plueme/wizJson huggingface dataset:
location: nan, 'Global 
year: 2021 source: BMC 
title: Co-creating physical activity interventions: a mixed methods evaluation approach 
abstract: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 registration: Open Science Framework: https://osf.io/r6xnt/ (retrospectively registered).
location: nan, 'Global 
year: 2021 source: BMC 
title: Evaluating cancer research impact: lessons and examples from existing reviews on approaches to research impact assessment 
abstract:BackgroundPerforming cancer research relies on substantial financial investment, and contributions in time and effort from patients. It is therefore important that this research has real life impacts which are properly evaluated. The optimal approach to cancer research impact evaluation is not clear. The aim of this study was to undertake a systematic review of review articles that describe approaches to impact assessment, and to identify examples of cancer research impact evaluation within these reviews.MethodsIn total, 11 publication databases and the grey literature were searched to identify review articles addressing the topic of approaches to research impact assessment. Information was extracted on methods for data collection and analysis, impact categories and frameworks used for the purposes of evaluation. Empirical examples of impact assessments of cancer research  were identified from these literature reviews. Approaches used in these examples were appraised, with a reflection on which methods would be suited to cancer research  impact evaluation going forward.ResultsIn total, 40 literature reviews were identified. Important methods to collect and analyse data for impact assessments were surveys, interviews and documentary analysis. Key categories of impact spanning the reviews were summarised, and a list of frameworks commonly used for impact assessment was generated. The Payback Framework was most often described. Fourteen examples of impact evaluation for cancer research  were identified. They ranged from those assessing the impact of a national, charity-funded portfolio of cancer research to the clinical practice impact of a single trial. A set of recommendations for approaching cancer research impact assessment was generated.ConclusionsImpact evaluation can demonstrate if and why conducting cancer research  is worthwhile. Using a mixed methods, multi-category assessment organised within a framework, will provide a robust evaluation, but the ability to perform this type of assessment may be constrained by time and resources. Whichever approach is used, easily measured, but inappropriate metrics should be avoided. Going forward, dissemination of the results of cancer research impact assessments will allow the cancer research  community to learn how to conduct these evaluations.
location: nan, 'Global 
year: 2021 source: BMC 
title: EVITA 2.0, an updated framework for understanding evidence-based mental health policy agenda-setting: tested and informed by key informant interviews in a multilevel comparative case study 
abstract:BackgroundMental health remains a neglected issue on the global health policy agenda, particularly in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC), and the translation of research evidence into policy and practice is slow. The new EVITA framework was developed to improve mental health evidence uptake and policy agenda-setting in LMICs. In addition, behavioural science methods may be able to support knowledge translation to policy.MethodsUsing a mixed-methods study design, we applied and tested the newly developed EVITA 1.1 framework against three case studies related to South Africa at the district, national and international levels. In-depth interviews with 26 experts were conducted between August and November 2019, transcribed, coded and analysed in NVivo, using iterative categorization. The data were analysed against both the EVITA framework and the MINDSPACE framework for behavioural insights.ResultsIn our case study comparison, we found that (1) research translation to the policy agenda occurs in a complex, fluid system which includes multiple “research clouds”, “policy spheres” and other networks; (2) mental health research policy agenda-setting is based on key individuals and intermediaries and their interrelationships; and (3) key challenges and strategies for successful research to policy agenda impact are known, but are frequently not strategically implemented, such as including all stakeholders to overcome the policy implementation gap. Our data also suggest that behavioural science methods can be strategically applied to support knowledge translation to policy agenda-setting.ConclusionWe found that the EVITA framework is useful for understanding and improving mental health research policy interrelationships to support evidence uptake to the policy agenda, and that behavioural science methods are effective support mechanisms. The revised EVITA 2.0 framework therefore includes behavioural insights, for improved mental health policy agenda-setting in LMICs. More research is needed to understand whether EVITA can be applied to other LMICs and to high-income contexts.
