Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Online First
    • Multimedia
    • Collections
    • Past Issues
    • Articles by Subject
    • Articles by Type
    • Supplements
    • The Issue in Brief (Plain Language Summaries)
    • Call for Papers
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Reviewers
    • Media
    • Job Seekers
  • About
    • Annals of Family Medicine
    • Editorial Staff & Boards
    • Sponsoring Organizations
    • Copyrights & Permissions
    • Announcements
  • Engage
    • Engage
    • e-Letters (Comments)
    • Subscribe
    • RSS
    • Email Alerts
    • Journal Club
  • Contact
    • Feedback
    • Contact Us
  • Careers

User menu

  • My alerts

Search

  • Advanced search
Annals of Family Medicine
  • My alerts
Annals of Family Medicine

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Online First
    • Multimedia
    • Collections
    • Past Issues
    • Articles by Subject
    • Articles by Type
    • Supplements
    • The Issue in Brief (Plain Language Summaries)
    • Call for Papers
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Reviewers
    • Media
    • Job Seekers
  • About
    • Annals of Family Medicine
    • Editorial Staff & Boards
    • Sponsoring Organizations
    • Copyrights & Permissions
    • Announcements
  • Engage
    • Engage
    • e-Letters (Comments)
    • Subscribe
    • RSS
    • Email Alerts
    • Journal Club
  • Contact
    • Feedback
    • Contact Us
  • Careers
  • Follow annalsfm on Twitter
  • Visit annalsfm on Facebook
EditorialEditorials

Could 5R Research Help Achieve the Triple Aim?

Bernard Ewigman
The Annals of Family Medicine September 2014, 12 (5) 399-401; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1370/afm.1708
Bernard Ewigman
Department of Family Medicine, The University of Chicago/NorthShore University HealthSystem, Chicago, Illinois
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: bewigman@uchicago.edu
  • Article
  • Info & Metrics
  • eLetters
  • PDF
Loading

Is it possible to meet the standards of the bold research model proposed by Peek et al in this issue of Annals of Family Medicine?1 And if it is possible, would it be worth the effort and investment required? In their “5R” model, the authors posit that health care delivery research could not only be relevant, applied, and implemented, it could also be participatory (all stakeholders), grant funded (rapidly), published (quickly and retrievable), continued in the operational workflows of the practice setting (if successful), and replicable in other practice settings.

It is tempting to dismiss the expectations of this model as idealistic, unrealistic, and overly ambitious. Training a career researcher in any one of the methods outlined, launching a single junior faculty in a successful focused research career, or building a sustainable organizational research enterprise with a defined research agenda takes years of effort and investment.2,3 Are these authors proposing a bold standard, or an impossible one for all but the rare case? Or is this a brilliant, innovative, and achievable synthesis of many research methods and traditions that is not only feasible, but worthwhile—even imperative—to pursue?

The potential value of this model is too compelling to dismiss. Theoretically, the human beings leading the research in this model and those affected by it are engaged in answering their most meaningful questions, solving their most vexing problems, and doing it with a rigor that makes the outcomes believable, widely applicable, and rapidly accomplished. Rather than repeat the new thinking, new infrastructure, and the relevant caveats that these authors articulate well, I will address why this model would be worth pursuing and what actions could be taken to move it forward into use.

The value of research is often judged by how often published papers are cited or by the external research funding acquired. Only occasionally is it judged by meaningful human impact, which is challenging to directly observe or measure.4,5 Yet all research, even “pure” research done for the sake of knowledge generation, is ultimately imbued with value by the impact it may have or does have on lives. For example, the identification of a chromosomal translocation in 1972 led, 20 years later, to the development of imatinib, a powerfully effective treatment for a previously fatal form of leukemia.6,7 There have been thousands of such basic science discoveries that have been translated into clinical practice, but this one is meaningful to me, my family, and thousands of others because it has dramatically extended the lives of our loved ones.

My point is that knowledge is most valuable when it affects human lives directly. The 5R model has one driving purpose: to affect lives in ways that are judged to be most meaningful by the persons doing the work as well as by those who may benefit from it. And, in my view, 5R combines the best, most practical, most engaging, and most appropriately rigorous methods, habits, and processes related to care delivery research that have been developed over the past several decades. The 5R model synthesizes these elements in a manner that I would expect to systematically accelerate the generation and use of findings of the most meaningful kind.

