptions of the family physician's role: continuity of care and patient advocacy were seen as the foundations of the discipline. Respondents also shared a sense of discomfort about how accessible they were expected to be for patients and about the scope of family practice. They saw family medicine as flexible and reported that they strove for balance between their professional and personal life goals. All respondents strongly believed that their profession was undervalued by the medical schools where they trained.

CONCLUSION

This exploratory study suggests that there are more similarities than differences in the understanding that future family physicians from different countries have of their discipline and of their careers. We observed a tension between a desire to develop a "new general practice" and the more traditional vision of the discipline. The culture in academic settings appears to contribute to the persistent low appeal of being a primary care physician.

Six essential roles of health promotion research centres: the Atlantic Canada experience

Over the past 20 years, the federal government and universities across Canada have directed resources towards the development of university-based health promotion research centres. Researchers at health promotion research centres in Canada have produced peer-reviewed papers and policy documents based on their work, but no publications have emerged that focus on the specific roles of the health promotion research centres themselves. The purpose of this paper is to propose a framework, based on an in-depth examination of one centre, to help identify the unique roles of health promotion research centres and to clarify the value they add to promoting health and advancing university goals. Considering the shifting federal discourse on health promotion over time and the vulnerability of social and health sciences to changes in research funding priorities, health promotion research centres in Canada and elsewhere may need to articulate their unique roles and contributions in order to maintain a critical focus on health promotion research. The authors briefly describe the Atlantic Health Promotion Research Centre (AHPRC), propose a framework that illustrates six essential roles of health promotion research centres and describe the policy contexts and challenges of health promotion research centres. The analysis of research and knowledge translation activities over 15 years at AHPRC sheds light on the roles that health promotion research centres play in applied research. The conclusion raises questions regarding the value of university-based research centres and challenges to their sustainability.

Improving access to dementia care: development and evaluation of a rural and remote memory clinic

The availability, accessibility and acceptability of services are critical factors in rural health service delivery. In Canada, the aging population and the consequent increase in prevalence of dementia challenge the ability of many rural communities to provide specialized dementia care. This paper describes the development, operation and evaluation of an interdisciplinary memory clinic designed to improve access to diagnosis and management of early stage dementia for older persons living in rural and remote areas in the Canadian province of Saskatchewan. We describe the clinic structure, processes and clinical assessment, as well as the evaluation research design and instruments. Finally, we report the demographic characteristics and geographic distribution of individuals referred during the first three years.

It's all about relationships: a qualitative study of health researchers' perspectives of conducting interdisciplinary health research

Background

Interdisciplinary research has been promoted as an optimal research paradigm in the health sciences, yet little is known about how researchers experience interdisciplinarity in practice. This study sought to determine how interdisciplinary research was conceptualized and operationalized from the researcher's perspective and to better understand how best to facilitate interdisciplinary research success.

Methods

Key informant interviews were conducted with health researchers with expertise or experience in conducting interdisciplinary research. Interviews were completed either in person or over the telephone using a semi-structured interview guide. Data collection occurred simultaneously with data analysis so that emerging themes could be explored in subsequent interviews. A content analysis approach was used.

Results

Nineteen researchers took part in this study. Interdisciplinary research was conceptualized disparately between participants, and there was modest attention towards operationalization of interdisciplinary research. There was one overriding theme, "It's all about relationships", that emerged from the data. Within this theme, there were four related subthemes: 1) Involvement in interdisciplinary research; 2) Why do I do interdisciplinary research?; 3) Managing and fostering interdisciplinary relationships; and 4) The prickly side to interdisciplinary research. Together, these themes suggest that the choice to conduct interdisciplinary research, though often driven by the research question, is highly influenced by interpersonal and relationship-related factors. In addition, researchers preferred to engage in interdisciplinary research with those that they had already established relationships and where their role in the research process was clearly articulated. A focus on relationship building was seen as a strong facilitator of interdisciplinary success.

Conclusion

Many health researchers experienced mixed reactions towards their involvement in interdisciplinary research. A well thought-out rationale for interdisciplinary research, and strategies to utilize the contribution of each researcher involved were seen as facilitators towards maximizing the benefits that could be derived from interdisciplinary research.

Ethics in research

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review will examine research ethics in the context of globalization of clinical trials and recent rapid developments in bioscience. It will focus on international ethical guidelines and the functions of research ethics review boards in research governance. Consent issues in genetic research, which must comply with privacy laws by protecting confidentiality and privacy of personal health data, will be discussed.

RECENT FINDINGS

There has been a rapid expansion of genomic and proteonomic research and biotechnology in the last decade. International ethical guidelines have been updated and the bioscience industry has developed ethics policies. At the same time, problems in academic anesthesia in the US and UK have been identified, leading to recommendations to train physician-scientists in anesthesia to stimulate research activity in the future. Anesthesiologists are joining interdisciplinary research teams and the concept of evidence-based translational research is emerging.

SUMMARY

Anesthesiologists are moving towards participation in interdisciplinary research teams. They are well placed to speed the translation of research discovery into clinical practice and provide evidence-based perioperative care. This review provides the ethical framework that anesthesiologists will need to meet the challenges of this changing pattern of practice.