Implementing health research through academic and clinical partnerships: a realistic evaluation of the Collaborations for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care (CLAHRC)

Jo Rycroft-Malone, Joyce E Wilkinson, Christopher R Burton, Gavin Andrews, Steven Ariss, Richard Baker, Sue Dopson, Ian Graham, Gill Harvey, Graham Martin, Brendan McCormack, Sophie Staniszewska, Carl Thompson

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    66 Citations (Scopus)

    Abstract

    BackgroundThe English National Health Service has made a major investment in nine partnerships between higher education institutions and local health services called Collaborations for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care (CLAHRC). They have been funded to increase capacity and capability to produce and implement research through sustained interactions between academics and health services. CLAHRCs provide a natural 'test bed' for exploring questions about research implementation within a partnership model of delivery. This protocol describes an externally funded evaluation that focuses on implementation mechanisms and processes within three CLAHRCs. It seeks to uncover what works, for whom, how, and in what circumstances. Design and methodsThis study is a longitudinal three-phase, multi-method realistic evaluation, which deliberately aims to explore the boundaries around knowledge use in context. The evaluation funder wishes to see it conducted for the process of learning, not for judging performance. The study is underpinned by a conceptual framework that combines the Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services and Knowledge to Action frameworks to reflect the complexities of implementation. Three participating CLARHCS will provide in-depth comparative case studies of research implementation using multiple data collection methods including interviews, observation, documents, and publicly available data to test and refine hypotheses over four rounds of data collection. We will test the wider applicability of emerging findings with a wider community using an interpretative forum. DiscussionThe idea that collaboration between academics and services might lead to more applicable health research that is actually used in practice is theoretically and intuitively appealing; however the evidence for it is limited. Our evaluation is designed to capture the processes and impacts of collaborative approaches for implementing research, and therefore should contribute to the evidence base about an increasingly popular (e.g., Mode two, integrated knowledge transfer, interactive research), but poorly understood approach to knowledge translation. Additionally we hope to develop approaches for evaluating implementation processes and impacts particularly with respect to integrated stakeholder involvement.
    LanguageEnglish
    JournalImplementation Science
    Volume6
    Issue number74
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 2011

    Fingerprint

    research implementation
    leadership
    health service
    health
    evaluation
    data collection method
    knowledge transfer
    evidence
    stakeholder
    interaction
    interview
    knowledge
    learning
    community
    performance
    education

    Cite this

    Rycroft-Malone, Jo ; Wilkinson, Joyce E ; Burton, Christopher R ; Andrews, Gavin ; Ariss, Steven ; Baker, Richard ; Dopson, Sue ; Graham, Ian ; Harvey, Gill ; Martin, Graham ; McCormack, Brendan ; Staniszewska, Sophie ; Thompson, Carl. / Implementing health research through academic and clinical partnerships: a realistic evaluation of the Collaborations for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care (CLAHRC). In: Implementation Science. 2011 ; Vol. 6, No. 74.
    @article{e4fd0d69627741d3b1947e080bf8cb70,
    title = "Implementing health research through academic and clinical partnerships: a realistic evaluation of the Collaborations for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care (CLAHRC)",
    abstract = "BackgroundThe English National Health Service has made a major investment in nine partnerships between higher education institutions and local health services called Collaborations for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care (CLAHRC). They have been funded to increase capacity and capability to produce and implement research through sustained interactions between academics and health services. CLAHRCs provide a natural 'test bed' for exploring questions about research implementation within a partnership model of delivery. This protocol describes an externally funded evaluation that focuses on implementation mechanisms and processes within three CLAHRCs. It seeks to uncover what works, for whom, how, and in what circumstances. Design and methodsThis study is a longitudinal three-phase, multi-method realistic evaluation, which deliberately aims to explore the boundaries around knowledge use in context. The evaluation funder wishes to see it conducted for the process of learning, not for judging performance. The study is underpinned by a conceptual framework that combines the Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services and Knowledge to Action frameworks to reflect the complexities of implementation. Three participating CLARHCS will provide in-depth comparative case studies of research implementation using multiple data collection methods including interviews, observation, documents, and publicly available data to test and refine hypotheses over four rounds of data collection. We will test the wider applicability of emerging findings with a wider community using an interpretative forum. DiscussionThe idea that collaboration between academics and services might lead to more applicable health research that is actually used in practice is theoretically and intuitively appealing; however the evidence for it is limited. Our evaluation is designed to capture the processes and impacts of collaborative approaches for implementing research, and therefore should contribute to the evidence base about an increasingly popular (e.g., Mode two, integrated knowledge transfer, interactive research), but poorly understood approach to knowledge translation. Additionally we hope to develop approaches for evaluating implementation processes and impacts particularly with respect to integrated stakeholder involvement.",
    author = "Jo Rycroft-Malone and Wilkinson, {Joyce E} and Burton, {Christopher R} and Gavin Andrews and Steven Ariss and Richard Baker and Sue Dopson and Ian Graham and Gill Harvey and Graham Martin and Brendan McCormack and Sophie Staniszewska and Carl Thompson",
    year = "2011",
    doi = "10.1186/1748-5908-6-74",
    language = "English",
    volume = "6",
    journal = "Implementation Science",
    issn = "1748-5908",
    publisher = "BioMed Central",
    number = "74",

