Skip to main content
Top
Published in: BMC Medical Research Methodology 1/2014

Open Access 01-12-2014 | Research article

Using logic model methods in systematic review synthesis: describing complex pathways in referral management interventions

Authors: Susan K Baxter, Lindsay Blank, Helen Buckley Woods, Nick Payne, Melanie Rimmer, Elizabeth Goyder

Published in: BMC Medical Research Methodology | Issue 1/2014

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

There is increasing interest in innovative methods to carry out systematic reviews of complex interventions. Theory-based approaches, such as logic models, have been suggested as a means of providing additional insights beyond that obtained via conventional review methods.

Methods

This paper reports the use of an innovative method which combines systematic review processes with logic model techniques to synthesise a broad range of literature. The potential value of the model produced was explored with stakeholders.

Results

The review identified 295 papers that met the inclusion criteria. The papers consisted of 141 intervention studies and 154 non-intervention quantitative and qualitative articles. A logic model was systematically built from these studies. The model outlines interventions, short term outcomes, moderating and mediating factors and long term demand management outcomes and impacts. Interventions were grouped into typologies of practitioner education, process change, system change, and patient intervention. Short-term outcomes identified that may result from these interventions were changed physician or patient knowledge, beliefs or attitudes and also interventions related to changed doctor-patient interaction. A range of factors which may influence whether these outcomes lead to long term change were detailed. Demand management outcomes and intended impacts included content of referral, rate of referral, and doctor or patient satisfaction.

Conclusions

The logic model details evidence and assumptions underpinning the complex pathway from interventions to demand management impact. The method offers a useful addition to systematic review methodologies.

