Skip to main content

Main menu

  • HOME
  • ARTICLES
    • Current Issue
    • Ahead of Print
    • Archives
    • Abstracts In Press
    • Special Issue Archive
    • Subject Collections
  • INFO FOR
    • Authors
    • Reviewers
    • Call For Papers
    • Subscribers
    • Advertisers
  • SUBMIT
    • Manuscript
    • Peer Review
  • ABOUT
    • The JABFM
    • Editorial Board
    • Indexing
    • Editors' Blog
  • CLASSIFIEDS
  • Other Publications
    • abfm

User menu

Search

  • Advanced search
American Board of Family Medicine
  • Other Publications
    • abfm
American Board of Family Medicine

American Board of Family Medicine

Advanced Search

  • HOME
  • ARTICLES
    • Current Issue
    • Ahead of Print
    • Archives
    • Abstracts In Press
    • Special Issue Archive
    • Subject Collections
  • INFO FOR
    • Authors
    • Reviewers
    • Call For Papers
    • Subscribers
    • Advertisers
  • SUBMIT
    • Manuscript
    • Peer Review
  • ABOUT
    • The JABFM
    • Editorial Board
    • Indexing
    • Editors' Blog
  • CLASSIFIEDS
  • JABFM On Twitter
  • JABFM On YouTube
  • JABFM On Facebook
OtherAbout Practice-Based Research Networks

Physician Perspectives on Incentives to Participate in Practice-based Research: A Greater Rochester Practice-Based Research Network (GR-PBRN) Study

Karen Gibson, Peter Szilagyi, Carlos M. Swanger, Thomas Campbell, Thomas McInerny, Joseph Duckett, Joseph J. Guido and Kevin Fiscella
The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine July 2010, 23 (4) 452-454; DOI: https://doi.org/10.3122/jabfm.2010.04.090160
Karen Gibson
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Peter Szilagyi
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Carlos M. Swanger
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Thomas Campbell
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Thomas McInerny
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Joseph Duckett
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Joseph J. Guido
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Kevin Fiscella
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • References
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

Objectives: To understand factors associated with primary care physician research participation in a practice-based research network (PBRN) and to compare perspectives by specialty.

Methods: We surveyed primary care internists, family physicians, and pediatricians in Monroe County, New York, regarding their past experience with research and incentives to participate in practice-based research. We performed descriptive and tabular analyses to assess perceptions and used χ2 and analysis of variance to compare perceptions across the 3 specialties.

Results: The response rate was 33%. The most frequently endorsed aspects of collaboration were the opportunity to enact quality improvement (78%), contribution to clinical knowledge (75%), and intellectual stimulation (65%). Significant differences among the primary care specialties were found in 2 aspects: (1) internists were more likely to endorse additional source of income as “important,” and family medicine physicians were more likely to cite the opportunity to shape research questions, projects, and journal articles as “important.”

Conclusion: Physicians across all 3 specialties cited the opportunity to enact quality improvement and contribution to clinical knowledge as important incentives to participating in practice-based research. This supports the importance of strengthening the interface between research and quality improvement in PBRN projects. Further study is needed to assess reasons for differences among specialties if PBRNs are to become successful in research involving adult patients.

  • Practice-based Research
  • PBRN
  • Primary Health Care
  • Community Health Systems

Practice-based research networks (PBRNs) are groups of practices that collaborate to study issues of importance to clinical care. Most involve primary care practices. PBRNs are important for translational research.1,2 Studies about practice-based research have primarily involved single disciplines such as pediatrics3 or family medicine4 and have not compared perspectives across disciplines.

In 2007, the University of Rochester's Clinical and Translational Science Institute, funded by a Clinical and Translational Science Award, established the Greater Rochester PBRN (GR-PBRN). Before engaging practices in PBRN-related research, we surveyed physicians about practice-based research to assess factors that facilitate physician participation in practice-based research and to compare the perspectives of internists, family physicians, and pediatricians.

Methods

Setting

The study was conducted in Monroe County, New York, which includes the city of Rochester and the surrounding suburban and rural communities.

