scholarly journals Terrie Fox Wetle Award (2021): Advancing multidisciplinary health services science: Developments in a Dementia-Focused Program of Research

2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 385-386
Author(s):  
Andrea Gilmore Bykovskyi
Keyword(s):  
Health Services Research ◽  
Health Services ◽  
Health Care Research ◽  
Outcome Evaluation ◽  
Advanced Dementia ◽  
Services Research ◽  
Aging Research ◽  
Award Recipient ◽  
Observational Measures ◽  
Services Science

Abstract The Terrie Fox Wetle Rising Star Award in health Services and Aging Research is an award named in honor of Fox Wetle, PhD, who is internationally recognized for her contributions to aging, public health, and health care research. The award recognizes health services researchers in early or middle-career phases who have made significant contributions that embody the value of multidisciplinary health services science and are likely to have a sustained, high impact on practice and research. This aware lecture will be presented by the 2021 Award Recipient, Andrea Gilmore-Bykovskyi, PhD, RN, and will highlight emergent findings and foci in her dementia-focused health services research program. In particular, the award lecture will discuss progress in investigating social and behavioral communication patterns among individuals with moderate to advanced dementia; and the role of temporally situated observational measures and inclusion of persons with dementia and their caregivers in this line of research. The lecture will conclude with a discussion of next steps for this area of investigation surrounding assessment of episodes of lucidity in advanced dementia; and considerations for strengthening progress in outcome evaluation among persons living with dementia through multidisciplinary and community-informed health services research.

scholarly journals You can't get there from here: building bridges across research and practice communities

2005 ◽  
Vol 29 (1) ◽  
pp. 4
Author(s):  
Judith Dwyer ◽  
Sandra G Leggat
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Health Services Research ◽  
Health Services ◽  
Research Evaluation ◽  
South Australia ◽  
Health Care Research ◽  
Economic Evaluations ◽  
Purchasing Decisions ◽  
Services Research ◽  
Broad Policy

IN THIS ISSUE, Ried and Fuller (page 6) describe an approach taken by the Primary Health Care Research Evaluation and Development (PHCRED) program in South Australia to support novice authors. This paper reminds us of the acute need to support developing researchers, given the low levels of support for health services research in Australia.1 But where is the accompanying paper that focuses our attention on developing the research insight of managers, leaders, policymakers and practitioners? There has been much talk of the critical need to link the disparate research and decision-making communities, but little action. Consistently we find evidence that evidence is not available or is not used. In a study of economic evaluations only 27% were thought to have influenced either health care decision makers or policy.2 Review of purchasing decisions by NHS districts found that only 42% had evidence to support the decision made.3 In Australia there is a dearth of health services research focusing on major system or broad policy issues.1

scholarly journals Geriatric oncology health services research: Cancer and Aging Research Group infrastructure core

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 350-354 ◽  
Author(s):  
Melisa L. Wong ◽  
Stuart M. Lichtman ◽  
Gary R. Morrow ◽  
John Simmons ◽  
Tomma Hargraves ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Services Research ◽  
Health Services ◽  
Research Group ◽  
Geriatric Oncology ◽  
Services Research ◽  
Aging Research

The alias dilemma: Implications for health services research

2005 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ruth Elwood Martin ◽  
Greg Hislop ◽  
Veronika Moravan ◽  
Garry Grams ◽  
Betty Calam
Keyword(s):  
Health Services Research ◽  
Health Services ◽  
Services Research

11. Who is in charge? Introducing criteria to evaluate health human resource (HHR) policy documents

2007 ◽  
Vol 30 (4) ◽  
pp. 33
Author(s):  
D. Rosenfield ◽  
C. Abrahams ◽  
S. Verma
Keyword(s):  
Health Services Research ◽  
Health Services ◽  
Human Resource ◽  
Grey Literature ◽  
Implementation Strategies ◽  
Policy Formulation ◽  
Health Human Resource ◽  
Services Research ◽  
Policy Documents ◽  
Care Technology

The maldistribution of and lack of access to health professionals continues to be a major issue for policymakers at all levels of government. Additionally, the basis by which Health Human Resource (HHR) policy is determined is unclear. Publications found in independent reports, peer-reviewed journals and most importantly, grey literature, can significantly influence or inform major policy decisions for “hot button” HHR issues (1) . We propose a framework that can be used to classify, rank and evaluate HHR policy/planning documents. Our framework creates six major criteria that are used to evaluate policy documents. These criteria are: 1) literature review, 2) source of primary information, 3) nature of recommendations, 4) implementation strategies, 5) credibility of authors and 6) credibility of publisher. Within each category, a score from zero to three (for criteria 1-4) or zero to two (criteria 5-6) is assigned, depending on the caliber of the document. Summing the scores from each section yields a document’s overall score. The intent of this measure is two-fold. Firstly, we want to create a tool that can be widely utilized by policymakers to help inform their decisions. Secondly, it can be used as a springboard to stimulate discussion and debate around HHR planning and policy formulation. National Information Center on Health Services Research and Health Care Technology. (NICHSR) Health Services Research and Health Policy Grey Literature Project: Summary Report. 2006. http://www.nlm.nih.gov/ nichsr/greylitreport_06.html. Accessed February 20, 2007.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document