Researchers in residence in general practice

We welcome Marshall et al.’s call for researchers in residence (June issue). ¹

They have identified the big academic problem of separation of university-based academics from service-based practitioners to the detriment of both and have devised a way of ameliorating the problem.

We, too, in our research-oriented general practice undertake regular research inside an NHS service setting. The St Leonard’s Practice has been publishing research in peer-reviewed medical journals. Since 2005, we have employed successively three different PhD research staff, one being first author of this letter. There are many benefits: research is sharply focused on patient care and related issues. We have published research on predicting emergency admissions ² and report diagnosing diabetes before symptoms ³ plus the costs of this, ⁴ through one practice’s research. The part-time PhD staff member is a ‘researcher in residence’ bringing extra academic time and rigour to our work.

We believe general practice is the priority setting for this development. GP postgraduate training is shorter than all postgraduate specialist training and much less research-oriented. Hospital staff usually see research taking place in their service setting – the hospitals: GPs do not see active research in their clinical setting. GP registrars are the only doctors in training who usually never see research led from their own clinical setting. However, students experiencing it can become enthused by research in general practice – one attached BSc student won Exeter University’s Quintiles Prize for Women in Science. ⁵

Research in general practices is complementary to university-based research. We know no academic disadvantages. The main obstacle is funding.