The research interest, capacity and culture of NHS staff in South East Scotland and changes in attitude to research following the pandemic: a cross-sectional survey.

BACKGROUND: The UK National Health Service (NHS) is ideally placed to undertake research. The UK Government recently launched its vision of research within the NHS to improve research culture and activity amongst its staff. Currently, little is known about the research interest, capacity and culture of staff in one Health Board in South East Scotland and how their attitudes to research may have changed as a result of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. METHODS: We used the validated Research Capacity and Culture tool in an online survey of staff working in one Health Board in South East Scotland to explore attitudes to research at the organisation, team and individual level together with involvement in, barriers to and motivators to engage in research. Questions included changes in attitude to research as a result of the pandemic. Staff were identified by professional group: nurses/midwives, medical/dental, allied health professionals (AHP), other therapeutic and administrative roles. Median scores and interquartile ranges were reported and differences between groups assessed using the Chi-square and Kruskal-Wallis tests with P < 0.05 accepted as statistical significance. Free-text entries were analysed using content analysis. RESULTS: Replies were received from 503/9145 potential respondents (5.5% response), of these 278 (3.0% response) completed all sections of the questionnaire. Differences between groups were noted in the proportions of those with research as part of their role (P = 0.012) and in being research-active (P < 0.001). Respondents reported high scores for promoting evidence-based practice and for finding and critically reviewing literature. Low scores were returned for preparing reports and securing grants. Overall, medical and other therapeutic staff reported higher levels of practical skills compared with other groups. Principal barriers to research were pressure of clinical work and lack of time, backfill and funds. 171/503 (34%) had changed their attitude to research as a result of the pandemic with 92% of 205 respondents more likely to volunteer for a study themselves. CONCLUSION: We found a positive change in attitude to research arising from the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Research engagement may increase after addressing the barriers cited. The present results provide a baseline against which future initiatives introduced to increase research capability and capacity may be assessed.

Engagement in radiation therapy research: What happens after graduation?

BACKGROUND: To prepare undergraduate radiation therapy (RT) students for the professional role of Scholarly Practitioner the University of Alberta's Radiation Therapy Program (RADTH) provides research education, and students conduct novel research studies during their final practicum year with the final result being a publishable paper. A curriculum evaluation project was carried out to examine the impact of the RADTH undergraduate research education by examining the final outcomes of these research projects and whether the learners carried out further research after graduation. METHODS: Alumni who graduated from 2017 to 2020 were surveyed to seek information on the dissemination of their research projects, whether the projects resulted in a change to practice, policy, or patient care, if subsequent research has been performed by the graduates, and the motivators or barriers to conducting research post-graduation. A subsequent manual search of publication databases was conducted to fill in data gaps pertaining to publications. RESULTS: All RADTH research projects have been disseminated by conference presentation and/or publication. One project was reported to have had an impact on practice, with no impact reported for five projects and two respondents not sure about any impact. All respondents reported they have not participated in any new research projects since graduation. Barriers listed included: limited local opportunity, lack of topic ideas, other professional development, no interest in research, COVID impact, and lack of research knowledge. CONCLUSIONS: RADTH's research education curriculum successfully enables the RT students to conduct and disseminate research. All RADTH projects have been successfully disseminated by the graduates. However, participation in research post-graduation is not occurring due to a variety of factors. While MRT education programs are required to develop research skills, this education alone may not alter motivation nor ensure research participation post-graduation. Exploring other avenues of professional scholarship may be key to ensuring contribution to evidence-informed practice.

Development strategies as catalysts for provision of the RDM services in the South African higher education institutions

A strategy in this paper was viewed as a plan of action for achieving the mission and vision of an organisation. This paper presents preliminary findings of the larger study which aimed to determine the strategies for research data management (RDM) at selected universities in KwaZulu-Natal. The current study used the community capability maturity model framework (CCMF) and the digital curation centre (DCC) lifecycle model as theoretical support to determine the strategies for RDM service provision with specific reference to the University of Zululand. The interpretive paradigm, following the qualitative research approach through a single case study, was used. Primary data was gathered through online interviews using Zoom and Teams with Librarians, Technicians, HODs, and DVC Research due to the Covid-19 pandemic and availability of technologies. The findings of the study revealed the University of Zululand does not have an RDM policy;however, research activities are practiced. The University lacks the infrastructure and investment to support RDM services and activities. The study is significant for providing the background for developing RDM in the public university through RDM strategy and policy. The findings also sought to inform the university's RDM agenda.

Saving millions of lives but some resources squandered: emerging lessons from health research system pandemic achievements and challenges.

