Search

The COVID-19 pandemic, and ensuing physical distancing measures, poses challenges for researchers in the field of interprofessional care. Pandemic management has highlighted the centrality of interprofessional working to effective healthcare delivery during crises. It is essential to find ways to maintain interprofessional research that has commenced, while also designing research to capture important learning from pandemic management and response. However, it also creates opportunities for new research projects and novel research designs. This discussion paper explores ways of adapting existing research methodologies and outlines potential avenues for new research. Specifically, considerations to bear in mind when designing interprofessional research during the pandemic include research ethics and integrity, research design, data collection methods, research opportunities, implications and limitations. Interprofessional research can continue to make a valuable contribution in informing global responses to COVID-19 and in planning for future global health crises. We call for, insofar as possible, for interprofessional research to continue to be developed during this time. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: Bibliometric analysis of the nursing literature can provide insights into the current state and dynamics of the nursing profession. This study aimed to assess global nursing‐related research activity from 2009 to 2020. Method: The corpus of nursing papers was harvested from the Web of Science Core Collection database. The bibliometric indicators and VOSviewer mapping of the retrieved papers were presented. Results: The search found 109,782 papers, and 39.0% of papers reported funded studies. Publication numbers were increasing. The USA was the most prolific country in literature production and international collaboration in nursing studies. International cooperation in nursing research was dominated by developed regions. Among the 20 most cited articles, 75% were published in first quartile journals, and review papers received a higher number of citations than original research articles. Author keyword analysis identified 'quality of life', 'mental health', 'nursing students' education' and 'adolescent' as common nursing focus topics. Conclusions: The publication trend of nursing papers was positive. However, several problems were associated with nursing research activity, including low research funding, regionally centred research activity and inactivity of developing regions in terms of international collaborations, which need to be addressed by policy makers, nursing managers and scholars. Summary statement: What is already known about this topic? Nursing research has developed rapidly worldwide over the years.Little is known about its overall development in recent years. What this paper adds? This study describes the nature of nursing research worldwide in terms of publication numbers, growth trend, geographic locus, international collaborations, the most productive authors, the most cited articles and author keywords analysis. The implications of this paper: The study is important for nursing scholars, managers and professionals to learn about the present status and dynamics of nursing research.The study provides important information for policymakers to allocate research grant that promotes the dissemination of nursing research into the broader scientific community. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The aim of this study was to synthesize previous knowledge about ethics in nurses' interprofessional collaboration in clinical practice. Although healthcare professionals have common goals and shared values, ethical conflicts still arise during patient care. We carried out a meta-synthesis of peer-reviewed papers published in any language from 2013–2019, using both electronic searches, with the CINAHL, PubMed, Scopus, and SocINDEX databases, and manual searches. We identified 4,763 papers and selected six qualitative papers, and three theoretical papers, based on predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria and quality appraisal. The studies came from the USA, Canada, Sweden, Australia, Botswana, and the Netherlands. We found that in ethics studies on nurses' interprofessional collaboration in clinical practice the focus has been on factors that affect how patients receive care. These factors were patients' wishes, whether they were told the truth about their condition, and how different professionals recognized and treated their pain. The focus in the papers we reviewed was on the roles of different professionals during the care process, including ethical conflicts with regard to their aims, commitment, and the balance of power among them and other professions. More research is needed to raise the visibility of how nurses and other professionals recognize, and evaluate, their professional and interprofessional ethics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The aim of this paper is to help writers at all levels improve their likelihood of success in having papers accepted by academic peer-reviewed journals, including the Journal of Interprofessional Care. We discuss the importance of reading both in your own discipline and also more widely across disciplines and fields of study. There are sections on the attributes of good authors, how to choose a journal, types of articles that are published and the structure of these, the contrast between research and evaluation, and how to plan a paper. We stress the importance of reading and complying with a journal's author guidelines and answering the 'so what' question by the end of the article. There is more detail about the main elements of a paper and what should be included in the introduction, methods, results (findings) and discussion to improve the quality of the reporting. As well as content we also focus on the style of writing. We finish with a discussion of the submission and review processes, why papers may be rejected and how to manage decisions on papers. Dissemination of scholarly work is paramount to the advancement of the interprofessional field; we invite authors to consider our advice and in so doing help strengthen the quality and rigor of interprofessional scholarship. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: This study intended to explore the workplace bullying, self‐efficacy and emotional distress of the nursing staff and determine the predictors of nursing staff's emotional distress. Methods: Cross‐sectional and correlation designs were used, collecting data including socio‐demographic data, workplace bullying, self‐efficacy and emotional distress scales. Results: Results showed that the frequency of poor sleep quality in the recent 2 weeks, working in the intensive care centre or emergency room, high workplace bullying and low self‐efficacy were the main predictors of emotional distress in nursing staff. Conclusion: Nursing supervisors are advised to design suitable shift schemes to allow adequate time for nurses to maintain proper rest and develop a safety notification system to give bullied victims the assurance of safety. The design and implementation of the programs are encouraged to improve self‐efficacy among nurses by strengthening the training of social skills, improving employees' communication skills and their relationships with other employees. Summary statement: What is already known about this topic? Nursing workplace bullying can lead to health problems and patient safety problems.What this paper adds? This study provides information about workplace bullying, self‐efficacy and emotional distress in nurses.Poor sleep quality in the recent 2 weeks, working in the intensive care centre or the emergency room, high workplace bullying and low self‐efficacy were the main predictors of emotional distress among nurses.The implications of this paper for policy/practice/research/education Hospital managers should arrange education programs to improve nurses' self‐efficacy to avoid emotional distress.Suitable shift schemes should be designed for the nurses to maintain proper rest, and a safety notification system should be provided to the bullied victims for the assurance of safety. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

With series on conventional television and pay TV platforms now a key element of media consumption, they have gained increasing academic attention in the last decade, both as a main object of study and in combination with other social phenomena. However, the boundaries of this line of research, which draws together researchers from different fields, have become increasingly blurred. This paper undertook a bibliometric investigation to understand how this line of research has come about, what its characteristics are, the main streams within it, and the extent to which the rise in publications reflects a mature and consolidated field of research in its own right. This analysis focused on the development of scientific production on television series indexed by database Scopus between 2010 and 2019 (n = 1,679 documents). More specifically, this study analyzed authorship, journals, national output and international collaboration, co-citation of keywords to ascertain the main intellectual trends in the area and the co-occurrence of references to find out if there is a theoretical body of works that serve as a foundation for this research. The results show symptoms of immaturity, such as a lack of continuity in authority, little concurrence between specialized journals and the most cited authors and works, vagueness in both the keyword clusters and the papers that are often cited together. In addition, a large number of the most cited works come from fields outside Communication that consider television series an accessory aspect of their main theme, such as their impact on the influx of tourists as a result due to the consumption of cultural works. On the other hand, this points to a strong, versatile line of research capable of hosting research on new and old media and related to various topics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

