ArticlePDF Available

Abstract and Figures

In an evidence-based health care environment, healthcare professions require a sustainable research culture to remain relevant. At present however, there is not a mature research culture across the chiropractic profession largely due to deficiencies in research capacity and leadership, which may be caused by a lack of chiropractic teaching programs in major universities. As a response to this challenge the Chiropractic Academy for Research Leadership, CARL, was created with the aim of develop a global network of successful early-career chiropractic researchers under the mentorship of three successful senior academics from Australia, Canada, and Denmark. The program centres upon an annual week-long program residential that rotates continental locations over the first three-year cycle and between residentials the CARL fellows work on self-initiated research and leadership initiatives. Through a competivite application process, the first cohort was selected and consists of 13 early career researchers from five professions in seven countries who represent diverse areas of interests of high relevance for chiropractic. The first residential was held in Odense, Denmark, with the second being planned in April 2018 in Edmonton, Canada, and the final residential to be held in Sydney, Australia in 2019.
Content may be subject to copyright.
COMMENTARY Open Access
Leadership and capacity building in
international chiropractic research:
introducing the chiropractic academy for
research leadership (CARL)
Jon Adams
1
, Greg Kawchuk
2
, Alexander Breen
3
, Diana De Carvalho
4
, Andreas Eklund
5
, Matthew Fernandez
6
,
Martha Funabashi
2
, Michelle M. Holmes
3,7
, Melker S. Johansson
8,9
, Katie de Luca
10
, Craig Moore
1
, Isabelle Pagé
11
,
Katherine A. Pohlman
12
, Michael S. Swain
13
, Arnold Y. L. Wong
14
and Jan Hartvigsen
8,15*
Abstract
In an evidence-based health care environment, healthcare professions require a sustainable research culture to
remain relevant. At present however, there is not a mature research culture across the chiropractic profession
largely due to deficiencies in research capacity and leadership, which may be caused by a lack of chiropractic
teaching programs in major universities. As a response to this challenge the Chiropractic Academy for Research
Leadership, CARL, was created with the aim of develop a global network of successful early-career chiropractic
researchers under the mentorship of three successful senior academics from Australia, Canada, and Denmark. The
program centres upon an annual week-long program residential that rotates continental locations over the first
three-year cycle and between residentials the CARL fellows work on self-initiated research and leadership initiatives.
Through a competivite application process, the first cohort was selected and consists of 13 early career researchers
from five professions in seven countries who represent diverse areas of interests of high relevance for chiropractic.
The first residential was held in Odense, Denmark, with the second being planned in April 2018 in Edmonton,
Canada, and the final residential to be held in Sydney, Australia in 2019.
Keywords: Chiropractic, Leadership, Research, Evidence
Background
Health care professions require a sustainable research cul-
ture to underpin practice and justify effective, safe coord-
ination and integration of care within the wider health
care system [1]. Despite numerous calls for more research
[27], at present, a mature research culture across the
chiropractic profession remains elusive, largely due to
deficiencies in research capacity and leadership [8]. The
interrelated tasks of building research capacity and facili-
tating research leadership in chiropractic are especially
pertinent given some parts of chiropracticscontemporary
focus on evidence-based health care [9]. Futhermore, it is
pertinent as a core foundation to produce a sound evi-
dence base relevant to appropriate practice and policy
decision-making [10]. Building research capacity and
facilitating research leadership can also have significant
positive effects to advance a broader leadership capability
and a wider professional development of chiropractic
beyond the research realm [8].
Given the need to develop research capacity and
leadership within chiropractic, a group of senior health
researchers (Adams, Hartvigsen and Kawchuk) having
research interests of relevance to chiropractic, have
planned and founded the world-first international chiro-
practic research leadership initiative the Chiropractic
Academy of Research Leadership (CARL).
* Correspondence: jhartvigsen@health.sdu.dk
8
Department of Sports Science and Clinical Biomechanics, University of
Southern Denmark, Campusvej 55, 5230 Odense M, Denmark
15
Nordic Institute of Chiropractic and Clinical Biomechanics, University of
Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark
Full list of author information is available at the end of the article
© The Author(s). 2018 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0
International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and
reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to
the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver
(http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
Adams et al. Chiropractic & Manual Therapies (2018) 26:5
DOI 10.1186/s12998-018-0173-3
The aims of the CARL program
The CARL program is driven by a number of distinct
but interrelated aims. While there are undoubtedly sig-
nificant pockets of chiropractic research activity dotted
around the world, a challenge for many in this field has
been a lack of global networks and infrastructure. The
primary aim of the CARL program is therefore to
address this gap through mentoring of early career re-
searchers into a cohesive cohort. As such, this program
provides an opportunity for geographically disparate re-
searchers to share interests and insights and ultimately
develop longstanding, hopefully lifelong, friendships and
collaborations helping to develop a critical mass of
successful early-career chiropractic researchers on the
international stage.
Another aim of the CARL program is to encourage
multi-disciplinary perspectives and cooperation in chiro-
practic research not only across different disciplinary
trainings and expertise but also across the researcher/
practitioner fields and chiropractic/non-chiropractic div-
ide where those exist. As with many budding research
fields, chiropractic academia can in some cases be a
highly competitive environment and CARL encourages
appointed Fellows to co-ordinate and collaborate their
efforts wherever possible.
The program also aims to provide much-needed time-
outfrom the day-to-day pressure of work environments
allowing space and time to reflect and consider longer-
term, deeper issues around both individual career devel-
opment and strategic blue-sky planning for the profes-
sion more broadly.
CARL further aims to develop confidence amongst
these future leaders in the profession. It is important for
a research culture that researchers are confident both in
their own location in the research and academic world
as well as in their discipline and focus or topic. This can
be as simple as reaffirming that chiropractic is indeed an
important field amongst many others in the health sys-
tem worthy of its own independent and integrative
examination and assessment.
The CARL program additionally aims to provide direct
mentorship, support and advice to a cohort of CARL Fel-
lows regarding their own research focus, strategic develop-
ment and career pathway. There are countless potential
opportunities and hazards in advancing any academic car-
eer and CARL encourages Fellows to identify and explore
these in a safeplace away from what can sometimes be
the competitively-driven environment of a home institu-
tion. Peer-support is a core ingredient in advancing this
aim. Importantly, 50% of the programs contact time fo-
cuses on providing leadership skills and identifying leader-
ship opportunities within the profession. This critical
feature recognizes that a relatively small percentage of
early career health researchers remain within academia in
the face of high rejection rates and an increasingly com-
petitive environment [1113]. The CARL program not
only helps strengthen future researchers, but also aims to
build a cohort of high-functioning leaders who have been
exposed to other career opportunities within chiropractic.
