- Email: [email protected]
Focusing research priorities in schools of nursing
Focusing Research Priorities in Schools of Nursing ANNE PEIRCE, PHD, RN,* SARAH COOK, MED, RN,† AND ELAINE LARSON, PHD, RN‡
Schools of nursing are facing the challenge of shrinking resources simultaneously with the public’s cry for more nursing manpower. This challenge compounds the difficult decisions all schools must make regarding the allocation of precious resources. One element critical to the future of the profession is the growth of its knowledge base through research, but it is essential to ensure that the research programs developed and encouraged in the school reflect its culture and values and contribute to the mission of the sponsoring institution and the profession. The purpose of this article is to describe a process for articulating a school of nursing’s research focus and its congruence with the school’s culture. The process outlined includes a discussion of the role of the school’s leadership, how faculty can become engaged, and criteria used to identify a school’s research niche. Additionally, an example of one school’s final articulation of research focus is provided. Schools of nursing that support research should examine that enterprise in light of their mission. The first step should be a formal articulation of how the research conducted in the school supports the school’s mission. (Index words: Research articulation; School mission and philosophy; resource utilization) J Prof Nurs 20:156-159, 2004. © 2004 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
T
ODAY, MORE THAN EVER, SCHOOLS of nursing are confronted with the challenge of shrinking resources in the face of the public’s cry for more nursing manpower. This challenge compounds the difficult decisions all schools must make about the allocation of precious resources. One element critical to the future of the profession is the growth of its knowledge base through research. Like all university endeavors, faculty research comes with a price. There-
*Associate Dean for Academic Affairs and Associate Professor of Clinical Nursing, Columbia University School of Nursing, New York, NY. †Vice Dean and Dorothy Rogers Professor of Clinical Nursing, Columbia University School of Nursing, New York, NY. ‡Associate Dean for Research and Professor of Therapeutic and Pharmaceutical Research, Columbia University School of Nursing, New York, NY. Address correspondence and reprint requests to Dr. Peirce: Columbia University School of Nursing, 630 W. 168th St., New York, NY 10032. E-mail: [email protected] 8755-7223/$30.00 © 2004 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.profnurs.2004.04.005 156
fore, it behooves schools of nursing to consider the research enterprise as a cost as well as a potential revenue center and to ensure that the research programs developed and encouraged in the school reflect its culture and values and contribute to the mission of the sponsoring institution and the profession. At Columbia University School of Nursing, we undertook an examination of the research in the school and its relationship to the mission and philosophy of the school and to the profession. This effort resulted in an intellectual guide to research in the school, assuring that the research enterprise is balanced, focused, and congruent with the mission. The purpose of this article is to describe a process for articulating a school of nursing’s research focus and its congruence with the school’s culture.
Background
The Columbia University School of Nursing (CUSON) was founded in 1892. Since that time, its mission has been to prepare clinical experts. In 1956, it became the first school to award a master’s degree in a clinical specialty, and it is the home of the nation’s oldest continuously running nurse midwifery program as well as the World Health Organization Collaborating Center for International Nursing Development in Advanced Practice. The academic degree programs at the school include the Entry to Practice Program for nonnurse baccalaureate holders who wish to become advanced practice nurses, master’s programs with 13 clinical specialties, and a decade-old Doctor of Nursing Science (DNSc) program. All the programs focus on scholarly nursing practice, either through the provision of care or the study of care and policies influencing that care. The DNSc, is similar to the PhD in that it prepares nurse scholars to contribute to the body of nursing knowledge through the conduct and dissemination of research. In addition, CUSON will soon offer a Doctor of Nursing Practice (DrNP), a clinical degree similar to other clinical degrees such as the MD or DDS. This degree is designed to produce clinicians capable of providing high-level primary care. It will satisfy the needs of the profession by providing a clinical focus to
Journal of Professional Nursing, Vol 20, No 3 (May-June), 2004: pp 156-159
FOCUSING RESEARCH PRIORITIES
the doctoral degree panoply and the needs of the patients by ensuring a standardized curriculum for comprehensive, cross-site primary care. The juxtaposition of the two doctoral degrees has led us to further delineate the various components of scholarship and clinical applied research that we believe should characterize the nurse scholar at this school. In a recent article, Froman, Hall, Shah, Bernstein, & Galloway (2003) provided helpful information about establishing an office of research, including functions of staff and types of support provided. Having such an infrastructure is a necessary but not sufficient requirement for successful scholarly productivity. Faculty also need to understand and agree with the philosophic underpinnings from which a school’s scholarship emanates. Process
