4.6 Article

Collaboration and knowledge generation in an 18-year quality improvement research programme in Australian Indigenous primary healthcare: a coauthorship network analysis

Journal

BMJ OPEN
Volume 11, Issue 5, Pages -

Publisher

BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-045101

Keywords

health policy; primary care; quality in health care

Funding

  1. National Health and Medical Research Council [1078927]
  2. National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia [1078927] Funding Source: NHMRC

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study examines publication outputs from an Australian Indigenous primary healthcare research network from 2002 to 2019. It found that the number of publications increased over time, especially in the final phase, indicating the importance of long-term relationship building and diversity in authorship for enhancing research impact in continuous quality improvement in primary healthcare.
Objectives Though multidisciplinary research networks support the practice and effectiveness of continuous quality improvement (CQI) programmes, their characteristics and development are poorly understood. In this study, we examine publication outputs from a research network in Australian Indigenous primary healthcare (PHC) to assess to what extent the research network changed over time. Setting Australian CQI research network in Indigenous PHC from 2002 to 2019. Participants Authors from peer-reviewed journal articles and books published by the network. Design Coauthor networks across four phases of the network (2002-2004; 2005-2009; 2010-2014; 2015-2019) were constructed based on author affiliations and examined using social network analysis methods. Descriptive characteristics included organisation types, Indigenous representation, gender, student authorship and thematic research trends. Results We identified 128 publications written by 308 individual authors from 79 different organisations. Publications increased in number and diversity over each funding phase. During the final phase, publication outputs accelerated for organisations, students, project officers, Indigenous and female authors. Over time there was also a shift in research themes to encompass new clinical areas and social, environmental or behavioural determinants of health. Average degree (8.1), clustering (0.81) and diameter (3) indicated a well-connected network, with a core-periphery structure in each phase (p <= 0.03) rather than a single central organisation (degree centralisation=0.55-0.65). Academic organisations dominated the core structure in all funding phases. Conclusion Collaboration in publications increased with network consolidation and expansion. Increased productivity was associated with increased authorship diversity and a decentralised network, suggesting these may be important factors in enhancing research impact and advancing the knowledge and practice of CQI in PHC. Publication diversity and growth occurred mainly in the fourth phase, suggesting long-term relationship building among diverse partners is required to facilitate participatory research in CQI. Despite improvements, further work is needed to address inequities in female authorship and Indigenous authorship.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available