Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37803445›Full record

ArticleSystematic reviews2023

Exploring the impact of evaluation on learning and health innovation sustainability: protocol for a realist synthesis.

Marissa Bird, Élizabeth Côté-Boileau, Walter P Wodchis, Lianne Jeffs, Maura MacPhee, James Shaw, Tujuanna Austin, Frances Bruno, Megan Bhalla, Carolyn Steele Gray

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Systematic reviews, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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.

Marissa BirdInstitute for Better Health, 100 Queensway West-Clinical, Administrative Building, 6Th Floor, Mississauga, ON, L5B 1B8, Canada. marissa.bird@thp.ca.ORCID 0000-0003-2188-0767
Élizabeth Côté-BoileauDepartment of Health Management, Evaluation and Policy, School of Public Health, University of Montreal, 7101 Av du Parc, Montréal, QC, H3N 1X9, Canada.
Walter P WodchisInstitute for Better Health, 100 Queensway West-Clinical, Administrative Building, 6Th Floor, Mississauga, ON, L5B 1B8, Canada.
Lianne JeffsScience of Care Institute, Sinai Health, 1 Bridgepoint Drive, Toronto, ON, M4M 2B5, Canada.
Maura MacPheeNursing-Applied Sciences, University of British Columbia, 239-2211 Wesbrook Mall, Vancouver, BC, V6T2B5, Canada.
James ShawDepartment of Physical Therapy, Temerty Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, 500 University Ave, Toronto, ON, M5G 1V7, Canada.
Tujuanna AustinInstitute of Health Policy Management and Evaluation (IHPME), Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Suite 425-155 College Street, Toronto, ON, M5T 3M6, Canada.
Frances BrunoInstitute of Health Policy Management and Evaluation (IHPME), Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Suite 425-155 College Street, Toronto, ON, M5T 3M6, Canada.
Megan BhallaOPTI-Hex Lab, Leslie Dan Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Toronto, 144 College St, Toronto, ON, M5S 3M2, Canada.
Carolyn Steele GrayInstitute of Health Policy Management and Evaluation (IHPME), Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Suite 425-155 College Street, Toronto, ON, M5T 3M6, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWithin the Learning Health System (LHS) model, learning routines, including evaluation, allow for continuous incremental change to take place. Within these learning routines, evaluation assists in problem identification, data collection, and data transformation into contextualized information, which is then re-applied to the LHS environment. Evaluation that catalyzes learning and improvement may also contribute to health innovation sustainability. However, there is little consensus as to why certain evaluations seem to support learning and sustainability, while others impede it. This realist synthesis seeks to understand the contextual factors and underlying mechanisms or drivers that best support health systems learning and sustainable innovation.

methodsThis synthesis will be guided by Pawson and colleagues' 2005 and Emmel and colleagues' 2018 guidelines for conducting realist syntheses. The review process will encompass five steps: (1) scoping the review, (2) building theories, (3) identifying the evidence, (4) evidence selection and appraisal, and (5) data extraction and synthesis. An Expert Committee comprised of leaders in evaluation, innovation, sustainability, and realist methodology will guide this synthesis. Review findings will be reported using the RAMESES guidelines. DISCUSSION: The use of a realist review will allow for exploration and theorizing about the contextual factors and underlying mechanisms that make evaluations 'work' (or 'not work') to support learning and sustainability. Depending on results, we will attempt to synthesize findings into a series of recommendations for evaluations with the intention to support health systems learning and sustainability. Finalized results will be presented at national and international conferences, as well as disseminated via a peer-reviewed publication. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: This realist synthesis protocol has been registered with PROSPERO ( https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/  ID 382690).

Indexed as

LearningResearch DesignHumansSystematic Reviews as TopicEvaluationInnovationLearningLearning health systemsRealist synthesisSustainability

Identifiers

PMID37803445
PMCPMC10557319

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.