Title |
Developing a checklist for research proposals to help describe health service interventions in UK research programmes: a mixed methods study
|
---|---|
Published in |
Health Research Policy and Systems, March 2014
|
DOI | 10.1186/1478-4505-12-12 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Hannah Dorling, Donna White, Sheila Turner, Kevin Campbell, Tara Lamont |
Abstract |
One of the most common reasons for rejecting research proposals in the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Services and Delivery Research (HS&DR) Programme is the failure to adequately specify the intervention or context in research proposals. Examples of failed research proposals include projects to assess integrated care models, use of generic caseworkers, or new specialist nurse services. These are all important service developments which need evaluation, but the lack of clarity about the intervention and context prevented these research proposals from obtaining funding. The purpose of the research presented herein was to develop a checklist, with key service intervention and contextual features, for use by applicants to the NIHR HS&DR Programme to potentially enhance the quality of research proposals. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
United Kingdom | 17 | 41% |
Spain | 2 | 5% |
United States | 1 | 2% |
Timor-Leste | 1 | 2% |
Canada | 1 | 2% |
Australia | 1 | 2% |
Ireland | 1 | 2% |
Unknown | 17 | 41% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Members of the public | 21 | 51% |
Scientists | 10 | 24% |
Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 6 | 15% |
Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 4 | 10% |
Mendeley readers
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
United Kingdom | 4 | 4% |
Indonesia | 1 | 1% |
New Zealand | 1 | 1% |
India | 1 | 1% |
Unknown | 89 | 93% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Researcher | 23 | 24% |
Student > Ph. D. Student | 14 | 15% |
Student > Master | 10 | 10% |
Other | 8 | 8% |
Librarian | 5 | 5% |
Other | 24 | 25% |
Unknown | 12 | 13% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Medicine and Dentistry | 20 | 21% |
Social Sciences | 14 | 15% |
Nursing and Health Professions | 13 | 14% |
Psychology | 7 | 7% |
Computer Science | 4 | 4% |
Other | 21 | 22% |
Unknown | 17 | 18% |