An analysis of bibliometric data exploring factors affecting research capacity amongst HCPC registered radiographers in England

Radiography (Lond). 2019 Oct:25 Suppl 1:S33-S39. doi: 10.1016/j.radi.2019.03.005. Epub 2019 Apr 17.

Abstract

Introduction: Pre-existing studies argue, radiographers are "apathetic" when it comes to research. However, labelling everyone as such seems a gross simplification of a multifaceted issue; especially as current evidence tends to err towards the anecdotal, subjective or is compared to similar professions. Considering this, the SCoR periodically issues a Research Strategy, recognising the necessity to embed/improve research-capacity across all levels of the profession. The aim of this study is to ascertain factors characteristically influencing research-capacity amongst HCPC-registered radiographers in England.

Methods: A purposeful sample of 5 years' bibliometric data from the journal 'Radiography.' A critical and thematic analysis followed based on current peer reviewed journals and grey literature.

Results: Of 374 eligible articles and 143 research-active authors (published 2 + articles), collaborations prominently featured (74.9%) across 19 international partnerships. HCPC registrants in England were principal investigator(s) in 49.20% of cases and registrants affiliated with the journal/publisher generally published more than non-affiliates. Preferred topic-areas included 'Education & Research' and 'Technical Practice.' Males published more than females (M = 5.13/F = 3.45). Average length of practice equalled 22.93 years. Outputs mostly originated from HEIs (62.07%), but contributions varied (mean = 10.05/std.deviation = ±17.09); modestly correlating high-REF scoring HEIs (r = 0.330); however, regional workforce ratio(s) proved the strongest indicator (r = 0.601).

Conclusion: No "one-size-fits all" approach to research-capacity applies; multiple variables affect capacity/activeness. Many seem contingent on extrinsic factors e.g. regional locale, organisational type and culture/support. Personal/professional influences included career status, length of qualification and gender. Future strategies may benefit from refinement; mindful of the dynamics influencing the heterogeneity of the current workforce. Recommendations are that future strategies/studies may benefit from more specific targeting.

Keywords: Bibliographic analysis; Research capacity; Research publication; Research strategy.

MeSH terms

  • Bibliometrics*
  • Biomedical Research / statistics & numerical data*
  • England
  • Female
  • Humans
  • Interdisciplinary Communication
  • Male
  • Radiography / statistics & numerical data*