david case study health and social care

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

Case study ďavid health and social care

Birch View is a residential care home in Wales. It caters for older people, lots of whom have dementia. Many of the individuals living in Birch View speak Welsh and the home tries to employ care and support workers who speak both Welsh and English. Birch View aims to treat all individuals living in the home with dignity and respect and provide services that help them achieve their personal outcomes and what matters to them, for example knowing what time they like to get up and go to bed, when they like to eat their meals and the type of food that they enjoy, what their hobbies and interests are and how they would like to stay in touch with family and friends. The home is welcoming and has lots of different activities such as: • An art club • Singing for pleasure • Film and book clubs • A gardening group • Keep fit sessions e.g. chair-based exercises The home has an activities co-ordinator who organises the clubs and groups, she is always keen to hear from the individuals living at Birch View about their interests or what they would like to try. The activities co-ordinator has resources for the clubs and groups including computer tablets that can be used to watch films for the film club. Birch View involves the local community in the home including: • Visits from school children • Weekly hairdresser • Monthly visiting Chapel Service • Visits from people with their pets • Visits to events in the local town David has recently moved into Birch View, he is 88 years old and speaks Welsh as his first language. David has been diagnosed with dementia. Until recently, David lived at home with his wife Gwen who is 85 years old. He was supported by Gwen, health and social care services and their son and daughter who both live locally, have families of their own and work full time. David has become more confused recently, he is becoming muddled between night and day and Gwen has found him wandering outside in the middle of the night. He is struggling to access the bathroom in the house, is having difficulties with continence and has had a number of falls; after the last fall he was admitted to hospital where he was treated for minor injuries. Before he was discharged from hospital, an assessment was completed with David, Gwen, their son and daughter by social services and health professionals. This included a mental capacity and best-interest assessment. It was agreed that it was in David’s best interest for him to move into a residential care home as it was no longer safe for him to stay at home. Gwen, their children and grandchildren visit him regularly. 48 David has been given a walking frame to use at Birch View but forgets to use it. Since moving into Birch View, he has become more unstable, he has fallen twice and struggles to get in and out of bed. The care and support workers have reported that he seems agitated and confused, is not sleeping well, is trying to get out of bed in the night and has little appetite. David’s family and the care and support workers are worried that he is not settling in and is struggling more with his mobility. Nicole is one of the care and support workers at Birch View, she has noticed that David tends to be more confused in the mornings but is clearer in the afternoons. This information has been recorded in his personal plan to support his communication. Nicole is working with David and his family to find out more about his interests and background. Gwen tells her that before he became unwell, he was very active, walking the dog daily and gardening. She says that he loved growing vegetables and had been a vegetarian for the past 30 years. He was a history teacher and used to belong to the local history club at the library, he loved reading and enjoyed watching old war films. He spent a lot of time with the grandchildren as they were growing up, spending time with them in the garden, planting seeds and growing plants in their own little plots on his vegetable patch. Nicole explains to Gwen that even though David’s personal plan says that he is a vegetarian, he has been choosing the meat option from the lunch time menu and then not eating it. The care and support workers are offering David vegetarian food options but he is refusing these. Nicole asks Gwen for some ideas of the type of food that David enjoyed when he was living at home as she is worried that he is not eating enough and this may be affecting him. Nicole arranges for David to meet the activities co-ordinator in the afternoon when he is less confused and more able to express what he wants. Having spoken to Gwen and David, she thinks that he may enjoy the gardening group and film club and wonders whether they could arrange for one of his favourite war films to be shown to get him interested. Describe one method used by Birch View to meet David’s communication needs. The decline in David’s mobility has the potential to impact upon his well-being. a. State two potential impacts of this on his physical well-being. State two potential impacts on his mental well-being Explain how the principles of the Mental Capacity Act have been applied in supporting David’s health and well-being.

RELATED PAPERS

IEEE Access

Rony Kumer Saha, Ph.D.

Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences

Nor Saleha Mohd Salleh

Marco Block-Berlitz

RUDN Journal of Public Administration

Elena Dobrolyubova

FOOD SCIENCE RESEARCH JOURNAL

Circulation

Dr. Harold L Kennedy

Physical review

Gabriela Pulla Alvarado

… : revista catalana d'història de la …

Àlvar Martínez-Vidal

Airlangga International Journal of Islamic Economics and Finance

Mutiara Sakinah

Guilherme Marconi Germer

Ramazan Kama

Gloria Ribas

Mieczysław Kunz

jaspreet sharma

International Journal of Business Management and Leadership

Dr. Vijay M. Kumbhar

Journal of Orthopaedic Science

Mohamed Abdel-Wanis

Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences

Lee Panetta

RELATED TOPICS

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

This site is optimised for modern browsers. For the best experience, please use Google Chrome, Mozilla Firefox, or Microsoft Edge.

Case study: Taking part in cancer research: David’s story

Taking part in cancer research: David's story

A Headington grandfather-of-seven has urged people to consider taking part in research to shape the future of healthcare after joining a bowel cancer study.

David Martin, 58, spoke ahead of International Clinical Trials Day on Saturday 20 May, a day of awareness-raising about the importance of health research.

The deputy lodge manager at St John’s College at the University of Oxford says he feels “stronger each day” following immunotherapy treatment received as part of a bowel cancer trial, supported by the National Institute of Health and Care Research (NIHR).

The PRIME-RT trial aims to find out if immunotherapy drug durvalumab can shrink rectal cancer with radiotherapy and chemotherapy to avoid the need for surgery for some patients.

In November 2022, David was invited to provide a stool sample as part of a routine bowel cancer screening for people over 55.  The results indicated abnormalities and David was invited to have further testing.

David said he had previously noticed a small amount of blood in his stool, which he thought was as a result of having anal fissures, small tears in the large intestine.

He said: “At no stage did I feel ill, I had a little blood but no obvious cancer symptoms like pain or bloating.”

In December 2022, David underwent a colonoscopy at the John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford and was diagnosed with stage-2 bowel cancer.

“As soon as I heard the word ‘cancer’, I thought the worst. I was completely shocked.

I spoke with a cancer specialist and when I was invited to take part in the trial, I immediately said yes. I thought I had nothing to lose and everything to gain by taking part.”

Participants in the PRIME-RT trial are given immunotherapy drug durvalumab in addition to radiotherapy and chemotherapy.  Immunotherapy is not part of standard treatment for rectal cancer and works by stimulating the body’s immune system to help fight the cancer.

David received 4 rounds of immunotherapy alongside radiotherapy and chemotherapy. 

He said: “The fatigue is the worst part. It’s so much worse than having the flu. All I can do is rest and wait for the feeling to go away.

“ I don't want anyone to ever be frightened of screenings. It's better to have it done and find out if there is something wrong, than to find out at a point when it’s too late.”

“I’m privileged to have been invited onto the trial. I’ve received extra assessments to make sure my body is responding to the treatment properly. I also appreciate all the phone calls from the nurses and doctors on the study team who check in on me.”

David will find out in June if his cancer has shrunk and whether he will need surgery. The results of the trial have yet to be announced.

“Right now, I feel great. I do think the immunotherapy has worked and has made me stronger and more able to fight the cancer.

“If the doctors tell me that I don’t need an operation, then I will be absolutely over the moon.

“The university students and my work colleagues have been so supportive. They have told me that I look so well and can’t believe that I have cancer. 

“I’m so grateful to have been offered this immunotherapy treatment. I am so optimistic that I will beat this. If anyone is ever given the chance to take part in a trial like this, absolutely go for it.”

The PRIME-RT study is co-sponsored by NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde and the University of Glasgow and aims to recruit 42 people from across the UK. The study is coordinated by the Cancer Research UK Glasgow Clinical Trials Unit and is funded by AstraZeneca UK.

Participating in health research helps develop new treatments, improve the NHS, public health and social care and save lives.

The NHS, public health and social care supports research by giving patients opportunities to take part in trials. Healthy people can also take part so results can be compared to those with a medical condition.

Patients are also encouraged to ask their doctor or health professional about research opportunities, view trials seeking volunteers and sign up to be contacted about studies at bepartofresearch.uk  

• Oxford Thesis Collection
• CC0 version of this metadata

Integrated care in practice: a case study of health and social care for adults considered to be at high risk of hospital admission

Integrated care is pursued globally as a strategy to manage health and social care resources more effectively. It offers the promise of meeting increasingly complex needs, particularly those of aging populations, in a person-centred, co-ordinated way that addresses fragmentation and improves quality.

However, policy to integrate health and social care in England has led to programmes which have had disappointing effects on reducing hospital admissions and costs. My concern with the...

Email this record

Please enter the email address that the record information will be sent to.

Please add any additional information to be included within the email.

Cite this record

Chicago style, access document.

• HUGHES 2018 thesis.pdf (pdf, 3.1MB)

Why is the content I wish to access not available via ORA?

Content may be unavailable for the following four reasons.

• Version unsuitable We have not obtained a suitable full-text for a given research output. See the versions advice for more information.
• Recently completed Sometimes content is held in ORA but is unavailable for a fixed period of time to comply with the policies and wishes of rights holders.
• Permissions All content made available in ORA should comply with relevant rights, such as copyright. See the copyright guide for more information.
• Clearance Some thesis volumes scanned as part of the digitisation scheme funded by Dr Leonard Polonsky are currently unavailable due to sensitive material or uncleared third-party copyright content. We are attempting to contact authors whose theses are affected.

Alternative access to the full-text

Request a copy.

We require your email address in order to let you know the outcome of your request.

Provide a statement outlining the basis of your request for the information of the author.

Please note any files released to you as part of your request are subject to the terms and conditions of use for the Oxford University Research Archive unless explicitly stated otherwise by the author.

Contributors

Bibliographic details, item description, terms of use, views and downloads.

If you are the owner of this record, you can report an update to it here: Report update to this record

Report an update

We require your email address in order to let you know the outcome of your enquiry.

• Open access
• Published: 27 June 2011

The case study approach

• Sarah Crowe 1 ,
• Kathrin Cresswell 2 ,
• Ann Robertson 2 ,
• Guro Huby 3 ,
• Anthony Avery 1 &
• Aziz Sheikh 2  

BMC Medical Research Methodology volume  11 , Article number:  100 ( 2011 ) Cite this article

784k Accesses

1048 Citations

37 Altmetric

Metrics details

The case study approach allows in-depth, multi-faceted explorations of complex issues in their real-life settings. The value of the case study approach is well recognised in the fields of business, law and policy, but somewhat less so in health services research. Based on our experiences of conducting several health-related case studies, we reflect on the different types of case study design, the specific research questions this approach can help answer, the data sources that tend to be used, and the particular advantages and disadvantages of employing this methodological approach. The paper concludes with key pointers to aid those designing and appraising proposals for conducting case study research, and a checklist to help readers assess the quality of case study reports.

Peer Review reports

Introduction

The case study approach is particularly useful to employ when there is a need to obtain an in-depth appreciation of an issue, event or phenomenon of interest, in its natural real-life context. Our aim in writing this piece is to provide insights into when to consider employing this approach and an overview of key methodological considerations in relation to the design, planning, analysis, interpretation and reporting of case studies.

The illustrative 'grand round', 'case report' and 'case series' have a long tradition in clinical practice and research. Presenting detailed critiques, typically of one or more patients, aims to provide insights into aspects of the clinical case and, in doing so, illustrate broader lessons that may be learnt. In research, the conceptually-related case study approach can be used, for example, to describe in detail a patient's episode of care, explore professional attitudes to and experiences of a new policy initiative or service development or more generally to 'investigate contemporary phenomena within its real-life context' [ 1 ]. Based on our experiences of conducting a range of case studies, we reflect on when to consider using this approach, discuss the key steps involved and illustrate, with examples, some of the practical challenges of attaining an in-depth understanding of a 'case' as an integrated whole. In keeping with previously published work, we acknowledge the importance of theory to underpin the design, selection, conduct and interpretation of case studies[ 2 ]. In so doing, we make passing reference to the different epistemological approaches used in case study research by key theoreticians and methodologists in this field of enquiry.

This paper is structured around the following main questions: What is a case study? What are case studies used for? How are case studies conducted? What are the potential pitfalls and how can these be avoided? We draw in particular on four of our own recently published examples of case studies (see Tables 1 , 2 , 3 and 4 ) and those of others to illustrate our discussion[ 3 – 7 ].

What is a case study?

A case study is a research approach that is used to generate an in-depth, multi-faceted understanding of a complex issue in its real-life context. It is an established research design that is used extensively in a wide variety of disciplines, particularly in the social sciences. A case study can be defined in a variety of ways (Table 5 ), the central tenet being the need to explore an event or phenomenon in depth and in its natural context. It is for this reason sometimes referred to as a "naturalistic" design; this is in contrast to an "experimental" design (such as a randomised controlled trial) in which the investigator seeks to exert control over and manipulate the variable(s) of interest.

Stake's work has been particularly influential in defining the case study approach to scientific enquiry. He has helpfully characterised three main types of case study: intrinsic , instrumental and collective [ 8 ]. An intrinsic case study is typically undertaken to learn about a unique phenomenon. The researcher should define the uniqueness of the phenomenon, which distinguishes it from all others. In contrast, the instrumental case study uses a particular case (some of which may be better than others) to gain a broader appreciation of an issue or phenomenon. The collective case study involves studying multiple cases simultaneously or sequentially in an attempt to generate a still broader appreciation of a particular issue.

These are however not necessarily mutually exclusive categories. In the first of our examples (Table 1 ), we undertook an intrinsic case study to investigate the issue of recruitment of minority ethnic people into the specific context of asthma research studies, but it developed into a instrumental case study through seeking to understand the issue of recruitment of these marginalised populations more generally, generating a number of the findings that are potentially transferable to other disease contexts[ 3 ]. In contrast, the other three examples (see Tables 2 , 3 and 4 ) employed collective case study designs to study the introduction of workforce reconfiguration in primary care, the implementation of electronic health records into hospitals, and to understand the ways in which healthcare students learn about patient safety considerations[ 4 – 6 ]. Although our study focusing on the introduction of General Practitioners with Specialist Interests (Table 2 ) was explicitly collective in design (four contrasting primary care organisations were studied), is was also instrumental in that this particular professional group was studied as an exemplar of the more general phenomenon of workforce redesign[ 4 ].

What are case studies used for?

According to Yin, case studies can be used to explain, describe or explore events or phenomena in the everyday contexts in which they occur[ 1 ]. These can, for example, help to understand and explain causal links and pathways resulting from a new policy initiative or service development (see Tables 2 and 3 , for example)[ 1 ]. In contrast to experimental designs, which seek to test a specific hypothesis through deliberately manipulating the environment (like, for example, in a randomised controlled trial giving a new drug to randomly selected individuals and then comparing outcomes with controls),[ 9 ] the case study approach lends itself well to capturing information on more explanatory ' how ', 'what' and ' why ' questions, such as ' how is the intervention being implemented and received on the ground?'. The case study approach can offer additional insights into what gaps exist in its delivery or why one implementation strategy might be chosen over another. This in turn can help develop or refine theory, as shown in our study of the teaching of patient safety in undergraduate curricula (Table 4 )[ 6 , 10 ]. Key questions to consider when selecting the most appropriate study design are whether it is desirable or indeed possible to undertake a formal experimental investigation in which individuals and/or organisations are allocated to an intervention or control arm? Or whether the wish is to obtain a more naturalistic understanding of an issue? The former is ideally studied using a controlled experimental design, whereas the latter is more appropriately studied using a case study design.

Case studies may be approached in different ways depending on the epistemological standpoint of the researcher, that is, whether they take a critical (questioning one's own and others' assumptions), interpretivist (trying to understand individual and shared social meanings) or positivist approach (orientating towards the criteria of natural sciences, such as focusing on generalisability considerations) (Table 6 ). Whilst such a schema can be conceptually helpful, it may be appropriate to draw on more than one approach in any case study, particularly in the context of conducting health services research. Doolin has, for example, noted that in the context of undertaking interpretative case studies, researchers can usefully draw on a critical, reflective perspective which seeks to take into account the wider social and political environment that has shaped the case[ 11 ].

How are case studies conducted?

Here, we focus on the main stages of research activity when planning and undertaking a case study; the crucial stages are: defining the case; selecting the case(s); collecting and analysing the data; interpreting data; and reporting the findings.

Defining the case

Carefully formulated research question(s), informed by the existing literature and a prior appreciation of the theoretical issues and setting(s), are all important in appropriately and succinctly defining the case[ 8 , 12 ]. Crucially, each case should have a pre-defined boundary which clarifies the nature and time period covered by the case study (i.e. its scope, beginning and end), the relevant social group, organisation or geographical area of interest to the investigator, the types of evidence to be collected, and the priorities for data collection and analysis (see Table 7 )[ 1 ]. A theory driven approach to defining the case may help generate knowledge that is potentially transferable to a range of clinical contexts and behaviours; using theory is also likely to result in a more informed appreciation of, for example, how and why interventions have succeeded or failed[ 13 ].

For example, in our evaluation of the introduction of electronic health records in English hospitals (Table 3 ), we defined our cases as the NHS Trusts that were receiving the new technology[ 5 ]. Our focus was on how the technology was being implemented. However, if the primary research interest had been on the social and organisational dimensions of implementation, we might have defined our case differently as a grouping of healthcare professionals (e.g. doctors and/or nurses). The precise beginning and end of the case may however prove difficult to define. Pursuing this same example, when does the process of implementation and adoption of an electronic health record system really begin or end? Such judgements will inevitably be influenced by a range of factors, including the research question, theory of interest, the scope and richness of the gathered data and the resources available to the research team.

Selecting the case(s)

The decision on how to select the case(s) to study is a very important one that merits some reflection. In an intrinsic case study, the case is selected on its own merits[ 8 ]. The case is selected not because it is representative of other cases, but because of its uniqueness, which is of genuine interest to the researchers. This was, for example, the case in our study of the recruitment of minority ethnic participants into asthma research (Table 1 ) as our earlier work had demonstrated the marginalisation of minority ethnic people with asthma, despite evidence of disproportionate asthma morbidity[ 14 , 15 ]. In another example of an intrinsic case study, Hellstrom et al.[ 16 ] studied an elderly married couple living with dementia to explore how dementia had impacted on their understanding of home, their everyday life and their relationships.

For an instrumental case study, selecting a "typical" case can work well[ 8 ]. In contrast to the intrinsic case study, the particular case which is chosen is of less importance than selecting a case that allows the researcher to investigate an issue or phenomenon. For example, in order to gain an understanding of doctors' responses to health policy initiatives, Som undertook an instrumental case study interviewing clinicians who had a range of responsibilities for clinical governance in one NHS acute hospital trust[ 17 ]. Sampling a "deviant" or "atypical" case may however prove even more informative, potentially enabling the researcher to identify causal processes, generate hypotheses and develop theory.

In collective or multiple case studies, a number of cases are carefully selected. This offers the advantage of allowing comparisons to be made across several cases and/or replication. Choosing a "typical" case may enable the findings to be generalised to theory (i.e. analytical generalisation) or to test theory by replicating the findings in a second or even a third case (i.e. replication logic)[ 1 ]. Yin suggests two or three literal replications (i.e. predicting similar results) if the theory is straightforward and five or more if the theory is more subtle. However, critics might argue that selecting 'cases' in this way is insufficiently reflexive and ill-suited to the complexities of contemporary healthcare organisations.

The selected case study site(s) should allow the research team access to the group of individuals, the organisation, the processes or whatever else constitutes the chosen unit of analysis for the study. Access is therefore a central consideration; the researcher needs to come to know the case study site(s) well and to work cooperatively with them. Selected cases need to be not only interesting but also hospitable to the inquiry [ 8 ] if they are to be informative and answer the research question(s). Case study sites may also be pre-selected for the researcher, with decisions being influenced by key stakeholders. For example, our selection of case study sites in the evaluation of the implementation and adoption of electronic health record systems (see Table 3 ) was heavily influenced by NHS Connecting for Health, the government agency that was responsible for overseeing the National Programme for Information Technology (NPfIT)[ 5 ]. This prominent stakeholder had already selected the NHS sites (through a competitive bidding process) to be early adopters of the electronic health record systems and had negotiated contracts that detailed the deployment timelines.

It is also important to consider in advance the likely burden and risks associated with participation for those who (or the site(s) which) comprise the case study. Of particular importance is the obligation for the researcher to think through the ethical implications of the study (e.g. the risk of inadvertently breaching anonymity or confidentiality) and to ensure that potential participants/participating sites are provided with sufficient information to make an informed choice about joining the study. The outcome of providing this information might be that the emotive burden associated with participation, or the organisational disruption associated with supporting the fieldwork, is considered so high that the individuals or sites decide against participation.

In our example of evaluating implementations of electronic health record systems, given the restricted number of early adopter sites available to us, we sought purposively to select a diverse range of implementation cases among those that were available[ 5 ]. We chose a mixture of teaching, non-teaching and Foundation Trust hospitals, and examples of each of the three electronic health record systems procured centrally by the NPfIT. At one recruited site, it quickly became apparent that access was problematic because of competing demands on that organisation. Recognising the importance of full access and co-operative working for generating rich data, the research team decided not to pursue work at that site and instead to focus on other recruited sites.

Collecting the data

In order to develop a thorough understanding of the case, the case study approach usually involves the collection of multiple sources of evidence, using a range of quantitative (e.g. questionnaires, audits and analysis of routinely collected healthcare data) and more commonly qualitative techniques (e.g. interviews, focus groups and observations). The use of multiple sources of data (data triangulation) has been advocated as a way of increasing the internal validity of a study (i.e. the extent to which the method is appropriate to answer the research question)[ 8 , 18 – 21 ]. An underlying assumption is that data collected in different ways should lead to similar conclusions, and approaching the same issue from different angles can help develop a holistic picture of the phenomenon (Table 2 )[ 4 ].

Brazier and colleagues used a mixed-methods case study approach to investigate the impact of a cancer care programme[ 22 ]. Here, quantitative measures were collected with questionnaires before, and five months after, the start of the intervention which did not yield any statistically significant results. Qualitative interviews with patients however helped provide an insight into potentially beneficial process-related aspects of the programme, such as greater, perceived patient involvement in care. The authors reported how this case study approach provided a number of contextual factors likely to influence the effectiveness of the intervention and which were not likely to have been obtained from quantitative methods alone.

In collective or multiple case studies, data collection needs to be flexible enough to allow a detailed description of each individual case to be developed (e.g. the nature of different cancer care programmes), before considering the emerging similarities and differences in cross-case comparisons (e.g. to explore why one programme is more effective than another). It is important that data sources from different cases are, where possible, broadly comparable for this purpose even though they may vary in nature and depth.

Analysing, interpreting and reporting case studies

Making sense and offering a coherent interpretation of the typically disparate sources of data (whether qualitative alone or together with quantitative) is far from straightforward. Repeated reviewing and sorting of the voluminous and detail-rich data are integral to the process of analysis. In collective case studies, it is helpful to analyse data relating to the individual component cases first, before making comparisons across cases. Attention needs to be paid to variations within each case and, where relevant, the relationship between different causes, effects and outcomes[ 23 ]. Data will need to be organised and coded to allow the key issues, both derived from the literature and emerging from the dataset, to be easily retrieved at a later stage. An initial coding frame can help capture these issues and can be applied systematically to the whole dataset with the aid of a qualitative data analysis software package.

The Framework approach is a practical approach, comprising of five stages (familiarisation; identifying a thematic framework; indexing; charting; mapping and interpretation) , to managing and analysing large datasets particularly if time is limited, as was the case in our study of recruitment of South Asians into asthma research (Table 1 )[ 3 , 24 ]. Theoretical frameworks may also play an important role in integrating different sources of data and examining emerging themes. For example, we drew on a socio-technical framework to help explain the connections between different elements - technology; people; and the organisational settings within which they worked - in our study of the introduction of electronic health record systems (Table 3 )[ 5 ]. Our study of patient safety in undergraduate curricula drew on an evaluation-based approach to design and analysis, which emphasised the importance of the academic, organisational and practice contexts through which students learn (Table 4 )[ 6 ].

Case study findings can have implications both for theory development and theory testing. They may establish, strengthen or weaken historical explanations of a case and, in certain circumstances, allow theoretical (as opposed to statistical) generalisation beyond the particular cases studied[ 12 ]. These theoretical lenses should not, however, constitute a strait-jacket and the cases should not be "forced to fit" the particular theoretical framework that is being employed.

When reporting findings, it is important to provide the reader with enough contextual information to understand the processes that were followed and how the conclusions were reached. In a collective case study, researchers may choose to present the findings from individual cases separately before amalgamating across cases. Care must be taken to ensure the anonymity of both case sites and individual participants (if agreed in advance) by allocating appropriate codes or withholding descriptors. In the example given in Table 3 , we decided against providing detailed information on the NHS sites and individual participants in order to avoid the risk of inadvertent disclosure of identities[ 5 , 25 ].

What are the potential pitfalls and how can these be avoided?

The case study approach is, as with all research, not without its limitations. When investigating the formal and informal ways undergraduate students learn about patient safety (Table 4 ), for example, we rapidly accumulated a large quantity of data. The volume of data, together with the time restrictions in place, impacted on the depth of analysis that was possible within the available resources. This highlights a more general point of the importance of avoiding the temptation to collect as much data as possible; adequate time also needs to be set aside for data analysis and interpretation of what are often highly complex datasets.

Case study research has sometimes been criticised for lacking scientific rigour and providing little basis for generalisation (i.e. producing findings that may be transferable to other settings)[ 1 ]. There are several ways to address these concerns, including: the use of theoretical sampling (i.e. drawing on a particular conceptual framework); respondent validation (i.e. participants checking emerging findings and the researcher's interpretation, and providing an opinion as to whether they feel these are accurate); and transparency throughout the research process (see Table 8 )[ 8 , 18 – 21 , 23 , 26 ]. Transparency can be achieved by describing in detail the steps involved in case selection, data collection, the reasons for the particular methods chosen, and the researcher's background and level of involvement (i.e. being explicit about how the researcher has influenced data collection and interpretation). Seeking potential, alternative explanations, and being explicit about how interpretations and conclusions were reached, help readers to judge the trustworthiness of the case study report. Stake provides a critique checklist for a case study report (Table 9 )[ 8 ].

Conclusions

The case study approach allows, amongst other things, critical events, interventions, policy developments and programme-based service reforms to be studied in detail in a real-life context. It should therefore be considered when an experimental design is either inappropriate to answer the research questions posed or impossible to undertake. Considering the frequency with which implementations of innovations are now taking place in healthcare settings and how well the case study approach lends itself to in-depth, complex health service research, we believe this approach should be more widely considered by researchers. Though inherently challenging, the research case study can, if carefully conceptualised and thoughtfully undertaken and reported, yield powerful insights into many important aspects of health and healthcare delivery.

Yin RK: Case study research, design and method. 2009, London: Sage Publications Ltd., 4

Google Scholar  

Keen J, Packwood T: Qualitative research; case study evaluation. BMJ. 1995, 311: 444-446.

Article   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Sheikh A, Halani L, Bhopal R, Netuveli G, Partridge M, Car J, et al: Facilitating the Recruitment of Minority Ethnic People into Research: Qualitative Case Study of South Asians and Asthma. PLoS Med. 2009, 6 (10): 1-11.

Article   Google Scholar  

Pinnock H, Huby G, Powell A, Kielmann T, Price D, Williams S, et al: The process of planning, development and implementation of a General Practitioner with a Special Interest service in Primary Care Organisations in England and Wales: a comparative prospective case study. Report for the National Co-ordinating Centre for NHS Service Delivery and Organisation R&D (NCCSDO). 2008, [ http://www.sdo.nihr.ac.uk/files/project/99-final-report.pdf ]

Robertson A, Cresswell K, Takian A, Petrakaki D, Crowe S, Cornford T, et al: Prospective evaluation of the implementation and adoption of NHS Connecting for Health's national electronic health record in secondary care in England: interim findings. BMJ. 2010, 41: c4564-

Pearson P, Steven A, Howe A, Sheikh A, Ashcroft D, Smith P, the Patient Safety Education Study Group: Learning about patient safety: organisational context and culture in the education of healthcare professionals. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2010, 15: 4-10. 10.1258/jhsrp.2009.009052.