General practices are rooted in the local community and considered to be particularly well‐positioned for engaging in preventive and health‐promoting activities. The overall aim of the scoping review is to identify priorities and gaps in research published in the past 20 years on preventive and health‐promoting activities provided by general practitioners or their teams in general practices in Germany. MEDLINE and Embase databases were systematically searched in November 2020. Papers were selected in dual‐review mode and extracted in single‐review mode. Data analysis was finished by May 2021. In total, 530 papers were included in the synthesis. Little research has been carried out into collaboration opportunities both within the general practice team and in communities as a whole, with specialists (18%), hospitals (9%), and health insurance companies (6%) being the most frequent cooperation partners of GPs. 15%–20% of papers each dealt with 'early detection', 'information provision' and 'cardiovascular prevention'. Secondary (53%) and tertiary prevention (43%) was more often the subject of research than primary (39%) and quaternary prevention (15%). Healthy subjects (26%) were less often studied than people with pre‐existing conditions (42%) and risk factors (48%). Little information was available on preventive activities in terms of gender, young people, migration background, housing conditions or educational background. Personal counselling (15%) was the most frequently described approach to health promotion in general practices, along with printed information materials (10%). This scoping review provides information on which to base targeted interventions and future research that can contribute towards transforming general practices into promoters of health within the community. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: This paper aims to share how the Centre for Ageing and Dementia Research co-designs research within a national programme of work to improve the lives of older adults and those affected by dementia. Through examples of this work, the authors identify the barriers and enablers to participatory approaches and lessons to inform future involvement activities. Design/methodology/approach: This study reflects on implementing the UK National Standards for Public Involvement into practice. Of international relevance, the observations span the research process from research prioritisation and design to research implementation and knowledge exchange. Findings: This study demonstrates the importance of using a relational approach, working toward a common purpose and engaging in meaningful dialogue. Only through offering choice and flexibility and actively learning from one another can co-design lead to synergistic relationships that benefit everyone. Research limitations/implications: Key implications for researchers engaged in patient and public involvement are be receptive to other people's views and acknowledge expertise of those with lived experience alongside those with academic expertise. Training, resources and time are required to effectively support involvement and meaningful relationships. A nominated contact person enables trust and mutual understanding to develop. This is an ongoing collective learning experience that should be embedded throughout the entire research process. Originality/value: This paper demonstrates how the standards are implemented with people who are often excluded from research to influence a national programme of work. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Why you should read this article: • To appreciate the benefits of academic writing retreats for nurses and allied health professionals • To gain practical strategies for promoting productive and effective writing retreats in a range of settings • To understand what effects engaging in writing about research can generate Background: COVID-19 raised the profile of nursing globally, with widespread recognition of nurses' valuable roles during the pandemic. There is a unique opportunity to capitalise on this momentum to support nurses to become more engaged in and disseminate their research widely. One way to enable this is to develop academic writing retreats for nurses. Aim: To report on the development of academic writing retreats to engage nurses in research. Discussion: Four writing retreats were set up in the south of England between September 2019 and April 2021. Two were delivered face to face on hospital premises and two online. The retreats provided uninterrupted time for writing an academic publication, mentorship, peer support networks, and question and answer sessions. The retreats were attended by 42 health professionals, with more than 25 papers published in peer-reviewed journals. The retreats have enabled learning communities to develop, fostering long-term networking opportunities. Conclusion: Academic writing retreats for nurses have widespread benefits, providing nurses with uninterrupted time and space to focus on writing high-quality publications and creating networking opportunities through peer support and mentorship channels. Implications for practice: Academic writing retreats are a simple, yet effective way to get nurses to engage in research by writing about their own spheres of practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents several abstracts which are concerned with medical education, including abstracts on frameworks for learner assessment in medicine, academic dishonesty and ethical reasoning in pharmacy and medical school students and the interprofessional clinical training of medical students.

The counting of papers and citations is fundamental to the assessment of research productivity and impact. In an age of increasing scientific collaboration across national borders, the counting of papers produced by collaboration between multiple countries, and citations of such papers, raises concerns in country-level research evaluation. In this study, we compared the number counts and country ranks resulting from five different counting methods. We also observed inflation depending on the method used. Using the 1989 to 2008 physics papers indexed in ISI's Web of Science as our sample, we analyzed the counting results in terms of paper count (research productivity) as well as citation count and citation-paper ratio (CP ratio) based evaluation (research impact). The results show that at the country-level assessment, the selection of counting method had only minor influence on the number counts and country rankings in each assessment. However, the influences of counting methods varied between paper count, citation count, and CP ratio based evaluation. The findings also suggest that the popular counting method (whole counting) that gives each collaborating country one full credit may not be the best counting method. Straight counting that accredits only the first or the corresponding author or fractional counting that accredits each collaborator with partial and weighted credit might be the better choices. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Context: Given that a significant portion of medical education occurs in various social settings (small groups, large classes, clinical environments), it is critical to examine how group members interact. One type of influence on these interactions is conformity, whereby an individual changes his or her own behaviour to match incorrect responses of others in a group. Conformity to peer pressure has been replicated in experimental research conducted in many countries over the last 60 years. There is newly emerging empirical evidence of this effect in medical education, suggesting that subtle motivations and pressures within a group may prevent students from challenging or questioning information that seems incorrect., Objectives: This narrative review aims to present an overview of theory and findings in research into conformity in the fields of social psychology, business, sociology and aviation theory to demonstrate its direct relevance to medical education and the health professions., Methods: We searched online databases (MEDLINE, PubMed, PsycINFO and ProQuest) from the University of Calgary catalogue. We also searched citations in articles reviewed and references provided by colleagues. We limited our narrative review to publications released between 1950 and 2012., Results: Group conformity behaviour may be one of a number of communication challenges associated with interprofessional care, and may represent a factor contributing to the burden of adverse events. This paper calls for a new programme of research into conformity in medical education that provides systematic empirical evidence of its relevance and applications in education, health care and practice., Conclusions: This review reveals decades of anecdotal and empirical evidence that conformity is a pervasive phenomenon across disciplines. Further research is needed to elucidate which situations pose the greatest risk for the occurrence of conformity, how to manage it in practice and its implications for patient safety., (© 2014 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Introduction: Despite the advancements in Patient and Public Involvement and Engagement (PPIE), the voices of traditionally underserved groups are still poorly reflected in dementia research. This study aimed to report on a PPIE partnership between academics and members of the public from underserved communities to co‐design Forward with Dementia—Social Care, a resource and information website supporting people receiving a dementia diagnosis. Methods: The PPIE partnership was set up in four stages: 1–identifying communities that have been under‐represented from PPIE in dementia research; 2—recruiting PPIE partners from these communities; 3—supporting PPIE partners to become confident to undertake their research roles and 4—undertaking research co‐design activities in an equitable fashion. Results: To address under‐representation from PPIE in dementia research we recruited seven PPIE partners from Black, Asian and other minority ethnic groups; lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer+ communities; remote/rural area; religious minorities and partners living with rare forms of dementia. The partners met regularly throughout the project to oversee new sections for the study website, refine existing content and promote the website within their communities. Conclusion: Strategies can be used to successfully recruit and involve PPIE partners from underserved communities in co‐design activities. These include networking with community leaders, developing terms of reference, setting out 'rules of engagement', and investing adequate resources and time for accessible and equitable involvement. These efforts facilitate the