Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Systematic Reviews 1/2015

Open Access 01-12-2015 | Protocol

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

Authors: Jo Durham, Amara Bains

Published in: Systematic Reviews | Issue 1/2015

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

In most developed nations, there has been a shift from public services to a marketisation of public goods and services - representing a significant reform process aiming to transform the way in which community-based human services, such as health, are delivered and consumed. For services, this means developing the capacity to adapt and innovate in response to changing circumstances to achieve quality. The availability of rigorous research to demonstrate whether a market approach and contestability, in particular, is a coherent reform process is largely absent. Contestability operates on the premise that better procurement processes allow more providers to enter the market and compete for contracts. This is expected to create stimulus for greater efficiencies, innovation and improved service delivery to consumers. There is limited understanding, however, about how community-based providers morph and re-configure in response to the opportunities posed by contestability. This study focuses on the effect of a contestability policy on the community-managed mental health sector.

Methods/design

A realist review will be undertaken to understand how and why the introduction of contestability into a previously incontestable market influences the ways in which community-based mental health providers respond to contestability. The review will investigate those circumstances that shape organisational response and generate outcomes through activating mechanisms. An early scoping has helped to formulate the initial program theory. A realist synthesis will be undertaken to identify relevant journal articles and grey literature. Data will be extracted in relation to the emerging contextual factors, mechanisms and outcomes and their configurations. The analysis will seek patterns and regularities in these configurations across the extracted data and will focus on addressing our theory-based questions.

Discussion

Increasingly, community-based mental health markets are moving to contestability models. Rigorous research is needed to understand how such markets work and in what contexts. The knowledge gained from this study in community-based mental health will provide valuable lessons in how contestability works, in what circumstances and who benefits when. The results of the proposed research will be useful to policy-makers and may be applicable in other contexts beyond the community-based mental health sector.

