PT  - JOURNAL ARTICLE
AU  - Mungia, Rahma
AU  - Funkhouser, Ellen
AU  - Makhija, Sonia K.
AU  - Reyes, Stephanie C.
AU  - Cohen, Rachel A.
AU  - Cochran, David L.
AU  - Meyerowitz, Cyril
AU  - Rindal, D. Brad
AU  - Gordan, Valeria V.
AU  - Fellows, Jeffrey L.
AU  - Trejo, Meredith
AU  - Oates, Thomas W.
AU  - McCargar, Jason D.
AU  - McMahon, Pamela A.
AU  - Gilbert, Gregg H.
ED - National Dental PBRN Collaborative Group
TI  - Practitioner Engagement in Activities of the National Dental Practice-Based Research Network (PBRN): 7-Year Results
AID  - 10.3122/jabfm.2020.05.190339
DP  - 2020 Sep 01
TA  - The Journal of the American Board of Family
                Medicine
PG  - 687--697
VI  - 33
IP  - 5
4099  - http://www.jabfm.org/content/33/5/687.short
4100  - http://www.jabfm.org/content/33/5/687.full
SO  - J Am Board Fam Med2020 Sep 01; 33
AB  - Purpose: To 1) quantify practitioner activities of the National Dental Practice–Based Research Network (Network) for which Continuing Education (CE) credits were received (study training, videos, webinars, meetings, and symposia); 2) quantify practitioner coauthoring Network publications and presentations; and 3) test whether practitioner characteristics were associated with participation in these activities.Methods: A retrospective analysis of 4361 practitioners who enrolled in the Network between April 12, 2012 and October 12, 2018.Results: Overall, 59% (n = 2586) of practitioners earned CE credit from the Network; among these, 68% (n = 1757) from a video, 38% (n = 993) attended an annual Network meeting, 31% (n = 798) due to training for a Network clinical study, 9% (n = 226) attended a national symposium, and 7% (n = 170) participated in a Network webinar. Members of 2 large group practices earned on average more CEs than practitioners from other practice settings. Four percent (n = 159) of practitioners coauthored a Network presentation or publication. Practitioners who received their dental degree before 2000, were general practitioners, or were members of 2 large group practices, were more likely to have coauthored a publication or presentation.Conclusion: This Network used a broad range of activities to engage community practitioners. These activities were successful in sustaining a high level of practitioner engagement in clinical research and its relevance to everyday clinical practice.