co‐design of research outputs that reflect the diversity and complexity of UK contemporary society. Patient or Public Contribution: This study received support from seven members of the public with lived experience of dementia from communities that have been traditionally underserved in dementia research. These seven members of the public undertook the role of partners in the study. They all equally contributed to the study design, recruitment of participants, development and revision of topic guides for the interviews and development of the website. Three of these partners were also co‐authors of this paper. On top of the activities shared with the other partners, they contributed to write independently of the academic team the section in this paper titled 'Partners' experiences, benefits and challenges of the partnership'. Further, they provided input in other sections of the paper on a par with the other (academic) co‐authors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Social annotation has emerged as a promising educational technology that fosters collaborative reading and discussion of digital resources among learners. While the positive impact of social annotation on students' learning process and performance is widely acknowledged, students' behavioural patterns in social annotation are underexplored. Objectives: This study investigated patterns in students' use of annotation and response behaviours in social annotation activities. We also explored how students' performance in the behavioural, cognitive, emotional, and social dimensions varied based on their behavioural patterns. Methods: We recruited 93 undergraduates who were enrolled in an elective course at a large North American University. Students were tasked with collaboratively annotating the class readings uploaded to Perusall, a social annotation platform, over 7 weeks. We used metaclustering to determine the optimal number of clusters pertaining to student behaviours. We compared the differences among clusters across multiple performance dimensions. Results and Conclusions: Two distinct clusters were identified and defined as initiators and responders. We found that responders had significantly longer active reading time and exhibited greater social annotation effort compared to initiators. However, initiators received more peer acknowledgement, as evidenced by higher upvotes. No significant difference was found in cognitive insight between initiators and responders, but responders demonstrated significantly higher cognitive discrepancy. Additionally, there were no significant differences in positive and negative tones between initiators and responders; however, responders displayed higher levels of prosocial behaviours than initiators. This study has significant practical implications regarding promoting students' collaborative learning experience in social annotation. Lay Description: What is already known about this topic: Annotation and response behaviours are two primary actions in social annotation.Understanding how students navigate through annotations and respond to their peers' contributions is essential for optimizing their learning experience.Social annotation outcomes can be assessed in the behavioural, cognitive, emotional, and social dimensions. What this paper adds: This paper revealed students' behavioural patterns in social annotation activities.This study offered a comprehensive understanding of the various dimensions of performance among students with different behavioural tendencies. Implications for practice and/or policy: The two student clusters, initiators and responders, revealed distinct engagement patterns in social annotation and informed the design of targeted scaffoldings.Responders were not passive learners since they demonstrated significantly longer active reading time, greater social annotation effort, and higher level of prosocial behaviours.Educators might not need to place significant emphasis on monitoring participants' emotional expressions in social annotation.Social annotation platforms should incorporate features that encourage and reward both initiation and response behaviours. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The field of interprofessional research has grown both in size and in importance since the 1970s. In this paper, we use a macrosociological approach and a Bourdieusian theoretical framework to investigate this growth and the changing nature of the field's research. We investigate publication trends at the aggregate (field) level, using an original dataset of 100,488 interprofessional-related articles published between 1970 and 2010 and recorded in the PubMed database. Articles were coded using a list of 638 codes that were then analyzed thematically and longitudinally. Our results are presented in two main sections. Initially, we consider the growth and reach of the interprofessional field. Second, we explore the five different trends ("terminological issues", "rising management rhetoric", "expansion of psychometrics", "shift from individualism to collectivism" and "emerging issues") that emerged out of our thematic analysis of publications over time. These findings are discussed in the light of Bourdieu's framework to provide an indication of what we argue is a growing legitimacy of the field of interprofessional research as a scholarly domain in its own right.

Power dynamics influence every aspect of scientific collaboration. Team power dynamics can be measured by team power level and team power hierarchy. Team power level is conceptualized as the average level of the possession of resources, expertise, or decision‐making authorities of a team. Team power hierarchy represents the vertical differences of the possessions of resources in a team. In Science of Science, few studies have looked at scientific collaboration from the perspective of team power dynamics. This research examines how team power dynamics affect team impact to fill the research gap. In this research, all coauthors of one publication are treated as one team. Team power level and team power hierarchy of one team are measured by the mean and Gini index of career age of coauthors in this team. Team impact is quantified by citations of a paper authored by this team. By analyzing over 7.7 million teams from Science (e.g., Computer Science, Physics), Social Sciences (e.g., Sociology, Library & Information Science), and Arts & Humanities (e.g., Art), we find that flat team structure is associated with higher team impact, especially when teams have high team power level. These findings have been repeated in all five disciplines except Art, and are consistent in various types of teams from Computer Science including teams from industry or academia, teams with different gender groups, teams with geographical contrast, and teams with distinct size. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: This collaborative paper (working together) describes collaborative practice development and research by and with people from the learning disabilities community. This paper aims to show some of the activities which supported the collaborative practice development and research to show and encourage others to do more collaboration. The paper format is based on a previous collaborative paper published in the Tizard Learning Disability Review (Chapman et al., 2013). Design/methodology/approach: The collaborative practice development and feasibility study [1] focuses on an intervention called Keep Safe. This is an intervention for young people with learning disabilities who are 12 years and older and have shown "out-of-control" or harmful sexual behaviour. Findings: The paper gives examples of activities of the Keep Safe Advisory Group in planning, doing and thinking about Keep Safe development and feasibility. The authors list some good things and some difficulties in collaborating. They look at which parts of Frankena et al.'s (2019a) Consensus Statement on how to do inclusive research were done, which ones were not, and why. Social implications: The paper ends with some thoughts about collaborating with people from the learning disabilities community: for people with learning disabilities, practitioners and researchers. Originality/value: The paper is original in its illustration of collaborative practice development and research and measuring the activities against the inclusive research consensus statement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In recent years, the use of collaborative and partnership approaches in health and agricultural research has flourished. Such approaches are frequently adopted to ensure more successful research uptake and to contribute to community empowerment through participatory research practices. At the same time that interest in research partnerships has been growing, publications on methods, models, and guidelines for building these partnerships have proliferated. However, partnership development is not necessarily as straightforward or linear a process as such literature makes it appear, particularly when the research involves divisive or contentious issues. This paper explores prevailing views on research partnerships, and also questions the applicability of partnership models using an emerging research program around gender equity and health in Fair Trade coffee cooperatives in Nicaragua as an example. Moreover, the paper introduces some of the complicated issues facing the authors as they attempt to develop and expand partnerships in this research area. The paper culminates with a series of strategies that the authors plan to use that offer alternative ways of thinking about building research partnerships concerning controversial or complex issues in the field of community health and development.

The aim of this paper is to analyse the sociocultural dynamics underlying collaborative research. The article is based on an international collaborative project on the everyday lives of working families in Italy, Sweden and the USA. The aim of this paper is to show that collaborative research does not necessarily produce collaboration: this is possible only with very strong rules between partners. It proposes a distinction between collaboration and cooperation, and uses this distinction to examine intergroup and intragroup joint activity. Through the analysis of the communicative exchanges occurring between researchers, the paper highlights conditions in which cooperation can become fruitful collaboration.