location: nan, 'Global 
year: 2021 source: BMC 
title: Rapid prioritisation of topics for rapid evaluation: the case of innovations in adult social care and social work 
abstract:BackgroundPrioritisation processes are widely used in healthcare research and increasingly in social care research. Previous research has recommended using consensus development methods for inclusive research agenda setting. This research has highlighted the need for transparent and systematic methods for priority setting. Yet there has been little research on how to conduct prioritisation processes using rapid methods. This is a particular concern when prioritisation needs to happen rapidly. This paper aims to describe and discuss a process of rapidly identifying and prioritising a shortlist of innovations for rapid evaluation applied in the field of adult social care and social work.MethodWe adapted the James Lind Alliance approach to priority setting for rapid use. We followed four stages: (1) Identified a long list of innovations, (2) Developed shortlisting criteria, (3) Grouped and sifted innovations, and (4) Prioritised innovations in a multi-stakeholder workshop (n = 23). Project initiation through to completion of the final report took four months.ResultsTwenty innovations were included in the final shortlist (out of 158 suggested innovations). The top five innovations for evaluation were identified and findings highlighted key themes which influenced prioritisation. The top five priorities (listed here in alphabetical order) were: Care coordination for dementia in the community, family group conferencing, Greenwich prisons social care, local area coordination and MySense.Ai. Feedback from workshop participants (n = 15) highlighted tensions from using a rapid process (e.g. challenges of reaching consensus in one workshop).ConclusionThe method outlined in this manuscript can be used to rapidly prioritise innovations for evaluation in a feasible and robust way. We outline some implications and compromises of rapid prioritisation processes for future users of this approach to consider.
location: nan, 'Global 
year: 2021 source: BMC 
title: The how and why of producing policy relevant research: perspectives of Australian childhood obesity prevention researchers and policy makers 
abstract:BackgroundUnderstanding why research is conducted may help address the under-utilisation of research. This study examined the reasons for childhood obesity prevention knowledge production in New South Wales (NSW), Australia, and the factors influencing research choices from the perspective of the researchers and health policy agencies contributing to the research.MethodsA literature search of SCOPUS and ISI Web of Knowledge (affiliation and key word searches) was conducted to compile a database of NSW childhood obesity research outputs, published between 2000 and 2015 (n = 543). Descriptive statistics were used to quantify outputs by research type, differentiating measurement, descriptive, and intervention research, systematic reviews and other publications. Interviews were conducted with a sample of researchers drawn from the database (n = 13) and decision makers from health policy agencies who funded and contributed to childhood obesity research in NSW (n = 15). Researcher interviews examined views about societal impacts, why and under what circumstances the research was conducted. Decision-maker interviews examined policy agency research investment and how research was used in decision making. Content analysis and a thematic approach was used to analyse the interview transcripts.ResultsThe research in this case was conducted for mix of reasons including those traditionally associated with academic inquiry, as well as intentions to influence policy and practice. Differences in funding mechanisms, administrative and employment arrangements, and ‘who’ initiated the research, created differing incentives and perspectives for knowledge production. Factors associated with the characteristics and experience of the individuals involved also influenced goals, as did the type of research conducted. Policy agencies played a role in directing research to address policy needs.ConclusionsThe findings of this study confirm that researchers are strongly influenced by their working environment. Funding schemes and other incentives to support policy relevant knowledge production are important. Contextual factors such as policy priorities, policy-driven research funding and the embedded nature or strong connections between some researchers and the policy agencies involved, are likely to have influenced the extent to which policy goals were reported in this study.
