Symbiotic relationships of quality of life, health services research and other health research

1994 ◽  
Vol 3 (5) ◽  
pp. 365-371 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. M. Andersen ◽  
P. L. Davidson ◽  
P. A. Ganz
2010 ◽  
Vol 51 (4) ◽  
pp. 1886 ◽  
Author(s):  
Valerie Tadic ◽  
Esther Louise Hamblion ◽  
Sarah Keeley ◽  
Phillippa Cumberland ◽  
Gillian Lewando Hundt ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Reema Harrison ◽  
Benjamin Jones ◽  
Peter Gardner ◽  
Rebecca Lawton

Abstract Background In the context of the volume of mixed- and multi-methods studies in health services research, the present study sought to develop an appraisal tool to determine the methodological and reporting quality of such studies when included in systematic reviews. Evaluative evidence regarding the design and use of our existing Quality Assessment Tool for Studies with Diverse Designs (QATSDD) was synthesised to enhance and refine it for application across health services research. Methods Secondary data were collected through a literature review of all articles identified using Google Scholar that had cited the QATSDD tool from its inception in 2012 to December 2019. First authors of all papers that had cited the QATSDD (n=197) were also invited to provide further evaluative data via a qualitative online survey. Evaluative findings from the survey and literature review were synthesised narratively and these data used to identify areas requiring refinement. The refined tool was subject to inter-rater reliability, face and content validity analyses. Results Key limitations of the QATSDD tool identified related to a lack of clarity regarding scope of use of the tool and in the ease of application of criteria beyond experimental psychological research. The Quality Appraisal for Diverse Studies (QuADS) tool emerged as a revised tool to address the limitations of the QATSDD. The QuADS tool demonstrated substantial inter-rater reliability (k=0.66), face and content validity for application in systematic reviews with mixed, or multi-methods health services research. Conclusion Our findings highlight the perceived value of appraisal tools to determine the methodological and reporting quality of studies in reviews that include heterogeneous studies. The QuADS tool demonstrates strong reliability and ease of use for application to multi or mixed-methods health services research.


BMJ ◽  
2019 ◽  
pp. k4439 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rob Cook ◽  
Tara Lamont ◽  
Rachel Taft

The studyA patient-centred intervention to improve the management of multimorbidity in general practice: the 3D RCT. Salisbury C, Man M-S, Chaplin K, et al.Published in Health Serv Deliv Res 2019;7(5).  This study was funded by the National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Programme (project number 12/130/15).To read the full NIHR Signal, go to: https://discover.dc.nihr.ac.uk/content/signal-000658/patient-centred-care-for-multimorbidity-improves-patient-experience-but-quality-of-life-is-unchanged


2015 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 18-24
Author(s):  
Monica M. Matthieu ◽  
Nicole Hart ◽  
Bridgette Larkin-Perkins ◽  
Jeffery A. Pitcock ◽  
Kathy L. Henderson ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Zaheer-Ud-Din Babar

Pharmacy practice research (PPR) is a specialty field within the wider area of health services research and it focuses on studies of how and why people access pharmacy services. This stream of research is also referred to as more universally recognized term such as health services research in pharmacy. The health services research in pharmacy has increased manifold; however, the impact of this research is not visible at the global level. The editorial explains several issues on quality and quantity of evidence produced including how evidence produced could contribute to improve quality of care and patients’ health outcomes. It also narrates examples from the UK and Australia showing how health services research in pharmacy has made an impact on healthcare service delivery. The editorial argues that building an encyclopaedia in health services research in pharmacy is vital to enhance the visibility and impact of this research.


2008 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 92-98 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alicia O'cathain ◽  
Elizabeth Murphy ◽  
Jon Nicholl

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document