Background: Interdisciplinary health research is increasingly perceived as an expectation of research institutions and funding bodies within Australia. However, little consideration has been given to the extent to which this re-orientation has produced a new type of researcher--an interdisciplinary health researcher., Discussion: As cross-enrolled postgraduate research students, we assert that we do not have an intellectual home. Rather, we must forge a virtual intellectual home through the process of bridging disciplines. In this paper we explain that this virtual home affords us the role of 'interlockers' in future health research. The interlocker role privileges a breadth of understandings across disciplines, rather than a depth in one., Summary: We conclude by reiterating that there is an undeniable need for interdisciplinary health research, and that the roles and actions of interdisciplinary health researchers need to be better understood and catered for. We therefore call for increased consideration and discussion concerning the future roles and capacities of interdisciplinary health researchers such as ourselves.

The aim of this paper is to explore the issues that present both opportunities and risks when working in an interdisciplinary research project. As the research context changes in the social reform environment, some scientists suggest it is time to forge new scientific working relationships, to open up the boundaries between disciplines. Interdisciplinary research is an alternative approach for nurses who might develop different ways of working with health researchers from other disciplines. The ideas in this paper come from a larger, grounded theory study on interdisciplinary teamwork. The changing research context, the meaning of interdisciplinary working, collaboration, and competence, integrating different disciplinary perspectives, interprofessional learning opportunities, and the relevance for nurses are explored in relation to interdisciplinary researching. Interdisciplinary researching is complex and potentially risky; however, it does offer nurses the opportunities for professional growth, development, and research work satisfaction. Many nurses are already well-trained researchers and might consider developing roles as interdisciplinary research project managers as well.

Purpose: Conducting well designed pharmacy resident research projects has inherent challenges including inadequate sample size, a lack of time, decreased generalizability, and inadequate research support. A way to overcome these barriers is through conducting multicenter research projects. However, this approach may also bring new challenges. Therefore, the purpose of this article is to provide a general approach for pharmacy preceptors and leaders on implementation of multicenter residency research. Summary: This article includes a general approach to conducting multicenter research from experienced individuals based upon their successes and failures. A timeline-based format is presented to lay the groundwork for implementation of this approach. Key topics in this paper include establishing a research overview committee, research question development, Institutional Review Board considerations, site recruitment, authorship discussions, resident coordination, protocol development, data collection, manuscript development, and considerations after residency. The approach maintains a critical focus on the individual residents ability to achieve American Society of Health-System Pharmacists accreditation standards for conducting research while operating in a collaborative manner. Conclusion: Conducting multicenter residency research projects requires a team-based approach and advanced planning. This approach has the potential to improve pharmacy resident project quality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper discusses how to enhance the research-to-practice exchange in the addictions field, while maintaining a balance with the demands and complexities of program delivery and policy development. It outlines the evolution of the concept of evidence-based practice, discusses the practical limitations and ways to improve transferring research to practice, and provides examples of research transfer activities in Canada. Practical limitations to research transfer include individual, organizational, and community factors. A strategic approach to research transfer includes addressing these limitations by combining dissemination activities with interventions such as individual instruction and incentives; building relationships among researchers, practitioners, and populations served; and obtaining commitments at a systemic level from funding bodies and research organizations to support research transfer. The potential is noted for the concept of workforce development to facilitate research transfer at organizational levels. The conclusion shown in this paper is that the tools and concept of evidence-based practice can lead the way to strengthening addictions programs and policies, and the development of a conceptual model for addiction research transfer in Canada would be a useful next step.

This paper is a posthumous publication of a Steven McNabb's presentation to the 1993 annual meeting of the American Anthropological Association. In it he described how the Social Transitions in the North research project involved explicit cross-cultural contact or participation at three levels: between scientists and public agencies; between scientists and study populations; and between research teams themselves. He explored a few of the entanglements and opportunities that arise in those interactions. Dr. McNabb urged northern researchers to avoid embracing rigid standards, for they will result in more entanglements and fewer opportunities. On the otherhand, if researchers are open-minded, they will be able to treat each dilemma as an opportunity that will make for better science.

Cigarette smoking is the largest preventable cause of death and morbidity in the United States. Heightened recognition of this public health concern has led researchers from multiple and varied disciplines to address this complex and multidimensional behavior. The need for an alternative research paradigm, focusing on a transdisciplinary approach that integrates work across disciplines in order to advance the field most quickly, has been identified. This recognized need led to the development of the Transdisciplinary Tobacco Use Research Centers (TTURC) initiative, funded jointly by the National Cancer Institute, the National Institute on Drug Abuse, and The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. This paper discusses the formation and early implementation stages of the initiative, including meetings that led to the development of the TTURCs, funders' and research centers' perspectives on implementation, and early observations about the products of the initiative.

Transdisciplinary research involves the integration of measures and methods across diverse response systems and levels of analysis, with that integration occurring via a synthesis of theories and models of different scientific disciplines. This paper first discusses the need for transdisciplinary research. The paper then articulates a model to guide the comprehensive evaluation of treatments for tobacco use and discusses how transdisciplinary research might be integrated into this treatment evaluation model. The potential benefits and costs of a transdisciplinary approach are discussed, along with selected research projects from the Transdisciplinary Tobacco Use Research Centers.