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

van Harten WH, Casparie TF, Fisscher OA: The evaluation of the introduction of a quality management system: a process-oriented case study in a large rehabilitation hospital. Health Policy. 2002, 60 (1): 17-37. 10.1016/S0168-8510(01)00187-7.

Stake RE: The art of case study research. 1995, London: Sage Publications Ltd.

Sheikh A, Smeeth L, Ashcroft R: Randomised controlled trials in primary care: scope and application. Br J Gen Pract. 2002, 52 (482): 746-51.

PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

King G, Keohane R, Verba S: Designing Social Inquiry. 1996, Princeton: Princeton University Press

Doolin B: Information technology as disciplinary technology: being critical in interpretative research on information systems. Journal of Information Technology. 1998, 13: 301-311. 10.1057/jit.1998.8.

George AL, Bennett A: Case studies and theory development in the social sciences. 2005, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press

Eccles M, the Improved Clinical Effectiveness through Behavioural Research Group (ICEBeRG): Designing theoretically-informed implementation interventions. Implementation Science. 2006, 1: 1-8. 10.1186/1748-5908-1-1.

Article   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Netuveli G, Hurwitz B, Levy M, Fletcher M, Barnes G, Durham SR, Sheikh A: Ethnic variations in UK asthma frequency, morbidity, and health-service use: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet. 2005, 365 (9456): 312-7.

Sheikh A, Panesar SS, Lasserson T, Netuveli G: Recruitment of ethnic minorities to asthma studies. Thorax. 2004, 59 (7): 634-

CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Hellström I, Nolan M, Lundh U: 'We do things together': A case study of 'couplehood' in dementia. Dementia. 2005, 4: 7-22. 10.1177/1471301205049188.

Som CV: Nothing seems to have changed, nothing seems to be changing and perhaps nothing will change in the NHS: doctors' response to clinical governance. International Journal of Public Sector Management. 2005, 18: 463-477. 10.1108/09513550510608903.

Lincoln Y, Guba E: Naturalistic inquiry. 1985, Newbury Park: Sage Publications

Barbour RS: Checklists for improving rigour in qualitative research: a case of the tail wagging the dog?. BMJ. 2001, 322: 1115-1117. 10.1136/bmj.322.7294.1115.

Mays N, Pope C: Qualitative research in health care: Assessing quality in qualitative research. BMJ. 2000, 320: 50-52. 10.1136/bmj.320.7226.50.

Mason J: Qualitative researching. 2002, London: Sage

Brazier A, Cooke K, Moravan V: Using Mixed Methods for Evaluating an Integrative Approach to Cancer Care: A Case Study. Integr Cancer Ther. 2008, 7: 5-17. 10.1177/1534735407313395.

Miles MB, Huberman M: Qualitative data analysis: an expanded sourcebook. 1994, CA: Sage Publications Inc., 2

Pope C, Ziebland S, Mays N: Analysing qualitative data. Qualitative research in health care. BMJ. 2000, 320: 114-116. 10.1136/bmj.320.7227.114.

Cresswell KM, Worth A, Sheikh A: Actor-Network Theory and its role in understanding the implementation of information technology developments in healthcare. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2010, 10 (1): 67-10.1186/1472-6947-10-67.

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Malterud K: Qualitative research: standards, challenges, and guidelines. Lancet. 2001, 358: 483-488. 10.1016/S0140-6736(01)05627-6.

Article   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Yin R: Case study research: design and methods. 1994, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publishing, 2

Yin R: Enhancing the quality of case studies in health services research. Health Serv Res. 1999, 34: 1209-1224.

Green J, Thorogood N: Qualitative methods for health research. 2009, Los Angeles: Sage, 2

Howcroft D, Trauth E: Handbook of Critical Information Systems Research, Theory and Application. 2005, Cheltenham, UK: Northampton, MA, USA: Edward Elgar

Book   Google Scholar  

Blakie N: Approaches to Social Enquiry. 1993, Cambridge: Polity Press

Doolin B: Power and resistance in the implementation of a medical management information system. Info Systems J. 2004, 14: 343-362. 10.1111/j.1365-2575.2004.00176.x.

Bloomfield BP, Best A: Management consultants: systems development, power and the translation of problems. Sociological Review. 1992, 40: 533-560.

Shanks G, Parr A: Positivist, single case study research in information systems: A critical analysis. Proceedings of the European Conference on Information Systems. 2003, Naples

Pre-publication history

The pre-publication history for this paper can be accessed here: http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2288/11/100/prepub

Download references

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to the participants and colleagues who contributed to the individual case studies that we have drawn on. This work received no direct funding, but it has been informed by projects funded by Asthma UK, the NHS Service Delivery Organisation, NHS Connecting for Health Evaluation Programme, and Patient Safety Research Portfolio. We would also like to thank the expert reviewers for their insightful and constructive feedback. Our thanks are also due to Dr. Allison Worth who commented on an earlier draft of this manuscript.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Division of Primary Care, The University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK

Sarah Crowe & Anthony Avery

Centre for Population Health Sciences, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK

Kathrin Cresswell, Ann Robertson & Aziz Sheikh

School of Health in Social Science, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sarah Crowe .

Additional information

Competing interests.

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Authors' contributions

AS conceived this article. SC, KC and AR wrote this paper with GH, AA and AS all commenting on various drafts. SC and AS are guarantors.

Rights and permissions

This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Crowe, S., Cresswell, K., Robertson, A. et al. The case study approach. BMC Med Res Methodol 11 , 100 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-11-100

Download citation

Received : 29 November 2010

Accepted : 27 June 2011

Published : 27 June 2011

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-11-100

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Case Study Approach
• Electronic Health Record System
• Case Study Design
• Case Study Site
• Case Study Report

BMC Medical Research Methodology

ISSN: 1471-2288

• General enquiries: [email protected]

An Exploratory Multi-Case Study of the Health and Wellbeing Needs, Relationships and Experiences of Health and Social Care Service Users and the People who Support them at Home

Affiliations.

• 1 Bon Accord Care, Inspire Building, Beach Boulevard, Aberdeen, AB24 5HP, GB.
• 2 Robert Gordon University, School of Nursing & Midwifery, Garthdee Road, Aberdeen, United Kingdom, AB10 7QE, GB.
• 3 University of Highlands and Islands, Institute of Health Research and Innovation, Centre for Health Science, Old Perth Road, Inverness, United Kingdom, IV2 3JH, GB.
• 4 The Queens Nursing Institute Scotland, 31 Castle Terrance, Edinburgh, Scotland, United Kingdom, AH1 2EL, GB.
• 5 The University of Limerick, Department of Nursing and Midwifery, Limerick, Ireland, V94 T9PX, GB.
• PMID: 36845871
• PMCID: PMC9951626
• DOI: 10.5334/ijic.7003

Introduction: International policies and legislation set a precedence of person-centred sustainable integrated Health and Social Care (HSC) that meets the health and wellbeing needs of service users through improved experiences. However, current research focuses on service models, with fewer studies investigating experiences and needs.

Methods: This qualitative multi-case [n = 7] study was co-designed with key stakeholders and aimed to explore experiences and needs of people who access and provide HSC at home. Data were collected in a regional area of Scotland (UK) via single [n = 10] or dyad [n = 4] semi-structured interviews with service users [n = 6], informal carers [n = 5] and HSC staff [n = 7] and synthesised using Interpretive Thematic Analysis.

Findings: Interpersonal connections and supportive relationships were instrumental in helping all participant groups feel able to cope with their changing HSC needs and roles. They promoted reassurance, information sharing and reduced anxiety; when they were lacking, it negatively impacted upon experiences of HSC.

Discussion: Promoting inter-personal connections that encourage supportive relationships between people who access and provide HSC and their communities, could promote person-centred Relationship-based care and improve HSC experiences.

Conclusions: This study identifies indicators for improved HSC, advocating co-produced community-driven services to meet the self-defined needs of those who access and provide care.

Keywords: co-production; community or communities; health and wellbeing needs; integrated health and social care; people-centred care; relationships or relationship-based care.

Copyright: © 2023 The Author(s).

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it's official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you're on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings
• Browse Titles

NCBI Bookshelf. A service of the National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health.

Health and Social Care Delivery Research

• Copyright and Permissions

Formerly Health Services and Delivery Research (HS&DR) (ISSN: 2050-4357 (Online), ISSN: 2050-4349 (Print))

Health and Social Care Delivery Research (HSDR) publishes evidence to improve the quality, accessibility and organisation of health services and to enhance the strategic focus on research that matters to the NHS.