To articulate the research mission of the school, we embarked on an iterative process in which all stakeholders could participate. Initially, the dean convened a group of faculty members who were conducting externally funded studies to discuss the themes and priorities of their research and to obtain their perspectives on strengths and gaps in or needs of the research mission of the school. This was an important step in the process because it explicitly communicated the top leadership’s support for and commitment to this mission, in addition to recognizing the need to identify research strengths and priorities from the perspective of the faculty. The rest of the process was facilitated by the associate dean for research, who obtained faculty input in several ways. First, a survey was sent by e-mail to all faculty members, including the full-time clinicians, giving the rationale and background and soliciting their input. The survey consisted of 5 items. 1. List the top two areas of clinical expertise/ focus in the school. 2. List two major research focuses in the school. 3. Describe how you think that these two foci (clinical and research) do and/or should interface. 4. Describe your own personal research interests. 5. Write in 8 words or less 1 or 2 potential themes that characterize the school’s research strengths. Responses were obtained from about one-fourth of faculty and were then collated and used to provide background and discussion points for subsequent meetings.
157
Next, two meetings open to all interested faculty were convened to discuss results of the survey and identify emerging themes. Faculty were given information on national research priorities from the National Institute for Nursing Research (“Research Themes for the Future”) and from the Institute of Medicine (Adams & Corrigan, 2003). The mission of the school was also reviewed and discussed at these meetings. Twenty faculty members attended one or both sessions. Four criteria were used by the faculty to develop a consensus about the school’s research umbrella and thematic focus. The theme had to (1) reflect and take advantage of the research expertise of the faculty, (2) support and further the mission of the school and the nursing profession, (3) address national health care research needs and priorities, and (4) enhance the potential for obtaining research funding. As a result of the survey and meetings, a research statement was drafted, reviewed again with the school’s leadership and other faculty, and adopted. The statement (Appendix) informs the school about recruitment of new faculty, curriculum development, decisions about research resources, fundraising and grant-writing, and building consensus. This statement is an example specific to one school, but its formulation and its format could be useful to other schools of nursing as they struggle with how best to guide resources and faculty efforts in times of shortage. Each school must develop and adopt its own statement of research priorities. It is critical to the profession that research contributes to our understanding of the care of people, improves the systems of care, contributes to curriculum development, and influences health policy continues. The present level of research must increase exponentially if we are to make a real difference. Many factors contribute to the growth of nursing research, including the education of qualified researchers and the financial support of such research and its translation into practice. A second reality is that most nursing research takes place in our colleges and universities. Each college and university program has a mission that elucidates its own unique vision of how it contributes to its communities of interest. To be truly effective, the mission must flow through all of a school’s activities from education to service and research. In many schools of nursing, it is commonplace for the mission to weigh most heavily on the educational arm and less on research and service, but the faculty must become the link between the research and educational endeavors of the school and the overt demonstration of
158
PEIRCE ET AL
the mission. The process we have outlined helps to ensure the intellectual honesty of the school in remaining true to its stated mission. The process of identifying how the school’s mission is articulated in research activities has some other benefits as well. First, it will provide direction to the school’s administration as to the allocation of resources. The statement will also reduce research initiatives that seem more influenced by the question of the day than by why such research is important to the profession. Third, the statement will help in the search for faculty by providing a clear statement of focus and evaluation of fit. It is also a protection against the possibility that successful funding can drive the research initiatives. All schools seek funded research; however, it does not ultimately benefit the school if the funding
moves faculty and resources away from the stated mission. We believe all schools that support research should examine that enterprise in light of the mission. The first step should be a formal articulation of how the research conducted in the school supports the school’s mission. Acknowledgment The authors thank Jacqueline Merrill, Columbia University School of Nursing predoctoral informatics trainee, for developing the figure (Appendix).
