Evaluating Primary Care Research Networks: A Review of Currently Available Tools

The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine

Wim A. B. Stalman¹  Henriëtte E. van der Horst²  Joan M. C. Bleeker² 

[1] Executive Board (WABS), VU University Medical Centre, Amsterdam, The Netherlands;Department of General Practice and the EMGO Institute (JMCB, HEvdH), VU University Medical Centre, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

关键词: Practice-based Research;    PBRN;    Evaluation;   

DOI  :  10.3122/jabfm.2010.04.090297

学科分类：过敏症与临床免疫学

来源: The American Board of Family Medicine

【 摘 要 】

Background: An increasing number of primary care research networks (PCRNs) are being developed around the world. Despite the fact that they have existed for a long time in some countries, little is known about what they have actually achieved. There is an ongoing debate in the literature about the appropriate framework for the evaluation of PCRNs. Here, we aim to provide an overview of the tools that are currently available for measuring the performance of PCRNs and practices involved in PCRNs or research.

Methods: We performed electronic searches in bibliographic databases and several additional searches. We composed a checklist to evaluate the design, content, and methodological quality of the tools.

Results: We identified 4 tools for the evaluation of PCRNs or the measurement of primary care practices involved in PCRNs or research.

Conclusions: The results of our study showed that various methods, areas of interest, dimensions, and indicators for the evaluation of PCRNs have been proposed. However, no generic and validated tool that enables meaningful comparison between different network models has been developed. It is, therefore, time to reflect on the appropriateness and effectiveness of PCRNs and determine the desired outcomes (ends) of PCRNs and how we can best achieve them in the future (means). To open up the “black box” of the effectiveness of the PCRNs, it may be relevant to observe the effects of network and research participation on those involved in networks.

• Practice-based Research
• PBRN
• Evaluation

Increasing numbers of primary care research networks (PCRNs) are being developed around the world.^1–4 In some countries their number is steadily increasing. In the United States, approximately 100 PCRNs are currently active,^5,6 whereas a decade earlier only 28 PCRNs could be identified.⁶ PCRNs initially were developed to provide an infrastructure for primary care research, to strengthen and develop the research base of primary care, and to increase research capacity and research activity among primary care providers.^7–11

Current networks operate in different ways, depending on aspects such as contexts, baseline of experience, and resources. Therefore, PCRNs represent a great diversity of network models, objectives, and configurations.^12,13 In general, PCRNs aim to conduct research close to practice, identify and respond to current primary care research needs, and to engage more primary care professionals with research. In addition to these research-based objectives, it has been suggested that PCRNs can also play an important role in the translation and diffusion of research findings into practice^14–16 and other activities that are relevant in the field of primary care, like quality improvement, training, and education.^17–22

Internationally, both policy advisers and researchers have acknowledged the importance of PCRNs and have recognized the challenging opportunities they provide for the improvement of primary care. Yet, despite their long existence in some countries like The Netherlands and the United Kingdom, little is known about the effectiveness of PCRNs^23–26 or their added value compared with other research capacity–building initiatives in primary care. Another issue that has not yet been studied is the impact of network and research involvement in daily practice in terms of increased use of research evidence and quality improvement. There seems to be a fundamental lack of evaluative studies about the progress, impact, and output of PCRNs, which prevents a validated comparison of different network models and thus insight into what type of model is optimal for achieving specific goals.

Valid and agreed methods of evaluation are urgently needed to provide stakeholders and policy advisers with comprehensive and meaningful data about these issues. Therefore, we reviewed the literature on PCRNs to identify and describe currently available frameworks and tools for evaluating PCRNs and practices involved in PCRNs or research. The design, content, and methodological quality of the identified frameworks and tools were also reviewed to provide more detailed information about their usefulness.

【 授权许可】

Unknown   

【 预 览 】

附件列表

Files	Size	Format	View
RO201912020423078ZK.pdf	94KB	PDF