• Evaluating the real-world implementation of the Family Nurse Partnership in England: a data linkage study Francesca Cavallaro, Amanda Clery, Ruth Gilbert, Jan van der Meulen, Sally Kendall, Eilis Kennedy, Catherine Phillips, and Katie Harron. Southampton (UK): National Institute for Health and Care Research; May 2024.
• Factors influencing effective data sharing between health care and social care regarding the care of older people: a qualitative evidence synthesis Siân de Bell, Zhivko Zhelev, Alison Bethel, Jo Thompson Coon, and Rob Anderson. Southampton (UK): National Institute for Health and Care Research; May 2024.
• Service design for children and young people with common mental health problems: literature review, service mapping and collective case study Steven Pryjmachuk, Susan Kirk, Claire Fraser, Nicola Evans, Rhiannon Lane, Liz Neill, Elizabeth Camacho, Peter Bower, Penny Bee, and Tim McDougall. Southampton (UK): National Institute for Health and Care Research; May 2024.
• A service-user digital intervention to collect real-time safety information on acute, adult mental health wards: the WardSonar mixed-methods study John Baker, Sarah Kendal, Chris Bojke, Gemma Louch, Daisy Halligan, Saba Shafiq, Charlotte Sturley, Lauren Walker, Mark Brown, Kathryn Berzins, Lyn Brierley-Jones, Jane K O’Hara, Kirstin Blackwell, Gemma Wormald, Krysia Canvin, and Charles Vincent. Southampton (UK): National Institute for Health and Care Research; May 2024.
• Causes and solutions to workplace psychological ill-health for nurses, midwives and paramedics: the Care Under Pressure 2 realist review Jill Maben, Cath Taylor, Justin Jagosh, Daniele Carrieri, Simon Briscoe, Naomi Klepacz, and Karen Mattick. Southampton (UK): National Institute for Health and Care Research; April 2024.
• Evaluation of different models of general practitioners working in or alongside emergency departments: a mixed-methods realist evaluation Freya Davies, Michelle Edwards, Delyth Price, Pippa Anderson, Andrew Carson-Stevens, Mazhar Choudhry, Matthew Cooke, Jeremy Dale, Liam Donaldson, Bridie Angela Evans, Barbara Harrington, Shaun Harris, Julie Hepburn, Peter Hibbert, Thomas Hughes, Faris Hussain, Saiful Islam, Rhys Pockett, Alison Porter, Aloysius Niroshan Siriwardena, Helen Snooks, Alan Watkins, Adrian Edwards, and Alison Cooper. Southampton (UK): National Institute for Health and Care Research; April 2024.
• Relationship between staff and quality of care in care homes: StaRQ mixed methods study Karen Spilsbury, Andy Charlwood, Carl Thompson, Kirsty Haunch, Danat Valizade, Reena Devi, Cornell Jackson, David Phillip Alldred, Antony Arthur, Lucy Brown, Paul Edwards, Will Fenton, Heather Gage, Matthew Glover, Barbara Hanratty, Julienne Meyer, and Aileen Waton. Southampton (UK): National Institute for Health and Care Research; April 2024.
• Practices of falls risk assessment and prevention in acute hospital settings: a realist investigation Rebecca Randell, Lynn McVey, Judy Wright, Hadar Zaman, V-Lin Cheong, David M Woodcock, Frances Healey, Dawn Dowding, Peter Gardner, Nicholas R Hardiker, Alison Lynch, Chris Todd, Christopher Davey, and Natasha Alvarado. Southampton (UK): National Institute for Health and Care Research; March 2024.
• Reducing health inequalities through general practice: a realist review and action framework Anna Gkiouleka, Geoff Wong, Sarah Sowden, Isla Kuhn, Annie Moseley, Sukaina Manji, Rebecca R Harmston, Rikke Siersbaek, Clare Bambra, and John A Ford. Southampton (UK): National Institute for Health and Care Research; March 2024.
• Safer and more efficient vital signs monitoring protocols to identify the deteriorating patients in the general hospital ward: an observational study Jim Briggs, Ina Kostakis, Paul Meredith, Chiara Dall’ora, Julie Darbyshire, Stephen Gerry, Peter Griffiths, Jo Hope, Jeremy Jones, Caroline Kovacs, Rob Lawrence, David Prytherch, Peter Watkinson, and Oliver Redfern. Southampton (UK): National Institute for Health and Care Research; March 2024.
• The implications of competing risks and direct treatment disutility in cardiovascular disease and osteoporotic fracture: risk prediction and cost effectiveness analysis Bruce Guthrie, Gabriel Rogers, Shona Livingstone, Daniel R Morales, Peter Donnan, Sarah Davis, Ji Hee Youn, Rob Hainsworth, Alexander Thompson, and Katherine Payne. Southampton (UK): National Institute for Health and Care Research; February 2024.
• ‘Why are we stuck in hospital?’ Barriers to people with learning disabilities/autistic people leaving ‘long-stay’ hospital: a mixed methods study Jon Glasby, Robin Miller, Anne-Marie Glasby, Rebecca Ince, and Frederick Konteh. Southampton (UK): National Institute for Health and Care Research; February 2024.
• Conceptual framework on barriers and facilitators to implementing perinatal mental health care and treatment for women: the MATRIx evidence synthesis Rebecca Webb, Elizabeth Ford, Judy Shakespeare, Abigail Easter, Fiona Alderdice, Jennifer Holly, Rose Coates, Sally Hogg, Helen Cheyne, Sarah McMullen, Simon Gilbody, Debra Salmon, and Susan Ayers. Southampton (UK): National Institute for Health and Care Research; January 2024.
• Factors within the clinical encounter that impact upon risk assessment within child and adolescent mental health services: a rapid realist synthesis Anna Cantrell, Katie Sworn, Duncan Chambers, Andrew Booth, Elizabeth Taylor Buck, and Scott Weich. Southampton (UK): National Institute for Health and Care Research; January 2024.
• Evaluating mental health decision units in acute care pathways (DECISION): a quasi-experimental, qualitative and health economic evaluation Steve Gillard, Katie Anderson, Geraldine Clarke, Chloe Crowe, Lucy Goldsmith, Heather Jarman, Sonia Johnson, Jo Lomani, David McDaid, Paris Pariza, A-La Park, Jared Smith, Kati Turner, and Heather Yoeli. Southampton (UK): National Institute for Health and Care Research; December 2023.
• What factors are associated with informal carers’ psychological morbidity during end-of-life home care? A systematic review and thematic synthesis of observational quantitative studies Tracey Shield, Kerin Bayliss, Alexander Hodkinson, Maria Panagioti, Alison Wearden, Jackie Flynn, Christine Rowland, Penny Bee, Morag Farquhar, Danielle Harris, and Gunn Grande. Southampton (UK): National Institute for Health and Care Research; November 15, 2023.
• The effectiveness and acceptability of multimedia information when recruiting children and young people to trials: the TRECA meta-analysis of SWATs Peter Knapp, Jacqueline Martin-Kerry, Thirimon Moe-Byrne, Rebecca Sheridan, Elizabeth Coleman, Jenny Roche, Bridget Young, Steven Higgins, Jennifer Preston, Peter Bower, Carrol Gamble, and Catherine Stones. Southampton (UK): National Institute for Health and Care Research; November 2023.
• The effectiveness of sexual assault referral centres with regard to mental health and substance use: a national mixed-methods study – the MiMoS Study Elizabeth Hughes, Jill Domoney, Nicky Knights, Holly Price, Sibongile Rutsito, Theodora Stefanidou, Rabiya Majeed-Ariss, Alexandra Papamichail, Steven Ariss, Gail Gilchrist, Rachael Hunter, Sarah Kendal, Brynmor Lloyd-Evans, Mike Lucock, Fay Maxted, Rebekah Shallcross, Karen Tocque, and Kylee Trevillion. Southampton (UK): National Institute for Health and Care Research; November 2023.
• Eye donation from palliative and hospice care contexts: the EDiPPPP mixed-methods study Tracy Long-Sutehall, Mike Bracher, Sarah Mollart, and Jane Wale. Southampton (UK): National Institute for Health and Care Research; November 2023.
• Impact of interventions to improve recovery of older adults following planned hospital admission on quality-of-life following discharge: linked-evidence synthesis Debbie Kinsey, Samantha Febrey, Simon Briscoe, Dylan Kneale, Jo Thompson Coon, Daniele Carrieri, Christopher Lovegrove, John McGrath, Anthony Hemsley, GJ Melendez-Torres, Liz Shaw, and Michael Nunns. Southampton (UK): National Institute for Health and Care Research; November 2023.
• Remote monitoring for long-term physical health conditions: an evidence and gap map Siân de Bell, Zhivko Zhelev, Naomi Shaw, Alison Bethel, Rob Anderson, and Jo Thompson Coon. Southampton (UK): National Institute for Health and Care Research; November 2023.
• Involving carer advisors in evidence synthesis to improve carers’ mental health during end-of-life home care: co-production during COVID-19 remote working Gunn Grande, Kerin Bayliss, Tracey Shield, Jackie Flynn, Christine Rowland, Danielle Harris, Alison Wearden, Morag Farquhar, Maria Panagioti, Alexander Hodkinson, Margaret Booth, David Cotterill, Lesley Goodburn, Cedric Knipe, and Penny Bee. Southampton (UK): National Institute for Health and Care Research; October 25, 2023.
• Integration, effectiveness and costs of different models of primary health care provision for people who are homeless: an evaluation study Maureen Crane, Louise Joly, Blánaid JM Daly, Heather Gage, Jill Manthorpe, Gaia Cetrano, Chris Ford, and Peter Williams. Southampton (UK): National Institute for Health and Care Research; October 2023.
• Rapid evaluation of the Special Measures for Quality and challenged provider regimes: a mixed-methods study Naomi J Fulop, Estela Capelas Barbosa, Melissa Hill, Jean Ledger, Pei Li Ng, Christopher Sherlaw-Johnson, Lucina Rolewicz, Laura Schlepper, Jonathan Spencer, Sonila M Tomini, Cecilia Vindrola-Padros, and Stephen Morris. Southampton (UK): National Institute for Health and Care Research; October 2023.
• Reducing unplanned hospital admissions from care homes: a systematic review Duncan Chambers, Anna Cantrell, Louise Preston, Carl Marincowitz, Lynne Wright, Simon Conroy, and Adam Lee Gordon. Southampton (UK): National Institute for Health and Care Research; October 2023.
• Vertical integration of general practices with acute hospitals in England: rapid impact evaluation Manbinder Sidhu, Catherine L Saunders, Charlotte Davies, Gemma McKenna, Frances Wu, Ian Litchfield, Fifi Olumogba, and Jon Sussex. Southampton (UK): National Institute for Health and Care Research; October 2023.
• Understanding what affects psychological morbidity in informal carers when providing care at home for patients at the end of life: a systematic qualitative evidence synthesis Kerin Bayliss, Tracey Shield, Alison Wearden, Jackie Flynn, Christine Rowland, Penny Bee, Morag Farquhar, Danielle Harris, Alexander Hodkinson, Maria Panagioti, Margaret Booth, David Cotterill, Lesley Goodburn, Cedric Knipe, and Gunn Grande. Southampton (UK): National Institute for Health and Care Research; September 12, 2023.
• Explanation of context, mechanisms and outcomes in adult community mental health crisis care: the MH-CREST realist evidence synthesis Nicola Clibbens, John Baker, Andrew Booth, Kathryn Berzins, Michael C Ashman, Leila Sharda, Jill Thompson, Sarah Kendal, and Scott Weich. Southampton (UK): National Institute for Health and Care Research; September 2023.
• Identifying models of care to improve outcomes for older people with urgent care needs: a mixed methods approach to develop a system dynamics model Simon Conroy, Sally Brailsford, Christopher Burton, Tracey England, Jagruti Lalseta, Graham Martin, Suzanne Mason, Laia Maynou-Pujolras, Kay Phelps, Louise Preston, Emma Regen, Peter Riley, Andrew Street, and James van Oppen. Southampton (UK): National Institute for Health and Care Research; September 2023.
• Rapid evaluation of service innovations in health and social care: key considerations Judith Smith, Jo Ellins, Chris Sherlaw-Johnson, Cecilia Vindrola-Padros, John Appleby, Stephen Morris, Jon Sussex, and Naomi J Fulop. Southampton (UK): National Institute for Health and Care Research; July 2023.
• A rapid mixed-methods evaluation of remote home monitoring models during the COVID-19 pandemic in England Naomi J Fulop, Holly Walton, Nadia Crellin, Theo Georghiou, Lauren Herlitz, Ian Litchfield, Efthalia Massou, Chris Sherlaw-Johnson, Manbinder Sidhu, Sonila M Tomini, Cecilia Vindrola-Padros, Jo Ellins, Stephen Morris, and Pei Li Ng. Southampton (UK): National Institute for Health and Care Research; July 2023.
• What happens after an NHS Health Check? A survey and realist review Claire Duddy, Erica Gadsby, Vivienne Hibberd, Janet Krska, and Geoff Wong. Southampton (UK): National Institute for Health and Care Research; July 2023.
• Youth violence intervention programme for vulnerable young people attending emergency departments in London: a rapid evaluation John Appleby, Theo Georghiou, Jean Ledger, Lucina Rolewicz, Chris Sherlaw-Johnson, Sonila M Tomini, Jason M Frerich, and Pei Li Ng. Southampton (UK): National Institute for Health and Care Research; July 2023.
• Early evaluation of the Children and Young People’s Mental Health Trailblazer programme: a rapid mixed-methods study Jo Ellins, Lucy Hocking, Mustafa Al-Haboubi, Jenny Newbould, Sarah-Jane Fenton, Kelly Daniel, Stephanie Stockwell, Brandi Leach, Manbinder Sidhu, Jenny Bousfield, Gemma McKenna, Katie Saunders, Stephen O’Neill, and Nicholas Mays. Southampton (UK): National Institute for Health and Care Research; June 2023.
• The effects of computerised decision support systems on nursing and allied health professional performance and patient outcomes: a systematic review and user contextualisation Carl Thompson, Teumzghi Mebrahtu, Sarah Skyrme, Karen Bloor, Deidre Andre, Anne Maree Keenan, Alison Ledward, Huiqin Yang, and Rebecca Randell. Southampton (UK): National Institute for Health and Care Research; June 2023.
• A multimethod study of NHS 111 online Joanne Turnbull, Jennifer MacLellan, Kate Churruca, Louise A Ellis, Jane Prichard, David Browne, Jeffrey Braithwaite, Emily Petter, Matthew Chisambi, and Catherine Pope. Southampton (UK): National Institute for Health and Care Research; June 2023.
• New and emerging technology for adult social care – the example of home sensors with artificial intelligence (AI) technology Jon Glasby, Ian Litchfield, Sarah Parkinson, Lucy Hocking, Denise Tanner, Bridget Roe, and Jennifer Bousfield. Southampton (UK): National Institute for Health and Care Research; June 2023.
• Thinking ahead about medical treatments in advanced illness: a qualitative study of barriers and enablers in end-of-life care planning with patients and families from ethnically diverse backgrounds Zoebia Islam, Kristian Pollock, Anne Patterson, Matilda Hanjari, Louise Wallace, Irfhan Mururajani, Simon Conroy, and Christina Faull. Southampton (UK): National Institute for Health and Care Research; June 2023.
• Towards achieving interorganisational collaboration between health-care providers: a realist evidence synthesis Ross Millar, Justin Avery Aunger, Anne Marie Rafferty, Joanne Greenhalgh, Russell Mannion, Hugh McLeod, and Deborah Faulks. Southampton (UK): National Institute for Health and Care Research; June 2023.
• Factors which facilitate or impede patient engagement with pulmonary and cardiac rehabilitation: a rapid evaluation mapping review Lindsay Blank, Anna Cantrell, Katie Sworn, and Andrew Booth. Southampton (UK): National Institute for Health and Care Research; May 2023.
• Mental health crisis care for children and young people aged 5 to 25 years: the CAMH-Crisis evidence synthesis Nicola Evans, Deborah Edwards, Judith Carrier, Mair Elliott, Elizabeth Gillen, Ben Hannigan, Rhiannon Lane, and Liz Williams. Southampton (UK): National Institute for Health and Care Research; May 2023.
• Centralisation of specialist cancer surgery services in two areas of England: the RESPECT-21 mixed-methods evaluation Naomi J Fulop, Angus IG Ramsay, Cecilia Vindrola-Padros, Caroline S Clarke, Rachael Hunter, Georgia Black, Victoria J Wood, Mariya Melnychuk, Catherine Perry, Laura Vallejo-Torres, Pei Li Ng, Ravi Barod, Axel Bex, Ruth Boaden, Afsana Bhuiya, Veronica Brinton, Patrick Fahy, John Hines, Claire Levermore, Satish Maddineni, Muntzer M Mughal, Kathy Pritchard-Jones, John Sandell, David Shackley, Maxine Tran, and Steve Morris. Southampton (UK): National Institute for Health and Care Research; February 2023.
• Clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of emergency surgery for adult emergency hospital admissions with common acute gastrointestinal conditions: the ESORT study Richard Grieve, Andrew Hutchings, Silvia Moler Zapata, Stephen O’Neill, David G Lugo-Palacios, Richard Silverwood, David Cromwell, Tommaso Kircheis, Elizabeth Silver, Claire Snowdon, Paul Charlton, Geoff Bellingan, Ramani Moonesinghe, Luke Keele, Neil Smart, and Robert Hinchliffe. Southampton (UK): National Institute for Health and Care Research; January 2023.
• Brief education supported psychological treatment for adolescent borderline personality disorder: the BEST feasibility RCT Jon Wilson, Brioney Gee, Nicola Martin, Sarah Maxwell, Jamie Murdoch, Tim Clarke, Allan Clark, David Turner, Caitlin Notley, Thando Katangwe, Peter B Jones, and Peter Fonagy. Southampton (UK): National Institute for Health and Care Research; December 2022.
• Health literacy interventions for reducing the use of primary and emergency services for minor health problems: a systematic review Alicia O’Cathain, Alexis Foster, Christopher Carroll, Louise Preston, Margaret Ogden, Mark Clowes, and Joanne Protheroe. Southampton (UK): National Institute for Health and Care Research; December 2022.
• Improving risk prediction model quality in the critically ill: data linkage study Paloma Ferrando-Vivas, Manu Shankar-Hari, Karen Thomas, James C Doidge, Fergus J Caskey, Lui Forni, Steve Harris, Marlies Ostermann, Ivan Gornik, Naomi Holman, Nazir Lone, Bob Young, David Jenkins, Stephen Webb, Jerry P Nolan, Jasmeet Soar, Kathryn M Rowan, and David A Harrison. Southampton (UK): National Institute for Health and Care Research; December 2022.
• Recommended summary plan for emergency care and treatment: ReSPECT a mixed-methods study Gavin D Perkins, Claire A Hawkes, Karin Eli, James Griffin, Claire Jacques, Caroline J Huxley, Keith Couper, Cynthia Ochieng, Jonathan Fuld, Zoe Fritz, Rob George, Doug Gould, Richard Lilford, Martin Underwood, Catherine Baldock, Chris Bassford, Peter-Marc Fortune, John Speakman, Anna Wilkinson, Bob Ewings, Jane Warwick, Frances Griffiths, and Anne-Marie Slowther. Southampton (UK): National Institute for Health and Care Research; December 2022.
• Shared decision-making during childbirth in maternity units: the VIP mixed-methods study Ellen Annandale, Helen Baston, Siân Beynon-Jones, Lyn Brierley-Jones, Alison Brodrick, Paul Chappell, Josephine Green, Clare Jackson, Victoria Land, and Tomasina Stacey. Southampton (UK): National Institute for Health and Care Research; December 2022.
• Understanding the potential factors affecting carers’ mental health during end-of-life home care: a meta synthesis of the research literature Gunn Grande, Tracey Shield, Kerin Bayliss, Christine Rowland, Jackie Flynn, Penny Bee, Alexander Hodkinson, Maria Panagioti, Morag Farquhar, Danielle Harris, and Alison Wearden. Southampton (UK): National Institute for Health and Care Research; December 2022.
• Evaluation of timeliness and models of transporting critically ill children for intensive care: the DEPICT mixed-methods study Padmanabhan Ramnarayan, Sarah Seaton, Ruth Evans, Victoria Barber, Emma Hudson, Enoch Kung, Matthew Entwistle, Anna Pearce, Patrick Davies, Will Marriage, Paul Mouncey, Eithne Polke, Fatemah Rajah, Nicholas Hudson, Robert Darnell, Elizabeth Draper, Jo Wray, Stephen Morris, and Christina Pagel. Southampton (UK): National Institute for Health and Care Research; November 2022.
• Intensive support teams for adults with intellectual disabilities displaying challenging behaviour: the IST-ID mixed-methods study Angela Hassiotis, Athanasia Kouroupa, Leila Hamza, Nicola Morant, Ian Hall, Louise Marston, Renee Romeo, Nahel Yaziji, Rebecca Jones, Ken Courtenay, Peter Langdon, Laurence Taggart, Vicky Crossey, and Brynmor Lloyd-Evans. Southampton (UK): National Institute for Health and Care Research; November 2022.
• Using pulse oximeters in care homes for residents with COVID-19 and other conditions: a rapid mixed-methods evaluation Manbinder Sidhu, Ian Litchfield, Robin Miller, Naomi J Fulop, Barbara Janta, Jamie-Rae Tanner, Giulia Maistrello, Jenny Bousfield, Cecilia Vindrola-Padros, and Jon Sussex. Southampton (UK): National Institute for Health and Care Research; November 2022.
• Exploring the work and organisation of local Healthwatch in England: a mixed-methods ethnographic study Giulia Zoccatelli, Amit Desai, Glenn Robert, Graham Martin, and Sally Brearley. Southampton (UK): National Institute for Health and Care Research; October 2022.
• General practitioners working in or alongside the emergency department: the GPED mixed-methods study Jonathan Benger, Heather Brant, Arabella Scantlebury, Helen Anderson, Helen Baxter, Karen Bloor, Janet Brandling, Sean Cowlishaw, Tim Doran, James Gaughan, Andrew Gibson, Nils Gutacker, Heather Leggett, Dan Liu, Katherine Morton, Sarah Purdy, Chris Salisbury, Anu Vaittinen, Sarah Voss, Rose Watson, and Joy Adamson. Southampton (UK): National Institute for Health and Care Research; October 2022.
• Using simulation and machine learning to maximise the benefit of intravenous thrombolysis in acute stroke in England and Wales: the SAMueL modelling and qualitative study Michael Allen, Charlotte James, Julia Frost, Kristin Liabo, Kerry Pearn, Thomas Monks, Zhivko Zhelev, Stuart Logan, Richard Everson, Martin James, and Ken Stein. Southampton (UK): National Institute for Health and Care Research; October 2022.
• Complex speech-language therapy interventions for stroke-related aphasia: the RELEASE study incorporating a systematic review and individual participant data network meta-analysis Marian C Brady, Myzoon Ali, Kathryn VandenBerg, Linda J Williams, Louise R Williams, Masahiro Abo, Frank Becker, Audrey Bowen, Caitlin Brandenburg, Caterina Breitenstein, Stefanie Bruehl, David A Copland, Tamara B Cranfill, Marie di Pietro-Bachmann, Pamela Enderby, Joanne Fillingham, Federica Lucia Galli, Marialuisa Gandolfi, Bertrand Glize, Erin Godecke, Neil Hawkins, Katerina Hilari, Jacqueline Hinckley, Simon Horton, David Howard, Petra Jaecks, Elizabeth Jefferies, Luis MT Jesus, Maria Kambanaros, Eun Kyoung Kang, Eman M Khedr, Anthony Pak-Hin Kong, Tarja Kukkonen, Marina Laganaro, Matthew A Lambon Ralph, Ann Charlotte Laska, Béatrice Leemann, Alexander P Leff, Roxele R Lima, Antje Lorenz, Brian MacWhinney, Rebecca Shisler Marshall, Flavia Mattioli, İlknur Maviş, Marcus Meinzer, Reza Nilipour, Enrique Noé, Nam-Jong Paik, Rebecca Palmer, Ilias Papathanasiou, Brígida F Patrício, Isabel Pavão Martins, Cathy Price, Tatjana Prizl Jakovac, Elizabeth Rochon, Miranda L Rose, Charlotte Rosso, Ilona Rubi-Fessen, Marina B Ruiter, Claerwen Snell, Benjamin Stahl, Jerzy P Szaflarski, Shirley A Thomas, Mieke van de Sandt-Koenderman, Ineke van der Meulen, Evy Visch-Brink, Linda Worrall, and Heather Harris Wright. Southampton (UK): National Institute for Health and Care Research; September 2022.
• Early evidence of the development of primary care networks in England: a rapid evaluation study Judith Smith, Sarah Parkinson, Amelia Harshfield, and Manbinder Sidhu. Southampton (UK): National Institute for Health and Care Research; September 2022.
• Evidence and methods required to evaluate the impact for patients who use social prescribing: a rapid systematic review and qualitative interviews Lena Al-Khudairy, Abimbola Ayorinde, Iman Ghosh, Amy Grove, Jenny Harlock, Edward Meehan, Adam Briggs, Rachel Court, and Aileen Clarke. Southampton (UK): National Institute for Health and Care Research; September 2022.
• Prehospital video triage of potential stroke patients in North Central London and East Kent: rapid mixed-methods service evaluation Angus IG Ramsay, Jean Ledger, Sonila M Tomini, Claire Hall, David Hargroves, Patrick Hunter, Simon Payne, Raj Mehta, Robert Simister, Fola Tayo, and Naomi J Fulop. Southampton (UK): National Institute for Health and Care Research; September 2022.
• Group clinics for young adults living with diabetes in an ethnically diverse, socioeconomically deprived population: mixed-methods evaluation Chrysanthi Papoutsi, Dougal Hargreaves, Ann Hagell, Natalia Hounsome, Helen Skirrow, Koteshwara Muralidhara, Grainne Colligan, Shanti Vijayaraghavan, Trish Greenhalgh, and Sarah Finer. Southampton (UK): National Institute for Health and Care Research; August 2022.
• Implementation of ‘Freedom to Speak Up Guardians’ in NHS acute and mental health trusts in England: the FTSUG mixed-methods study Aled Jones, Jill Maben, Mary Adams, Russell Mannion, Carys Banks, Joanne Blake, Kathleen Job, and Daniel Kelly. Southampton (UK): National Institute for Health and Care Research; August 2022.
• Optimum models of hospice at home services for end-of-life care in England: a realist-informed mixed-methods evaluation Claire Butler, Patricia Wilson, Vanessa Abrahamson, Rasa Mikelyte, Heather Gage, Peter Williams, Charlotte Brigden, Brooke Swash, Melanie Rees-Roberts, Graham Silsbury, Mary Goodwin, Kay Greene, Bee Wee, and Stephen Barclay. Southampton (UK): National Institute for Health and Care Research; August 2022.
• Co-designed strategies for delivery of positive newborn bloodspot screening results to parents: the ReSPoND mixed-methods study Jane Chudleigh, Pru Holder, Francesco Fusco, James R Bonham, Mandy Bryon, Louise Moody, Stephen Morris, Ellinor K Olander, Alan Simpson, Holly Chinnery, Fiona Ulph, and Kevin W Southern. Southampton (UK): National Institute for Health and Care Research; July 2022.
• Experiences of children and young people from ethnic minorities in accessing mental health care and support: rapid scoping review Helen Coelho, Anna Price, Fraizer Kiff, Laura Trigg, Sophie Robinson, Jo Thompson Coon, and Rob Anderson. Southampton (UK): National Institute for Health and Care Research; July 2022.
• Patient and carer access to medicines at end of life: the ActMed mixed-methods study Sue Latter, Natasha Campling, Jacqueline Birtwistle, Alison Richardson, Michael I Bennett, David Meads, Alison Blenkinsopp, Liz Breen, Zoe Edwards, Claire Sloan, Elizabeth Miller, Sean Ewings, Miriam Santer, and Lesley Roberts. Southampton (UK): National Institute for Health and Care Research; July 2022.
• Perioperative exercise programmes to promote physical activity in the medium to long term: systematic review and qualitative research Michael W Pritchard, Amy Robinson, Sharon R Lewis, Suse V Gibson, Antony Chuter, Robert Copeland, Euan Lawson, and Andrew F Smith. Southampton (UK): National Institute for Health and Care Research; July 2022.
• Equal access to hospital care for children with learning disabilities and their families: a mixed-methods study Kate Oulton, Jo Wray, Charlotte Kenten, Jessica Russell, Lucinda Carr, Angela Hassiotis, Carey Jewitt, Paula Kelly, Sam Kerry, Irene Tuffrey-Wijne, Mark Whiting, and Faith Gibson. Southampton (UK): National Institute for Health and Care Research; June 2022.
• Impact of telephone triage on access to primary care for people living with multiple long-term health conditions: rapid evaluation Catherine L Saunders and Evangelos Gkousis. Southampton (UK): National Institute for Health and Care Research; June 2022.
• Interventions to optimise the outputs of national clinical audits to improve the quality of health care: a multi-method study including RCT Thomas A Willis, Alexandra Wright-Hughes, Ana Weller, Sarah L Alderson, Stephanie Wilson, Rebecca Walwyn, Su Wood, Fabiana Lorencatto, Amanda Farrin, Suzanne Hartley, Jillian Francis, Valentine Seymour, Jamie Brehaut, Heather Colquhoun, Jeremy Grimshaw, Noah Ivers, Richard Feltbower, Justin Keen, Benjamin C Brown, Justin Presseau, Chris P Gale, Simon J Stanworth, and Robbie Foy. Southampton (UK): National Institute for Health and Care Research; June 2022.
• Safety of disinvestment in mid- to late-term follow-up post primary hip and knee replacement: the UK SAFE evidence synthesis and recommendations Sarah R Kingsbury, Lindsay K Smith, Carolyn J Czoski Murray, Rafael Pinedo-Villanueva, Andrew Judge, Robert West, Chris Smith, Judy M Wright, Nigel K Arden, Christine M Thomas, Spryos Kolovos, Farag Shuweihdi, Cesar Garriga, Byron KY Bitanihirwe, Kate Hill, Jamie Matu, Martin Stone, and Philip G Conaghan. Southampton (UK): National Institute for Health and Care Research; June 2022.
• Understanding approaches to continence care for people living with dementia in acute hospital settings: an ethnographic study Katie Featherstone, Andy Northcott, Paula Boddington, Deborah Edwards, Sofia Vougioukalou, Sue Bale, Karen Harrison Dening, Karen Logan, Rosie Tope, Daniel Kelly, Aled Jones, Jackie Askey, and Jane Harden. Southampton (UK): National Institute for Health and Care Research; June 2022.
• Vertical integration of GP practices with acute hospitals in England and Wales: rapid evaluation Manbinder Sidhu, Jack Pollard, and Jon Sussex. Southampton (UK): National Institute for Health and Care Research; June 2022.
• Assessment and management pathways of older adults with mild cognitive impairment: descriptive review and critical interpretive synthesis Duncan Chambers, Anna Cantrell, Katie Sworn, and Andrew Booth. Southampton (UK): National Institute for Health and Care Research; May 2022.
• Components of interventions to reduce restrictive practices with children and young people in institutional settings: the Contrast systematic mapping review John Baker, Kathryn Berzins, Krysia Canvin, Sarah Kendal, Stella Branthonne-Foster, Judy Wright, Tim McDougall, Barry Goldson, Ian Kellar, and Joy Duxbury. Southampton (UK): National Institute for Health and Care Research; May 2022.
• Design and evaluation of an interactive quality dashboard for national clinical audit data: a realist evaluation Rebecca Randell, Natasha Alvarado, Mai Elshehaly, Lynn McVey, Robert M West, Patrick Doherty, Dawn Dowding, Amanda J Farrin, Richard G Feltbower, Chris P Gale, Joanne Greenhalgh, Julia Lake, Mamas Mamas, Rebecca Walwyn, and Roy A Ruddle. Southampton (UK): National Institute for Health and Care Research; May 2022.
• Healthcare Leadership with Political Astuteness and its role in the implementation of major system change: the HeLPA qualitative study Justin Waring, Simon Bishop, Jenelle Clarke, Mark Exworthy, Naomi J Fulop, Jean Hartley, Angus IG Ramsay, Georgia Black, and Bridget Roe. Southampton (UK): National Institute for Health and Care Research; May 2022.
• Scale, scope and impact of skill mix change in primary care in England: a mixed-methods study Imelda McDermott, Sharon Spooner, Mhorag Goff, Jon Gibson, Elizabeth Dalgarno, Igor Francetic, Mark Hann, Damian Hodgson, Anne McBride, Katherine Checkland, and Matt Sutton. Southampton (UK): National Institute for Health and Care Research; May 2022.
• Co-ordinated care for people affected by rare diseases: the CONCORD mixed-methods study Stephen Morris, Emma Hudson, Lara Bloom, Lyn S Chitty, Naomi J Fulop, Amy Hunter, Jennifer Jones, Joe Kai, Larissa Kerecuk, Maria Kokocinska, Kerry Leeson-Beevers, Pei Li Ng, Sharon Parkes, Angus IG Ramsay, Amy Simpson, Alastair Sutcliffe, Christine Taylor, and Holly Walton. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; March 2022.
• Developing programme theories of leadership for integrated health and social care teams and systems: a realist synthesis Ruth Harris, Simon Fletcher, Sarah Sims, Fiona Ross, Sally Brearley, and Jill Manthorpe. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; March 2022.
• End-of-life care for people with severe mental illness: the MENLOC evidence synthesis Ben Hannigan, Deborah Edwards, Sally Anstey, Michael Coffey, Paul Gill, Mala Mann, and Alan Meudell. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; March 2022.
• Multiple versus single risk behaviour interventions for people with severe mental illness: a network meta-analysis and qualitative synthesis Nick Meader, Hollie Melton, Connor Evans, Kath Wright, David Shiers, Elena Ratschen, Sofia Dias, Ceri Dare, Gordon Johnston, Harminder Kaur, Michel Syrett, Christopher J Armitage, Rachel Churchill, Simon Gilbody, and Peter Coventry. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; March 2022.
• Optimising the impact of health services research on the organisation and delivery of health services: a mixed-methods study Martin Marshall, Huw Davies, Vicky Ward, Justin Waring, Naomi J Fulop, Liz Mear, Breid O’Brien, Richard Parnell, Katherine Kirk, Benet Reid, and Tricia Tooman. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; February 2022.
• Development, implementation and evaluation of an early warning system improvement programme for children in hospital: the PUMA mixed-methods study Davina Allen, Amy Lloyd, Dawn Edwards, Aimee Grant, Kerenza Hood, Chao Huang, Jacqueline Hughes, Nina Jacob, David Lacy, Yvonne Moriarty, Alison Oliver, Jennifer Preston, Gerri Sefton, Richard Skone, Heather Strange, Khadijeh Taiyari, Emma Thomas-Jones, Robert Trubey, Lyvonne Tume, Colin Powell, and Damian Roland. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; January 2022.
• Hospital at Home admission avoidance with comprehensive geriatric assessment to maintain living at home for people aged 65 years and over: a RCT Sasha Shepperd, Andrea Cradduck-Bamford, Christopher Butler, Graham Ellis, Mary Godfrey, Alastair Gray, Anthony Hemsley, Pradeep Khanna, Peter Langhorne, Petra Mäkelä, Sam Mort, Scott Ramsay, Rebekah Schiff, Surya Singh, Susan Smith, David J Stott, Apostolos Tsiachristas, Angela Wilkinson, Ly-Mee Yu, and John Young. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; January 2022.
• Impact of NHS 111 Online on the NHS 111 telephone service and urgent care system: a mixed-methods study Janette Turner, Emma Knowles, Rebecca Simpson, Fiona Sampson, Simon Dixon, Jaqui Long, Helen Bell-Gorrod, Richard Jacques, Joanne Coster, Hui Yang, Jon Nicholl, Peter Bath, Daniel Fall, and Tony Stone. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; November 2021.
• Large-scale implementation of stroke early supported discharge: the WISE realist mixed-methods study Rebecca J Fisher, Niki Chouliara, Adrian Byrne, Trudi Cameron, Sarah Lewis, Peter Langhorne, Thompson Robinson, Justin Waring, Claudia Geue, Lizz Paley, Anthony Rudd, and Marion F Walker. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; November 2021.
• STOPP/START interventions to improve medicines management for people aged 65 years and over: a realist synthesis Jaheeda Gangannagaripalli, Ian Porter, Antoinette Davey, Ignacio Ricci Cabello, Joanne Greenhalgh, Rob Anderson, Simon Briscoe, Carmel Hughes, Rupert Payne, Emma Cockcroft, Jim Harris, Charlotte Bramwell, and Jose M Valderas. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; November 2021.
• Care home residents’ quality of life and its association with CQC ratings and workforce issues: the MiCareHQ mixed-methods study Ann-Marie Towers, Nick Smith, Stephen Allan, Florin Vadean, Grace Collins, Stacey Rand, Jennifer Bostock, Helen Ramsbottom, Julien Forder, Stefania Lanza, and Jackie Cassell. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; October 2021.
• GPs’ involvement to improve care quality in care homes in the UK: a realist review Neil H Chadborn, Reena Devi, Christopher Williams, Kathleen Sartain, Claire Goodman, and Adam L Gordon. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; October 2021.
• Acute day units in non-residential settings for people in mental health crisis: the AD-CARE mixed-methods study David Osborn, Danielle Lamb, Alastair Canaway, Michael Davidson, Graziella Favarato, Vanessa Pinfold, Terry Harper, Sonia Johnson, Hameed Khan, James Kirkbride, Brynmor Lloyd-Evans, Jason Madan, Farhana Mann, Louise Marston, Adele McKay, Nicola Morant, Debra Smith, Thomas Steare, Jane Wackett, and Scott Weich. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; September 2021.
• Improving care transfers for homeless patients after hospital discharge: a realist evaluation Michelle Cornes, Robert W Aldridge, Elizabeth Biswell, Richard Byng, Michael Clark, Graham Foster, James Fuller, Andrew Hayward, Nigel Hewett, Alan Kilmister, Jill Manthorpe, Joanne Neale, Michela Tinelli, and Martin Whiteford. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; September 2021.
• Promoting physical activity and physical function in people with long-term conditions in primary care: the Function First realist synthesis with co-design Rebecca-Jane Law, Joseph Langley, Beth Hall, Christopher Burton, Julia Hiscock, Lynne Williams, Val Morrison, Andrew B Lemmey, Candida Lovell-Smith, John Gallanders, Jennifer Cooney, and Nefyn H Williams. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; September 2021.
• Family and health-care professionals managing medicines for patients with serious and terminal illness at home: a qualitative study Kristian Pollock, Eleanor Wilson, Glenys Caswell, Asam Latif, Alan Caswell, Anthony Avery, Claire Anderson, Vincent Crosby, and Christina Faull. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; August 2021.
• Synthesis for health services and policy: case studies in the scoping of reviews Rob Anderson, Andrew Booth, Alison Eastwood, Mark Rodgers, Liz Shaw, Jo Thompson Coon, Simon Briscoe, Anna Cantrell, Duncan Chambers, Elizabeth Goyder, Michael Nunns, Louise Preston, Gary Raine, and Sian Thomas. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; August 2021.
• Increasing specialist intensity at weekends to improve outcomes for patients undergoing emergency hospital admission: the HiSLAC two-phase mixed-methods study Julian Bion, Cassie Aldridge, Chris Beet, Amunpreet Boyal, Yen-Fu Chen, Michael Clancy, Alan Girling, Timothy Hofer, Joanne Lord, Russell Mannion, Peter Rees, Chris Roseveare, Louise Rowan, Gavin Rudge, Jianxia Sun, Elizabeth Sutton, Carolyn Tarrant, Mark Temple, Sam Watson, Janet Willars, and Richard Lilford. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; July 2021.
• Hospital-based specialist palliative care compared with usual care for adults with advanced illness and their caregivers: a systematic review Adejoke O Oluyase, Irene J Higginson, Deokhee Yi, Wei Gao, Catherine J Evans, Gunn Grande, Chris Todd, Massimo Costantini, Fliss EM Murtagh, and Sabrina Bajwah. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; May 2021.
• Identifying determinants of diabetes risk and outcomes for people with severe mental illness: a mixed-methods study Jennie Lister, Lu Han, Sue Bellass, Jo Taylor, Sarah L Alderson, Tim Doran, Simon Gilbody, Catherine Hewitt, Richard IG Holt, Rowena Jacobs, Charlotte EW Kitchen, Stephanie L Prady, John Radford, Jemimah R Ride, David Shiers, Han-I Wang, and Najma Siddiqi. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; May 2021.
• Remediation programmes for practising doctors to restore patient safety: the RESTORE realist review Tristan Price, Nicola Brennan, Geoff Wong, Lyndsey Withers, Jennifer Cleland, Amanda Wanner, Thomas Gale, Linda Prescott-Clements, Julian Archer, and Marie Bryce. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; May 2021.
