6 research outputs found
Juggling Confidentiality and Safety: a qualitative study of how general practice clinicians document domestic violence in families with children
Background Domestic violence and abuse (DVA) and child safeguarding are interlinked problems, impacting on all family members. Documenting in electronic patient records (EPRs) is an important part of managing these families. Current evidence and guidance, however, treats DVA and child safeguarding separately. This does not reflect the complexity clinicians face when documenting both issues in one family.
Aim To explore how and why general practice clinicians document DVA in families with children.
Design and setting A qualitative interview study using vignettes with GPs and practice nurses (PNs) in England.
Method Semi-structured telephone interviews with 54 clinicians (42 GPs and 12 PNs) were conducted across six sites in England. Data were analysed thematically using a coding frame incorporating concepts from the literature and emerging themes.
Results Most clinicians recognised DVA and its impact on child safeguarding, but struggled to work out the best way to document it. They described tensions among the different roles of the EPR: a legal document; providing continuity of care; information sharing to improve safety; and a patient-owned record. This led to strategies to hide information, so that it was only available to other clinicians.
Conclusion Managing DVA in families with children is complex and challenging for general practice clinicians. National integrated guidance is urgently needed regarding how clinicians should manage the competing roles of the EPR, while maintaining safety of the whole family, especially in the context of online EPRs and patient access
Evaluation capacity building in response to the agricultural research impact agenda: Emerging insights from Ireland, Catalonia (Spain), New Zealand, and Uruguay
Performance-based funding and calls for public-funded science to demonstrate societal impact are
encouraging public research organisations to evaluate impact, the so-called impact agenda. This paper
explores evaluation methods of four fully or partially public-funded agricultural research organisations
and how they are building evaluative capacity to respond to the impact agenda. Drawing on cross-
organisational comparison of the readiness of each organisation to implement evaluation, the
implications for improving evaluative capacity building (ECB) are discussed. This study extends the
current literature on ECB, as very little has focussed on research organisations in general, and
particularly agricultural research.Postprint (author's final draft
Evaluation capacity building in response to the agricultural research impact agenda:Emerging insights from Ireland, Catalonia (Spain), New Zealand, and Uruguay
Performance-based funding and calls for public-funded science to demonstrate societal impact are
encouraging public research organisations to evaluate impact, the so-called impact agenda. This paper
explores evaluation methods of four fully or partially public-funded agricultural research organisations
and how they are building evaluative capacity to respond to the impact agenda. Drawing on cross-
organisational comparison of the readiness of each organisation to implement evaluation, the
implications for improving evaluative capacity building (ECB) are discussed. This study extends the
current literature on ECB, as very little has focussed on research organisations in general, and
particularly agricultural research.Postprint (author's final draft