Promotion of research in primary care
Objective. To identify what can be done to promote research and development (R+D) in primary care. To find the main lines of primary care R+D in the Community of Valencia, Spain. Design. Qualitative research based on consensus group. Concretely, the Phillips technique, modified for the number attend...
| Autores: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Tipo de recurso: | artículo |
| Estado: | Versión publicada |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2008 |
| País: | España |
| Institución: | Fundación para el Fomento de la Investigación Sanitaria y Biomédica de la Comunitat Valenciana (FISABIO) |
| Repositorio: | r-FISABIO. Repositorio Institucional de Producción Científica |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:fisabio.fundanetsuite.com:p14408 |
| Acceso en línea: | https://fisabio.portalinvestigacion.com/publicaciones/14408 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palabra clave: | research family practice primary health care cualitative research |
| Sumario: | Objective. To identify what can be done to promote research and development (R+D) in primary care. To find the main lines of primary care R+D in the Community of Valencia, Spain. Design. Qualitative research based on consensus group. Concretely, the Phillips technique, modified for the number attending, was employed. Setting. Primary care. Participants. Twenty-four primary care professionals in the Community of Valencia (75% of 32 invited): physicians, pharmacists, teaching or research unit professionals, medical managers, and researcher-doctors leading primary care R+D projects. Main measurements. Four questions were asked: concerning barriers to research, how to make it easier to take part in competitive R+D contests, how to disseminate results and what topics are of most interest today. Results. Problems identified were: lack of time, need for technical support, and need for day-schools and prizes to promote investigation. It was suggested that research should be given value in job contests, it should be made a requirement to finish training (MIR), funds for projects in health areas should be created and finance for emerging groups should be provided. Conclusions. In summary, it was proposed to create research units in every department/area with professionals given time off to lead projects and with administrative support to gain resources. Doctors should be encouraged to take part by the recognition of research for job contests, in their professional careers and in productivity indicators. |
|---|