Describing the state of a research network: A mixed methods approach to network evaluation
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER:
PROVIDER: S-EPMC10550251 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Oct
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:Vision Zero (VZ) aims to reduce fatalities and serious injuries from road traffic crashes to zero through a Safe Systems approach. Little is known about the extent of uptake of VZ in the United States (US), or the attributes and functioning of the initiatives. Using a mixed-methods design, our objectives were to describe the status of VZ implementation and characteristics of those initiatives among US municipalities. Websites of all US municipalities with a population of at least 50,000 (n = 788) were searched to identify involvement in VZ. When initiatives were identified, we abstracted information from their website and other published documents, using a comprehensive framework of best practice VZ components. From the VZ initiatives identified, we interviewed representatives from 12 municipalities with diversity by region of the country, population size, and VZ implementation. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and coded for themes. Through systematic web-based searching, we identified 86 of 788 (10.9%) municipalities with a VZ initiative. Among 314 larger municipalities (population >=100,000), 68 (21.7%) were identified. Among 476 medium-size municipalities (population of 50,000-99,999), 18 (3.8%) were identified. VZ initiatives began as early as 2014, starting with larger municipalities, and followed in 2015 with medium-size municipalities. Among the VZ initiatives, 58 (67.4%) recorded a vision statement, with 51 (59.3%) setting a target year to reach zero deaths. Thirty-nine (45.3%) had published VZ plans, with another 22 (25.6%) working towards a plan. Twenty-five initiatives (29.1%) shared resources across stakeholder groups, such as funding or staff. Forty-six initiatives (53.5%) had an established coalition, and 18 (20.9%) proposed or were developing a coalition. Twenty-six initiatives (30.2%) provided regular updates or evaluation on progress towards performance metrics, but only 4 (4.7%) had implemented a performance management system to regularly track progress on VZ-related actions. The interviews provided further context and a more detailed understanding of results. Documenting the characteristics of VZ initiatives among US municipalities can contribute to an understanding of current practice, potential opportunities to support ongoing initiatives, and information to assist new initiatives. Ultimately, the impact of municipal-level VZ efforts should be evaluated with regards to traffic-related serious injuries and fatalities.
| S-EPMC10594405 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionHospital group models represent an organisational form that aims to bring together multiple provider organisations with a central headquarters and unified leadership responsible for locally managed operating units, standardised systems and a value-set shared across the group. These models seek to improve outcomes by reducing unwarranted variations in care provision and reducing costs through economies of scale. There is limited evidence on the impact and processes of implementing these models, so this study aims to evaluate one case study of a hospital group model.Methods and analysisWe will conduct a formative, mixed-methods evaluation using an embedded research approach to analyse the implementation of the model and its impact on outcomes and costs. We will carry out a multisited ethnography to analyse the programme theory for model design and implementation, the barriers and facilitators in the implementation; and wider contextual issues that influence implementation using semi-structured interviews (n=80), non-participant observations (n=80 hours), 'shadowing' (n=20 hours) and documentary analysis. We will also carry out an economic evaluation composed of a cost-consequence analysis and a return on investment analysis to evaluate the costs of creating and running the model and balance these against the potential cost-savings.Ethics and disseminationThe study protocol was reviewed by the local R&D Office and University College London Ethics Committee and classified as a service evaluation, not requiring approval by a research ethics committee. We will follow guidelines for informed consent, confidentiality and information governance, and address issues of critical distance prevalent in embedded research. Findings will be shared at regular time points to inform the implementation of the model. The evaluation will also generate: an evaluation framework to evaluate future changes; recommendations for meaningful baseline data and measuring improvement; identification of implementation costs and potential cost-savings; and lessons for the National Health Service on implementing these models.