Finally, CARL aims to promote and produce a prolific
range of tangible research outputs and products helping to
bolster and coordinate efforts to build an evidence base to
inform practitioners, patients, policymakers and other
relevant stakeholders. The focus is upon not only develop-
ment of new collaborative projects and project funding
but also dissemination via peer-review publications, pro-
fessional and research conferences and community-based
engagement.
Core principles of CARL
A number of core features are arguably important to de-
velop sustainable, effective health research capacity and
leadership. Foremost, the development should acknow-
ledge and reflect issues and topics of relevance to practi-
tioners and their patients. Unfortunately, health research
to date, beyond and within chiropractic, has illustrated a
disconnect between research and clinical practice [1416],
and it is important that future chiropractic enquiry not be
defined by these same challenges [17].
Another core feature of CARL will be the camaraderie
of high achieving, like-minded individuals placed to-
gether within a supportive and productive environment.
It is known that feelings of isolation, the lack of profes-
sional support and/or recognition from within the chiro-
practic profession are substantial challenges faced by
higher-degree chiropractic research students and can be a
major barrier to research retention [18]. Moreover, the
challenges of career advancement within a competitive cli-
mate, overcoming disappointment and managing re-
searcher burnoutare often either dealt with in isolation
or not discussed. While most chiropractors opt for clinical
practice, providing mentorship in a safe, prosperous envir-
onment for early career researchers will enhance their re-
search capability, leadership and career development.
Another closely related core feature of CARL is to en-
courage and reflect both a broad range of perspectives
beyond the chiropractic profession and the investigation
of topics that stretch beyond those exclusively of interest
to chiropractic. As such, CARL will include collabora-
tions and an interface with experts from across the wider
academy (e.g. clinical researchers, trial methodologists,
public health and health service researchers, social scien-
tists and health economists amongst many others) not
only enriching empirical investigation but also safeguard-
ing research from adopting predominantly or exclusively
chiropractic-centricperspectives.
Multi-discplinary collaboration is also essential to
ensuring chiropractic is subjected to the same rigorous
Adams et al. Chiropractic & Manual Therapies (2018) 26:5 Page 2 of 6
critical methodological testing and evaluation as other
areas of health practice a perspective that advances
the entire health care field within and beyond conven-
tional medical practice. Such a stance helps maintain in-
ternal and external validity and provides the potential
for a legitimate evidence base essential if chiropractic
care is to advance within the wider health system.
Finally, it is important to develop chiropractic research
focus beyond the short-term [19]. CARL will develop a
road-map and the infrastructure to facilitate strategic re-
search direction, growth and sustainability for future in-
vestigators and investigations will encourage a co-
ordinated, big-picture approach issues of crucial sig-
nificance given the relative infancy of the chiropractic
research culture in many jurisdictions around the world.
The evolution and methodology of CARL
CARL was initially built upon the personal experience of
Distinguished Professor Jon Adams as an appointed Se-
nior Fellow (2009) on the Oxford International Primary
Care Research Leadership Program at the Nuffield De-
partment of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of
Oxford (www.phc.ox.ac.uk). In late 2015 Distinguished
Professor Adams, Professor Hartvigsen and Professor
Kawchuk collaborated on the idea of a similar inter-
national research leadership program around chiroprac-
tic and the concept of the CARL Program was founded.
The CARL Program identifies and mentors talented,
promising early career researchers over an initial three-
year period with future program years planned.
The design and content of the CARL Program was in
part informed by the list of aims outlined earlier as well as
the foundational features of the Oxford International Pri-
mary Care Research Leadership Program. As a result, the
program centres upon an annual week-long program resi-
dential that rotates continental locations over the first
three-year cycle. Each residential consists of an intense
week of activities whereby Fellows receive individual men-
torship, problem-solving, career development, insights into
academic and research management and presentations and
workshops from invited international senior academics.
Alongside these structured sessions and activities, Fellows
are also allocated time to explore areas of mutual interest
for collaboration and partnership. In addition, an essential
feature of the program and residential is to facilitate and
encourage unstructured,organicinteractionsandconversa-
tions between Fellows who, in many cases, may not have
necessarily had an opportunity to investigate and explore
collaborative opportunities with each other outside the
CARL Program. Between residentials, the Fellows work on
research and leadership projectsusingelectronicandinter-
net platforms for project management and communication.
Importantly, while the mentors inspire activities, the drive
of the program quickly becomes the charge of the Fellows
who shape and mold future directions and projects, with
mentor support, as their confidence and experience grows.
The first CARL cohort
The initial worldwide call for CARL Fellowship submis-
sions attracted over 30 full applications from inter-
national candidates. Following extensive peer-review by
the founders and a round of short-listed candidate inter-
views, the first cohort of the CARL program has now
been selected and consists of 13 early career leaders
from 5 professions in 7 countries who represent diverse
areas of interests of high relevance for chiropractic
(Table 1). Six are women, six are PhD students, four are
Postdoctoral Fellowss, three are Assistant Professors,
and four work as part time clinicians in addition to their
research activities. With regards to their motivations for
joining CARL, all Fellows have reported the need for
and benefit of being involved in an international net-
work helping to strengthen their research and leadership
careers, the importance of receiving explicit mentorship
and developing collaborations and friendships from their
program involvement.
Discussion: progress and successes of CARL
program to date
Health professions operating beyond the conventional
medical profession and curriculum are increasingly rea-
lising that they need to increasingly engage with the lar-
ger societal agenda of evidence-based practice [20].
Chiropractic is among the largest health care professions
in the world beyond conventional medicine. While there
are existing research groups in chiropractic who are pro-
ductive by any standard, global research activities in
chiropractic remain modest. In response to these cir-
cumstances, the Chiropractic Academy for Research
Leadership (CARL) Program was founded in 2016. This
model will provide the longevity and impact to deliver
one platform and growth strategy, which is required to
develop a mature, sustainable international chiropractic
research and leadership culture. With the first cohort of
Fellows appointed in late 2016, the inaugural CARL resi-
dential was held at the University of Southern Denmark
campus in Odense, Denmark in April 2017. The 5-day
program included guest lectures from successful young re-
searchers, experienced musculoskeletal research leaders,
experts on management and leadership as well as many
workshops and social activities. From these interactions
and scheduled work time, the primary outcome for the
first CARL residential was produced; a catalogue of collab-
orative research and leadership opportunities for the Fel-
lows to pursue over the coming year. Specifically, the
catalogue currently consists of numerous identified aca-
demic and leadership projects. In the six months since
the first residential in Denmark, CARL Fellows have
Adams et al. Chiropractic & Manual Therapies (2018) 26:5 Page 3 of 6
Table 1 Descriptive details about CARL fellows and own statements about reasons for joining CARL
Country, sex,
academic degrees
Current positions Why did you join CARL? What do you expect to get
out of CARL?
