Does participation in research lead to changes in attitudes among clinicians? Report on a survey of those involved in a French practice research network

Abstract

Background/Objective: With increasing awareness of some of the limitations of randomised controlled trials as the ‘gold standard’ of psychotherapy evaluation, researchers at the start of the twenty-first century have focused on a number of new priorities: developing studies in natural conditions; investigating the psychotherapeutic process to better understand the conditions, causes and mechanisms of change; and reducing the gap between clinicians and researchers. Can these three interrelated objectives be combined? Method: A French psychotherapy practice-based research network (PRN) is used as a field of research for these issues. A survey was used to investigate the conditions that encouraged the clinicians to participate in the PRN study within the context of clinicians’ general opposition to research. Results: Several elements emerged as the key to clinicians’ positive involvement in research: the methodology implemented (intensive case studies during one year); the choice of measures; the constant attention to the practicalities and the potential contribution of studies to clinical practice; the organisation of work in peer groups; the training methods; the use of new information technologies and the sense of participation in a project that would support the profession. Implications: These elements are briefly discussed in relation to the question of how best to encourage clinicians to engage with research.

Keywords:

• care efficiency
• intensive case study
• mechanisms of change
• practice research network (PRN)
• process-outcome study
• science-practitioner model

Acknowledgements

The PRN is funded by Inserm, Office General for Health, and France Foundation. Thanks to the clinicians of the borderline and autism sub-groups of the network who took part in the study, and J. Massonnet and F. Journet who helped to refine the questionnaire. Thanks also to G. Haag, C. Barthelemy and B. Falissard for their participation in the dynamics of the network, and also to T. Delespierre.