| S-EPMC6589026 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundCo-creation strategies, such as cooperative planning, are promising as a means to ensure that physical activity interventions address real-world problems and are tailored to the target group. This has already been validated in diverse settings. However, questions targeting the transferability of cooperative planning to new settings and the key factors influencing its success or failure remain unclear. At the same time, co-creation processes are complex, and evaluation can be challenging. Following calls for detailed reporting, this paper describes the programme activities, the underlying logic, and methodological design of a study that aims to evaluate the transfer of cooperative planning to new settings and to explore the associated key determinants.MethodsCooperative planning was utilized as a strategy to target physical activity promotion in three real-world German settings in the nursing care and automotive mechatronics sectors. This involved researchers working alongside stakeholders from practice and policy to conjointly develop new interventions to promote physical activity in physically demanding jobs. A pragmatic approach is used to evaluate both the transferability and key determinants of this strategy. We developed a logic model for this co-creation process that describes the underlying assumptions and guides the evaluation. The evaluation outcomes of this study include planning meetings, newly developed interventions, and the determinants that are likely to affect cooperative planning. Quantitative and qualitative data will be collected using questionnaires, documents, and interviews. The quantitative data will be analysed descriptively, while the qualitative data will mainly be analysed using qualitative content analysis, split by settings. Subsequently, data triangulation will be used to integrate the quantitative and qualitative findings, which will then be compared across all three settings.DiscussionThe study findings will contribute to a better understanding of co-creation strategies, their transferability, and key determinants. The practical implications can include a checklist for assessing key determinants and a guideline for transferring cooperative planning into new settings to benefit more people. Ultimately, this study will help to advance co-creation strategies and may be relevant for researchers, practitioners, and policy-makers targeting physical activity promotion in various contexts.Trial registrationOpen Science Framework: https://osf.io/r6xnt/ (retrospectively registered).
| S-EPMC7958094 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundIn patient-oriented research (POR), patients contribute their valuable knowledge and lived-experiences to work together as active research partners at all stages of the health research cycle. However, research looking to understand how patient research partners (PRPs) and researchers work together in meaningful and collaborative ways remains limited. This study aims to evaluate patient engagement with the RePORT Patient Advisory Council (PAC) and to identify barriers and facilitators to meaningful patient engagement encountered within research partnerships involving patient research partners and researchers.MethodsThe RePORT PAC members included nine PRPs and nine researchers (clinician-researchers, research staff, patient engagement experts) from both Alberta and British Columbia. All members were contacted and invited to complete an anonymous online survey (Public and Patient Engagement Evaluation (PPEET) tool) at two different project times points. The PAC was invited for a semi-structured interview to gain in-depth understanding of their experiences working together. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and the data was thematically analyzed with the support of a qualitative analysis software, NVivo.ResultsA total of nine PRPs (100%) and three researchers (33%) participated in the baseline survey in February 2022 while six PRPs (67%) responded and three researchers (33%) completed the follow up survey in May 2022. For the semi-structured interviews, nine PRPs (100%) and six researchers (67%) participated. According to the survey results, PAC members agreed that the supports (e. g. training, compensation) needed to contribute to the project were available throughout the project. The survey responses also showed that most members of the PAC felt their opinions and views were heard. Responses to the survey regarding diversity within the PAC were mixed. There were many suggestions for improving diversity and collaboration provided by PAC members during the semi-structured interviews. PAC members mentioned that PAC PRPs informed the co-development of research materials such as recruitment posters and interview guides for the RePORT study.ConclusionsThrough fostering a collaborative environment, we can engage a diverse group of people to work together meaningfully in health research. We have identified what works well, and areas for improvement within our research partnership involving PRPs and researchers as well as recommendations for POR projects more broadly, going forward.
