Research protocol: A realist synthesis of contestability in community-based mental health markets

Systematic Reviews

Volumn 4, Issue 1, 2015, Pages

  Durham, Jo ^a   Bains, Amara ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF QUEENSLAND   (Australia)

^b Agriculture and Food Innovation   (Australia)

Author keywords

Community mental health; Community based organisations; Contestability; Contestable markets; Mental health; Realist review; Realist synthesis

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CONTESTABILITY; HEALTH CARE COST; HEALTH CARE MANAGEMENT; HEALTH CARE PERSONNEL; HUMAN; INFORMATION DISSEMINATION; MARKETING; MENTAL HEALTH; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SOCIAL CHANGE; SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT; VALIDITY; CONTRACT; DEMOGRAPHY; HEALTH CARE PLANNING; MENTAL HEALTH SERVICE; METHODOLOGY;

CONTRACTS; HEALTH RESOURCES; HUMANS; MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES; RESEARCH DESIGN; RESIDENCE CHARACTERISTICS;

EID: 84939171380     PISSN: None     EISSN: 20464053     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/s13643-015-0025-3     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Davidson B. Contestability in human services markets. J Aust Polit Econ. 2011;68:213-39.
2. Grace C, Fletcher K, Martin SJ, Bottrill I. Making and managing markets: contestability, competition and improvement in local government. London: Audit Commission; 2007.
3. Preker AS. 'Make or buy' decisions in the production of health care goods and services: new insights from institutional economics and organizational theory. Bull World Health Organ. 2000;78(6):779-90.
4. Esposito L, Perez FM. Neoliberalism and the commodification of mental health. Humanit Soc. 2014;38(4):414-42.
5. Timmermans S, Almeling R. Objectification, standardization, and commodification in health care: a conceptual readjustment. Soc Sci Med. 2009;69(1):21-7.
6. Walsh A. The commodification of the public service of water: a normative perspective. Public Reason. 2011;3(2):90-106.
7. Deber RB. Delivering health services: public, not-for-profit, or private? In: Commission on the Future of Health Care in Canada. 2002.
8. Sturgess GL. Diversity and contestability in the public service economy. North Sydney: nswbusinesschamber; 2012.
9. Bloom G, Standing H, Lucas H, Bhuiya A, Oladepo O, Peters DH. Making health markets work better for poor people: the case of informal providers. Health Policy Plan. 2011;26:i45-52.
10. Tschumi P, Hagan H. A synthesis of the making markets work for the poor (M4P) approach. London and Berne: UK Department for International Development (DFID) and Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (SDC); 2008.
11. Ghosh BN. Rich doctors and poor patients: market failure and health care systems in developing countries. J Contemp Asia. 2008;38(2):259-76.
12. Pawson R. Evidence-based policy: the promise of "Realist Synthesis". Evaluation. 2002;8(3):340-58.
13. Hayami Y, Godo Y. Development economics. 3rd ed. Oxford: Oxford Univerisity Press; 2005.
14. Gubb J, Meller-Herbert O. Markets in health care: the theory behind the policy. London: CIVITAS: Institute for the Study of Civil Society; 2009.
15. Mwachofi A, Al-Assaf AF. Health care market deviations from the ideal market. SQU Med J. 2011;11(3):328-37.
16. Glouberman S, Zimmerman B. Complicated and complex systems? What would sucessful reform of medicare look like? Commission on the Future of Health Care in Canada, vol. Discussion Paper 8. 2002.
17. Gunderson LH, Holling CS. Panarchy: understanding transformations in human and natural systems. Washington, D.C. USA: Island University Press; 2002.
18. Cilliers P. Complexity and postmodernism. Understanding complex systems. London: Routledge; 1998.
19. Holland J. Emergence: from chaos to order. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1998.
20. Pawson R. The science of evaluation: a realist manifesto. London: Sage; 2013.
21. Brown K, Ryan N, Parker R. New modes of service delivery in the public sector: commercialising government services. Int J Public Sect Manage. 2000;13(2):206-21.
22. McDonald C, Marston G. Patterns of governance: the curious case of non-profit community services in Australia. Soc Pol Admin. 2002;36(4):376.
23. Pawson R. Evidence-based policy: a realist perspective. London: Sage; 2006.
24. Pawson R, Greenhalgh T, Harvey G, Walshe K. Realist synthesis: an introduction. In: Working Paper Series, vol. RMP Methods Paper 2/2004. Manchester: ESRC Research Methods Programme, University of Manchester; 2004.
25. Pawson R, Greenhalgh T, Harvey G, Walshe K. Realist review - a new method of systematic review designed for complex policy interventions. J Health Serv Res Pol. 2005;10 Suppl 1:21-34.
26. Robert E, Ridde V, Marchal B, Fournier P. Protocol: a realist review of user fee exemption policies for health services in Africa. BMJ Open. 2012;2:e000706.
27. Best A, Greenhalgh T, Lewis S, Saul JE, Carroll S, Blitz J. Large-system transformation in health care: a realist review. Milbank Q. 2012;90(3):421-56.
28. Wong G, Greenhalgh T, Pawson R. Internet-based medical education: a realist review of what works, for whom and in what circumstances. BMC Med Educ. 2010;10(1):12.
29. Jagosh J, Pluye P, Macaulay A, Salsberg J, Henderson J, Sirett E, et al. Assessing the outcomes of participatory research: protocol for identifying, selecting, appraising and synthesizing the literature for realist review. Implementation Sci. 2011;6(1):24.
30. Wong G, Greenhalgh T, Westhorp G, Pawson R. Development of methodological guidance, publication standards and training materials for realist and meta-narrative reviews: the RAMESES (Realist And Meta-narrative Evidence Syntheses - Evolving Standards) project. Health Serv Deliv Res. 2014;2(30): doi:10.3310/hsdr02300.
31. Pawson R, Tilley N. Realistic evaluation. London: Sage Publications; 1997.
32. Wong G, Greenhalgh T, Westhorp G, Buckingham J, Pawson R. RAMESES publication standards: realist syntheses. BMC Med. 2013;11(1):21.
33. Mertens DM. Transformative research and evaluation. New York: The Guilford Press; 2010.
34. Mark MM, Julnes GT. The mechanisms and outcomes of evaluation influence. Evaluation. 2004;10(1):35-57.
35. Brennan N, Bryce M, Pearson M, Wong G, Cooper C, Archer J. Understanding how appraisal of doctors produces its effects: a realist review protocol. BMJ Open. 2014;4(6):e005466. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2014-005466.
36. Pluye P, Gagnon M-P, Griffiths F, Johnson-Lafleur J. A scoring system for appraising mixed methods research, and concomitantly appraising qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods primary studies in Mixed Studies Reviews. Int J Nurs Stud. 2009;46(4):529-46.
37. Pace R, Pluye P, Bartlett G, Macaulay AC. Testing the reliability and efficiency of the pilot Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) for systematic mixed studies review. Int J Nurs Stud;49(1):47-53.
38. Rohrbasser A, Mickan S, Harris J. Exploring why quality circles work in primary health care: a realist review protocol. Syst Rev. 2013;2(1):110.
39. Saul JE, Willis CD, Bitz J, Best A. A time-responsive tool for informing policy making: rapid realist review. Implementation Science. 2013;8(103): doi:10.1186/1748-5908-8-103.