Introduction: There are several barriers discouraging clinicians from undertaking research, including insufficient funding, lack of time, organizational issues and lack of support. The strengthening of research capacity is perceived from three levels: characteristics of the researcher, the environment, and organizational issues. To date, Portugal is lacking studies on this subject. The aim of this study was to identify the best practices to promote research in Portuguese Primary Health Care.Methods: We conducted a qualitative study using semi-structured interviews with family doctors with broadly recognized research work and other stakeholders. We selected a sample by convenience and snowball sampling. From a total of 14 doctors invited by email, 12 responded positively, and we subsequently included two other stakeholders. We conducted the interviews in digital or face-to-face formats. Two team members handled the coding of interviews independently. We kept all recordings and transcripts confidential, only accessible to researchers.Results: We identified 16 strategies: 1) increasing institutional support; 2) creating support structures; 3) redefining the residency program; 4) investing in research training; 5) redefining curriculum evaluation; 6) establishing dedicated time for research; 7) increasing funding; 8) improving access to research data; 9) being a research driver; 10) establishing a research culture; 11) working in collaboration; 12) creating formally organized research groups; 13) creating autonomous research centers; 14) improving the definition of the research subjects and study designs; 15) reviewing procedures for ethics’ committees; and 16) reviewing the current selection of articles for publication.Conclusion: Overall, a greater proportion of interviewees identified the following as the most relevant strategies for research promotion: institutional support, including technical and scientific support from public institutions, private entities and academic centers; the reorganization of working hours with protected time for research; increased funding directed towards research and breaking isolation in research, promoting teamwork with clinicians within the same area or from different professional backgrounds.

Background: There is a need for a deeper understanding of the barriers to research in family medicine (FM) and to consider the perceptions and perspectives of professionals. Our study aims to provide a strategic view for research capacity building in FM. We included the perspective of family physician researchers (FPR) on the existing barriers to investigation in this context. Objectives: To understand and characterize the barriers to research in FM (personal and structural), from the perspective of Portuguese family physicians who are researchers. Methods: A qualitative study, of phenomenological nature, was performed, through the conduction of semi-structured interviews with FPR, from 2019 to 2022. Data analysis and thematic coding were done on MAxQDA®, with inductive and deductive approaches, until data saturation was reached. Results: A total of 12 family physicians/researchers were interviewed. Seven main themes were identified as barriers to research: time, professional valorization, funding, ethics committees, infrastructure, management/institutions, and participants. Each theme is divided into subthemes that make it possible to assess how a barrier can affect researchers in performing research activities. Conclusion: Our study highlights the identification of 7 main barriers. Structuring them into sub-themes not only improved the organization of our results but also provided robust support for the next phase, namely the application of a survey with the aim of gaining a deeper insight into the repercussions that these barriers to FPR have at a national level. This research is crucial to laying the foundations for a policy document that offers well-defined and tailored recommendations to address the barriers we have uncovered.

Introduction: Research is crucial for building an efficient health system care. This reality is particularly evident in primary care, the cornerstone of healthcare services. However, research in primary care is not consistently implemented across Europe. With this study we aimed to: 1) identify the factors and strategies that healthcare professionals consider relevant for promoting research in primary care in Portugal; 2) analyze whether the prioritized strategies vary according to the geographical area, professional group, workplace, interest, and experience in research of the participants.Methods: We conducted an analytical cross-sectional study using an online survey applied in the first semester of 2023. We designed the survey based on strategies identified in a previous qualitative study. We included health professionals working in Primary Care in Portugal (continental and autonomous regions). We intended to obtain at least 200 answers for each professional category and geographical area. The survey was initially sent to a convenience sample to assess the acceptability and interpretation of the questions. We then disseminated the survey through all national Health Center Clusters and through professional associations. We conducted an analysis using a 5% significance level.Results: The sample consisted of 1027 participants: 507 doctors, 377 nurses, 106 diagnostic and therapeutic technicians, and 30 secretaries. The majority worked in the Lisbon and Tagus Valley region (51.9%), followed by the North (22.1%) and Centre (17.1%). Around half of the participants worked in a Family Health Unit, 16.5% worked in a Personalized Healthcare Unit, 11% in a Community Care Unit, and 8.7% in a Public Health Unit. The factors promoting research mentioned by a greater proportion of participants were research training (76%), access to mentors (71%) and grants (56%). As for strategies to promote research, most participants supported the existence of dedicated time for research (82%), public grants (65%), institutional support (51%), access to support services (58%) and research data (57%).Conclusion: There seems to be a consensus on which factors are currently promoting research and what future strategies might be useful for promoting research in primary care in Portugal. Nevertheless, there are some differences between certain sub-groups. This information might be useful to tailor initiatives directed at specific sub-groups. Our intention is to help form policies and strategies to promote research in primary care in Portugal, contributing to the national development on the subject.

