The feasibility of determining the impact of primary health care research projects using the Payback Framework

Health Research Policy and Systems

Volumn 7, Issue , 2009, Pages

  Kalucy, Elizabeth C ^a   Jackson Bowers, Eleanor ^a   McIntyre, Ellen ^a   Reed, Richard ^a  

^a FLINDERS UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CLINICAL PRACTICE; CONTINUING EDUCATION; COST CONTROL; DATA ANALYSIS; ECONOMIC ASPECT; FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT; HEALTH CARE DELIVERY; HEALTH CARE POLICY; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH; INFORMATION DISSEMINATION; INFORMATION PROCESSING; INTERVIEW; MEDICAL AUDIT; MEDICAL DECISION MAKING; MEDICAL LITERATURE; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PEER REVIEW; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRIMARY HEALTH CARE; PUBLIC HEALTH; TELEPHONE;

EID: 66349117668     PISSN: None     EISSN: 14784505     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/1478-4505-7-11     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Australian Government Department of Health and Ageing Primary Health Care Research, Evaluation and Development Strategy Phase 2 (2006-2009) Strategic Plan Primary Health Care Research and Information Service 2005.
2. Beacham B Kalucy L McIntyre E Focus on ... understanding and measuring research impact Primary Health Care Research and Information Service 2005.
3. Davies H Nutley S Walter I Assessing the impact of social science research: Conceptual, methodological and practical issues. A background discussion paper for ESRC Symposium on Assessing Non-Academic Impact of Research May 2005 Research Unit for Research Utilisation School of Management, University of St Andrews 2005.
4. Gabbay J Le May A Jefferson H Webb D Lovelock R Powell J Lathlean J A case study of knowledge management in multiagency consumer informed 'communities of practice': Implications for evidence based policy development in health and social services Health 2003, 7:283-310. 10.1177/1363459303007003003
5. Wells R Whitworth J Assessing outcomes of health and medical research: do we measure what counts or count what we can measure? Australia and New Zealand Health Policy 2007, 4:14. 10.1186/1743-8462-4-14
6. Hanney S Grant J Wooding S Buxton M Proposed methods for reviewing the outcomes of health research: The impact of funding by the UK's Arthritis Research Campaign Health Research Policy and Systems 2004, 2(1):4. 10.1186/1478-4505-2-4
7. Buxton M Hanney S Packwood T Roberts S Youll P Assessing the benefits from Department of Health and National Health Service Research and Development Public Money and Management 2000, 20(4).
8. Kwan P Johnston J Fung A Chong D Collins R Lo S A systematic evaluation of publicly funded health and health services research in Hong Kong BMC Health Services Research 2007, 7:121. 1952059 17662157 10.1186/ 1472-6963-7-121
9. Butler L Biglia B Analysing the journal output of NH&MRC research grants Research Evaluation and Policy Project (REPP) for the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) 2001.
10. Scopus database http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/ bibliographicdatabasedescription.cws_home/705152/description#description
11. Web of Science database http://www.thomsonreuters.com/products_services/ scientific/Web_of_Science
12. Kuruvilla S Mays N Pleasand A Walt G Describing the impact of health research: A research Impact framework BMC Health Services Research 2006, 6:134. 1635046 17049092 10.1186/1472-6963-6-134
13. Kuruvilla S Mays N Wait G Describing the impact of health services and policy research Journal Health Services Research and Policy 2007, 12:23-31. 10.1258/135581907780318374
14. Wooding S Hanney S Buxton M Grant J Payback arising from research funding: Evaluation of the arthritis research campaign Rheumatology 2005, 44:1145-1156. 10.1093/rheumatology/keh708 16049052
15. Lowcay B McIntyre E Hale M Ward A Peer reviewed publication rates: An indication of research output Australian Family Physician 2004, 33:284-285. 15129477
16. Buxton M Hanney S Packwood T Roberts S Youll P Assessing the benefits from North Thames Research and Development HERG Research Report No 25 Health Economics Research Group Brunel University, UK 1999.
17. Amara N Ouimet M Landry R New Evidence on Instrumental, Conceptual, and Symbolic Utilization of University Research in Government Agencies Science Communication 2004, 26:75-106. 10.1177/1075547004267491
18. Hanney S Personal interaction with researchers or detached synthesis of the evidence: Modelling the health policy paradox Evaluation and Research in Evaluation 2004, 18:72-82. 10.1080/09500790408668309
19. Pakenham-Walsh N Wherever possible, research communication should be based on the scientific cumulation of knowledge, Response to Jonathan Lomas: The in-between world of knowledge brokering BMJ 2007, 334:129-132. 1779881 17235094 10.1136/bmj.39038.593380.AE
20. Australian Government Department of Education Science and Training Research Quality Framework: Assessing the quality and impact of research in Australia: The recommended RQF. Australia
21. Greenhalgh T Russell J Reframing evidence synthesis as rhetorical action in the policy making drama Healthc Policy 2006, 1(2):34-42. 2585323 19305651