During the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, astonishingly rapid research averted millions of deaths worldwide through new vaccines and repurposed and new drugs. Evidence use informed life-saving national policies including non-pharmaceutical interventions. Simultaneously, there was unprecedented waste, with many underpowered trials on the same drugs. We identified lessons from COVID-19 research responses by applying WHO's framework for research systems. It has four functions-governance, securing finance, capacity-building, and production and use of research-and nine components. Two linked questions focused the analysis. First, to what extent have achievements in knowledge production and evidence use built on existing structures and capacity in national health research systems? Second, did the features of such systems mitigate waste? We collated evidence on seven countries, Australia, Brazil, Canada, Germany, New Zealand, the United Kingdom and the United States, to identify examples of achievements and challenges.We used the data to develop lessons for each framework component. Research coordination, prioritization and expedited ethics approval contributed to rapid identification of new therapies, including dexamethasone in the United Kingdom and Brazil. Accelerated vaccines depended on extensive funding, especially through the Operation Warp Speed initiative in the United States, and new platforms created through long-term biomedical research capacity in the United Kingdom and, for messenger ribonucleic acid (mRNA) vaccines, in Canada, Germany and the United States. Research capacity embedded in the United Kingdom's healthcare system resulted in trial acceleration and waste avoidance. Faster publication of research saved lives, but raised challenges. Public/private collaborations made major contributions to vastly accelerating new products, available worldwide, though unequally. Effective developments of living (i.e. regularly updated) reviews and guidelines, especially in Australia and Canada, extended existing expertise in meeting users' needs. Despite complexities, effective national policy responses (less evident in Brazil, the United Kingdom and the United States) also saved lives by drawing on health research system features, including collaboration among politicians, civil servants and researchers; good communications; and willingness to use evidence. Comprehensive health research strategies contributed to success in research production in the United Kingdom and in evidence use by political leadership in New Zealand. In addition to waste, challenges included equity issues, public involvement and non-COVID research. We developed recommendations, but advocate studies of further countries.

Enabling evidence to tackle everyday diseases to mitigate another pandemic.

The next emergent novel pathogen is likely to occur where the ability to undertake health research and collect life-saving data is lacking. Without embedded and ongoing research activities in place spotting and stopping a new threat is not possible, thereby enabling undetected infection and unchecked transmission within a community. Without local existing capabilities to collect such data delay is catastrophic. Fundamental goals in pandemic preparedness should be to stop an outbreak before it becomes a pandemic. This requires immediate action from teams already in place with the right skills, this could be readily achieved if we shift our thinking and enable research capabilities to be present in every healthcare setting. Addressing fundamental gaps in health research capacity and equity could tackle this and then we would be better prepared, globally.

Are we there yet? A scoping review of factors that increase academic research capacity in schools of nursing and midwifery.

AIMS: 1. To identify approaches and strategies that can build research capacity among academics from the disciplines of nursing and midwifery working in tertiary education institutions. 2. To identify evidence-informed strategies that enable academic transformation of professional identity from clinician to researcher. BACKGROUND: Nurses and midwives are core to leading health practice and system change through research. Despite manifold efforts to build research capacity among nurse academics over the past two decades, there is scant evidence about what specific strategies are effective and few robust evaluations of any capacity building strategies. DESIGN: This scoping review was guided by Arksey and O'Malley's framework to identify key concepts and map the available evidence specifically related to volume, nature and characteristics. METHODS: The authors followed a scoping review framework and used a PRISMA flowchart to report findings. Electronic data bases (CINAHL, ERIC, Medline and Scopus) were searched between April and June 2020. Literature published between 2000 and 2020 was searched. The Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) was used for data coding and extraction and all included papers were subsequently thematically analysed. RESULTS: Fourteen studies from seven countries met the inclusion criteria and were comprised of literature reviews (n = 4) case studies (n = 3) qualitative survey (n = 1) and intervention studies (n = 6). Four themes were identified as follows: academic identity, organisational changes, leadership and research skills development. CONCLUSIONS: Rigorous evaluation of research capacity building strategies for academics from the disciplines of nursing and midwifery is a significant gap in the literature. To promulgate research among nurse and midwife academics, strong, supportive leadership and a range of inclusive and targeted approaches are needed. Significant work remains in terms of negotiating with the broader university to operationalise supportive systems and structures. Clarifying how self-concept has an impact on building and maintaining a research identity for nurse and midwife academics is an area worthy of further study. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: Strong, supportive leadership with inclusive and targeted research skills development is key to reorienting academic nursing and midwifery research culture.

Training LEADers to Accelerate Global Mental Health Disparities Research (LEAD) Program: A Research Training Program Protocol.

Background: There is a critical need to address mental health needs across the globe, especially in low and middle-income countries where mental health disparities are pervasive, including among children. The global mental health disparities suggest an imperative for culturally and contextually-congruent mental health services models that expand upon the existing services and interventions for these groups. Rigorous research is a key tool in providing the scientific evidence to inform public policy and practice efforts to effectively address these needs. Yet, there is a limited number of researchers, especially those from diverse backgrounds, who study these issues. In this paper, we describe the "TrainingLEADers to Accelerate Global Mental Health Disparities Research" (LEAD) program, a research training program funded by the National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities and focused on global mental health disparities research for early career researchers from under-represented minority groups. Methods: The LEAD program is designed as a two-phase training program for advanced pre-doctoral students, postdoctoral fellows, and junior faculty from diverse backgrounds in the U.S., including groups underrepresented in biomedical, behavioral, clinical and social sciences research, interested in global mental health disparities research. Trainees are matched with mentors and participate in an intensive 12-week program. Discussion: The LEAD program seeks to provide a robust platform for the development, implementation and expansion of evidence-based culturally and contextually-congruent interventions and services models addressing global mental health disparities across the life cycle, especially in low-resource communities in the global context. By producing a sustainable network of well-trained investigators from underrepresented backgrounds, LEAD will potentially contribute to the shared lessons and efforts relevant to addressing global mental health disparities and improving care for vulnerable populations in low-resource settings.

