Cookies on this website

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you click 'Accept all cookies' we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies and you won't see this message again. If you click 'Reject all non-essential cookies' only necessary cookies providing core functionality such as security, network management, and accessibility will be enabled. Click 'Find out more' for information on how to change your cookie settings.

INTRODUCTION Insufficient investment in primary care services, even in high-income countries, is challenging health systems, for example, through pressures on the primary care workforce from rising workloads, ageing practitioner profiles, and declining interest in primary care careers from young practitioners. Failure to invest in research to guide better practice, raising quality and reducing variations in care, may be a further risk. But is primary care research really that important? IMPORTANCE AND DOMINANCE OF BASIC SCIENCE MEDICAL RESEARCH Most biomedical research has historically been centred on basic science and the pursuit of discovery, for example, on the mechanisms of disease and their amelioration. Until latterly, the application of this science was seen merely as a professional responsibility — why don’t practitioners just get on and apply the important findings? But such implementation delays may be more to do with incomplete evidence than clinical inertia, hence one argument for more applied research evidence to inform discovery science. A century of serial multi-billion-dollar investments in basic and discovery science generated the interventions we use today. But this investment is being challenged by the dawning recognition by health systems that they need a better evidence base to inform the structure and provision of care, and how to apply the findings of much of this extraordinary biomedical science. Despite basic research consuming most of the global health research investment, much of health care remains empirical and non-evidence based. And, even when evidence gives a clear directive on what to do, slow translation into clinical practice may be as often due to uncertainties as to how to apply the data than on professional inertia. Belated recognition of such barriers to implementation has led to the introduction of a more applied clinical research focus in many countries with developed healthcare systems, such as the NHS, that complements basic science and discovery research. First came the science around evidence-based medicine (EBM), for 20 years developing and employing better methods of synthesising and presenting the totality of quality evidence and thereby reducing uncertainty. Latterly an investment in applied health research, and the capacity to better deliver this, has gathered impetus internationally, for example, via the main driver for such applied research in the UK, the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR). Primary care and primary care academics have steadily contributed to many aspects of health research, but it has been particularly important in applied research at the structural and inspirational levels.

More information Original publication

DOI

10.3399/bjgp19X705149

Publisher

BJGP

Publication Date

29/08/2019

Addresses

Editorial