There are many ways in which this model could be moved forward to operational feasibility. Foundations could finance proof-of-concept initiatives. Medical schools could create endowed professorships, endowed chairs, research fellowships, and trans-disciplinary research programs to develop this concept and conduct research within this model. Funding agencies could continue their gradual but notable shift from disease-oriented, mechanistic research agendas to those that embrace prevention, patient centeredness, practice-based research, population-based research, health care services delivery research, and community-engaged research from which the 5R model has been derived. More specifically, clinical translational science research could integrate this model into community engagement domains.8 Finally, the Family Medicine for America’s Health initiative should seriously consider this model as an organizing framework for the future of care delivery research in the discipline.9

The authors have provided concrete examples of how past and current research fits 1 or more criteria of the 5R model.1 It is telling that only 1 example meets all 5 of the criteria—the expectations of this model have been met in only 1 case identified by the authors. However, there are multiple other examples meeting 1 or more criteria that provide proof of concept for individual elements of the model. Conceptually, there is no reason that all of these elements could not be incorporated into specific projects and teaching programs, keeping in mind the many resource, training, and infrastructure needs that would be required. And research following several of the principles of the 5R model is emerging. A research team in my department recently identified patients with elevated blood pressures consistent with hypertension, but undiagnosed as hypertensive and therefore untreated. We developed a quality improvement intervention and embedded a workflow into our clinical operations to eliminate undiagnosed hypertension among active primary care patients.10,11 This process has a number of benefits, but the real value comes from knowing that we are saving lives by systematically addressing one of the most potent risk factors for several leading causes of death and disability.

The 5R model has several appealing strengths. First, it is explicitly nonlinear and reflects the iterative and complex nature of systems-level research. In this way, it is unlike the T1-T4 model of the NIH’s clinical and translation research initiative, which implies a stepwise progression cumulating in a single point of “translation” that rarely occurs in reality. Second, despite its apparent ambitiousness, the 5R model is actually more constrained than the clinical translational model in that it focuses mainly on expediting throughput of valued care delivery research. In translational medicine we can sit through many fascinating presentations by basic research scientists in a futile attempt to relate their work to current health disparities in our communities of interest or as an application in clinical practice.12 The timeline from basic discovery to clinical application or policy impact is generally decades long. By focusing primarily on care delivery, 5R seems more doable within a single research initiative, team, organization, and location. Finally, there is a wide variety of intellectual domains and types of scholarship, methods and disciplines that can be embedded within this 5R framework. This fits well with the multi-method and trans-disciplinary approaches that characterize the best scholarship in family medicine, primary care, prevention, public health, community health, and health services research traditions.

For over 4 generations, family medicine has been a leader in proposing and implementing several bold new concepts in response to evolving health care needs. The creation of the specialty of family medicine itself was one such socially responsive initiative, as Americans in the 1960s expressed the need for continued access to personal doctors.13 Engaging community-based practicing physicians in research and the establishment of practice-based research networks were also pioneering innovations.14,15 The patient-centered medical home is a more recent bold idea from family medicine and pediatrics that is gradually becoming embedded in our health care system.16 For reasons that are analogous to these historical shifts, and no less achievable, the 5R model strikes me as a logical next step in the evolution of the care delivery research paradigm.

The Institute for Health Improvement articulates our most pressing needs as the “Triple Aim” of improving the patient experience of care, improving the health of populations, and reducing the per capita cost of health care.17 The 5R model creates a clear vision for research that would likely hit the targets of the Triple Aim more consistently and more quickly than our current, more fragmented approach. If so, the investments needed to adopt this model and actualize it could pay off in the most meaningful way possible; through the direct application of the most valuable knowledge that directly preserves human life and relieves human suffering.

Footnotes

  • Conflicts of interest: author reports none.

  • Received for publication August 5, 2014.
  • Accepted for publication August 6, 2014.
  • © 2014 Annals of Family Medicine, Inc.