How might CARL benefit
chiropractic?
Australia, ,
chiropractor, MSc
PhD student
Part-time
clinician
Want to be part of global
collaboration among ECRs
to move chiropractic forward
Mentorship and help to
participate in research projects
Coordinated international
research planning and output
is critical to the progress and
standing of the chiropractic
profession within mainstream
health
Sweden, ,
chiropractor, MSc, PhD
Post Doc Part-
time clinician
Want to engage in global
collaboration and get
exposure to other research
groups and professional
networks with a common
focus on chiropractic/
manual medicine
Get exposure to new methods
and applications, expand
knowledge and skills.
Increased publication output
and research experience
Help build research capacity
in Chiropractic. Increase the
output and quality of research
relevant to the Chiropractic
profession
Canada, ,
chiropractor, MSc
PhD student Part
time clinician
Huge opportunity for PhD
student who wants to
continue in the field of
chiropractic research and
believes international
collaboration is of prime
importance
Become part of strong international
network. Develop research skills
and independence
CARL allows for the development
of a strong network of researchers
around the word that have the
capacity to collaborate and
support each other
Australia, ,
chiropractor, MSc, PhD
Post Doc Part-
time clinician
Want to become part
of international network
and learn from key
international academics
in supportive environment
Boost in research career and high-
quality research output. Broaden
opportunities for collaborating
with international researchers
The CARL leadership projects
will benefit all chiropractors,
with CARL fellows dedicated
to establishing and endorsing
initiatives that will foster
growth and increased visibility
for the chiropractic profession
UK, , Natural
therapeutics, MSc
PhD student
Lecturer
Want to be able to co-
ordinate my research with
researchers internationally
in order to advance the field
Collaborate with other fellows
to identify areas of research
priority for the profession.
Having mentorship
Through the CARL program,
the CARL fellows can plan
research projects to have a
successful impact in practice
and contribute to the international
research agenda within chiropractic
and the future of the profession
Canada, ,
chiropractor, MSc, PhD
Assistant
Professor
I joined CARL to develop
and expand my international
network for collaborations,
for early career mentorship
and to ensure my research
continues to have an impact
in the field of chiropractic
Iexpect to learn from and work
with my colleagues in order to
become a better researcher
and leader in the chiropractic
profession
CARL can elevate the profession
in terms of research productivity
and impact and connect future
leaders that can motivate and
inspire chiropractic practitioners
worldwide to integrate evidence
to the benefit of their patients
Australia, ,
chiropractor, PhD
Clinician
Lecturer
To work with like-minded
early career researchers,
continuing my education
in research, and the
opportunity to be mentored
by leaders in the field
Leadership skills, publication
output, friendship and being
part of an up-and-coming
early research culture within
the profession
Change the landscape, where
private practice providers can
appreciate and further utilize
high-quality research, impacting
their practice in an evidence-
based manner establishing
chiropractic cultural authority
Canada, , physical
therapist, MSc, PhD
Post Doc
Research
Associate
To learn from successful
mentors as well as to build
strong collaborations to assist
with increasing the number
of publications and planning/
conducting future high-quality
studies. For my surprise, CARL
was much more than that
Learn from mentorsexperience
get their guidance. To build strong
relationships with the other CARL
fellows, which will lead to strong
collaborations that will significantly
contribute to the advancement of
chiropractic and SMT research
Bringing the young career
researchers that have the
greatest potential of becoming
successful investigators in
chiropractic together, giving
them the opportunity to bond,
have ideas, work together and
support each other is a brilliant
idea that paves the way for
fruitful collaborations and high-
quality studies that will greatly
advance the evidence regarding
the chiropractic profession
Australia, ,
chiropractor
PhD student
Lecturer
I joined CARL to meet people
who share my passion for
An international network of
career long collaborators that
To exist, a profession must have
a knowledge base, quality
Adams et al. Chiropractic & Manual Therapies (2018) 26:5 Page 4 of 6
submitted a variety of papers to peer-reviewed journals
and have completed numerous leadership activities. A
fellow-driven newsletter will be released twice a year, with
the first and subsequent newsletter available at https://
chiroresearchfellows.wordpress.com/.
The next residential is now being planned for
Edmonton, Canada in April 2018 and will bring the Fel-
lows together to seed the Program catalogue with new
ideas and review progress as well as provide additional
advanced training in research productivity and leader-
ship skills. The following week, the CARL Fellows will
also take part and showcase their abilities at the Canad-
ian Chiropractic Association Convention in Calgary.
Conclusion
The long-term aim of CARL is to develop the essential
leadership skills and experiences to take on senior CARL
mentorship appointments and help secure the successful
Table 1 Descriptive details about CARL fellows and own statements about reasons for joining CARL (Continued)
Country, sex,
academic degrees
Current positions Why did you join CARL? What do you expect to get
out of CARL?
How might CARL benefit
chiropractic?
developing the scholarship
of chiropractic, and to work
collaboratively with them into
the future for the befit of
the community
will answer important research
questions and expand the
relevant knowledge base and
international leadership
education, and ongoing expansion
of that knowledge base through
postgraduate scholarly activity
and research. CARL serves a
necessary contribution from
aprofessiontothebetterment
of society
UK, , MSc, PhD Post Doc I applied to join CARL to put
my work into the context of
other chiropractic researchers.
My long-term aim is to
understand dynamic
individualized biomechanical
factors in low back pain and
help to explain the effects
of spinal manipulation.
The CARL program has helped
help me to gain a deeper
appreciation of research areas
beyond my own focus in
biomechanics. In return, it is my
hope that my own expertise in
biomechanics might help the
other CARL fellows
A community of early career
researchers from across the
board of chiropractic research
based all over the world can
do more for the scientific
progress of the profession
than individual experts aligned
to their more disparate and
isolated topics.
I am confident that this program
can promote a synergy between
the biological, physiological and
social aspects of the
biopsychosocial model
Denmark, ,
chiropractor, MSc
PhD student CARL came across as a great
opportunity to meet like-minded
research colleagues and friends,
for sharing experiences and
improving research-related skills
CARL constitutes an excellent
Forum, just like a greenhouse,
where we can discuss issues
and barriers related to research
and career development, learn
and be inspired; collaborate,
and ultimately flourish as
health care researchers
CARL will strengthen the
profession by facilitating
international research
collaborations, fostering
future leaders and thereby
further position the
chiropractic profession as
an important contributor
to health care and health
care research globally
USA, , chiropractor,
MSc
PhD student
Assistant
Professor
CARL opens up the opportunity
to create the most impactful
and innovative chiropractic
research, which is my desire
for the special pediatric,
pregnant, and post-partum
population
As the solo chiropractic clinical
scientist, CARL is for mentorship
in research capacity building.
