背景:卫生专业人员参与转化健康和医学研究(HMR)是基于证据的实践的基础,从而导致更好的患者健康结果。然而,从事研究的卫生专业人员数量有所减少,这对患者健康和经济有影响。在基于动机的预期价值成本(EVC)和自我决定理论(SDT)的指导下,本系统文献综述研究了卫生专业人员(HP)进行研究的动机的障碍和促进因素。
方法:在2011年至2021年之间搜索了相关的英文同行评审文章,使用CINAHL完成,提供信息,MedlineOvid,Medline(PubMed),Scopus,WebofScience和GoogleScholar数据库。本系统评价按照PRISMA指南进行并报告。
结果:确定了HP参与研究的障碍包括缺乏知识,技能,和进行研究的能力,缺乏受保护的研究时间,缺乏资金和组织支持。整合基于EVC和SDT理论的这篇综述的结果表明,研究能力,ie,预期和能力受到态度的高度影响,ie,价值的类型(成就,内在或效用)和归因于研究的联系。对研究持积极态度的惠普表现出了这三种价值观,尽管存在障碍,他们仍热衷于从事研究。那些持积极态度的人只是因为它的效用价值而被激励去做研究,并不一定认为它对自己有个人意义。没有动机的HP没有看到与研究经验的任何个人联系或相关性,并且在研究中没有价值。
结论:HP对其研究价值的态度是动机或动机参与研究的催化剂,因为它直接影响障碍的相关性。加快研究旅程的促进者被归因于研究培训,指导计划和支持性组织研究文化。通过EVC和SDT探索的HP的动机对于维持研究文化和临床医生-研究人员开发管道至关重要。
BACKGROUND: Health professionals\' engagement in translational health and medical research (HMR) is fundamental to evidence-based practice leading to better patient health outcomes. However, there is a decline in the number of health professionals undertaking research which has implications for patient health and the economy. Informed by the motivation-based expectancy-value-cost (
EVC) and self determination theories (SDT), this systematic literature
review examined the barriers and facilitators of health professionals\' (HPs) motivation to undertake research.
METHODS: The literature was searched between 2011 and 2021 for relevant peer-reviewed articles written in English, using CINAHL Complete, Informit, Medline Ovid, Medline (PubMed), Scopus, Web of Science and Google Scholar databases. This systematic
review was performed and reported in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines.
RESULTS: Identified barriers to HPs\' engagement with research included the lack of knowledge, skills, and competence to conduct research, lack of protected research time, lack of funding and lack of organisational support. Integration of the findings of this
review based on the
EVC and SDT theories indicate that research capacity, ie, expectancy and competence is highly influenced by attitude, ie, the type of value (attainment, intrinsic or utility) and connection attributed to research. HPs who had very positive attitude towards research demonstrated all three values and were keen to take up research despite the barriers. Those who had a positive attitude were only motivated to do research because of its utility value and did not necessarily see it as having personal relevance for themselves. HPs who were unmotivated did not see any personal connection or relatedness to the research experience and saw no value in research.
CONCLUSIONS: The attitude HPs hold in their value of research is a catalyst for motivation or amotivation to engage in research as it directly influences the relevance of barriers. Facilitators that expedite the research journey have been attributed to research training, mentorship programs and supportive organisational research culture. Motivation of HPs explored through
EVC and SDT is critical to the maintenance of a research culture and the clinician-researcher development pipeline.