Cargando…

Research and implementation interactions in a social accountability study: utilizing guidance for conducting process evaluations of complex interventions

BACKGROUND: In recent years, researchers and evaluators have made efforts to identify and use appropriate and innovative research designs that account for the complexity in studying social accountability. The relationship between the researchers and those implementing the activities and how this imp...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Cordero, Joanna Paula, Mochache, Vernon, Boydell, Victoria, Addah, Mary Awelana, McMullen, Heather, Monyo, Alice, Mrema, Sigilbert, Nai, Dela, Shamba, Donat, Steyn, Petrus S.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9632007/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36329485
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12939-022-01718-0
_version_ 1784823939205169152
author Cordero, Joanna Paula
Mochache, Vernon
Boydell, Victoria
Addah, Mary Awelana
McMullen, Heather
Monyo, Alice
Mrema, Sigilbert
Nai, Dela
Shamba, Donat
Steyn, Petrus S.
author_facet Cordero, Joanna Paula
Mochache, Vernon
Boydell, Victoria
Addah, Mary Awelana
McMullen, Heather
Monyo, Alice
Mrema, Sigilbert
Nai, Dela
Shamba, Donat
Steyn, Petrus S.
author_sort Cordero, Joanna Paula
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: In recent years, researchers and evaluators have made efforts to identify and use appropriate and innovative research designs that account for the complexity in studying social accountability. The relationship between the researchers and those implementing the activities and how this impacts the study have received little attention. In this paper, we reflect on how we managed the relationship between researchers and implementers using the United Kingdom Medical Research Council (MRC) guidance on process evaluation of a complex intervention. MAIN BODY: The MRC guidance focuses on three areas of interaction between researchers and stakeholders involved in developing and delivering the intervention: (i) working with program developers and implementers; (ii) communication of emerging findings between researchers/evaluators and implementers; and (iii) overlapping roles of the intervention and research/evaluation. We summarize how the recommendations for each of the three areas were operationalized in the Community and Provider driven Social Accountability Intervention (CaPSAI) Project and provide reflections based on experience. We co-developed various tools, including standard operating procedures, contact lists, and manuals. Activities such as training sessions, regular calls, and meetings were also conducted to enable a good working relationship between the different partners. CONCLUSIONS: Studying social accountability requires the collaboration of multiple partners that need to be planned to ensure a good working relationship while safeguarding both the research and intervention implementation. The MRC guidance is a useful tool for making interaction issues explicit and establishing procedures. Planning procedures for dealing with research and implementers’ interactions could be more comprehensive and better adapted to social accountability interventions if both researchers and implementers are involved. There is a need for social accountability research to include clear statements explaining the nature and types of relationships between researchers and implementers involved in the intervention. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12939-022-01718-0.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9632007
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-96320072022-11-04 Research and implementation interactions in a social accountability study: utilizing guidance for conducting process evaluations of complex interventions Cordero, Joanna Paula Mochache, Vernon Boydell, Victoria Addah, Mary Awelana McMullen, Heather Monyo, Alice Mrema, Sigilbert Nai, Dela Shamba, Donat Steyn, Petrus S. Int J Equity Health Commentary BACKGROUND: In recent years, researchers and evaluators have made efforts to identify and use appropriate and innovative research designs that account for the complexity in studying social accountability. The relationship between the researchers and those implementing the activities and how this impacts the study have received little attention. In this paper, we reflect on how we managed the relationship between researchers and implementers using the United Kingdom Medical Research Council (MRC) guidance on process evaluation of a complex intervention. MAIN BODY: The MRC guidance focuses on three areas of interaction between researchers and stakeholders involved in developing and delivering the intervention: (i) working with program developers and implementers; (ii) communication of emerging findings between researchers/evaluators and implementers; and (iii) overlapping roles of the intervention and research/evaluation. We summarize how the recommendations for each of the three areas were operationalized in the Community and Provider driven Social Accountability Intervention (CaPSAI) Project and provide reflections based on experience. We co-developed various tools, including standard operating procedures, contact lists, and manuals. Activities such as training sessions, regular calls, and meetings were also conducted to enable a good working relationship between the different partners. CONCLUSIONS: Studying social accountability requires the collaboration of multiple partners that need to be planned to ensure a good working relationship while safeguarding both the research and intervention implementation. The MRC guidance is a useful tool for making interaction issues explicit and establishing procedures. Planning procedures for dealing with research and implementers’ interactions could be more comprehensive and better adapted to social accountability interventions if both researchers and implementers are involved. There is a need for social accountability research to include clear statements explaining the nature and types of relationships between researchers and implementers involved in the intervention. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12939-022-01718-0. BioMed Central 2022-11-03 /pmc/articles/PMC9632007/ /pubmed/36329485 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12939-022-01718-0 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Commentary
Cordero, Joanna Paula
Mochache, Vernon
Boydell, Victoria
Addah, Mary Awelana
McMullen, Heather
Monyo, Alice
Mrema, Sigilbert
Nai, Dela
Shamba, Donat
Steyn, Petrus S.
Research and implementation interactions in a social accountability study: utilizing guidance for conducting process evaluations of complex interventions
title Research and implementation interactions in a social accountability study: utilizing guidance for conducting process evaluations of complex interventions
title_full Research and implementation interactions in a social accountability study: utilizing guidance for conducting process evaluations of complex interventions
title_fullStr Research and implementation interactions in a social accountability study: utilizing guidance for conducting process evaluations of complex interventions
title_full_unstemmed Research and implementation interactions in a social accountability study: utilizing guidance for conducting process evaluations of complex interventions
title_short Research and implementation interactions in a social accountability study: utilizing guidance for conducting process evaluations of complex interventions
title_sort research and implementation interactions in a social accountability study: utilizing guidance for conducting process evaluations of complex interventions
topic Commentary
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9632007/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36329485
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12939-022-01718-0
work_keys_str_mv AT corderojoannapaula researchandimplementationinteractionsinasocialaccountabilitystudyutilizingguidanceforconductingprocessevaluationsofcomplexinterventions
AT mochachevernon researchandimplementationinteractionsinasocialaccountabilitystudyutilizingguidanceforconductingprocessevaluationsofcomplexinterventions
AT boydellvictoria researchandimplementationinteractionsinasocialaccountabilitystudyutilizingguidanceforconductingprocessevaluationsofcomplexinterventions
AT addahmaryawelana researchandimplementationinteractionsinasocialaccountabilitystudyutilizingguidanceforconductingprocessevaluationsofcomplexinterventions
AT mcmullenheather researchandimplementationinteractionsinasocialaccountabilitystudyutilizingguidanceforconductingprocessevaluationsofcomplexinterventions
AT monyoalice researchandimplementationinteractionsinasocialaccountabilitystudyutilizingguidanceforconductingprocessevaluationsofcomplexinterventions
AT mremasigilbert researchandimplementationinteractionsinasocialaccountabilitystudyutilizingguidanceforconductingprocessevaluationsofcomplexinterventions
AT naidela researchandimplementationinteractionsinasocialaccountabilitystudyutilizingguidanceforconductingprocessevaluationsofcomplexinterventions
AT shambadonat researchandimplementationinteractionsinasocialaccountabilitystudyutilizingguidanceforconductingprocessevaluationsofcomplexinterventions
AT steynpetruss researchandimplementationinteractionsinasocialaccountabilitystudyutilizingguidanceforconductingprocessevaluationsofcomplexinterventions