References

  1. ↵
    1. Peek CJ,
    2. Glasgow RE,
    3. Stange KC,
    4. Klesges LM,
    5. Purcell E,
    6. Kessler RS
    . The 5 R’s: an emerging bold standard for conducting relevant research in a changing world. Ann Fam Med. 2014;12(5):447–455.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  2. ↵
    1. James P,
    2. Davis A,
    3. Borkan J
    ; Association of Departments of Family Medicine. The challenge to build research capacity in family medicine: is our discipline ready? Ann Fam Med. 2010;8(4):371–373.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  3. ↵
    1. Ewigman BG
    . Fire in the belly: doing what it takes to produce excellent research. Fam Med. 1996;28(4):289–290.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  4. ↵
    1. Garfield E
    . Citation indexes for science: a new dimension in documentation through association of ideas. Science. 1955;122(3159):108–111.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  5. ↵
    Funding First. Mary Woodard Lasker Charitable Trust. Exceptional Returns: the Economic Value of America’s Investment in Medical Research. 2000. http://www.laskerfoundation.org/media/pdf/exceptional.pdf. Accessed Aug 1, 2014.
  6. ↵
    1. Rowley JD
    . Letter: A new consistent chromosomal abnormality in chronic myelogenous leukaemia identified by quinacrine fluorescence and Giemsa staining. Nature. 1973;243(5405):290–293.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  7. ↵
    1. Eck MJ,
    2. Manley PW
    . The interplay of structural information and functional studies in kinase drug design: insights from BCR-Abl. Curr Opin Cell Biol. 2009;21(2):288–295.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  8. ↵
    1. Leshner AI,
    2. Terry SF,
    3. Schultz AM,
    4. Liverman CT
    ; Committee to Review the Clinical and Translational Science Awards Program at the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences. Board on Health Sciences Policy. Institute of Medicine. The CTSA Program at NIH: Opportunities for Advancing Clinical and Translational Research. http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php.
  9. ↵
    Family Medicine Working Party. Family medicine for America’s health: future of family medicine 2.0. http://www.aafp.org/about/initiatives/future-family-medicine.html. Accessed Aug 1, 2014.
  10. ↵
    1. Rakotz MK,
    2. Ewigman BG,
    3. Sarav M,
    4. et al
    . A technology-based quality innovation to identify undiagnosed hypertension among active primary care patients. Ann Fam Med. 2014 12(4):352–358.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  11. ↵
    Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ). Health Care Innovations Exchange. Information technology-facilitated identification of at-risk primary care patients combined with in-office automated measurement significantly reduces undiagnosed hypertension. http://www.innovations.ahrq.gov/content.aspx?id=4190. Accessed Aug 2, 2014.
  12. ↵
    Institute for Translational Medicine. The University of Chicago. http://itm.uchicago.edu/. Accessed Aug 1, 2014.
  13. ↵
    American Medical Association, Ad Hoc Committee on Education for Family Practice of the Council on Medical Education. Meeting the Challenge of Family Practice. Chicago, IL: American Medical Association; 1966.
  14. ↵
    1. Green LA,
    2. Hickner J
    . A short history of primary care practice-based research networks: from concept to essential research laboratories. J Am Board Fam Med. 2006;19(1):1–10.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  15. ↵
    1. Lindbloom EJ,
    2. Ewigman BG,
    3. Hickner JM
    . Practice-based research networks: the laboratories of primary care research. Med Care. 2004;42(4)(Suppl):III45–III49.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  16. ↵
    The medical home: what do we know, what do we need to know? A review of the earliest evidence on the effectiveness of the patient-centered medical home model. Prepared by Mathematica Policy Research, Princeton, NJ for Agency for Healthcare Research & Quality (AHRQ). Contract Nos. HHSA290200900019I/HHSA29032002T, HHSA290200900019I/HHSA29032005T. http://pcmh.ahrq.gov/sites/default/files/attachments/the-medical-home-what-do-we-know.pdf. Accessed Aug 1, 2014.
  17. ↵
    Institute for Healthcare Improvement. http://www.ihi.org/engage/initiatives/tripleaim/. Accessed Aug 1, 2014.
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

The Annals of Family Medicine: 12 (5)
The Annals of Family Medicine: 12 (5)
Vol. 12, Issue 5
September/October 2014
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
  • Back Matter (PDF)
  • Front Matter (PDF)
  • The Issue in Brief
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on Annals of Family Medicine.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Could 5R Research Help Achieve the Triple Aim?
(Your Name) has sent you a message from Annals of Family Medicine
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the Annals of Family Medicine web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
1 + 0 =
Solve this simple math problem and enter the result. E.g. for 1+3, enter 4.
Citation Tools
Could 5R Research Help Achieve the Triple Aim?
Bernard Ewigman
The Annals of Family Medicine Sep 2014, 12 (5) 399-401; DOI: 10.1370/afm.1708

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Get Permissions
Share
Could 5R Research Help Achieve the Triple Aim?
Bernard Ewigman
The Annals of Family Medicine Sep 2014, 12 (5) 399-401; DOI: 10.1370/afm.1708
Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Info & Metrics
  • eLetters
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • In This Issue: Raise the Gaze
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Recruiting, Educating, and Taking Primary Care to Rural Communities
  • Returning to a Patient-Centered Approach in the Management of Hypothyroidism
  • An Opportunity to Emphasize Equity, Social Determinants, and Prevention in Primary Care
Show more Editorials

Similar Articles

Content

  • Current Issue
  • Past Issues
  • Past Issues in Brief
  • Multimedia
  • Articles by Type
  • Articles by Subject
  • Multimedia
  • Supplements
  • Online First
  • Calls for Papers

Info for

  • Authors
  • Reviewers
  • Media
  • Job Seekers

Engage

  • E-mail Alerts
  • e-Letters (Comments)
  • RSS
  • Journal Club
  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Subscribe
  • Family Medicine Careers

About

  • About Us
  • Editorial Board & Staff
  • Sponsoring Organizations
  • Copyrights & Permissions
  • Contact Us
  • eLetter/Comments Policy

© 2023 Annals of Family Medicine