Reference Froman, R. D., Hall, A. W., Shah, A., Bernstein, J. M., & Galloway, R. Y. (2003). A methodology for supporting research and scholarship. Nursing Outlook, 51, 84-89.
Appendix EXAMPLE OF STATEMENT OF RESEARCH FOCUS COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF NURSING TRANSLATIONAL RESEARCH FOR QUALITY HEALTH OUTCOMES: BEYOND THE BEDSIDE
A National Gap A barrier to improving health outcomes has been a gap between researchers, administrators and planners, and policymakers. This translational block occurs at two interfaces: between basic science and human studies, and between clinical research and clinical practice and health decision-making. These translational blocks “impede efforts to apply science to better human health in an expeditious fashion” (Sung, Crowley, Genel, Salber, Sandy, & Sherwood, et.al., 2003, p. 1279). As a result, the patient might receive poorquality care because of inadequate delivery systems and national policies rather than because of ineffective treatment.
tise can help to bridge the translational gap from clinical research to practice and policy. The commitment to serving the underserved and to translational research for practice and policy is reflected in statements from the school’s mission: ●
●
●
Develop and test advancements in nursing practice and in research, especially in concert with colleagues in other professions, including medicine, public health, health policy, business, and law. Assume active accountability for the quality and excellence of nursing practice through leadership in research, practice, education, advocacy, and policy. Continuously improve the opportunities for nurses in research and practice to fully use their knowledge and skills to the betterment of science and care.
Filling the National Gap
Core Translational Processes (Figure 1)
The Columbia University School of Nursing contributes uniquely to the national clinical research enterprise because of the interface of two areas of expertise. First, members of the faculty conduct their research in settings and with populations that are difficult to reach and seldom studied. These populations include prisoners, recent immigrants, the urban poor, non-English speakers with chronic health problems, and other vulnerable and underserved groups. Second, faculty members work at all levels of the health care and public health systems that are needed to translate research from the individual recipient of care to health systems and policy. The school has a long history of evidence-based practice, and the faculty’s research is informed and enriched by clinical practice. Because of its commitment to improving health outcomes, the faculty has also developed extensive expertise in translational methods such as health and risk communication, economic analysis, information technology and informatics, and policy and dissemination research. This exper-
The school accomplishes its mission of translational research for improved health outcomes through three core processes: clinical effectiveness research, systems research, and health policy research. Clinical effectiveness research: Improved care outcomes. One of the school’s major contributions to the nursing profession is clinical expertise and advanced clinical practice, which enriches clinical research. The faculty members in this school are clinical experts, and most continue to practice at the highest level of their credentialing. This practice activity adds depth and dimension to research and helps to focus evaluation of outcomes to care interventions. Commitment to health care quality and access underpins all of our research endeavors, and translational research is essential to move discoveries from the basic sciences into practice arenas. Faculty members are also deeply involved in collaborative work with other disciplines, further facilitating the dissemination and translational process.
