Philip J Davis1,2, Justin Yan3, Kerstin de Wit4,5, Patrick M Archambault6, Andrew McRae7, David W Savage8, Naveen Poonai9, Marco L A Sivilotti5, Alix Carter10, Shelley L McLeod11. 1. Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK, Canada. phil.davis@usask.ca. 2. Royal University Hospital, 103 Hospital Drive, Saskatoon, SK, S7N 0W8, Canada. phil.davis@usask.ca. 3. Division of Emergency Medicine, Department of Medicine, Western University, London, ON, Canada. 4. Department of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada. 5. Department of Emergency Medicine, Queen's University, Kingston, ON, Canada. 6. Department of Family and Emergency Medicine, Université Laval, Québec, QC, Canada. 7. Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada. 8. Section of Emergency Medicine, Northern Ontario School of Medicine, Lakehead University, Thunder Bay, ON, Canada. 9. Departments of Paediatrics, Internal Medicine, and Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Western University, London, ON, Canada. 10. Division of EMS, Department of Emergency Medicine, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada. 11. Schwartz/Reisman Emergency Medicine Institute, Sinai Health and Division of Emergency Medicine, Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To develop pragmatic recommendations for starting, building and sustaining a program of research in emergency medicine (EM) in Canada at sites with limited infrastructure and/or prior research experience. METHODS: At the direction of the Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians (CAEP) academic section, we assembled an expert panel of 10 EM researchers with experience building programs of research. Using a modified Delphi approach, our panel developed initial recommendations for (1) starting, (2) building, and (3) sustaining a program of research in EM. These recommendations were peer-reviewed by emergency physicians and researchers from each of the panelist's home institutions and tested for face and construct validity, as well as ease of comprehension. The recommendations were then iteratively revised based on feedback and suggestions from peer review and amended again after being presented at the 2020 CAEP academic symposium. RESULTS: Our panel created 15 pragmatic recommendations for those intending to start (formal research training, find mentors, local support, develop a niche, start small), build (funding, build a team, collaborate, publish, expect failure) and sustain (become a mentor, obtain leadership roles, lead national studies, gain influence, prioritize wellness) a program of EM research in centers without an established research culture. Additionally, we suggest four recommendations for department leads aiming to foster a program of research within their departments. CONCLUSION: These recommendations serve as guidance for centres wanting to establish a program of research in EM.
OBJECTIVE: To develop pragmatic recommendations for starting, building and sustaining a program of research in emergency medicine (EM) in Canada at sites with limited infrastructure and/or prior research experience. METHODS: At the direction of the Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians (CAEP) academic section, we assembled an expert panel of 10 EM researchers with experience building programs of research. Using a modified Delphi approach, our panel developed initial recommendations for (1) starting, (2) building, and (3) sustaining a program of research in EM. These recommendations were peer-reviewed by emergency physicians and researchers from each of the panelist's home institutions and tested for face and construct validity, as well as ease of comprehension. The recommendations were then iteratively revised based on feedback and suggestions from peer review and amended again after being presented at the 2020 CAEP academic symposium. RESULTS: Our panel created 15 pragmatic recommendations for those intending to start (formal research training, find mentors, local support, develop a niche, start small), build (funding, build a team, collaborate, publish, expect failure) and sustain (become a mentor, obtain leadership roles, lead national studies, gain influence, prioritize wellness) a program of EM research in centers without an established research culture. Additionally, we suggest four recommendations for department leads aiming to foster a program of research within their departments. CONCLUSION: These recommendations serve as guidance for centres wanting to establish a program of research in EM.
Entities:
Keywords:
Administration; Emergency medicine; Research methods, implementation
Authors: Lisa A Calder; Riyad B Abu-Laban; Jennifer D Artz; Shelley McLeod; Barbara Blackie; Bijon Das; Robert Woods; Jeffrey J Perry; Christian Vaillancourt; Ian G Stiell; Jason R Frank Journal: CJEM Date: 2015-09 Impact factor: 2.410
Authors: Jeffrey J Perry; Carolyn E Snider; Jennifer D Artz; Ian G Stiell; Sedigheh Shaeri; Shelley McLeod; Natalie Le Sage; Corinne Hohl; Lisa A Calder; Christian Vaillancourt; Brian Holroyd; Judd E Hollander; Laurie J Morrison Journal: CJEM Date: 2015-05 Impact factor: 2.410
Authors: Christian Vaillancourt; Brian H Rowe; Jennifer D Artz; Robert Green; Marcel Émond; Venkatesh Thiruganasambandamoorthy; Grant Innes; Jeffrey J Perry; Lisa A Calder; Ian G Stiell Journal: CJEM Date: 2015-07 Impact factor: 2.410
Authors: Jeffrey J Perry; Marco L A Sivilotti; Jane Sutherland; Corinne M Hohl; Marcel Émond; Lisa A Calder; Christian Vaillancourt; Venkatesh Thirganasambandamoorthy; Howard Lesiuk; George A Wells; Ian G Stiell Journal: CMAJ Date: 2017-11-13 Impact factor: 8.262
Authors: Brent Thoma; Julien Poitras; Rick Penciner; Jonathan Sherbino; Brian R Holroyd; Robert A Woods Journal: CJEM Date: 2015-03 Impact factor: 2.410