↓ Skip to main content

Integration of research and practice to improve public health and healthcare delivery through a collaborative 'Health Integration Team' model - a qualitative investigation

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, June 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
115 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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.
Title
Integration of research and practice to improve public health and healthcare delivery through a collaborative 'Health Integration Team' model - a qualitative investigation
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, June 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12913-016-1445-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sabi Redwood, Emer Brangan, Verity Leach, Jeremy Horwood, Jenny L. Donovan

Abstract

Economic considerations and the requirement to ensure the quality, safety and integration of research with health and social care provision have given rise to local developments of collaborative organisational forms and strategies to span the translational gaps. One such model - the Health Integration Team (HIT) model in Bristol in the United Kingdom (UK) - brings together National Health Service (NHS) organisations, universities, local authorities, patients and the public to facilitate the systematic application of evidence to promote integration across healthcare pathways. This study aimed to (1) provide empirical evidence documenting the evolution of the model; (2) to identify the social and organisational processes and theory of change underlying healthcare knowledge and practice; and (3) elucidate the key aspects of the HIT model for future development and translation to other localities. Contemporaneous documents were analysed, using procedures associated with Framework Analysis to produce summarised data for descriptive accounts. In-depth interviews were undertaken with key informants and analysed thematically. Comparative methods were applied to further analyse the two data sets. One hundred forty documents were analysed and 10 interviews conducted with individuals in leadership positions in the universities, NHS commissioning and provider organisations involved in the design and implementation of the HIT model. Data coalesced around four overarching themes: 'Whole system' engagement, requiring the active recruitment of all those who have a stake in the area of practice being considered, and 'collaboration' to enable coproduction were identified as 'process' themes. System-level integration and innovation were identified as potential 'outcomes' with far-reaching impacts on population health and service delivery. The HIT model emerged as a particular response to the perceived need for integration of research and practice to improve public health and healthcare delivery at a time of considerable organisational turmoil and financial constraints. The concept gained momentum and will likely be of interest to those involved in setting up similar arrangements, and researchers in the social and implementation sciences with an interest in their evaluation.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 115 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Unknown 114 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 21 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 14%
Researcher 13 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 11 10%
Student > Bachelor 8 7%
Other 19 17%
Unknown 27 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 20 17%
Nursing and Health Professions 17 15%
Medicine and Dentistry 11 10%
Business, Management and Accounting 8 7%
Psychology 8 7%
Other 20 17%
Unknown 31 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 16 May 2017.
All research outputs
#14,267,420
of 22,879,161 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#5,080
of 7,651 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#201,696
of 352,770 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#94
of 150 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,879,161 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,651 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.7. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 352,770 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 150 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.