Trial registration number

PROSPERO registration number: CRD42013004037.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Faulkner A, Mills N, Bainton D, Baxter K, Kinnersley P, Peters TJ, Sharp D: A systematic review of the effect of primary care-based service innovations on quality and patterns of referral to specialist secondary care. Brit J Gen Pract. 2003, 53: 878-884. Faulkner A, Mills N, Bainton D, Baxter K, Kinnersley P, Peters TJ, Sharp D: A systematic review of the effect of primary care-based service innovations on quality and patterns of referral to specialist secondary care. Brit J Gen Pract. 2003, 53: 878-884.
2.
go back to reference Weiss CH: Nothing as practical as a good theory: exploring theory-based evaluation for comprehensive community initiatives for children and families. New Approaches to Evaluating Community Initiatives. Edited by: Connell JP, Kubisch AC, Schoor LB, Weiss CH. 1995, Washington DC: Aspen Institute, 65-69. Weiss CH: Nothing as practical as a good theory: exploring theory-based evaluation for comprehensive community initiatives for children and families. New Approaches to Evaluating Community Initiatives. Edited by: Connell JP, Kubisch AC, Schoor LB, Weiss CH. 1995, Washington DC: Aspen Institute, 65-69.
4.
go back to reference Miles A: Complexity in medicine and healthcare: people and systems, theory and practice. J Eval Clin Pract. 2009, 15: 409-410. 10.1111/j.1365-2753.2009.01204.x.CrossRefPubMed Miles A: Complexity in medicine and healthcare: people and systems, theory and practice. J Eval Clin Pract. 2009, 15: 409-410. 10.1111/j.1365-2753.2009.01204.x.CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Pawson R: Evidence-based policy: the promise of realist synthesis. Evaluation. 2002, 8: 340-358. 10.1177/135638902401462448.CrossRef Pawson R: Evidence-based policy: the promise of realist synthesis. Evaluation. 2002, 8: 340-358. 10.1177/135638902401462448.CrossRef
6.
go back to reference Rogers PJ: Theory-based evaluation: reflections ten years on. N Dir Eval. 2007, 114: 63-81.CrossRef Rogers PJ: Theory-based evaluation: reflections ten years on. N Dir Eval. 2007, 114: 63-81.CrossRef
7.
go back to reference Anderson LM, Petticrew M, Rehfuess E, Armstong R, Ueffing E, Baker P, Francis D, Tugwell D: Using logic models to capture complexity in systematic reviews. Res Synth Meth. 2011, 2: 33-42. 10.1002/jrsm.32.CrossRef Anderson LM, Petticrew M, Rehfuess E, Armstong R, Ueffing E, Baker P, Francis D, Tugwell D: Using logic models to capture complexity in systematic reviews. Res Synth Meth. 2011, 2: 33-42. 10.1002/jrsm.32.CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Rogers PJ: Using programme theory to evaluate complicated and complex aspects of interventions. Evaluation. 2008, 14: 29-48. 10.1177/1356389007084674.CrossRef Rogers PJ: Using programme theory to evaluate complicated and complex aspects of interventions. Evaluation. 2008, 14: 29-48. 10.1177/1356389007084674.CrossRef
9.
go back to reference Wallace J, Nwosu B, Clarke M: Barriers to the uptake of evidence from systematic reviews and meta-analyses: a systematic review of decision makers’ perceptions. BMJ Open. 2012, 2: e001220-doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2012-001220CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Wallace J, Nwosu B, Clarke M: Barriers to the uptake of evidence from systematic reviews and meta-analyses: a systematic review of decision makers’ perceptions. BMJ Open. 2012, 2: e001220-doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2012-001220CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
10.
go back to reference Baxter S, Baxter S, Killoran A, Kelly M, Goyder E: Synthesizing diverse evidence: the use of primary qualitative data analysis methods and logic models in public health reviews. Pub Health. 2010, 124: 99-106. 10.1016/j.puhe.2010.01.002.CrossRef Baxter S, Baxter S, Killoran A, Kelly M, Goyder E: Synthesizing diverse evidence: the use of primary qualitative data analysis methods and logic models in public health reviews. Pub Health. 2010, 124: 99-106. 10.1016/j.puhe.2010.01.002.CrossRef
11.
go back to reference Allmark P, Baxter S, Goyder E, Guillaume L, Crofton-Martin G: Assessing the health benefits of advice services: using research evidence and logic model methods to explore complex pathways. Health Soc Care Comm. 2013, 21: 59-68. 10.1111/j.1365-2524.2012.01087.x.CrossRef Allmark P, Baxter S, Goyder E, Guillaume L, Crofton-Martin G: Assessing the health benefits of advice services: using research evidence and logic model methods to explore complex pathways. Health Soc Care Comm. 2013, 21: 59-68. 10.1111/j.1365-2524.2012.01087.x.CrossRef
12.
go back to reference EPPI-Centre: Methods for Conducting Systematic Reviews. 2010, London: EPPI-Centre, Social Science Research Unit, Institute of Education, University of London EPPI-Centre: Methods for Conducting Systematic Reviews. 2010, London: EPPI-Centre, Social Science Research Unit, Institute of Education, University of London
13.
