Lessons from the evaluation of the UK's NHS R&D implementation methods programme

Implementation Science

Volumn 2, Issue 1, 2007, Pages

  Soper, Bryony ^a   Hanney, Stephen R ^a  

^a BRUNEL UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 34247892191     PISSN: None     EISSN: 17485908     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/1748-5908-2-7     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Grol R, Grimshaw J: From best evidence to best practice: effective implementation of change in patients' care. Lancet 2003, 362:1225-1229.
2. Committee on Quality Health Care in America, Institute of Medicine: Crossing the Quality Chasm: A New Health System for the 21st Century, Washington DC: The National Academies Press; 2001.
3. Haines A, Kuruvilla S, Borchert M: Bridging the implementation gap between knowledge and action for health. Bull World Health Organ 2004, 82:724-731.
4. Pang T, Sadana R, Hanney S, Butta Z, Hyder AA, Simon J: Knowledge for better health - a conceptual framework and foundation for health research systems. Bull World Health Organ 2003, 81:815-820.
5. Lanier DC, Roland M, Burstin H, Knottnerus JA: Doctor performance and public accountability. Lancet 2003, 362:1404-1408.
6. Davis D, Evans M, Jadad A, Perrier L, Rath D, Ryan D, et al.: The case for knowledge translation: shortening the journey from evidence to effect. BMJ 2003, 327:33-35.
7. Hanney S, Soper B, Buxton M: Evaluation of the NHS R&D Implementation Methods Programme. HERG Research Report No.29 2003 [http://www.brunel.ac.uk/about/acad/herg/publications/hergreports]. Uxbridge: Health Economics Research Group, Brunel University
8. Department of Health: Methods to Promote the Implementation of Research Findings in the NHS. Leeds: Department of Health; 1995.
9. Culyer A: Supporting Research and Development in the NHS: a Report to the Minister of Health. London: HMSO; 1994.
10. NHS Executive: National R&D Programme on the Evaluation of Methods to Promote the Implementation of Research Findings. Leeds: NHS Executive; 2000.
11. Buxton M, Hanney S, Packwood T, Roberts S, Youll P: Assessing the Benefits from North Thames Research and Development. In Research Report No 25 Uxbridge: Brunel University; 1999.
12. Buxton M, Hanney S, Packwood T, Roberts S, Youll P: Assessing benefits from Department of Health and National Health Service research & development. Public Money Manag 2000, 20(4):29-34.
13. Buxton M, Hanney S: How can payback from health services research be assessed? J Health Serv Res Policy 1996, 1:35-43.
14. Hanney S, Packwood T, Buxton M: Evaluating the benefits from health research and development centres: a categorisation, a model and examples of application. Evaluation: The International Journal of Theory, Research and Practice 2000, 6:137-160.
15. Coulter A, Entwistle V, Gilbert D: Sharing decisions with patients: is the information good enough? BMJ 1999, 318:318-322.
16. Oxman AD, Thompson MA, Davis DA, Haynes RB: No magic bullets: a systematic review of 102 trials of interventions to help health care professionals deliver services more effectively or efficiently. Can Med Assoc J 1995, 153:1423-1431.
17. Verhorn C, Landerfeld J, Wagner D: Measuring the contribution of biomedical research to the production of health. Research Policy 1982, 11:3-13.
18. Stapleton H, Kirkham M, Thomas G: Qualitative study of evidence based leaflets in maternity care. BMJ 2002, 324:639-643.
19. Wilson B, Thornton JG, Hewison J, et al.: The Leeds University maternity audit project. Int J for Quality in Health Care 2002, 14:175-181.
20. Hanney S, Davies A, Buxton M: Assessing benefits from health research projects: can we use questionnaires instead of case studies? Research Evaluation 1999, 8:189-199.
21. Wisely j: Assessment of the Benefits from the National R&D Programme on Primary/Secondary Care Interface. Unpublished report from the NHS London Regional Office; 2000.
22. Wisely J: National R&D Programme in the Area of Mother and Child: Programme Report. Unpublished report from the NHS London Regional Office; 2000.
23. Eccles M: Methods to promote the implementation of research findings in the NHS: a review of funded studies and priority areas. In NHS Executive. National R&D Programme on the Evaluation of Methods to Promote the Implementation of Research Findings: Programme Report Leeds: NHS Executive; 2000.
24. Department of Health: National R&D Programme on The Evaluation of Methods to Promote the Implementation of Research Findings: First Annual Report. Unpublished report 1996.
25. Coulter A, Entwistle V, Gilbert D: Informing Patients: An Assessment of the Quality of Patient Information Materials. London: King's Fund; 1998.
26. McCaughan D, Thompson C, Cullum N, Sheldon TA, Thompson D: Acute care nurses' perceptions of barriers to using research information in clinical decision-making. J Advan Nurs 2002, 39:46-60.
27. Walker A, Grimshaw J, Johnston M, Pitts N, Steen N, Eccles M: PRIME - PRocess modeling in ImpleMEntation research: selecting a theoretical base for interventions to change clinical practice. BMC Health Services Research 2003, 3:22.
28. West E, Barron DN, Dowsett J, Newton JN: Hierarchies and cliques in the social network of health care professionals: implications for the design of dissemination strategies. Soc Sci Med 1999, 48:633-646.
29. Halladay M, Bero L: Implementing evidence-based practice in health care. Public Money Manag 2000, 20(4):43-49.
30. Dash P, Gowman N, Traynor M: Increasing the impact of health services research. BMJ 2003, 327:1339-1341.
31. Moss F, Thompson R: A new structure for quality improvement reports. Qual Health Care 1999, 8:76.
32. Smith R: Quality improvement reports: a new sort of article. BMJ 2000, 321:1428.
33. Greenhalgh T, Robert G, Macfarlane F, Bate P, Kyriakidou O: Diffusion of innovations in service organisations: systematic review and recommendations. Milbank Q 2004, 82:581-629.
34. Berwick DM: Broadening the view of evidence-based medicine. Qual Saf Health Care 2005, 14:315-316.
35. Oxman A, Sackett D, Chalmers I, Prescott T: A surrealistic megaanalysis of redisorganization theories. J R Soc Med 2005, 98:563-568.