APAP Committee Report, January 15, 2002
Committee Name: APAP Research and Review Committee
Committee Chair: Rick Dehn, MPA, PA-C
Current Activities:
--Review of survey instruments utilized for surveying APAP member programs, faculty, or students is ongoing.
--Peer-review of the APAP Research Institute small grant program applications as needed per grant cycle (ongoing).
--Peer-review of proposals for faculty research presentations for October conferences as needed (ongoing).
--Peer-review of proposals for research poster presentations as needed (ongoing).
--Discussions continue to be held with NCCPA about cooperation with research activities. The R&R Chair (Rick Dehn) has been appointed to the NCCPA Research Committee and is scheduled to attend the NCCPA Research Committee meetings March 2002 and September 2002 in Atlanta to discuss and refine the cooperative grant process for next year. Three R&R members will again join with three NCCPA Research Committee members to review proposals for the spring 2002 NCCPA/APAP research grant cycle. This is expected to be an ongoing process.
--The Research and Review Committee is again conducting the J.Peter Nyquist Student Writing Contest this year (ongoing). I. Keir Todd, MEd, PA-C, from Central Michigan University PA Program, is again administering the competition. The submission deadline is Feb 1st. This is an ongoing activity. JAAPA is again generously sponsoring the awards of cash prizes, transportation, and lodging for the winners. This is an annually occurring ongoing activity.
--The committee is planning an add-on day dedicated to “Research in the PA Profession” for October 2002 APAP meeting directed at showcasing the research done on the PA profession, including work done by non-PA researchers who research the PA profession. Rod Hooker is responsible for suggesting this proposal and submitting it to APAP staff.
--The Research and Review Committee Chair has in the past few years worked in cooperation with the Education Committee to review research-oriented workshop proposals for APAP meetings, and at this time the process appears to be an ongoing activity (see further discussion of this issue below in Concerns section).
Completion dates: As above
Accomplishments/Success Stories:
--The six-hour Research Track at the October 2001 meeting was by all measures a big success. This track was designed and taught entirely by the Research and Review Committee in response to informal requests by APAP members over the last few years.
--Development of objective criteria for accepting/rejecting survey instruments was completed May 2000 and posted on committee's web site at http://paprogram.medicine.uiowa.edu/randr. The new criterion and mechanism appear to be working as expected. Since last October 2001, 2 surveys have been approved, and the R&R Chair has directed several potential researchers to existing data that addresses their research questions. The process of reviewing surveys is intended to avoid duplication in surveys, improve the quality of research done on the PA education system, and to prevent "survey burnout" that would negatively impact all of our research efforts. Currently interest has been primarily from PA students, and the research chair and others have been able to use these contacts as an opportunity to advise students about PA research. The Research and Review Committee will continue to discuss ways to encourage and enhance student research while attempting to control the quantity and quality of research done on PA programs.
--The Fall 2001 Small Research Grants review subcommittee was composed of: Dennis Blessing, University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, Subcommittee Chair; Meredith Davison, Midwestern University; Michelle Heinan, East Carolina University; Rod Hooker, University of Texas Southwest; Tony Miller, Shenandoah University; and Martha Petersen, Lock Haven University. These individuals performed an exemplary job, and their service to APAP should be recognized. It is hoped they can be persuaded to serve again for the Fall 2002 cycle.
--The administrator of the J. Peter Nyquist Student Writing Contest, I. Keir Todd, MEd, PA-C, Central Michigan University PA Program, is again conducting the competition. A substantial increase for funding the J. Peter Nyquist Student Writing Contest was secured last year, and this funding was used increase the support for honoring the winners. Winners this year will again receive a cash prize of $500, $300, or $200 for 1st, 2nd, or 3rd place, as well as transportation, and lodging at the APAP hotel. The generous support is provided by JAAPA, which should be recognized for its support of this important student activity. I. Keir Todd should be recognized for the substantial service effort this activity demands.
--There is an increase in the number of original papers and abstracts presented at the October 2001 APAP meeting as well as an increase in the size of the audience. An additional hour was added to this year’s allocation of time for faculty paper presentations. Since an APAP mission to provide a venue for faculty advancement as well as dissemination of PA education information, it is proposed that two 2-hour faculty research presentation sessions (four hours total) be allocated for Fall 2002.
--The Research and Review Committee closed list serve is currently in use. It appears to be useful in allowing members to discuss committee issues as they come up rather than twice a year at meetings. The Research and Review Committee web site (http://paprogram.medicine.uiowa.edu/randr ) has been successful at keeping the survey review and grant activities organized and available to the public.