Aim: The aim was to describe and discuss the process of establishing and leading a cross‐institutional partnership to regain focus on and reconceptualize fundamental nursing care in clinical practice, nursing education and research in one region in Denmark. Design: A discursive paper. The case study method is used as an adapted frame for describing and discussing the establishment and strategic decisions of a cross‐institutional partnership. Data sources This discursive paper draws on the authors' experiences with establishing a cross‐institutional partnership and related literature. Implications for nursing: The paper addresses the challenges surrounding fundamental care. Establishing cross‐institutional partnerships can contribute to a reconceptualization of fundamental care and initiate discussions on what nursing care is and requires. The paper provides an example of how a cross‐institutional partnership can be established and describes and discusses the opportunities and challenges in doing so. Conclusion: A key step in the process of establishing a partnership is to actively involve key stakeholders and stimulate their commitment to investing time and resources in the partnership. This requires commitment, clear strategic direction and leadership. Another key step is engaging and informing executive management leaders, and continuously nurture their interest. Impact The paper aims to inform clinicians, educators, nursing leaders, researchers and policy makers on how to organize a formal partnership structured around a strategic research, development and implementation programme where the focal point of the collaboration is improving nursing care by integrating the conceptual FoC framework. No patient or public contribution: Patients, service users, caregivers or members of the public were not involved in this study as it is a discursive paper based on the authors' experiences and relevant literature. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: Partnered Pharmacist Medication Charting (PPMC) in patients admitted under general medical units has been shown to reduce medication errors. The aim of this study is to evaluate the impact of the PPMC model on medication errors in patients admitted under cancer units in Victorian hospitals. Methods: A prospective cohort study comparing cohorts before and after the introduction of PPMC was conducted. This included a 2-month pre-intervention phase and 3-month intervention phase. PPMC was implemented during the intervention phase as new model of care that enabled credentialed pharmacists to chart all admission medications, including pre-admission or new medications and cancer therapies, in collaboration with the admitting medical officer. The proportion of medication charts with at least one error was the primary outcome measure. Results: Seven health services across Victoria were included in the study. The majority of health services were using paper-based prescribing systems for oncology. Of the 547 patients who received standard medical medication charting, 331 (60.5%) had at least one medication error identified compared to 18 out of 416 patients (4.3%) using the PPMC model (p < 0.001). The median (interquartile range) inpatient length of stay was 5 (2.9–10.6) days in pre-intervention and 4.9 (2.9–11) days in intervention (p = 0.88). In the intervention arm, 42 patients had cancer therapy charted by a pharmacist with no errors. Conclusions: PPMC was successfully scaled into cancer units as a collaborative medication safety strategy. The model was associated with significantly lower rates of medication errors, including cancer therapies. PPMC should be adopted more widely in cancer units in Australia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: Career Pathways initiatives in Vocational Rehabilitation (VR) have emerged as a crucial strategy for enhancing quality employment outcomes among individuals with disabilities. This paper conducts a comprehensive examination of the integration of Career Pathways within VR, emphasizing its significance in aligning vocational goals with evolving labor market demands. OBJECTIVE: Drawing from the innovative Career Pathways initiatives introduced by the Rehabilitation Services Administration (RSA), this paper addresses the RSA Career Pathways Demonstration Initiatives from 2015 to 2019 alongside the ongoing Disability Innovation Fund-Career Advancement Initiative Model Demonstration Project. The paper also discusses the strengthening of Career Pathways through the development of high-quality Individualized Plans for Employment and program evaluation. METHODS: This study utilized a modified exploratory case study approach to examine past and present career pathways initiatives in state VR agencies. Data were gathered from publicly available documentation and archival records, focusing on 12 cases from two national initiatives: the RSA Career Pathways Demonstration Initiatives (2015–2019) and the Disability Innovation Fund-Career Advancement Initiative Model Demonstration Project (2021–2026). RESULTS: The study reveals a substantial, positive impact on employment outcomes for individuals with disabilities through Career Pathways in VR programs, facilitated by the integration of adaptable pathways, individualized planning, and program evaluation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Problem: An important aspect of the work that takes place in and across our Aboriginal Health and Ageing research group is about building partnerships between Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples and non‐Indigenous people. Partnerships are created between colleagues and co‐researchers as well as with community Elders, Aboriginal community‐controlled organisations, community groups and associations and individuals. Setting: To fully realise this has required an introspective look at the way we function as a team of Aboriginal researchers and non‐Indigenous researchers working together. It has challenged us to explore and determine our shared visions and shared outcomes and to develop strong, enduring and authentic partnerships by putting culture at the centre of everything we do. Key measures for improvement: This wisdom‐led approach has fostered the development of a shared narrative about research WITH Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities and a shared language of research collaboration. Strategies and effects of change: This paper aims to provide an opportunity to reflect on the key elements of co‐design which have underpinned our work together across cultures both within team and within community. Lessons learnt This paper will provide lived examples of the co‐design and co‐creation process utilised by our team in working with community. It will further share a model which underpins these experiences. It provides a framework to refer to and reflect upon, which commits to working with shared respect, shared meaning, shared knowledge and an enriched experience of collaboratively working and walking and learning together. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Engagement of frontline practitioners by academic researchers in the research process is believed to afford benefits toward closing the research practice gap. However, little is known about if and how academic researchers engage nurses, midwives, or therapists in research activities or if evidence supports these claims of positive impact. Method: A scoping review was undertaken using the Arksey and O'Malley (2005) framework to identify the extent to which this phenomenon has been considered in the literature. Results: An iterative search carried out in CINAHL, Pubmed, Medline, and Embase retrieved 32 relevant papers published 2000 to 2017, with the majority from the last 2-years. Retained papers described or evaluated active engagement of a practitioner from nursing, midwifery, and therapy disciplines in at least one stage of a research project other than as a study participant. Engagement most often took place in one research activity with few examples of engagement throughout the research process. Limited use of theory and variations in terms used to describe practitioner engagement by researchers was observed. Subjective perspectives of practitioners' experiences and a focus on challenges and benefits were the most prominently reported outcomes. Few attempts were found to establish effects which could support claims that practitioner engagement can enhance the use of findings or impact health outcomes. Conclusion: It is recommended that a culture of practitioner engagement is cultivated by developing guiding theory, establishing consistent terminology, and building an evidence base through empirical evaluations which provide objective data to support claims that this activity can positively influence the research practice gap. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Advances in health equity rely on representation of diverse groups in population health research samples. Despite progress in the diversification of research samples, continued expansion to include systematically excluded groups is needed to address health inequities. One such group that is infrequently represented in population health research are adults with intellectual disability. Individuals with intellectual disability experience pervasive health disparities. Representation in population health research is crucial to determine the root causes of inequity, understand the health of diverse populations, and address health disparities. The purpose of this paper was to develop recommendations for researchers to increase the accessibility of university health research and to support the inclusion of adults with intellectual disability as participants in health research. Methods: A comprehensive literature review, consultation with the university ethics review board, and review of United States federal regulations was completed to identify barriers to research participation for individuals with intellectual disability. A collaborative stakeholder working group developed recommendations and products to increase the accessibility of university research for participants with intellectual disability. Results: Eleven key barriers to research participation were identified including gaps in researchers' knowledge, lack of trust, accessibility and communication challenges, and systematic exclusion among others. Together the stakeholder working group compiled seven general recommendations for university health researchers to guide inclusion efforts. Recommendations included: 1) address the knowledge gap, 2) build community partnerships, 3) use plain language, 4) simplify consent and assent processes, 5) establish research capacity to consent, 6) offer universal supports and accommodations, and 7) practice accessible dissemination. In addition, four products were created as part of the stakeholder working group to be shared with researchers to support the inclusion of participants with intellectual disability. 