Evaluating Primary Care Research Networks: A Review of Currently Available Tools

被引:5
作者
Bleeker, Joan M. C. [2 ,3 ]
Stalman, Wim A. B. [1 ]
van der Horst, Henriette E. [2 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Vrije Univ Amsterdam Med Ctr, Execut Board, Amsterdam, Netherlands
[2] Vrije Univ Amsterdam Med Ctr, Dept Gen Practice, Amsterdam, Netherlands
[3] Vrije Univ Amsterdam Med Ctr, EMGO Inst, Amsterdam, Netherlands
关键词
Practice-based Research; PBRN; Evaluation; PRIMARY HEALTH-CARE; GENERAL-PRACTICE; QUALITY; QUESTIONNAIRES; LABORATORIES;
D O I
10.3122/jabfm.2010.04.090297
中图分类号
R1 [预防医学、卫生学];
学科分类号
1004 ; 120402 ;
摘要
Background: An increasing number of primary care research networks (PCRNs) are being developed around the world. Despite the fact that they have existed for a long time in some countries, little is known about what they have actually achieved. There is an ongoing debate in the literature about the appropriate framework for the evaluation of PCRNs. Here, we aim to provide an overview of the tools that are currently available for measuring the performance of PCRNs and practices involved in PCRNs or research. Methods: We performed electronic searches in bibliographic databases and several additional searches. We composed a checklist to evaluate the design, content, and methodological quality of the tools. Results: We identified 4 tools for the evaluation of PCRNs or the measurement of primary care practices involved in PCRNs or research. Conclusions: The results of our study showed that various methods, areas of interest, dimensions, and indicators for the evaluation of PCRNs have been proposed. However, no generic and validated tool that enables meaningful comparison between different network models has been developed. It is, therefore, time to reflect on the appropriateness and effectiveness of PCRNs and determine the desired outcomes (ends) of PCRNs and how we can best achieve them in the future (means). To open up the "black box" of the effectiveness of the PCRNs, it may be relevant to observe the effects of network and research participation on those involved in networks. (J Am Board Fam Med 2010;23:465-475.)
引用
收藏
页码:465 / 475
页数:11
相关论文
共 38 条
[1]  
ABYAD A, 2007, MEJFM, V5, P55
[2]  
[Anonymous], 2005, Ann Fam Med, DOI [10.1370/afm.303, DOI 10.1370/AFM.303]
[3]   Clinimetric evaluation of shoulder disability questionnaires: a systematic review of the literature [J].
Bot, SDM ;
Terwee, CB ;
van der Windt, DAWM ;
Bouter, LM ;
Dekker, J ;
de Vet, HCW .
ANNALS OF THE RHEUMATIC DISEASES, 2004, 63 (04) :335-341
[4]  
Carter YH, 2000, BRIT J GEN PRACT, V50, P859
[5]  
Carter Yvonne H, 2002, Occas Pap R Coll Gen Pract, piii
[6]  
Clement S, 2000, BRIT J GEN PRACT, V50, P651
[7]   Fidelity Versus Flexibility Translating Evidence-Based Research into Practice [J].
Cohen, Deborah J. ;
Crabtree, Benjamin F. ;
Etz, Rebecca S. ;
Balasubramanian, Bijal A. ;
Donahue, Katrina E. ;
Leviton, Laura C. ;
Clark, Elizabeth C. ;
Isaacson, Nicole F. ;
Stange, Kurt C. ;
Green, Lawrence W. .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PREVENTIVE MEDICINE, 2008, 35 (05) :S381-S389
[8]  
DOORN B, 1999, HUISARTS WET, V42, P57
[9]  
Doorn B., 1999, HUIS WETEN, V42, P267
[10]  
Edwards Joellen B, 2003, J Am Acad Nurse Pract, V15, P563, DOI 10.1111/j.1745-7599.2003.tb00349.x