    }

    Rycroft-Malone, J, Wilkinson, JE, Burton, CR, Andrews, G, Ariss, S, Baker, R, Dopson, S, Graham, I, Harvey, G, Martin, G, McCormack, B, Staniszewska, S & Thompson, C 2011, 'Implementing health research through academic and clinical partnerships: a realistic evaluation of the Collaborations for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care (CLAHRC)', Implementation Science, vol. 6, no. 74. https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-6-74

    Implementing health research through academic and clinical partnerships: a realistic evaluation of the Collaborations for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care (CLAHRC). / Rycroft-Malone, Jo; Wilkinson, Joyce E; Burton, Christopher R; Andrews, Gavin; Ariss, Steven; Baker, Richard; Dopson, Sue; Graham, Ian; Harvey, Gill; Martin, Graham; McCormack, Brendan; Staniszewska, Sophie; Thompson, Carl.

    In: Implementation Science, Vol. 6, No. 74, 2011.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - Implementing health research through academic and clinical partnerships: a realistic evaluation of the Collaborations for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care (CLAHRC)

    AU - Rycroft-Malone, Jo

    AU - Wilkinson, Joyce E

    AU - Burton, Christopher R

    AU - Andrews, Gavin

    AU - Ariss, Steven

    AU - Baker, Richard

    AU - Dopson, Sue

    AU - Graham, Ian

    AU - Harvey, Gill

    AU - Martin, Graham

    AU - McCormack, Brendan

    AU - Staniszewska, Sophie

    AU - Thompson, Carl

    PY - 2011

    Y1 - 2011

    N2 - BackgroundThe English National Health Service has made a major investment in nine partnerships between higher education institutions and local health services called Collaborations for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care (CLAHRC). They have been funded to increase capacity and capability to produce and implement research through sustained interactions between academics and health services. CLAHRCs provide a natural 'test bed' for exploring questions about research implementation within a partnership model of delivery. This protocol describes an externally funded evaluation that focuses on implementation mechanisms and processes within three CLAHRCs. It seeks to uncover what works, for whom, how, and in what circumstances. Design and methodsThis study is a longitudinal three-phase, multi-method realistic evaluation, which deliberately aims to explore the boundaries around knowledge use in context. The evaluation funder wishes to see it conducted for the process of learning, not for judging performance. The study is underpinned by a conceptual framework that combines the Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services and Knowledge to Action frameworks to reflect the complexities of implementation. Three participating CLARHCS will provide in-depth comparative case studies of research implementation using multiple data collection methods including interviews, observation, documents, and publicly available data to test and refine hypotheses over four rounds of data collection. We will test the wider applicability of emerging findings with a wider community using an interpretative forum. DiscussionThe idea that collaboration between academics and services might lead to more applicable health research that is actually used in practice is theoretically and intuitively appealing; however the evidence for it is limited. Our evaluation is designed to capture the processes and impacts of collaborative approaches for implementing research, and therefore should contribute to the evidence base about an increasingly popular (e.g., Mode two, integrated knowledge transfer, interactive research), but poorly understood approach to knowledge translation. Additionally we hope to develop approaches for evaluating implementation processes and impacts particularly with respect to integrated stakeholder involvement.

    AB - BackgroundThe English National Health Service has made a major investment in nine partnerships between higher education institutions and local health services called Collaborations for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care (CLAHRC). They have been funded to increase capacity and capability to produce and implement research through sustained interactions between academics and health services. CLAHRCs provide a natural 'test bed' for exploring questions about research implementation within a partnership model of delivery. This protocol describes an externally funded evaluation that focuses on implementation mechanisms and processes within three CLAHRCs. It seeks to uncover what works, for whom, how, and in what circumstances. Design and methodsThis study is a longitudinal three-phase, multi-method realistic evaluation, which deliberately aims to explore the boundaries around knowledge use in context. The evaluation funder wishes to see it conducted for the process of learning, not for judging performance. The study is underpinned by a conceptual framework that combines the Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services and Knowledge to Action frameworks to reflect the complexities of implementation. Three participating CLARHCS will provide in-depth comparative case studies of research implementation using multiple data collection methods including interviews, observation, documents, and publicly available data to test and refine hypotheses over four rounds of data collection. We will test the wider applicability of emerging findings with a wider community using an interpretative forum. DiscussionThe idea that collaboration between academics and services might lead to more applicable health research that is actually used in practice is theoretically and intuitively appealing; however the evidence for it is limited. Our evaluation is designed to capture the processes and impacts of collaborative approaches for implementing research, and therefore should contribute to the evidence base about an increasingly popular (e.g., Mode two, integrated knowledge transfer, interactive research), but poorly understood approach to knowledge translation. Additionally we hope to develop approaches for evaluating implementation processes and impacts particularly with respect to integrated stakeholder involvement.

    U2 - 10.1186/1748-5908-6-74

    DO - 10.1186/1748-5908-6-74

    M3 - Article

    VL - 6

    JO - Implementation Science

    T2 - Implementation Science

    JF - Implementation Science

    SN - 1748-5908

    IS - 74

    ER -