Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Department of General Practice, and Amsterdam Public Health research institute, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract. 2024 Sep;29(4):1417-1434. doi: 10.1007/s10459-024-10340-4. Epub 2024 May 27.
Health professions education (HPE) research in the General Practice domain (GP-HPE) is vital for high-quality healthcare. Collaboration among GP-HPE researchers is crucial but challenging. Formulating a research agenda, involving stakeholders, and fostering inter-institutional collaboration can address these challenges and connect educational research and practice.
We used Q-methodology to explore perspectives on GP-HPE research of participants from all Dutch postgraduate GP training institutes. Participants individually sorted statements based on the relevance of future GP-HPE research for educational practice. Data analysis comprised inverted factor analysis, rotation, and qualitative interpretation of configurations of all statements. The National Meeting on Educational Research took a participatory approach.
We included 73 participants with diverse involvement in GP-HPE research. We identified five distinct perspectives, each representing a research focus area for developing and innovating GP education: the clinician scientist, the socially engaged GP, the specific GP identity, the GP as an entrepreneur, and the GP engaged in lifelong learning.
The resulting five perspectives align with General Practice hallmarks. Q-methodology and a participatory approach facilitated collaboration among stakeholders. Successful inter-institutional collaboration requires a common goal, neutral leadership, participant commitment, regular meetings, audit trail support, process transparency, and reflexivity. Future research should address evidence gaps within these perspectives.
Using Q-methodology turned out to be valuable for compiling a national research agenda for GP-HPE research. The research process helped to cross boundaries between researchers in different institutions, thus putting inter-institutional collaborative advantage center stage. Our approach could provide a conceivable procedure for HPE researchers worldwide.
普通科医学领域（GP-HPE）的卫生专业教育（HPE）研究对于高质量的医疗保健至关重要。GP-HPE 研究人员之间的合作至关重要，但也具有挑战性。制定研究议程，让利益相关者参与进来，并促进机构间的合作，可以解决这些挑战，并将教育研究与实践联系起来。
我们使用 Q 方法学来探索来自荷兰所有研究生普通科培训学院的参与者对 GP-HPE 研究的看法。参与者根据未来 GP-HPE 研究对教育实践的相关性，对陈述进行单独分类。数据分析包括反转因子分析、旋转和对所有陈述的配置进行定性解释。国家教育研究会议采用了参与式方法。
我们纳入了 73 名参与者，他们在 GP-HPE 研究中有着不同程度的参与。我们确定了五个不同的观点，每个观点都代表了发展和创新普通科教育的一个研究重点领域：临床科学家、社会参与的普通科医生、特定的普通科医生身份、普通科医生作为企业家、以及终身学习的普通科医生。
由此产生的五个观点与普通科的特点相一致。Q 方法学和参与式方法促进了利益相关者之间的合作。成功的机构间合作需要有一个共同的目标、中立的领导、参与者的承诺、定期会议、审计跟踪支持、过程透明度和反思性。未来的研究应该解决这些观点中的证据差距问题。
使用 Q 方法学为编制普通科医学研究的国家研究议程提供了有价值的参考。研究过程有助于跨越不同机构的研究人员之间的界限，从而将机构间的合作优势置于中心位置。我们的方法可以为全球卫生专业教育研究人员提供一个可行的程序。
