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

AbstractBackground/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.