Medical research barriers, facilitators, and motives in a developing country: a mixed-methods single-centre study.
6 affiliations
- 1School of Medicine, Tehran University of Medical Sciences (TUMS), Tehran, Iran.
- 2Iranian Center of Neurological Research (ICNR), Neuroscience Institute, Tehran University of Medical Sciences (TUMS), Tehran, Iran.
- 3Department of Neurosurgery, Children's Medical Center Hospital, Tehran University of Medical Sciences (TUMS), Tehran, Iran.
- 4Department of Neurosurgery, Shariati Hospital, Tehran University of Medical Sciences (TUMS), Tehran, Iran.
- 5Department of Preventive and Community Medicine, School of Medicine, Tehran University of Medical Sciences (TUMS), Tehran, Iran.
- 6Department of Neurosurgery, Shariati Hospital, Tehran University of Medical Sciences (TUMS), Tehran, Iran. [email protected].
Abstract
Background
Research engagement is essential for advancing clinical care and strengthening academic capacity. However, sustained participation is often limited by institutional and workflow constraints. This study assessed perceived research barriers and related factors at Tehran University of Medical Sciences (TUMS) and developed and preliminarily evaluated a context-specific instrument.Methods
A sequential, exploratory, mixed-methods, single-centre study was conducted. Qualitative interviews and focus groups informed the development of a 45-item questionnaire covering 10 domains of research barriers and motives. The final instrument was administered via an online survey, with quota-based stratified sampling across academic roles. Internal consistency was evaluated using Cronbach's alpha.Results
The scale showed acceptable internal consistency (α = 0.85), but domain-level reliability was mostly modest (α range: 0.36-0.76), and the a priori 10-domain structure was not confirmed (CFI = 0.69, TLI = 0.66, RMSEA = 0.062, SRMR = 0.17); exploratory analysis supported five to six broader dimensions. A total of 358 participants completed the survey (mean age 28.66 ± 7.38; 62.6% male). The total questionnaire score ranged from 113 to 198, with a mean of 153.66 ± 16.24, indicating moderate-to-strong endorsement of perceived research challenges. The highest domain means were observed for data access and quality (27.01 ± 4.05), financial resources and infrastructure (23.01 ± 4.10), and authorship, ethics, and research performance (17.80 ± 2.95). Total scores did not differ by academic position (P = 0.27), but significant differences were observed in time, workload, and organizational support, as well as in skills, training, and methodological consultation (both P < 0.001). Total scores had a weak but significant correlation with years of research experience (P < 0.001) and H-index (P = 0.01).Conclusion
Perceived research barriers at TUMS are broadly endorsed and appear concentrated in modifiable institutional domains, particularly data access and quality, resource constraints, and governance-related factors. Institutional strategies that strengthen data systems, improve access to evidence, and enhance organizational support may improve the feasibility and sustainability of research engagement in similar academic medical settings.
Related
- Barriers and facilitators to Medical Emergency Team activation among healthcare professionals: protocol for a multicentre cross-sectional survey in four Swiss hospitals
- Whistleblowing and retractions concerning Iran-affiliated medical research: motives and editorial perspectives.
- Perceived barriers and facilitators to medical students participating in volunteer services for older adults with disabilities: a qualitative descriptive study
- Innovation Management in Medical Education: A Narrative Review of Its Organizational Dimensions, Facilitators, and Barriers
- Using implementation research frameworks to identify facilitators and barriers to implementation of ferric carboxymaltose intravenous iron among moderately anemic postpartum women participating in a trial in India
BibTeX
@article{abed2026medical,
title = {{Medical research barriers, facilitators, and motives in a developing country: a mixed-methods single-centre study.}},
author = {Mohammad Abed and Farhang Rashidi and Mohammad Hassan Bagheri and Alipahsa Meysamie and Milad Shafizadeh},
journal = {Health research policy and systems},
year = {2026},
month = jul,
doi = {10.1186/s12961-026-01517-x},
url = {https://europepmc.org/article/MED/42894174},
note = {CC BY-NC-ND},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - Medical research barriers, facilitators, and motives in a developing country: a mixed-methods single-centre study.
AU - Mohammad Abed
AU - Farhang Rashidi
AU - Mohammad Hassan Bagheri
AU - Alipahsa Meysamie
AU - Milad Shafizadeh
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/07/01
JO - Health research policy and systems
DO - 10.1186/s12961-026-01517-x
UR - https://europepmc.org/article/MED/42894174
AB - Background Research engagement is essential for advancing clinical care and strengthening academic capacity. However, sustained participation is often limited by institutional and workflow constraints. This study assessed perceived research barriers and related factors at Tehran University of Medical Sciences (TUMS) and developed and preliminarily evaluated a context-specific instrument.Methods A sequential, exploratory, mixed-methods, single-centre study was conducted. Qualitative interviews and focus groups informed the development of a 45-item questionnaire covering 10 domains of research barriers and motives. The final instrument was administered via an online survey, with quota-based stratified sampling across academic roles. Internal consistency was evaluated using Cronbach's alpha.Results The scale showed acceptable internal consistency (α = 0.85), but domain-level reliability was mostly modest (α range: 0.36-0.76), and the a priori 10-domain structure was not confirmed (CFI = 0.69, TLI = 0.66, RMSEA = 0.062, SRMR = 0.17); exploratory analysis supported five to six broader dimensions. A total of 358 participants completed the survey (mean age 28.66 ± 7.38; 62.6% male). The total questionnaire score ranged from 113 to 198, with a mean of 153.66 ± 16.24, indicating moderate-to-strong endorsement of perceived research challenges. The highest domain means were observed for data access and quality (27.01 ± 4.05), financial resources and infrastructure (23.01 ± 4.10), and authorship, ethics, and research performance (17.80 ± 2.95). Total scores did not differ by academic position (P = 0.27), but significant differences were observed in time, workload, and organizational support, as well as in skills, training, and methodological consultation (both P < 0.001). Total scores had a weak but significant correlation with years of research experience (P < 0.001) and H-index (P = 0.01).Conclusion Perceived research barriers at TUMS are broadly endorsed and appear concentrated in modifiable institutional domains, particularly data access and quality, resource constraints, and governance-related factors. Institutional strategies that strengthen data systems, improve access to evidence, and enhance organizational support may improve the feasibility and sustainability of research engagement in similar academic medical settings.
SN - 1478-4505
ER -