Study Design

We sent a confidential survey to all primary care physicians in Monroe County. We used multiple search strategies to identify physicians, including existing department lists, yellow pages listings, web sites of health systems, and publicly available lists from insurance providers. We called practices to confirm physician names and practice addresses, and we surveyed all physicians rather than a practice representative.

The questionnaire examined past experience with research and incentives that facilitate participation in practice-based research. We asked physicians to rate the incentives that were “most important of all” on a 4-point Likert scale, which we collapsed it into 2 categories.

Analyses

We performed descriptive analyses of the data and used χ2 and analysis of variance tests to compare responses among specialties.

Results

Response Rates and Demographic Characteristics

Of the 559 physicians for whom addresses were verified, 185 completed the survey (33%): 70 of the 241 internal medicine (IM) physicians (29%) responded; 37 of the 132 family physicians (FP; 29%) responded; and 78 of the 186 pediatricians (42%) responded. Seventy-four percent of respondents had participated in at least one research study during the past 5 years, including 67% of internists, 68% of family physicians, and 79% of pediatricians. Four percent of respondents’ practices had participated in more than 10 studies.

Perceived Incentives to Participating in Practice-Based Research

Physicians were asked to what extent aspects of collaboration with academic researchers would be important to them and to rate the most important aspect. The 3 most frequently endorsed “important” items were the opportunity to enact quality improvement (78%), contribution to clinical knowledge (75%), and intellectual stimulation (65%). These 3 items were also most frequently cited as “the most important of all.” The 3 least frequently endorsed “important” items were recognition by patients (17%), recognition by colleagues (21%), and additional source of income (30%) (Table 1

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 1.

Incentives Important to Monroe County Physicians for Participating in Research

Significant differences among the primary care specialties were found in 2 aspects: (1) internists were more likely to endorse additional source of income as “important” and (2) family physicians were more likely to cite the opportunity to shape research questions, projects, and journal articles as “important.”

Discussion

Our study noted high interest in practice-based research among physicians and a willingness to participate in research; key incentives were the potential for quality improvement, contribution to knowledge, and intellectual stimulation. These findings underscore the importance of conducting practice-based research that is clinically relevant to physicians, such as quality improvement studies or clinical projects with short-term practice benefits.5

Internists were significantly more likely to endorse “additional source of income” as an incentive than other family physicians or pediatricians. It is unclear whether this reflects a higher level of financial pressures endured by internists compared with other specialists or other factors. Overall, PBRNs will need to carefully assess local incentives to practice-based research and devote substantial efforts to understanding specialty differences if they are to include a broad spectrum of practices in their studies.

Acknowledgments

We thank the Steering Committee Members of the Greater Rochester Practice-Based Research Network: John Andolina, MD, Clinton Medical Associates; Philip Bonanni, MD, Unity Health; James L. Budd, MD, Twelve Corners Internal Medicine; John K. Chamberlain, MD, Ridgewood Med-Peds; John F. Cox III, MD, Clinton Medical Associates; Joseph A. DiPoala Jr., MD, Ridgeview Internal Medicine Group; Paul S. Frame, MD, Tri-County Family Medicine; Anne B. Francis, MD, Elmwood Pediatric Group; Raj B. Kachoria, MD, Kachoria Family Practice; Edward D. Lewis, MD, Lewis Pediatrics; Sanford J. Mayer, MD, Twelve Corners Pediatrics; Michael Nazar, MD, Unity Health; Betty Rabinowitz, MD, Clinton Medical Associates; and Heidi R. Zinkand, MD, Westside Health Services.

Notes

  • This article was externally peer reviewed.

  • Funding: This publication was made possible by Grant no. UL1 RR024160 from the National Center for Research Resources (NCRR), a component of the National Institutes of Health (NIH), and the NIH Roadmap for Medical Research.

  • See Related Commentary on Page 440.

  • Conflict of interest: none declared.

  • Disclaimer: The contents of this article are solely the responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official view of the NCRR or NIH. Information about the NCRR is available at http://www.ncrr.nih.gov/. Information on Re-engineering the Clinical Research Enterprise can be obtained from http://nihroadmap.nih.gov/clinicalresearch/overview-translational.asp.

  • Received for publication June 29, 2009.
  • Revision received August 13, 2009.
  • Accepted for publication August 20, 2009.

References

  1. ↵
    Simpson LA, Marshall R. Getting the evidence needed: a recent report from the Institute of Medicine. Ambul Pediatr 2008; 8: 147–9.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  2. ↵
    Szilagyi PG. Translational research and pediatrics. Acad Pediatr 2009; 9: 71–80.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  3. ↵
    Wasserman RC, Slora EJ, Bocian AB, et al. Pediatric research in office settings (PROS): a national practice-based research network to improve children's health care. Pediatrics 1998; 102: 1350–7.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  4. ↵
    Hickner J, Graham DG, Elder NC, et al. Testing process errors and their harms and consequences reported from family medicine practices: a study of the American Academy of Family Physicians National Research Network. Qual Saf Health Care 2008; 17: 194–200.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  5. ↵
    Mold JW, Peterson KA. Primary care practice-based research networks: working at the interface between research and quality improvement. Ann Fam Med 2005; 3(Suppl 1): S12–20.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine: 23 (4)
The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine
Vol. 23, Issue 4
July-August 2010
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • Cover (PDF)
  • Index by author
  • Back Matter (PDF)
  • Front Matter (PDF)
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on American Board of Family Medicine.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Physician Perspectives on Incentives to Participate in Practice-based Research: A Greater Rochester Practice-Based Research Network (GR-PBRN) Study
(Your Name) has sent you a message from American Board of Family Medicine
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the American Board of Family Medicine web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
5 + 3 =
Solve this simple math problem and enter the result. E.g. for 1+3, enter 4.
Citation Tools
Physician Perspectives on Incentives to Participate in Practice-based Research: A Greater Rochester Practice-Based Research Network (GR-PBRN) Study
Karen Gibson, Peter Szilagyi, Carlos M. Swanger, Thomas Campbell, Thomas McInerny, Joseph Duckett, Joseph J. Guido, Kevin Fiscella
The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine Jul 2010, 23 (4) 452-454; DOI: 10.3122/jabfm.2010.04.090160

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Physician Perspectives on Incentives to Participate in Practice-based Research: A Greater Rochester Practice-Based Research Network (GR-PBRN) Study
Karen Gibson, Peter Szilagyi, Carlos M. Swanger, Thomas Campbell, Thomas McInerny, Joseph Duckett, Joseph J. Guido, Kevin Fiscella
The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine Jul 2010, 23 (4) 452-454; DOI: 10.3122/jabfm.2010.04.090160
Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Acknowledgments
    • Notes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • References
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • What Do We Get From Participating in Practice-based Research Networks?
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • Rural Family Medicine Clinicians' Motivations to Participate in a Pragmatic Obesity Trial
  • Practitioner Participation in National Dental Practice-based Research Network (PBRN) Studies: 12-Year Results
  • A cross-sectional examination of the profile of chiropractors recruited to the Australian Chiropractic Research Network (ACORN): a sustainable resource for future chiropractic research
  • Maintenance of Certification Part 4 Credit and Recruitment for Practice-Based Research
  • Preventing the Voltage Drop: Keeping Practice-based Research Network (PBRN) Practices Engaged in Studies
  • Practice-based Research Networks (PBRNs): Meeting the Challenges of the Future
  • Measuring the Impact of Practice-based Research Networks (PBRNs)
  • No Longer Simply a Practice-based Research Network (PBRN): Health Improvement Networks
  • What Do We Get From Participating in Practice-based Research Networks?
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Practice-based Research Networks (PBRNs) Bridging the Gaps between Communities, Funders, and Policymakers
  • Lessons Learned from Developing a Patient Engagement Panel: An OCHIN Report
  • Lessons from Initiating the First Veterans Health Administration (VA) Women's Health Practice-based Research Network (WH-PBRN) Study
Show more About Practice-Based Research Networks

Similar Articles

Navigate

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Past Issues

Authors & Reviewers

  • Info For Authors
  • Info For Reviewers
  • Submit A Manuscript/Review

Other Services

  • Get Email Alerts
  • Classifieds
  • Reprints and Permissions

Other Resources

  • Forms
  • Contact Us
  • ABFM News

© 2023 American Board of Family Medicine

Powered by HighWire