This page was translated automatically from Turkish. Read the original

This page is an AI-assisted Turkish summary of the study presented at the 26th World Congress of Psychiatry. The study belongs to the presenting authors; please refer to the original source when citing it.

SO463

Transitioning from clinical practice to mental health research: evaluation of a research workshop for psychiatrists

MOVING FROM CLINICAL PRACTICE TO MENTAL HEALTH RESEARCH: EVALUATION OF A RESEARCH WORKSHOP FOR PSYCHIATRISTS

Despite low participation, structured research training with mentoring measurably improved psychiatrists' perceived ability to conduct research.

The aim was to evaluate whether structured research training for psychiatrists in Guatemala changed their perceived research capacity. The study used a pre–post design; 27 psychiatrists were recruited through an open invitation, and a curriculum comprising synchronous and asynchronous sessions totaling 30 credit hours was delivered over six weeks. Quantitative and qualitative methods were covered, and participants developed their own protocols as a practical exercise. The measurement instrument was the Attitudes, Reported Confidence and Behavior Questionnaire (ARCBQ), which included demographic information, knowledge level, ten capacity items, and eleven barrier items. Data were analyzed using SPSS v.29, with chi-square tests for categorical variables and the Mann–Whitney U test for continuous variables because of the small, non-normally distributed sample. Of the 27 psychiatrists enrolled, 52% were women (mean age 47.2 ± 22.3), 56% were unmarried, 37% had no research experience, and 48% had no prior training; 10 participants (37%) completed the workshop, and 8 (30%) provided complete pre–post data. Compared with non-completers, completers were more often women (70% versus 41%), unmarried (70% versus 47%), without prior coursework (60% versus 41%), and without research experience (50% versus 29%). Perceived capacity increased in seven of ten domains; only confidence in preparing a protocol suitable for submission to an ethics committee approached statistical significance (Z = -1.93, p = 0.053), and six of eleven barriers decreased among completers. The concentration of gains around protocol development was consistent with close, session-based supervision, identified in the literature as the strongest predictor of clinicians' participation in research. The authors identify low participation and the small sample as the main limitations and emphasize that the study represents a first step in the systematic evaluation of research training tailored to psychiatrists.

All WCP 2026 summaries