1) Supports I Need Checklist, 2) Plain language glossary of health and research terms, 3) Understanding Consent and Assent in Plain Language, 4) Easy-Read Paper Template. Conclusion: Community members and individuals with intellectual disability want to be included in research and are eager to engage as research participants. It is the responsibility of the researcher to open the door to university health research. The recommendations discussed in this paper could increase accessibility for a broader range of research participants and, in particular, promote the inclusion of individuals with intellectual disability to advance health equity in population health research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: This research paper presents a cross‐sectional study that examinefs the preferences of students for hybrid teaching and learning scenarios. Unlike previous studies that merely describe hybrid scenarios, this research prioritizes them, offering evidence‐based findings for informed policy decisions. Methods: The data collection method involved eight choice‐based tasks using the conjoint analysis technique conducted with 'Sawtooth' software. The study surveyed students at a mid‐sized university across four departments in Central Switzerland. The sample analysed in this article comprised 319 respondents from the Lucerne School of Business. Results and Conclusions: Our survey found that students' own location during a teaching session played a significant role in determining participation preferences, followed by that of the lecturer. Factors that influenced students' preferences whether to attend onsite or online include workload, didactical format, perceived level of difficulty, student residence, and semester. Forms of hybrid collaboration and student–student interaction did not significantly influence student preferences. Takeaways: The value of this study lies in its evidence‐based findings for specific hybrid scenarios, which can provide useful insights for policymakers in degree programs and faculty in hybrid classrooms. This study is one of only a few to use conjoint analysis with such a high respondent rate to determine student preferences for hybrid attendance. Lay Description: What is currently known about this topic?: Student demand for hybrid teaching scenarios remains high, while many faculty find the scenario technically challenging.Opinions as to the precise features of 'hybrid' vary widely.No clear understanding of the conditions under which students will decide to attend any given class.Demand for additional exchange among online students is recommended in the literature, but often not implemented. What does this paper add?: The study uses conjoint analysis to simulate how students make attendance decisions.The study shows empirically which factors are most important to determine students' attendance.Two‐thirds of the students surveyed prefer an online option.Group composition and informal exchange do not significantly impact students' attendance preferences. Implications for practice/or policy: Students appreciate the flexibility of online learning but expect lecturers to be onsite.Difficult subjects are more likely to be attended onsite.Student residence, workload, degree program, and semester impact students' attendance preferences.No additional infrastructure is needed to encourage exchange among students. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Radiotherapy is the main treatment modality in cancer. There is sparse knowledge on how patients with cancer experience their radiotherapy trajectory, and which factors might be associated with patients' experiences. Objectives: The aim of the present study was to explore how adults with cancer receiving radiotherapy evaluate the quality of their care, utilizing a patient-reported experience measure, and how patient- and service-related characteristics are associated with their evaluation. Methods: An explorative cross-sectional study using a self-completed questionnaire to assess patients' radiotherapy experiences was performed. Participants were recruited consecutively, within their last week of treatment, from two different hospitals in Norway from January 2021 to January 2022. Four hundred and eighty paper questionnaires were distributed to recruited patients, 240 at each hospital. Questionnaires were self-completed at home and returned by mail. The instrument person-centered coordinated care experience questionnaire (P3CEQ) was used. In addition to this, participants completed the European Organization of Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-C30 (EORTC QLQ-C30) and The Sense of Coherence 13 scale (SOC-13). Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, parametric tests, and unadjusted/adjusted linear regression models were estimated. Results: The study included 373 patients. Patients evaluated quality of care in terms of P3CEQ scores, with a mean score of 19.5 (standard deviation = 5.4). Lowest scores were identified in areas concerning person-centeredness and service coordination. There were no significant differences in P3CEQ scores between the younger and older groups. Having a partner and better SOC-13 scores were independently associated with the overall patient-reported experience score, whereas age was not. Conclusion: Patient-reported experience scores indicate that improvements are needed in some areas, such as informing and involving patients in the planning and coordination of their care. Findings suggest paying special attention to patients without a partner to offer patients the best possible care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of African Journal of Reproductive Health is the property of Women's Health & Action Research Centre and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Research involving international research communities has been advocated in the field of behavior analysis (Dymond et al., 2000; Martin et al., 2016). The purpose of the present study was to report the status of behavioral research in mainland China, Hong Kong, and Taiwan, in terms of number of publications, types of research, and frequency of collaboration with international researchers. Fifteen behavioral journals were selected from the list by Cooper et al. (2020). These were searched by hand to find publications conducted in or authored by researchers from mainland China, Hong Kong, and Taiwan dating from each journal's inception to December 2021. The earliest publication we found appeared in 1980 in The Psychological Record. Over the following four decades (1980–1989; 1990–1999; 2000–2009; 2010–2021), the number of publications per decade increased dramatically and continues in recent years to rise. Publications include research reports, review papers, and conceptual articles, with the majority being basic research reports published in Behavioral Processes. Approximately half the publications involve collaboration with international researchers, mostly in North America. Implications for behavioral research, practice, and policy in mainland China, Hong Kong, and Taiwan are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Accessible summary: What is known on the subject?: Between policing and health, there are many shared issues. Mental health distress and crises and caring for people who may be vulnerable are priority areas.Working together in partnership is challenging, and fragmented systems and processes are the result. This leads to poor experiences for the police, health professions and the public. What the paper adds to existing knowledge?: This paper describes an event that brought together 26 stakeholders involved in law enforcement and public health.The aim of this work was to identify the biggest shared challenges that they experience in their day to day jobs.The five key priorities were as follows: vulnerability; mental health crisis; decision‐making around assessment and triage across professional groups and professional roles; peer support and organizational well‐being; and information and data sharing. What are the implications for practice?: This paper demonstrates the strength of bringing partners together throughout law enforcement and public health, making proper time to actually discuss the "big issues" which affect them, how they each experience these issues, and how they might have overcome these within their own professions.Only through working together as partners and having everyone on the same page with the shared priorities can we really start to make a difference in the areas and with the people who matter.The focus on "vulnerability" and "mental health crisis" demonstrates the complexity of the issues between the professions, and that they need to find effective ways to work together to support people.No one professional group can solve inter‐professional challenges alone. Introduction: Law enforcement professions now assume more responsibility for tackling mental health issues alongside public health colleagues than ever before. The term "vulnerability" is frequently used within Law Enforcement and Public Health (LEPH) to identify those requiring emergency mental health care. However, there are ongoing challenges within LEPH to determine whose responsibility this is. Aim: To co‐create the most important priorities for LEPH research in Scotland. Method: The paper describes a collaborative workshop which brought together an Expert Advisory Group (EAG) of 26 senior stakeholders, from academia, policing, mental health nursing, psychiatry, paramedics, emergency medicine, people with lived experience, policy makers and third sector. Results: The five key priorities included: vulnerability; mental health crisis; decision‐making around assessment and triage across professional groups and professional roles; peer support and organizational well‐being; and information and data sharing. Discussion: The paper discusses the EAG group event as a co‐production process, focusing on how key LEPH research priorities were derived. Implications for practice: This paper demonstrates the inextricable link between co‐production and co‐creation of value via EAG group consensus on LEPH research priorities. Shared vision and professional will are not enough to ensure progress: there must also be shared policy, knowledge and access. