Towards an agenda for implementation science in global health: there is nothing more practical than good (social science) theories

Affiliations

¹ Health Policy Unit, Department of Public Health, Institute of Tropical Medicine, Antwerp, Belgium.
² Health Services Organisation Unit, Department of Public Health, Institute of Tropical Medicine, Antwerp, Belgium.

Comment

Sara Van Belle et al. BMJ Glob Health. 2017.

. 2017 Mar 24;2(2):e000181.

doi: 10.1136/bmjgh-2016-000181. eCollection 2017.

¹ Health Policy Unit, Department of Public Health, Institute of Tropical Medicine, Antwerp, Belgium.
² Health Services Organisation Unit, Department of Public Health, Institute of Tropical Medicine, Antwerp, Belgium.

No abstract available

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: None declared.

Need for more and better implementation science in global health.
Ridde V. Ridde V. BMJ Glob Health. 2016 Aug 8;1(2):e000115. doi: 10.1136/bmjgh-2016-000115. eCollection 2016. BMJ Glob Health. 2016. PMID: 28588947 Free PMC article. No abstract available.

1. Ridde V. Need for more and better implementation science in global health. BMJ Global Health 2016;1:e000115. - PMC - PubMed
1. Ostrom E. Polycentric systems for coping with collective action and global environmental change. Global Environ Change 2010;2:550–7.
1. Merton RK. On sociological theories of the middle range. In: Calhoun C, Gerteis J, Moody J et al., eds. Classical sociological theory. 2nd edn Oxford: Blackwell, 1949:448–58.
1. Weiss C. Nothing as practical as good theory: exploring theory-based evaluation for comprehensive community initiatives. In: Connell J, Kubisch A, Schorr L et al., eds. New approaches to evaluating comprehensive community initiatives: concepts, methods and contexts. Washington: (DC: ): The Aspen Institute, 1995:65–92.
1. Pawson R, Tilley N. Realistic evaluation. London: Sage, 1997.