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 Jul 31;22(1):88.
doi: 10.1186/s12961-024-01162-2.

"They don't have the luxury of time": interviews exploring the determinants of public health research activity that contextualise embedded researcher roles in local government

Rachael C Edwards  1 , Dylan Kneale  2 , Claire Stansfield  2 , Sarah Lester  2
Affiliations

"They don't have the luxury of time": interviews exploring the determinants of public health research activity that contextualise embedded researcher roles in local government

Rachael C Edwards et al. Health Res Policy Syst. .

Abstract

Background: Embedded researchers are a novel intervention to improve the translation of research evidence into policy and practice settings, including public health. These roles are being implemented with increasing popularity, but they often lack clear evaluative frameworks. Understanding initial levels of research activity, including associated barriers and opportunities, is essential to developing theories of change and thus shaping the roles and defining expectations. We aimed to identify the principal determinants of research activity in public health that contextualise embedded researcher roles, including attributes of the embedded researcher themselves.

Methods: We undertook seventeen semi-structured interviews with embedded researchers in diverse public health settings in English local government. Interviews were analysed using thematic analysis.

Results: We identified thirteen interlinked determinants of research activity within local government public health settings. Research and interpersonal skills, as well as pre-existing connections and knowledge within local government, were highly valued individual attributes for embedded researchers. Resource deficiencies (funding, time, and infrastructure) were primary barriers to research activity, whereas a strong local appetite for evidence informed decision making presented a valuable opportunity. However, there was inconsistencies across public health teams relating to perceptions of what constituted "research" and the resources that would be required.

Conclusions: Our results suggest that successful embedded researchers will have equally strong research and communication skills and should be offered mentorship and clear career progression pathways. Perceptions of research within local government are closely linked to resource deficiencies and senior endorsement. Embedded researchers could benefit from taking the time to develop locally contextualised knowledge of this research culture. Theories of change for embedded researchers should conceptualise the interconnections across individual, interpersonal, and organisational barriers and opportunities underlying local government research activity. Further research is needed to identify methods for exploring the influence of embedded researchers as well as to unpack the stages of research activity within local government and the associated behaviours.

Keywords: Embedded researcher; Evidence use; Local government; Public health; Research activity.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

This study represents independent research commissioned through the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Policy Research Programme (PRP) for the Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC). The views expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR or the DHSC. NIHR also funded the embedded researcher programme that was the focus of the research, but had no substantial input in the study design, data collection, analysis, interpretation of data, in the writing of the article, or in the decision to submit the article for publication.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Nested, interconnected determinants of research activity in public health settings that contextualise embedded researcher roles
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Coates D, Mickan S. Challenges and enablers of the embedded researcher model. J Health Organ Manag. 2020;34(7):743–64.10.1108/JHOM-02-2020-0043 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Rapport F, Clay-Williams R, Churruca K, Shih P, Hogden A, Braithwaite J. The struggle of translating science into action: foundational concepts of implementation science. J Eval Clin Pract. 2018;24(1):117–26. 10.1111/jep.12741 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Churruca K, Ludlow K, Taylor N, Long JC, Best S, Braithwaite J. The time has come: Embedded implementation research for health care improvement. J Eval Clin Pract. 2019;25(3):373–80. 10.1111/jep.13100 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Kneale D, Rojas-García A, Raine R, Thomas J. The use of evidence in English local public health decision-making: a systematic scoping review. Implement Sci. 2017;12(1):53. 10.1186/s13012-017-0577-9 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. van der Graaf P, Forrest LF, Adams J, Shucksmith J, White M. How do public health professionals view and engage with research? A qualitative interview study and stakeholder workshop engaging public health professionals and researchers. BMC Public Health. 2017;17(1):892. 10.1186/s12889-017-4896-1 - DOI - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources