Refocusing research: A mixed methods study to evaluate utilisation of the top 10 priorities for occupational therapy research in the United Kingdom

Abstract

Introduction:

The top 10 priorities for occupational therapy research in the United Kingdom were identified via a priority setting partnership and published in 2020. This study aimed to evaluate utilisation of the top 10 priorities since 2020 and identify recommendations to re-focus research efforts.

Method:

A mixed methods approach involving evidence checking and stakeholder consultation was undertaken. Direct and selective methods were used to recruit stakeholders, including previous steering group members, who were invited to take part in 30-minute semi-structured interviews.

Results:

Eighty-one evidence sources were included and addressed the research priorities 127 times. Stakeholders (N = 7) discussed the top 10 priorities in relation to five key themes: (1) what has been done; (2) the most addressed priorities; (3) the least addressed priorities; (4) barriers to using the priorities (three barriers emerged); and (5) what should be done next (six strategies emerged).

Conclusion:

There was strong agreement that research priority 1 (how does occupational therapy have an impact and make a difference on everyday lives?) was the most addressed; however, all research priorities require more attention. Recommendations to refocus research efforts included continuing to support priority-driven research and greater promotion of the priorities.

Keywords

Occupational therapy priority setting partnership research priorities James Lind Alliance

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Comer

Collings

McCracken

, et al. (2022) Allied health professionals’ perceptions of research in the United Kingdom National Health Service: A survey of research capacity and culture. BioMed Central Health Services Research 22: 1094.

Ganesan

Fong

KNK

Meena

, et al. (2021) Impact of COVID-19 pandemic lockdown on occupational therapy practice and use of telerehabilitation – A cross sectional study. European Review for Medical and Pharmacological Sciences 25: 3614–3622.

Grill

(2021) Involving stakeholders in research priority setting: A scoping review. Research Involvement and Engagement 7: 75.

Health Education England (2022) Allied Health Professions’ Research and Innovation Strategy for England. London, England: National Health Service.

James Lind Alliance (2022) The James Lind Alliance. Available at: https://www.jla.nihr.ac.uk/ (accessed 4 August 2023).

Jazieh

Kozlakidis

(2020) Healthcare transformation in the post-coronavirus PANDEMIC ERA. Frontiers in Medicine (Lausanne) 7: 429.

Royal College of Occupational Therapists (2021) Identifying research priorities for occupational therapy in the UK. Available at: https://www.rcot.co.uk/top-10 (accessed 17 July 2023).

Staley

Crowe

(2019) More than a top 10: How James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnerships transform research, people and organisations. Available at: https://www.jla.nihr.ac.uk/ (accessed 3 August 2023).

Walden University Library (2023) Evidence-Based Research: Levels of Evidence Pyramid. Available at: https://academicguides.waldenu.edu/library/healthevidence/evidencepyramid (accessed 17 July 2023).

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.03 MB