Mathieu Albert | University of Toronto (original) (raw)

Papers by Mathieu Albert

Research paper thumbnail of 4. Interdisciplinary Fantasy: Social Scientists and Humanities Scholars Working in Faculties of Medicine

Rutgers University Press eBooks, Dec 31, 2019

Research paper thumbnail of Re-appraising disciplines: a commentary

Studies in Higher Education, Oct 29, 2022

Research paper thumbnail of Exploring the merits of research performance measures that comply with the San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment and strategies to overcome barriers of adoption: qualitative interviews with administrators and researchers

Health Research Policy and Systems, Jun 5, 2023

Research paper thumbnail of Do biomedical scientists perceive the social sciences as legitimate sciences

Research paper thumbnail of Medical scientists' standpoints toward the promotion of interdisciplinary research. Variations between biomedical, clinician and social scientists

Research paper thumbnail of Understanding decisions to scale up: a qualitative case study of three health service intervention evaluations

Journal of Health Services Research & Policy, May 7, 2020

Research paper thumbnail of Louvel Severine (2021) The Policies and Politics of Interdisciplinary Research: Nanomedicine in France and in the United States

Science and technology studies, May 15, 2022

Research paper thumbnail of Morbidity and mortality rounds in the medical literature: A text based analysis of shifting knowledge regimes

SSM - Qualitative Research in Health

Research paper thumbnail of DORA-compliant measures to assess research quality and impact in biomedical institutions: review of published research, international best practice and Delphi survey

ABSTRACTObjectiveThe San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA) advocates for assess... more ABSTRACTObjectiveThe San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA) advocates for assessing biomedical research quality and impact, yet academic organizations continue to employ traditional measures such as Journal Impact Factor. We aimed to identify and prioritize measures for assessing research quality and impact.MethodsWe conducted a review of published and grey literature to identify measures of research quality and impact, which we included in an online survey. We assembled a panel of researchers and research leaders, and conducted a two-round Delphi survey to prioritize measures rated as high (rated 6 or 7 by ≥ 80% of respondents) or moderate (rated 6 or 7 by ≥ 50% of respondents) importance.ResultsWe identified 50 measures organized in 8 domains: relevance of the research program, challenges to research program, or productivity, team/open science, funding, innovations, publications, other dissemination, and impact. Rating of measures by 44 panelists (60%) in Round On...

Research paper thumbnail of Theorizing Reorganizations of Care: Boundary Work and the Professions During Ontario’s COVID-19 Response

Organising Care in a Time of Covid-19, 2021

Research paper thumbnail of Understanding decisions to scale up: a qualitative case study of three health service intervention evaluations

Journal of Health Services Research & Policy, 2020

Objective Efforts to scale up evidence-based health care interventions are seen as a key strategy... more Objective Efforts to scale up evidence-based health care interventions are seen as a key strategy to address complex health system challenges. However, scale-up efforts have shown significant variability. We address the gap between scale-up theory and practice by exploring the socio-cultural factors at play in the evaluation and scale-up of three interventions within the clinical field. Methods A qualitative multiple case study was conducted to characterize the evaluation and scale-up efforts of three interventions. We interviewed 18 participants, including clinicians and researchers across the three cases. Using Pierre Bourdieu’s concepts of field and capital as a theoretical lens, we conducted a thematic analysis of the data. Results Despite the espoused goals of ensuring that health service interventions are always based on high-quality evidence within the clinical field, this study demonstrates that the outcomes of the evaluations are not the only factor in the decision to engag...

Research paper thumbnail of Quelques recommandations de base pour initier un centre de recherche en education médicale

Research paper thumbnail of Brève revue de la littérature sur la recherche en éducation médicale

Research paper thumbnail of Introduction: Investigating Interdisciplinarities

Investigating Interdisciplinary Collaboration, 2019

Research paper thumbnail of DORA-compliant measures of research quality and impact to assess the performance of researchers in biomedical institutions: Review of published research, international best practice and Delphi survey

Research paper thumbnail of When all else fails: The (mis)use of qualitative research in the evaluation of complex interventions

Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice

RATIONAL, AIMS, AND OBJECTIVES Qualitative research has been promoted as an important component o... more RATIONAL, AIMS, AND OBJECTIVES Qualitative research has been promoted as an important component of the evaluation of complex interventions to support the scale up and spread of health service interventions, but is currently not being maximized in practice. We aim to identify and explore the sociocultural and structural factors that impact the uses (and misuses) of qualitative research in the evaluation of complex health services interventions. METHODS We conducted a qualitative analysis of data collected in a multiple case study of the evaluation and scale up and spread of three health service intervention. RESULTS Our findings demonstrate the challenges of meaningfully integrating qualitative research in evaluation programmes lead by clinicians with limited qualitative expertise and operating within an environment dominated by biomedical research, even with methodological support. CONCLUSIONS Based on these findings we encourage ongoing engagement of qualitative researchers in evaluation programmes to begin to refine our methodological understanding, while also suggesting changes to medical education and evaluation funding models to create fertile environments for interdisciplinary collaborations.