go back to reference Grant MJ, Brettle A, Long AF: Poster Presentation. Beyond the Basics of Systematic Reviews. Developing a Review Question: A Spiral Approach to Literature Searching. 2000, Oxford Grant MJ, Brettle A, Long AF: Poster Presentation. Beyond the Basics of Systematic Reviews. Developing a Review Question: A Spiral Approach to Literature Searching. 2000, Oxford
14.
go back to reference Schardt C, Adams MB, Owens T, Keitz S, Fontelo P: Utilization of the PICO framework to improve searching PubMed for clinical questions. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2007, 7: doi:10.1186/1472-6947-7-16 Schardt C, Adams MB, Owens T, Keitz S, Fontelo P: Utilization of the PICO framework to improve searching PubMed for clinical questions. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2007, 7: doi:10.1186/1472-6947-7-16
15.
go back to reference The Cochrane Collaboration: Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions, version 5.1.0, 2011. [Handbook.cochrane.org] The Cochrane Collaboration: Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions, version 5.1.0, 2011. [Handbook.cochrane.org]
17.
go back to reference Hoogendoom WE, Van Poppel MN, Bongers PM, Koes BW, Bouter LM: Physical load during work and leisure time as risk factors for back pain. Scand J Work Environ Health. 1999, 25: 387-403. 10.5271/sjweh.451.CrossRef Hoogendoom WE, Van Poppel MN, Bongers PM, Koes BW, Bouter LM: Physical load during work and leisure time as risk factors for back pain. Scand J Work Environ Health. 1999, 25: 387-403. 10.5271/sjweh.451.CrossRef
18.
go back to reference Thomas A, Harden A: Methods for the thematic synthesis of qualitative research in systematic reviews. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2008, 8: doi:10.1186/1471-2288-8-45 Thomas A, Harden A: Methods for the thematic synthesis of qualitative research in systematic reviews. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2008, 8: doi:10.1186/1471-2288-8-45
19.
go back to reference Weiss CH: Theory-based evaluation: past present and future. N Dir Eval. 1997, 76: 68-81. Weiss CH: Theory-based evaluation: past present and future. N Dir Eval. 1997, 76: 68-81.
20.
go back to reference Blamey A, Mackenzie M: Theories of change and realistic evaluation: peas in a pod or apples and oranges?. Evaluation. 2007, 13: 439-455. 10.1177/1356389007082129.CrossRef Blamey A, Mackenzie M: Theories of change and realistic evaluation: peas in a pod or apples and oranges?. Evaluation. 2007, 13: 439-455. 10.1177/1356389007082129.CrossRef
21.
go back to reference Dixon-Woods M, Fitzpatrick R, Roberts K: Including qualitative research in systematic reviews: opportunities and problems. J Eval Clin Pract. 2001, 2: 125-133.CrossRef Dixon-Woods M, Fitzpatrick R, Roberts K: Including qualitative research in systematic reviews: opportunities and problems. J Eval Clin Pract. 2001, 2: 125-133.CrossRef
22.
go back to reference Gale NK, Heath G, Cameron E, Rashid S, Redwood S: Using the framework method for the analysis of qualitative data in multi-disciplinary health research. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2013, 13: doi:10.1186/1471-2288-13-117 Gale NK, Heath G, Cameron E, Rashid S, Redwood S: Using the framework method for the analysis of qualitative data in multi-disciplinary health research. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2013, 13: doi:10.1186/1471-2288-13-117
23.
go back to reference Ritchie J, Lewis J: Qualitative Research Practice: A Guide for Social Science Students and Researchers. 2003, London: Sage Ritchie J, Lewis J: Qualitative Research Practice: A Guide for Social Science Students and Researchers. 2003, London: Sage
24.
go back to reference McDonald KM, Schultz EM, Chang C: Evaluating the state of quality-improvement science through evidence synthesis: insights from the Closing the Quality Gap Series. Perm J. 2013, 17: 52-61. 10.7812/TPP/13-010.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral McDonald KM, Schultz EM, Chang C: Evaluating the state of quality-improvement science through evidence synthesis: insights from the Closing the Quality Gap Series. Perm J. 2013, 17: 52-61. 10.7812/TPP/13-010.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
25.
go back to reference Vogel I: Review of the Use of Theory of Change in International Development: Review Report. 2012, London: Department of International Development Vogel I: Review of the Use of Theory of Change in International Development: Review Report. 2012, London: Department of International Development
Metadata
Title
Using logic model methods in systematic review synthesis: describing complex pathways in referral management interventions
Authors
Susan K Baxter
Lindsay Blank
Helen Buckley Woods
Nick Payne
Melanie Rimmer
Elizabeth Goyder
Publication date
01-12-2014
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Medical Research Methodology / Issue 1/2014
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2288
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-14-62

Other articles of this Issue 1/2014

BMC Medical Research Methodology 1/2014 Go to the issue