Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33743827›Full record

ArticleResearch involvement and engagement2021

A realist evaluation of a collaborative model to support research co-production in long-term care settings in England: the ExCHANGE protocol.

K Wilkinson, J Day, J Thompson-Coon, V Goodwin, K Liabo, G Coxon, G Cox, C Marriott, I A Lang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Research involvement and engagement, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Emotion in public involvement: A conceptual review.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2024
    Review
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

9 authors.

K WilkinsonUniversity of Exeter, College of Medicine and Health, St Luke's Campus, Heavitree Road, Exeter, EX1 2LU, UK. K.Wilkinson2@exeter.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8962-0991
J DayUniversity of Exeter, College of Medicine and Health, St Luke's Campus, Heavitree Road, Exeter, EX1 2LU, UK.
J Thompson-CoonUniversity of Exeter, College of Medicine and Health, St Luke's Campus, Heavitree Road, Exeter, EX1 2LU, UK.
V GoodwinUniversity of Exeter, College of Medicine and Health, St Luke's Campus, Heavitree Road, Exeter, EX1 2LU, UK.
K LiaboUniversity of Exeter, College of Medicine and Health, St Luke's Campus, Heavitree Road, Exeter, EX1 2LU, UK.
G CoxonClassic Care Homes (Devon) Ltd, Pottles Court, Days Pottles Lane, Exminster, Devon, EX6 8RL, UK.
G CoxSouthern Healthcare (Wessex) Ltd, Sefton Hall, 11 Plantation Terrace, Dawlish, Devon, EX7 9DS, UK.
C MarriottThe Peninsula Public Engagement Group (PenPEG) member, University of Exeter, College of Medicine and Health, St Luke's Campus, Heavitree Road, Exeter, EX1 2LU, UK.
I A LangUniversity of Exeter, College of Medicine and Health, St Luke's Campus, Heavitree Road, Exeter, EX1 2LU, UK.

Funding

Alzheimer's Society (UK) 504 (AS-CC-18-008)EPA EP-C-18-008
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCollaborative working between academic institutions and those who provide health and social care has been identified as integral in order to produce acceptable, relevant, and timely research, and for outputs to be useful and practical to implement. The ExCHANGE Collaboration aims to bring together researchers and people working, living in and visiting care homes to build capacity, share and mobilise knowledge, and identify key areas for future research. This paper describes an embedded, formative, realist and theory-driven evaluation which aims to gather information about how successful the ExCHANGE Collaboration is perceived to be in achieving its aims. An existing realist programme theory from the literature - Closer Collaboration - will be supplemented by two substantive theories: Co-production and Knowledge Brokering. This will result in an initial programme theory which will be tested by this formative evaluation to refine understanding of how the ExCHANGE Collaboration works.

methodsThe evaluation will employ mixed qualitative methods, including: analysis of documents such as feedback forms, Knowledge Broker journal/diary, event attendance records, risk and issues logs and other relevant paperwork gathered as part of project delivery; observations of events/activities; and interviews with care home providers and staff, care home residents, residents' family members, and researchers who are involved in the project (both project design/delivery, and also attendance or involvement in project activities/events). Framework Analysis will be used to interpret the data collected; analysis will be strategic, by focusing on particular key areas of importance in the developing theory of how the ExCHANGE Collaboration might achieve change.

resultsThe results of this study are expected to be published in 2022. DISCUSSION: This evaluation will investigate how successful the ExCHANGE Collaboration is perceived to be in achieving its aims, in what way, in which contexts, and how this may differ for those involved. It will do this by testing an initial programme theory about how the collaboration works, for whom, under which circumstances, and in what way. Findings will be shared through written publication, an end of project learning event for those involved/interested in the project, and a lay summary to be made publically available.

Indexed as

Care homesCollaborationEvidence-informed practiceImplementationKnowledge brokeringKnowledge mobilisationRealist evaluationWellbeing

Identifiers

PMID33743827
PMCPMC7980357

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.