location: nan, 'Global 
year: 2021 source: BMC 
title: The V-BRCH Project: building clinical trial research capacity for HIV and noncommunicable diseases in Nigeria 
abstract:Antiretroviral therapy has turned HIV into a chronic condition, with morbidity from HIV-associated noncommunicable diseases (NCDs) becoming more common as HIV-infected individuals live longer. In Nigeria, the additional challenge of an under-capacitated health system highlights the need for skilled clinical investigators who can generate evidence to tackle the double burden of HIV and NCDs. The Vanderbilt-Nigeria Building Research Capacity in HIV and Non-communicable Diseases (V-BRCH) programme is a training platform to create a cohort of skilled Nigerian investigators with the capacity to lead independent clinical trial research focused on the intersection of HIV and NCDs. V-BRCH will solidify an atmosphere of continuous mentoring and skills acquisition for physician faculty at the Aminu Kano Teaching Hospital via short- and medium-term learning opportunities, paired mentoring arrangements, and mentored research projects. Trainees will attend an annual faculty enrichment programme in Nashville, in addition to on-site workshops in Nigeria on HIV-associated NCD epidemiology, clinical trials methodology, evidence synthesis, qualitative research methods, stakeholder engagement, knowledge translation, and grant writing. Research-oriented junior faculty will undergo focused training in clinical trials administration and regulatory oversight. Scholars will share best practices through mentoring panels, regular ‘Works in Progress’ meetings, and monthly career development seminars. Competitive seed grants will be provided to mentor–mentee teams to promote targeted in-country pilot studies focused on HIV-associated NCDs. For long-term training, physician scientists will be supported to undergo enhanced Master of Public Health (MPH) training at Bayero University in Nigeria and Master of Science in Clinical Investigation (MSCI) training at Vanderbilt. Short-term regional courses, staff development workshops, and MPH curriculum refinement will help to strengthen institutional capacity in HIV-associated NCD clinical trial research. V-BRCH will create a cohort of skilled Nigerian scientists who will be able to compete for independent funding and design and implement high quality research that will generate evidence to inform policy and practice and lead to improved outcomes for Nigerians impacted by HIV-associated NCDs.
location: nan, 'Global 
year: 2021 source: BMC 
title: PRIMASYS: a health policy and systems research approach for the assessment of country primary health care systems 
abstract:For the renewed global impetus on primary health care (PHC) to translate into action at a country level, it will be important to strengthen existing ways of understanding and assessing country PHC systems. The architecture and performance of primary care systems are widely acknowledged to be crucial determinants of the health of populations in high-income countries as well as in low- and middle-income countries. There is no one-size-fits-all model of a country-level PHC system, and countries have implemented diverse models, adapted to and conditioned by their respective social, economic and political contexts. This paper applies advances in the field of health policy and systems research (HPSR) to propose an approach to the assessment of country PHC systems, using a compendium of 70 elements of enquiry requiring mixed quantitative and qualitative assessment. The approach and elements of enquiry were developed based on a review of policy and guidance documents and literature on PHC and HPSR and were finalized as part of a consultation of experts on PHC. Key features of the approach include sensitivity to context, flexibility in allowing for in-depth enquiry where necessary, systems thinking, a learning emphasis, and complementarity with existing frameworks and efforts. Implemented in 20 countries to date, the approach is anticipated to have further utility in a single country as well as in comparative assessments of PHC systems.
location: nan, 'Global 
year: 2021 source: BMC 
title: The consequences of compromising the EU’s free movement of persons principle on Swiss research: how to survive constrained access to regional funding 
abstract:Between 2014 and 2016, Switzerland’s access to some of the EU funding was limited after a referendum against mass immigration was accepted and the country refused to sign the free movement accord to the EU’s newest member, Croatia. It is well documented that Switzerland has suffered from a drop in participation, funding and a decrease in consortium lead positions. However, there is no account of the consequences on institutional level. We therefore aimed at describing the immediate- and longer-term impact of the partial association status to the Swiss Tropical and Public Health Institute (Swiss TPH) and to identify key strategies for minimizing institutional damage during a limited access period to a key regional funding source. A quantitative analysis of the institute’s grants database, from 2007 to 2019, did not show any clear trends related to the partial association status of Switzerland for funding and projects awarded. The qualitative outcomes changed along the timeline assessed; whereas in 2014 a range of negative effects were stated by Swiss TPH researchers, a survey conducted in 2019 with Swiss TPH applicants and project partners to Horizon 2020, revealed that most project leaders felt that the partial association did neither affect their external partners’ willingness to collaborate nor Swiss TPH’s role in the proposal or consortium. On the other hand, the institutional strategic goal of taking on consortia leads was delayed by several years as a direct consequence of the partial association. Also, the exclusion from European research networks and the lack of consultation of expertise by the European partner institutions was widely seen as damaging. A policy of favouring long-term partnerships over ad-hoc collaborations, along with constant and trustful communication, as immediate mitigation measure, helped averting some of the reputational and access damage. Moreover, the Swiss TPH business model based on a three-way strategy of research, education and services has proven highly viable allowing to build a large pool of potential funding sources internationally, resulting in relative resilience in terms of income lost.