With this network, chiropractic
research could become united,
cohesive, and impactful
CARL just fast-tracked chiropractic
research by networking early
career scientists and providing
the platform for collaboration.
This effort will undoubtingly impact
the current evidence-based
chiropractic literature gap and most
importantly the management and
care of chiropractic patients
Hong Kong, physical
therapist, MSc, PhD
Assistant
Professor
As an early career researcher
with a passion to conduct
high quality research, I want
to have some mentors and
peers to guide and support
my research journey
To broaden my research
skills and network through
collaboration. I am determined
to be a prominent research
leader and conduct impactful
chiropractic research and
nurture new research leaders
Given the complexity of spinal
problems, it is important to
coordinate personal resources
from different disciplines. This
program can empower the
next generation of chiropractic
research leaders through research
collaborations, grant writing
and knowledge translation
= Female
= Male
Adams et al. Chiropractic & Manual Therapies (2018) 26:5 Page 5 of 6
mentorship of a subsequent early-career researcher co-
hort of Fellows. The initial cohort of 13 appointed CARL
Fellows has shown excellent promise and produced nu-
merous outputs in the first six months since the pro-
gram launch and it is envisaged that this first cohort can
be supported on a more ongoing basis.
Abbreviations
CARL: Chiropractic Academy of Research Leadership
Acknowledgements
We thank the financial supporters of CARL for their generous contributions.
Funding
The Chiropractic Academy of Research Leadership (CARL) Program was
established and supported by researchers at University of Alberta, Canada,
the University of Southern Denmark and the Nordic Institute of Chiropractic
and Clinical Biomechanics (NIKKB), and the University of Technology Sydney,
Australia. The CARL Program was initiated in partnership with the World
Federation of Chiropractic (WFC), the European Centre for Chiropractic
Research Excellence (ECCRE), the Canadian Chiropractic Association (CCA),
and has received in-kind support from the Nordic Institute of Chiropractic
and Clinical Biomechanics (NIKKB) and the Australian Research Centre in
Complementary and Integrative Medicine (UTS:ARCCIM).
Availability of data and materials
Not applicable.
Authorscontributions
JA, GNK and JH drafted the first version of the manuscript. All authors
contributed to subsequent revisions and approved the final version of the
manuscript.
Authorsinformation
Not applicable.
Ethics approval and consent to participate
Not applicable.
Consent for publication
All authors approved the final version of the manuscript.
Competing interests
Through generous funding from sources listed above, participation in CARL
including travel and other expenses associated with the residentials is free
for the fellows. JA, GNK and JH receive no fee or other financial
compensation in connection with CARL. Not applicable.
PublishersNote
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in
published maps and institutional affiliations.
Author details
1
Faculty of Health, University of Technology Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
2
Faculty of Rehabilitation Medicine, University of Alberts, Edmonton, Canada.
3
AECC University College, Bournemouth, UK.
4
Faculty of Medicine, Memorial
University of Newfoundland, NL, St. John s, Canada.
5
Institute of
Environmental Medicine, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
6
Private
practice of chiropractic, Drummoyne, NSW, Australia.
7
Department of
Psychology, University of Southampton, Southhampton, UK.
8
Department of
Sports Science and Clinical Biomechanics, University of Southern Denmark,
Campusvej 55, 5230 Odense M, Denmark.
9
National Research Centre for the
Working Environment, Copenhagen, Denmark.
10
Private practice of
chiropractic, South West Rocks, South West Rocks, NSW, Australia.
11
Department of Anatomy, Université du Québec à Trois-Rivières,
Trois-Rivières, Québec, Canada.
12
Research Institute, Parker University, Dallas,
TX, USA.
13
Department of Chiropractic, Faculty of Science and Engineering,
Macquaire University, Sydney, Australia.
14
Department of Rehabilitation
Sciences, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Kowloon, Hong Kong.
15
Nordic Institute of Chiropractic and Clinical Biomechanics, University of
Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark.
Received: 6 November 2017 Accepted: 5 January 2018
References
1. Myburgh C, Hartvigsen J, Grunnet-Nilsson N. Secondary legitimacy: a key
mainstream health care inclusion strategy for the Danish chiropractic
profession? J Manip Physiol Ther. 2008;31(5):3925.
2. Charlton KH. Caves, wizards and the state of the petunia patch. J Manip
Physiol Ther. 1990;13(6):3435.
3. Hoskins W, Pollard H, Reggars J, Vitiello A, Bonello R. Journal publications by
Australian chiropractic academics: are they enough? Chiropr Osteopat. 2006;14:13.
4. Swain MS, Kongsted A, Downie A, Hancock MJ. A chiropractic scholar visits
from Denmark: a report on the chiropractic research seminar. Chiropractic
Journal of Australia. 2013;43:1036.
5. Stuber K, Bussieres A, Gotlib A. Research consortium workshop III to
advance the Canadian chiropractic research agenda. The Journal of the
Canadian Chiropractic Association. 2009;53(1):713.
6. Mootz RD, Hansen DT, Breen A, Killinger LZ, Nelson C. Health services research
related to chiropractic: review and recommendations for research prioritization
by the chiropractic profession. J Manip Physiol Ther. 2006;29(9):70725.
7. Rubinstein SM, Bolton J, Webb AL, Hartvigsen J. The first research agenda
for the chiropractic profession in Europe. Chiropractic & manual therapies.
2014;22(1):9.
8. Murphy DR, Schneider MJ, Seaman DR, Perle SM, Nelson CF. How can
chiropractic become a respected mainstream profession? The example of
podiatry. Chiropr Osteopat. 2008;16:10.
9. Lefebvre R, Peterson D, Haas M. Evidence-based practice and chiropractic
care. J Evid Based Complementary Altern Med. 2012;18(1):759.
10. Cooke R. Evidence-based medicine. Lancet. 2005;366(9490):979.
11. Pohlhaus JR, Jiang H, Wagner RM, Schaffer WT, Pinn VW. Sex differences in
application, success, and funding rates for NIH extramural programs. Acad
Med. 2011;86(6):75967.
12. Jagsi R, Motomura AR, Griffith KA, Rangarajan S, Ubel PA. Sex differences in
attainment of independent funding by career development awardees. Ann
Intern Med. 2009;151(11):80411.
13. Jagsi R, DeCastro R, Griffith KA, Rangarajan S, Churchill C, Stewart A, Ubel
PA. Similarities and differences in the career trajectories of male and female
career development award recipients. Acad Med. 2011;86(11):141521.
