Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow E-letters: Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when E-letters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (6)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Shaw, S.
Right arrow Articles by Carter, Y. H
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Shaw, S.
Right arrow Articles by Carter, Y. H
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Family Practice Vol. 21, No. 1, 92-98
© Oxford University Press 2004, all rights reserved.


Article

Developing research management and governance capacity in primary care organizations: transferable learning from a qualitative evaluation of UK pilot sites

Sara Shawa,e,, Fraser Macfarlaneb, Colin Greavesc and Yvonne H Carterd

a Department of General Practice and Primary Care and d Institute of Community Health Sciences, Barts and The London, Queen Mary's School of Medicine and Dentistry, Medical Sciences Building, Mile End Road, London E1 4NS, b School of Management, University of Surrey, Guldford, Surrey and c Mid Devon Primary Care Research Group, Devon, UK; e Present address: Department of Primary Care and Population Sciences, University College London, Holborn Union Building, Highgate Hill, London N19 5LW

E-mail: sara.shaw{at}pcps.ucl.ac.uk

Background. The capacity and capabilities for undertaking primary care research have increased both within and outside of the UK in recent years. The UK Department of Health aims to facilitate this further by establishing a national network of primary care organizations (PCOs) ready to act as hosts for shared research governance systems. However, it is unclear which models offer the most effective option. In addition, there is confusion over new processes and concern that researchers may be deterred from addressing important questions.

Objectives. The research ascertains how PCOs selected as pilot sites have organized research management and governance (RM&G).

Methods. We adopted a case study approach involving interviews with key informants in a purposive sample of eight pilot PCO (RM&G) sites.

Results. Motivating factors for PCOs to host RM&G included the possibility of additional resources and more effective use of research to improve service delivery. A range of organizational models were adopted, often reflecting existing strategic alliances. It is envisaged that it will not be effective or cost-effective for many PCOs to make individual arrangements for RM&G, and so models are already developing among groups of PCOs and partner organizations. The extent of partnerships between PCOs varied with concern over critical mass and dilution of expertise in larger groupings. The development and implementation of systems in pilot sites was facilitated by the support of the wider PCO in recognizing research as a valued and integral part of the organization; the effective management of relationships and the establishment of equal partnership arrangements for RM&G, and the effective use of existing R&D infrastructure and expertise.

Conclusions. RM&G partnerships vary according to local circumstances. It is likely that groupings will develop in the future with increasing co-terminosity and across wider health organization boundaries, such as Strategic Heath Authorities (in the UK) or primary care research networks. Critical mass of RM&G arrangements is likely to be linked to levels of research activity. There are real concerns over the levels of bureaucracy associated with the implementation of research governance; however, those PCOs that develop as RM&G sites have the opportunity to enrich their organizations and expand clinically relevant R&D. Partnership working within PCOs and with primary care research networks, academic departments or acute trusts, may be the key to success. Those undertaking research within primary care settings outside of the UK can learn important lessons from the UK experience and ensure development of high quality research that informs improvements in patient care.

Keywords. Health policy, organization and administration, primary health care, research.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
BMJHome page
L. Robinson, D. Murdoch-Eaton, and Y. Carter
NHS research ethics committees
BMJ, July 7, 2007; 335(7609): 6 - 6.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Fam PractHome page
F. Macfarlane, S. Shaw, T. Greenhalgh, and Y. H Carter
General practices as emergent research organizations: a qualitative study into organizational development
Fam. Pract., June 1, 2005; 22(3): 298 - 304.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]



Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.