location: nan, 'Global 
year: 2021 source: BMC 
title: How to bring research evidence into policy? Synthesizing strategies of five research projects in low-and middle-income countries 
abstract:BackgroundAddressing the uptake of research findings into policy-making is increasingly important for researchers who ultimately seek to contribute to improved health outcomes. The aims of the Swiss Programme for Research on Global Issues for Development (r4d Programme) initiated by the Swiss National Science Foundation and the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation are to create and disseminate knowledge that supports policy changes in the context of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. This paper reports on five r4d research projects and shows how researchers engage with various stakeholders, including policy-makers, in order to assure uptake of the research results.MethodsEleven in-depth interviews were conducted with principal investigators and their research partners from five r4d projects, using a semi-structured interview guide. The interviews explored the process of how stakeholders and policy-makers were engaged in the research project.ResultsThree key strategies were identified as fostering research uptake into policies and practices: (S1) stakeholders directly engaged with and sought evidence from researchers; (S2) stakeholders were involved in the design and throughout the implementation of the research project; and (S3) stakeholders engaged in participatory and transdisciplinary research approaches to coproduce knowledge and inform policy. In the first strategy, research evidence was directly taken up by international stakeholders as they were actively seeking new evidence on a very specific topic to up-date international guidelines. In the second strategy, examples from two r4d projects show that collaboration with stakeholders from early on in the projects increased the likelihood of translating research into policy, but that the latter was more effective in a supportive and stable policy environment. The third strategy adopted by two other r4d projects demonstrates the benefits of promoting colearning as a way to address potential power dynamics and working effectively across the local policy landscape through robust research partnerships.ConclusionsThis paper provides insights into the different strategies that facilitate collaboration and communication between stakeholders, including policy-makers, and researchers. However, it remains necessary to increase our understanding of the interests and motivations of the different actors involved in the process of influencing policy, identify clear policy-influencing objectives and provide more institutional support to engage in this complex and time-intensive process.
location: nan, 'Global 
year: 2021 source: BMC 
title: From fringe to centre-stage: experiences of mainstreaming health equity in a health research collaboration 
abstract:BackgroundAction to address the structural determinants of health inequalities is prioritized in high-level initiatives such as the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals and many national health strategies. Yet, the focus of much local policy and practice is on behaviour change. Research shows that whilst lifestyle approaches can improve population health, at best they fail to reduce health inequalities because they fail to address upstream structural determinants of behaviour and health outcomes. In health research, most efforts have been directed at three streams of work: understanding causal pathways; evaluating the equity impact of national policy; and developing and evaluating lifestyle/behavioural approaches to health improvement. As a result, there is a dearth of research on effective interventions to reduce health inequalities that can be developed and implemented at a local level.ObjectiveTo describe an initiative that aimed to mainstream a focus on health equity in a large-scale research collaboration in the United Kingdom and to assess the impact on organizational culture, research processes and individual research practice.MethodsThe study used multiple qualitative methods including semi-structured interviews, focus groups and workshops (n = 131 respondents including Public Advisers, university, National Health Service (NHS), and local and document review.Resultsutilizing Extended Normalization Process Theory (ENPT) and gender mainstreaming theory, the evaluation illuminated (i) the processes developed by Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care North West Coast to integrate ways of thinking and acting to tackle the upstream social determinants of health inequities (i.e. to mainstream a health equity focus) and (ii) the factors that promoted or frustrated these efforts.ConclusionsFindings highlight the role of contextual factors and processes aimed at developing and implementing a robust strategy for mainstreaming health equity as building blocks for transformative change in applied health research.