Measuring the impact of health research

Author:

Lavis John1,Ross Suzanne2,McLeod Christopher3,Gildiner Alina4

Affiliation:

1. Centre for Health Economics and Policy Analysis; Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics; Department of Political Science, McMaster University, and Institute for Work & Health, Toronto, Ontario, Canada

2. Centre for Health Economics and Policy Analysis, and Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada

3. Centre for Health Economics and Policy Analysis, and Institute for Work & Health, Toronto, Ontario, Canada

4. Centre for Health Economics and Policy Analysis; Department of Political Science, and Health Studies Programme, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada

Abstract

Measuring the decision-making impact of applied health research should constitute a core function for many research funders and research organizations. Different target audiences warrant different measures of impact. The target audiences for applied health research include the general public, patients (and their families), clinicians, managers (in hospitals, regional health authorities and health plans), research and development officers (in biotechnology firms) and public policy-makers (i.e. elected officials, political staff and civil servants). Making meaningful assessments within peer groups that fund or produce similar types of research knowledge for similar types of target audiences makes more sense than a one-size-fits-all approach to impact assessment. User-pull and interactive measures of impact (i.e. measures of cultural shifts that would facilitate the on-going use of research knowledge to inform decision-making) can supplement more traditional producer-push measures that assess researchers' active efforts to inform decision-making and the outcome of these efforts. Cultural shifts may include the creation of a research-attuned culture among decision-makers and a decision-relevant culture among researchers. Moving beyond whether research was used to examine how it was used is also important. Research knowledge may be used in instrumental, conceptual or symbolic ways. These actions, coupled with on-going refinements to the proposed assessment tool as research evidence evolves, would take us a long way towards assessment and accountability in the health sector.

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health,Health Policy

Cited by 169 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3