Publication | Closed Access
Validation of the research capacity and culture (RCC) tool: measuring RCC at individual, team and organisation levels
193
Citations
26
References
2011
Year
Family MedicineOrganizationsProject ManagementAllied Health ProfessionsEducationOrganizational CultureHealth PsychologyResearch Capacity BuildingHuman Resource ManagementCapacity BuildingOrganizational BehaviorResearch CapacityManagement DevelopmentIntervention ScienceManagementResearch CultureFactor AnalysisAssessmentReliabilityCross-cultural ManagementOutcomes ResearchMultilevel ModelingResearch DesignCultureTest-retest ReliabilityCross-cultural AssessmentBusinessOrganisation LevelsMeasuring RccPsychological Measurement
Research capacity building (RCB) in Australia has recently focussed on strategies that take a whole of system approach to developing research culture at individual, team and organisation levels. Although a theoretical framework exists, no tool has been published that quantitatively measures the effectiveness of RCB interventions aimed at these three levels. A sample of 134 allied health workers was used to validate the research capacity and culture (RCC) tool. Item level analysis was undertaken using Cronbach's α and exploratory factor analysis, and test-retest reliability was examined using intra-class correlations (ICC). The tool had one factor emerge for each domain, with excellent internal consistency for organisation, team and individual domains (α=0.95, 0.96 and 0.96 respectively; and factor loadings ranges of 0.58-0.89, 0.65-0.89 and 0.59-0.93 respectively). The overall mean score (total) for each domain was: 5.4 (inter-quartile range 3.9-7.7), 4.4 (IQR 2.6-6.1) and 3.9 (IQR 2.9-6) for the organisation, team and individual domains respectively. Test-retest reliability was strong for each domain: organisation ICC=0.77, team ICC=0.83 and individual ICC=0.82. The RCC tool has three domains measuring research capacity and culture at organisation, team and individual levels. It demonstrates excellent internal consistency and strong test-retest reliability.
| Year | Citations | |
|---|---|---|
Page 1
Page 1