--In anticipation of the restructuring of APAP's committee system, Research and Review Committee activities are being delegated to smaller task-focused subcommittees. Typically these committees will contain 3-6 members and will require a substantial work commitment for a limited period of time. The first attempt at this process was a subcommittee formed to re-write the small grants guidelines, and it has since been utilized for the NCCPA research reviews in the Spring of 2001 and the Fall 2001 Research Institute small research review process. The intent is to develop a cadre of experienced subcommittee members for each activity in order to foster institution memory and stability in ongoing processes, and to compartmentalize the work demands on volunteers to predictable times. So far these experiments in organization appear to be quite successful and will be continued.
--NCCPA has appointed two new members to the NCCPA/APAP Research Grant review subcommittee. Elaine Grant and George Thomas will join Emil Petrusa in representing NCCPA, and last year’s APAP representatives Bill Tozier, Pat Kelly, and Rick Dehn will again serve. Emil and Petrusa and Rick Dehn will serve as co-chairs. NCCPA will contribute $20,000 for the spring research grant cycle, with awards to be presented at the May 2002 meeting in Boston. NCCPA should be recognized for its generous support of PA research.
Concerns:
--APAP member faculty are responding to increasing pressure due to the demands of promotion and tenure, likely due to the conversion of programs to awarding advanced degrees. Since participation in professional academic activities on a national level is typically part of academic promotion and tenure processes, this committee has seen a sharp increase in the number of proposals for presentation of original work. In order to effectively provide for our members' needs in this area, APAP will need to provide adequate time and resources for faculty presentation activities. As one variation of how to accomplish this, a poster-presentation option was revived for the Fall 2001 conference, although the demand was underestimated. In response to the unprecedented number of faculty presentation submissions, an extra hour of faculty presentation time was scheduled for the Fall 2001 meeting. This trend is likely to increase; therefore next year more time should be scheduled at the October meeting for faculty presentation, and plans should be make for a larger number of poster displays. In anticipation of next year's demand, four hours of presentation time should be allocated, as well as room for up to 12 posters.
--This committee has found it difficult to plan and implement research curriculum at APAP meetings. This is due to this committee’s duties and responsibilities in this area overlapping with those of the Education Committee. For example, the Research Track presented at the October 2001 meeting took three years to bring to our member because it was derailed in 1999 and 2000 by this committee overlap. Similar problems of overlapping committee responsibilities have occurred with other R&R activities such as paper and abstract presentations as well as the poster presentation. This structural problem works to the detriment of this committee being able to offer research resources to the APAP membership, and thus should be addressed by the BOD.
Budget Issues:
--The Spring NCCPA/APAP research grant will have a $25,000 contribution to APAP to administer $20,000 for Year 2002 awards.
--APAP staff administered the funding ($6000 from JAAPA) for the J. Peter Nyquist Student Writing Contest for the first time in 2001, and similar funding is proposed for this year’s competition.
--$20,000 will be required to fund the APAP Research Institute Research Grants fall 2002 cycle.
--The committee is planning an add-on day dedicated to “Research in the PA Profession” for the October 2002 APAP meeting directed at showcasing all the research done on the PA profession, which is to be funded by an additional registration fee and possibly some outside grant money.
Board Action Required: The Research and Review Committee sent proposals to the BOD at the October 2001 meeting that need attention:
--At the October 2001 APAP BOD meeting the Research and Review Committee proposed that the J. Peter Nyquist Student Writing Contest name be changed to the APAP Student Writing Contest. The motion was defeated, and an alternative proposal was submitted to re-name the contest the APAP Student Writing Contest for the 2002-2003 cycle with the first place award named the J. Peter Nyquist Award and other awards to be named later. The R&R committee has discussed this compromise and finds it acceptable, and the SAAPA board notified the R&R chair that they support it also. The board needs to discuss and decide this issue so it can be implemented for the 2002-2003 competition.
-- At the October 2001 APAP BOD meeting the Research and Review Committee requested that additional time at the fall conferences be dedicated to individual faculty presentations and poster presentations. Specifically four hours was requested for paper and abstract presentations. This proposal was defeated, and a motion was made to study the larger issue of conference curriculum at future BOD meetings. The Research and Review Committee requests again that the board resolve this issue of conflicts with the Education Committee over time allocations that seriously limit the resources available for research activities (which also includes the issue of research skills workshops directed at APAP membership). It is anticipated that faculty demands for paper and abstract presentations as well as poster submissions will increase significantly as graduate level education becomes the norm in PA education, and that faculty will desire more research-oriented curriculum at future conferences, therefore conflicts inherent in this process will likely only intensify in the future if not addressed.
--Additionally, the committee asks the board to support the add-on day dedicated to showcasing research in the profession and to direct the staff to work with Rod Hooker to implement it.