Cookies on this website

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you click 'Accept all cookies' we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies and you won't see this message again. If you click 'Reject all non-essential cookies' only necessary cookies providing core functionality such as security, network management, and accessibility will be enabled. Click 'Find out more' for information on how to change your cookie settings.

Few studies have explored the development of practices as research organisations. This paper reports the findings of a study exploring the development of UK research practices and the impact of practice roles on research. Twenty-eight qualitative interviews were undertaken with research team members in a maximum variety sample of 11 research practices. All interviews were tape-recorded, transcribed and analysed using an adaptation of Framework, a systematic method for qualitative data analysis. Research practice development was influenced by motivations to participate in research and by team roles and activity. General practitioners (GPs) regarded their "research role" as one of generating new knowledge, whereas nurses were motivated by the potential for improving care for their specific patient populations. "Research hierarchies" were revealed in practices hosting research, with GPs often leading decision-making and nurses undertaking much of the groundwork. Lack of coordination across research team/s appeared to hinder development, with shared decision-making helping to foster activity. Tensions were evident in managing the interface between research and other practice roles. Findings raise important issues in relation to assumed practice roles. Role issues must be fully addressed in order for research capacity building to be effective, particularly where the role of nursing is being extended.

Original publication




Journal article


Australian Journal of Primary Health

Publication Date





24 - 31