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Peer observation of teaching has for long been defended as a valuable device of professional and institutional development in higher education, but is almost unexplored at primary- and secondary-level schools. This paper introduces a model for multidisciplinary peer observation of teaching that has been developed and implemented in a professional development programme in two Portuguese school clusters of basic and secondary education in collaboration with its teachers. After four years of developing the programme in these school clusters, a case study was conducted through a qualitative analysis of observation guides completed throughout the years (N = 563) to identify perceived effects of participating in the programme for both teacher professional development and reflective practices. The programme emerged as a powerful initiative to foster teacher collaboration, innovation, and reflection for improving practices. Implications related to current national curriculum and educational policies are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: This study aimed to explore and understand the barriers perceived by Italian nurses to adopting self‐monitoring for managing oral anticoagulation in real‐life settings. Background: Barriers to self‐monitoring implementation for managing oral anticoagulation have been poorly described. Design: The study had a qualitative descriptive and exploratory design with a hybrid approach. Methods: A literature review was conducted to identify a priori barriers (deductive approach), while a small and semi‐structured focus group discussion was performed to explore the contextual barriers experienced by Italian nurses (inductive approach). A classic content analysis technique was adopted. Data were collected in 2019. Findings Two main categories were identified. Organizational barriers referred to the lack of inter‐professional collaboration and health‐care system strategies to provide clinical pathways for self‐monitoring. Individual barriers encompassed professional characteristics (e.g. university background, professional knowledge, continuum education and accountability/responsibility) and patient characteristics (e.g. patient health literacy and knowledge, engagement/empowerment and educational programmes). Finally, unwarranted clinical variation in oral anticoagulation management arose as a barrier determined by organizational and individual elements. Conclusions: The results of this study pointed out an urgent public health issue in addressing barriers influencing self‐monitoring practice and in sustaining care models that might enhance the quality improvement of self‐monitoring for managing oral anticoagulation. Summary statement: What is already known about this topic? Anticoagulation therapy is one of the leading chronic treatments worldwide to prevent stroke in atrial fibrillation patients.Self‐monitoring is a valuable option to further improve the quality of anticoagulation surveillance and patient medication adherence compared to standard care models.Thus far, the barriers underpinning self‐monitoring implementation experienced by Italian nurses are mainly unexplored.What does this paper add? This study is the first Italian description regarding the main barriers perceived by Italian nurses to adopting SM in patients treated using oral anticoagulation therapy.Organizational barriers refer to the lack of inter‐professional collaboration and health‐care system strategies to provide clinical pathways for self‐monitoring.Individual barriers encompass professional characteristics and patient characteristics, and unwarranted clinical variation arose as a barrier determined by both organizational and individual barriers.The implications of this paper Description of the main barriers perceived by Italian nurses to adopt self‐monitoring of oral anticoagulation is required to prioritize policies and system‐level interventions.Health institutions, patient associations and scientific societies should develop policies that enhance the continuum of professional education of nurses regarding self‐monitoring for oral anticoagulation.Integrated care models where nurses have a leadership role in providing self‐monitoring practice are required to implement self‐monitoring widely. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study undertakes a bibliometric analysis, science mapping, and visualization of the consequences of marital union dissolution on the household members, including parents, children, and other relations. We also analyze the temporal trends of the scientific production and citation of authorsand sources, and institutions/countries' collaborations using data from published documents indexed on SCOPUS within the last four decades. The paper highlights five outcomes. First, there is an upward trend in scientific production on divorce and the consequences, which mirrors the increasing divorce rate in different cultures and societies. Second, the clusters of terms identify various adverse effects of divorce on the household members, including a severe economic impact on women and children. Even the dissolution of bad marriage carries significant emotional and psychological pains on the household members. Third, parental divorce can constitute an adverse childhood experience with potentially long-term consequences in some cases where the offspring cannot recover from the emotional trauma. Fourth, divorce can cause health problems, including social, behavioral, psychological, and mental health problems to the parents and children, and economic challenges. Fifth, the results using network analysis show that the consequences of divorce are not linear but multi-directional. Finally, most research output originates from countries with a high divorce rate. The study reveals upward trends in the literature production, the divorce rate across all marriage groups and social status, and religious groups. The paper contributes to integrating scholarship in divorce consequences. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper explores the Dementia Enquirers approach to dementia research, and the 10 local projects which have been funded in the first wave of the programme. The paper is written by six people with dementia with expertise by experience, supported by a traditional academic with expertise by research. This co-production enables the voices of people with dementia to be heard, and expands the field of disability studies. The authors discuss problems with traditional academic research, and the different ways that people with dementia go about research. Two examples of research projects led by people with dementia are discussed. The paper explores difficulties people with dementia have had with formal research ethics procedures and how they propose to do things differently. In conclusion, the authors challenge mainstream dementia research to do things differently, and to understand the potential contributions of people with dementia. People with dementia can conduct research People with dementia understand ethics and can come to considered judgements about capacity, consent and the risk of harm. People with dementia may sometimes enjoy advantages in their ways of working Mainstream research and research governance needs to adapt, if people with dementia are to be included. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study conducted the bibliometric analysis of the journal "ALIS" and its comparison to other journals worldwide and in India. The data were sourced from the Scopus database with the help of advanced searching from 2018 to 2021, in which 108 papers were received for the study. This study studies the authorship pattern and the extent of collaboration. Total citations received, most prolific author and country's contribution, highest cited paper, and year-wise productivity of the journal The results reveal that India is the highest contributing country, i.e., from 2018 to 2021. Sri Lanka is the second-leading contributing country, and Iran is in third place. The extent of collaboration is 0.71 between authors. Four authors have published four articles each during this tenure. If we count the year-wise productivity of the journal, 2021 is the leading year both in terms of publication and the number of citations received. It found that in 2020, the journal's rank will be 110, which will continue increasing. It also reveals the top 10 ranking in the database, in which the International Journal of Information Management scored the first rank. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: There are few meaningful frameworks or toolkits that exist for involvement with young people. Coproduction is a more recent patient and public involvement (PPI) approach that emphasizes the importance of power‐sharing, to set young people as equal partners in the research process. This paper explores the successes and challenges encountered by one coproduced PPI space for young people. Methods: This paper is written by a team of young people who developed and worked on the Youth PPI Café over a period of 18 months. It explores how we developed a youth‐led space for involvement in research. The authors have reflected on their experiences, providing examples of how youth PPI and coproduction were delivered in the NHS, in practice. Results: By working 'with' young people, rather than 'for' them, we offer insights into the successes and challenges of an entirely youth‐led involvement space. Despite being effective in shaping mental health research for children and young people, we faced challenges with tokenism, resourcing and diversity and inclusion. Conclusions: Involving youth meaningfully in research has the potential to inform studies at a macro‐ and microlevel, enabling positive change within research and within the systems that support young people. Patient or Public Contribution: Young people aged 16–24 years with lived experience were included at every stage of this project, from formulation to the delivery and development of the group, to the preparation of this manuscript and its dissemination. Sussex Partnership NHS Foundation Trust's charity 'Heads On' provided funding for this study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In 1962, Methods of Information in Medicine ( MIM ) began to publish papers on the methodology and scientific fundamentals of organizing, representing, and analyzing data, information, and knowledge in biomedicine and health care. Considered a companion journal, Applied Clinical Informatics ( ACI ) was launched in 2009 with a mission to establish a platform that allows sharing of knowledge between clinical medicine and health IT specialists as well as to bridge gaps between visionary design and successful and pragmatic deployment of clinical information systems. Both journals are official journals of the International Medical Informatics Association.Objectives: As a follow-up to prior work, we set out to explore congruencies and interdependencies in publications of ACI and MIM. The objectives were to describe the major topics discussed in articles published in ACI in 2014 and to determine if there was evidence that theory in 2014 MIM publications was informed by practice described in ACI publications in any year. We also set out