Capturing the Real Impact of Clinical Academics in Practice

Q2 Health Professions
J. Coad, J. Manning, E. Mills, C. Semple, B. Johnston, A. Mcmahon
{"title":"Capturing the Real Impact of Clinical Academics in Practice","authors":"J. Coad, J. Manning, E. Mills, C. Semple, B. Johnston, A. Mcmahon","doi":"10.18552/ijpblhsc.v7i2.647","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The Clinical Academic Careers Framework proposes an over-arching structure to develop the clinical academic workforce whose activities have patient benefit within a clear UK programme. Traditionally this has centred on professionals from medicine and dentistry, but in the last ten years has developed into a more inclusive career framework for non-medical health professions which includes Nurses, Midwives and Allied Health Professionals (NMAHPs) and Healthcare Scientists (HCSs) that provide NHS services. As such, it is reported that clinical academic NMAHPs and HCSs can contribute to the generation and translation of new knowledge to help improve outcomes and experiences for patients. In this article, we explore key issues relating to the impact of clinical academic NMAHPs and HCSs on clinical practice in a UK context, as well as some measurements of impact, including the value and limitations of currently used metrics (such as Key Performance Indicators, or KPIs). We report that measuring the learning in practice of this novel role will need to include smart metrics alongside a person-centred approach. We share four national case studies, all of which are drawn from clinical academic researchers from different UK settings to show the real variety and differences in roles. We argue that this is the key both to learning in practice about this role, and to witnessing the real differences clinical academics make.","PeriodicalId":36796,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Practice-Based Learning in Health and Social Care","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-12-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"10","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Practice-Based Learning in Health and Social Care","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18552/ijpblhsc.v7i2.647","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Health Professions","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 10

Abstract

The Clinical Academic Careers Framework proposes an over-arching structure to develop the clinical academic workforce whose activities have patient benefit within a clear UK programme. Traditionally this has centred on professionals from medicine and dentistry, but in the last ten years has developed into a more inclusive career framework for non-medical health professions which includes Nurses, Midwives and Allied Health Professionals (NMAHPs) and Healthcare Scientists (HCSs) that provide NHS services. As such, it is reported that clinical academic NMAHPs and HCSs can contribute to the generation and translation of new knowledge to help improve outcomes and experiences for patients. In this article, we explore key issues relating to the impact of clinical academic NMAHPs and HCSs on clinical practice in a UK context, as well as some measurements of impact, including the value and limitations of currently used metrics (such as Key Performance Indicators, or KPIs). We report that measuring the learning in practice of this novel role will need to include smart metrics alongside a person-centred approach. We share four national case studies, all of which are drawn from clinical academic researchers from different UK settings to show the real variety and differences in roles. We argue that this is the key both to learning in practice about this role, and to witnessing the real differences clinical academics make.
在实践中捕捉临床学术的真正影响
临床学术职业框架提出了一个总体结构,以发展临床学术队伍,其活动在明确的英国计划中使患者受益。传统上,这是以医学和牙科专业人员为中心的,但在过去十年中,它已经发展成为非医疗卫生专业人员的更具包容性的职业框架,其中包括护士、助产士和联合卫生专业人员(NMAHP)以及提供NHS服务的医疗保健科学家(HCSs)。因此,据报道,临床学术NMAHP和HCSs可以有助于新知识的生成和翻译,以帮助改善患者的结果和体验。在这篇文章中,我们探讨了与英国临床学术NMAHP和HCSs对临床实践的影响有关的关键问题,以及一些影响的衡量标准,包括当前使用的指标(如关键绩效指标或KPI)的价值和局限性。我们报告称,衡量这一新角色在实践中的学习情况,需要将智能指标与以人为本的方法结合起来。我们分享了四个国家的案例研究,所有这些研究都来自英国不同环境的临床学术研究人员,以展示角色的真实多样性和差异。我们认为,这是在实践中学习这一角色的关键,也是见证临床学者所产生的真正差异的关键。
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
International Journal of Practice-Based Learning in Health and Social Care
International Journal of Practice-Based Learning in Health and Social Care Health Professions-Health Professions (miscellaneous)
CiteScore
1.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
12
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书