Approaches to enabling rapid evaluation of innovations in health and social care: a scoping review of evidence from high-income countries

Author:

Norman GillORCID,Mason ThomasORCID,Dumville Jo CORCID,Bower PeterORCID,Wilson PaulORCID,Cullum NickyORCID

Abstract

ObjectiveThe COVID-19 pandemic increased the demand for rapid evaluation of innovation in health and social care. Assessment of rapid methodologies is lacking although challenges in ensuring rigour and effective use of resources are known. We mapped reports of rapid evaluations of health and social care innovations, categorised different approaches to rapid evaluation, explored comparative benefits of rapid evaluation, and identified knowledge gaps.DesignScoping review.Data sourcesMEDLINE, EMBASE and Health Management Information Consortium (HMIC) databases were searched through 13 September 2022.Eligibility criteria for selecting studiesWe included publications reporting primary research or methods for rapid evaluation of interventions or services in health and social care in high-income countries.Data extraction and synthesisTwo reviewers developed and piloted a data extraction form. One reviewer extracted data, a second reviewer checked 10% of the studies; disagreements and uncertainty were resolved through consensus. We used narrative synthesis to map different approaches to conducting rapid evaluation.ResultsWe identified 16 759 records and included 162 which met inclusion criteria.We identified four main approaches for rapid evaluation: (1) Using methodology designed specifically for rapid evaluation; (2) Increasing rapidity by doing less or using less time-intensive methodology; (3) Using alternative technologies and/or data to increase speed of existing evaluation method; (4) Adapting part of non-rapid evaluation.The COVID-19 pandemic resulted in an increase in publications and some limited changes in identified methods. We found little research comparing rapid and non-rapid evaluation.ConclusionsWe found a lack of clarity about what ‘rapid evaluation’ means but identified some useful preliminary categories. There is a need for clarity and consistency about what constitutes rapid evaluation; consistent terminology in reporting evaluations as rapid; development of specific methodologies for making evaluation more rapid; and assessment of advantages and disadvantages of rapid methodology in terms of rigour, cost and impact.

Funder

National Institute for Health Research

Publisher

BMJ

Subject

General Medicine

Reference243 articles.

1. Rapid qualitative research methods during complex health emergencies: a systematic review of the literature;Johnson;Soc Sci Med,2017

2. Can we re-imagine research so it is timely, relevant and responsive? Comment on "Experience of health leadership in partnering with University-based researchers in Canada: a call to 'Re-Imagine' research";Vindrola-Padros;Int J Health Policy Manag,2021

3. Rapid techniques in qualitative research: a critical review of the literature;Vindrola-Padros;Qual Health Res,2020

4. A scoping review of rapid review methods;Tricco;BMC Med,2015

5. An international survey and modified Delphi approach revealed numerous rapid review methods;Tricco;J Clin Epidemiol,2016

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