Introduction The qualities of primary healthcare (PHC) make it a very relevant environment for research; however, there is still work to be done to enhance the research capabilities of family physicians in healthcare units. Considering there is no ongoing review that specifically addresses this objective, the proposed goal of this scoping review is to determine the depth of the literature on the current strategies that support research capacity building among family physicians in the context of PHC. Methods and analysis The scoping review will include studies from PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane Library and grey literature, published from 2008 to 2023, that address strategies to promote research capacity building among family physicians in the context of PHC. Only studies published in English, Portuguese or Spanish will be considered. All study designs, including quantitative, qualitative and mixed-methods studies, will be eligible for inclusion. The literature search will be performed from January to March of 2024 and data charting will employ a descriptive-analytical method, systematically summarising study objectives, methodologies, findings and implications. This protocol follows the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis Protocols and the review will employ the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for scoping reviews. Ethics and dissemination This review does not need ethical approval. Peer-reviewed publications, policy summaries, presentations at conferences and involvement with pertinent stakeholders are all part of our outreach approach.

Introduction Health information systems represent an opportunity to improve the care provided to people with multimorbidity. There is a pressing need to assess their impact on clinical outcomes to validate this intervention. Our study will determine whether using a digital platform (Multimorbidity Management Health Information System, METHIS) to manage multimorbidity improves health-related quality of life (HR-QoL). Methods and analysis A superiority, cluster randomised trial will be conducted at primary healthcare practices (1:1 allocation ratio). All public practices in the Lisbon and Tagus Valley (LVT) Region, Portugal, not involved in a previous pilot trial, will be eligible. At the participant level, eligible patients will be people with complex multimorbidity, aged 50 years or older, with access to an internet connection and a communication technology device. Participants who cannot sign/read/write and who do not have access to an email account will not be included in the study. The intervention combines a training programme and a customised information system (METHIS). Both are designed to help clinicians adopt a goal-oriented care model approach and to encourage patients and carers to play a more active role in autonomous healthcare. The primary outcome is HR-QoL, measured at 12 months with the physical component scale of the 12-item Short Form questionnaire (SF-12). Secondary outcomes will also be measured at 12 months and include mental health (mental component Scale SF-12, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale). We will also assess serious adverse events during the trial, including hospitalisation and emergency services. Finally, at 18 months, we will ask the general practitioners for any potentially missed diagnoses. Ethics and dissemination The Research and Ethics Committee (LVT Region) approved the trial protocol. Clinicians and patients will sign an informed consent. A data management officer will handle all data, and the publication of several scientific papers and presentations at relevant conferences/workshops is envisaged. Trial registration number NCT05593835.

Introduction: Research in primary care (PC) is essential for improving patient outcomes and healthcare systems. However, family physicians often face barriers to conducting research, including limited training, time constraints, and lack of institutional support. Identifying effective strategies to build research capacity can help integrate research into PC practice. Aim: This scoping review identifies and synthesises strategies that strengthen family physicians’ research capacity in PC. Methods: The review followed the PRISMA-ScR methodology. We included studies published up to 2023 in English, Portuguese, or Spanish that described relevant research capacity building (RCB) strategies for family physicians in PC, with no restrictions on study design. A comprehensive search in PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library was conducted. This review protocol was registered in the Open Science Framework (1). Results: We included 19 studies and identified five key strategic approaches to RCB in PC: (1) Training and mentoring programmes – Structured educational initiatives and mentorship developed research skills. (2) Networking – Collaborative research networks fostered engagement. (3) Blueprint development – Frameworks guided research initiatives. (4) Strategic communication interventions – Awareness campaigns promoted a research culture. (5) Knowledge transfer and exchange – Mechanisms facilitated the application and dissemination of research findings. Discussion: Implementing multifaceted strategies enhances family physicians’ involvement in research and strengthens the research culture in PC. Combining structured training programmes, professional networking, and strategic communication fosters a more research-friendly environment. Future studies should assess how adaptable these strategies are to different PC settings, evaluate their long-term impact, and integrate other professional groups within PC.