Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0196379
Title: Decision making process and factors contributing to research participation among general practitioners: A grounded theory study
Authors: Tong S.F.
Ng C.J.
Lee V.K.M. 
Lee P.Y.
Ismail I.Z.
Khoo E.M.
Tahir N.A.
Idris I.
Ismail M.
Abdullah A.
Keywords: article
clinical practice
conceptual framework
decision making
funding
general practitioner
genetic transcription
grounded theory
human
interview
organizational culture
sampling
skill
social environment
theoretical study
adult
aged
ethics
general practitioner
grounded theory
information processing
middle aged
primary health care
psychology
Adult
Aged
Decision Making
Focus Groups
General Practitioners
Grounded Theory
Humans
Interviews as Topic
Middle Aged
Organizational Culture
Primary Health Care
Social Environment
Issue Date: 2018
Citation: Tong S.F., Ng C.J., Lee V.K.M., Lee P.Y., Ismail I.Z., Khoo E.M., Tahir N.A., Idris I., Ismail M., Abdullah A. (2018). Decision making process and factors contributing to research participation among general practitioners: A grounded theory study. PLoS ONE 13 (4) : e0196379. ScholarBank@NUS Repository. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0196379
Rights: Attribution 4.0 International
Abstract: Introduction The participation of general practitioners (GPs) in primary care research is variable and often poor. We aimed to develop a substantive and empirical theoretical framework to explain GPs’ decision-making process to participate in research. Methods We used the grounded theory approach to construct a substantive theory to explain the decision-making process of GPs to participate in research activities. Five in-depth interviews and four focus group discussions were conducted among 21 GPs. Purposeful sampling followed by theoretical sampling were used to attempt saturation of the core category. Data were collected using semi-structured open-ended questions. Interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim and checked prior to analysis. Open line-by-line coding followed by focus coding were used to arrive at a substantive theory. Memoing was used to help bring concepts to higher abstract levels. Results The GPs’ decision to participate in research was attributed to their inner drive and appreciation for primary care research and their confidence in managing their social and research environments. The drive and appreciation for research motivated the GPs to undergo research training to enhance their research knowledge, skills and confidence. However, the critical step in the GPs’ decision to participate in research was their ability to align their research agenda with priorities in their social environment, which included personal life goals, clinical practice and organisational culture. Perceived support for research, such as funding and technical expertise, facilitated the GPs’ participation in research. In addition, prior experiences participating in research also influenced the GPs’ confidence in taking part in future research. Conclusions The key to GPs deciding to participate in research is whether the research agenda aligns with the priorities in their social environment. Therefore, research training is important, but should be included in further measures and should comply with GPs’ social environments and research support. © 2018 Tong et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Source Title: PLoS ONE
URI: https://scholarbank.nus.edu.sg/handle/10635/161232
ISSN: 19326203
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0196379
Rights: Attribution 4.0 International
Appears in Collections:Staff Publications
Elements

Show full item record
Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormatAccess SettingsVersion 
10_1371_journal_pone_0196379.pdf891.98 kBAdobe PDF

OPEN

NoneView/Download

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


This item is licensed under a Creative Commons License Creative Commons