| S-EPMC10394768 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPractice-based research networks (PBRNs) have been implemented to support clinical research in German general practice since 2020. General practitioners (GPs) are often critical concerning the feasibility of clinical trials. Among others, high workload, lack of resources in GP teams and little acceptance of the trial requirements by the patients are assumed barriers. Therefore, the aim of this study was to evaluate the perspectives of the GP teams and their patients on the set up of BayFoNet during the implementation of the two pilot cluster-randomized trials to improve this collaboration on a sustainable basis.MethodsGPs and medical assistants (MAs) were interviewed using semi-structured interviews based on the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. Implementation research and verbatim transcripts were analyzed using qualitative content analysis. Patient attitudes were evaluated quantitatively with questionnaires based on the theoretical domains framework using descriptive statistics.ResultsA total of 15 GPs and 15 MAs were interviewed, and 109 complete patient questionnaires were returned. Main facilitators for GPs' active participation in clinical research were networking as well as active participation of GP teams at different levels of the research process. Increased awareness concerning PBRNs might promote a lively network. From the GPs' perspective, lack of motivation among MAs and patients was a perceived barrier to support clinical research in general practice. MAs emphasized their own increase in knowledge and competence as well as the importance of clinical research for improved patient care. In contrast to the GPs, most MAs were not aware of BayFoNet as a network structure. The surveyed patients rated their own capabilities and opportunities to actively participate in the pilot studies as very good. Prior to the implementations of the interventions, some patients experienced some difficulty in defining clear goals for their own participation.DiscussionIncreased awareness concerning PBRNs might promote a lively network. Target-group specific dissemination strategies as well as opportunities for GP teams and their patients to participate in clinical research should be elaborated. This might increase the feasibility of clinical trials and the motivation of all participants to conduct clinical trials in general practice.Trial registrationPilot cluster-randomized trial 1 (MicUTI) was prospectively registered on December 19, 2022 at www.Clinicaltrialsgov (NCT05667207); Pilot cluster-randomized trial 2 (IMONEDA) was prospectively registered on April 22, 2022 at www.bfarm.de (DRKS00028805).
| S-EPMC11869661 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundCollaboration between researchers, implementers and policymakers improves uptake of health systems research. In 2018, researchers and VHA Innovators Network (iNET) leadership used an embedded research model to conduct an evaluation of iNET. We describe our evaluation design, early results, and lessons learned.MethodsThis mixed-methods evaluation incorporated primary data collection via electronic survey, descriptive analysis using existing VA datasets (examining associations between facility characteristics and iNET participation), and qualitative interviews to support real-time program implementation and to probe perceived impacts, benefits and challenges of participation.ResultsWe developed reporting tools and collected data regarding site participation, providing iNET leadership rapid access to needed information on projects (e.g., target populations reached, milestones achieved, and barriers encountered). Secondary data analyses indicated iNET membership was greater among larger, more complex VA facilities. Of the 37 iNET member sites, over half (n = 22) did not have any of the six major types of VA research centers; thus iNET is supporting VA sites not traditionally served by research innovation pathways. Qualitative findings highlighted enhanced engagement and perceived value of social and informational networks.ConclusionsWorking alongside our iNET partners, we supported and influenced iNET's development through our embedded evaluation's preliminary findings. We also provided training and guidance aimed at building capacity among iNET participants.ImplicationsEmbedded research can yield successful collaborative efforts between researchers and partners. An embedded research team can help programs pivot to ensure effective use of limited resources. Such models inform program development and expansion, supporting strategic planning and demonstrating value.
| S-EPMC8244154 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundDespite the central role of mixed methods in health research, studies evaluating online methods training in the health sciences are nonexistent. The focused goal was to evaluate online training by comparing the self-rated skills of scholars who experienced an in-person retreat to scholars in an online retreat in specific domains of mixed methods research for the health sciences from 2015-2023.MethodsThe authors administered a scholar Mixed Methods Skills Self-Assessment instrument based on an educational competency scale that included domains on: "research questions," "design/approach," "sampling," "analysis," and "dissemination" to participants of the Mixed Methods Research Training Program for the Health Sciences (MMRTP). Self-ratings on confidence on domains were compared before and after retreat participation within cohorts who attended in person (n = 73) or online (n = 57) as well as comparing across in-person to online cohorts. Responses to open-ended questions about experiences with the retreat were analyzed.ResultsScholars in an interactive program to improve mixed methods skills reported significantly increased confidence in ability to define or explain concepts and in ability to apply the concepts to practical problems, whether the program was attended in-person or synchronously online. Scholars in the online retreat had self-rated skill improvements as good or better than scholars who participated in person. With the possible exception of networking, scholars found the online format was associated with advantages such as accessibility and reduced burden of travel and finding childcare. No differences in difficulty of learning concepts was described.ConclusionsKeeping in mind that the retreat is only one component of the MMRTP, this study provides evidence that mixed methods training online was associated with the same increases in self-rated skills as persons attending online and can be a key component to increasing the capacity for mixed methods research in the health sciences.