Research paper thumbnail of Investigating Interdisciplinary Collaboration

Research paper thumbnail of Barriers to cross-disciplinary knowledge flow: The case of medical education research

Perspectives on Medical Education

Introduction The medical education research field operates at the crossroads of two distinct acad... more Introduction The medical education research field operates at the crossroads of two distinct academic worlds: higher education and medicine. As such, this field provides a unique opportunity to explore new forms of cross-disciplinary knowledge exchange. Methods Cross-disciplinary knowledge flow in medical education research was examined by looking at citation patterns in the five journals with the highest impact factor in 2017. To grasp the specificities of the knowledge flow in medical education, the field of higher education was used as a comparator. In total, 2031 citations from 64 medical education and 41 higher education articles published in 2017 were examined. Results Medical education researchers draw on a narrower range of knowledge communities than their peers in higher education. Medical education researchers predominantly cite articles published in health and medical education journals (80% of all citations), and to a lesser extent, articles published in education and so...

Research paper thumbnail of Interdisciplinarity in medical education research: myth and reality

Advances in Health Sciences Education

The medical education (Med Ed) research community characterises itself as drawing on the insights... more The medical education (Med Ed) research community characterises itself as drawing on the insights, methods, and knowledge from multiple disciplines and research domains (e.g. Sociology, Anthropology, Education, Humanities, Psychology). This common view of Med Ed research is echoed and reinforced by the narrative used by leading Med Ed departments and research centres to describe their activities as “interdisciplinary.” Bibliometrics offers an effective method of investigating scholarly communication to determine what knowledge is valued, recognized, and utilized. By empirically examining whether knowledge production in Med Ed research draws from multiple disciplines and research areas, or whether it primarily draws on the knowledge generated internally within the field of Med Ed, this article explores whether the characterisation of Med Ed research as interdisciplinary is substantiated. A citation analysis of 1412 references from research articles published in 2017 in the top five M...

Research paper thumbnail of Problematizing assumptions about interdisciplinary research: implications for health professions education research

Advances in Health Sciences Education

This article critically examines three assumptions underlying recent efforts to advance interdisc... more This article critically examines three assumptions underlying recent efforts to advance interdisciplinary research-defined in this article as communication and collaboration between researchers across academic disciplines (e.g. Sociology, Psychology, Biology)and examines these assumptions' implications for health professions education research (HPER). These assumptions are: (1) disciplines are silos that inhibit the free flowing of knowledge across fields and stifle innovative thinking; (2) interdisciplinary research generates a better understanding of the world as it brings together researchers from various fields of expertise capable of tackling complex problems; and (3) interdisciplinary research reduces fragmentation across groups of researchers by eliminating boundaries. These assumptions are among the new beliefs shaping the contemporary academic arena; they orient academics' and university administrators' decisions toward expanding interdisciplinary research and training, but without solid empirical evidence. This article argues that the field of HPER has largely adopted the premises of interdisciplinary research but has not yet debated the potential effects of organizing around these premises. The authors hope to inspire members of the HPER community to critically examine the ubiquitous discourse promoting interdisciplinarity, and engage in reflection about the future of the field informed by evidence rather than by unsubstantiated assumptions. For example: Should research centres and graduate programs in HPER encourage the development of interdisciplinary or disciplinary-trained researchers? Should training predominantly focus on methods and methodologies or draw more on disciplinary-based knowledge? What is the best route toward increasing the field's profile within academia and attracting the best students and researchers to engage in HPER? These are questions that merit attention at the current juncture as the future of the HPER field relies on decisions made in the present time.