The Effect of Covid-19 Pandemic on the Regional Universities Research Culture and the Quality of the Engineering Education

In this paper we define university research culture and suggest a metric to evaluate the level of its maturity by comparing five universities in Russia, including the regional ones. We argue that strong research culture is pivotal for talent attraction and quality education, especially in engineering. By comparing the research productivity of universities with established and with immature research cultures during COVID-19 pandemic, we demonstrate that the mature research culture has helped universities to survive such global stressful situations with comparatively fewer loses, whereas the universities with currently undeveloped or emerging research culture have experienced a dramatic impact on their publication output. We suggest a set of activities to enhance research capacity of HE organizations by engaging local full-time faculty and report the results of implementation of a related faculty development program at one of the regional universities under study in late 2019 – early 2020. The implementation results show that such an intervention has contributed to enhancing research capacity and has advanced research culture at the University even at the time of pandemic as the result of increased research productivity of experienced and moderately experienced researchers and of forming new research groups. © 2022, The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG.

Real-Time Operational Research: Case Studies from the Field of Tuberculosis and Lessons Learnt.

Real-time operational research can be defined as research on strategies or interventions to assess if they are feasible, working as planned, scalable and effective. The research involves primary data collection, periodic analysis during the conduct of the study and dissemination of the findings to policy makers for timely action. This paper aims to illustrate the use of real-time operational research and discuss how to make it happen. Four case studies are presented from the field of tuberculosis. These include (i) mis-registration of recurrent tuberculosis in Malawi; (ii) HIV testing and adjunctive cotrimoxazole to reduce mortality in TB patients in Malawi; (iii) screening TB patients for diabetes mellitus in India; and (iv) mitigating the impact of COVID-19 on TB case detection in capital cities in Kenya, Malawi and Zimbabwe. The important ingredients of real-time operational research are sound ethics; relevant research; adherence to international standards of conducting and reporting on research; consideration of comparison groups; timely data collection; dissemination to key stakeholders; capacity building; and funding. Operational research can improve the delivery of established health interventions and ensure the deployment of new interventions as they become available, irrespective of diseases. This is particularly important when public health emergencies, including pandemics, threaten health services.

Health Inequalities in the Time of COVID-19: The Globally Reinforcing Need to Strengthen Health Inequalities Research Capacities.

The full impact of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is yet to be well established; however, as the pandemic spreads, and early results emerge, unmet needs are being revealed, and pressing questions are being asked about who is most affected, how, where, and in what ways government responses might be exacerbating inequalities. A number of scholars have called for more in-depth critical research on COVID-19 and health inequalities to produce a strong empirical evidence based on these issues. There are also justifiable concerns about the scarcity of health-equity actions oriented analyses of the situation and calls for more empirical evidence on COVID-19 and health inequalities. A preliminary condition to establish this type of information is strong capacity to conduct health inequalities research. Worldwide, however, this type of capacity is limited, which, alongside other challenges, will likely hinder capacities of many countries to develop comprehensive equity-oriented COVID-19 analyses, and adequate responses to present and future crises. The current pandemic reinforces the pending need to invest in and strengthen these research capacities. These capacities must be supported by widespread recognition and concern, cognitive social capital, and greater commitment to coordinated, transparent action, and responsibility. Otherwise, we will remain inadequately prepared to respond and meet our society's unmet needs.

Impact of COVID-19 on clinical trials and clinical research: A systematic review.

Background: The World Health Organization has reported more than 31,186,000 confirmed cases of coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19), including 962,343 deaths, worldwide as on September 21, 2020. The current COVID-19 pandemic is affecting clinical research activities in most parts of the world. The focus on developing a vaccine for SARS-CoV-2 and the treatment of COVID-19 is, in fact, disrupting many upcoming and/or ongoing clinical trials on other diseases around the globe. On March 18, 2020, the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued an updated guideline for the conduct of clinical trials during the current health emergency situation. The potential challenges, such as social distancing and quarantines, result in study participants' inaccessibility and trial personnel for in-person scheduled study visits and/or follow-up. Due to the sudden onset and wide-spread impact of COVID-19, its influence on the management of clinical trials and research necessitates urgent attention. Therefore, our systematic review of the literature aims to assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the conduction of clinical trials and research. The search for the relevant articles for review included the keywords "COVID-19" AND "clinical trial" in PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, Google scholar and Google electronic databases. Key findings include: delaying subject enrollment and operational gaps in most ongoing clinical trials, which in turn has a negative impact on trial programmes and data integrity. Globally, most sites conducting clinical trials other than COVID-19 are experiencing a delay in timelines and a complete halt of operations in lieu of this pandemic, thus affecting clinical research outcomes.