• Safety of reducing antibiotic prescribing in primary care: a mixed-methods study Martin C Gulliford, Judith Charlton, Olga Boiko, Joanne R Winter, Emma Rezel-Potts, Xiaohui Sun, Caroline Burgess, Lisa McDermott, Catey Bunce, James Shearer, Vasa Curcin, Robin Fox, Alastair D Hay, Paul Little, Michael V Moore, and Mark Ashworth. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; May 2021.
• Understanding health-care outcomes of older people with cognitive impairment and/or dementia admitted to hospital: a mixed-methods study Emma Reynish, Simona Hapca, Rebecca Walesby, Angela Pusram, Feifei Bu, Jennifer K Burton, Vera Cvoro, James Galloway, Henriette Ebbesen Laidlaw, Marion Latimer, Siobhan McDermott, Alasdair C Rutherford, Gordon Wilcock, Peter Donnan, and Bruce Guthrie. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; April 2021.
• Variation in availability and use of surgical care for female urinary incontinence: a mixed-methods study Rebecca S Geary, Ipek Gurol-Urganci, Jil B Mamza, Rebecca Lynch, Dina El-Hamamsy, Andrew Wilson, Simon Cohn, Douglas Tincello, and Jan van der Meulen. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; March 2021.
• Dental therapists compared with general dental practitioners for undertaking check-ups in low-risk patients: pilot RCT with realist evaluation Paul Brocklehurst, Zoe Hoare, Chris Woods, Lynne Williams, Andrew Brand, Jing Shen, Matthew Breckons, James Ashley, Alison Jenkins, Lesley Gough, Philip Preshaw, Christopher Burton, Karen Shepherd, and Nawaraj Bhattarai. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; February 2021.
• Models of generalist and specialist care in smaller hospitals in England: a mixed-methods study Louella Vaughan, Martin Bardsley, Derek Bell, Miranda Davies, Andrew Goddard, Candace Imison, Mariya Melnychuk, Stephen Morris, and Anne Marie Rafferty. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; February 2021.
• Non-pharmacological interventions to reduce restrictive practices in adult mental health inpatient settings: the COMPARE systematic mapping review John Baker, Kathryn Berzins, Krysia Canvin, Iris Benson, Ian Kellar, Judy Wright, Rocio Rodriguez Lopez, Joy Duxbury, Tim Kendall, and Duncan Stewart. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; February 2021.
• Respite care and short breaks for young adults aged 18–40 with complex health-care needs: mixed-methods systematic review and conceptual framework development Katherine Knighting, Gerlinde Pilkington, Jane Noyes, Brenda Roe, Michelle Maden, Lucy Bray, Barbara Jack, Mary O’Brien, Julia Downing, Céu Mateus, and Sally Spencer. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; February 2021.
• Theory and practical guidance for effective de-implementation of practices across health and care services: a realist synthesis Christopher R Burton, Lynne Williams, Tracey Bucknall, Denise Fisher, Beth Hall, Gill Harris, Peter Jones, Matthew Makin, Anne Mcbride, Rachel Meacock, John Parkinson, Jo Rycroft-Malone, and Justin Waring. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; February 2021.
• Developing an evidence-based online method of linking behaviour change techniques and theoretical mechanisms of action: a multiple methods study Susan Michie, Marie Johnston, Alexander J Rothman, Marijn de Bruin, Michael P Kelly, Rachel N Carey, Lauren EC Bohlen, Hilary NK Groarke, Niall C Anderson, and Silje Zink. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; January 2021.
• Evaluating specialist autism teams’ provision of care and support for autistic adults without learning disabilities: the SHAPE mixed-methods study Bryony Beresford, Suzanne Mukherjee, Emese Mayhew, Emily Heavey, A-La Park, Lucy Stuttard, Victoria Allgar, and Martin Knapp. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; December 2020.
• Pelvic floor muscle training for women with pelvic organ prolapse: the PROPEL realist evaluation Margaret Maxwell, Karen Berry, Sarah Wane, Suzanne Hagen, Doreen McClurg, Edward Duncan, Purva Abhyankar, Andrew Elders, Catherine Best, Joyce Wilkinson, Helen Mason, Linda Fenocchi, Eileen Calveley, Karen Guerrero, and Douglas Tincello. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; December 2020.
• Variations in the organisation of and outcomes from Early Pregnancy Assessment Units: the VESPA mixed-methods study Maria Memtsa, Venetia Goodhart, Gareth Ambler, Peter Brocklehurst, Edna Keeney, Sergio Silverio, Zacharias Anastasiou, Jeff Round, Nazim Khan, Jennifer Hall, Geraldine Barrett, Ruth Bender-Atik, Judith Stephenson, and Davor Jurkovic. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; December 2020.
• The decision-making process in recommending electronic communication aids for children and young people who are non-speaking: the I-ASC mixed-methods study Janice Murray, Yvonne Lynch, Juliet Goldbart, Liz Moulam, Simon Judge, Edward Webb, Mark Jayes, Stuart Meredith, Helen Whittle, Nicola Randall, David Meads, and Stephane Hess. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; November 2020.
• The transition from children’s services to adult services for young people with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder: the CATCh-uS mixed-methods study Astrid Janssens, Helen Eke, Anna Price, Tamsin Newlove-Delgado, Sharon Blake, Cornelius Ani, Philip Asherson, Bryony Beresford, Tobit Emmens, Chris Hollis, Stuart Logan, Moli Paul, Kapil Sayal, Susan Young, and Tamsin Ford. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; November 2020.
• Understanding and improving experiences of care in hospital for people living with dementia, their carers and staff: three systematic reviews Ruth Gwernan-Jones, Ilianna Lourida, Rebecca A Abbott, Morwenna Rogers, Colin Green, Susan Ball, Anthony Hemsley, Debbie Cheeseman, Linda Clare, Darren Moore, Julia Burton, Sue Lawrence, Martyn Rogers, Chrissy Hussey, George Coxon, David J Llewellyn, Tina Naldrett, and Jo Thompson Coon. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; November 2020.
• Understanding the health-care experiences of people with sickle cell disorder transitioning from paediatric to adult services: This Sickle Cell Life, a longitudinal qualitative study Alicia Renedo, Sam Miles, Subarna Chakravorty, Andrea Leigh, John O Warner, and Cicely Marston. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; November 2020.
• The effects of interoperable information technology networks on patient safety: a realist synthesis Justin Keen, Maysam Abdulwahid, Natalie King, Judy Wright, Rebecca Randell, Peter Gardner, Justin Waring, Roberta Longo, Silviya Nikolova, Claire Sloan, and Joanne Greenhalgh. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; October 2020.
• Psychosocial support for families of children with neurodisability who have or are considering a gastrostomy: the G-PATH mixed-methods study Gillian M Craig, Eva Brown Hajdukova, Celia Harding, Chris Flood, Christine McCourt, Diane Sellers, Joy Townsend, Dawn Moss, Catherine Tuffrey, Bryony Donaldson, Maxime Cole, and Anna Gill. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; October 2020.
• Seizure first aid training for people with epilepsy attending emergency departments and their significant others: the SAFE intervention and feasibility RCT Adam Noble, Sarah Nevitt, Emily Holmes, Leone Ridsdale, Myfanwy Morgan, Catrin Tudur-Smith, Dyfrig Hughes, Steve Goodacre, Tony Marson, and Darlene Snape. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; October 2020.
• Social norms interventions to change clinical behaviour in health workers: a systematic review and meta-analysis Sarah Cotterill, Mei Yee Tang, Rachael Powell, Elizabeth Howarth, Laura McGowan, Jane Roberts, Benjamin Brown, and Sarah Rhodes. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; October 2020.
• Immediate versus delayed short-term integrated palliative care for advanced long-term neurological conditions: the OPTCARE Neuro RCT Nilay Hepgul, Rebecca Wilson, Deokhee Yi, Catherine Evans, Sabrina Bajwah, Vincent Crosby, Andrew Wilcock, Fiona Lindsay, Anthony Byrne, Carolyn Young, Karen Groves, Clare Smith, Rachel Burman, K Ray Chaudhuri, Eli Silber, Irene J Higginson, and Wei Gao. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; September 2020.
• An online supported self-management toolkit for relatives of people with psychosis or bipolar experiences: the IMPART multiple case study Fiona Lobban, Duncan Appelbe, Victoria Appleton, Golnar Aref-Adib, Johanna Barraclough, Julie Billsborough, Naomi R Fisher, Sheena Foster, Bethany Gill, David Glentworth, Chris Harrop, Sonia Johnson, Steven H Jones, Tibor Z Kovacs, Elizabeth Lewis, Barbara Mezes, Charlotte Morton, Elizabeth Murray, Puffin O’Hanlon, Vanessa Pinfold, Jo Rycroft-Malone, Ronald Siddle, Jo Smith, Chris J Sutton, Pietro Viglienghi, Andrew Walker, and Catherine Wintermeyer. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; September 2020.
• A framework and toolkit of interventions to enhance reflective learning among health-care professionals: the PEARL mixed-methods study Julian Bion, Olivia Brookes, Celia Brown, Carolyn Tarrant, Julian Archer, Duncan Buckley, Lisa-Marie Buckley, Ian Clement, Felicity Evison, Fang Gao Smith, Chris Gibbins, Emma-Jo Hayton, Jennifer Jones, Richard Lilford, Randeep Mullhi, Greg Packer, Gavin D Perkins, Jonathan Shelton, Catherine Snelson, Paul Sullivan, Ivo Vlaev, Daniel Wolstenholme, Stephen Wright; the PEARL collaboration. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; August 2020.
• Publication and related bias in quantitative health services and delivery research: a multimethod study Abimbola A Ayorinde, Iestyn Williams, Russell Mannion, Fujian Song, Magdalena Skrybant, Richard J Lilford, and Yen-Fu Chen. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; August 2020.
• Temporal variations in quality of acute stroke care and outcomes in London hyperacute stroke units: a mixed-methods study Robert Simister, Georgia B Black, Mariya Melnychuk, Angus IG Ramsay, Abigail Baim-Lance, David L Cohen, Jeannie Eng, Penny D Xanthopoulou, Martin M Brown, Anthony G Rudd, Steve Morris, and Naomi J Fulop. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; August 2020.
• Using co-production to increase activity in acute stroke units: the CREATE mixed-methods study Fiona Jones, Karolina Gombert-Waldron, Stephanie Honey, Geoffrey Cloud, Ruth Harris, Alastair Macdonald, Chris McKevitt, Glenn Robert, and David Clarke. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; August 2020.
• The contribution of the voluntary sector to mental health crisis care: a mixed-methods study Karen Newbigging, James Rees, Rebecca Ince, John Mohan, Doreen Joseph, Michael Ashman, Barbara Norden, Ceri Dare, Suzanne Bourke, and Benjamin Costello. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; July 2020.
• Early morbidities following paediatric cardiac surgery: a mixed-methods study Katherine L Brown, Christina Pagel, Deborah Ridout, Jo Wray, Victor T Tsang, David Anderson, Victoria Banks, David J Barron, Jane Cassidy, Linda Chigaru, Peter Davis, Rodney Franklin, Luca Grieco, Aparna Hoskote, Emma Hudson, Alison Jones, Suzan Kakat, Rhian Lakhani, Monica Lakhanpaul, Andrew McLean, Steve Morris, Veena Rajagopal, Warren Rodrigues, Karen Sheehan, Serban Stoica, Shane Tibby, Martin Utley, and Thomas Witter. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; July 2020.
• Effects of increased distance to urgent and emergency care facilities resulting from health services reconfiguration: a systematic review Duncan Chambers, Anna Cantrell, Susan K Baxter, Janette Turner, and Andrew Booth. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; July 2020.
• The association between primary care quality and health-care use, costs and outcomes for people with serious mental illness: a retrospective observational study Rowena Jacobs, Lauren Aylott, Ceri Dare, Tim Doran, Simon Gilbody, Maria Goddard, Hugh Gravelle, Nils Gutacker, Panagiotis Kasteridis, Tony Kendrick, Anne Mason, Nigel Rice, Jemimah Ride, Najma Siddiqi, and Rachael Williams. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; June 2020.
• Dementia and mild cognitive impairment in prisoners aged over 50 years in England and Wales: a mixed-methods study Katrina Forsyth, Leanne Heathcote, Jane Senior, Baber Malik, Rachel Meacock, Katherine Perryman, Sue Tucker, Rachel Domone, Matthew Carr, Helen Hayes, Roger Webb, Laura Archer-Power, Alice Dawson, Sarah Leonard, David Challis, Stuart Ware, Richard Emsley, Caroline Sanders, Salman Karim, Seena Fazel, Adrian Hayes, Alistair Burns, Mary Piper, and Jenny Shaw. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; June 2020.
• Digital methods to enhance the usefulness of patient experience data in services for long-term conditions: the DEPEND mixed-methods study Caroline Sanders, Papreen Nahar, Nicola Small, Damian Hodgson, Bie Nio Ong, Azad Dehghan, Charlotte A Sharp, William G Dixon, Shôn Lewis, Evangelos Kontopantelis, Gavin Daker-White, Peter Bower, Linda Davies, Humayun Kayesh, Rebecca Spencer, Aneela McAvoy, Ruth Boaden, Karina Lovell, John Ainsworth, Magdalena Nowakowska, Andrew Shepherd, Patrick Cahoon, Richard Hopkins, Dawn Allen, Annmarie Lewis, and Goran Nenadic. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; June 2020.
• Evaluating alcohol intoxication management services: the EDARA mixed-methods study Simon C Moore, Davina Allen, Yvette Amos, Joanne Blake, Alan Brennan, Penny Buykx, Steve Goodacre, Laura Gray, Andy Irving, Alicia O’Cathain, Vaseekaran Sivarajasingam, and Tracey Young. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; June 2020.
• Medication management in older people: the MEMORABLE realist synthesis Ian D Maidment, Sally Lawson, Geoff Wong, Andrew Booth, Anne Watson, Jane McKeown, Hadar Zaman, Judy Mullan, and Sylvia Bailey. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; June 2020.
• Multisystemic therapy compared with management as usual for adolescents at risk of offending: the START II RCT Peter Fonagy, Stephen Butler, David Cottrell, Stephen Scott, Stephen Pilling, Ivan Eisler, Peter Fuggle, Abdullah Kraam, Sarah Byford, James Wason, Jonathan A Smith, Alisa Anokhina, Rachel Ellison, Elizabeth Simes, Poushali Ganguli, Elizabeth Allison, and Ian M Goodyer. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; May 2020.
• Identifying features associated with higher-quality hospital care and shorter length of admission for people with dementia: a mixed-methods study Rahil Sanatinia, Mike J Crawford, Alan Quirk, Chloe Hood, Fabiana Gordon, Peter Crome, Sophie Staniszewska, Gemma Zafarani, Sara Hammond, Alistair Burns, and Kate Seers. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; April 2020.
• Interventions to minimise doctors’ mental ill-health and its impacts on the workforce and patient care: the Care Under Pressure realist review Daniele Carrieri, Mark Pearson, Karen Mattick, Chrysanthi Papoutsi, Simon Briscoe, Geoff Wong, and Mark Jackson. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; April 2020.
• Undiagnosed dementia in primary care: a record linkage study Clare F Aldus, Antony Arthur, Abi Dennington-Price, Paul Millac, Peter Richmond, Tom Dening, Chris Fox, Fiona E Matthews, Louise Robinson, Blossom CM Stephan, Carol Brayne, and George M Savva. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; April 2020.
• Using patient experience data to support improvements in inpatient mental health care: the EURIPIDES multimethod study Scott Weich, Sarah-Jane Fenton, Sophie Staniszewska, Alastair Canaway, David Crepaz-Keay, Michael Larkin, Jason Madan, Carole Mockford, Kamaldeep Bhui, Elizabeth Newton, Charlotte Croft, Una Foye, Aimee Cairns, Emma Ormerod, Stephen Jeffreys, and Frances Griffiths. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; April 2020.
• Workplace-based interventions to promote healthy lifestyles in the NHS workforce: a rapid scoping and evidence map Gary Raine, Sian Thomas, Mark Rodgers, Kath Wright, and Alison Eastwood. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; April 2020.
• Access to and interventions to improve maternity care services for immigrant women: a narrative synthesis systematic review Gina MA Higginbottom, Catrin Evans, Myfanwy Morgan, Kuldip K Bharj, Jeanette Eldridge, Basharat Hussain, and Karen Salt. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; March 2020.
• Delivery, dose, outcomes and resource use of stroke therapy: the SSNAPIEST observational study Matthew Gittins, David Lugo-Palacios, Andy Vail, Audrey Bowen, Lizz Paley, Benjamin Bray, Brenda Gannon, and Sarah F Tyson. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; March 2020.
• Drivers of ‘clinically unnecessary’ use of emergency and urgent care: the DEUCE mixed-methods study Alicia O’Cathain, Emma Knowles, Jaqui Long, Janice Connell, Lindsey Bishop-Edwards, Rebecca Simpson, Joanne Coster, Linda Abouzeid, Shan Bennett, Elizabeth Croot, Jon M Dickson, Steve Goodacre, Enid Hirst, Richard Jacques, Miranda Phillips, Joanne Turnbull, and Janette Turner. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; March 2020.
• The Safer Nursing Care Tool as a guide to nurse staffing requirements on hospital wards: observational and modelling study Peter Griffiths, Christina Saville, Jane E Ball, Rosemary Chable, Andrew Dimech, Jeremy Jones, Yvonne Jeffrey, Natalie Pattison, Alejandra Recio Saucedo, Nicola Sinden, and Thomas Monks. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; March 2020.
• Understanding how front-line staff use patient experience data for service improvement: an exploratory case study evaluation Louise Locock, Chris Graham, Jenny King, Stephen Parkin, Alison Chisholm, Catherine Montgomery, Elizabeth Gibbons, Esther Ainley, Jennifer Bostock, Melanie Gager, Neil Churchill, Sue Dopson, Trish Greenhalgh, Angela Martin, John Powell, Steve Sizmur, and Sue Ziebland. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; March 2020.
• Electronic health records in ambulances: the ERA multiple-methods study Alison Porter, Anisha Badshah, Sarah Black, David Fitzpatrick, Robert Harris-Mayes, Saiful Islam, Matthew Jones, Mark Kingston, Yvette LaFlamme-Williams, Suzanne Mason, Katherine McNee, Heather Morgan, Zoe Morrison, Pauline Mountain, Henry Potts, Nigel Rees, Debbie Shaw, Niro Siriwardena, Helen Snooks, Rob Spaight, and Victoria Williams. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; February 2020.
• Factors influencing utilisation of ‘free-standing’ and ‘alongside’ midwifery units for low-risk births in England: a mixed-methods study Denis Walsh, Helen Spiby, Christine McCourt, Dawn Coleby, Celia Grigg, Simon Bishop, Miranda Scanlon, Lorraine Culley, Jane Wilkinson, Lynne Pacanowski, and Jim Thornton. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; February 2020.
• The impacts of GP federations in England on practices and on health and social care interfaces: four case studies Ruth McDonald, Lisa Riste, Simon Bailey, Fay Bradley, Jonathan Hammond, Sharon Spooner, Rebecca Elvey, and Kath Checkland. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; February 2020.
• Intravenous infusion practices across England and their impact on patient safety: a mixed-methods observational study Ann Blandford, Dominic Furniss, Galal H Galal-Edeen, Gill Chumbley, Li Wei, Astrid Mayer, and Bryony Dean Franklin. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; February 2020.
• A multifaceted intervention to reduce antimicrobial prescribing in care homes: a non-randomised feasibility study and process evaluation Carmel Hughes, David Ellard, Anne Campbell, Rachel Potter, Catherine Shaw, Evie Gardner, Ashley Agus, Dermot O’Reilly, Martin Underwood, Mark Loeb, Bob Stafford, and Michael Tunney. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; February 2020.
• Use of community treatment orders and their outcomes: an observational study Scott Weich, Craig Duncan, Liz Twigg, Orla McBride, Helen Parsons, Graham Moon, Alastair Canaway, Jason Madan, David Crepaz-Keay, Patrick Keown, Swaran Singh, and Kamaldeep Bhui. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; February 2020.
• Access to primary and community health-care services for people 16 years and over with intellectual disabilities: a mapping and targeted systematic review Anna Cantrell, Elizabeth Croot, Maxine Johnson, Ruth Wong, Duncan Chambers, Susan K Baxter, and Andrew Booth. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; January 2020.
• Impact of changing provider remuneration on NHS general dental practitioner services in Northern Ireland: a mixed-methods study Paul Brocklehurst, Martin Tickle, Stephen Birch, Ruth McDonald, Tanya Walsh, Tom Lloyd Goodwin, Harry Hill, Elizabeth Howarth, Michael Donaldson, Donncha O’Carolan, Sandy Fitzpatrick, Gillian McCrory, and Carolyn Slee. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; January 2020.
• The impact of the enhanced recovery pathway and other factors on outcomes and costs following hip and knee replacement: routine data study Andrew Judge, Andrew Carr, Andrew Price, Cesar Garriga, Cyrus Cooper, Daniel Prieto-Alhambra, Fraser Old, George Peat, Jacqueline Murphy, Jose Leal, Karen Barker, Lydia Underdown, Nigel Arden, Rachael Gooberman-Hill, Raymond Fitzpatrick, Sarah Drew, and Mark G Pritchard. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; January 2020.
• Implementation of interventions to reduce preventable hospital admissions for cardiovascular or respiratory conditions: an evidence map and realist synthesis Duncan Chambers, Anna Cantrell, and Andrew Booth. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; January 2020.
• Measuring and optimising the efficiency of community hospital inpatient care for older people: the MoCHA mixed-methods study John Young, Claire Hulme, Andrew Smith, John Buckell, Mary Godfrey, Claire Holditch, Jessica Grantham, Helen Tucker, Pam Enderby, John Gladman, Elizabeth Teale, and Jean-Christophe Thiebaud. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; January 2020.
• Presenting patients with information on their oral health risk: the PREFER three-arm RCT and ethnography Rebecca Harris, Christopher Vernazza, Louise Laverty, Victoria Lowers, Girvan Burnside, Stephen Brown, Susan Higham, and Laura Ternent. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; January 2020.
• Informing NHS policy in ‘digital-first primary care’: a rapid evidence synthesis Mark Rodgers, Gary Raine, Sian Thomas, Melissa Harden, and Alison Eastwood. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; December 2019.
• Multicomponent hospital-led interventions to reduce hospital stay for older adults following elective surgery: a systematic review Michael Nunns, Liz Shaw, Simon Briscoe, Jo Thompson Coon, Anthony Hemsley, John S McGrath, Christopher J Lovegrove, David Thomas, and Rob Anderson. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; December 2019.
• Developing an intervention around referral and admissions to intensive care: a mixed-methods study Chris Bassford, Frances Griffiths, Mia Svantesson, Mandy Ryan, Nicolas Krucien, Jeremy Dale, Sophie Rees, Karen Rees, Agnieszka Ignatowicz, Helen Parsons, Nadine Flowers, Zoe Fritz, Gavin Perkins, Sarah Quinton, Sarah Symons, Catherine White, Huayi Huang, Jake Turner, Mike Brooke, Aimee McCreedy, Caroline Blake, and Anne Slowther. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; November 2019.
• Alternative community-based models of care for young people with anorexia nervosa: the CostED national surveillance study Sarah Byford, Hristina Petkova, Ruth Stuart, Dasha Nicholls, Mima Simic, Tamsin Ford, Geraldine Macdonald, Simon Gowers, Sarah Roberts, Barbara Barrett, Jonathan Kelly, Grace Kelly, Nuala Livingstone, Kandarp Joshi, Helen Smith, and Ivan Eisler. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; October 2019.
• Intentional rounding in hospital wards to improve regular interaction and engagement between nurses and patients: a realist evaluation Ruth Harris, Sarah Sims, Mary Leamy, Ros Levenson, Nigel Davies, Sally Brearley, Robert Grant, Stephen Gourlay, Giampiero Favato, and Fiona Ross. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; October 2019.
• Using online patient feedback to improve NHS services: the INQUIRE multimethod study John Powell, Helen Atherton, Veronika Williams, Fadhila Mazanderani, Farzana Dudhwala, Steve Woolgar, Anne-Marie Boylan, Joanna Fleming, Susan Kirkpatrick, Angela Martin, Michelle van Velthoven, Anya de Iongh, Douglas Findlay, Louise Locock, and Sue Ziebland. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; October 2019.
• Using patient experience data to develop a patient experience toolkit to improve hospital care: a mixed-methods study Laura Sheard, Claire Marsh, Thomas Mills, Rosemary Peacock, Joseph Langley, Rebecca Partridge, Ian Gwilt, and Rebecca Lawton. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; October 2019.
• Improving care for women and girls who have undergone female genital mutilation/cutting: qualitative systematic reviews Catrin Evans, Ritah Tweheyo, Julie McGarry, Jeanette Eldridge, Juliet Albert, Valentine Nkoyo, and Gina Higginbottom. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; September 2019.
• Interventions to manage use of the emergency and urgent care system by people from vulnerable groups: a mapping review Andrew Booth, Louise Preston, Susan Baxter, Ruth Wong, Duncan Chambers, and Janette Turner. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; September 2019.
• A national quality improvement programme to improve survival after emergency abdominal surgery: the EPOCH stepped-wedge cluster RCT Carol J Peden, Tim Stephens, Graham Martin, Brennan C Kahan, Ann Thomson, Kirsty Everingham, David Kocman, Jose Lourtie, Sharon Drake, Alan Girling, Richard Lilford, Kate Rivett, Duncan Wells, Ravi Mahajan, Peter Holt, Fan Yang, Simon Walker, Gerry Richardson, Sally Kerry, Iain Anderson, Dave Murray, David Cromwell, Mandeep Phull, Mike PW Grocott, Julian Bion, Rupert M Pearse; the EPOCH trial group . Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; September 2019.
• Organisational strategies and practices to improve care using patient experience data in acute NHS hospital trusts: an ethnographic study Sara Donetto, Amit Desai, Giulia Zoccatelli, Glenn Robert, Davina Allen, Sally Brearley, and Anne Marie Rafferty. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; September 2019.
• The 10-year impact of a ward-level quality improvement intervention in acute hospitals: a multiple methods study Sophie Sarre, Jill Maben, Peter Griffiths, Rosemary Chable, and Glenn Robert. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; August 2019.
• Digital and online symptom checkers and assessment services for urgent care to inform a new digital platform: a systematic review Duncan Chambers, Anna Cantrell, Maxine Johnson, Louise Preston, Susan K Baxter, Andrew Booth, and Janette Turner. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; August 2019.
• A nurse-led, preventive, psychological intervention to reduce PTSD symptom severity in critically ill patients: the POPPI feasibility study and cluster RCT Paul R Mouncey, Dorothy Wade, Alvin Richards-Belle, Zia Sadique, Jerome Wulff, Richard Grieve, Lydia M Emerson, Chris R Brewin, Sheila Harvey, David Howell, Nicholas Hudson, Imran Khan, Monty Mythen, Deborah Smyth, John Weinman, John Welch, David A Harrison, and Kathryn M Rowan. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; August 2019.
• Automated analysis of free-text comments and dashboard representations in patient experience surveys: a multimethod co-design study Carol Rivas, Daria Tkacz, Laurence Antao, Emmanouil Mentzakis, Margaret Gordon, Sydney Anstee, and Richard Giordano. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; July 2019.
• Innovation to enhance health in care homes and evaluation of tools for measuring outcomes of care: rapid evidence synthesis Barbara Hanratty, Dawn Craig, Katie Brittain, Karen Spilsbury, John Vines, and Paul Wilson. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; July 2019.
• A national registry to assess the value of cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging after primary percutaneous coronary intervention pathway activation: a feasibility cohort study Jessica M Harris, Rachel C Brierley, Maria Pufulete, Chiara Bucciarelli-Ducci, Elizabeth A Stokes, John P Greenwood, Stephen H Dorman, Richard A Anderson, Chris A Rogers, Sarah Wordsworth, Sunita Berry, and Barnaby C Reeves. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; July 2019.
• Non-traditional support workers delivering a brief psychosocial intervention for older people with anxiety and depression: the NOTEPAD feasibility study Heather Burroughs, Bernadette Bartlam, Peter Bullock, Karina Lovell, Reuben Ogollah, Mo Ray, Peter Bower, Waquas Waheed, Simon Gilbody, Tom Kingstone, Elaine Nicholls, and Carolyn A Chew-Graham. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; July 2019.
• Sense-making strategies and help-seeking behaviours associated with urgent care services: a mixed-methods study Joanne Turnbull, Gemma McKenna, Jane Prichard, Anne Rogers, Robert Crouch, Andrew Lennon, and Catherine Pope. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; July 2019.
• Care bundles to reduce re-admissions for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a mixed-methods study Katherine Morton, Emily Sanderson, Padraig Dixon, Anna King, Sue Jenkins, Stephanie J MacNeill, Alison Shaw, Chris Metcalfe, Melanie Chalder, William Hollingworth, Jonathan Benger, James Calvert, and Sarah Purdy. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; June 2019.
• Holistic services for people with advanced disease and chronic or refractory breathlessness: a mixed-methods evidence synthesis Matthew Maddocks, Lisa Jane Brighton, Morag Farquhar, Sara Booth, Sophie Miller, Lara Klass, India Tunnard, Deokhee Yi, Wei Gao, Sabrina Bajwah, William D-C Man, and Irene J Higginson. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; June 2019.
• Births and their outcomes by time, day and year: a retrospective birth cohort data linkage study Alison Macfarlane, Nirupa Dattani, Rod Gibson, Gill Harper, Peter Martin, Miranda Scanlon, Mary Newburn, and Mario Cortina-Borja. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; May 2019.
• Police-related triage interventions for mental health-related incidents: a rapid evidence synthesis Mark Rodgers, Sian Thomas, Jane Dalton, Melissa Harden, and Alison Eastwood. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; May 2019.
• The role of physician associates in secondary care: the PA-SCER mixed-methods study Vari M Drennan, MBE, Mary Halter, Carly Wheeler, Laura Nice, Sally Brearley, James Ennis, Jon Gabe, Heather Gage, Ros Levenson, Simon de Lusignan, Phil Begg, and Jim Parle. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; May 2019.
• A ‘telephone first’ approach to demand management in English general practice: a multimethod evaluation Jennifer Newbould, Sarah Ball, Gary Abel, Matthew Barclay, Tray Brown, Jennie Corbett, Brett Doble, Marc Elliott, Josephine Exley, Anna Knack, Adam Martin, Emma Pitchforth, Catherine Saunders, Edward CF Wilson, Eleanor Winpenny, Miaoqing Yang, and Martin Roland. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; May 2019.
• Comprehensive geriatric assessment for frail older people in acute hospitals: the HoW-CGA mixed-methods study Simon Paul Conroy, Martin Bardsley, Paul Smith, Jenny Neuburger, Eilís Keeble, Sandeepa Arora, Joshua Kraindler, Cono Ariti, Chris Sherlaw-Johnson, Andrew Street, Helen Roberts, Sheila Kennedy, Graham Martin, Kay Phelps, Emma Regen, David Kocman, Patricia McCue, Elizabeth Fisher, and Stuart Parker. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; April 2019.
• Policies and strategies to retain and support the return of experienced GPs in direct patient care: the ReGROUP mixed-methods study John L Campbell, Emily Fletcher, Gary Abel, Rob Anderson, Rupatharshini Chilvers, Sarah G Dean, Suzanne H Richards, Anna Sansom, Rohini Terry, Alex Aylward, Grant Fitzner, Mayam Gomez-Cano, Linda Long, Navonil Mustafee, Sophie Robinson, Philip A Smart, Fiona C Warren, Jo Welsman, and Chris Salisbury. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; April 2019.
• Reablement services for people at risk of needing social care: the MoRe mixed-methods evaluation Bryony Beresford, Rachel Mann, Gillian Parker, Mona Kanaan, Rita Faria, Parvaneh Rabiee, Helen Weatherly, Susan Clarke, Emese Mayhew, Ana Duarte, Alison Laver-Fawcett, and Fiona Aspinal. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; April 2019.
• Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment in hospital and hospital-at-home settings: a mixed-methods study Mike Gardner, Sasha Shepperd, Mary Godfrey, Petra Mäkelä, Apostolos Tsiachristas, Amina Singh-Mehta, Graham Ellis, Pradeep Khanna, Peter Langhorne, Stephen Makin, and David J Stott. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; March 2019.
• Developing and evaluating a tool to measure general practice productivity: a multimethod study Jeremy Dawson, Anna Rigby-Brown, Lee Adams, Richard Baker, Julia Fernando, Amanda Forrest, Anna Kirkwood, Richard Murray, Michael West, Paul Wike, and Michelle Wilde. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; March 2019.
• Refusal and resistance to care by people living with dementia being cared for within acute hospital wards: an ethnographic study Katie Featherstone, Andy Northcott, Jane Harden, Karen Harrison Denning, Rosie Tope, Sue Bale, and Jackie Bridges. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; March 2019.
• Specialist nursing support for unpaid carers of people with dementia: a mixed-methods feasibility study Kate Gridley, Fiona Aspinal, Gillian Parker, Helen Weatherly, Rita Faria, Francesco Longo, and Bernard van den Berg. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; March 2019.
• Developing a reporting guideline to improve meta-ethnography in health research: the eMERGe mixed-methods study Maggie Cunningham, Emma F France, Nicola Ring, Isabelle Uny, Edward AS Duncan, Rachel J Roberts, Ruth G Jepson, Margaret Maxwell, Ruth L Turley, and Jane Noyes. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; February 2019.
• Evaluation of reconfigurations of acute stroke services in different regions of England and lessons for implementation: a mixed-methods study Naomi J Fulop, Angus IG Ramsay, Rachael M Hunter, Christopher McKevitt, Catherine Perry, Simon J Turner, Ruth Boaden, Iliatha Papachristou, Anthony G Rudd, Pippa J Tyrrell, Charles DA Wolfe, and Stephen Morris. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; February 2019.
• Identifying exceptional cystic fibrosis care services: combining statistical process control with focus groups Stephanie J MacNeill, Livia Pierotti, Mohammed A Mohammed, Martin Wildman, Jonathan Boote, Steve Harrison, Siobhán B Carr, Paul Cullinan, Caroline Elston, and Diana Bilton. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; February 2019.
• A patient-centred intervention to improve the management of multimorbidity in general practice: the 3D RCT Chris Salisbury, Mei-See Man, Katherine Chaplin, Cindy Mann, Peter Bower, Sara Brookes, Polly Duncan, Bridie Fitzpatrick, Caroline Gardner, Daisy M Gaunt, Bruce Guthrie, Sandra Hollinghurst, Bryar Kadir, Victoria Lee, John McLeod, Stewart W Mercer, Keith R Moffat, Emma Moody, Imran Rafi, Rebecca Robinson, Alison Shaw, and Joanna Thorn. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; February 2019.
• The role of service factors on variations in place of death: an observational study Wei Gao, Emeka Chukwusa, Julia Verne, Peihan Yu, Giovanna Polato, and Irene J Higginson. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; February 2019.
• Service provision for older homeless people with memory problems: a mixed-methods study Jill Manthorpe, Kritika Samsi, Louise Joly, Maureen Crane, Heather Gage, Ann Bowling, and Ramin Nilforooshan. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; February 2019.
• Analysis of the profile, characteristics, patient experience and community value of community hospitals: a multimethod study Deborah Davidson, Angela Ellis Paine, Jon Glasby, Iestyn Williams, Helen Tucker, Tessa Crilly, John Crilly, Nick Le Mesurier, John Mohan, Daiga Kamerade, David Seamark, and Jan Marriott. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; January 2019.
• The impact of opiate substitution treatment on mortality risk in drug addicts: a natural experiment study Colin D Steer, John Macleod, Kate Tilling, Aaron G Lim, John Marsden, Tim Millar, John Strang, Maggie Telfer, Heather Whitaker, Peter Vickerman, and Matthew Hickman. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; January 2019.
• Interventions to reduce mortality from in-hospital cardiac arrest: a mixed-methods study Helen Hogan, Andrew Hutchings, Jerome Wulff, Catherine Carver, Elizabeth Holdsworth, John Welch, David Harrison, and Nick Black. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; January 2019.
• Experiences of the ‘Nearest Relative’ provisions in the compulsory detention of people under the Mental Health Act: a rapid systematic review Liz Shaw, Michael Nunns, Simon Briscoe, Rob Anderson, and Jo Thompson Coon. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; December 2018.
• Options for possible changes to the blood donation service: health economics modelling Richard Grieve, Sarah Willis, Kaat De Corte, M Zia Sadique, Neil Hawkins, Silvia Perra, Mark Pennington, Jenny Turner, Carmel Moore, Crispin Wickenden, Catharina Koppitz, Gavin Cho, David J Roberts, Gail Miflin, and John A Cairns. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; December 2018.
• A staff training intervention to improve communication between people living with dementia and health-care professionals in hospital: the VOICE mixed-methods development and evaluation study Rowan H Harwood, Rebecca O’Brien, Sarah E Goldberg, Rebecca Allwood, Alison Pilnick, Suzanne Beeke, Louise Thomson, Megan Murray, Ruth Parry, Fiona Kearney, Bryn Baxendale, Kate Sartain, and Justine Schneider. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; December 2018.
• NHS managers’ use of nursing workforce planning and deployment technologies: a realist synthesis Christopher R Burton, Jo Rycroft-Malone, Lynne Williams, Siân Davies, Anne McBride, Beth Hall, Anne-Marie Rowlands, Adrian Jones, Denise Fisher, Margaret Jones, and Maria Caulfield. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; November 2018.
• Nurse staffing levels, missed vital signs and mortality in hospitals: retrospective longitudinal observational study Peter Griffiths, Jane Ball, Karen Bloor, Dankmar Böhning, Jim Briggs, Chiara Dall’Ora, Anya De Iongh, Jeremy Jones, Caroline Kovacs, Antonello Maruotti, Paul Meredith, David Prytherch, Alejandra Recio Saucedo, Oliver Redfern, Paul Schmidt, Nicola Sinden, and Gary Smith. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; November 2018.
