Читать книгу A Guide to the Scientific Career - Группа авторов - Страница 130

14 Essence of Collaborative Research: Leadership, Engaging Others, and Cooperativeness

Rebecca Andall Petru Matusz Jerzy Gielecki and Marios Loukas

Department of Anatomical Sciences, St. George's University School of Medicine, Grenada, West Indies

14.1 Introduction

Collaborative research is a fairly modern concept in which the pursuit of new knowledge is married to the desire to solve societal problems through the interaction of a multidisciplinary expert team. Scientists and researchers are now encouraged to work with the various stakeholders in the community to which their work applies in order to break down the divide between researchers, healthcare professionals, scholars, decision makers, and community members (O'Sullivan et al. 2010). This approach requires active engagement of these various professionals throughout all stages of the research process to ensure that the research problem is addressed in its societal context (Barkin et al. 2013; Krebbekx et al. 2012).

Collaborations are made between professionals in the same field or across scientific disciplines and institutions in order to take advantage of the unique perspectives and expertise that these individuals can offer (O'Sullivan et al. 2010; Hofmeyer et al. 2012). These collaborations are necessary in this new era of ultra‐specialization in medicine and with the increased prevalence of chronic multisystem diseases. It also ensures that clinicians are accountable to their colleagues and to the public to deliver quality, evidence‐based care while efficiently using resources and avoiding waste (Miles et al. 2013).

There are numerous examples of multicenter partnerships around the world. The Tuberculosis Network European Trials group (TBNET) is a collaboration, launched in 2006, made up of a network of 500 professionals around the world to address shared research agendas related to tuberculosis in Europe (Giehl et al. 2012). The Early Nutrition Programming Project (EARNEST) is another organization comprising a multidisciplinary international team from 40 institutions around Europe who address issues surrounding nutrition in early childhood (Koletzko et al. 2011). Similarly, the World Health Organization (WHO) has taken the concept of collaboration to a global level with an importance placed on bringing professionals together to help improve health and healthcare policy around the world.

The purpose of this chapter is to provide some background to this approach, guidance on how to make collaborations more effective and to caution on some of the challenges that may be encountered as different teams interact to achieve a common goal.

14.2 Why Collaborate?

Collaborative research methodologies have been developed to minimize efforts from a single group. It was also implemented to reduce the delays between scientific advances, improvements in healthcare policy and the use of the new knowledge by clinicians (Barkin et al. 2013; Mikesell et al. 2013; Miles et al. 2013).

Minority communities should be included in decisions about healthcare policy because they tend to be compliant with research and benefit from improved health outcomes (Amendola 2011). Studies that engage minority populations in all aspects of research experience higher enrollment rates and fewer dropout rates within these ethnic groups (De las Nueces et al. 2012). Patients benefit from partnerships because they have access to a team of experts that offer “best practice” by continually incorporating up‐to‐date innovations into their patient care (Miles et al. 2013). Researchers benefit from collaborations because they have access to multidisciplinary perspectives that allow them to tackle a research problem in a well‐rounded but relevant way. They can also take advantage of pooled resources, technologies, and funding.

14.3 Challenges to Collaborative Research

Researchers may find collaborative research a challenge because they were not taught how to effectively interact within interdisciplinary teams during their training. It is also difficult to create partnerships amongst academic institutions that subscribe to conflicting theoretical frameworks (O'Sullivan et al. 2010). More often than not, it is the cultural differences or the managerial politics within institutions that create barriers to collaborations (Cummings and Kiesler 2005; Raza 2005).

There can also be conflicts between the different professions within a team. Researchers may focus on hypothesis‐driven goals while clinicians may reject these theories for ones that coincide with what they experience in their workplace (Krebbekx et al. 2012). Team members may have different expectations and goals for a study that can impede group synergy (Mikesell et al. 2013). Still, there are special challenges that can be experienced when researchers work with policy makers as there can be frequent changes in professional roles, availability and political interest (Hofmeyer et al. 2012). Also, working with untrained community members may make maintaining study protocols and standards more difficult (Barkin et al. 2013).

The right to authorship and ownership of research can also become a complicated issue as the number of collaborators on a project, with their varying levels of contribution, increase. In practice, a person's right to authorship should not be challenged if that person contributed to the study design, analysis of data or its interpretation, or were contacted to review the manuscript before it is published. These guidelines, however, do not address the rights to authorship for contributions made by other stakeholders in research such as biobanks (Colledge et al. 2013).

