You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
Mendeley readers
| Title |
Developing the protocol for the evaluation of the health foundation's 'engaging with quality initiative' – an emergent approach
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Implementation Science, October 2008
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1748-5908-3-46 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Bryony Soper, Martin Buxton, Stephen Hanney, Wija Oortwijn, Amanda Scoggins, Nick Steel, Tom Ling |
| Abstract |
In 2004 a UK charity, The Health Foundation, established the 'Engaging with Quality Initiative' to explore and evaluate the benefits of engaging clinicians in quality improvement in healthcare. Eight projects run by professional bodies or specialist societies were commissioned in various areas of acute care. A developmental approach to the initiative was adopted, accompanied by a two level evaluation: eight project self-evaluations and a related external evaluation. This paper describes how the protocol for the external evaluation was developed. The challenges faced included large variation between and within the projects (in approach, scope and context, and in understanding of quality improvement), the need to support the project teams in their self-evaluations while retaining a necessary objectivity, and the difficulty of evaluating the moving target created by the developmental approach adopted in the initiative. An initial period to develop the evaluation protocol proved invaluable in helping us to explore these issues. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 25 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Brazil | 2 | 8% |
| Spain | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 22 | 88% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 24% |
| Other | 4 | 16% |
| Researcher | 4 | 16% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 8% |
| Lecturer > Senior Lecturer | 2 | 8% |
| Other | 5 | 20% |
| Unknown | 2 | 8% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 9 | 36% |
| Social Sciences | 8 | 32% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 1 | 4% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 4% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 4 | 16% |