159
FOCUSING RESEARCH PRIORITIES
Figure 1. Columbia University School of Nursing Translational Research for Quality Health Outcomes. Three of the school’s centers are specifically focused on clinical effectiveness research. The Center for AIDS Research centers around symptom management and nursing interventions for persons with HIV infection. The WHO Center for International Development of Advanced Practice emphasizes advanced practice and clinical effectiveness on a global level. The CAPNA Center houses the Columbia Advanced Practice Nurse Associates (CAPNA) faculty practice, which offers primary care to commercially insured and private patients and those covered by Medicare. Systems research: Improved health systems. The Center for Evidence-Based Practice in the Underserved applies the effectiveness theme for patient and public safety and improved health care outcomes to developing practice patterns and systems that can better serve vulnerable populations and reduce health disparities. In particular, the center-funded research applies informatics and health communication techniques to more effectively and efficiently meet the health and health information needs of cultural, ethnic, and racial minority groups. This theme is also reflected in the currently funded T32 Reducing Health Disparities Through Informatics, which funds pre- and postdoctoral fellows in informatics. The school’s proposed Center for Health Care for the Underserved will continue the school’s longtime commitment to inner-city and other underserved communities. It will house three existing clinical practices that provide and evaluate cross-cultural health care for Latino and African American families.
Health policy research: Improved health policy. The Center for Health Policy of the school also focuses on research that improves public health and safety by translational work from the level of the individual recipient of care to the health care system and public policy. Recent activities in that area have included helping to define the workforce needs for public health and emergency preparedness, including bioterrorism. Many of the faculty are active at the national and international levels with the state and federal governments and with influential policy groups, such as the Institute of Medicine, the World Health Organization, large health care foundations, and professional organizations. This provides effective venues to ensure that the final translational gap between clinical and systems research and health policy is filled. References
Adams, K., & Corrigan, J. M. (2003). Priority areas for national action: transforming health care quality (electronic version). Institute of Medicine. Retrieved August 29, 2003, from http://www.iom.edu/report.asp?id⫽4290. Froman, R. D., Hall, A. W., Shah, A., Bernstein, J. M., & Galloway, R. Y. (2003). A methodology for supporting research and scholarship. Nursing Outlook, 51, 84-89. Research themes for the furture (n.d.). Retrieved August 29, 2003, from http://www.nih.gov/ninr/research/themes.doc. Sung, N. S., Crowley, W. F., Genel, M., Salber, P., Sandy, L., Sherwood, L. M., et. al. (2003). Central challenges facing the national clinical research enterprise. Journal of the American Medical Association, 289, 1278-1287.
Schools of nursing are facing the challenge of shrinking resources simultaneously with the public’s cry for more nursing manpower. This challenge compounds the difficult decisions all schools must make regarding the allocation of precious resources. One element critical to the future of the profession is the growth of its knowledge base through research, but it is essential to ensure that the research programs developed and encouraged in the school reflect its culture and values and contribute to the mission of the sponsoring institution and the profession. The purpose of this article is to describe a process for articulating a school of nursing’s research focus and its congruence with the school’s culture. The process outlined includes a discussion of the role of the school’s leadership, how faculty can become engaged, and criteria used to identify a school’s research niche. Additionally, an example of one school’s final articulation of research focus is provided. Schools of nursing that support research should examine that enterprise in light of their mission. The first step should be a formal articulation of how the research conducted in the school supports the school’s mission. (Index words: Research articulation; School mission and philosophy; resource utilization) J Prof Nurs 20:156-159, 2004. © 2004 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
T
ODAY, MORE THAN EVER, SCHOOLS of nursing are confronted with the challenge of shrinking resources in the face of the public’s cry for more nursing manpower. This challenge compounds the difficult decisions all schools must make about the allocation of precious resources. One element critical to the future of the profession is the growth of its knowledge base through research. Like all university endeavors, faculty research comes with a price. There-
*Associate Dean for Academic Affairs and Associate Professor of Clinical Nursing, Columbia University School of Nursing, New York, NY. †Vice Dean and Dorothy Rogers Professor of Clinical Nursing, Columbia University School of Nursing, New York, NY. ‡Associate Dean for Research and Professor of Therapeutic and Pharmaceutical Research, Columbia University School of Nursing, New York, NY. Address correspondence and reprint requests to Dr. Peirce: Columbia University School of Nursing, 630 W. 168th St., New York, NY 10032. E-mail: [email protected] 8755-7223/$30.00 © 2004 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.profnurs.2004.04.005 156
fore, it behooves schools of nursing to consider the research enterprise as a cost as well as a potential revenue center and to ensure that the research programs developed and encouraged in the school reflect its culture and values and contribute to the mission of the sponsoring institution and the profession. At Columbia University School of Nursing, we undertook an examination of the research in the school and its relationship to the mission and philosophy of the school and to the profession. This effort resulted in an intellectual guide to research in the school, assuring that the research enterprise is balanced, focused, and congruent with the mission. The purpose of this article is to describe a process for articulating a school of nursing’s research focus and its congruence with the school’s culture.
