Weidner Amanda, Peterson Lars E, Mainous Arch G, Datta Avisek, Ewigman Bernard
Association of Departments of Family Medicine, Leawood, KS, and University of Washington School of Medicine, Family Medicine Residency Network.
University of Kentucky College of Medicine.
Fam Med. 2019 Feb;51(2):112-119. doi: 10.22454/FamMed.2019.180310.
Capacity for conducting family medicine research has grown significantly since the specialty was founded. Many calls to increase this capacity have been published, but there has been no consistent, systematic, and longitudinal assessment. This survey was designed to gather baseline data with an easily replicable set of measures associated with research productivity that can guide and monitor the impact of efforts to build research capacity in US departments of family medicine (DFMs).
We surveyed family medicine department chairs regarding departmental research capacity using well-established empirical measures of capacity (trained research faculty, infrastructure, research leadership, and funding) and a self-assessment. We used bivariate analyses to assess correlation between the empirical measures and the self-assessed stage of research capacity.
Self-assessed capacity was significantly associated with every empirical measure. High-capacity departments have more research-trained faculty, more faculty effort, utilize more research "laboratories," have more faculty serving on federal peer-review panels, more faculty as principal investigators, devote more internal funding to research, and garner larger amounts of funding from more external funding sources than moderate or minimal-capacity departments.
US DFMs have made great strides over the past half century in building research capacity. However, much more capacity in family medicine and primary care research is needed to produce new knowledge necessary to improve the health and health care of the nation. Periodic measurement using the simple, replicable, and valid minimum measures of this study provides an opportunity to establish longitudinal tracking of change in research capacity in US DFMs.
自家庭医学专业创立以来，开展家庭医学研究的能力有了显著提升。许多呼吁提高这一能力的文章已经发表，但一直没有持续、系统和纵向的评估。本次调查旨在收集基线数据，采用一套易于复制的与研究生产力相关的指标，以指导和监测美国各家庭医学系（DFMs）建设研究能力的努力所产生的影响。
我们就部门研究能力对家庭医学系主任进行了调查，采用成熟的能力实证指标（受过培训的研究人员、基础设施、研究领导力和资金）以及自我评估。我们使用双变量分析来评估实证指标与研究能力自我评估阶段之间的相关性。
自我评估的能力与每项实证指标都显著相关。高能力的部门拥有更多经过研究培训的教员、更多的教员投入、使用更多的研究“实验室”、有更多教员在联邦同行评审小组任职、更多教员担任首席研究员、投入更多内部资金用于研究，并且比中等或低能力部门从更多外部资金来源获得的资金数额更大。
美国的家庭医学系在过去半个世纪里在建设研究能力方面取得了巨大进展。然而，为了产生改善国家健康和医疗保健所需的新知识，家庭医学和初级保健研究还需要更多的能力。使用本研究中简单、可复制且有效的最低指标进行定期测量，为建立美国各家庭医学系研究能力变化的纵向跟踪提供了机会。