• A realist informed mixed-methods evaluation of Schwartz Center Rounds ® in England Jill Maben, Cath Taylor, Jeremy Dawson, Mary Leamy, Imelda McCarthy, Ellie Reynolds, Shilpa Ross, Caroline Shuldham, Laura Bennett, and Catherine Foot. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; November 2018.
• A framework to address key issues of neonatal service configuration in England: the NeoNet multimethods study Emma Villeneuve, Paolo Landa, Michael Allen, Anne Spencer, Sue Prosser, Andrew Gibson, Katie Kelsey, Ruben Mujica-Mota, Brad Manktelow, Neena Modi, Steve Thornton, and Martin Pitt. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; October 2018.
• Culturally adapted Family Intervention (CaFI) for African-Caribbean people diagnosed with schizophrenia and their families: a mixed-methods feasibility study of development, implementation and acceptability Dawn Edge, Amy Degnan, Sarah Cotterill, Katherine Berry, John Baker, Richard Drake, and Kathryn Abel. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; September 2018.
• Evaluating nuanced practices for initiating decision-making in neurology clinics: a mixed-methods study Markus Reuber, Paul Chappell, Clare Jackson, and Merran Toerien. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; September 2018.
• Implementing the Creating Learning Environments for Compassionate Care (CLECC) programme in acute hospital settings: a pilot RCT and feasibility study Jackie Bridges, Ruth M Pickering, Hannah Barker, Rosemary Chable, Alison Fuller, Lisa Gould, Paula Libberton, Ines Mesa-Eguiagaray, James Raftery, Avan Aihie Sayer, Greta Westwood, Wendy Wigley, Guiqing Yao, Shihua Zhu, and Peter Griffiths. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; September 2018.
• Improving care for older people with long-term conditions and social care needs in Salford: the CLASSIC mixed-methods study, including RCT Peter Bower, David Reeves, Matt Sutton, Karina Lovell, Amy Blakemore, Mark Hann, Kelly Howells, Rachel Meacock, Luke Munford, Maria Panagioti, Beth Parkinson, Lisa Riste, Mark Sidaway, Yiu-Shing Lau, Lynsey Warwick-Giles, John Ainsworth, Thomas Blakeman, Ruth Boaden, Iain Buchan, Stephen Campbell, Peter Coventry, Siobhan Reilly, Caroline Sanders, Suzanne Skevington, Waquas Waheed, and Katherine Checkland. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; August 2018.
• Supporting shared decision-making for older people with multiple health and social care needs: a realist synthesis Frances Bunn, Claire Goodman, Bridget Russell, Patricia Wilson, Jill Manthorpe, Greta Rait, Isabel Hodkinson, and Marie-Anne Durand. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; August 2018.
• Understanding new models of integrated care in developed countries: a systematic review Susan Baxter, Maxine Johnson, Duncan Chambers, Anthea Sutton, Elizabeth Goyder, and Andrew Booth. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; August 2018.
• Understanding the knowledge gaps in whistleblowing and speaking up in health care: narrative reviews of the research literature and formal inquiries, a legal analysis and stakeholder interviews Russell Mannion, John Blenkinsopp, Martin Powell, Jean McHale, Ross Millar, Nicholas Snowden, and Huw Davies. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; August 2018.
• Closing five Emergency Departments in England between 2009 and 2011: the closED controlled interrupted time-series analysis Emma Knowles, Neil Shephard, Tony Stone, Lindsey Bishop-Edwards, Enid Hirst, Linda Abouzeid, Suzanne Mason, and Jon Nicholl. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; July 2018.
• Factors associated with hospital emergency readmission and mortality rates in patients with heart failure or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a national observational study Alex Bottle, Kate Honeyford, Faiza Chowdhury, Derek Bell, and Paul Aylin. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; July 2018.
• Advantages and limitations of virtual online consultations in a NHS acute trust: the VOCAL mixed-methods study Sara Shaw, Joseph Wherton, Shanti Vijayaraghavan, Joanne Morris, Satya Bhattacharya, Philippa Hanson, Desirée Campbell-Richards, Seendy Ramoutar, Anna Collard, Isabel Hodkinson, and Trisha Greenhalgh. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; June 2018.
• From programme theory to logic models for multispecialty community providers: a realist evidence synthesis Rod Sheaff, Sarah L Brand, Helen Lloyd, Amanda Wanner, Mauro Fornasiero, Simon Briscoe, Jose M Valderas, Richard Byng, and Mark Pearson. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; June 2018.
• The international knowledge base for new care models relevant to primary care-led integrated models: a realist synthesis Alison Turner, Abeda Mulla, Andrew Booth, Shiona Aldridge, Sharon Stevens, Mahmoda Begum, and Anam Malik. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; June 2018.
• The Person, Interactions and Environment Programme to improve care of people with dementia in hospital: a multisite study Mary Godfrey, John Young, Rosemary Shannon, Ann Skingley, Rosemary Woolley, Frank Arrojo, Dawn Brooker, Kim Manley, and Claire Surr. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; June 2018.
• The potential of alternatives to face-to-face consultation in general practice, and the impact on different patient groups: a mixed-methods case study Helen Atherton, Heather Brant, Sue Ziebland, Annemieke Bikker, John Campbell, Andy Gibson, Brian McKinstry, Tania Porqueddu, and Chris Salisbury. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; June 2018.
• Quality and safety between ward and board: a biography of artefacts study Justin Keen, Emma Nicklin, Andrew Long, Rebecca Randell, Nyantara Wickramasekera, Cara Gates, Claire Ginn, Elizabeth McGinnis, Sean Willis, and Jackie Whittle. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; June 2018.
• Understanding variation in ambulance service non-conveyance rates: a mixed methods study Alicia O’Cathain, Emma Knowles, Lindsey Bishop-Edwards, Joanne Coster, Annabel Crum, Richard Jacques, Cathryn James, Rod Lawson, Maggie Marsh, Rachel O’Hara, Aloysius Niroshan Siriwardena, Tony Stone, Janette Turner, and Julia Williams. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; May 2018.
• Measuring quality in community nursing: a mixed-methods study Sue Horrocks, Katherine Pollard, Lorna Duncan, Christina Petsoulas, Emma Gibbard, Jane Cook, Ruth McDonald, Lesley Wye, Pauline Allen, Pete Husband, Lizanne Harland, Ailsa Cameron, and Chris Salisbury. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; April 2018.
• A meta-ethnography of health-care professionals’ experience of treating adults with chronic non-malignant pain to improve the experience and quality of health care Fran Toye, Kate Seers, and Karen Barker. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; April 2018.
• What evidence is there for the identification and management of frail older people in the emergency department? A systematic mapping review Louise Preston, Duncan Chambers, Fiona Campbell, Anna Cantrell, Janette Turner, and Elizabeth Goyder. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; April 2018.
• The capacity of health service commissioners to use evidence: a case study Graeme Currie, Charlotte Croft, Yaru Chen, Tina Kiefer, Sophie Staniszewska, and Richard J Lilford. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; March 2018.
• An evaluation of a near real-time survey for improving patients’ experiences of the relational aspects of care: a mixed-methods evaluation Chris Graham, Susanne Käsbauer, Robyn Cooper, Jenny King, Steve Sizmur, Crispin Jenkinson, and Laura Kelly. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; March 2018.
• A randomised controlled trial to evaluate the impact of a human rights based approach to dementia care in inpatient ward and care home settings Peter Kinderman, Sarah Butchard, Ashley J Bruen, Abbie Wall, Nia Goulden, Zoe Hoare, Carys Jones, and Rhiannon Edwards. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; March 2018.
• Variation in outcome of hospitalised patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest from acute coronary syndrome: a cohort study Keith Couper, Peter K Kimani, Chris P Gale, Tom Quinn, Iain B Squire, Andrea Marshall, John JM Black, Matthew W Cooke, Bob Ewings, John Long, and Gavin D Perkins. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; March 2018.
• Economic analysis of service and delivery interventions in health care Matt Sutton, Steph Garfield-Birkbeck, Graham Martin, Rachel Meacock, Stephen Morris, Mark Sculpher, Andrew Street, Samuel I Watson, and Richard J Lilford. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; February 2018.
• Evaluation of a national surveillance system for mortality alerts: a mixed-methods study Paul Aylin, Alex Bottle, Susan Burnett, Elizabeth Cecil, Kathryn L Charles, Paul Dawson, Danielle D’Lima, Aneez Esmail, Charles Vincent, Samantha Wilkinson, and Jonathan Benn. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; February 2018.
• An evaluation of a referral management and triage system for oral surgery referrals from primary care dentists: a mixed-methods study Joanna Goldthorpe, Tanya Walsh, Martin Tickle, Stephen Birch, Harry Hill, Caroline Sanders, Paul Coulthard, and Iain A Pretty. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; February 2018.
• Identifying perinatal depression with case-finding instruments: a mixed-methods study (BaBY PaNDA – Born and Bred in Yorkshire PeriNatal Depression Diagnostic Accuracy) Elizabeth Littlewood, Shehzad Ali, Lisa Dyson, Ada Keding, Pat Ansell, Della Bailey, Debrah Bates, Catherine Baxter, Jules Beresford-Dent, Arabella Clarke, Samantha Gascoyne, Carol Gray, Lisa Hackney, Catherine Hewitt, Dorothy Hutchinson, Laura Jefferson, Rachel Mann, David Marshall, Dean McMillan, Alice North, Sarah Nutbrown, Emily Peckham, Jodi Pervin, Zoe Richardson, Kelly Swan, Holly Taylor, Bev Waterhouse, Louise Wills, Rebecca Woodhouse, and Simon Gilbody. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; February 2018.
• Interventions to improve antimicrobial prescribing of doctors in training (IMPACT): a realist review Chrysanthi Papoutsi, Karen Mattick, Mark Pearson, Nicola Brennan, Simon Briscoe, and Geoff Wong. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; February 2018.
• The provision of services in the UK for UK armed forces veterans with PTSD: a rapid evidence synthesis Jane Dalton, Sian Thomas, Hollie Melton, Melissa Harden, and Alison Eastwood. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; February 2018.
• The role of digital communication in patient–clinician communication for NHS providers of specialist clinical services for young people [the Long-term conditions Young people Networked Communication (LYNC) study]: a mixed-methods study Frances E Griffiths, Xavier Armoiry, Helen Atherton, Carol Bryce, Abigail Buckle, Jonathan AK Cave, Rachel Court, Kathryn Hamilton, Thandiwe R Dliwayo, Melina Dritsaki, Patrick Elder, Vera Forjaz, Joe Fraser, Richard Goodwin, Caroline Huxley, Agnieszka Ignatowicz, Eleni Karasouli, Sung Wook Kim, Peter Kimani, Jason J Madan, Harjit Matharu, Mike May, Luhanga Musumadi, Moli Paul, Gyanu Raut, Sailesh Sankaranarayanan, Anne-Marie Slowther, Mark A Sujan, Paul A Sutcliffe, Isabelle Svahnstrom, Frances Taggart, Ayesha Uddin, Alice Verran, Leigh Walker, and Jackie Sturt. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; February 2018.
• Clinical leadership in service redesign using Clinical Commissioning Groups: a mixed-methods study John Storey, Richard Holti, Jean Hartley, Martin Marshall, and Tatum Matharu. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; January 2018.
• The Patient Centred Assessment Method for improving nurse-led biopsychosocial assessment of patients with long-term conditions: a feasibility RCT Margaret Maxwell, Carina Hibberd, Patricia Aitchison, Eileen Calveley, Rebekah Pratt, Nadine Dougall, Christine Hoy, Stewart Mercer, and Isobel Cameron. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; January 2018.
• Predictive risk stratification model: a randomised stepped-wedge trial in primary care (PRISMATIC) Helen Snooks, Kerry Bailey-Jones, Deborah Burge-Jones, Jeremy Dale, Jan Davies, Bridie Evans, Angela Farr, Deborah Fitzsimmons, Jane Harrison, Martin Heaven, Helen Howson, Hayley Hutchings, Gareth John, Mark Kingston, Leo Lewis, Ceri Phillips, Alison Porter, Bernadette Sewell, Daniel Warm, Alan Watkins, Shirley Whitman, Victoria Williams, and Ian T Russell. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; January 2018.
• Self-care support for children and adolescents with long-term conditions: the REfOCUS evidence synthesis Penny Bee, Rebecca Pedley, Amber Rithalia, Gerry Richardson, Steven Pryjmachuk, Susan Kirk, and Peter Bower. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; January 2018.
• The effectiveness of the Older prisoner Health and Social Care Assessment and Plan (OHSCAP): a randomised controlled trial Katrina Forsyth, Laura Archer-Power, Jane Senior, Rachel Meacock, Roger Webb, Richard Emsley, Dawn Edge, Elizabeth Walsh, Stuart Ware, David Challis, Adrian Hayes, Kate O’Hara, Alistair Burns, and Jenny Shaw. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; December 2017.
• Variations in mortality across the week following emergency admission to hospital: linked retrospective observational analyses of hospital episode data in England, 2004/5 to 2013/14 Lu Han, Rachel Meacock, Laura Anselmi, Søren R Kristensen, Matt Sutton, Tim Doran, Stuart Clough, and Maxine Power. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; November 2017.
• Investigating the organisational factors associated with variation in clinical productivity in community pharmacies: a mixed-methods study Sally Jacobs, Fay Bradley, Rebecca Elvey, Tom Fegan, Devina Halsall, Mark Hann, Karen Hassell, Andrew Wagner, and Ellen Schafheutle. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; October 2017.
• Optimal NHS service delivery to care homes: a realist evaluation of the features and mechanisms that support effective working for the continuing care of older people in residential settings Claire Goodman, Sue L Davies, Adam L Gordon, Tom Dening, Heather Gage, Julienne Meyer, Justine Schneider, Brian Bell, Jake Jordan, Finbarr Martin, Steve Iliffe, Clive Bowman, John RF Gladman, Christina Victor, Andrea Mayrhofer, Melanie Handley, and Maria Zubair. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; October 2017.
• Quality and reporting standards, resources, training materials and information for realist evaluation: the RAMESES II project Geoff Wong, Gill Westhorp, Joanne Greenhalgh, Ana Manzano, Justin Jagosh, and Trisha Greenhalgh. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; October 2017.
• Cross-national mixed-methods comparative case study of recovery-focused mental health care planning and co-ordination in acute inpatient mental health settings (COCAPP-A) Alan Simpson, Michael Coffey, Ben Hannigan, Sally Barlow, Rachel Cohen, Aled Jones, Alison Faulkner, Alexandra Thornton, Jitka Všetečková, Mark Haddad, and Karl Marlowe. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; September 2017.
• An evaluation of the effectiveness of annual health checks and quality of health care for adults with intellectual disability: an observational study using a primary care database Iain M Carey, Fay J Hosking, Tess Harris, Stephen DeWilde, Carole Beighton, and Derek G Cook. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; September 2017.
• Evaluating the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of British Sign Language Improving Access to Psychological Therapies: an exploratory study Alys Young, Katherine Rogers, Linda Davies, Mark Pilling, Karina Lovell, Steve Pilling, Rachel Belk, Gemma Shields, Claire Dodds, Malcolm Campbell, Catherine Nassimi-Green, Deborah Buck, and Rosemary Oram. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; August 2017.
• Decommissioning health care: identifying best practice through primary and secondary research – a prospective mixed-methods study Iestyn Williams, Jenny Harlock, Glenn Robert, Russell Mannion, Sally Brearley, and Kelly Hall. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; July 2017.
• Improving risk adjustment in the PRAiS (Partial Risk Adjustment in Surgery) model for mortality after paediatric cardiac surgery and improving public understanding of its use in monitoring outcomes Christina Pagel, Libby Rogers, Katherine Brown, Gareth Ambler, David Anderson, David Barron, Emily Blackshaw, Sonya Crowe, Kate English, Rodney Franklin, Emily Jesper, Laura Meagher, Mike Pearson, Tim Rakow, Marta Salamonowicz, David Spiegelhalter, John Stickley, Joanne Thomas, Shane Tibby, Victor Tsang, Martin Utley, and Thomas Witter. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; July 2017.
• Community hospitals and their services in the NHS: identifying transferable learning from international developments – scoping review, systematic review, country reports and case studies Emma Pitchforth, Ellen Nolte, Jennie Corbett, Céline Miani, Eleanor Winpenny, Edwin van Teijlingen, Natasha Elmore, Sarah King, Sarah Ball, Joanna Miler, and Tom Ling. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; June 2017.
• A realist process evaluation of robot-assisted surgery: integration into routine practice and impacts on communication, collaboration and decision-making Rebecca Randell, Stephanie Honey, Jon Hindmarsh, Natasha Alvarado, Joanne Greenhalgh, Alan Pearman, Andrew Long, Alexandra Cope, Arron Gill, Peter Gardner, Alwyn Kotze, David Wilkinson, David Jayne, Julie Croft, and Dawn Dowding. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; June 2017.
• Seclusion and Psychiatric Intensive Care Evaluation Study (SPICES): combined qualitative and quantitative approaches to the uses and outcomes of coercive practices in mental health services Len Bowers, Alexis E Cullen, Evanthia Achilla, John Baker, Mizanur Khondoker, Leonardo Koeser, Lois Moylan, Sophie Pettit, Alan Quirk, Faisil Sethi, Duncan Stewart, Paul McCrone, and Alex D Tulloch. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; June 2017.
• Improving the capabilities of NHS organisations to use evidence: a qualitative study of redesign projects in Clinical Commissioning Groups Jacqueline Swan, Emmanouil Gkeredakis, Rachel M Manning, Davide Nicolini, David Sharp, and John Powell. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; May 2017.
• NHS top managers, knowledge exchange and leadership: the early development of Academic Health Science Networks – a mixed-methods study Ewan Ferlie, Davide Nicolini, Jean Ledger, Daniela D’Andreta, Dmitrijs Kravcenko, and John de Pury. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; May 2017.
• Better guidelines for better care: accounting for multimorbidity in clinical guidelines – structured examination of exemplar guidelines and health economic modelling Bruce Guthrie, Alexander Thompson, Siobhan Dumbreck, Angela Flynn, Phil Alderson, Moray Nairn, Shaun Treweek, and Katherine Payne. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; April 2017.
• Accessibility and implementation in the UK NHS services of an effective depression relapse prevention programme: learning from mindfulness-based cognitive therapy through a mixed-methods study Jo Rycroft-Malone, Felix Gradinger, Heledd O Griffiths, Rebecca Crane, Andy Gibson, Stewart Mercer, Rob Anderson, and Willem Kuyken. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; March 2017.
• Incentives in Diabetic Eye Assessment by Screening (IDEAS) trial: a three-armed randomised controlled trial of financial incentives Gaby Judah, Ara Darzi, Ivo Vlaev, Laura Gunn, Derek King, Dominic King, Jonathan Valabhji, Lisa Bishop, Adrian Brown, Grant Duncan, Anna Fogg, Gemma Harris, Peter Tyacke, and Colin Bicknell. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; March 2017.
• REACH: a mixed-methods study to investigate the measurement, prediction and improvement of retention and engagement in outpatient HIV care Alison Howarth, Vanessa Apea, Susan Michie, Steve Morris, Memory Sachikonye, Catherine Mercer, Amanda Evans, Valerie Delpech, Caroline Sabin, and Fiona Burns. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; March 2017.
• Updated meta-review of evidence on support for carers Sian Thomas, Jane Dalton, Melissa Harden, Alison Eastwood, and Gillian Parker. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; March 2017.
• Can Health-care Assistant Training improve the relational care of older people? (CHAT) A development and feasibility study of a complex intervention Antony Arthur, Clare Aldus, Sophie Sarre, Jill Maben, Heather Wharrad, Justine Schneider, Garry Barton, Elaine Argyle, Allan Clark, Fiona Nouri, and Caroline Nicholson. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; February 2017.
• The Community IntraVenous Antibiotic Study (CIVAS): a mixed-methods evaluation of patient preferences for and cost-effectiveness of different service models for delivering outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy Jane Minton, Carolyn Czoski Murray, David Meads, Stephane Hess, Armando Vargas-Palacios, Elizabeth Mitchell, Judy Wright, Claire Hulme, David K Raynor, Angela Gregson, Philip Stanley, Kate McLintock, Rachel Vincent, and Maureen Twiddy. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; February 2017.
• Critical time Intervention for Severely mentally ill Prisoners (CrISP): a randomised controlled trial Jenny Shaw, Sarah Conover, Dan Herman, Manuela Jarrett, Morven Leese, Paul McCrone, Caroline Murphy, Jane Senior, Ezra Susser, Graham Thornicroft, Nat Wright, Dawn Edge, Richard Emsley, Charlotte Lennox, Alyson Williams, Henry Cust, Gareth Hopkin, and Caroline Stevenson. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; February 2017.
• Effects of a demand-led evidence briefing service on the uptake and use of research evidence by commissioners of health services: a controlled before-and-after study Paul M Wilson, Kate Farley, Liz Bickerdike, Alison Booth, Duncan Chambers, Mark Lambert, Carl Thompson, Rhiannon Turner, and Ian S Watt. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; February 2017.
• Elective hospital admissions: secondary data analysis and modelling with an emphasis on policies to moderate growth Martin Chalkley, Barry McCormick, Robert Anderson, Maria Jose Aragon, Nazma Nessa, Catia Nicodemo, Stuart Redding, and Raphael Wittenberg. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; February 2017.
• Measuring harm and informing quality improvement in the Welsh NHS: the longitudinal Welsh national adverse events study Sharon Mayor, Elizabeth Baines, Charles Vincent, Annette Lankshear, Adrian Edwards, Mansel Aylward, Helen Hogan, Paul Harper, Jan Davies, Ameet Mamtora, Emily Brockbank, and Jonathon Gray. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; February 2017.
• A mixed-methods study exploring the characteristics and needs of long-stay patients in high and medium secure settings in England: implications for service organisation Birgit Völlm, Rachel Edworthy, Jessica Holley, Emily Talbot, Shazmin Majid, Conor Duggan, Tim Weaver, and Ruth McDonald. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; February 2017.
• Factors that influence variation in clinical decision-making about thrombolysis in the treatment of acute ischaemic stroke: results of a discrete choice experiment Richard G Thomson, Aoife De Brún, Darren Flynn, Laura Ternent, Christopher I Price, Helen Rodgers, Gary A Ford, Matthew Rudd, Emily Lancsar, Stephen Simpson, and John Teah. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; January 2017.
• Functionality and feedback: a realist synthesis of the collation, interpretation and utilisation of patient-reported outcome measures data to improve patient care Joanne Greenhalgh, Sonia Dalkin, Kate Gooding, Elizabeth Gibbons, Judy Wright, David Meads, Nick Black, Jose Maria Valderas, and Ray Pawson. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; January 2017.
• Interventions to improve contact tracing for tuberculosis in specific groups and in wider populations: an evidence synthesis Susan Baxter, Elizabeth Goyder, Duncan Chambers, Maxine Johnson, Louise Preston, and Andrew Booth. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; January 2017.
• Researching outcomes from forensic services for people with intellectual or developmental disabilities: a systematic review, evidence synthesis and expert and patient/carer consultation Catrin Morrissey, Nicole Geach, Regi Alexander, Verity Chester, John Devapriam, Conor Duggan, Peter E Langdon, Bill Lindsay, Jane McCarthy, and Dawn-Marie Walker. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; January 2017.
• Evidence for models of diagnostic service provision in the community: literature mapping exercise and focused rapid reviews Duncan Chambers, Andrew Booth, Susan K Baxter, Maxine Johnson, Katherine C Dickinson, and Elizabeth C Goyder. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; December 2016.
• Location of care for people with serious mental illness (LOCAPE): implications for service use and costs using a mixed-methods approach Paul McCrone, Steve Wright, Darshan Zala, Muralikrishnan Radhakrishnan Kartha, Leonardo Koeser, Mark Ashworth, Peter Schofield, Diana Rose, Sarah Corlett, Anita Patel, Robert Stewart, Daniel Stahl, David Whitney, and Julia Gannon. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; December 2016.
• Getting the most out of knowledge and innovation transfer agents in health care: a qualitative study Alison Bullock, Emma Barnes, Zoe Slote Morris, Jill Fairbank, John de Pury, Rosamund Howell, and Susan Denman. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; November 2016.
• Estimating the risk of adverse birth outcomes in pregnant women undergoing non-obstetric surgery using routinely collected NHS data: an observational study Paul Aylin, Phillip Bennett, Alex Bottle, Stephen Brett, Vinnie Sodhi, Angus Rivers, and Violeta Balinskaite. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; October 2016.
• Patient-level information and costing systems (PLICSs): a mixed-methods study of current practice and future potential for the NHS health economy Sue Llewellyn, Naomi Chambers, Sheila Ellwood, Christos Begkos, and Chris Wood. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; October 2016.
• A qualitative study of decision-making about the implantation of cardioverter defibrillators and deactivation during end-of-life care Holly Standing, Catherine Exley, Darren Flynn, Julian Hughes, Kerry Joyce, Trudie Lobban, Stephen Lord, Daniel Matlock, Janet M McComb, Paul Paes, and Richard G Thomson. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; October 2016.
• Towards improved decision support in the assessment and management of pain for people with dementia in hospital: a systematic meta-review and observational study S José Closs, Dawn Dowding, Nick Allcock, Claire Hulme, John Keady, Elizabeth L Sampson, Michelle Briggs, Anne Corbett, Philip Esterhuizen, John Holmes, Kirstin James, Reena Lasrado, Andrew Long, Elizabeth McGinnis, John O’Dwyer, Caroline Swarbrick, and Valentina Lichtner. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; October 2016.
• Characterising the nature of primary care patient safety incident reports in the England and Wales National Reporting and Learning System: a mixed-methods agenda-setting study for general practice Andrew Carson-Stevens, Peter Hibbert, Huw Williams, Huw Prosser Evans, Alison Cooper, Philippa Rees, Anita Deakin, Emma Shiels, Russell Gibson, Amy Butlin, Ben Carter, Donna Luff, Gareth Parry, Meredith Makeham, Paul McEnhill, Hope Olivia Ward, Raymond Samuriwo, Anthony Avery, Antony Chuter, Liam Donaldson, Sharon Mayor, Sukhmeet Panesar, Aziz Sheikh, Fiona Wood, and Adrian Edwards. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; September 2016.
• Health Equity Indicators for the English NHS: a longitudinal whole-population study at the small-area level Richard Cookson, Miqdad Asaria, Shehzad Ali, Brian Ferguson, Robert Fleetcroft, Maria Goddard, Peter Goldblatt, Mauro Laudicella, and Rosalind Raine. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; September 2016.
• Models of care for the delivery of secondary fracture prevention after hip fracture: a health service cost, clinical outcomes and cost-effectiveness study within a region of England Andrew Judge, M Kassim Javaid, José Leal, Samuel Hawley, Sarah Drew, Sally Sheard, Daniel Prieto-Alhambra, Rachael Gooberman-Hill, Janet Lippett, Andrew Farmer, Nigel Arden, Alastair Gray, Michael Goldacre, Antonella Delmestri, and Cyrus Cooper. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; September 2016.
• Transforming community health services for children and young people who are ill: a quasi-experimental evaluation Gemma Spiers, Victoria Allgar, Gerry Richardson, Kate Thurland, Sebastian Hinde, Yvonne Birks, Kate Gridley, Helen Duncan, Susan Clarke, Linda Cusworth, and Gillian Parker. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; September 2016.
• Improving care for people with dementia: development and initial feasibility study for evaluation of life story work in dementia care Kate Gridley, Jenni Brooks, Yvonne Birks, Kate Baxter, and Gillian Parker. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; August 2016.
• The use of cardiac rehabilitation services to aid the recovery of patients with bowel cancer: a pilot randomised controlled trial with embedded feasibility study Gill Hubbard, Julie Munro, Ronan O’Carroll, Nanette Mutrie, Lisa Kidd, Sally Haw, Richard Adams, Angus JM Watson, Stephen J Leslie, Petra Rauchhaus, Anna Campbell, Helen Mason, Sarkis Manoukian, Gillian Sweetman, and Shaun Treweek. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; August 2016.
• Determining the optimal model for role substitution in NHS dental services in the UK: a mixed-methods study Paul Brocklehurst, Stephen Birch, Ruth McDonald, Harry Hill, Lucy O’Malley, Richard Macey, and Martin Tickle. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; July 2016.
• The Prevalence of Visual Impairment in People with Dementia (the PrOVIDe study): a cross-sectional study of people aged 60–89 years with dementia and qualitative exploration of individual, carer and professional perspectives Michael Bowen, David F Edgar, Beverley Hancock, Sayeed Haque, Rakhee Shah, Sarah Buchanan, Steve Iliffe, Susan Maskell, James Pickett, John-Paul Taylor, and Neil O’Leary. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; July 2016.
• The care of dying people in nursing homes and intensive care units: a qualitative mixed-methods study Elizabeth Perkins, Maureen Gambles, Rachel Houten, Sheila Harper, Alan Haycox, Terri O’Brien, Sarah Richards, Hong Chen, Kate Nolan, and John E Ellershaw. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; June 2016.
• Challenges, solutions and future directions in the evaluation of service innovations in health care and public health Rosalind Raine, Ray Fitzpatrick, Helen Barratt, Gywn Bevan, Nick Black, Ruth Boaden, Peter Bower, Marion Campbell, Jean-Louis Denis, Kelly Devers, Mary Dixon-Woods, Lesley Fallowfield, Julien Forder, Robbie Foy, Nick Freemantle, Naomi J Fulop, Elizabeth Gibbons, Clare Gillies, Lucy Goulding, Richard Grieve, Jeremy Grimshaw, Emma Howarth, Richard J Lilford, Ruth McDonald, Graham Moore, Laurence Moore, Robin Newhouse, Alicia O’Cathain, Zeynep Or, Chrysanthi Papoutsi, Stephanie Prady, Jo Rycroft-Malone, Jasjeet Sekhon, Simon Turner, Samuel I Watson, and Merrick Zwarenstein. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; May 2016.
• Costs and outcomes of increasing access to bariatric surgery for obesity: cohort study and cost-effectiveness analysis using electronic health records Martin C Gulliford, Judith Charlton, Helen P Booth, Alison Fildes, Omar Khan, Marcus Reddy, Mark Ashworth, Peter Littlejohns, A Toby Prevost, and Caroline Rudisill. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; May 2016.
• The INCENTIVE study: a mixed-methods evaluation of an innovation in commissioning and delivery of primary dental care compared with traditional dental contracting Claire Hulme, Peter Robinson, Gail Douglas, Paul Baxter, Barry Gibson, Jenny Godson, Karen Vinall-Collier, Eirini Saloniki, David Meads, Paul Brunton, and Sue Pavitt. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; May 2016.
• Infant deaths in the UK community following successful cardiac surgery: building the evidence base for optimal surveillance, a mixed-methods study Katherine L Brown, Jo Wray, Rachel L Knowles, Sonya Crowe, Jenifer Tregay, Deborah Ridout, David J Barron, David Cunningham, Roger Parslow, Rodney Franklin, Nick Barnes, Sally Hull, and Catherine Bull. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; May 2016.
• Outpatient services and primary care: scoping review, substudies and international comparisons Eleanor Winpenny, Céline Miani, Emma Pitchforth, Sarah Ball, Ellen Nolte, Sarah King, Joanne Greenhalgh, and Martin Roland. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; May 2016.
• Do-not-attempt-cardiopulmonary-resuscitation decisions: an evidence synthesis Gavin D Perkins, Frances Griffiths, Anne-Marie Slowther, Robert George, Zoe Fritz, Philip Satherley, Barry Williams, Norman Waugh, Matthew W Cooke, Sue Chambers, Carole Mockford, Karoline Freeman, Amy Grove, Richard Field, Sarah Owen, Ben Clarke, Rachel Court, and Claire Hawkes. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; April 2016.
• Equity of utilisation of cardiovascular care and mental health services in England: a cohort-based cross-sectional study using small-area estimation Sheena Asthana, Alex Gibson, Trevor Bailey, Graham Moon, Paul Hewson, and Chris Dibben. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; April 2016.
• Improving skills and care standards in the support workforce for older people: a realist synthesis of workforce development interventions Jo Rycroft-Malone, Christopher R Burton, Lynne Williams, Stephen Edwards, Denise Fisher, Beth Hall, Brendan McCormack, Sandra Nutley, Diane Seddon, and Roger Williams. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; April 2016.
• Integrated care to address the physical health needs of people with severe mental illness: a rapid review Mark Rodgers, Jane Dalton, Melissa Harden, Andrew Street, Gillian Parker, and Alison Eastwood. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; April 2016.
• Management by geographical area or management specialised by disorder? A mixed-methods evaluation of the effects of an organisational intervention on secondary mental health care for common mental disorder Alex D Tulloch, Bryony Soper, Anke Görzig, Sophie Pettit, Leonardo Koeser, Catherine Polling, Andrew Watson, Mizanur Khondoker, Diana Rose, Paul McCrone, André Tylee, and Graham Thornicroft. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; March 2016.
• Preparing for Home: a before-and-after study to investigate the effects of a neonatal discharge package aimed at increasing parental knowledge, understanding and confidence in caring for their preterm infant before and after discharge from hospital Jennifer Ingram, Peter S Blair, Jane E Powell, Sarah Manns, Heather Burden, David Pontin, Margaret Redshaw, Lucy Beasant, Claire Rose, Deborah Johnson, Daisy Gaunt, and Peter Fleming. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; March 2016.
• Comorbidity and dementia: a mixed-method study on improving health care for people with dementia (CoDem) Frances Bunn, Anne-Marie Burn, Claire Goodman, Louise Robinson, Greta Rait, Sam Norton, Holly Bennett, Marie Poole, Johan Schoeman, and Carol Brayne. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; February 2016.
• Comparing the cost-effectiveness and clinical effectiveness of a new community in-reach rehabilitation service with the cost-effectiveness and clinical effectiveness of an established hospital-based rehabilitation service for older people: a pragmatic randomised controlled trial with microcost and qualitative analysis – the Community In-reach Rehabilitation And Care Transition (CIRACT) study Opinder Sahota, Ruth Pulikottil-Jacob, Fiona Marshall, Alan Montgomery, Wei Tan, Tracey Sach, Pip Logan, Denise Kendrick, Alison Watson, Maria Walker, and Justin Waring. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; February 2016.
• Cross-national comparative mixed-methods case study of recovery-focused mental health care planning and co-ordination: Collaborative Care Planning Project (COCAPP) Alan Simpson, Ben Hannigan, Michael Coffey, Aled Jones, Sally Barlow, Rachel Cohen, Jitka Všetečková, and Alison Faulkner. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; February 2016.
• Development of risk models for the prediction of new or worsening acute kidney injury on or during hospital admission: a cohort and nested study Michael Bedford, Paul Stevens, Simon Coulton, Jenny Billings, Marc Farr, Toby Wheeler, Maria Kalli, Tim Mottishaw, and Chris Farmer. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; February 2016.
• Demand management for planned care: a realist synthesis Ray Pawson, Joanne Greenhalgh, and Cathy Brennan. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; January 2016.
• Developing a methodological framework for organisational case studies: a rapid review and consensus development process Mark Rodgers, Sian Thomas, Melissa Harden, Gillian Parker, Andrew Street, and Alison Eastwood. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; January 2016.
• Effective board governance of safe care: a (theoretically underpinned) cross-sectioned examination of the breadth and depth of relationships through national quantitative surveys and in-depth qualitative case studies Russell Mannion, Tim Freeman, Ross Millar, and Huw Davies. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; January 2016.
• How can frontline expertise and new models of care best contribute to safely reducing avoidable acute admissions? A mixed-methods study of four acute hospitals Jonathan Pinkney, Susanna Rance, Jonathan Benger, Heather Brant, Sian Joel-Edgar, Dawn Swancutt, Debra Westlake, Mark Pearson, Daniel Thomas, Ingrid Holme, Ruth Endacott, Rob Anderson, Michael Allen, Sarah Purdy, John Campbell, Rod Sheaff, and Richard Byng. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; January 2016.
• Collective action for knowledge mobilisation: a realist evaluation of the Collaborations for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care Jo Rycroft-Malone, Christopher Burton, Joyce Wilkinson, Gill Harvey, Brendan McCormack, Richard Baker, Sue Dopson, Ian Graham, Sophie Staniszewska, Carl Thompson, Steven Ariss, Lucy Melville-Richards, and Lynne Williams. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; December 2015.
