Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Qualitative study explores barriers and enablers of research engagement in health practitioners.
INTRODUCTION: A research competent workforce is essential for embedding and sustaining evidence-based practice with health and care services. Despite strategic emphasis, many practitioners lack the confidence, skills, and opportunities to engage in research. This study explored the experiences of health and care practitioners from a range of clinical and nonclinical roles undertaking a project-based research internship. It aimed to identify key barriers and enablers to research engagement. METHODS: A qualitative study was conducted with participants engaged in a 12-month research internship program in the north west of England. Using normalization process theory as a framework, an online semistructured group interview was held with six interns postprogram. Data were analyzed thematically and mapped to normalization process theory domains: coherence, cognitive participation, collective action, and reflexive monitoring. RESULTS: Four themes were identified: discovering purpose from initial uncertainty; negotiating commitment and researcher identity; applying research practice within real-world contexts; and establishing a sense of research legitimacy. Subthemes provide nuance around clarifying expectations, balancing responsibilities, support structures, adapting to organizational constraints, and the internship as a foundation for future practice. DISCUSSION: The internship program successfully contributed to the development of confidence and researcher identity among novice practitioners. Engagement was maintained through supervision, peer interaction, and pastoral input from coordinators, while workload pressures and differing expectations across stakeholders created challenges. Future delivery should continue to prioritize supportive supervision, peer connection, and pastoral input, while also attending to alignment of expectations, reliable provision of protected time, and training timing that aligns with project milestones.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Lamont et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: