Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2016 Apr 5:11:48.
doi: 10.1186/s13012-016-0412-8.

Study protocol: DEcisions in health Care to Introduce or Diffuse innovations using Evidence (DECIDE)

Affiliations

Study protocol: DEcisions in health Care to Introduce or Diffuse innovations using Evidence (DECIDE)

Simon Turner et al. Implement Sci. .

Abstract

Background: A range of evidence informs healthcare decision-making, from formal research findings to 'soft intelligence' or local data, as well as practical experience or tacit knowledge. However, cultural and organisational factors often prevent the translation of such evidence into practice. Using a multi-level framework, this project will analyse how interactions between the evidence available and processes at the micro (individual/group) and meso (organisational/system) levels influence decisions to introduce or diffuse innovations in acute and primary care within the National Health Service in the UK.

Methods/design: This study will use a mixed methods design, combining qualitative and quantitative methods, and involves four interdependent work streams: (1) rapid evidence synthesis of relevant literature with stakeholder feedback; (2) in-depth case studies of 'real-world' decision-making in acute and primary care; (3) a national survey and discrete choice experiment; and (4) development of guidance for decision-makers and evaluators to support the use of evidence in decision-making.

Discussion: This study will enhance the understanding of decision-makers' use of diverse forms of evidence. The findings will provide insights into how and why some evidence does inform decisions to introduce healthcare innovations, and why barriers persist in other cases. It will also quantify decision-makers' preferences, including the 'tipping point' of evidence needed to shift stakeholders' views. Practical guidance will be shared with healthcare decision-makers and evaluators on uses of evidence to enable the introduction and diffusion of innovation.

Keywords: Cancer; Decision-making; Discrete choice experiment; Ethnography; Evidence; Innovation; Ophthalmology; Qualitative; Service improvement; Stroke.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Dobbins M, Jack S, Thomas H, Kothari A. Public health decision-makers’ informational needs and preferences for receiving research evidence. Worldviews Evid Based Nurs. 2007;4:156–63. doi: 10.1111/j.1741-6787.2007.00089.x. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Martin GP, McKee L, Dixon-Woods M. Beyond metrics? Utilizing ‘soft intelligence’ for healthcare quality and safety. Soc Sci Med. 2015;142:19–26. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2015.07.027. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Gabbay J, Le May A. Practice-based evidence for healthcare: clinical mindlines. Abingdon: Routledge; 2011.
    1. Cooksey D. A review of UK health research funding. London: HMSO; 2006. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Fulop N, Robert G. Context for successful improvement: evidence review. London: The Health Foundation; 2015.

LinkOut - more resources