Reporting health research translation and impact in the curriculum vitae: a survey.
Curriculum vitae
Health researchers
Impact
Reporting
Research activities
Research translation
Journal
Implementation science communications
ISSN: 2662-2211
Titre abrégé: Implement Sci Commun
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101764360
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2020
2020
Historique:
received:
05
09
2019
accepted:
10
02
2020
entrez:
5
9
2020
pubmed:
5
9
2020
medline:
5
9
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Increasingly, health researchers must demonstrate the impact and real-life applications of their research. We investigated how health researchers with expertise in knowledge translation report research translation activities and impact on their curriculum vitae (CV). We conducted a cross-sectional survey of health researchers with expertise in knowledge translation as we anticipated best practices in CV reporting from this specialized group. Our survey asked participants about their reporting of research translation and impact activities on their CVs, intention to report, and barriers and facilitators to reporting such activities on their CVs. We calculated univariate descriptive statistics for all quantitative data. Linear regression models determined predictors of researchers' intention to report research translation and impact activities on their CVs. We analyzed open-ended qualitative responses using content analysis. One hundred and fifty-three health researchers responded to the survey (response rate = 29%). Most respondents were Canadian, were female, and had a doctoral degree. Eighty-two percent indicated they reported at least one research translation and/or impact indicator on their CVs. Of those, health researchers commonly reported the following: advisory/regulatory committee membership related to research program (83%), research translation award(s) (61%), and academic performance assessments (59%). Researchers least commonly indicated the following: citation metric scores (31%), summaries of impact (21%), and requests to use research materials and/or products (19%). Fewer than half of the health researchers intended to report knowledge translation (43%) and impact (33%) on their CVs. Strong beliefs about capabilities and consequences of reporting research translation and/or impact were significant predictors of intention. Main barriers were as follows: CV templates do not include research translation and impact activities, participants perceived employers do not value research translation and impact activities, and lack of metrics to evaluate research translation and impact. Ninety-six percent were unaware of a CV template formatted to include research translation and/or impact reporting. Knowledge translation and impact indicators on the CV are inconsistently reported by our sample of health researchers. Modifiable barriers should be addressed to support more consistent reporting of such activities, including providing a CV template that includes research translation and impact as well as clear metrics to quantify them.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Increasingly, health researchers must demonstrate the impact and real-life applications of their research. We investigated how health researchers with expertise in knowledge translation report research translation activities and impact on their curriculum vitae (CV).
METHODS
METHODS
We conducted a cross-sectional survey of health researchers with expertise in knowledge translation as we anticipated best practices in CV reporting from this specialized group. Our survey asked participants about their reporting of research translation and impact activities on their CVs, intention to report, and barriers and facilitators to reporting such activities on their CVs. We calculated univariate descriptive statistics for all quantitative data. Linear regression models determined predictors of researchers' intention to report research translation and impact activities on their CVs. We analyzed open-ended qualitative responses using content analysis.
RESULTS
RESULTS
One hundred and fifty-three health researchers responded to the survey (response rate = 29%). Most respondents were Canadian, were female, and had a doctoral degree. Eighty-two percent indicated they reported at least one research translation and/or impact indicator on their CVs. Of those, health researchers commonly reported the following: advisory/regulatory committee membership related to research program (83%), research translation award(s) (61%), and academic performance assessments (59%). Researchers least commonly indicated the following: citation metric scores (31%), summaries of impact (21%), and requests to use research materials and/or products (19%). Fewer than half of the health researchers intended to report knowledge translation (43%) and impact (33%) on their CVs. Strong beliefs about capabilities and consequences of reporting research translation and/or impact were significant predictors of intention. Main barriers were as follows: CV templates do not include research translation and impact activities, participants perceived employers do not value research translation and impact activities, and lack of metrics to evaluate research translation and impact. Ninety-six percent were unaware of a CV template formatted to include research translation and/or impact reporting.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Knowledge translation and impact indicators on the CV are inconsistently reported by our sample of health researchers. Modifiable barriers should be addressed to support more consistent reporting of such activities, including providing a CV template that includes research translation and impact as well as clear metrics to quantify them.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32885181
doi: 10.1186/s43058-020-00021-9
pii: 21
pmc: PMC7427883
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
20Informations de copyright
© The Author(s) 2020.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Competing interestsThe authors declare that they have no competing interests to disclose, except Alison Hutchinson is an Associate Editor for Implementation Science and was not involved in handling the peer-review process.
Références
PLoS One. 2017 May 1;12(5):e0176678
pubmed: 28459836
Health Res Policy Syst. 2017 Mar 21;15(1):22
pubmed: 28327199
Qual Health Res. 2005 Nov;15(9):1277-88
pubmed: 16204405
Scand J Caring Sci. 2013 Mar;27(1):1-2
pubmed: 23383725
Health Res Policy Syst. 2018 Feb 8;16(1):8
pubmed: 29422063
PLoS One. 2018 Feb 28;13(2):e0193201
pubmed: 29489870
PLoS One. 2014 Mar 18;9(3):e91013
pubmed: 24643173
Eval Program Plann. 2019 Apr;73:10-23
pubmed: 30453183
Int J Surg. 2014 Dec;12(12):1495-9
pubmed: 25046131
Nature. 2015 Apr 23;520(7548):429-31
pubmed: 25903611
Physiother Can. 2015 Winter;67(1):76-84
pubmed: 25931657
Lancet. 2014 Jan 11;383(9912):101-4
pubmed: 24411643
Lancet. 2003 Oct 11;362(9391):1225-30
pubmed: 14568747