Using digital tools in clinical, health and social care research: a mixed-methods study of UK stakeholders
Clohessy, S. ORCID: 0000-0003-2945-157X, Arvanitis, T. N., Rashid, U. , Craddock, C., Evans, M., Toro, C. T. & Elliott, M. T. (2024).
Using digital tools in clinical, health and social care research: a mixed-methods study of UK stakeholders.
BMJ Open, 14(4),
article number e076613.
doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2023-076613
Abstract
Objective
The COVID-19 pandemic accelerated changes to clinical research methodology, with clinical studies being carried out via online/remote means. This mixed-methods study aimed to identify which digital tools are currently used across all stages of clinical research by stakeholders in clinical, health and social care research and investigate their experience using digital tools.
Design
Two online surveys followed by semistructured interviews were conducted. Interviews were audiorecorded, transcribed and analysed thematically.
Setting, participants
To explore the digital tools used since the pandemic, survey participants (researchers and related staff (n=41), research and development staff (n=25)), needed to have worked on clinical, health or social care research studies over the past 2 years (2020–2022) in an employing organisation based in the West Midlands region of England (due to funding from a regional clinical research network (CRN)). Survey participants had the opportunity to participate in an online qualitative interview to explore their experiences of digital tools in greater depth (n=8).
Results
Six themes were identified in the qualitative interviews: ‘definition of a digital tool in clinical research’; ‘impact of the COVID-19 pandemic’; ‘perceived benefits/drawbacks of digital tools’; ‘selection of a digital tool’; ‘barriers and overcoming barriers’ and ‘future digital tool use’. The context of each theme is discussed, based on the interview results.
Conclusions
Findings demonstrate how digital tools are becoming embedded in clinical research, as well as the breadth of tools used across different research stages. The majority of participants viewed the tools positively, noting their ability to enhance research efficiency. Several considerations were highlighted; concerns about digital exclusion; need for collaboration with digital expertise/clinical staff, research on tool effectiveness and recommendations to aid future tool selection. There is a need for the development of resources to help optimise the selection and use of appropriate digital tools for clinical research staff and participants.
Publication Type: | Article |
---|---|
Additional Information: | Copyright information: © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Unported (CC BY 4.0) license, which permits others to copy, redistribute, remix, transform and build upon this work for any purpose, provided the original work is properly cited, a link to the licence is given, and indication of whether changes were made. See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. |
Subjects: | R Medicine > RA Public aspects of medicine > RA0421 Public health. Hygiene. Preventive Medicine |
Departments: | School of Health & Medical Sciences School of Health & Medical Sciences > Department of Global, Public & Population Health & Policy |
SWORD Depositor: |
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution.
Download (414kB) | Preview
Export
Downloads
Downloads per month over past year