Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
BMC Health Services Research
Published in: BMC Health Services Research 1/2005

Open Access 01-12-2005 | Debate

From theory to practice: improving the impact of health services research

Authors: Kevin Brazil, Elizabeth Ozer, Michelle M Cloutier, Robert Levine, Daniel Stryer

Published in: BMC Health Services Research | Issue 1/2005

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

While significant strides have been made in health research, the incorporation of research evidence into healthcare decision-making has been marginal. The purpose of this paper is to provide an overview of how the utility of health services research can be improved through the use of theory. Integrating theory into health services research can improve research methodology and encourage stronger collaboration with decision-makers.

Discussion

Recognizing the importance of theory calls for new expectations in the practice of health services research. These include: the formation of interdisciplinary research teams; broadening the training for those who will practice health services research; and supportive organizational conditions that promote collaboration between researchers and decision makers. Further, funding bodies can provide a significant role in guiding and supporting the use of theory in the practice of health services research.

Summary

Institutions and researchers should incorporate the use of theory if health services research is to fulfill its potential for improving the delivery of health care.
Literature
1.
Lenfant C: Clinical research to clinical practice – lost in translation. N Engl J Med. 2003, 349: 868-874. 10.1056/NEJMsa035507.CrossRefPubMed
2.
Oxman A, Thompson M, Davis D, Haynes B: No magic bullets: A systematic review of 102 trials of interventions to improve professional practice. CMAJ. 1995, 153: 1423-1431.PubMedPubMedCentral
3.
Cabana M, Rand C, Powe N, Wu M, Abbound P, Rubin H: Why don't physicians follow clinical practice guidelines? A framework for improvement. JAMA. 1999, 282: 1458-1465. 10.1001/jama.282.15.1458.CrossRefPubMed
4.
Mittman B, Tonesk X, Jacobson P: Implementing clinical practice guidelines: Social influence strategies and practitioner behavior change. QRB Qual Rev Bull. 1992, 18: 413-422.PubMed
5.
Lomas J: Retailing research: Increasing the role of evidence in clinical services for childbirth. Milbank Q. 1993, 71: 439-1373.CrossRefPubMed
6.
Funk S, Champagne M, Tornquist E, Wiese R: Administrator's views on barriers to research utilization. ANR. 1995, 8: 44-49. 10.1016/S0897-1897(95)80331-9.PubMed
7.
Lomas J: Improving research dissemination and uptake in the health sector: Beyond the sound of one hand clapping. Health Policy Commentary Series. 1997, Hamilton, Centre for Health Economics and Policy Analysis, McMaster University, . No C9701
8.
Grimshaw J, Eccles M, Walker A: Changing physicians' behavior: What works and thoughts on getting more things to work. J Contin Educ Health Prof. 2002, 22: 237-243.CrossRefPubMed
9.
Foy R, Eccles M, Grimshaw J: Why does primary care need more implementation research?. Fam Prac. 2001, 18: 353-355. 10.1093/fampra/18.4.353.CrossRef
10.
Chen H: Theory-driven evaluations. 1990, Newbury Park: Sage Publications
11.
Weiss C: Evaluation methods for studying programs and policies. 1998, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall
12.
Sidani S, Braden C: Evaluating nursing interventions: A theory-driven approach. 1998, Newbury Park: Sage Publications
13.
Lipsey M: Theory as method: Small theories of treatments. In: Research methodology: Strengthening causal interpretations of nonexperimental data: Conference proceedings. Edited by: Sechrest L, Perrin E, Bunker J. 1990, Washington: Agency for Health Care Policy and Research, 33-51.
14.
DeFriese G: Theory as method. In: Research methodology: Strengthening causal interpretations of nonexperimental data: Conference proceedings. Edited by: Sechrest L, Perrin E, Bunker J. 1990, Washington: Agency for Health Care Policy and Research, 53-55.
15.
Chen H, Rossi P: Evaluating with sense: The theory-driven approach. Eval Rev. 1983, 7: 283-302.CrossRef
16.
Kerlinger F: Foundations of Behavioral Research. 1964, New York, Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc
17.
Creswell J: Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches. 2003, Thousand Oaks, Sage Publications
18.
Sheldon T: It ain't what you do but the way that you do it. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2001, 6: 3-5. 10.1258/1355819011927125.CrossRefPubMed
19.
Ferlie E, Shortell S: Improving the quality of health care in the United Kingdom and the United States: A framework for change. Milbank Q. 2001, 79: 281-315. 10.1111/1468-0009.00206.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