Research paper thumbnail of 4. Interdisciplinary Fantasy: Social Scientists and Humanities Scholars Working in Faculties of Medicine

Rutgers University Press eBooks, Dec 31, 2019

Research paper thumbnail of Re-appraising disciplines: a commentary

Studies in Higher Education, Oct 29, 2022

Research paper thumbnail of Exploring the merits of research performance measures that comply with the San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment and strategies to overcome barriers of adoption: qualitative interviews with administrators and researchers

Health Research Policy and Systems, Jun 5, 2023

Research paper thumbnail of Do biomedical scientists perceive the social sciences as legitimate sciences

Research paper thumbnail of Medical scientists' standpoints toward the promotion of interdisciplinary research. Variations between biomedical, clinician and social scientists

Research paper thumbnail of Understanding decisions to scale up: a qualitative case study of three health service intervention evaluations

Journal of Health Services Research & Policy, May 7, 2020

Research paper thumbnail of Louvel Severine (2021) The Policies and Politics of Interdisciplinary Research: Nanomedicine in France and in the United States

Science and technology studies, May 15, 2022

Research paper thumbnail of Morbidity and mortality rounds in the medical literature: A text based analysis of shifting knowledge regimes

SSM - Qualitative Research in Health

Research paper thumbnail of DORA-compliant measures to assess research quality and impact in biomedical institutions: review of published research, international best practice and Delphi survey

ABSTRACTObjectiveThe San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA) advocates for assess... more ABSTRACTObjectiveThe San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA) advocates for assessing biomedical research quality and impact, yet academic organizations continue to employ traditional measures such as Journal Impact Factor. We aimed to identify and prioritize measures for assessing research quality and impact.MethodsWe conducted a review of published and grey literature to identify measures of research quality and impact, which we included in an online survey. We assembled a panel of researchers and research leaders, and conducted a two-round Delphi survey to prioritize measures rated as high (rated 6 or 7 by ≥ 80% of respondents) or moderate (rated 6 or 7 by ≥ 50% of respondents) importance.ResultsWe identified 50 measures organized in 8 domains: relevance of the research program, challenges to research program, or productivity, team/open science, funding, innovations, publications, other dissemination, and impact. Rating of measures by 44 panelists (60%) in Round On...

Research paper thumbnail of Theorizing Reorganizations of Care: Boundary Work and the Professions During Ontario’s COVID-19 Response

Organising Care in a Time of Covid-19, 2021

Research paper thumbnail of Understanding decisions to scale up: a qualitative case study of three health service intervention evaluations

Journal of Health Services Research & Policy, 2020

Objective Efforts to scale up evidence-based health care interventions are seen as a key strategy... more Objective Efforts to scale up evidence-based health care interventions are seen as a key strategy to address complex health system challenges. However, scale-up efforts have shown significant variability. We address the gap between scale-up theory and practice by exploring the socio-cultural factors at play in the evaluation and scale-up of three interventions within the clinical field. Methods A qualitative multiple case study was conducted to characterize the evaluation and scale-up efforts of three interventions. We interviewed 18 participants, including clinicians and researchers across the three cases. Using Pierre Bourdieu’s concepts of field and capital as a theoretical lens, we conducted a thematic analysis of the data. Results Despite the espoused goals of ensuring that health service interventions are always based on high-quality evidence within the clinical field, this study demonstrates that the outcomes of the evaluations are not the only factor in the decision to engag...

Research paper thumbnail of Quelques recommandations de base pour initier un centre de recherche en education médicale

Research paper thumbnail of Brève revue de la littérature sur la recherche en éducation médicale

Research paper thumbnail of Introduction: Investigating Interdisciplinarities

Investigating Interdisciplinary Collaboration, 2019

Research paper thumbnail of DORA-compliant measures of research quality and impact to assess the performance of researchers in biomedical institutions: Review of published research, international best practice and Delphi survey

Research paper thumbnail of When all else fails: The (mis)use of qualitative research in the evaluation of complex interventions

Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice

RATIONAL, AIMS, AND OBJECTIVES Qualitative research has been promoted as an important component o... more RATIONAL, AIMS, AND OBJECTIVES Qualitative research has been promoted as an important component of the evaluation of complex interventions to support the scale up and spread of health service interventions, but is currently not being maximized in practice. We aim to identify and explore the sociocultural and structural factors that impact the uses (and misuses) of qualitative research in the evaluation of complex health services interventions. METHODS We conducted a qualitative analysis of data collected in a multiple case study of the evaluation and scale up and spread of three health service intervention. RESULTS Our findings demonstrate the challenges of meaningfully integrating qualitative research in evaluation programmes lead by clinicians with limited qualitative expertise and operating within an environment dominated by biomedical research, even with methodological support. CONCLUSIONS Based on these findings we encourage ongoing engagement of qualitative researchers in evaluation programmes to begin to refine our methodological understanding, while also suggesting changes to medical education and evaluation funding models to create fertile environments for interdisciplinary collaborations.