14. Bussieres AE, Terhorst L, Leach M, Stuber K, Evans R, Schneider MJ. Self-
reported attitudes, skills and use of evidence-based practice among
Canadian doctors of chiropractic: a national survey. The Journal of the
Canadian Chiropractic Association. 2015;59(4):33248.
15. Bussieres AE, Al Zoubi F, Stuber K, French SD, Boruff J, Corrigan J, Thomas A.
Evidence-based practice, research utilization, and knowledge translation in
chiropractic: a scoping review. BMC Complement Altern Med. 2016;16:216.
16. Tierney WM, Oppenheimer CC, Hudson BL, Benz J, Finn A, Hickner JM,
Lanier D, Gaylin DS. A national survey of primary care practice-based
research networks. Ann Fam Med. 2007;5(3):24250.
17. Adams J, Steel A, Chang S, Sibbritt D. Helping address the national research
and research capacity needs of Australian chiropractic: introducing the
Australian chiropractic research network (ACORN) project. Chiropractic &
manual therapies. 2015;23:12.
18. de Luca K, Tuchin P, Bonello R. A web-based survey of the motivations and
challenges faced by emerging researchers in the chiropractic profession.
The Journal of chiropractic education. 2015;29(2):1518.
19. Adams J, Peng W, Steel A, Lauche R, Moore C, Amorin-Woods L, Sibbritt D.
A cross-sectional examination of the profile of chiropractors recruited to the
Australian chiropractic research network (ACORN): a sustainable resource for
future chiropractic research. BMJ Open. 2017;7(9):e015830.
20. Wardle J, Adams J. Are the CAM professions engaging in high-level health
and medical research? Trends in publicly funded complementary medicine
research grants in Australia. Complementary therapies in medicine. 2013;
21(6):7469.
Adams et al. Chiropractic & Manual Therapies (2018) 26:5 Page 6 of 6
... Research capacity came to the forefront for the chiropractic profession in 1996, a time that coincided with the advancement of evidence-based medicine [1,2]. The shift toward evidence-based medicine has emphasized research as an essential activity for contemporary healthcare professions to advance knowledge, provide effective and safe ways to help patients [3][4][5][6][7], and integrate care within the wider healthcare system [8]. Research enables a profession to establish its cultural authority, validate its professional roles and ensure ongoing improvement in the quality of its academic programming [9]. ...
... Research enables a profession to establish its cultural authority, validate its professional roles and ensure ongoing improvement in the quality of its academic programming [9]. Despite the clear importance of research, in general a mature research culture has eluded the chiropractic profession; [8] however, there are institutions where such culture is maturing and growing. As "centers of advanced learning", a fundamental role of chiropractic academic institutions is to promote scholarly activity and enhance research productivity [10]. ...
... Recent scholarly attention has focused mainly on building research capacity in the chiropractic profession (including specialties) or describing programs aimed at developing networks of researchers [3,5,8,10,14]. A recent scoping review revealed that only two published studies have focused on research capacity at chiropractic academic institutions since 2010 [12]. ...
Article
Full-text available
Background Research enables a profession to establish its cultural authority, validate its professional roles and ensure ongoing improvement in the quality of its academic programming. Despite the clear importance of research, a mature research culture has eluded the chiropractic profession. A fostering institutional culture that enables, values, and supports research activity is essential to building research capacity. Our study aimed to collect information about the existing research capacity and culture at the Canadian Memorial Chiropractic College (CMCC) and explore the views, attitudes and experiences of faculty members regarding research. Methods We conducted a sequential explanatory mixed methods study with quantitative priority between April and July, 2023. Quantitative data were collected using the Research Capacity and Culture (RCC) tool. Survey results guided the qualitative data collected from four faculty focus groups with varying levels of research experience. Quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive statistics by domain and stratified by research education and workload. The qualitative data were thematically analyzed and then integrated with the quantitative results to provide deeper meaning to the results. Results The faculty survey response rate was 42% (59/144). Attributes at the organization or department level were consistently rated as either moderate or high; however, research skills at an individual level were more variable and influenced by factors such as research workload and highest research-related academic qualification. Qualitative focus group data were categorized under four themes: institutional factors, resource allocation, career pathways and personal factors. Lower scores for survey items related to mentorship, research planning and ensuring faculty research career pathways, as well as the identified workload and time-related barriers (e.g., other work roles and desire for work/life balance) for engaging in research were supported by each of the four themes. Research motivators included keeping the brain stimulated, developing skills and increasing job satisfaction. Conclusion The quantitative and qualitative information in this study provides a baseline evaluation for RCC and identifies key factors impacting RCC at the CMCC. This information is critical for planning, developing, implementing, and evaluating future interventions to enhance research capacity. Ultimately, these efforts are aimed at maturing the research culture of the chiropractic profession.
... 11,22,25 Altering the atmosphere surrounding research, such as increasing scholarly productivity of supervisors, could motivate teaching faculty to conduct and publish research. 31 Promoting positive research cultures in the chiropractic student body and teaching critical analysis skills early on could help build research capacity and instill the value of research participation. 10 Professional organizations should espouse the benefits of research to the chiropractic profession and public. ...
... Of 14 included articles, 13 are outdated with publication dates before 2010. 7,10,12,14,21,[23][24][25][26][27]31 Several studies were conducted across multiple institutions, which provides useful, if not dated, information about the state of faculty research participation across the profession. 7,10,11,21-23 However, many projects had small samples from single institutions, limiting the generalizability of those findings. ...
Article
Full-text available
Objective To describe peer-reviewed literature on chiropractic faculty participation in research and identify important barriers and facilitators. Methods We conducted a scoping review using comprehensive searches of relevant databases from inception through November 2022. English language publications of any design were included, with search terms consisting of subject headings specific to each database and free text words related to chiropractic, faculty, and research. Primary and secondary reviewer teams performed article screening and data abstraction using Covidence software, with primary reviewers responsible for consensus. Data were entered into evidence tables and analyzed descriptively. Results A total of 330 articles were screened, with 14 deemed eligible including 8 cross-sectional/correlational studies and 6 narrative reviews/editorials. Article publication dates ranged from 1987 to 2017. No intervention studies were identified. Facilitators of chiropractic faculty research included research assignment as primary role, institutional culture promoting research, and dedicated release time. Barriers included teaching/clinic assignments, lack of incentives and mentorship, and teaching load. Qualitative results identified 5 domains impacting faculty research: demographics/professional roles; personal empowerment; research culture; institutional setting/policies; and research training. Conclusion Our scoping review found a paucity of recently published articles on chiropractic faculty participation in research. Educational institutions building research capacity among chiropractic faculty must establish cultural environments where scholarship is expected, rewarded, and valued. Tangible support, such as research policies, resources, and space, advanced training, funding, and release time, must be available. Faculty are encouraged to build upon key facilitators, evaluate interventions to address barriers to chiropractic faculty research, and publish their results.