Background
The Columbia University School of Nursing (CUSON) was founded in 1892. Since that time, its mission has been to prepare clinical experts. In 1956, it became the first school to award a master’s degree in a clinical specialty, and it is the home of the nation’s oldest continuously running nurse midwifery program as well as the World Health Organization Collaborating Center for International Nursing Development in Advanced Practice. The academic degree programs at the school include the Entry to Practice Program for nonnurse baccalaureate holders who wish to become advanced practice nurses, master’s programs with 13 clinical specialties, and a decade-old Doctor of Nursing Science (DNSc) program. All the programs focus on scholarly nursing practice, either through the provision of care or the study of care and policies influencing that care. The DNSc, is similar to the PhD in that it prepares nurse scholars to contribute to the body of nursing knowledge through the conduct and dissemination of research. In addition, CUSON will soon offer a Doctor of Nursing Practice (DrNP), a clinical degree similar to other clinical degrees such as the MD or DDS. This degree is designed to produce clinicians capable of providing high-level primary care. It will satisfy the needs of the profession by providing a clinical focus to
Journal of Professional Nursing, Vol 20, No 3 (May-June), 2004: pp 156-159
FOCUSING RESEARCH PRIORITIES
the doctoral degree panoply and the needs of the patients by ensuring a standardized curriculum for comprehensive, cross-site primary care. The juxtaposition of the two doctoral degrees has led us to further delineate the various components of scholarship and clinical applied research that we believe should characterize the nurse scholar at this school. In a recent article, Froman, Hall, Shah, Bernstein, & Galloway (2003) provided helpful information about establishing an office of research, including functions of staff and types of support provided. Having such an infrastructure is a necessary but not sufficient requirement for successful scholarly productivity. Faculty also need to understand and agree with the philosophic underpinnings from which a school’s scholarship emanates. Process
To articulate the research mission of the school, we embarked on an iterative process in which all stakeholders could participate. Initially, the dean convened a group of faculty members who were conducting externally funded studies to discuss the themes and priorities of their research and to obtain their perspectives on strengths and gaps in or needs of the research mission of the school. This was an important step in the process because it explicitly communicated the top leadership’s support for and commitment to this mission, in addition to recognizing the need to identify research strengths and priorities from the perspective of the faculty. The rest of the process was facilitated by the associate dean for research, who obtained faculty input in several ways. First, a survey was sent by e-mail to all faculty members, including the full-time clinicians, giving the rationale and background and soliciting their input. The survey consisted of 5 items. 1. List the top two areas of clinical expertise/ focus in the school. 2. List two major research focuses in the school. 3. Describe how you think that these two foci (clinical and research) do and/or should interface. 4. Describe your own personal research interests. 5. Write in 8 words or less 1 or 2 potential themes that characterize the school’s research strengths. Responses were obtained from about one-fourth of faculty and were then collated and used to provide background and discussion points for subsequent meetings.