| S-EPMC11328416 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAccess to perinatal mental health services in rural and remote areas is scarce, particularly perinatal psychiatry services. Telehealth, together with psychiatry consultation-liaison services are one way to improve access to areas of need. The New South Wales State-wide Outreach Perinatal Services - Mental Health (SwOPS) program is a Sydney-based program, offering specialist perinatal consultation-liaison services to rural and remote community mental health clinicians caring for perinatal women with significant mental health problems. This study aimed to evaluate healthcare practitioners' perceptions of the SwOPS program.MethodHealthcare practitioners (N = 31) were purposely recruited to participate in the study. Data were analysed using a mixed-methods cross-sectional design.ResultsMost participants reported being familiar with and satisfied with the service. As a result of accessing the service, participants reported an increase in knowledge and confidence regarding caring for women with moderate-to-severe or complex mental health conditions. Qualitative comments highlight the participant's perceptions of the program.ConclusionThis study provides useful insights about a state-wide telehealth psychiatry consultation-liaison service from the perspective of practitioners. It highlights the benefits, facilitators, and barriers associated with implementing such services.
| S-EPMC9881293 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundDespite the myriad benefits of research to patients, professionals, and organisations, fewer than 0.1% of the Allied Health Professions workforce are employed in clinical academic roles. Identified barriers include a lack of role modelling, management support, funding, and availability of clinical academic roles. Research capacity building is critical to improving Allied Health Professional research capability. The aim of this evaluation was to explore the current research capacity and culture of Allied Health Professionals to inform future tailored research capacity building strategies at a local level.MethodsA mixed methods evaluation of research capacity and culture was conducted within the Allied Health Professions department of a large National Health Service Foundation Trust using an online research capacity and culture questionnaire, followed by focus groups. Staff were recruited using a purposive method with the questionnaire and subsequent focus groups completed between July and September 2020. Data from the questionnaire was analysed using simple descriptive statistics and after inductive coding, focus group data was analysed thematically.Results93 out of 278 staff completed the questionnaire and 60 staff members attended seven focus groups. The research capacity and culture survey reported the department's key strength as promoting clinical practice based on evidence (median=8, range=6-9). A key reported weakness of the department was insufficient resources to support staff research training (med=4, 3-6). Respondents considered themselves most skilled in finding relevant literature (med=6, 5-8) and least skilled at securing research funding (med=1, 1-2). Greater than half of the respondents (n=50) reported not currently being involved with research. Five themes were identified from the focus groups: empowerment; building research infrastructure; fostering research skills; access for all; and positive research culture.ConclusionsAllied Health Professionals recognise the benefits of research at teams and departmental level, but marginally at an individual level. Local research capacity building strategies should aim to address the role, responsibilities and barriers to Allied Health Profession research development at an individual level. To ensure all staff can engage, research infrastructure and empowerment are essential.
| S-EPMC8764821 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundIntersectionality theoretical frameworks have been increasingly incorporated into quantitative research. A range of methods have been applied to describing outcomes and disparities across large numbers of intersections of social identities or positions, with limited evaluation.MethodsUsing data simulated to reflect plausible epidemiologic data scenarios, we evaluated methods for intercategorical intersectional analysis of continuous outcomes, including cross-classification, regression with interactions, multilevel analysis of individual heterogeneity (MAIHDA), and decision-tree methods (classification and regression trees [CART], conditional inference trees [CTree], random forest). The primary outcome was estimation accuracy of intersection-specific means. We applied each method to an illustrative example using National Health and Nutrition Examination Study (NHANES) systolic blood pressure data.ResultsWhen studying high-dimensional intersections at smaller sample sizes, MAIHDA, CTree, and random forest produced more accurate estimates. In large samples, all methods performed similarly except CART, which produced less accurate estimates. For variable selection, CART performed poorly across sample sizes, although random forest performed best. The NHANES example demonstrated that different methods resulted in meaningful differences in systolic blood pressure estimates, highlighting the importance of selecting appropriate methods.ConclusionsThis study evaluates some of a growing toolbox of methods for describing intersectional health outcomes and disparities. We identified more accurate methods for estimating outcomes for high-dimensional intersections across different sample sizes. As estimation is rarely the only objective for epidemiologists, we highlight different outputs each method creates, and suggest the sequential pairing of methods as a strategy for overcoming certain technical challenges.
| S-EPMC8983950 | biostudies-literature