Abstract
The engagement of frontline practitioners in the production of research‐derived
knowledge is often advocated. Doing so can address perceived gaps between what is known from research and what happens in clinical practice. Engagement practices span a continuum, from co‐production approaches underpinned by principles of equality and power sharing to those which can minimalize practitioners' contributions to the knowledge production process. We observed a conceptual gap in published healthcare literature that labels or defines practitioners' meaningful contribution to the research process.
We, therefore, aimed to develop the concept of “Researcher Practitioner Engagement” in the context of academically initiated healthcare research in the professions of nursing, midwifery, occupational therapy, physiotherapy, and speech and language therapy.
Guided by Schwartz‐Barcott et al.'s hybrid model of concept development, published examples were analyzed to establish the attributes, antecedents, and consequences of this type of engagement. Academic researchers (n = 17) and frontline practitioners (n=8) with relevant experience took part in online focus groups to confirm, eliminate, or elaborate on these proposed concept components. Combined analysis of theoretical and focus group data showed that the essence of this form of engagement is that practitioners' clinical knowledge is valued from a study's formative stages. The practitioner's clinical perspectives inform problem‐solving and decision‐making in study activities and
enhance the professional and practice relevance of a study. The conceptual model produced from the study findings forms a basis to guide engagement practices, future concept testing, and empirical evaluation of engagement practices.
knowledge is often advocated. Doing so can address perceived gaps between what is known from research and what happens in clinical practice. Engagement practices span a continuum, from co‐production approaches underpinned by principles of equality and power sharing to those which can minimalize practitioners' contributions to the knowledge production process. We observed a conceptual gap in published healthcare literature that labels or defines practitioners' meaningful contribution to the research process.
We, therefore, aimed to develop the concept of “Researcher Practitioner Engagement” in the context of academically initiated healthcare research in the professions of nursing, midwifery, occupational therapy, physiotherapy, and speech and language therapy.
Guided by Schwartz‐Barcott et al.'s hybrid model of concept development, published examples were analyzed to establish the attributes, antecedents, and consequences of this type of engagement. Academic researchers (n = 17) and frontline practitioners (n=8) with relevant experience took part in online focus groups to confirm, eliminate, or elaborate on these proposed concept components. Combined analysis of theoretical and focus group data showed that the essence of this form of engagement is that practitioners' clinical knowledge is valued from a study's formative stages. The practitioner's clinical perspectives inform problem‐solving and decision‐making in study activities and
enhance the professional and practice relevance of a study. The conceptual model produced from the study findings forms a basis to guide engagement practices, future concept testing, and empirical evaluation of engagement practices.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Article number | NUR-20-582.R2 |
Pages (from-to) | 534-547 |
Number of pages | 14 |
Journal | Research in Nursing and Health |
Volume | 44 |
Issue number | 3 |
Early online date | 28 Mar 2021 |
DOIs | |
Publication status | Published (in print/issue) - 1 Jun 2021 |
Bibliographical note
Funding Information:This project was funded by the Department for Education and Learning (DEL), Northern Ireland.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2021 The Authors. Research in Nursing & Health Published by Wiley Periodicals LLC
Keywords
- concept formation
- focus groups
- practitioner engagement
- research personnel
- General Nursing
- Decision Making
- Humans
- Focus Groups
- Problem Solving
- Cooperative Behavior
- Health Services Research
- Research Personnel
- Health Personnel
- Internet