to describe lessons learned in the context of bridging informatics practice and theory and offer opinions on how ACI editorial policies could evolve to foster and improve such bridging.Methods: We conducted a retrospective observational study and reviewed all articles published in ACI during the calendar year 2014 (Volume 5) for their main theme, conclusions, and key words. We then reviewed the citations of all MIM papers from 2014 to determine if there were references to ACI articles from any year. Lessons learned in the context of bridging informatics practice and theory and opinions on ACI editorial policies were developed by consensus among the two authors.Results: A total of 70 articles were published in ACI in 2014. Clinical decision support, clinical documentation, usability, Meaningful Use, health information exchange, patient portals, and clinical research informatics emerged as major themes. Only one MIM article from 2014 cited an ACI article. There are several lessons learned including the possibility that there may not be direct links between MIM theory and ACI practice articles. ACI editorial policies will continue to evolve to reflect the breadth and depth of the practice of clinical informatics and articles received for publication. Efforts to encourage bridging of informatics practice and theory may be considered by the ACI editors.Conclusions: The lack of direct links from informatics theory-based papers published in MIM in 2014 to papers published in ACI continues as was described for papers published during 2012 to 2013 in the two companion journals. Thus, there is little evidence that theory in MIM has been informed by practice in ACI. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Co‐production is a collaborative way of working which emphasises the exchange of diverse forms of knowledge in an equal partnership for equal benefits. Co‐produced research is a key strategic aim of the UK Research and Innovation (UKRI) Transforming UK Food Systems (TUKFS) Strategic Priorities Fund; this research programme brings together researchers, policymakers, industry and communities to create positive change in the way food is produced, accessed and consumed. However, more generally, there are diverse understandings of co‐production and a lack of consensus on what 'good practice' looks like. Therefore, this study aimed to identify and map examples of co‐production methods employed across the TUKFS programme. Two creative workshops (n = 15 participants), conversations with TUKFS researchers and stakeholders (n = 15), and systematic analysis of project documents were used to critically explore co‐production activities within six TUKFS projects. A range of co‐production activities were identified. Findings highlighted areas of 'messiness' and complexity, challenges associated with applying co‐production approaches and practical solutions. Four key shared principles for co‐production were identified: (1) Relationships: developing and maintaining reciprocity‐based partnerships; (2) Knowledge: recognising the contribution of diverse forms of expertise; (3) Power: considering power dynamics and addressing imbalances; and (4) Inclusivity: ensuring research is accessible to all who wish to participate. Opportunities for reflection and reflexivity were considered crucial across all these areas. Findings contribute important insights towards a shared conceptual understanding of co‐production for food system transformation research. This paper makes recommendations for researchers, practitioners, academic institutions and funders working in this area of research and practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: People with learning disabilities experience health and social inequalities, and research that could improve health services may not be implemented in real‐life settings. Building stakeholder networks that can share and implement research findings may address this. This paper presents a framework for building a stakeholder network that maximises the likelihood of research recommendations being implemented in practice. This was developed as part of the 'Making Positive Moves' (MPM) study, which explores the experiences of people with learning disabilities following discharge from a residential stay within a hospital inpatient setting. Methods: We reviewed the literature on existing theoretical frameworks to support the development of a model for dissemination of the MPM findings. Stakeholder categories were identified through consultation with the MPM researchers, experts by experience and the steering group and a hub and spoke model to represent all stakeholder categories was created. These categories include person moving; family of the person moving; specialist schools; social care; care providers; regulators; third sector organisations; policy organisations; academic community; and NHS professionals. After establishing the categories, we consulted with people with learning disabilities and other stakeholders and conducted online searches to create a stakeholder database. Through information gathering and direct contact with stakeholders, we assessed levels of interest, power and engagement to determine which stakeholders to prioritise in our dissemination activities. The Stakeholder Wheel was created to present the data captured within the database and engagement profiles in an illustrative way. Findings: We use two stakeholder sub‐categories, user‐led organisations and care providers, to demonstrate the methodological approach. The examples illustrate how a scoring system helped us to identify high‐priority stakeholders who we then contacted to collaborate within developing our dissemination strategy to maximise the impact of the MPM research findings. Conclusions: We developed a framework to map stakeholders for the MPM study and enable targeted dissemination to increase the impact of the research. This approach has the potential to reduce health inequalities among people with learning disabilities by increasing the awareness of and ability to implement evidence‐based recommendations in real‐life settings. The stakeholder mapping framework could be applied to research projects associated with learning disabilities to bridge the gap between research and practice and reduce health inequalities. Accessible Summary: People with learning disabilities experience unfair disadvantages relating to their health. These are known as health and social inequalities.Findings from research projects can help improve health and social care for people with learning disabilities, but only if people know about and are able to apply the research recommendations.Finding people and organisations who can make use of the research findings (known as stakeholders) is an important first step in sharing research. Working with stakeholders to think about how they use the findings to change practice can improve care and services.We have been doing this for one research project called Making Positive Moves and it has helped us plan how to share our findings. Our approach could be used by other researchers to make it more likely that their research findings will be used to make a difference in the lives of people with learning disabilities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The context of this paper is family situations where young people are experiencing significant behavioural and emotional problems. Based on a qualitative study, it offers an empirical and theoretical contribution to the understanding of family‐related factors that promote or hinder behaviour change. Data were collected through face‐to‐face, semi‐structured group interviews with nine families (28 participants), all of them mandatory recipients of child welfare services in Croatia. Thematic analysis comprised primary coding designed to elicit information about individual family members' capacity for change and secondary coding of family‐level phenomena. The results indicated 10 phenomena that were judged to represent factors that helped or hindered change. The discussion section suggests three broad categories of capacity to change at family level (Goals and Priorities; Problem solving dynamics; and Development of role relationship). This analysis is offered as the basis for an examination of the concept of family capacity for change. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Public involvement in health services research is encouraged. Descriptions of public involvement across the whole research cycle of a major study are uncommon and its effects on research conduct are poorly understood. Aim: This study aimed to describe how we implemented public involvement, reflect on process and effects in a large‐scale multi‐site research study and present learning for future involvement practice. Method: We recorded public involvement roles and activities throughout the study and compared these to our original public involvement plan included in our project proposal. We held a group interview with study co‐applicants to explore their experiences, transcribed the recorded discussion and conducted thematic analysis. We synthesized the findings to develop recommendations for future practice. Results: Public contributors' activities went beyond strategic study planning and management to include active involvement in data collection, analysis and dissemination. They attended management, scrutiny, planning and task meetings. They also facilitated public involvement through annual planning and review sessions, conducted a Public Involvement audit and coordinated public and patient input to stakeholder discussions at key study stages. Group interview respondents said that involvement exceeded their expectations. They identified effects such as changes to patient recruitment, terminology clarification and extra dissemination activities. They identified factors enabling effective involvement including team and leader commitment, named support contact, building relationships and demonstrating equality and public contributors being confident to challenge and flexible to meet researchers' timescales and work patterns. There were challenges matching resources to roles and questions about the risk of over‐professionalizing public contributors. Conclusion: We extended our planned approach to public involvement and identified benefits to the research process that were both specific and general. We identified good practice to support effective public involvement in health services research that study teams should consider in planning and undertaking research. Public Contribution: This paper was co‐conceived, co‐planned and co‐authored by public contributors to contribute research evidence, based on their experiences of active involvement in the design, implementation and dissemination of a major health services research study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]