Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2024 Jun 7:11:23821205241233425.
doi: 10.1177/23821205241233425. eCollection 2024 Jan-Dec.

An Assessment of Clinical Research Self-Efficacy among Researchers at the Largest Healthcare Institute in Qatar: Recommendations and Future Actions

Affiliations

An Assessment of Clinical Research Self-Efficacy among Researchers at the Largest Healthcare Institute in Qatar: Recommendations and Future Actions

Seba Qussini et al. J Med Educ Curric Dev. .

Abstract

Objectives: Clinical research professionals must be equipped with adequate training in sound scientific methods and appropriate ethics. In this study, we aimed to assess the current clinical research self-efficacy of researchers at Hamad Medical Corporation (HMC). We also evaluated the effects of training courses on researchers' self-efficacy.

Methods: Utilizing a cross-sectional design, we used the shortened Clinical Research Appraisal Inventory (CRAI-12) through an online survey to assess the current clinical research self-efficacy of 600 researchers at HMC, Doha, Qatar. After conducting descriptive analyses, unpaired t test and ANOVA were used to determine significant mean percentages between variables. Pearson correlation coefficients were also calculated to measure the association among the interval variables. All tests were 2-sided, and significance was defined as P < .05.

Results: For all questions, except those related to "funding," most participants scored on the upper half of the scale (>5), reflecting higher self-efficacy for the topics covered in CRAI. Gender differences were significant across all factors, with males reporting higher levels of self-assessed efficacy and in clinical research. Other factors such as higher education degrees and previous (external) clinical research training were also associated with higher self-reported clinical research efficacy.

Conclusions: The findings of this study indicate that researchers at HMC possess high clinical research self-efficacy overall, but lower self-efficacy in securing funding. Gender and education level positively influence self-efficacy across CRAI factors. Notably, clinical research training boosts self-efficacy, especially when obtained outside HMC. In conclusion, healthcare providers are strongly encouraged to engage in effective clinical research training courses, both within and outside of their healthcare institutions, to improve their clinical research efficacy and enhance clinical practice.

Keywords: Qatar; clinical research; continuing education; research integrity; self-efficacy; training.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that the research was conducted without any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
The factor model for the shortened CRAI-12 as described by Robinson et al. The tool's factors and items are described in full in Table 2.Abbreviation: CRAI, Clinical Research Appraisal Inventory.

Similar articles

References

    1. Hornung CA, Jones CT, Calvin-Naylor NA, et al. Competency indices to assess the knowledge, skills and abilities of clinical research professionals. Int J Clin Trials. 2018;5(1):46-53. https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:169934464
    1. Ciubotariu II, Bosch G. Improving research integrity: a framework for responsible science communication. BMC Res Notes. 2022;15(1):177. doi:10.1186/s13104-022-06065-5 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Ianni PA, Samuels E, Eakin BL, Perorazio TE, Ellingrod VL. Assessments of research competencies for clinical investigators: a systematic review. Eval Health Prof. 2021;44(3):268-278. https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:209446527 - PMC - PubMed
    1. Kambakamba P, Geoghegan J, Hoti E. The peer review at high risk from COVID-19—are we socially distancing from scientific quality control? Br J Surg. 2020;107(9):e334-e335. doi:10.1002/bjs.11785 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Mullikin EA, Bakken LL, Betz NE. Assessing research self-efficacy in physician-scientists: the clinical research APPraisal inventory. J Career Assess. 2007;15(3):367-387. doi:10.1177/1069072707301232 - DOI

LinkOut - more resources