157
Next, two meetings open to all interested faculty were convened to discuss results of the survey and identify emerging themes. Faculty were given information on national research priorities from the National Institute for Nursing Research (“Research Themes for the Future”) and from the Institute of Medicine (Adams & Corrigan, 2003). The mission of the school was also reviewed and discussed at these meetings. Twenty faculty members attended one or both sessions. Four criteria were used by the faculty to develop a consensus about the school’s research umbrella and thematic focus. The theme had to (1) reflect and take advantage of the research expertise of the faculty, (2) support and further the mission of the school and the nursing profession, (3) address national health care research needs and priorities, and (4) enhance the potential for obtaining research funding. As a result of the survey and meetings, a research statement was drafted, reviewed again with the school’s leadership and other faculty, and adopted. The statement (Appendix) informs the school about recruitment of new faculty, curriculum development, decisions about research resources, fundraising and grant-writing, and building consensus. This statement is an example specific to one school, but its formulation and its format could be useful to other schools of nursing as they struggle with how best to guide resources and faculty efforts in times of shortage. Each school must develop and adopt its own statement of research priorities. It is critical to the profession that research contributes to our understanding of the care of people, improves the systems of care, contributes to curriculum development, and influences health policy continues. The present level of research must increase exponentially if we are to make a real difference. Many factors contribute to the growth of nursing research, including the education of qualified researchers and the financial support of such research and its translation into practice. A second reality is that most nursing research takes place in our colleges and universities. Each college and university program has a mission that elucidates its own unique vision of how it contributes to its communities of interest. To be truly effective, the mission must flow through all of a school’s activities from education to service and research. In many schools of nursing, it is commonplace for the mission to weigh most heavily on the educational arm and less on research and service, but the faculty must become the link between the research and educational endeavors of the school and the overt demonstration of
158
PEIRCE ET AL
the mission. The process we have outlined helps to ensure the intellectual honesty of the school in remaining true to its stated mission. The process of identifying how the school’s mission is articulated in research activities has some other benefits as well. First, it will provide direction to the school’s administration as to the allocation of resources. The statement will also reduce research initiatives that seem more influenced by the question of the day than by why such research is important to the profession. Third, the statement will help in the search for faculty by providing a clear statement of focus and evaluation of fit. It is also a protection against the possibility that successful funding can drive the research initiatives. All schools seek funded research; however, it does not ultimately benefit the school if the funding
moves faculty and resources away from the stated mission. We believe all schools that support research should examine that enterprise in light of the mission. The first step should be a formal articulation of how the research conducted in the school supports the school’s mission. Acknowledgment The authors thank Jacqueline Merrill, Columbia University School of Nursing predoctoral informatics trainee, for developing the figure (Appendix).
Reference Froman, R. D., Hall, A. W., Shah, A., Bernstein, J. M., & Galloway, R. Y. (2003). A methodology for supporting research and scholarship. Nursing Outlook, 51, 84-89.
Appendix EXAMPLE OF STATEMENT OF RESEARCH FOCUS COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF NURSING TRANSLATIONAL RESEARCH FOR QUALITY HEALTH OUTCOMES: BEYOND THE BEDSIDE
A National Gap A barrier to improving health outcomes has been a gap between researchers, administrators and planners, and policymakers. This translational block occurs at two interfaces: between basic science and human studies, and between clinical research and clinical practice and health decision-making. These translational blocks “impede efforts to apply science to better human health in an expeditious fashion” (Sung, Crowley, Genel, Salber, Sandy, & Sherwood, et.al., 2003, p. 1279). As a result, the patient might receive poorquality care because of inadequate delivery systems and national policies rather than because of ineffective treatment.
tise can help to bridge the translational gap from clinical research to practice and policy. The commitment to serving the underserved and to translational research for practice and policy is reflected in statements from the school’s mission: ●
●
●
Develop and test advancements in nursing practice and in research, especially in concert with colleagues in other professions, including medicine, public health, health policy, business, and law. Assume active accountability for the quality and excellence of nursing practice through leadership in research, practice, education, advocacy, and policy. Continuously improve the opportunities for nurses in research and practice to fully use their knowledge and skills to the betterment of science and care.