• Family-Reported Experiences Evaluation (FREE) study: a mixed-methods study to evaluate families’ satisfaction with adult critical care services in the NHS Stephen E Wright, Emma Walmsley, Sheila E Harvey, Emily Robinson, Paloma Ferrando-Vivas, David A Harrison, Ruth R Canter, Elaine McColl, Annette Richardson, Michael Richardson, Lisa Hinton, Daren K Heyland, and Kathryn M Rowan. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; December 2015.
• What is the evidence for the effectiveness, appropriateness and feasibility of group clinics for patients with chronic conditions? A systematic review Andrew Booth, Anna Cantrell, Louise Preston, Duncan Chambers, and Elizabeth Goyder. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; December 2015.
• What evidence is there on the effectiveness of different models of delivering urgent care? A rapid review Janette Turner, Joanne Coster, Duncan Chambers, Anna Cantrell, Viet-Hai Phung, Emma Knowles, Daniel Bradbury, and Elizabeth Goyder. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; November 2015.
• Ensuring comparisons of health-care providers are fair: development and validation of risk prediction models for critically ill patients David A Harrison, Paloma Ferrando-Vivas, Jason Shahin, and Kathryn M Rowan. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; October 2015.
• Measuring prevalence, reliability and variation in high-risk prescribing in general practice using multilevel modelling of observational data in a population database Bruce Guthrie, Ning Yu, Douglas Murphy, Peter T Donnan, and Tobias Dreischulte. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; October 2015.
• An evidence base to optimise methods for involving patient and public contributors in clinical trials: a mixed-methods study Carrol Gamble, Louise Dudley, Alison Allam, Philip Bell, Deborah Buck, Heather Goodare, Bec Hanley, Jennifer Preston, Alison Walker, Paula R Williamson, and Bridget Young. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; September 2015.
• A realist analysis of hospital patient safety in Wales: applied learning for alternative contexts from a multisite case study Andrea Herepath, Martin Kitchener, and Justin Waring. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; September 2015.
• ReseArch with Patient and Public invOlvement: a RealisT evaluation – the RAPPORT study Patricia Wilson, Elspeth Mathie, Julia Keenan, Elaine McNeilly, Claire Goodman, Amanda Howe, Fiona Poland, Sophie Staniszewska, Sally Kendall, Diane Munday, Marion Cowe, and Stephen Peckham. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; September 2015.
• The Birthplace in England national prospective cohort study: further analyses to enhance policy and service delivery decision-making for planned place of birth Jennifer Hollowell, Rachel Rowe, John Townend, Marian Knight, Yangmei Li, Louise Linsell, Maggie Redshaw, Peter Brocklehurst, Alison Macfarlane, Neil Marlow, Christine McCourt, Mary Newburn, Jane Sandall, and Louise Silverton. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; August 2015.
• Establishing and implementing best practice to reduce unplanned admissions in those aged 85 years and over through system change [Establishing System Change for Admissions of People 85+ (ESCAPE 85+)]: a mixed-methods case study approach Andrew Wilson, Richard Baker, John Bankart, Jay Banerjee, Ran Bhamra, Simon Conroy, Stoyan Kurtev, Kay Phelps, Emma Regen, Stephen Rogers, and Justin Waring. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; August 2015.
• Integration and continuity of primary care: polyclinics and alternatives – a patient-centred analysis of how organisation constrains care co-ordination Rod Sheaff, Joyce Halliday, John Øvretveit, Richard Byng, Mark Exworthy, Stephen Peckham, and Sheena Asthana. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; August 2015.
• Research utilisation and knowledge mobilisation in the commissioning and joint planning of public health interventions to reduce alcohol-related harms: a qualitative case design using a cocreation approach Rosemary K Rushmer, Mandy Cheetham, Lynda Cox, Ann Crosland, Joanne Gray, Liam Hughes, David J Hunter, Karen McCabe, Pete Seaman, Carol Tannahill, and Peter Van Der Graaf. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; August 2015.
• A systematic review and metaethnography to identify how effective, cost-effective, accessible and acceptable self-management support interventions are for men with long-term conditions (SELF-MAN) Paul Galdas, Zoe Darwin, Jennifer Fell, Lisa Kidd, Peter Bower, Christian Blickem, Kerri McPherson, Kate Hunt, Simon Gilbody, and Gerry Richardson. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; August 2015.
• Care and communication between health professionals and patients affected by severe or chronic illness in community care settings: a qualitative study of care at the end of life Kristian Pollock and Eleanor Wilson. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; July 2015.
• Development, validation and evaluation of an instrument for active monitoring of men with clinically localised prostate cancer: systematic review, cohort studies and qualitative study Andrew J Simpkin, Leila Rooshenas, Julia Wade, Jenny L Donovan, J Athene Lane, Richard M Martin, Chris Metcalfe, Peter C Albertsen, Freddie C Hamdy, Lars Holmberg, David E Neal, and Kate Tilling. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; July 2015.
• Evaluation of a continuous monitoring and feedback initiative to improve quality of anaesthetic care: a mixed-methods quasi-experimental study Jonathan Benn, Glenn Arnold, Danielle D’Lima, Igor Wei, Joanna Moore, Floor Aleva, Andrew Smith, Alex Bottle, and Stephen Brett. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; July 2015.
• Contracting with General Dental Services: a mixed-methods study on factors influencing responses to contracts in English general dental practice Rebecca Harris, Elizabeth Perkins, Robin Holt, Steve Brown, Jayne Garner, Sarah Mosedale, Phil Moss, and Alan Farrier. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; June 2015.
• Evaluating the evidence on employee engagement and its potential benefits to NHS staff: a narrative synthesis of the literature Catherine Bailey, Adrian Madden, Kerstin Alfes, Luke Fletcher, Dilys Robinson, Jenny Holmes, Jonathan Buzzeo, and Graeme Currie. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; June 2015.
• Mobilising knowledge to improve UK health care: learning from other countries and other sectors – a multimethod mapping study Huw TO Davies, Alison E Powell, and Sandra M Nutley. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; June 2015.
• The organisation and delivery of health improvement in general practice and primary care: a scoping study Stephen Peckham, Jane Falconer, Steve Gillam, Alison Hann, Sally Kendall, Kiran Nanchahal, Benjamin Ritchie, Rebecca Rogers, and Andrew Wallace. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; June 2015.
• Delivering the aims of the Collaborations for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care: understanding their strategies and contributions Bryony Soper, Saba Hinrichs, Samuel Drabble, Ohid Yaqub, Sonja Marjanovic, Stephen Hanney, and Ellen Nolte. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; May 2015.
• An evidence synthesis of risk identification, assessment and management for young people using tier 4 inpatient child and adolescent mental health services Ben Hannigan, Deborah Edwards, Nicola Evans, Elizabeth Gillen, Mirella Longo, Steven Pryjmachuk, and Gemma Trainor. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; May 2015.
• Patient safety in ambulance services: a scoping review Joanne D Fisher, Karoline Freeman, Aileen Clarke, Peter Spurgeon, Mike Smyth, Gavin D Perkins, Mark-Alexander Sujan, and Matthew W Cooke. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; May 2015.
• A qualitative and quantitative evaluation of the Advancing Quality pay-for-performance programme in the NHS North West Ruth McDonald, Ruth Boaden, Martin Roland, Søren Rud Kristensen, Rachel Meacock, Yiu-Shing Lau, Tom Mason, Alex J Turner, and Matt Sutton. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; May 2015.
• Right cot, right place, right time: improving the design and organisation of neonatal care networks – a computer simulation study Michael Allen, Anne Spencer, Andy Gibson, Justin Matthews, Alex Allwood, Sue Prosser, and Martin Pitt. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; May 2015.
• What is the evidence on interventions to manage referral from primary to specialist non-emergency care? A systematic review and logic model synthesis Lindsay Blank, Susan Baxter, Helen Buckley Woods, Elizabeth Goyder, Andrew Lee, Nick Payne, and Melanie Rimmer. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; May 2015.
• The delivery of chemotherapy at home: an evidence synthesis Mark Corbett, Morag Heirs, Micah Rose, Alison Smith, Lisa Stirk, Gerry Richardson, Daniel Stark, Daniel Swinson, Dawn Craig, and Alison Eastwood. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; April 2015.
• Do higher primary care practice performance scores predict lower rates of emergency admissions for persons with serious mental illness? An analysis of secondary panel data Rowena Jacobs, Nils Gutacker, Anne Mason, Maria Goddard, Hugh Gravelle, Tony Kendrick, Simon Gilbody, Lauren Aylott, and June Wainwright. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; April 2015.
• Knowledge exchange in health-care commissioning: case studies of the use of commercial, not-for-profit and public sector agencies, 2011–14 Lesley Wye, Emer Brangan, Ailsa Cameron, John Gabbay, Jonathan Klein, and Catherine Pope. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; April 2015.
• The management of individuals with enduring moderate to severe mental health needs: a participatory evaluation of client journeys and the interface of mental health services with the criminal justice system in Cornwall Susan Lea, Lynne Callaghan, Susan Eick, Margaret Heslin, John Morgan, Mark Bolt, Andrew Healey, Barbara Barrett, Diana Rose, Anita Patel, and Graham Thornicroft. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; April 2015.
• A national study of practice patterns in UK renal units in the use of dialysis and conservative kidney management to treat people aged 75 years and over with chronic kidney failure Paul Roderick, Hugh Rayner, Sarah Tonkin-Crine, Ikumi Okamoto, Caroline Eyles, Geraldine Leydon, Miriam Santer, Jonathan Klein, Guiqing Lily Yao, Fliss Murtagh, Ken Farrington, Fergus Caskey, Charles Tomson, Fiona Loud, Emma Murphy, Robert Elias, Roger Greenwood, and Donal O’Donoghue. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; April 2015.
• Service user engagement and health service reconfiguration: a rapid evidence synthesis Jane Dalton, Duncan Chambers, Melissa Harden, Andrew Street, Gillian Parker, and Alison Eastwood. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; April 2015.
• Towards a framework for enhancing procurement and supply chain management practice in the NHS: lessons for managers and clinicians from a synthesis of the theoretical and empirical literature Joe Sanderson, Chris Lonsdale, Russell Mannion, and Tatum Matharu. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; April 2015.
• Using clinical practice variations as a method for commissioners and clinicians to identify and prioritise opportunities for disinvestment in health care: a cross-sectional study, systematic reviews and qualitative study William Hollingworth, Leila Rooshenas, John Busby, Christine E Hine, Padmanabhan Badrinath, Penny F Whiting, Theresa HM Moore, Amanda Owen-Smith, Jonathan AC Sterne, Hayley E Jones, Claire Beynon, and Jenny L Donovan. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; April 2015.
• Delivering patient choice in clinical practice: a conversation analytic study of communication practices used in neurology clinics to involve patients in decision-making Markus Reuber, Merran Toerien, Rebecca Shaw, and Roderick Duncan. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; March 2015.
• The dynamics of quality: a national panel study of evidence-based standards Antonia C Hardcastle, Luke TA Mounce, Suzanne H Richards, Max O Bachmann, Allan Clark, William E Henley, John L Campbell, David Melzer, and Nicholas Steel. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; March 2015.
• Insights from the clinical assurance of service reconfiguration in the NHS: the drivers of reconfiguration and the evidence that underpins it – a mixed-methods study Candace Imison, Lara Sonola, Matthew Honeyman, Shilpa Ross, and Nigel Edwards. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; March 2015.
• Multisite implementation of trained volunteer doula support for disadvantaged childbearing women: a mixed-methods evaluation Helen Spiby, Josephine M Green, Zoe Darwin, Helen Willmot, David Knox, Jenny McLeish, and Murray Smith. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; March 2015.
• NHS commissioning practice and health system governance: a mixed-methods realistic evaluation Rod Sheaff, Nigel Charles, Ann Mahon, Naomi Chambers, Verdiana Morando, Mark Exworthy, Richard Byng, Russell Mannion, and Sue Llewellyn. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; March 2015.
• Planning for a cohort study to investigate the impact and management of influenza in pregnancy in a future pandemic Marian Knight, Peter Brocklehurst, Pat O’Brien, Maria A Quigley, and Jennifer J Kurinczuk. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; March 2015.
• Evaluating a major innovation in hospital design: workforce implications and impact on patient and staff experiences of all single room hospital accommodation Jill Maben, Peter Griffiths, Clarissa Penfold, Michael Simon, Elena Pizzo, Janet Anderson, Glenn Robert, Jane Hughes, Trevor Murrells, Sally Brearley, and James Barlow. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; February 2015.
• Improving community health networks for people with severe mental illness: a case study investigation Vanessa Pinfold, Daryl Sweet, Ian Porter, Cath Quinn, Richard Byng, Chris Griffiths, Julie Billsborough, Doyo Gragn Enki, Ruth Chandler, Martin Webber, John Larsen, John Carpenter, and Peter Huxley. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; February 2015.
• Improving practice in safeguarding at the interface between hospital services and children’s social care: a mixed-methods case study Susan White, David Wastell, Suzanne Smith, Christopher Hall, Emilie Whitaker, Geoff Debelle, Russell Mannion, and Justin Waring. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; February 2015.
• Translation into British Sign Language and validation of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire Sophie Roberts, Barry Wright, Kate Moore, Josie Smith, Victoria Allgar, Alan Tennant, Caroline Doherty, Ellen Hughes, Danielle Collingridge Moore, Richard Ogden, Helen Phillips, Lilli Beese, and Katherine Rogers. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; February 2015.
• Secondary analysis and literature review of community rehabilitation and intermediate care: an information resource Steven M Ariss, Pamela M Enderby, Tony Smith, Susan A Nancarrow, Mike J Bradburn, Deborah Harrop, Stuart G Parker, Ann McDonnell, Simon Dixon, Tony Ryan, Alexandra Hayman, and Michael Campbell. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; January 2015.
• Explaining variation in emergency admissions: a mixed-methods study of emergency and urgent care systems Alicia O’Cathain, Emma Knowles, Janette Turner, Ravi Maheswaran, Steve Goodacre, Enid Hirst, and Jon Nicholl. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; December 2014.
• Learning for the NHS on procurement and supply chain management: a rapid evidence assessment Saba Hinrichs, Deepa Jahagirdar, Céline Miani, Benoit Guerin, and Ellen Nolte. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; December 2014.
• Organisational interventions to reduce length of stay in hospital: a rapid evidence assessment Céline Miani, Sarah Ball, Emma Pitchforth, Josephine Exley, Sarah King, Martin Roland, Jonathan Fuld, and Ellen Nolte. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; December 2014.
• A qualitative study of decision-making and safety in ambulance service transitions Rachel O’Hara, Maxine Johnson, Enid Hirst, Andrew Weyman, Deborah Shaw, Peter Mortimer, Chris Newman, Matthew Storey, Janette Turner, Suzanne Mason, Tom Quinn, Jane Shewan, and A Niroshan Siriwardena. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; December 2014.
• A rapid synthesis of the evidence on interventions supporting self-management for people with long-term conditions: PRISMS – Practical systematic Review of Self-Management Support for long-term conditions Stephanie JC Taylor, Hilary Pinnock, Eleni Epiphaniou, Gemma Pearce, Hannah L Parke, Anna Schwappach, Neetha Purushotham, Sadhana Jacob, Chris J Griffiths, Trisha Greenhalgh, and Aziz Sheikh. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; December 2014.
• Reducing Care Utilisation through Self-management Interventions (RECURSIVE): a systematic review and meta-analysis Maria Panagioti, Gerry Richardson, Elizabeth Murray, Anne Rogers, Anne Kennedy, Stanton Newman, Nicola Small, and Peter Bower. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; December 2014.
• Specialist rehabilitation for people with Parkinson’s disease in the community: a randomised controlled trial Heather Gage, Linda Grainger, Sharlene Ting, Peter Williams, Christina Chorley, Gillian Carey, Neville Borg, Karen Bryan, Beverly Castleton, Patrick Trend, Julie Kaye, Jake Jordan, and Derick Wade. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; December 2014.
• Staff satisfaction and organisational performance: evidence from a longitudinal secondary analysis of the NHS staff survey and outcome data Martin Powell, Jeremy Dawson, Anna Topakas, Joan Durose, and Chris Fewtrell. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; December 2014.
• Variation in compulsory psychiatric inpatient admission in England: a cross-sectional, multilevel analysis Scott Weich, Orla McBride, Liz Twigg, Patrick Keown, Eva Cyhlarova, David Crepaz-Keay, Helen Parsons, Jan Scott, and Kamaldeep Bhui. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; December 2014.
• Can valid and practical risk-prediction or casemix adjustment models, including adjustment for comorbidity, be generated from English hospital administrative data (Hospital Episode Statistics)? A national observational study Alex Bottle, Rene Gaudoin, Rosalind Goudie, Simon Jones, and Paul Aylin. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; November 2014.
• Commissioning for long-term conditions: hearing the voice of and engaging users – a qualitative multiple case study Stephen Peckham, Patricia Wilson, Lorraine Williams, Jane Smiddy, Sally Kendall, Fiona Brooks, Joanne Reay, Douglas Smallwood, and Linda Bloomfield. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; November 2014.
• The design of a survey questionnaire to measure perceptions and behaviour during an influenza pandemic: the Flu TElephone Survey Template (FluTEST) G James Rubin, Savita Bakhshi, Richard Amlôt, Nicola Fear, Henry WW Potts, and Susan Michie. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; November 2014.
• Geographical and temporal Understanding In place of Death in England (1984–2010): analysis of trends and associated factors to improve end-of-life Care (GUIDE_Care) – primary research Wei Gao, Yuen K Ho, Julia Verne, Emma Gordon, and Irene J Higginson. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; November 2014.
• Informing the development of NICE (National Institute for Health and Care Excellence) quality standards through secondary analysis of qualitative narrative interviews on patients’ experiences Sue Ziebland, Louise Locock, Ray Fitzpatrick, Tim Stokes, Glenn Robert, Norma O’Flynn, Kristina Bennert, Sara Ryan, Victoria Thomas, and Angela Martin. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; November 2014.
• A mixed-methods evaluation of transformational change in NHS North East David J Hunter, Jonathan Erskine, Chris Hicks, Tom McGovern, Adrian Small, Ed Lugsden, Paula Whitty, Ian Nick Steen, and Martin Eccles. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; November 2014.
• Responsiveness of primary care services: development of a patient-report measure – qualitative study and initial quantitative pilot testing Carolyn Tarrant, Emma Angell, Richard Baker, Mary Boulton, George Freeman, Patricia Wilkie, Peter Jackson, Fatimah Wobi, and Diane Ketley. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; November 2014.
• Rethinking resistance to ‘big IT’: a sociological study of why and when healthcare staff do not use nationally mandated information and communication technologies Trisha Greenhalgh, Deborah Swinglehurst, and Rob Stones. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; November 2014.
• What evidence is there for a relationship between organisational features and patient outcomes in congenital heart disease services? A rapid review Janette Turner, Louise Preston, Andrew Booth, Colin O’Keeffe, Fiona Campbell, Amrita Jesurasa, Katy Cooper, and Elizabeth Goyder. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; November 2014.
• The efficient use of the maternity workforce and the implications for safety and quality in maternity care: a population-based, cross-sectional study Jane Sandall, Trevor Murrells, Miranda Dodwell, Rod Gibson, Susan Bewley, Kirstie Coxon, Debra Bick, Graham Cookson, Cathy Warwick, and Diana Hamilton-Fairley. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; October 2014.
• Improving the effectiveness of multidisciplinary team meetings for patients with chronic diseases: a prospective observational study Rosalind Raine, Isla Wallace, Caoimhe Nic a’ Bháird, Penny Xanthopoulou, Anne Lanceley, Alex Clarke, Archie Prentice, David Ardron, Miriam Harris, J Simon R Gibbs, Ewan Ferlie, Michael King, Jane M Blazeby, Susan Michie, Gill Livingston, and Julie Barber. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; October 2014.
• Public involvement in research: assessing impact through a realist evaluation David Evans, Jane Coad, Kiera Cottrell, Jane Dalrymple, Rosemary Davies, Christine Donald, Vito Laterza, Amy Long, Amanda Longley, Pam Moule, Katherine Pollard, Jane Powell, Anna Puddicombe, Cathy Rice, and Ruth Sayers. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; October 2014.
• A systematic review of the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of peer-based interventions to maintain and improve offender health in prison settings Jane South, Anne-Marie Bagnall, Claire Hulme, James Woodall, Roberta Longo, Rachael Dixey, Karina Kinsella, Gary Raine, Karen Vinall-Collier, and Judy Wright. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; October 2014.
• Targeting the Use of Reminders and Notifications for Uptake by Populations (TURNUP): a systematic review and evidence synthesis Sionnadh McLean, Melanie Gee, Andrew Booth, Sarah Salway, Susan Nancarrow, Mark Cobb, and Sadiq Bhanbhro. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; October 2014.
• A cross-sectional prevalence survey of psychotropic medication prescribing patterns in prisons in England Lamiece Hassan, Martin Frisher, Jane Senior, Mary Tully, Roger Webb, David While, and Jenny Shaw. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; September 2014.
• Development of methodological guidance, publication standards and training materials for realist and meta-narrative reviews: the RAMESES (Realist And Meta-narrative Evidence Syntheses – Evolving Standards) project Geoff Wong, Trish Greenhalgh, Gill Westhorp, and Ray Pawson. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; September 2014.
• An ethnographic study of knowledge sharing across the boundaries between care processes, services and organisations: the contributions to ‘safe’ hospital discharge Justin Waring, Fiona Marshall, Simon Bishop, Opinder Sahota, Marion Walker, Graeme Currie, Rebecca Fisher, and Tony Avery. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; September 2014.
• A formative evaluation of Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care (CLAHRC): institutional entrepreneurship for service innovation Andy Lockett, Nellie El Enany, Graeme Currie, Eivor Oborn, Michael Barrett, Girts Racko, Simon Bishop, and Justin Waring. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; September 2014.
• A qualitative study of the knowledge-brokering role of middle-level managers in service innovation: managing the translation gap in patient safety for older persons’ care Graeme Currie, Nicola Burgess, Leroy White, Andy Lockett, John Gladman, and Justin Waring. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; September 2014.
• The use of a collaborative structured methodology for the development of a multifaceted intervention programme for the management of asthma (the MIA project), tailored to the needs of children and families of South Asian origin: a community-based, participatory study Monica Lakhanpaul, Deborah Bird, Lorraine Culley, Nicky Hudson, Noelle Robertson, Narynder Johal, Melanie McFeeters, Charlotte Hamlyn-Williams, and Mark Johnson. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; September 2014.
• Developing a high-performance support workforce in acute care: innovation, evaluation and engagement Ian Kessler, Karen Spilsbury, and Paul Heron. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; August 2014.
• Frequency of visual field testing when monitoring patients newly diagnosed with glaucoma: mixed methods and modelling David P Crabb, Richard A Russell, Rizwan Malik, Nitin Anand, Helen Baker, Trishal Boodhna, Carol Bronze, Simon SM Fung, David F Garway-Heath, Fiona C Glen, Rodolfo Hernández, James F Kirwan, Claire Lemer, Andrew I McNaught, and Ananth C Viswanathan. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; August 2014.
• Keeping knowledgeable: how NHS chief executive officers mobilise knowledge and information in their daily work Davide Nicolini, John Powell, and Maja Korica. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; August 2014.
• An exploration of the implementation of open disclosure of adverse events in the UK: a scoping review and qualitative exploration Yvonne Birks, Reema Harrison, Kate Bosanquet, Jill Hall, Melissa Harden, Vikki Entwistle, Ian Watt, Peter Walsh, Sarah Ronaldson, David Roberts, Joy Adamson, John Wright, and Rick Iedema. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; July 2014.
• Facilitating technology adoption in the NHS: negotiating the organisational and policy context – a qualitative study Sue Llewellyn, Rob Procter, Gill Harvey, Gregory Maniatopoulos, and Alan Boyd. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; July 2014.
• Initiatives to reduce length of stay in acute hospital settings: a rapid synthesis of evidence relating to enhanced recovery programmes Fiona Paton, Duncan Chambers, Paul Wilson, Alison Eastwood, Dawn Craig, Dave Fox, David Jayne, and Erika McGinnes. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; July 2014.
• Meeting the support needs of patients with complex regional pain syndrome through innovative use of wiki technology: a mixed-methods study Jeff Gavin, Karen Rodham, Neil Coulson, and Leon Watts. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; July 2014.
• A mixed-methods study exploring therapeutic relationships and their association with service user satisfaction in acute psychiatric wards and crisis residential alternatives Angela Sweeney, Sarah Fahmy, Fiona Nolan, Nicola Morant, Zoe Fox, Brynmor Lloyd-Evans, David Osborn, Emma Burgess, Helen Gilburt, Rosemarie McCabe, and Sonia Johnson. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; July 2014.
• New ways of working in mental health services: a qualitative, comparative case study assessing and informing the emergence of new peer worker roles in mental health services in England Steve Gillard, Christine Edwards, Sarah Gibson, Jess Holley, and Katherine Owen. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; July 2014.
• Developing a model of mental health self-care support for children and young people through an integrated evaluation of available types of provision involving systematic review, meta-analysis and case study Steven Pryjmachuk, Rebecca Elvey, Susan Kirk, Sarah Kendal, Peter Bower, and Roger Catchpole. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; June 2014.
• Transitions at the end of life for older adults – patient, carer and professional perspectives: a mixed-methods study Barbara Hanratty, Elizabeth Lowson, Gunn Grande, Sheila Payne, Julia Addington-Hall, Nicole Valtorta, and Jane Seymour. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; June 2014.
• Being a manager, becoming a professional? A case study and interview-based exploration of the use of management knowledge across communities of practice in health-care organisations Mike Bresnen, Damian Hodgson, Simon Bailey, Paula Hyde, and John Hassard. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; May 2014.
• Informing the NHS Outcomes Framework: evaluating meaningful health outcomes for children with neurodisability using multiple methods including systematic review, qualitative research, Delphi survey and consensus meeting Christopher Morris, Astrid Janssens, Amanda Allard, Joanne Thompson Coon, Valerie Shilling, Richard Tomlinson, Jane Williams, Andrew Fellowes, Morwenna Rogers, Karen Allen, Bryony Beresford, Colin Green, Crispin Jenkinson, Alan Tennant, and Stuart Logan. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; May 2014.
• Investigating the contribution of physician assistants to primary care in England: a mixed-methods study Vari M Drennan, Mary Halter, Sally Brearley, Wilfred Carneiro, Jonathan Gabe, Heather Gage, Robert Grant, Louise Joly, and Simon de Lusignan. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; May 2014.
• Mobilising identities: the shape and reality of middle and junior managers’ working lives – a qualitative study Janet Harvey, Ellen Annandale, John Loan-Clarke, Olga Suhomlinova, and Nina Teasdale. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; May 2014.
• Networked innovation in the health sector: comparative qualitative study of the role of Collaborations for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care in translating research into practice Harry Scarbrough, Daniela D’Andreta, Sarah Evans, Marco Marabelli, Sue Newell, John Powell, and Jacky Swan. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; May 2014.
• The role of informal networks in creating knowledge among health-care managers: a prospective case study Vicky Ward, Robert West, Simon Smith, Steven McDermott, Justin Keen, Ray Pawson, and Allan House. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; May 2014.
• How do managers and leaders in the National Health Service and social care respond to service user involvement in mental health services in both its traditional and emergent forms? The ENSUE study Diana Rose, Marian Barnes, Mike Crawford, Edward Omeni, Dee MacDonald, and Aaron Wilson. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; April 2014.
• Outcomes assessment for people with long-term neurological conditions: a qualitative approach to developing and testing a checklist in integrated care Fiona Aspinal, Sylvia Bernard, Gemma Spiers, and Gillian Parker. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; April 2014.
• Clinical handover within the emergency care pathway and the potential risks of clinical handover failure (ECHO): primary research Mark Sujan, Peter Spurgeon, Matthew Inada-Kim, Michelle Rudd, Larry Fitton, Simon Horniblow, Steve Cross, Peter Chessum, and Matthew W Cooke. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; March 2014.
• Developing and evaluating a child-centred intervention for diabetes medicine management using mixed methods and a multicentre randomised controlled trial Jane P Noyes, Lesley Lowes, Rhiannon Whitaker, Davina Allen, Cynthia Carter, Rhiannon T Edwards, Joanne Rycroft-Malone, Janice Sharp, Deborah Edwards, Llinos Haf Spencer, Yvonne Sylvestre, Seow Tien Yeo, and John W Gregory. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; March 2014.
• An ethnographic organisational study of alongside midwifery units: a follow-on study from the Birthplace in England programme Christine McCourt, Juliet Rayment, Susanna Rance, and Jane Sandall. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; March 2014.
• Making sense of evidence in management decisions: the role of research-based knowledge on innovation adoption and implementation in health care Yiannis Kyratsis, Raheelah Ahmad, Kyriakos Hatzaras, Michiyo Iwami, and Alison Holmes. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; March 2014.
• Testing accelerated experience-based co-design: a qualitative study of using a national archive of patient experience narrative interviews to promote rapid patient-centred service improvement Louise Locock, Glenn Robert, Annette Boaz, Sonia Vougioukalou, Caroline Shuldham, Jonathan Fielden, Sue Ziebland, Melanie Gager, Ruth Tollyfield, and John Pearcey. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; February 2014.
• The work, workforce, technology and organisational implications of the ‘111’ single point of access telephone number for urgent (non-emergency) care: a mixed-methods case study Joanne Turnbull, Catherine Pope, Alison Rowsell, Jane Prichard, Susan Halford, Jeremy Jones, Carl May, and Valerie Lattimer. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; February 2014.
• Implications for the NHS of inward and outward medical tourism: a policy and economic analysis using literature review and mixed-methods approaches Neil Lunt, Richard D Smith, Russell Mannion, Stephen T Green, Mark Exworthy, Johanna Hanefeld, Daniel Horsfall, Laura Machin, and Hannah King. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; January 2014.
• Variations in outcome and costs among NHS providers for common surgical procedures: econometric analyses of routinely collected data Andrew Street, Nils Gutacker, Chris Bojke, Nancy Devlin, and Silvio Daidone. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; January 2014.
• An evaluation of foundation doctor training: a mixed-methods study of the impact on workforce well-being and patient care [the Evaluating the Impact of Doctors in Training (EDiT) study] S Mason, C O’Keeffe, A Carter, R O’Hara, and C Stride. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; December 2013.
• Identifying the factors affecting the implementation of strategies to promote a safer environment for patients with learning disabilities in NHS hospitals: a mixed-methods study I Tuffrey-Wijne, N Giatras, L Goulding, E Abraham, L Fenwick, C Edwards, and S Hollins. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; December 2013.
• Towards equitable commissioning for our multiethnic society: a mixed-methods qualitative investigation of evidence utilisation by strategic commissioners and public health managers S Salway, D Turner, G Mir, B Bostan, L Carter, J Skinner, K Gerrish, and GTH Ellison. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; December 2013.
• A meta-ethnography of patients’ experience of chronic non-malignant musculoskeletal pain F Toye, K Seers, N Allcock, M Briggs, E Carr, J Andrews, and K Barker. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; November 2013.
• Seasonal Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness (SIVE): an observational retrospective cohort study – exploitation of a unique community-based national-linked database to determine the effectiveness of the seasonal trivalent influenza vaccine CR Simpson, N Lone, K Kavanagh, LD Ritchie, C Robertson, A Sheikh, and J McMenamin. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; November 2013.
• Transitions to palliative care for older people in acute hospitals: a mixed-methods study M Gott, C Ingleton, C Gardiner, N Richards, M Cobb, T Ryan, B Noble, M Bennett, J Seymour, S Ward, and C Parker. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; November 2013.
• Can an epilepsy nurse specialist-led self-management intervention reduce attendance at emergency departments and promote well-being for people with severe epilepsy? A non-randomised trial with a nested qualitative phase L Ridsdale, P McCrone, M Morgan, L Goldstein, P Seed, and A Noble. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; October 2013.
• Engagement in research: an innovative three-stage review of the benefits for health-care performance S Hanney, A Boaz, T Jones, and B Soper. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; October 2013.
• Facilitating knowledge exchange between health-care sectors, organisations and professions: a longitudinal mixed-methods study of boundary-spanning processes and their impact on health-care quality L Nasir, G Robert, M Fischer, I Norman, T Murrells, and P Schofield. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; October 2013.
• Towards a framework for enhancing the performance of NHS boards: a synthesis of the evidence about board governance, board effectiveness and board development N Chambers, G Harvey, R Mannion, J Bond, and J Marshall. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; October 2013.
• Health and social care services for older male adults in prison: the identification of current service provision and piloting of an assessment and care planning model J Senior, K Forsyth, E Walsh, K O'Hara, C Stevenson, A Hayes, V Short, R Webb, D Challis, S Fazel, A Burns, and J Shaw. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; August 2013.
• Exploring types of individual unlearning by local health-care managers: an original empirical approach CR Coombs, D Hislop, J Holland, SLC Bosley, and E Manful. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; June 2013.
• How do they manage? A qualitative study of the realities of middle and front-line management work in health care DA Buchanan, D Denyer, J Jaina, C Kelliher, C Moore, E Parry, and C Pilbeam. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; June 2013.
• Support matters: a mixed methods scoping study on the use of assistant staff in the delivery of community nursing services in England K Spilsbury, S Pender, K Bloor, R Borthwick, K Atkin, D McCaughan, I Watt, U Adderley, A Wakefield, and H McKenna. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; June 2013.
• A mortality risk model to adjust for case mix in UK paediatric cardiac surgery C Pagel, KL Brown, S Crowe, M Utley, D Cunningham, and VT Tsang. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; May 2013.

