ArticleBMJ open2018
Examining 'institutional entrepreneurship' in healthcare redesign and improvement through comparative case study research: a study protocol.
Article in BMJ open, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Conditions and strategies influencing sustainability of a community-based exercise program incorporating a healthcare-community partnership for people with balance and mobility limitations in Canada: A collective case study of the Together in Movement and Exercise (TIME™) program.Frontiers in rehabilitation sciences · 2023Article
- Factors that influence the implementation of organisational interventions for advancing women in healthcare leadership: A meta-ethnographic study.EClinicalMedicine · 2022Article
- Integrating the complexity of healthcare improvement with implementation science: a longitudinal qualitative case study.BMC health services research · 2022Article
- Integration intrapreneurship: implementing innovation in a public healthcare organization.Journal of innovation and entrepreneurship · 2022Article
- Using institutional entrepreneurship to understand the role of innovation teams in healthcare: a longitudinal qualitative study.BMJ open · 2021Article
- Pre-emptive Innovation Infrastructure for Medical Emergencies: Accelerating Healthcare Innovation in the Wake of a Global Pandemic.Frontiers in digital health · 2021Article
- Executive Decision-Making: Piloting Project ECHO® to Integrate Care in Queensland.International journal of integrated care · 2020Article
- Organizational Support in Healthcare Redesign Education: A Mixed-Methods Exploratory Study of Expert Coach and Executive Sponsor Experiences.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionHealthcare service redesign and improvement has become an important activity that health system leaders and clinicians realise must be nurtured and mastered, if the capacity issues that constrain healthcare delivery are to be solved. However, little is known about the critical success factors that are essential for sustaining and scaling up improvement initiatives. This situation limits the impact of these initiatives and undermines the general standing of redesign and improvement activity within healthcare systems. The conduct of the doctoral research detailed in this study protocol will be nested within a broader parent study that seeks to address this problem by drawing on the theory of 'institutional entrepreneurship'. The doctoral research will apply this idea to understanding the capacities and capabilities required at the organisation level to bring about transformational change in healthcare services. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The parent study is predominantly qualitative, is multilevel in nature and has been codesigned with five partner healthcare organisations. The focus is a sector-wide attempt in an Australian state jurisdiction to transfer new redesign and improvement knowledge into the public healthcare system. The doctoral research will focus on the implementation of the sector-wide approach in one healthcare service in the jurisdiction. This research involves interviews with project team members and stakeholders involved in two improvement initiatives undertaken by the health service. It will involve interviews with redesign and improvement leaders and senior managers responsible for the overall health service improvement approach. The methods will also include immersive fieldwork, interviews and focus groups. Appropriate methods for coding and thematic extraction will be applied to the qualitative data. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval has been granted by the health service and Monash University Human Research Ethics Committee. Dissemination will be facilitated via academic publication, industry reports and workshops and dissemination events as part of the broader project.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.