This document studied experiential expertise rather than being based on it. The research examined how social workers and occupational therapists with lived clinical experience approached research. However, the research team itself had over 70 years of combined mental health practice experience, bringing experiential knowledge to studying research culture.
Research‑related knowledge, understanding and practice in public mental health: the voices of social workers and occupational therapists
Overview
This study explored research-related knowledge and practices of 59 social workers and occupational therapists in Australian public mental health services. Findings revealed that research wasn't considered part of their professional identity, despite interest in practice-based research. Barriers included time constraints, fragmented knowledge, poor communication, and lack of ownership.
Downloads
Key insights
Key Insights:
- Professional identity gap: Research wasn't considered part of mental health clinicians' professional roles
- Practice-based motivation: Strong interest in research directly connected to clinical practice improvement
- Fragmented knowledge: Limited, disparate research experience described as "bits and pieces"
- Time constraints: No dedicated time for research in clinical roles
- Communication breakdown: Poor visibility and sharing of research activities within organisations
- Ownership absence: Most hadn't led research projects from conception to completion
- Resource uncertainty: Limited awareness of available research support and opportunities
- Skills atrophy: Research capabilities declined without regular practice in clinical settings
Did this resource draw on transformative evidence?
This document both studied and was informed by practice wisdom. The research examined how clinicians' accumulated practice knowledge influenced their research approaches, while the research team's 70+ years of mental health experience provided practice wisdom in designing and interpreting the study of research culture.
This document is extensively based on research and evaluation insights. It employed rigorous mixed-methods research (surveys and interviews), systematic thematic analysis, and comprehensive literature review. The study builds on existing research about barriers/motivators to clinical research while contributing new evaluation insights about professional identity gaps in mental health settings.