... Adams et al. described the aims, core principles, and methodology for the Chiropractic Academy for Research Leadership (CARL). CARL aims to bring together a global network of early career researchers in chiropractic in a global network [16]. Côté et al. described a chiropractic rehabilitation competency framework that was developed by the World Federation of Chiropractic Disability and rehabilitation Committee [17]. ...
... Papers in this series have again revealed deeply rooted disagreements within the chiropractic profession about what chiropractic is, and what it should be, as a profession [13,19,20], as well as disagreements and variation in relation to education of chiropractors [14,15] and chiropractic clinical practice [11]. In our opinion, it is ironic that while chiropractic has a strong presence in large parts of the world [3], is taking on increasingly important roles in disability prevention [6,7,17], in the military [5] and in interprofessional care [8] as well as growing research capacity [16], discussions about fundamental values and direction of the profession are unresolved. This unresolved issue creates confusion for stakeholders and threatens to impede professionalization and cultural authority. ...
Article
Full-text available
This commentary brings the 2017–2019 thematic series What is Chiropractic? to a close. The 18 papers published in the series contribute to a better understanding of what chiropractic is, where chiropractors practice and function, who seeks their care, what chiropractors do, and how they interact with other healthcare professionals. Several papers in the series highlighted deeply rooted disagreements within chiropractic about fundamental issues pertaining to ideology, acceptance of scientific evidence as the basis for clinical practice and the future of chiropractic. If the chiropractic profession is to remain relevant in today’s evidence-based healthcare environment, there is an urgent for the profession to undertake further research to describe what chiropractic is, what chiropractors do, and provide evidence for the value of these activities to patients and healthcare decision makers.
... McBride, 200627 Galaviz, 201955 Vassallo, 202135 Jaffe, 200938 Stacciarini, 201958 Butler, 201767 Gianfredi, 201939 Byington, 201657 Deiner, 201741 Walsh, 202268 Göç, 202254 Williams, 202069 Pfund, 201426 Gandhi, 201942 McBride, 201770 Pfund, 201329 Johnson, 202128 Weber-Main, 201925 Aliyu, 202271 Norman, 202151 Wides, 201472 Nearing, 202045 Libby, 201873 McMahon, 201974 Adams, 201875 Mayowski, 2019 76 Di Frances, 201949 Feldman, 200977 Steen, 202131 Johnson, 201443 Behar-Horenstein, 201932 Gandhi, 201630 Martina, 201444 McBride, 201878 Where no symbol is present, a paper did not evaluate outcomes at that level. Half the included studies reported organisational outcomes (n=24). ...
Article
Full-text available
Background: Academic institutions benefit from researchers adopting leadership positions and, subsequently, leadership development programmes are of increasing importance. Despite this, no evaluation of the evidence basis for leadership development programmes for healthcare researchers has been conducted. In this study, the authors reviewed leadership development programmes for healthcare researchers and aimed to identify their impact and the factors which influenced this impact. Methods: The authors searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and PsycINFO between January 2000 and January 2023 for evaluations of leadership development programmes with healthcare researchers. The authors synthesised results through exploratory meta-analysis and meta-aggregation and used the Medical Education Research Study Quality Instrument (MERSQI) and Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Checklist for Qualitative Studies to identify higher-reliability studies. Results: 48 studies met inclusion criteria, of which approximately half (22) met the criteria for higher reliability. The median critical appraisal score was 10.5/18 for the MERSQI and 3.5/10 for the JBI. Common causes of low study quality appraisal related to study design, data analysis and reporting. Evaluations principally consisted of questionnaires measuring self-assessed outcomes. Interventions were primarily focused on junior academics. Overall, 163/168 categorised programme outcomes were positive. Coaching, experiential learning/project work and mentoring were associated with increased organisational outcomes. Conclusion: Educational methods appeared to be more important for organisational outcomes than specific educational content. To facilitate organisational outcomes, educational methods should include coaching, project work and mentoring. Programmes delivered by external faculty were less likely to be associated with organisational outcomes than those with internal or mixed faculty, but this needs further investigation. Finally, improving evaluation design will allow educators and evaluators to more effectively understand factors which are reliably associated with organisational outcomes of leadership development.
... The Chiropractic Academy for Research Leadership (CARL) was conceived in late 2015 by three senior academics (Adams, Kawchuk, Hartvigsen) to identify and mentor talented, promising early career chiropractic researchers in a global network [1]. The program was devised in response to a lack of mature research culture across the chiropractic profession and aimed to develop a critical mass of successful early-career chiropractic researchers globally while at the same time encourage multi-disciplinary perspectives and cooperation in research and academia across professions. ...
Article
Full-text available
The Chiropractic Academy for Research Leadership (CARL) was formed in 2016 in response to a need for a global network of early career researchers and leaders in the chiropractic profession. Thirteen fellows were accepted competitively and have since worked together at residentials and virtually on many research and leadership projects. In 2020, the CARL program ended for this first cohort, and it is now timely to take stock and reflect on the achievements and benefits of the program. In this paper we present the structure of CARL, the scientific and leadership outputs as well as the personal value of CARL for the participating fellows. As a result of the success of the first CARL cohort, organizations from Europe, North America, and Australia have supported a second cohort of 14 CARL fellows, who were competitively accepted into the program in early 2020.
... The United States has a good understanding of the value and identity of the clinical academic (Adams et al., 2018;Bowman & Gardner, 2001;Havens et al., 2002;Huenneke et al., 2017;Peloquin & Abreu, 1996;Squires et al., 2017); in line with other developed countries, senior posts such as a clinical professor are recognised and available. The focus has predominantly been on medical and nursing roles, although a small number of senior midwifery clinical academic roles are noted, in additional to a scattering of senior AHP clinical academic roles (Squires, 2019). ...
Article
Healthcare research activity improves patient outcomes. Nurses, Midwives and Allied Health Professions (NMAHPs) make an important contribution to clinical research. Within the United Kingdom (UK), there is a 25-year history of increasing healthcare research capacity and capability through clinical academic roles. Medical colleagues were the first to introduce the role in 2005. In 2007, a national policy identified inequalities in access to and success of research training fellowships between medical and nursing healthcare professionals. This was followed by a number of national initiatives, which continue to evolve to the present day. There is evidence that the UK has reached the 'tipping point' to increase NMAHP research capacity and capability through clinical academic roles. Despite these initiatives substantial gaps remain. Outside, the UK, the term 'clinical academic' is not well understood. There is evidence of the presence of senior clinical academic roles, a clinical professor within Australia and the United States, for example, but there is a lack of opportunities and of a formulised research training pathway at a junior level. There is interest and appreciation of the NMAHP research-active clinical academic within the clinical setting in the Nordic countries and China, but the pace of change is slow due to co-existing priorities involving change and innovation. There is a need to develop and agree both national and international definitions that describes the NMAHP research-focused clinical academic role activity. © 2019 Debbie Carrick-Sen, Ann Moore, Patricia Davidson, Han Gendong, & Debra Jackson.