Filling the National Gap
Core Translational Processes (Figure 1)
The Columbia University School of Nursing contributes uniquely to the national clinical research enterprise because of the interface of two areas of expertise. First, members of the faculty conduct their research in settings and with populations that are difficult to reach and seldom studied. These populations include prisoners, recent immigrants, the urban poor, non-English speakers with chronic health problems, and other vulnerable and underserved groups. Second, faculty members work at all levels of the health care and public health systems that are needed to translate research from the individual recipient of care to health systems and policy. The school has a long history of evidence-based practice, and the faculty’s research is informed and enriched by clinical practice. Because of its commitment to improving health outcomes, the faculty has also developed extensive expertise in translational methods such as health and risk communication, economic analysis, information technology and informatics, and policy and dissemination research. This exper-
The school accomplishes its mission of translational research for improved health outcomes through three core processes: clinical effectiveness research, systems research, and health policy research. Clinical effectiveness research: Improved care outcomes. One of the school’s major contributions to the nursing profession is clinical expertise and advanced clinical practice, which enriches clinical research. The faculty members in this school are clinical experts, and most continue to practice at the highest level of their credentialing. This practice activity adds depth and dimension to research and helps to focus evaluation of outcomes to care interventions. Commitment to health care quality and access underpins all of our research endeavors, and translational research is essential to move discoveries from the basic sciences into practice arenas. Faculty members are also deeply involved in collaborative work with other disciplines, further facilitating the dissemination and translational process.
159
FOCUSING RESEARCH PRIORITIES
Figure 1. Columbia University School of Nursing Translational Research for Quality Health Outcomes. Three of the school’s centers are specifically focused on clinical effectiveness research. The Center for AIDS Research centers around symptom management and nursing interventions for persons with HIV infection. The WHO Center for International Development of Advanced Practice emphasizes advanced practice and clinical effectiveness on a global level. The CAPNA Center houses the Columbia Advanced Practice Nurse Associates (CAPNA) faculty practice, which offers primary care to commercially insured and private patients and those covered by Medicare. Systems research: Improved health systems. The Center for Evidence-Based Practice in the Underserved applies the effectiveness theme for patient and public safety and improved health care outcomes to developing practice patterns and systems that can better serve vulnerable populations and reduce health disparities. In particular, the center-funded research applies informatics and health communication techniques to more effectively and efficiently meet the health and health information needs of cultural, ethnic, and racial minority groups. This theme is also reflected in the currently funded T32 Reducing Health Disparities Through Informatics, which funds pre- and postdoctoral fellows in informatics. The school’s proposed Center for Health Care for the Underserved will continue the school’s longtime commitment to inner-city and other underserved communities. It will house three existing clinical practices that provide and evaluate cross-cultural health care for Latino and African American families.
Health policy research: Improved health policy. The Center for Health Policy of the school also focuses on research that improves public health and safety by translational work from the level of the individual recipient of care to the health care system and public policy. Recent activities in that area have included helping to define the workforce needs for public health and emergency preparedness, including bioterrorism. Many of the faculty are active at the national and international levels with the state and federal governments and with influential policy groups, such as the Institute of Medicine, the World Health Organization, large health care foundations, and professional organizations. This provides effective venues to ensure that the final translational gap between clinical and systems research and health policy is filled. References
Adams, K., & Corrigan, J. M. (2003). Priority areas for national action: transforming health care quality (electronic version). Institute of Medicine. Retrieved August 29, 2003, from http://www.iom.edu/report.asp?id⫽4290. Froman, R. D., Hall, A. W., Shah, A., Bernstein, J. M., & Galloway, R. Y. (2003). A methodology for supporting research and scholarship. Nursing Outlook, 51, 84-89. Research themes for the furture (n.d.). Retrieved August 29, 2003, from http://www.nih.gov/ninr/research/themes.doc. Sung, N. S., Crowley, W. F., Genel, M., Salber, P., Sandy, L., Sherwood, L. M., et. al. (2003). Central challenges facing the national clinical research enterprise. Journal of the American Medical Association, 289, 1278-1287.