RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Collaboration and knowledge generation in an 18-year quality improvement research programme in Australian Indigenous primary healthcare: a coauthorship network analysis
JF BMJ Open
JO BMJ Open
FD British Medical Journal Publishing Group
SP e045101
DO 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-045101
VO 11
IS 5
A1 Jodie Bailie
A1 Boyd Alexander Potts
A1 Alison Frances Laycock
A1 Seye Abimbola
A1 Ross Stewart Bailie
A1 Frances Clare Cunningham
A1 Veronica Matthews
A1 Roxanne Gwendalyn Bainbridge
A1 Kathleen Parker Conte
A1 Megan Elizabeth Passey
A1 David Peiris
YR 2021
UL http://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/11/5/e045101.abstract
AB Objectives Though multidisciplinary research networks support the practice and effectiveness of continuous quality improvement (CQI) programmes, their characteristics and development are poorly understood. In this study, we examine publication outputs from a research network in Australian Indigenous primary healthcare (PHC) to assess to what extent the research network changed over time.Setting Australian CQI research network in Indigenous PHC from 2002 to 2019.Participants Authors from peer-reviewed journal articles and books published by the network.Design Coauthor networks across four phases of the network (2002–2004; 2005–2009; 2010–2014; 2015–2019) were constructed based on author affiliations and examined using social network analysis methods. Descriptive characteristics included organisation types, Indigenous representation, gender, student authorship and thematic research trends.Results We identified 128 publications written by 308 individual authors from 79 different organisations. Publications increased in number and diversity over each funding phase. During the final phase, publication outputs accelerated for organisations, students, project officers, Indigenous and female authors. Over time there was also a shift in research themes to encompass new clinical areas and social, environmental or behavioural determinants of health. Average degree (8.1), clustering (0.81) and diameter (3) indicated a well-connected network, with a core-periphery structure in each phase (p≤0.03) rather than a single central organisation (degree centralisation=0.55–0.65). Academic organisations dominated the core structure in all funding phases.Conclusion Collaboration in publications increased with network consolidation and expansion. Increased productivity was associated with increased authorship diversity and a decentralised network, suggesting these may be important factors in enhancing research impact and advancing the knowledge and practice of CQI in PHC. Publication diversity and growth occurred mainly in the fourth phase, suggesting long-term relationship building among diverse partners is required to facilitate participatory research in CQI. Despite improvements, further work is needed to address inequities in female authorship and Indigenous authorship.Data are available on reasonable request. The data set is available from the corresponding author on reasonable request and if consistent with the projects’s ethics approvals.