Article
Objective: The purpose of this study was to explore the research priorities of Australian practicing chiropractors and academics across a set of research domains to determine the agreement or disagreement based on these domains. Methods: We conducted a pilot-tested online survey focusing on the following 5 principal research domains: basic science, conditions (disorders chiropractors may encounter), patient subgroups, clinical interventions, and practice and public health/health services. Responses were sought regarding support for funding research scholarships, practice-based research networks, scientific conferences/symposia, journals, and existing research agendas. Data were collected (February 19 to May 24, 2019) from a sample of chiropractic academics (n1 = 33) representing 4 Australian programs and practicing chiropractors (n2 = 340). Collected data were ranked and analyzed to determine agreement across domains and items. Results: There was agreement between the 2 groups across the majority (>90%) of domain items. The closest agreement and highest rankings were achieved for the "clinical interventions and practice" and "conditions" domains. Disagreement was observed within specific domain items, such as patient subgroups (infants), and for 1 intervention (chiropractic-specific techniques). Disagreement also occurred outside of the main domains, including research agenda support and funding. Conclusions: There was overall agreement between practicing chiropractors and academics across most research area domain items, which should help facilitate consensus-led development of any potential Australian Chiropractic research agenda. Disagreements across specific domain items, such as population subgroups, interventions, and funding require further investigation.
Article
Full-text available
Objectives The Australian Chiropractic Research Network (ACORN) practice-based research network (PBRN) cohort was established to provide sustainable infrastructure necessary to address lack of rigorous investigation and to bridge the research–practice gap focused on chiropractic care for future years. This paper presents the profile of chiropractors recruited to the ACORN PBRN, a nationally representative sample of chiropractors working in Australia. Design Cross-sectional analysis of baseline data from a cohort study of chiropractors in Australia. Setting All registered chiropractors in Australia were invited to participate in the ACORN study and those who completed a practitioner questionnaire and consent form were included in the PBRN cohort. Participants A total of 1680 chiropractors (36%) were recruited to the cohort database. The average age of the PBRN participants is 41.9 years and 63% are male. The vast majority of the PBRN participants hold a university degree. Results General practitioners were identified as the most popular referral source for chiropractic care and low back pain and neck pain were the most common conditions ‘often’ treated by the PBRN chiropractors. The chiropractors in this PBRN cohort rated high velocity, low amplitude adjustment/manipulation/mobilisation as the most commonly used technique/method and soft tissue therapy as the most frequently employed musculoskeletal intervention in their patient management. Conclusions The ACORN PBRN cohort constitutes the largest coverage of any single healthcare profession via a national voluntary PBRN providing a sustainable resource for future follow-up. The ACORN cohort provides opportunities for further nested substudies related to chiropractic care, chiropractors, their patients and a vast range of broader healthcare issues with a view to helping build a diverse but coordinated research programme and further research capacity building around Australian chiropractic.
Article
Full-text available
Background Evidence-based practice (EBP) gaps are widespread across health disciplines. Understanding factors supporting the uptake of evidence can inform the design of strategies to narrow these EBP gaps. Although research utilization (RU) and the factors associated with EBP have been reported in several health disciplines, to date this area has not been reviewed comprehensively in the chiropractic profession. The purpose of this review was to report on the current state of knowledge on EBP, RU, and knowledge translation (KT) in chiropractic. Methods A scoping review using the Arksey and O’Malley framework was used to systematically select and summarize existing literature. Searches were conducted using a combination of keywords and MeSH terms from the earliest date available in each database to May 2015. Quantitative and thematic analyses of the selected literature were conducted. Results Nearly 85 % (56/67) of the included studies were conducted in Canada, USA, UK or Australia. Thematic analysis for the three categories (EBP, RU, KT) revealed two themes related to EBP (attitudes and beliefs of chiropractors; implementation of EBP), three related to RU (guideline adherence; frequency and sources of information accessed; and perceived value of websites and search engines), and three related to KT (knowledge practice gaps; barriers and facilitators to knowledge use; and selection, tailoring, and implementation of interventions). EBP gaps were noted in the areas of assessment of activity limitation, determination of psychosocial factors influencing pain, general health indicators, establishing a prognosis, and exercise prescription. While most practitioners believed EBP and research to be important and a few studies suggested that traditional and online educational strategies could improve patient care, use of EBP and guideline adherence varied widely. Conclusion Findings suggest that the majority of chiropractors hold favourable attitudes and beliefs toward EBP. However, much remains to be done for chiropractors to routinely apply evidence into clinical practice. Educational strategies aimed at practicing chiropractors can lead to more EBP and improved patient care. The chiropractic profession requires more robust dissemination and implementation research to improve guideline adherence and patient health outcomes. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12906-016-1175-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Article
Full-text available
Objectives: To identify Canadian chiropractors' attitudes, skills and use of evidence based practice (EBP), as well as their level of awareness of previously published chiropractic clinical practice guidelines (CPGs). Methods: 7,200 members of the Canadian Chiropractic Association were invited by e-mail to complete an online version of the Evidence Based practice Attitude & utilisation SurvEy (EBASE); a valid and reliable measure of participant attitudes, skills and use of EBP. Results: Questionnaires were completed by 554 respondents. Most respondents (>75%) held positive attitudes toward EBP. Over half indicated a high level of self-reported skills in EBP, and over 90% expressed an interest in improving these skills. A majority of respondents (65%) reported over half of their practice was based on evidence from clinical research, and only half (52%) agreed that chiropractic CPGs significantly impacted on their practice. Conclusions: While most Canadian chiropractors held positive attitudes towards EBP, believed EBP was useful, and were interested in improving their skills in EBP, many did not use research evidence or CPGs to guide clinical decision making. Our findings should be interpreted cautiously due to the low response rate.
