Researching Healthcare Availability for Probation Clients: An Illustration of Methodological Challenges and Lessons in Surveying Organisations.

Coral Sirdifield, David Denney, Rebecca Marples, Charlie Brooker

Open access · greenAbstract read

In one paragraph

Article in British journal of community justice : BJCJ, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it

0cells of the map it votes in

0citing papers in PubMed

0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 20% 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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Coral SirdifieldSchool of Health and Social Care, University of Lincoln, Lincoln, UK.

David DenneySchool of Law, Royal Holloway, University of London, London, UK.

Rebecca MarplesSchool of Health and Social Care, University of Lincoln, Lincoln, UK.

Charlie BrookerSchool of Law, Royal Holloway, University of London, London, UK.

Royal Holloway University of London · GBUniversity of Lincoln · GB

Funding

Department of Health PB-PG-0815-20012

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This article critically reflects on the methodological approach used in a multi-method study of healthcare provision for probation service clients in England. The study involved gathering data from a range of large criminal justice and health organisations. Drawing on the literature and using learning from this study as an example, we address two central questions which evolved during the research: why was it more difficult to gain access in some organisations than others, and what methodological strategies might best improve engagement with research in the future? We discuss gatekeeping, and the impact of organisational resources, culture, responsibilities, change and objectives on engagement with research. We make recommendations for future methodological approaches to address these challenges, which are relevant to researchers in any discipline trying to engage organisations in research.

Indexed as

criminal justicegaining accessgatekeepersinterdisciplinary researchProbation

Identifiers

PMID35392652

PMCPMC7612585

OpenAlexW2968468816

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata

LicenceTDM

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.