The impact of local health professions education grants: is it worth the investment? (original) (raw)
Related papers
Show Me the Money: Successfully Obtaining Grant Funding in Medical Education
Obtaining grant funding is a fundamental component to achieving a successful research career. A successful grant application needs to meet specific mechanistic expectations of reviewers and funders. This paper provides an overview of the importance of grant funding within medical education, followed by a stepwise discussion of strategies for creating a successful grant application for medical education-based proposals. The last section includes a list of available medical education research grants.
Not enough time for research? Use of supported funding to promote allied health research activity
Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare
The current project evaluated the impact of a short-term, supported funding initiative that allowed staff from allied health (AH) professions to undertake research activity within rostered employment time. Specifically, the project will report on outcomes pertaining to individual research capacity, research output, and overall satisfaction with the initiative. Participants and methods: Sixteen AH clinicians (n=16) from six AH professions participated in the evaluation of the initiative, with data being collected within a service improvement framework. Clinicians received up to 4 weeks of protected time relieved from their clinical duties to undertake research activities, including writing for publication, undertaking a systematic review, data analysis, and preparation of ethics applications. An AH Research Fellow provided additional support and mentorship, including the development of an implementation plan. Evaluation included pre-post measures of individual research capacity using a 15-item self-report Research Capacity and Culture (RCC) survey, a post-implementation satisfaction survey, and monitoring of research output achieved. Results: Statistically significant improvements (p<0.05) were found on 14 out of 15 items on the RCC tool, with meaningful improvements in securing funding, analyzing qualitative data, writing for publication, literature searching skills, and providing advice to less experienced researchers. Overall satisfaction with the initiative was high, with positive comments from AH professionals (AHPs) regarding the initiative. Research output arising from the initiative included eleven manuscripts being submitted, with six currently in publication and others under review. Conclusion: The preliminary findings support the feasibility of implementing a local, clinical funding model to promote individual research capacity and research output for AHPs. The short-term funding should be supported by local mentorship and guidance. Local barriers and suggestions to optimize implementation, including integrating within existing research infrastructure and using flexible "backfill" options, will also be described.
BMC Family Practice, 2007
Background: General practitioners and other primary health care professionals are often the first point of contact for patients requiring health care. Identifying, understanding and linking current evidence to best practice can be challenging and requires at least a basic understanding of research principles and methodologies. However, not all primary health care professionals are trained in research or have research experience. With the aim of enhancing research skills and developing a research culture in primary health care, University Departments of General Practice and Rural Health have been supported since 2000 by the Australian Government funded 'Primary Health Care Research Evaluation and Development (PHCRED) Strategy'.
Research Productivity Among Recipients of AAFP Foundation Grants
The Annals of Family Medicine, 2007
PURPOSE This study examines research productivity generated by the American Academy of Family Physicians (AAFP) Foundation and the AAFP Joint Grant Awards Program (JGAP) based upon projects funded during the period 1990 through 2000. METHODS A structured questionnaire was mailed to all JGAP applicants who were funded between 1990 and 2000 (N = 95). The cross-sectional questionnaire included items refl ective of research productivity: (1) numbers of publications, (2) numbers of presentations, and (3) numbers and types of subsequent grants. An additional comparison examined publication productivity among a subset of funded (n = 17) and nonfunded applicants (n = 36). RESULTS The 69 funded respondents reported 91 publications and 129 presentations deriving from JGAP-supported research; 26 subsequent grants were funded ($9.6 million total costs). Funded and nonfunded applicants showed a signifi cant increase in the overall number of publications during the 5-year period after their application when compared with the 5-year period before their application. Funded applicants had a greater number of publications during both the 5 years before and the 5 years after their JGAP grant submission. CONCLUSION Projects supported by the JGAP have generated a considerable body of publications and presentations, as well as subsequent grant activity. This program appears to be important in supporting the early career development of family medicine researchers.
The Association of Women Surgeons research grant: An analysis of the first 25 years
The American Journal of Surgery, 2020
Background: The impact of the Association of Women Surgeons (AWS) Research Grant on academic productivity is unknown. Methods: Grant applications were obtained from AWS archives. Applicant bibliometrics and National Institutes of Health (NIH) grants were identified via public databases. Results: Twenty-four recipients between 1996 and 2020 and 68 nonrecipients between 2012 and 2017 were identified. 596,700wasawardedoverthe25years.Twenty−fivepercentofrecipientssubsequentlyacquiredNIHfundingamountingto596,700 was awarded over the 25 years. Twenty-five percent of recipients subsequently acquired NIH funding amounting to 596,700wasawardedoverthe25years.Twenty−fivepercentofrecipientssubsequentlyacquiredNIHfundingamountingto6,611,927.00, an 885e1008% return on investment. Compared to nonrecipients, grant recipients produced a greater mean number of publications (50.6 versus 36.4; p ¼ 0.05), had a higher h-index (15.92 versus 10.7; p ¼ 0.01), and were cited in higher impact factor journals (6.32 versus 3.9; p ¼ 0.02). Conclusions: Overall, previous AWS Research Grant recipients were more likely to become more impactful surgeon-scientists, as indicated by a higher post-award rate of NIH funding, total number of publications, and h-index than nonrecipients.
Health Research Policy and Systems
Background Providing funding for clinicians to have protected time to undertake research can address a commonly cited barrier to research – lack of time. However, limited research has evaluated the impact or mechanisms of such funding initiatives. In the current economic environment, it is important that funding is used efficiently and judiciously and that mechanisms and contexts that may assist with maximising outcomes of funding initiatives are identified. This study aimed to describe the medium-term outcomes of a funding initiative to promote allied health research activity and to identify the key mechanisms and contexts that facilitated these outcomes. Methods We used a qualitative research design informed by a realist evaluation, to conduct 10 semi-structured interviews with allied health professionals who had participated in a funding initiative 1–3 years ago. Questions explored outcomes, mechanisms and contexts of the funding initiative. Data was thematically coded into conte...
Costs and Funding for Published Medical Education Research
JAMA, 2005
Context The Institute of Medicine has called for increased rigor of education research and funding to support educational innovation. However, funding for medical education research is scarce. The costs of conducting studies in medical education and how such research is currently funded have not been systematically evaluated.