Included under terms of UK Non-commercial Government License .

• Cite this Page Health and Social Care Delivery Research. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; 2013-.

Related information

• NLM Catalog Related NLM Catalog Entries

Recent Activity

• Health and Social Care Delivery Research Health and Social Care Delivery Research

Your browsing activity is empty.

Activity recording is turned off.

Turn recording back on

Connect with NLM

National Library of Medicine 8600 Rockville Pike Bethesda, MD 20894

Web Policies FOIA HHS Vulnerability Disclosure

Help Accessibility Careers

Friday, June 7, 2024

IN THE NEWS:

Health care & community: social determinants of health.

Photo credit: Lindsey Murto

By Danielle H. Cho

May 28, 2024 8:25 p.m..

UCLA has long been a leader in healthcare innovation. In this miniseries, Daily Bruin Podcasts explores initiatives at UCLA clinics aimed at creating a more effective and equitable health care system. In this episode, Professor Alice Kuo joins Podcasts contributor Danielle Cho to discuss the social factors that impact health and ways to create change.

Danielle Cho : Hello everyone, this is Health Care and Community, where we interview professionals training and working in the clinics around UCLA. My name is Danielle, and I am a Podcasts contributor at the Daily Bruin.

In this three-part miniseries, we’ll explore new ideas in medicine including the importance of crosstalk between research and medicine, how community experiences shape medicine and the need to prioritize medicine for underserved communities. Stay tuned as we uncover how these initiatives, right here at UCLA, are shaping the future of healthcare.

In this interview, I talked with Professor Alice Kuo, a professor and chief of internal medicine-pediatrics and preventive medicine. We talked about her interest in pediatrics, the social factors and life outside the clinic that have larger impacts on your health, different approaches to creating change such as affecting policy, or starting programs. I hope you enjoy our conversations.

Thank you so much for joining me today, Professor Kuo.

Alice Kuo : Happy to be here.

DC : Could you share your current position and role at UCLA?

AK : Sure, I’m a professor and chief of internal medicine-pediatrics and preventive medicine. This is a division within the School of Medicine, where positions are double-boarded in medicine and pediatrics, meaning that we take care of patients of all ages. And then there’s a subgroup of us who are also formally trained in a specialty called preventive medicine, which focuses on, I think, the types of things that you’re interested in: lifestyle determinants of health, social determinants of health, those types of things.

DC : Thank you. And could you share a little bit about your journey into medicine? And just the kind of stuff that led to where you are today now?

AK : I think when I was in high school, I had thought I wanted to be a teacher. I knew I wanted to work with kids. And, you know, I had done volunteering and babysitting and things like that, and I was very fascinated by how children learn. And so I went to college sort of with the idea that I might want to be a teacher. And then one of my mentors encouraged me to kind of consider everything involving children, and so then I settled on pediatrics, which is the care of sick children. I became pre-med in college, and once I was in medical school, it turned out that for sure, I wanted to take care of kids. But then I also enjoyed sort of the thought processes that go into internal medicine and the care of adults, because adults have a lot of complex, physiological changes that happen with age and kind of, you know, taking on chronic illnesses like diabetes, hypertension – and sort of the consequences of those types of chronic diseases. And so then I also studied internal medicine, and then sort of late much later, because I was working so much in the intersection of health and public health, I went back and got training and preventive medicine with the CDC. So now I have all three certifications specialties.

DC : Wow, that’s so cool. Can you share a little bit about what the most important projects and initiatives you’ve taken on in the course of your career have been?

AK : Well, so I think a big part of my career was actually training: training new physicians, training young health professionals going into public health and other health-related fields. So I would say, looking back on my career, it’s been a lot of thinking about how to improve the way that young professionals develop. And so I was a residency program director for 19 years. I still continue to teach in the Fielding School of Public Health with bachelor’s- and doctoral-level students. And so I think that developing curriculum to address social determinants to get professionals and physicians to think about health problems in a different way has been a big part of my career. I think. And then from a research perspective, we have a big portfolio in autism and neurodevelopmental disabilities and also in maternal and child health. So in public health, I would say our biggest area is in maternal and child health. And then also medical perspective to other clinical conditions that we do research in, as sickle cell disease and addiction medicine or patients with substance use disorders, mainly because I think social determinants really affect their health outcomes as well.

DC : And what initially got you interested into public health? Because you mentioned earlier that you initially started out more interested in pediatrics, but then you also became interested in treating adults and then that kind of progressed to like, an interest in public health. But what exactly – did you have any people in your life or experiences that kind of motivated that shift?

AK : Yeah, I wouldn’t say it’s sort of a shift but more of a recognition that it’s all related. So now, you know, it’s funny – 20 years ago when you looked at all of my different interests, they looked like more separate types of things. But now 20 years later, I think it’s all coming together in that I’m very interested in the life course of children who have adversity in their backgrounds. And so you know, whether you’re a child in foster care, whether you have a disability, whether you are living in poverty, whether you’re Black, you know – any type of condition or trait that could lead to adversity in a child’s life. I think my interest is in how to lessen some of that and help that child reach their full potential. And so when you think about how a person has health, you know, in their lives, medical care is like, 10% of that. Health is about where you live, your parents, your values, what parks do you have access to, how safe your neighborhood is. And so my interest in public health came to the realization that kids are generally healthy unless they’re born with a congenital issue. So you know, 95% of kids never set foot in a hospital their entire lives, their entire childhood. And so if I was interested in keeping kids healthy, focusing on the medical condition, I wasn’t going to really be aware of that that would happe. Because you know, yes, there are children who experience terrible diagnoses like brain tumors and heart disease, you know, congenital heart disease requiring surgical repair and things like that. But the vast majority of kids don’t have medical ailment per se, like that, that would lead them in the hospital. The vast majority of kids have developmental behavioral issues, mental health issues that don’t even reach the attention of a medical professional most of the time. And so then that leads to families struggling trying to help their child, which also can lead to consequences and the family and the stress that that could place. And so really realizing that in order to help children and family, you have to work at that intersection of public health and health was how I became interested in public health, I guess.

DC : Thank you. Thank you for sharing that. And you’ve kind of mentioned this term, social determinants of health. For people who may have not heard of this term before, what does it entail?

AK : So thinking about the social determinants really recognizes that, you know, for example, when you look at the rates of childhood obesity in the County of Los Angeles, there is an area just south of the airport, where there are two cities, Manhattan Beach and Inglewood, that are literally side by side – like, separated by one large street. But the childhood obesity rates in Manhattan Beach are some of the lowest in the entire county. That’s a very affluent community – beach next to the beach, million-dollar homes, that kind of thing. And so the families have the resources to put their kids in sports, buy fresh fruits and vegetables, be able to provide for a more optimal childhood experience. And across that big street in Inglewood, the families there are some of the highest rates of childhood obesity in the county, but also some of the poorest families, and so they’re struggling to make ends meet. Fresh fruits and vegetables are more expensive than McDonald’s. You know where you can get. You can feed a family of four more inexpensively than buying ingredients and cooking and making a healthy meal, and so you know those types of zip code-level issues, socioeconomic status issues, even race issues can play into health outcomes. And we saw this very clearly during the pandemic in Los Angeles County, where essential workers, you know, that tend to be lower-income came from neighborhoods in South and East Los Angeles where the rates of COVID infection were much higher, and the rates of hospitalizations and deaths were also much higher than from affluent communities. And so those are, you know, not necessarily things that we impulse fix. We recognize that those differences exist. And so more effort needs to be paid in the underserved communities, those with lower income, to recognize that those are families that may not have access to health insurance, may not have a primary care provider and may not have information about vaccinations. And so public health departments really are aware that lower-income communities in their catchment areas require a little more attention and effort.

DC : Thank you. And I wanted to ask you a little bit more about just in the course of your education, you mentioned that you went back and actually did a CDC program to learn more about public health. And at any point in your career, I guess were there any defining, like, professors or experiences that kind of shaped your worldview on this topic?

AK : Yeah, when I was a fellow I worked with a professor, Neal Halfon – who is still a faculty member here at UCLA– and he is the type of person that thinks like in the sky, 30,000 feet, big view. I don’t think that high – I feel like I am much on-the-ground implementer. But I will say that, as a fellow learning about this, the colleagues that he introduced me to – really big thinkers in the field of child health – made me kind of start thinking in this way, start realizing that there is more to child health and writing an antibiotic or an ear infection, and recognizing that, you know, working at the neighborhood level, working at the community level, at the policy level, can influence so many more kids can, right. Like, passing a law in the state of California that requires vaccines on school entry probably did way more for thousands and thousands of kids in California and to keep them healthy than, you know, a one-by-one effort in a clinic. Like telling parents – I mean, you need both, but I think that you do need some people working on that higher level. I couldn’t not work at such a high level as Dr. Halfon does. But I think that in my teaching and then in the research projects that I’ve taken on, we do have a little more of a broad view than most projects.

DC : You kind of mentioned just now that you think your approach is more grounded. I wanted to ask you a little bit more of like, why you chose that word, or what it looks like when you try to approach these issues.

AK : Well, I feel as though a lot of my strengths lie in starting new programs. I’ve started many new programs at UCLA, both clinical programs and teaching programs. And so I feel like my strength is in figuring out how to get stuff started. That’s the big challenge. A lot of people, you know, when they say, well, we never had a sickle cell program at UCLA – and I’m like: Well, look, let’s make one. That sounds really hard. I’m like, I’ll take the challenge. you know, so figuring out who needs to be involved, figuring out who needs to approve it, figuring out how to fund it, figuring out, you know, who, how to stamp it, how to recruit patients, that kind of thing. I’m really interested in those types of challenges. And quite frankly, I tend to start new programs and then turn them over to people who can maintain them. Right. So the first couple of years we’ll get a new program started, and then actually my interest in starting the next new things, keeping the program that I had. And you know, because I think there are different skills involved in starting new things versus maintaining things or growing things, and I can maintain and grow as well, but there are a lot more people who can maintain and grow things as opposed to who can start things. And so I feel like my ability is in starting things, and there are fewer people who can do that. So you know, there is no lack of problems that need to get fixed. So if a new program or you know, clinic or whatever it is, can fill a void and fill a need, then I’m really interested in doing those things. So, you know, I am much more applied than theoretical. I feel like Dr. Halfon has a lot more theoretical, thinking at that big level of what needs to be done. I think it’s important to be in touch with those folks because they’re kind of pointing out the problems that need to be fixed. And then I like coming in and trying to fix some of those.

DC : Some takeaways from this conversation are perspectives in medicine that focus on the social determinants of health. Just because there are medical institutions doesn’t mean that everyone will seek or receive the appropriate healthcare. Furthermore, different people can use their different talents to address change on different levels. The theoretical, more slow-moving approach of trying to change policy may be able to spread changes to more people but may not have the immediate concrete results of starting orgs that address the smaller problems people encounter on a daily basis. Thus, solutions in medicine need to have a mixture of these different approaches.

You’ve been listening to Health Care and Community. We hope you’ve enjoyed this miniseries. Thank you for listening. That’s all for today. Next week we will talk with Professor Meza. See you next time.

Race, ethnicity influences disparity in children’s mental health care, study finds

Los Angeles

Ucla’s bruin scholars work to provide health care to underserved communities.

A Closer Look

Student group medical aid initiative promotes sustainability in health care.

APA Health CARE holds fair for underserved Asian Pacific Islander communities

Health and Social Care

Are you already working in the Health and Social Care?  Or looking to develop your healthcare skills further? Maybe you’re new to Health and Social Care?  With a range of programmes in our Health and Social Care cluster, you’ll find your fit with us.

Our Health and Social Care programmes offer a range of programmes that will equip you with the skills and knowledge you need to make a positive impact as allied workers in the health and social care sectors whether you’re interested in becoming a healthcare professional or a researcher in the sector.

Our Health and Social Care programmes look into the important part society plays in the sector in how we care for various groups of people.  Our lecturers are experts in their respective fields, with years of experience in the industry.

