Jones, C;
Birt, L;
Scott, S;
Alldred, D;
Boughen, M;
Bourne, Rs;
Franklin, Bd;
... Bhattacharya, D; + view all
(2025)
(ID: 154) Establishing the determinants and potential solutions for pharmacy professionals engaging with research: a theory-based UK survey.
[Digital scholarly resource].
https://doi.org/10.1093/ijpp/riaf093.052
![[thumbnail of Survey poster (RPS) final draft.pdf]](https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/style/images/fileicons/text.png) |
Text
Survey poster (RPS) final draft.pdf - Accepted Version Access restricted to UCL open access staff until 8 November 2026. Download (337kB) |
Abstract
Introduction: Pharmacy professionals are the third largest profession in the National Health Service [1], yet they are underrepresented in both applications and awards for research grants and fellowships [2]. Establishing the barriers and enablers to building research capacity within the pharmacy profession will help inform theory and evidence-based solutions./ / Aim: To establish the behavioural mechanisms by which pharmacy professionals’ barriers and enablers (determinants) to engaging with research may be addressed./ / Methodology: A survey hosted on Microsoft Forms from January to February 2025 was circulated via social media, email, and professional networks across the UK. The survey captured demographics and agreement with 16 statements representing determinants of research engagement and potential solutions to increasing pharmacy research capacity. Statements were derived from four previous focus groups with pharmacy professionals. The focus groups and resulting survey were underpinned by a framework of behaviour change theories [3]. Agreement with statements was captured on a 5-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree, 5 = strongly agree). Descriptive statistics were calculated for respondent characteristics and each statement. Ethical approval was granted by the University of Leicester. Results: Of 871 responses, 79.1% were pharmacists and 20.9% pharmacy technicians. Most respondents were from secondary care (64.1%), followed by primary care (15.6%). The majority were based in England (82.5%), identified as women (75.0%), and as white (76.7%). In terms of research experience, 14.7% reported none, 59.8% had undertaken audit/quality improvement projects, 10.2% had delivered research, and 9.9% had led research. The average (median; quartiles) of responses to statements associated with motivation showed agreement with personal benefits for engaging in research (4; 4,5), public and policy impacts (4; 4,5), research in revalidation (4; 3,4), and small-scale projects to build confidence (4; 3,4). Responses were mixed on fear of research (3; 2,4), guilt using work time (3; 2,4), and whether research was expected in roles (3; 2,4). For capability-related statements, respondents agreed they understood research (4; 3,4) and were aware of research networks (4; 2,4). Respondents agreed mentorship (4; 4,5) would help individuals monitor their progress in research. For opportunity-related statements, respondents agreed on solutions including receiving encouragement to engage with research (4; 4,4), hearing others’ successes (4; 4,4), and integrating research into job plans (4; 4,5). They disagreed with having time for research (2; 1,3), and responses were mixed on whether managers valued research (3; 2,4) and whether it was encouraged in training (3; 2,4). / / Discussion: Whilst it is encouraging that respondents report having research experience, this may reflect response bias due to the dominance of secondary care respondents. Furthermore, few progressed from audit/quality improvement to leading or delivering research indicating that challenges may persist between these two stages. Agreement with proposed solutions that focused on enhancing social support and embedding research within professional identity and responsibilities suggests that behavioural mechanisms associated with opportunity and motivation are key targets for intervention components. In contrast, determinants associated with capability, particularly knowledge, appear to be addressed by existing provision. These insights will inform co-designing, with pharmacy professionals, interventions to address the determinants to engaging with research.
Archive Staff Only
 |
View Item |
