HCS: Case study, Context and Complex interventions (TRIPLE C) - development of guidance and publication standards to support case study-based research

HCS：案例研究、背景和复杂干预措施 (TRIPLE C) - 制定指南和出版标准以支持基于案例研究的研究

• 批准号: MR/S014632/1
• 负责人: Sara Shaw
• 金额: $ 32.11万
• 依托单位: University of Oxford
• 依托单位国家: 英国
• 项目类别: Research Grant
• 财政年份: 2019
• 资助国家: 英国
• 起止时间: 2019 至 无数据
• 项目状态: 已结题
• 来源: https://gtr.ukri.org/projects?ref=MR%2FS014632%2F1
• 关键词: HCS; Case; study; Context; Complex

Complex interventions (e.g. redesign of stroke services, urban regeneration programmes) are widely used in the health service and in public health practice. The issue of how one develops, implements and evaluates complex interventions remains a key one for researchers. Traditional research methods have been stretched to the limit in meeting this challenge. There has been growing interest in developing research methods that support improved development and implementation in health care, and in ways that account for the contexts (communities, organisations and so on) in which complex interventions are intended. Case study research is widely recognised as offering such methods, and as a vital resource for understanding the influence of context on complex interventions. A significant literature on case study research already exists in health services research and the social sciences. This literature has evolved out of different disciplines (e.g. psychology, sociology, management), and research traditions (e.g. qualitative or quantitative). It has yet to be interrogated in a way that can support improved development and implementation of complex interventions in health care and public health. Traditional approaches to systematic literature review attempt to collate all evidence that fits pre-specified eligibility criteria in order to answer a specific research question. Such approaches lend themselves to certain (often quite narrow) areas of work but tend to be far less helpful when reviewing diverse, cross-disciplinary topics like the role of case study research in evaluating complex interventions. We therefore propose a meta-narrative review: in other words, using a systematic, theory-driven technique to guide reviewing the wide-ranging literature on case study methods and help us to understand how such methods have been differently conceptualised and used by different groups of researchers. Meta-narrative review is an on-going process, involving the reviewer in understanding what will be most useful to the intended audience, illuminating the topic from multiple angles, capturing how research traditions have unfolded over time, examining 'conflicting data' from different research traditions, continually reflecting on emerging findings and gaining feedback from an external audience to guide further reflection and analysis. We will combine data from key sources to produce an account of how and why case study traditions have evolved, and then compare findings from these different traditions to build a rich picture of case study research on complex interventions from multiple perspectives.Having summarised the relevant literature, we will conduct an online survey with a group of up to 30 experts in case study research (ensuring a range of perspectives, organisations and locations). The idea will be to share our summary of the literature with the group, stimulate reflection and (over three rounds of online discussion) work towards getting as close as possible to consensus on draft guidance on the use of case study when researching complex interventions. We plan to then test this draft guidance with up to five teams of researchers who have conducted and published highly regarded case studies of complex interventions, as well as a group of up to 10 case study experts. Through this iterative process, we will develop methodological guidance on how to design and carry out case studies of complex interventions in health care, and publish standards for case study-based research on complex interventions. We will make these freely available. We also plan to build a community of practice around case study research in this field, bringing together experts from different disciplines and traditions to inform future development, implementation and evaluation of complex system-level interventions.

复杂的干预措施（如重新设计中风服务、城市重建方案）广泛用于卫生服务和公共卫生实践。如何制定、实施和评估复杂的干预措施仍然是研究人员的一个关键问题。传统的研究方法在应对这一挑战方面已经发挥到了极限。人们越来越有兴趣开发研究方法，以支持改善医疗保健的发展和实施，并以考虑复杂干预措施的背景（社区，组织等）的方式。案例研究被广泛认为提供了这样的方法，并作为一个重要的资源，了解复杂的干预背景的影响。在卫生服务研究和社会科学中已经存在大量关于案例研究的文献。这些文献已经从不同的学科（例如心理学，社会学，管理学）和研究传统（例如定性或定量）中演变出来。它还有待于以一种能够支持改善保健和公共卫生方面复杂干预措施的发展和实施的方式加以探讨。系统性文献综述的传统方法试图整理符合预先规定的合格标准的所有证据，以回答特定的研究问题。这种方法适用于某些（通常相当狭窄）的工作领域，但在审查不同的跨学科主题时，如案例研究在评估复杂干预措施中的作用，往往没有多大帮助。因此，我们提出了一个元叙事审查：换句话说，使用系统的，理论驱动的技术，以指导审查广泛的文献案例研究方法，并帮助我们了解这些方法是如何被不同的概念化，并使用不同的研究小组。元叙事评论是一个持续的过程，涉及评论者了解什么对目标受众最有用，从多个角度阐明主题，捕捉研究传统如何随着时间的推移而展开，检查来自不同研究传统的“相互矛盾的数据”，不断反思新发现并获得外部受众的反馈，以指导进一步的反思和分析。我们将联合收割机从关键来源收集数据，以解释案例研究传统是如何以及为什么演变的，然后比较这些不同传统的研究结果，从多个角度构建复杂干预措施案例研究的丰富图景。在总结相关文献后，我们将与最多30名案例研究专家进行在线调查（确保一系列观点、组织和地点）。我们的想法是与小组分享我们对文献的总结，激发反思，并（通过三轮在线讨论）努力尽可能就研究复杂干预措施时使用案例研究的指南草案达成共识。然后，我们计划与最多五个研究人员团队一起测试该指南草案，这些研究人员已经进行并发表了高度评价的复杂干预措施案例研究，以及最多10个案例研究专家。通过这一迭代过程，我们将制定关于如何设计和开展医疗保健复杂干预措施案例研究的方法指南，并发布基于案例研究的复杂干预措施研究标准。我们将免费提供这些。我们还计划围绕这一领域的案例研究建立一个实践社区，汇集来自不同学科和传统的专家，为复杂的系统级干预措施的未来发展、实施和评估提供信息。

项目成果

Mobilising context as complex and dynamic in evaluations of complex health interventions.

• DOI: 10.1186/s12913-023-10354-5
• 发表时间: 2023-12-18
• 期刊: BMC HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH
• 影响因子: 2.8
• 作者: Murdoch, Jamie;Paparini, Sara;Papoutsi, Chrysanthi;James, Hannah;Greenhalgh, Trisha;Shaw, Sara E.
• 通讯作者: Shaw, Sara E.

Additional file 3 of TRIPLE C reporting principles for case study evaluations of the role of context in complex interventions

TRIPLE C 报告原则的附加文件 3，用于案例研究评估背景在复杂干预措施中的作用

• DOI: 10.6084/m9.figshare.22816997
• 发表时间: 2023
• 作者: Shaw S

We Need to Talk About Complexity in Health Research: Findings From a Focused Ethnography.

• DOI: 10.1177/1049732320968779
• 发表时间: 2021-01
• 期刊: Qualitative health research
• 影响因子: 3.2
• 作者: Papoutsi C;Shaw J;Paparini S;Shaw S
• 通讯作者: Shaw S

Additional file 4 of TRIPLE C reporting principles for case study evaluations of the role of context in complex interventions

TRIPLE C 报告原则的附加文件 4，用于案例研究评估背景在复杂干预措施中的作用

• DOI: 10.6084/m9.figshare.22817000
• 发表时间: 2023
• 作者: Shaw S

Additional file 1 of Evaluating complex interventions in context: systematic, meta-narrative review of case study approaches

附加文件 1：评估背景下的复杂干预措施：案例研究方法的系统性元叙事审查

• DOI: 10.6084/m9.figshare.16864726
• 发表时间: 2021
• 作者: Paparini S