Article
Full-text available
To investigate the motivations, challenges and perceptions of the educational environment of emerging researchers in chiropractic. A descriptive web-based survey of higher-degree chiropractic research students was performed between October and November 2013. The survey consisted of open and closed questions and the Dundee Ready Education Environment Measure. Twenty-two students currently enrolled in a higher-degree research program participated. Students were most commonly enrolled in a doctor of philosophy program at a part-time rate. Motivations of research were desire to improve the clinical care aspects of chiropractic for the public and belief that chiropractic research is lacking. The greatest challenges were the negative attitudes towards chiropractic, finding enough time to do everything required, and feelings of isolation. The higher-degree research educational environment was perceived to be more positive than negative, with the stimulating nature of research a positive feature. A negative feature of the educational environment was poor undergraduate preparation for higher-degree research. This study is the first study to describe higher-degree chiropractic research students. Primary motivations included building research, while challenges included not only negative attitudes toward the chiropractic profession but also negative attitudes toward researchers from within the profession. The higher-degree research educational environment was perceived to be positive. By acknowledging the issues that surround emerging researchers in chiropractic, the profession is better placed to foster academics and build research capacity.
Article
Full-text available
Chiropractic is a popular health care choice in Australia and yet major gaps in our empirical understanding of this area of practice remain. Furthermore, while some research excellence exists, a largely uncoordinated approach to research activity and development has in effect led to silos of interest and a lack of strategic 'big-picture' planning essential to producing a sustainable research culture and capacity for the profession. This commentary identifies the significance of a number of key features - including a national, coordinated focus, and a rich engagement with the practitioner and patient base amongst others - arguably important to the future development of research and research capacity within Australian chiropractic. The design features and phases of the Australian Chiropractic Research Network (ACORN) project are also outlined. ACORN is one contemporary initiative specifically developed to address chiropractic's research and research capacity building needs and help grow a broad evidence-base to inform safe, effective patient care.
Article
Full-text available
Research involving chiropractors is evolving and expanding in Europe while resources are limited. Therefore, we considered it timely to initiate a research agenda for the chiropractic profession in Europe. The aim was to identify and suggest priorities for future research in order to best channel the available resources and facilitate advancement of the profession. In total, 60 academics and clinicians working in a chiropractic setting, and who had attended any of the annual European Chiropractors' Union/European Academy of Chiropractic (ECU/EAC) Researchers' Day meetings since their inception in 2008, were invited to participate. Data collection consisted of the following phases: Phase 1 identification of themes; Phase 2 consensus, which employed a Delphi process and allowed us to distill the list of research priorities; and Phase 3 presentation of the results during both the Researchers' Day and a plenary session of the annual ECU Convention in May 2013. In addition, results were also distributed to all ECU member countries. The response rate was 42% from Phase 1 and 68% from Phase 2. In general, participants were middle-aged, male and had been awarded a Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) as well as chiropractic degree. Approximately equal numbers of participants had obtained their chiropractic degree from the UK/Europe and North America. The majority of participants worked primarily in an academic/research environment and approximately half worked in an independent institution. In total, 58% of the participants were from the UK and Denmark, collectively representing 44% of the chiropractors working in Europe. In total, 70 research priorities were identified, of which 19 reached consensus as priorities for future research. The following three items were thought to be most important: 1) cost-effectiveness/economic evaluations, 2) identification of subgroups likely to respond to treatment, and 3) initiation and promotion of collaborative research activities. This is the first formal and systematic attempt to develop a research agenda for the chiropractic profession in Europe. Future discussion and study is necessary to determine whether the themes identified in this survey should be broadly implemented.
Article
Full-text available
Evidence-based practice has had a growing impact on chiropractic education and the delivery of chiropractic care. For evidence-based practice to penetrate and transform a profession, the penetration must occur at 2 levels. One level is the degree to which individual practitioners possess the willingness and basic skills to search and assess the literature. Chiropractic education received a significant boost in this realm in 2005 when the National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine awarded 4 chiropractic institutions R25 education grants to strengthen their research/evidence-based practice curricula. The second level relates to whether the therapeutic interventions commonly employed by a particular health care discipline are supported by clinical research. A growing body of randomized controlled trials provides evidence of the effectiveness and safety of manual therapies.
Article
Background: Concerns have been raised about the career pipeline in academic medicine, including whether women with a demonstrated commitment to research succeed at the same rate as male colleagues. Objective: To determine the subsequent academic success of recipients of National Institutes of Health (NIH) career development awards. Setting: United States. Participants: 2784 of 2799 (99.5%) recipients of K08 and K23 awards for whom sex could be ascertained from the NIH Computer Retrieval of Information on Scientific Projects database and other publicly available sources. Measurements: Actuarial rates at which recipients of K08 and K23 awards from 1997 to 2003 went on to receive R01 awards. Sex-specific rates of R01 award attainment were calculated by using the Kaplan-Meier method, and sex differences were assessed by using a Cox proportional hazards model. Results: Overall, 31.4% of the 1919 K08 awardees and 43.7% of the 865 K23 awardees were female (P < 0.001). Women were less likely than men to receive an R01 award (P < 0.001). The actuarial rate of R01 award attainment at 5 years was 22.7% overall, 18.8% among women, and 24.8% among men. At 10 years, the rate was 42.5% overall, 36.2% among women, and 45.6% among men. Sex persisted as an independent significant predictor of R01 award attainment (hazard ratio, 0.79 [95% CI, 0.68 to 0.92]; P = 0.002) in multivariate analysis controlling for K award type, year of award, funding institute, institution, and specialty. Limitation: Whether the lower rate of R01 award achievement among women is due to lower rates of application or lower rates of success in application could not be determined. Conclusion: Only a minority of K awardees studied achieved R01 award funding during the period assessed, and a significant sex disparity was evident.
Article
Developing research capacity is an essential part of professional development in the health professions, as well as essential to improving health care delivery. CAM is one area in which the importance of research capacity has been previously highlighted. To determine whether academic and research CAM practitioners were actively engaged in high-level CAM research in Australia successful National Health and Medical Research Council grants data for projects starting between 2000 to present (2013) were collated and analyzed. CAM practitioners are not involved in most NHMRC-funded research, with non-clinical academics leading nearly half of all NHMRC-funded CAM grants. Conventional medical practitioners led the majority of CAM grants headed by clinicians. Only Chinese medicine and naturopathy practitioners appear to be building capacity, with NHMRC-funded CAM grants led by these practitioner groups increasing. University CAM faculties are for the most part not engaging in high level research, with most NHMRC-funded CAM projects being led by groups outside these faculties. Even the majority NHMRC-funded research led by CAM clinicians is administered outside university CAM faculties. The CAM professions have a low level of engagement with high-level health and medical research in Australia. Current levels of engagement appear to be dependent more on individual clinician involvement rather than professional strategy. Failure to engage with high-level health and medical research may pose challenges for the CAM professions, unless research engagement is improved. This requires an active and concerted effort from within CAM ranks to build research capacity in the CAM professions.