Systematic review registration

Literature
1.
go back to reference Davidson B. Contestability in human services markets. J Aust Polit Econ. 2011;68:213–39. Davidson B. Contestability in human services markets. J Aust Polit Econ. 2011;68:213–39.
2.
go back to reference Grace C, Fletcher K, Martin SJ, Bottrill I. Making and managing markets: contestability, competition and improvement in local government. London: Audit Commission; 2007. Grace C, Fletcher K, Martin SJ, Bottrill I. Making and managing markets: contestability, competition and improvement in local government. London: Audit Commission; 2007.
3.
go back to reference 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.PubMedPubMedCentral 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.PubMedPubMedCentral
4.
go back to reference Esposito L, Perez FM. Neoliberalism and the commodification of mental health. Humanit Soc. 2014;38(4):414–42. Esposito L, Perez FM. Neoliberalism and the commodification of mental health. Humanit Soc. 2014;38(4):414–42.
5.
go back to reference Timmermans S, Almeling R. Objectification, standardization, and commodification in health care: a conceptual readjustment. Soc Sci Med. 2009;69(1):21–7.PubMed Timmermans S, Almeling R. Objectification, standardization, and commodification in health care: a conceptual readjustment. Soc Sci Med. 2009;69(1):21–7.PubMed
6.
go back to reference Walsh A. The commodification of the public service of water: a normative perspective. Public Reason. 2011;3(2):90–106. Walsh A. The commodification of the public service of water: a normative perspective. Public Reason. 2011;3(2):90–106.
7.
go back to reference Deber RB. Delivering health services: public, not-for-profit, or private? In: Commission on the Future of Health Care in Canada. 2002. Deber RB. Delivering health services: public, not-for-profit, or private? In: Commission on the Future of Health Care in Canada. 2002.
8.
go back to reference Sturgess GL. Diversity and contestability in the public service economy. North Sydney: nswbusinesschamber; 2012. Sturgess GL. Diversity and contestability in the public service economy. North Sydney: nswbusinesschamber; 2012.
9.
go back to reference 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.PubMed 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.PubMed
10.
go back to reference 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. 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.
go back to reference Ghosh BN. Rich doctors and poor patients: market failure and health care systems in developing countries. J Contemp Asia. 2008;38(2):259–76. 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.
go back to reference Pawson R. Evidence-based policy: the promise of “Realist Synthesis”. Evaluation. 2002;8(3):340–58. Pawson R. Evidence-based policy: the promise of “Realist Synthesis”. Evaluation. 2002;8(3):340–58.
13.
go back to reference Hayami Y, Godo Y. Development economics. 3rd ed. Oxford: Oxford Univerisity Press; 2005. Hayami Y, Godo Y. Development economics. 3rd ed. Oxford: Oxford Univerisity Press; 2005.
14.
go back to reference Gubb J, Meller-Herbert O. Markets in health care: the theory behind the policy. London: CIVITAS: Institute for the Study of Civil Society; 2009. 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.
go back to reference Mwachofi A, Al-Assaf AF. Health care market deviations from the ideal market. SQU Med J. 2011;11(3):328–37. Mwachofi A, Al-Assaf AF. Health care market deviations from the ideal market. SQU Med J. 2011;11(3):328–37.
16.
go back to reference 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. 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.
go back to reference Gunderson LH, Holling CS. Panarchy: understanding transformations in human and natural systems. Washington, D.C. USA: Island University Press; 2002. Gunderson LH, Holling CS. Panarchy: understanding transformations in human and natural systems. Washington, D.C. USA: Island University Press; 2002.
18.
go back to reference Cilliers P. Complexity and postmodernism. Understanding complex systems. London: Routledge; 1998. Cilliers P. Complexity and postmodernism. Understanding complex systems. London: Routledge; 1998.
19.
go back to reference Holland J. Emergence: from chaos to order. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1998. Holland J. Emergence: from chaos to order. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1998.
20.
go back to reference Pawson R. The science of evaluation: a realist manifesto. London: Sage; 2013. Pawson R. The science of evaluation: a realist manifesto. London: Sage; 2013.
21.
go back to reference 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. 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.
go back to reference McDonald C, Marston G. Patterns of governance: the curious case of non-profit community services in Australia. Soc Pol Admin. 2002;36(4):376. 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.
go back to reference Pawson R. Evidence-based policy: a realist perspective. London: Sage; 2006. Pawson R. Evidence-based policy: a realist perspective. London: Sage; 2006.
24.
go back to reference 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. 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.
go back to reference 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. 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.
go back to reference 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.PubMedPubMedCentral 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.PubMedPubMedCentral
27.
go back to reference 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.PubMedPubMedCentral 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.PubMedPubMedCentral
28.
go back to reference 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.PubMedPubMedCentral 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.PubMedPubMedCentral
29.
go back to reference 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. 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.
go back to reference 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. 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.
go back to reference Pawson R, Tilley N. Realistic evaluation. London: Sage Publications; 1997. Pawson R, Tilley N. Realistic evaluation. London: Sage Publications; 1997.
32.
go back to reference Wong G, Greenhalgh T, Westhorp G, Buckingham J, Pawson R. RAMESES publication standards: realist syntheses. BMC Med. 2013;11(1):21.PubMedPubMedCentral Wong G, Greenhalgh T, Westhorp G, Buckingham J, Pawson R. RAMESES publication standards: realist syntheses. BMC Med. 2013;11(1):21.PubMedPubMedCentral
33.
go back to reference Mertens DM. Transformative research and evaluation. New York: The Guilford Press; 2010. Mertens DM. Transformative research and evaluation. New York: The Guilford Press; 2010.
34.
go back to reference Mark MM, Julnes GT. The mechanisms and outcomes of evaluation influence. Evaluation. 2004;10(1):35–57. Mark MM, Julnes GT. The mechanisms and outcomes of evaluation influence. Evaluation. 2004;10(1):35–57.
35.
go back to reference 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.PubMedPubMedCentral 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.PubMedPubMedCentral
36.
go back to reference 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.PubMed 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.PubMed
37.
go back to reference 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. 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.
go back to reference 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.PubMedPubMedCentral 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.PubMedPubMedCentral
39.
go back to reference 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. 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.
Metadata
Title
Research protocol: a realist synthesis of contestability in community-based mental health markets
Authors
Jo Durham
Amara Bains
Publication date
01-12-2015
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Systematic Reviews / Issue 1/2015
Electronic ISSN: 2046-4053
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-015-0025-3

Other articles of this Issue 1/2015

Systematic Reviews 1/2015 Go to the issue