Perspectives of old-age and dementia researchers on communication with policymakers and public research funding decision-makers: an international cross-sectional survey.

IF 3.1 3区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Frontiers in Medicine Pub Date : 2024-12-20 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.3389/fmed.2024.1472479
Peter Fusdahl, Miguel Germán Borda, Jonathan Patricio Baldera, Dag Aarsland, Ara Khachaturian, Geir Sverre Braut
{"title":"Perspectives of old-age and dementia researchers on communication with policymakers and public research funding decision-makers: an international cross-sectional survey.","authors":"Peter Fusdahl, Miguel Germán Borda, Jonathan Patricio Baldera, Dag Aarsland, Ara Khachaturian, Geir Sverre Braut","doi":"10.3389/fmed.2024.1472479","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Society commonly believes that research knowledge is complementary to public decision-making. This study aimed to understand the perspectives and implications of dementia researchers communicating with policymakers and public research decision-makers (public officials).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study uses 24 questions from an anonymous, online survey, which was received by 392 members of nine European, Latin American, and United States medical researcher associations/networks in the fields of age-related neurological degeneration and dementia medicine. The data were analyzed via crosstab analysis, two group comparison analyses, and a logistic regression model.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In total, 91 (23.2%) respondents completed the questionnaire. Eight independent variables were related to researchers' research discipline, research remuneration, experience, authorship, H-index, and research grants. The statistically significant variables determining whether the respondents had contact with public officials were \"Years of research experience\" (<i>p</i> = 0.004), \"Number of articles first-authored in the last 5 years\" (<i>p</i> = 0.007), and \"Average H-index in the last 5 years\" (<i>p</i> = 0.048) [median (IQR)]; 47% of the surveyed researchers had been in contact with public officials in the last 12 months. The most frequently communicated topics were the importance of their own research to society (61%) and their own funding (60%); 87% (<i>n</i> = 79) of the researchers did not believe that public officials had a very good understanding of their dementia research.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Less than half (47%) of dementia researchers communicate with public officials, and they communicate mostly about the importance of their own research and funding their own research. Nine of 10 researchers do not believe that public officials understand their research well.</p>","PeriodicalId":12488,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Medicine","volume":"11 ","pages":"1472479"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11695358/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2024.1472479","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Society commonly believes that research knowledge is complementary to public decision-making. This study aimed to understand the perspectives and implications of dementia researchers communicating with policymakers and public research decision-makers (public officials).

Methods: This study uses 24 questions from an anonymous, online survey, which was received by 392 members of nine European, Latin American, and United States medical researcher associations/networks in the fields of age-related neurological degeneration and dementia medicine. The data were analyzed via crosstab analysis, two group comparison analyses, and a logistic regression model.

Results: In total, 91 (23.2%) respondents completed the questionnaire. Eight independent variables were related to researchers' research discipline, research remuneration, experience, authorship, H-index, and research grants. The statistically significant variables determining whether the respondents had contact with public officials were "Years of research experience" (p = 0.004), "Number of articles first-authored in the last 5 years" (p = 0.007), and "Average H-index in the last 5 years" (p = 0.048) [median (IQR)]; 47% of the surveyed researchers had been in contact with public officials in the last 12 months. The most frequently communicated topics were the importance of their own research to society (61%) and their own funding (60%); 87% (n = 79) of the researchers did not believe that public officials had a very good understanding of their dementia research.

Conclusion: Less than half (47%) of dementia researchers communicate with public officials, and they communicate mostly about the importance of their own research and funding their own research. Nine of 10 researchers do not believe that public officials understand their research well.

老年和痴呆研究人员与政策制定者和公共研究资助决策者沟通的视角:一项国际横断面调查。
引言:社会普遍认为研究知识是公共决策的补充。本研究旨在了解痴呆症研究人员与政策制定者和公共研究决策者(政府官员)沟通的观点和意义。方法:本研究采用匿名在线调查中的24个问题,该调查由9个欧洲、拉丁美洲和美国医学研究协会/网络的392名成员接受,这些成员在与年龄相关的神经变性和痴呆医学领域。通过交叉表分析、两组比较分析和逻辑回归模型对数据进行分析。结果:共91人(23.2%)完成问卷调查。8个自变量与研究人员的研究学科、研究报酬、经验、作者身份、h指数和研究经费有关。决定被调查者是否接触公职人员的统计显著变量为“科研经验年数”(p = 0.004)、“最近5 年第一作者论文数”(p = 0.007)、“最近5 年平均h指数”(p = 0.048)[中位数(IQR)];47%的被调查研究人员在过去12个 月内与政府官员有过接触。最常交流的话题是他们自己的研究对社会的重要性(61%)和他们自己的资金(60%);87% (n = 79)的研究人员不认为公职人员对他们的痴呆症研究有很好的了解。结论:不到一半(47%)的痴呆症研究人员与政府官员沟通,他们主要是就自己的研究和资助自己的研究的重要性进行沟通。10个研究人员中有9个认为政府官员不太了解他们的研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Frontiers in Medicine
Frontiers in Medicine Medicine-General Medicine
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
5.10%
发文量
3710
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: Frontiers in Medicine publishes rigorously peer-reviewed research linking basic research to clinical practice and patient care, as well as translating scientific advances into new therapies and diagnostic tools. Led by an outstanding Editorial Board of international experts, this multidisciplinary open-access journal is at the forefront of disseminating and communicating scientific knowledge and impactful discoveries to researchers, academics, clinicians and the public worldwide. In addition to papers that provide a link between basic research and clinical practice, a particular emphasis is given to studies that are directly relevant to patient care. In this spirit, the journal publishes the latest research results and medical knowledge that facilitate the translation of scientific advances into new therapies or diagnostic tools. The full listing of the Specialty Sections represented by Frontiers in Medicine is as listed below. As well as the established medical disciplines, Frontiers in Medicine is launching new sections that together will facilitate - the use of patient-reported outcomes under real world conditions - the exploitation of big data and the use of novel information and communication tools in the assessment of new medicines - the scientific bases for guidelines and decisions from regulatory authorities - access to medicinal products and medical devices worldwide - addressing the grand health challenges around the world
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信