Research paper thumbnail of Investigating Interdisciplinary Collaboration

Research paper thumbnail of Barriers to cross-disciplinary knowledge flow: The case of medical education research

Perspectives on Medical Education

Introduction The medical education research field operates at the crossroads of two distinct acad... more Introduction The medical education research field operates at the crossroads of two distinct academic worlds: higher education and medicine. As such, this field provides a unique opportunity to explore new forms of cross-disciplinary knowledge exchange. Methods Cross-disciplinary knowledge flow in medical education research was examined by looking at citation patterns in the five journals with the highest impact factor in 2017. To grasp the specificities of the knowledge flow in medical education, the field of higher education was used as a comparator. In total, 2031 citations from 64 medical education and 41 higher education articles published in 2017 were examined. Results Medical education researchers draw on a narrower range of knowledge communities than their peers in higher education. Medical education researchers predominantly cite articles published in health and medical education journals (80% of all citations), and to a lesser extent, articles published in education and so...

Research paper thumbnail of Interdisciplinarity in medical education research: myth and reality

Advances in Health Sciences Education

The medical education (Med Ed) research community characterises itself as drawing on the insights... more The medical education (Med Ed) research community characterises itself as drawing on the insights, methods, and knowledge from multiple disciplines and research domains (e.g. Sociology, Anthropology, Education, Humanities, Psychology). This common view of Med Ed research is echoed and reinforced by the narrative used by leading Med Ed departments and research centres to describe their activities as “interdisciplinary.” Bibliometrics offers an effective method of investigating scholarly communication to determine what knowledge is valued, recognized, and utilized. By empirically examining whether knowledge production in Med Ed research draws from multiple disciplines and research areas, or whether it primarily draws on the knowledge generated internally within the field of Med Ed, this article explores whether the characterisation of Med Ed research as interdisciplinary is substantiated. A citation analysis of 1412 references from research articles published in 2017 in the top five M...

Research paper thumbnail of Problematizing assumptions about interdisciplinary research: implications for health professions education research

Advances in Health Sciences Education

This article critically examines three assumptions underlying recent efforts to advance interdisc... more This article critically examines three assumptions underlying recent efforts to advance interdisciplinary research-defined in this article as communication and collaboration between researchers across academic disciplines (e.g. Sociology, Psychology, Biology)and examines these assumptions' implications for health professions education research (HPER). These assumptions are: (1) disciplines are silos that inhibit the free flowing of knowledge across fields and stifle innovative thinking; (2) interdisciplinary research generates a better understanding of the world as it brings together researchers from various fields of expertise capable of tackling complex problems; and (3) interdisciplinary research reduces fragmentation across groups of researchers by eliminating boundaries. These assumptions are among the new beliefs shaping the contemporary academic arena; they orient academics' and university administrators' decisions toward expanding interdisciplinary research and training, but without solid empirical evidence. This article argues that the field of HPER has largely adopted the premises of interdisciplinary research but has not yet debated the potential effects of organizing around these premises. The authors hope to inspire members of the HPER community to critically examine the ubiquitous discourse promoting interdisciplinarity, and engage in reflection about the future of the field informed by evidence rather than by unsubstantiated assumptions. For example: Should research centres and graduate programs in HPER encourage the development of interdisciplinary or disciplinary-trained researchers? Should training predominantly focus on methods and methodologies or draw more on disciplinary-based knowledge? What is the best route toward increasing the field's profile within academia and attracting the best students and researchers to engage in HPER? These are questions that merit attention at the current juncture as the future of the HPER field relies on decisions made in the present time.

Research paper thumbnail of Investigating Interdisciplinary Collaboration: Theory and Practice Across Disciplines

Interdisciplinarity has become a buzzword in academia, as research universities funnel their fina... more Interdisciplinarity has become a buzzword in academia, as research universities funnel their financial resources toward collaborations between faculty in different disciplines. In theory, interdisciplinary collaboration breaks down artificial divisions between different departments, allowing more innovative and sophisticated research to flourish. But does it actually work this way in practice?

Investigating Interdisciplinary Collaboration puts the common beliefs about such research to the test, using empirical data gathered by scholars from the United States, Canada, and Great Britain. The book’s contributors critically interrogate the assumptions underlying the fervor for interdisciplinarity. Their attentive scholarship reveals how, for all its potential benefits, interdisciplinary collaboration is neither immune to academia’s status hierarchies, nor a simple antidote to the alleged shortcomings of disciplinary study.