ArticleMethodsX2023
A grounded theory-based qualitative approach for examining local implementation of public health policies during crises.
Article in MethodsX, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: COVID-19's emergence questions the agility of health policy deployment in a context of urgency. This exceptional pandemic offers a unique Implementation Science study opportunity. It reveals how actors adapt, coordinate, and mitigate an unknown global threat to safeguard populations from an initially mysterious virus. Limited research has explored how involved players act and adapt their practices to fulfil health protection missions during a global health crisis. Bridging the gap between public policy expectations and achievements requires a methodology for stakeholder identification and implementation practice description. Objective: Focusing on COVID-19 management in France's second-largest region, we investigate ministerial recommendation implementation and the emergence of new links, coordination modes, and practices. Methods: Due to the novel subject, we adopted grounded theory. Initial documentary data collection identifies stakeholders for subsequent interviews. Open-ended coding of collected discourse enables content analysis. Results: Findings reveal a crisis-driven re-evaluation of stakeholder relationships. This research identifies three levels of implementation of health policies at the local level (administrative, organizational and operational) and reveals different types of coordination specific to each of these levels. Our results provide insights on how to better coordinate and implement healthcare policies in a period of crisis. Recommendations include real-life simulations of large-scale crises. Conclusion: Our work establishes a methodological foundation for analysing coordination dynamics. Future research could compare these findings with other unpredictable health emergencies, such as episiotomic veterinary health crises.•The first step of the method is to analyse the guidelines of health policy implementation during the Covid-19 crisis and to identify the main stakeholders in charge of the local health policy implementation.•The second step consists of interviewing these stakeholders using a co-constructed sample and structural coding of their speech to reveal the forms of coordination between stakeholders.
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.