Medical research barriers, facilitators, and motives in a developing country: a mixed-methods single-centre study

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. 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. 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). 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.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Health Research Policy and Systems
Published
2026-07-22
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12961-026-01517-x
Primary Topic
Health and Medical Research Impacts
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Medical research barriers, facilitators, and motives in a developing country: a mixed-methods single-centre study

Farhang Rashidi, Milad Shafizadeh, Mohammad Abed, Mohammad Hassan Bagheri et al.
Health Research Policy and Systems
Health and Medical Research Impacts
article

Medical research barriers, facilitators, and motives in a developing country: a mixed-methods single-centre study

Farhang Rashidi, Milad Shafizadeh, Mohammad Abed, Mohammad Hassan Bagheri, Alipahsa Meysamie
article en

Abstract

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. 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. 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). 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.

Health Research Policy and Systems
Shariati Hospital (IR), Tehran University of Medical Sciences (IR)
Openalex Percentile: Top 6%
Health and Medical Research Impacts
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.