JCPSLP Vol 22 No 1 2020

of practice/expanded scope of practice”) are identified research priorities that have not been extensively addressed by SPA or clinically based research. While only low numbers of respondents identified these two areas as research priorities (n = 2 and n = 1 respectively), it demonstrates that there may be a need to explore SLP roles and support in these challenging and emotional areas of practice. The importance of regional context in the development of research prioritisation lists has been highlighted by the emergence of new categories and subcategories, not previously reported internationally, in the current Queensland-based study. It illustrates that a “one size fits all” approach to SLP research priority areas is limiting, with different local driving forces impacting the research needs of specific SLP subgroups. Further, the growing professional evidence base in clinical practice areas may have also resulted in the high prioritisation of broad service level concerns. The complexity of clinical questions prioritised by SLPs was also captured during the content analysis process, as a majority of the responses were mapped to several categories rather than only one category. Limitations The present study focused on issues within health services in Queensland only – and cannot be assumed to reflect issues experienced in other services, such as education or other settings outside Queensland. Even with the narrow recruitment scope selected for this study, the low number of respondents limits how representative the current findings are for SLPs working in health in Queensland. There is also a strong potential for self-selection bias due to the snowball sampling method by which participants were recruited (Lavrakas, 2008). The current study also did not ask clinicians to prioritise their top three research priorities, hence it is difficult to make any assumption regarding relative priority. Clinical implications/future studies The findings of this study will inform a future collaborative prioritisation process with multiple stakeholder groups that includes SLP clinicians and academics and consumers within Queensland. A greater number of respondents and wider range of stakeholders is important for future studies to ensure a true representation of the research areas that require further study for health related SLPs in Queensland. The ultimate aim of the project is to generate a freely available prioritised research agenda to provide support for business cases, funding applications, quality projects, and clinical research within SLP workplaces in Queensland. An established research agenda may help SLPs working in similar health contexts to make informed choices about service delivery options, emerging areas of expanded practice and professional issues. The next phase of this research project will include a NGT for multiple stakeholder groups and provide an opportunity to further discuss the current results, determine the importance of the categories, and capture any remaining topics. Conclusions This study, which involved specifically selected subgroups of clinicians working within health services in Queensland, is a first step towards identifying practical research topics that Queensland-based SLPs believe are relevant to their clinical practice. The surveyed cohort of Queensland SLPs

identified a wide range of areas for the profession that can be used in the next phase of the study, which will include all stakeholders (i.e., Australia-wide SLP clinicians, researchers, clients and carers), to help guide and offer a new perspective on future programmatic research agendas with a health focus. Acknowledgements We would like to thank all of the SLPs who gave up their valuable time to participate in the project. This project was supported by a Queensland Health Metro South Research Support Scheme Small Grant. References Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2015, 29 June). General social survey: Summary results, Australia , 2014. Retrieved from http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/mf/0/C6BF 68E57D3A308CCA256E21007686F8?Opendocument Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2019, March 21). Australian demographic statistics , cat. no. 3101.0, Sept., 2018. Retrieved from http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/ abs@.nsf/mf/3101.0 Franklin, S., Harhen, D., Hayes, M., Demos Mc Manus, S., & Pollock, A. (2018). Top 10 research priorities relating to aphasia following stroke. Aphasiology, 1–8. doi:10.1080/ 02687038.2017.1417539 Cowan, K., & Oliver, S. (2003). The James Lind Alliance guideboo k. Retrieved from http://www.jlaguidebook.org/ Gale, N. K., Heath, G., Cameron, E., Rashid, S., & Redwood, S. (2013). Using the framework method for the analysis of qualitative data in multi-disciplinary health research. BMC Medical Research Methodology , 13 (1), 117. doi:10.1186/1471-2288-13-117 Graneheim, U. H., & Lundman, B. (2004). Qualitative content analysis in nursing research: concepts, procedures and measures to achieve trustworthiness. Nurse Education Today , 24 (2), 105–112. doi:10.1016/j.nedt.2003.10.001 Health Workforce Australia. (2014, July). Speech pathologists in focus . Australia’s Health Workforce Series. Canberra, ACT: Australian Government Canberra. Retrieved from https://industry.gov.au/Office-of-the-Chief-Economist/ SkilledOccupationList/Documents/2015Submissions/ Speech-Pathology-Australia.pdf. Hinckley, J., Boyle, E., Lombard, D., & Bartels-Tobin, L. (2014). Towards a consumer-informed research agenda for aphasia: Preliminary work. disability and rehabilitation , 36 (12), 1042–1050. doi:10.3109/09638288.2013.829528 Hulcombe, J., Sturgess, J., Souvlis, T., & Fitzgerald, C. (2014). An approach to building research capacity for health practitioners in a public health environment: an organisational perspective. Australian Health Review , 38 (3), 252–258. James Lind Alliance (JLA). (2019). The James Lind Allianc e. Retrieved from http://www.jla.nihr.ac.uk/ Kitson, A., & Straus, S. E. (2010). The knowledge- to-action cycle: Identifying the gaps. Canadian Medical Association Journal , 182 (2), 73–77. doi:10.1503/ cmaj.081231 Jones, J., Bhatt, J., Avery, J., Laupacis, A., Cowan, K., Basappa, N., ... & Jewett, M. A. S. (2017). The kidney cancer research priority-setting partnership: Identifying the top 10 research priorities as defined by patients, caregivers, and expert clinicians. Canadian Urological Association Journal , 11 (12), 379–87.doi:10.5489/cuaj.4590 Lavrakas, P. J. (2008). Encyclopedia of survey research methods . California: Sage Publications.

27

JCPSLP Volume 22, Number 1 2020

www.speechpathologyaustralia.org.au