Cargando…

What do we want to get out of this? a critical interpretive synthesis of the value of process evaluations, with a practical planning framework

BACKGROUND: Process evaluations aim to understand how complex interventions bring about outcomes by examining intervention mechanisms, implementation, and context. While much attention has been paid to the methodology of process evaluations in health research, the value of process evaluations has re...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: French, Caroline, Dowrick, Anna, Fudge, Nina, Pinnock, Hilary, Taylor, Stephanie J. C.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9700891/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36434520
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12874-022-01767-7
_version_ 1784839414403301376
author French, Caroline
Dowrick, Anna
Fudge, Nina
Pinnock, Hilary
Taylor, Stephanie J. C.
author_facet French, Caroline
Dowrick, Anna
Fudge, Nina
Pinnock, Hilary
Taylor, Stephanie J. C.
author_sort French, Caroline
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Process evaluations aim to understand how complex interventions bring about outcomes by examining intervention mechanisms, implementation, and context. While much attention has been paid to the methodology of process evaluations in health research, the value of process evaluations has received less critical attention. We aimed to unpack how value is conceptualised in process evaluations by identifying and critically analysing 1) how process evaluations may create value and 2) what kind of value they may create. METHODS: We systematically searched for and identified published literature on process evaluation, including guidance, opinion pieces, primary research, reviews, and discussion of methodological and practical issues. We conducted a critical interpretive synthesis and developed a practical planning framework. RESULTS: We identified and included 147 literature items. From these we determined three ways in which process evaluations may create value or negative consequences: 1) through the socio-technical processes of ‘doing’ the process evaluation, 2) through the features/qualities of process evaluation knowledge, and 3) through using process evaluation knowledge. We identified 15 value themes. We also found that value varies according to the characteristics of individual process evaluations, and is subjective and context dependent. CONCLUSION: The concept of value in process evaluations is complex and multi-faceted. Stakeholders in different contexts may have very different expectations of process evaluations and the value that can and should be obtained from them. We propose a planning framework to support an open and transparent process to plan and create value from process evaluations and negotiate trade-offs. This will support the development of joint solutions and, ultimately, generate more value from process evaluations to all. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12874-022-01767-7.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9700891
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-97008912022-11-27 What do we want to get out of this? a critical interpretive synthesis of the value of process evaluations, with a practical planning framework French, Caroline Dowrick, Anna Fudge, Nina Pinnock, Hilary Taylor, Stephanie J. C. BMC Med Res Methodol Research BACKGROUND: Process evaluations aim to understand how complex interventions bring about outcomes by examining intervention mechanisms, implementation, and context. While much attention has been paid to the methodology of process evaluations in health research, the value of process evaluations has received less critical attention. We aimed to unpack how value is conceptualised in process evaluations by identifying and critically analysing 1) how process evaluations may create value and 2) what kind of value they may create. METHODS: We systematically searched for and identified published literature on process evaluation, including guidance, opinion pieces, primary research, reviews, and discussion of methodological and practical issues. We conducted a critical interpretive synthesis and developed a practical planning framework. RESULTS: We identified and included 147 literature items. From these we determined three ways in which process evaluations may create value or negative consequences: 1) through the socio-technical processes of ‘doing’ the process evaluation, 2) through the features/qualities of process evaluation knowledge, and 3) through using process evaluation knowledge. We identified 15 value themes. We also found that value varies according to the characteristics of individual process evaluations, and is subjective and context dependent. CONCLUSION: The concept of value in process evaluations is complex and multi-faceted. Stakeholders in different contexts may have very different expectations of process evaluations and the value that can and should be obtained from them. We propose a planning framework to support an open and transparent process to plan and create value from process evaluations and negotiate trade-offs. This will support the development of joint solutions and, ultimately, generate more value from process evaluations to all. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12874-022-01767-7. BioMed Central 2022-11-25 /pmc/articles/PMC9700891/ /pubmed/36434520 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12874-022-01767-7 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 Research
French, Caroline
Dowrick, Anna
Fudge, Nina
Pinnock, Hilary
Taylor, Stephanie J. C.
What do we want to get out of this? a critical interpretive synthesis of the value of process evaluations, with a practical planning framework
title What do we want to get out of this? a critical interpretive synthesis of the value of process evaluations, with a practical planning framework
title_full What do we want to get out of this? a critical interpretive synthesis of the value of process evaluations, with a practical planning framework
title_fullStr What do we want to get out of this? a critical interpretive synthesis of the value of process evaluations, with a practical planning framework
title_full_unstemmed What do we want to get out of this? a critical interpretive synthesis of the value of process evaluations, with a practical planning framework
title_short What do we want to get out of this? a critical interpretive synthesis of the value of process evaluations, with a practical planning framework
title_sort what do we want to get out of this? a critical interpretive synthesis of the value of process evaluations, with a practical planning framework
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9700891/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36434520
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12874-022-01767-7
work_keys_str_mv AT frenchcaroline whatdowewanttogetoutofthisacriticalinterpretivesynthesisofthevalueofprocessevaluationswithapracticalplanningframework
AT dowrickanna whatdowewanttogetoutofthisacriticalinterpretivesynthesisofthevalueofprocessevaluationswithapracticalplanningframework
AT fudgenina whatdowewanttogetoutofthisacriticalinterpretivesynthesisofthevalueofprocessevaluationswithapracticalplanningframework
AT pinnockhilary whatdowewanttogetoutofthisacriticalinterpretivesynthesisofthevalueofprocessevaluationswithapracticalplanningframework
AT taylorstephaniejc whatdowewanttogetoutofthisacriticalinterpretivesynthesisofthevalueofprocessevaluationswithapracticalplanningframework