Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32398136›Full record

ArticleHealth research policy and systems2020

Using developmental evaluation to enhance continuous reflection, learning and adaptation of an innovation platform in Australian Indigenous primary healthcare.

Jodie Bailie, Alison Frances Laycock, David Peiris, Roxanne Gwendalyn Bainbridge, Veronica Matthews, Frances Clare Cunningham, Kathleen Parker Conte, Seye Abimbola, Megan Elizabeth Passey, Ross Stewart Bailie

Open access · goldAbstract readLetter
In one paragraph

Article in Health research policy and systems, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 12% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Jodie BailieThe University Centre for Rural Health, The University of Sydney, 61 Uralba Street, Lismore, NSW, 2480, Australia. jodie.bailie@sydney.edu.au.
Alison Frances LaycockThe University Centre for Rural Health, The University of Sydney, 61 Uralba Street, Lismore, NSW, 2480, Australia.
David PeirisThe School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, 2006, Australia.
Roxanne Gwendalyn BainbridgeCentre for Indigenous Health Equity Research, Central Queensland University, Rockhampton, Australia.
Veronica MatthewsThe University Centre for Rural Health, The University of Sydney, 61 Uralba Street, Lismore, NSW, 2480, Australia.
Frances Clare CunninghamMenzies School of Health Research, Charles Darwin University, Casuarina, Australia.
Kathleen Parker ConteThe University Centre for Rural Health, The University of Sydney, 61 Uralba Street, Lismore, NSW, 2480, Australia.
Seye AbimbolaThe School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, 2006, Australia.
Megan Elizabeth PasseyThe University Centre for Rural Health, The University of Sydney, 61 Uralba Street, Lismore, NSW, 2480, Australia.
Ross Stewart BailieThe University Centre for Rural Health, The University of Sydney, 61 Uralba Street, Lismore, NSW, 2480, Australia.
Lismore Base Hospital · AUUniversity of Sydney · AUCentral Queensland University · AUMenzies School of Health Research · AU

Funding

National Health and Medical Research Council 1078927
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Effective efforts to strengthen health systems need diverse, multi-stakeholder networks working together on complex or 'wicked' problems such as prevention and control of chronic diseases, solutions to which go beyond the role and capability of one organisation. The contextual complexities inherent in 'wicked' problems mean that solutions warrant a systems approach that encompasses innovation and new ways of thinking about, facilitating and implementing collective decision-making processes and change practices.Innovation platforms are a mechanism for facilitating communication and collaboration among diverse stakeholders, promoting joint action and stimulating innovation. Developmental evaluation is an approach that is increasingly being used to evaluate innovative and emergent programmes and projects, as it enables evaluators to provide real-time feedback so that evaluation findings can be used to guide development and adaptations. Developmental evaluation emphasises learning and adaptation, and aligns well with the implementation of innovation platforms that have continuous reflection, learning and adaptation as a specific design principle.Here, we outline our rationale for applying a developmental evaluation to enhance the formation, functioning and outcomes of an innovation platform aimed at accelerating and strengthening large-scale quality improvement efforts in Australian Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander primary healthcare. We provide examples to explain how the developmental evaluation findings were used for adaptation of the innovation platform and assess to what extent our application of developmental evaluation was consistent with, and reflective of, its essential principles.Our evaluation aligned strongly with the principles of developmental evaluation, and the approach we took was well suited to situations with a developmental purpose, innovation niche and complexity such as innovation platforms. As a result, along with the increasing interest in multi-stakeholder platforms (e.g. innovation platforms) and the inherent challenges with evaluating these complex networks, we anticipate our use of this approach being of interest globally.

Indexed as

Health Services ResearchQuality ImprovementAustraliaChronic DiseaseFeedbackHealth Services, IndigenousHumansLearningLongitudinal StudiesPrimary Health Carecontinuous quality improvementco-productionDevelopmental evaluationhealth systems strengtheningIndigenous healthinnovationinnovation platformsmulti-stakeholder networksprimary healthcaresystems thinking

Identifiers

PMID32398136
PMCPMC7218558
OpenAlexW3028359177

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.