20.
Wholey J: Assessing the Feasibility and Likely Usefulness of Evaluation. In: Handbook of practical program evaluation. Edited by: Wholey J, Hatry H, Newcomer K. 1996, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 15-39.
21.
Cole G: Advancing the development and application of theory-based evaluation in the practice of public health. Am J Eval. 1999, 20: 453-470. 10.1016/S1098-2140(99)00033-8.CrossRef
22.
Medical Research Council: A Framework for Development and Evaluation of RCTs for Complex Interventions to Improve Health. MRC Health Services and Public Health Board discussion document. 2000
23.
Gitlin L, Lyons K, Kolodner E: A model to build collaborative research or educational teams of health professionals in gerontology. Educ Gerontol. 1994, 2015-34.
24.
Kitson A, Ahmed L, Harvey G, Seers K, Thompson D: From research to practice: One organizational model for promoting research-based practice. J Adv Nurs. 1996, 23: 430-440.CrossRefPubMed
25.
Israel B, Schulz A, Parker E, Becker A: Review of community-based research: Assessing partnership to improve public health. Annu Rev Public Health. 1998, 19: 173-202. 10.1146/annurev.publhealth.19.1.173.CrossRefPubMed
26.
Roussos S, Fawcett S: A review of collaborative partnerships as a strategy for improving community health. Annu Rev Public Health. 2000, 21: 369-402. 10.1146/annurev.publhealth.21.1.369.CrossRefPubMed
27.
Levine M, Perkins D: Principles of Community Psychology: Perspectives and Applications. 1987, New York: Oxford University Press
28.
Weiss C: Which links in which theories shall we evaluate?. In. Program theory in evaluation: Challenges and opportunities. New Directions for Program Evaluation, no 87. Edited by: Rogers P, Hacsi T, Petrosino A, Huebner T. 2000, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 35-45.
29.
Huebner T: Theory-based evaluation: Gaining a shared understanding between school staff and evaluators. In. Program theory in evaluation: Challenges and opportunities. New Directions for Program Evaluation, no 87. Edited by: Rogers P, Hacsi T, Petrosino A, Huebner T. 2000, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 79-89.
30.
Lipsey M, Pollard J: Driving toward theory in program evaluation: More models to choose from. Eval Program Plann. 1989, 12: 317-328. 10.1016/0149-7189(89)90048-7.CrossRef
31.
Patton M: Utilization-Focused Evaluation. 1996, Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage, 3
32.
Pawson R, Tiley N: Realistic Evaluation. 1995, London: Sage
33.
34.
Pew Health Professions Commission: Critical Cchallenges: Revitalizing the Health Professions for the Twenty-first century. 1995, San Francisco: UCSF: The Center for Health Professions
35.
MacLeod S, McCullough H: Social science education as a component of medical training. Soc Sci Med. 1994, 39: 1367-1373. 10.1016/0277-9536(94)90367-0.CrossRefPubMed
36.
37.
Farquhar C, Stryer D, Slutsky J: Translating research into practice: The future ahead. Int J Qual Health Care. 2002, 14: 233-249.CrossRefPubMed
38.
Baker E, Homan S, Schonoff R, Kreuter M: Principles of practice for academic/practice/community research partnerships. Am J Prev Med. 1999, 703: 74-85.
39.
LeGris J, Weir R, Browne G, Gafni A, Stewart L, Easton SL: Developing a model of collaborative research: The complexities and challenges of implementation. Int J Nurs Stud. 2000, 37: 65-79. 10.1016/S0020-7489(99)00036-X.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
From theory to practice: improving the impact of health services research
Authors
Kevin Brazil
Elizabeth Ozer
Michelle M Cloutier
Robert Levine
Daniel Stryer
Publication date
01-12-2005
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Health Services Research / Issue 1/2005
Electronic ISSN: 1472-6963
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-5-1

Other articles of this Issue 1/2005

BMC Health Services Research 1/2005 Go to the issue

Research article

What do hospital decision-makers in Ontario, Canada, have to say about the fairness of priority setting in their institutions?

Research article

Translating research into policy and practice in developing countries: a case study of magnesium sulphate for pre-eclampsia

Research article

Unhappy doctors? A longitudinal study of life and job satisfaction among Norwegian doctors 1994 – 2002

Research article

General practitioners with a special interest in respiratory medicine: national survey of UK primary care organisations

Research article

Health insurance, neighborhood income, and emergency department usage by Utah children 1996–1998

Research article

A primary care, multi-disciplinary disease management program for opioid-treated patients with chronic non-cancer pain and a high burden of psychiatric comorbidity