Cook Florence, Gilbody Nicky, Hunt Jenny, Knight Zoe, Sheldrick Heulwen, Houghton Lisa, Ewers Caroline, Caygill Michael, Speight Holly, Nazareth Irwin, Govender Roganie
Head & Neck Centre, University College London Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, 250 Euston Road, London, NW1 2PG, UK.
Head and Neck Academic Centre, Division of Surgery and Interventional Science, University College London, Charles Bell House, 43-45 Foley Street, London, W1W 7TS, UK.
BMC Health Serv Res. 2025 May 14;25(1):700. doi: 10.1186/s12913-025-12584-1.
Research impact is defined as an effect, change or benefit to the wider society or services beyond academia. Measuring impact demonstrates benefit and value for money of publicly-funded research. This study evaluates differing levels of impact associated with completion of the National Institute for Health and Care Research Associate Principal Investigator (PI) scheme on SIP SMART2 (Swallowing Intervention Package - Self Monitoring, Assessment & Rehabilitation Training 2); cluster-randomised multi-centre phase II trial with a focus on Prehabilitation of swallowing in head and neck cancer.
Data was acquired using two qualitative methods: Reflective virtual discussion group and documentary evidence based on the individual portfolios/checklists of eight accredited Associate PIs. Framework analysis and the evidence of impact model was employed for analysis.
High level impact was identified on the micro level, with evidence of individual learning and sense of pride in becoming an accredited Associate PI. Medium to high level impact was found at the meso level including taking a leading role in research delivery within own organisations and raising professional profiles amongst the wider team. There were limited examples directly demonstrating macro level impact.
The Associate PI scheme provides opportunities for professional groups that otherwise might not be involved in clinical trials, promoting equality and inclusiveness with benefits across multiple levels of impact. The current checklist of activities is designed to demonstrate competence in clinical trial delivery and may not currently capture the wider benefits and impact of the scheme. These could be better captured with some additions to the checklist including follow-up on potential impacts accrued beyond the 6-month timefame.
研究影响力被定义为对学术界以外的更广泛社会或服务产生的效果、变化或益处。衡量影响力能证明公共资助研究的益处和资金价值。本研究评估了与完成国家卫生与保健研究所副首席研究员(PI)计划对吞咽干预包 - 自我监测、评估与康复训练2(SIP SMART2)的影响相关的不同水平;这是一项整群随机多中心II期试验,重点关注头颈癌吞咽功能的预康复。
使用两种定性方法获取数据:反思性虚拟讨论组和基于八位认证副PI的个人档案/清单的文献证据。采用框架分析和影响证据模型进行分析。
在微观层面发现了高水平的影响,有个人学习的证据以及成为认证副PI的自豪感。在中观层面发现了中到高水平的影响,包括在自身组织内的研究实施中发挥主导作用以及在更广泛的团队中提升专业形象。直接证明宏观层面影响的例子有限。
副PI计划为那些原本可能不参与临床试验的专业群体提供了机会,促进了平等和包容性,在多个影响层面都带来了益处。当前的活动清单旨在展示临床试验实施方面的能力,目前可能无法涵盖该计划更广泛的益处和影响。通过对清单进行一些补充,包括对6个月时间框架之外产生的潜在影响进行跟踪,可以更好地捕捉这些内容。