Evidence mapPaperPMID 40197479Full record

ArticleHealth research policy and systems2025

Increasing research capacity in Canadian community hospitals: an intrinsic descriptive case study.

Elaina Orlando, Alexandra Binnie, Jennifer Tsang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health research policy and systems, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Elaina OrlandoNiagara Health Knowledge Institute, Niagara Health, 1200 Fourth Avenue, St. Catharines, ON, L2S 0A9, Canada. Elaina.Orlando@niagarahealth.on.ca.
Alexandra BinnieDivision of Critical Care, Department of Medicine, William Osler Health System, 101 Humber College Boulevard, Etobicoke, ON, M9V 1R8, Canada.
Jennifer TsangNiagara Health Knowledge Institute, Niagara Health, 1200 Fourth Avenue, St. Catharines, ON, L2S 0A9, Canada.

Funding

Canadian Critical Care Trials Group (CCCTG) through the Network of Clinical Trials Networks NCN-174189
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCanada's clinical research landscape is limited by minimal community hospital engagement. However, research participation in community hospitals may increase the speed of trial enrolment, enhance the generalizability of results and accelerate knowledge translation to community hospitals, where most Canadians receive care. Two identified barriers to community hospital participation are limited financial support and a lack of research mentorship.

methodsThis study is an intrinsic descriptive case study describing the impact of 1 year of research funding from the Canadian Critical Care Trials Group (CCCTG) and creation of a community of practice on research participation in 19 community hospitals. Thematic analysis was used to systematically identify themes from semistructured interviews and documents.

resultsA total of nine individuals (physician research lead, n = 7; research staff, n = 2) participated in semistructured interviews between April and September 2023. Community of practice meeting minutes (n = 7), emails (n = 22), status reports (n = 21) and field notes (n = 7) were analysed alongside interview transcripts. Funding enabled community hospitals to hire research staff, sustain research programs, increase the number of clinical trials they were running and develop research policies. The community of practice facilitated reciprocal learning and networking that positively impacted research programs and produced a tangible output: a toolkit to help community hospitals build clinical research programs. Contextual influences on community hospital research activities were identified as: (1) system characteristics, (2) clinical trial design, (3) local context and (4) individual characteristics.

conclusionsThe perception of participants was that the CCCTG funding and community of practice positively influenced research activities in community hospitals. Lessons learned include the need to: (1) leverage the power of connections among community hospitals to expand linkages, enabling further knowledge transfer, (2) work with trialists on clinical trial design to facilitate implementation and (3) create resources to support community hospitals with building and sustaining research programs, including resources to foster engagement in hospitals without historic research participation. Our findings highlight the importance of context, including local populations, organizational research culture, provincial health systems and research funding structures, which need to be considered during research program implementation.

Indexed as

Biomedical ResearchCapacity BuildingHospitals, CommunityCanadaClinical Trials as TopicHumansMentorsQualitative ResearchResearch PersonnelResearch Support as TopicClinical trialsCommunity hospitalsCommunity of practiceResearch capacityResearch infrastructure

Identifiers

PMID40197479
PMCPMC11974216

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.