14.4 Ethical Considerations

Most scholars agree that collaborative research calls for its own set of ethical guidelines. Community autonomy versus individual autonomy is one topic that is frequently debated in the literature. Some scholars are of the view that the traditional Belmont Report definition of patient autonomy is not comprehensive enough to provide appropriate guidance for community medicine and collaboration. Researchers are asked to recognize a community's right to self‐determination about the involvement of its individual members in research. Researchers are also asked to safeguard members of the community with impaired autonomy. A big aspect of respecting community autonomy involves the handling of research findings. However, some researchers argue against disclosing negative findings to community members (Mikesell et al. 2013). Researchers need to find ways of handling research data that does not jeopardize the confidentiality of the individual members in the community.

Collaborative research also imposes unique ethical dilemmas for researchers in terms of justice. For instance, problems can arise where there is a need to fairly distribute resources throughout the community despite limited funding. Minimizing harm to the community as well as managing informed consent can also prove more challenging for collaborative teams (Mikesell et al. 2013).

14.5 How to Make Collaborations Work

In order to make collaborations work, there should be ongoing communications between team members throughout the research process. These meetings should aim to clarify roles and expectations and to foster trust between members. It is important that problems are discussed openly as they arise and that the research goals address the needs of all parties in a relevant way (Happell 2010). It is also important that funding, capacity building (Mikesell et al. 2013), and post‐study sustainability (Blevins et al. 2010) in a community are addressed before the study is underway.

14.6 Conclusions

Regional and global health issues have become increasingly more important in society. As a result, academics are asked to make meaningful partnerships with key players within and outside of their field in order to have a more comprehensive understanding on health and healthcare policies. While most scholars would agree that collaborations are a good thing, there are still unique challenges that will need to be overcome to make these interactions beneficial to all stakeholders in the community.

References

1 Amendola, M. (2011). Empowerment: healthcare professionals' and community members' contributions. J. Cult. Divers. 18: 82–89.

2 Barkin, S. , Schlundt, D. , and Smith, P. (2013). Community‐engaged research perspectives: then and now. Acad. Pediatr. 13: 93–97.

3 Blevins, D. , Farmer, M.S. , Edlund, C. et al. (2010). Collaborative research between clinicians and researchers: a multiple case study of implementation. Implement. Sci. 5:: 76–84.

4 Colledge, F. , Elger, B. , and Shaw, D. (2013). “Conferring authorship”: biobank stakeholders' experiences with publication credit in collaborative research. PLoS One 8:: e76686.

5 Cummings, J.N. and Kiesler, S. (2005). Collaborative research across disciplinary and organisational boundaries. Soc. Stud. Sci. 35: 703–722.

6 De las Nueces, D. , Hacker, K. , DiGirolamo, A. et al. (2012). A systematic review of community‐based participatory research to enhance clinical trials in racial and ethnic minority groups. Health Serv. Res. 47: 363–1386.

7 Giehl, C. , Lange, C. , Duarte, R. et al. (2012). TBNET ‐ collaborative research on tuberculosis in Europe. Eur. J. Microbiol. Immunol. 2: 264–274.

8 Happell, B. (2010). Protecting the rights of individuals in collaborative research. Nurse Res. 17: 34–43.

9 Hofmeyer, A. , Scott, C. , and Lagendyk, L. (2012). Researcher‐decision‐maker partnerships in health services research: practical challenges, guiding principles. BMC Health Serv. Res. 12: 280.

10 Koletzko, B. , Brands, B. , and Demmelmair, H. (2011). The early nutrition programming project (EARNEST): 5 y of successful multidisciplinary collaborative research. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 94: 1749S–1753S.

11 Krebbekx, W. , Harting, J. , and Stronks, K. (2012). Does collaborative research enhance the integration of research, policy and practice? The case of the Dutch health broker partnership. J. Health Serv. Res. Policy 17: 219–226. Accessed June 3, 2014.

12 Mikesell, L. , Bromley, E. , and Khodyakov, D. (2013). Ethical community‐engaged research: a literature review. Am. J. Public Health 103: e7–e14.

13 Miles, P.V. , Conway, P.H. , and Pawlson, L.G. (2013). Physician professionalism and accountability: the role of collaborative improvement networks. Pediatrics 131: S2049.

14 O'Sullivan, P. , Stoddard, H. , and Kalishman, S. (2010). Collaborative research in medical education: a discussion of theory and practice. Med. Educ. 44: 1175–1184.

15 Raza, M. (2005). Collaborative healthcare research: some ethical considerations. Sci. Eng. Ethics 1: 177–186.