Linking Practice-Based Research Networks and Clinical and Translational Science Awards: New Opportunities for Community Engagement by Academic Health Centers

被引:38
作者
Fagnan, Lyle J. [1 ]
Davis, Melinda [1 ]
Deyo, Richard A. [2 ]
Werner, James J. [3 ,4 ]
Stange, Kurt C. [5 ]
机构
[1] Oregon Hlth & Sci Univ, Oregon Rural Practice Based Res Network, Portland, OR 97239 USA
[2] Oregon Hlth & Sci Univ, Oregon Clin & Translat Sci Inst, Community & Practice Res Program, Portland, OR 97239 USA
[3] Case Western Reserve Univ Clin & Translat Sci Col, Practice Based Res Network Shared Resources, Cleveland, OH 44106 USA
[4] Case Comprehens Canc Ctr, Cleveland, OH USA
[5] Case Western Reserve Univ Clin & Translat Sci Col, Practice Based Res Network Res, Cleveland, OH 44106 USA
基金
美国国家卫生研究院;
关键词
PARTICIPATORY RESEARCH; FAMILY MEDICINE; RESPONSE RATES; NIH; CTSAS; TIME;
D O I
10.1097/ACM.0b013e3181cd2ed3
中图分类号
G40 [教育学];
学科分类号
040101 ; 120403 ;
摘要
Purpose Practice-based research networks (PBRNs) are a part of many National Institutes of Health (NIH)-funded Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) sites. PBRNs, groups of primary care practices committed to collaborating on practice-relevant research, are unfamiliar to many CTSA leaders. Conversely, the CTSAs, as new research structures designed to transform clinical research, are unfamiliar to many PBRN directors. This study examined the extent to which these programs have congruent goals and expectations, and whether their engagement is likely to be mutually beneficial. Method The authors sent a Web-based survey to 38 CTSA community engagement directors and a similar survey to 114 PBRN directors during the fall of 2008. Results A total of 66% (25/38) CTSA community engagement directors and 61% (69/114) PBRN directors responded. Two thirds of responding CTSAs reported working with PBRNs, and over half of responding PBRNs reported a CTSA affiliation. Both groups indicated this relationship was important. CTSAs looked to PBRNs for access to patients and expertise in engaging communities and clinical practices. PBRNs reported seeking stable infrastructure support and greater collaboration and visibility in the academic research community. PBRN infrastructure support from CTSAs was highly variable. Both groups perceived considerable promise for building sustainable relationships and a bidirectional flow of information and research opportunities. Conclusions With fewer than three years of experience, the PBRN/CTSA relationship remains in the discovery phase; the participants are still negotiating expectations. If these collaborations prove mutually beneficial, they may advance the community engagement goals of many academic health centers.
引用
收藏
页码:476 / 483
页数:8
相关论文
共 34 条
[11]  
Lanier D., 2005, ANN FAM MED, V3, pS2, DOI DOI 10.1370/AFM.338
[12]  
Lucan SC, 2009, FAM MED, V41, P188
[13]   Moving the frontiers forward: Incorporating community-based participatory research into practice-based research networks [J].
Macaulay, AC ;
Nutting, PA .
ANNALS OF FAMILY MEDICINE, 2006, 4 (01) :4-7
[14]   Promoting participatory research by family physicians [J].
Macaulay, Ann C. .
ANNALS OF FAMILY MEDICINE, 2007, 5 (06) :557-560
[15]   Improving the Health of the Community: Duke's Experience with Community Engagement [J].
Michener, J. Lloyd ;
Yaggy, Susan ;
Lyn, Michelle ;
Warburton, Samuel ;
Champagne, Mary ;
Black, MaryAnn ;
Cuffe, Michael ;
Califf, Robert ;
Gilliss, Catherine ;
Williams, R. Sanders ;
Dzau, Victor J. .
ACADEMIC MEDICINE, 2008, 83 (04) :408-413
[16]  
Miller W., 1999, DOING QUALITATIVE RE, P127
[17]  
Mold James W, 2008, Ann Fam Med, V6, P570, DOI 10.1370/afm.932
[18]   The CTSAs, the Congress, and the Scientific Method [J].
Morrison, Lyrnn .
JOURNAL OF INVESTIGATIVE MEDICINE, 2008, 56 (01) :7-10
[19]  
*N AM PRIM CAR RES, WHAT IS NAPCRG
[20]  
NIEBAUER L, 1994, J FAM PRACTICE, V38, P409