We pride ourselves in developing your confidence and building your self-esteem so you can go on to deliver effective care in the sector.  Our Health and Social Care programmes are designed to build on your knowledge and confidence year after year and give you the flexibility to progress as your interests develop.

You’ll graduate not only with a qualification but with the confidence to take on the world of work as we challenge you academically to become the best healthcare professional possible.

Why study Health and Social Care at UWTSD?

Modern classrooms are the sacred spaces of these programmes, equipped with audio-visual technology and designed to promote active learning, with ample space for group collaboration and interactive teaching.

Library access at each campus creates hubs of research and learning.  With access to vast collections of books, journals and databases to support you in your academic pursuits. Inclusive of comfortable seating areas, our libraries are the ideal spaces for studying and collaborating.

What makes UWTSD unique?

Start your adventure with an undergraduate degree at UWTSD. You’ll immerse yourself in a subject that inspires you – exploring different career avenues and options for your future as you go. Whatever your ambitions, we’ll help you hit the ground running with your goals firmly in sight.

Content listing

Sinology (ba hons), cilex (paralegal, advanced paralegal, lawyer) (cilex), apprenticeship in paralegal, advanced paralegal, lawyer (cilex, undergraduate), operational policing (level 6 top-up) (bsc hons), apprenticeship in manufacturing systems engineering (beng hons), apprenticeship in engineering management (beng hons), apprenticeship in embedded electronics systems engineering (beng hons), apprenticeship in computing (data science and information systems) (bsc hons), apprenticeship in computing (computer networks and cybersecurity) (bsc hons), apprenticeship in supply chain and logistics (bsc hons).

Big Data for Social Good

Big social problems require big data solutions.

Using real-world data and policy interventions as applications, this Harvard Online course will teach core concepts in data science, economics, and statistics and equip you to tackle some of the most pressing social challenges of our time.

What You'll Learn

The American Dream—the idea that through hard work any child can rise up and achieve a higher standard of living than their parents—is fading: only half of kids today will go on to earn more than their parents did. Why has this happened? And, how can we reverse the fading of the American Dream?   “Big data” is often associated with corporations seeking to improve products by collecting data on customers. What if we could use big data for social good—to address problems such as the fading American Dream, growing income inequality, or persistent racial disparities?   Big Data for Social Good will teach you how to use big data, coupled with the tools of data science and economics, to solve some of the most important social problems of our time. Big data can help us cut through politically charged debates and find out what policies actually work from a scientific perspective, making the often-discussed notion of “evidence-based policymaking” a reality. Using big data, we can see how the specific neighborhoods in which we grow up and the schools we attend shape our life outcomes—and how we can take these insights to create better opportunities for all. 

The course will be delivered via  HBS Online’s course platform  and immerse learners in real-world examples from experts at industry-leading organizations. By the end of the course, participants will be able to:

• Examine historical income, education and family support, and geography to understand how these economic factors lead to upward mobility
• Understand how big data is used to identify the causes of socioeconomic disparities and how data can lead to evidence-based action and outcomes
• Explore economic methodologies, such as statistical models, regression analysis, and quasi-experiments in data set combinations
• Utilize economic frameworks and apply them to your work
• Use evidence to engage and gain support of communities and constituents to drive systemic policy developments and changes

Your Instructor

Raj Chetty, PhD,  is the William A. Ackman Professor of Public Economics at Harvard University and Director of Opportunity Insights. His research uses “big data” to understand how we can give children from disadvantaged backgrounds better chances of succeeding. Chetty's research combines empirical evidence and economic theory to help design more effective government policies. His work on topics ranging from tax policy and unemployment insurance to education and affordable housing has been widely cited in academia, media outlets, and Congressional testimony. He has received numerous awards for his research, including a MacArthur "Genius" Fellowship and the John Bates Clark medal, given to the economist under 40 whose work is judged to have made the most significant contribution to the field.

Real World Case Studies

Affiliations are listed for identification purposes only.

Geoffrey Canada

Hear from Geoffrey Canada, an educator, social activist, and author, about his pioneering work in helping children and families in Harlem and about place-based innovations.

Sarah Oppenheimer

Learn how Sarah Oppenheimer’s work bridges research with applied policy and practice to address poverty and support families’ outcomes.

Nathaniel Hendren

Explore research based on the core question “Do markets provide opportunity?”

Available Discounts and Benefits for Groups and Individuals

Experience Harvard Online by utilizing our wide variety of discount programs for individuals and groups. 

Past participant discounts.

Learners who have enrolled in at least one qualifying Harvard Online program hosted on the HBS Online platform are eligible to receive a 30% discount on this course, regardless of completion or certificate status in the first purchased program. Past Participant Discounts are automatically applied to the Program Fee upon time of payment.  Learn more here .

Learners who have earned a verified certificate for a HarvardX course hosted on the  edX platform  are eligible to receive a 30% discount on this course using a discount code. Discounts are not available after you've submitted payment, so if you think you are eligible for a discount on a registration, please check your email for a code or contact us .

Nonprofit, Government, Military, and Education Discounts

For this course we offer a 30% discount for learners who work in the nonprofit, government, military, or education fields. 

Eligibility is determined by a prospective learner’s email address, ending in .org, .gov, .mil, or .edu. Interested learners can apply below for the discount and, if eligible, will receive a promo code to enter when completing payment information to enroll in a Harvard Online program. Click here to apply for these discounts.

Gather your team to experience Data Privacy and Technology and other Harvard Online courses to enjoy the benefits of learning together: 

• Single invoicing for groups of 10 or more
• Tiered discounts and pricing available with up to 50% off
• Growth reports on your team's progress
• Flexible course and partnership plans 

Learn more and enroll your team ! 

Who Will Benefit

Community activists and nonprofits

Use big data and economic principles to gain support and advocate for change in underserved communities.

Policy advocates and public sector employees

Serve the needs and requests of your communities better through evidence-based research and defined policy outcomes.

Students and Recent Graduates

Learn how to combine disparate data sets that lead to key findings, insights, and solutions for addressing economic societal problems.

Course Syllabus

Learning requirements: In order to earn a Certificate of Completion from Harvard Online and Harvard Business School Online, participants must thoughtfully complete all 8 modules, including satisfactory completion of the associated assignments, by stated deadlines.

Download Full Syllabus

• Study The Opportunity Atlas and Brownsville, Brooklyn cases
• Recognize some of the statistical techniques used to measure and map opportunity
• Explore granular variation in levels of upward mobility
• Study the moving to opportunity experiment
• Consider the ethical and societal impacts of social experiments
• Explore two methods for causal inference
• Interpret methods for establishing statistical significance
• Study cases like Creating Moves to Opportunity and the Harlem Children's Zone
• Describe the factors that are correlated with differences in upward mobility across places
• Understand the relationship between supply and demand
• Explain the distinction between constraints and barriers
• Study the American Dream and social capital 
• Understand the concept of social capital
• Understand how economic policies can "pay for themselves" in the long terms
• Identify different statistical approaches to measuring upward mobility
• Investigate both redistributive policies and policies that invest in human capital
• Study the effect of mentorship
• Explain the relationship between economic growth and equality of opportunity
• Identify data sources for studying innovation
• Explore innovation as a potential path for increasing both equality of opportunity and economic growth
• Understand how to use propensity score reweighting
• Study college mobility rates
• Explore the extent to which colleges and universities in the US either promote or hinder upward mobility
• Understand how to measure the causal effect of college on a student’s outcomes
• Recognize the importance of both access and outcomes in determining a college’s Mobility Rate
• Understand methods for standardizing data from across different sources
• Study the importance of class size and teacher quality in determining students’ outcomes
• Understand dynamic models and steady states
• Explore differences in upward mobility by race/ethnicity and gender
• Explain that differences in upward mobility lead to the persistence of mobility gaps in “steady state”

Earn Your Certificate

Enroll today in Harvard Online's Big Data for Social Good course.

Still Have Questions?

Are there discounts available for this course? What are the learning requirements? How do I list my certificate on my resume? Learn the answers to these and more in our FAQs.

Related Courses

Reducing racial disparities in health care.

In partnership with the Disparities Solutions Center at MGH, this course will help you deliver high-quality health care to all through organizational change.

Data Privacy and Technology

Explore legal and ethical implications of one’s personal data, the risks and rewards of data collection and surveillance, and the needs for policy, advocacy, and privacy monitoring.

Outsmarting Implicit Bias

Designed for individuals and teams, this Harvard Online course taught by preeminent Harvard Professor Mahzarin Banaji teaches the science of implicit bias and strategies to counter the impact of bias in the workplace.

• Codes of Professional Practice and guidance
• Search the Register
• Registration
• Raise a concern about a social care worker
• Safeguarding
• Induction frameworks
• Accessibility on our website
• Increase text size

Resources to help you

Last updated: 8 December 2022

Examples of completed progress logs and case studies to show how the Induction Framework can be used to support the registration of social care managers who do not hold one of the required qualifications .

Introduction

We have some resources here to help you use the All Wales Induction Framework (Induction Framework) for Social Care Managers.

We also have a wide range of resources which can be used by managers to develop their knowledge, understanding and skills in relationship to leadership and management in social care.

These can be found on our resources and guidance page for social care managers and employers.

You may find ‘First steps in management – a resource for new social care managers’ particularly helpful.

Health Education Improvement Wales (HEIW) also have useful resources on Compassionate Leadership , which may be of interest.

Examples of completed progress logs

We have completed some sample progress logs here for you to see the type of evidence which can be used.

• Sample progress log - Section 4: Professional Practice DOCX 111KB
• Sample progress log - Section 11: Lead and manage care and support for individuals living in care home settings DOCX 111KB
• The progress logs should be used to note evidence you have drawn on to confirm achievement of the induction standard for example; qualification completion, supervision, records, observation of practice or witness testimonies.
• You should complete the column ‘how I have met this standard’ with a brief summary of the activities you have undertaken.
• The person signing the standard off will then need to add their comments and you should both date and sign.
• Your manager/appointed person should complete the summary notes with a list of the evidence used.

Using the Induction Framework for registration

For some specific managers, completion will be set as a ‘training requirement’ between the point of registration and renewal of registration.

Required qualifications are needed to register as a social care manager; where you do not hold one of these but hold an alternative which meets agreed essential criteria , completion of the Induction Framework can be used as a ‘top up’ if you wish to register with Social Care Wales either:

• for the first time or;
• to move to a different part of the Register .

If you wish to use this route to register, you will need to submit an application to the registration team . If the application is successful, you should complete the Induction Framework within the first 12 months of your registration and must provide evidence of this as part of your renewal of registration .

We have developed these case studies to help you understand how the Induction Framework can be used for registration as a social care manager if you do not hold one of the required qualifications .

Case study 1

Sian wants to register as a residential child care manager:.

Sian’s qualification was awarded on 16 June 2020 - Level 5 Diploma in Leadership for Health and Social Care and Children and Young People's Services - Adults' Residential Management (England), completed 88 credits.

Sian managed residential services for young adults (18 – 25) with a learning disability/autism. She has no experience of working with children and young people.

The employer also offers services to children and young people. Sian applied for and accepted a post in the same organisation as manager of residential short breaks service for children and young people with learning disability/autism.

We would accept Sian’s qualification for registration with a training requirement for her to complete the Induction Framework including section 8: ‘Lead and manage service provision for disabled children and young people’ by renewal of registration (3 years).

Case study 2

June wants to register as an adult care home manager:.

June has worked for the local authority for 17 years, 12 of these as a family support worker and five as a manager of family support services. She has recently been appointed as peripatetic manager for care home services within the local authority. She does not have any experience of working with older people.

June holds the following qualifications; she has also completed the Health and Social Care All Wales Induction Framework and workbooks (for workers) as a means of updating her knowledge and understanding.

• NVQ Level 3 Caring for Children and Young People - July 2006
• NVQ Level 4 Health and Social Care – Children and Young People – April 2008
• NVQ Level 5 Diploma in Management – August 2015
• ILM Level 5 Diploma in Principles of Leadership and Management – August 2015
• Level 5 Higher Apprenticeship in Leadership and Management – November 2015.

We would accept June’s qualifications for registration with a training requirement for her to complete the Induction Framework (for managers) including section 11 ‘Lead and manage service provision for care home settings’ by renewal of registration (3 years).

Case study 3

Megan wants to register as a residential child care manager:.

Megan holds the following qualifications:

• L5 NVQ Diploma in Management and Leadership (2018)
• L4 NVQ Leadership and Manager of Care Services (Units B6 and B7 which are the specific units needed to register as a Residential Child care manager, these have not completed) (2012)
• L3 NVQ Health and Social Care (adults) (2008)

Megan has the following employment history – all of which is working with adults:

• Oct 2009 – June 2012 Domiciliary care coordinator
• June 2012 – October 2012 Domiciliary care service manager
• November 2012 – February 2019 Home Manager for residential home for adults with learning disabilities and mental health
• From February 2019 – time application received (March 2020) - Deputy manager of a care home for children.

We would accept Megan’s qualifications with a training requirement for her to complete the Induction Framework including section 7 ‘Lead and manage service provision for children and young people who are looked after’ by renewal of registration (3 years).

Case study 4

Alun wants to register as a residential child care manager.

Alun completed the Level 5 diploma in Leadership of Health and Social Care Services (Children and Young People’s Management) (Wales and Northern Ireland) in October 2020 but he did not complete the unit ‘Lead and manage group living for children and young people’ which was needed for him to achieve the Children and Young People’s Residential Management pathway.

Alun was working as a deputy manager at a residential home for children and young people whilst completing the qualification.

We would accept Alun’s qualification with a training requirement for him to complete the Induction Framework including section 7 ‘Lead and manage service provision for children and young people who are looked after’ by renewal of registration (3 years).

Case study 5

Abdul wants to register as a domiciliary care manager (adults services):.

Abdul holds the Level 5 diploma in Leadership of health and Social Care and Children and Young People’s Services (adults management) (England) – 80 credits. It was completed in April 2020.

Abdul was working as a registered manager and assistant operations manager at a domiciliary care agency in England whilst completing the qualification.

We would accept Abdul’s qualification with a training requirement for him to complete the Induction Framework by renewal of registration (3 years). This would ensure Abdul has covered all of the relevant Welsh legislation and is able to apply this in his practice (Social Services and Well-Being (Wales) Act, Regulation and Inspection of Social Care Services (Wales) Act, All Wales Safeguarding Procedures, Welsh Language etc.)

Case study 6

Jean wants to register as a domiciliary care manager (adults services).

Jean holds the Level 5 diploma in Leadership of health and Social Services (adults’ advanced practice) Wales and Northern Ireland – 80 credits. It was completed in October 2020.

Jean was working as a team leader in supported living for individuals with a learning disability when she completed the qualification. She has been promoted into a manager’s role in the same organisation.

We would accept Jean’s qualification with a training requirement for her to complete the Induction Framework including Section 14: ‘Lead and manage support for individuals with a learning disability and/or autism’ by renewal of registration (3 years).

Manager and employer workshops to support use of the Induction Framework for Social Care Managers

We have a series of workshops to support the use of the All Wales Induction Framework for Social Care Managers.

These workshops are for managers, employers and those who are responsible for supporting new managers in post.

They will explain why the induction framework was developed, what it consists of and who should complete it and why.

There will be an opportunity to explore the content of the framework in smaller interactive breakout room sessions with other managers and employers.

Please note that all workshops will cover the same topic, it is not necessary for you to attend more than one.

Workshops will appear here when open for registration.

We also have some videos of employers about using the Induction Framework which you may want to watch.

If you have a question or if you can't find what you are looking for get in touch with us .

Related content

• Induction framework for social care managers
• Guidance for use
• Progress logs and certificate of completion
• Frequently asked questions
• Social care managers and employers

• Print this article

Research & theory

An exploratory multi-case study of the health and wellbeing needs, relationships and experiences of health and social care service users and the people who support them at home.

• Heather Bain
• Elaine Allan
• Catriona Kennedy
• Heather Bain , Assistant Head of Nursing and Midwifery, University of Highlands and Islands, Institute of Health Research and Innovation, Centre for Health Science, Old Perth Road, Inverness, United Kingdom, IV2 3JH, United Kingdom ORCID Dr, EdD, FQNIS, FHEA, PgCert LTA, BA, DipDN, RGN
• Elaine Allan , Lecturer – Co-ordinator for School Nursing, Robert Gordon University, School of Nursing & Midwifery, Garthdee Road, Aberdeen, United Kingdom, AB10 7QE, United Kingdom Dr, PhD, FQNIS, PG Cert Research Methods, BA, HV Dip, SCM., RGN
• Catriona Kennedy , Professor of Nursing, Robert Gordon University, School of Nursing & Midwifery, Garthdee Road, Aberdeen, United Kingdom, AB10 7QE; QNIS Professor of Community Nursing, The Queens Nursing Institute Scotland, 31 Castle Terrance, Edinburgh, Scotland, United Kingdom, AH1 2EL; Adjunct Professor, The University of Limerick, Department of Nursing and Midwifery, Limerick, Ireland, V94 T9PX, United Kingdom ORCID PhD, BA(Hons), Dip Nurs. RN, DN, RNT, DNT, PWT

Introduction: International policies and legislation set a precedence of person-centred sustainable integrated Health and Social Care (HSC) that meets the health and wellbeing needs of service users through improved experiences. However, current research focuses on service models, with fewer studies investigating experiences and needs.

Methods: This qualitative multi-case [n = 7] study was co-designed with key stakeholders and aimed to explore experiences and needs of people who access and provide HSC at home. Data were collected in a regional area of Scotland (UK) via single [n = 10] or dyad [n = 4] semi-structured interviews with service users [n = 6], informal carers [n = 5] and HSC staff [n = 7] and synthesised using Interpretive Thematic Analysis.

Findings: Interpersonal connections and supportive relationships were instrumental in helping all participant groups feel able to cope with their changing HSC needs and roles. They promoted reassurance, information sharing and reduced anxiety; when they were lacking, it negatively impacted upon experiences of HSC.

Discussion: Promoting inter-personal connections that encourage supportive relationships between people who access and provide HSC and their communities, could promote person-centred Relationship-based care and improve HSC experiences.

Conclusions: This study identifies indicators for improved HSC, advocating co-produced community-driven services to meet the self-defined needs of those who access and provide care.

• Page/Article: 11
• Accepted on 2 Feb 2023
• Published on 23 Feb 2023
• Peer Reviewed

• Qualifications >

Level 2 Health and Social Care: Core

• Key Documents & Course Materials
• Webinar Recordings & Materials

Find a centre

Please use the box above to find a centre near you

There are currently no centres within 30 miles of your location. Please try again using an alternative postcode to find your nearest centre.

Qualification Overview

The qualification has been developed for individuals working in, or intending to work, in the healthcare and social care sectors. It is targeted at learners in work based learning, further education, and school 6th forms. It will enable learners to apply for registration with Social Care Wales as a social care worker in domiciliary care or residential child care providing that they meet any additional registration requirements.

For more information, please visit: https://socialcare.wales/registration

Who is the qualification for?

It is suitable for:

• learners aged 16+ currently working in or intending to work in the health and social care sector
• social care worker (adults)
• social care worker (children and young people)
• healthcare support worker
• healthcare assistant.

It is strongly recommended that learners have completed the core qualification prior to, or alongside other qualifications within the suite as this will be a requirement for practice set by Social Care Wales. It will also be feature of the new Foundation Apprenticeship in Health and Social Care.

What will the qualification cover?

The qualification will provide a thorough introduction to the principles, values and knowledge needed to work in the healthcare and social care sectors with adults and children and young people.

The content for this qualification supports learners to develop their knowledge and understanding of:

• the core principles and values which underpin health and social care practice
• ways of working in the health and social care sectors
• effective practice within health and social care
• progression routes to further study or employment within Health and Social Care safeguarding.

The qualification has three pathways:

• Level 2 Health and Social Care: Core (Adults)
• Level 2 Health and Social Care: Core (Children and Young People)
• Level 2 Health and Social Care: Core (Adults & Children and Young People).

Learners can choose to complete qualification pathways separately to suit their career aspirations or they can choose to complete a combined qualification that includes content relevant to both adult and children & young people services.

Qualification structure and assessment

To achieve the (Adults) and (Children and Young People) pathways within this qualification, candidates must pass:

• one externally-set, externally-marked multiple choice test.

To achieve the (Adults & Children and Young People) pathway within this qualification, candidates must pass:

• two externally-set, externally-marked multiple choice tests.

What could the qualification lead to?

On completion, the qualification will provide a broad foundation of knowledge across health and social care. The Level 2 Health and Social Care: Core qualification provides the knowledge to progress on to:

• Level 2 Health and Social Care: Practice (Adults)
• Level 3 Health and Social Care: Practice (Adults)
• Level 3 Health and Social Care: Practice (Children and Young People)
• Level 2 Health and Social Care Principles and Contexts
• Level 3 Health and Social Care Principles and Contexts (Adults/Children & Young People)
• Advanced GCE and Advanced Subsidiary GCE in Health and Social Care, and Childcare.

Learners/New Centres

[email protected] 01924 930801

Existing Centres

[email protected] 01924 930800

We’ve made changes to level 2 HSCCC Core assessments -  Read more

Interpreting a score report, rubric infringement.

Health and Social Care and Childcare Core Qualifications

Examiner Report (August 2023)

Examiner report (february 2023), examiner report (august 2022), examiner report (february 2022), network meeting delegate pack - winter 2019, network meeting delegate pack - spring 2020, head to our  training and events  page for the latest information on professional development events and learning opportunities for this qualification..

All Wales Induction Framework for Health and Social Care - Certificate of Successful Completion

21 august 2019.

Completion certificate to evidence that all learning for the...

All Wales Induction Framework for Health and Social Care Progress log - Section 7: Health and Safety in health and social care

Induction framework progress log for section 7: Health and s...

All Wales Induction Framework for Health and Social Care - Workbook 6: Safeguarding Individuals

The induction framework workbook for section 6: Safeguarding...

All Wales Induction Framework for Health and Social Care Progress log - Section 6: Safeguarding Individuals

Induction framework progress log for section 6: Safeguarding...

All Wales Induction Framework for Health and Social Care - Workbook 5: Professional Practice as a Health and Social Care Worker

The induction framework workbook for section 5: Professional...

All Wales Induction Framework for Health and Social Care Progress log - Section 5: Professional Practice as a Health and Social Care Worker

Induction framework progress log for Section 5: Professional...

All Wales Induction Framework for Early Years and Childcare - Workbook 1: Principles and Values

This workbook will help you explore the principles and value...

All Wales Induction Framework for Health and Social Care - Workbook 4: Health and Well-being (Children and Young People)

The induction framework workbook for section 4: Health and w...

All Wales Induction Framework for Health and Social Care Progress Log Section 4: Health and Well-Being (Children and Young People)

Induction framework progress log for section 4: Health and w...

All Wales Induction Framework for Health and Social Care - Workbook 3: Health and Well-being (Adults)

The Induction framework workbook for section 3: Health and w...

All Wales Induction Framework for Health and Social Care Progress Log - Section 3: Health and Well-Being (adults)

Induction framework progress log for section 3: Health and w...

All Wales Induction Framework for Health and Social Care - Workbook 2: Principles and Values of Health and Social Care (Children and Young People)

The induction framework workbook for section 2: Principles a...

• Today's news
• Reviews and deals
• Climate change
• 2024 election
• Fall allergies
• Health news
• Mental health
• Sexual health
• Family health
• So mini ways
• Unapologetically
• Buying guides

Entertainment

• How to Watch
• My watchlist
• Stock market
• Biden economy
• Personal finance
• Stocks: most active
• Stocks: gainers
• Stocks: losers
• Trending tickers
• World indices
• US Treasury bonds
• Top mutual funds
• Highest open interest
• Highest implied volatility
• Currency converter
• Basic materials
• Communication services
• Consumer cyclical
• Consumer defensive
• Financial services
• Industrials
• Real estate
• Mutual funds
• Credit cards
• Balance transfer cards
• Cash back cards
• Rewards cards
• Travel cards
• Online checking
• High-yield savings
• Money market
• Home equity loan
• Personal loans
• Student loans
• Options pit
• Fantasy football
• Pro Pick 'Em
• College Pick 'Em
• Fantasy baseball
• Fantasy hockey
• Fantasy basketball
• Download the app
• Daily fantasy
• Scores and schedules
• GameChannel
• World Baseball Classic
• Premier League
• CONCACAF League
• Champions League
• Motorsports
• Horse racing
• Newsletters

New on Yahoo

• Privacy Dashboard

15 men brought to military enlistment office after mass brawl in Moscow Oblast

Local security forces brought 15 men to a military enlistment office after a mass brawl at a warehouse of the Russian Wildberries company in Elektrostal, Moscow Oblast on Feb. 8, Russian Telegram channel Shot reported .

29 people were also taken to police stations. Among the arrested were citizens of Kyrgyzstan.

A mass brawl involving over 100 employees and security personnel broke out at the Wildberries warehouse in Elektrostal on Dec. 8.

Read also: Moscow recruits ‘construction brigades’ from Russian students, Ukraine says

We’re bringing the voice of Ukraine to the world. Support us with a one-time donation, or become a Patron !

Read the original article on The New Voice of Ukraine

Recommended Stories

Top rbs for 2024 fantasy football, according to our experts.

The Yahoo Fantasy football analysts reveal their first running back rankings for the 2024 NFL season.

Sparks rookie Cameron Brink: 'There's a privilege' for WNBA's younger white players

The Sparks rookie had plenty to say about her WNBA rookie class, headlined by Caitlin Clark.

Angel Reese's 'weak' ejection from Sky-Liberty game draws attention, offer from Bulls' Lonzo Ball

Reese was ejected after two very quick whistles from referee Charles Watson.

GameStop stock soars as 'Roaring Kitty' announces livestream, reveals $382 million unrealized gain

First X, then Reddit, now YouTube. GameStop's most bullish enthusiast announced a livestream, and the stock surged.

Larry Allen, Cowboys legend and Pro Football Hall of Famer, dies at 52

Allen was a seven-time first-team All-Pro and part of the Cowboys' Super Bowl XXX winning team.

Rivian's path to survival is now remarkably clear

Rivian has had a lot on its plate as it transitioned from pitch mode to selling EVs. It created an electric pickup and an electric SUV while prepping a monster IPO. It now plans to sell an even cheaper SUV that could make Rivian a dominant EV player for years to come.

Vikings reveal 'Winter Warrior' alternate all-white uniforms to be worn on Week 15

The Minnesota Vikings revealed their all-white "Winter Warrior" uniforms that the team will wear for Week 15's matchup with the Chicago Bears.

Sky's Chennedy Carter has 'no regrets' about foul on Caitlin Clark; Angel Reese will 'take the bad guy role'

The Sky have broken their silence about the flagrant foul on Caitlin Clark, and they had a lot to say.

Paul Skenes blows away Shohei Ohtani, who returns the favor in his next at-bat

The Dodgers-Pirates matchup lived up to its billing.

2024 Fantasy football wide receiver rankings

The Yahoo Fantasy football analysts reveal their first wide receiver rankings for the 2024 NFL season.

Yes, Marshall's has an online store — and we found 10 summer steals under $50

Tommy Bahama, Ralph Lauren, Jantzen: It's a treasure trove of deals — like going in person, but better!

2025 Toyota Crown Signia First Drive: Venza replacement puts efficiency and fashion first

Our first drive review of the 2025 Toyota Crown Signia where we tell you all about it and give initial driving impressions.

Emma Hayes' first big USWNT conundrum: Olympic roster cuts

At least two players who started for the USWNT over the past week will have to be cut for the Olympics. Might Alex Morgan or Rose Lavelle be on the roster bubble?

Opposing players aren't fond of Caitlin Clark ... which should be good for the WNBA

Watching Clark fight through adversity and rack up rivals will only bring more eyeballs to the league.

Stock market today: Stocks dip but notch weekly wins after jobs report smashes expectations

Investors are looking to the monthly jobs report for signs of labor market cooldown pivotal to the odds for a rate cut.

MLB Power Rankings: Yankees, Phillies, Orioles looking like baseball's strongest teams

How do we feel about all 30 MLB teams now, compared to what we expected at the start of the season?

Beware the retirement savings 'time bomb,' tax expert warns

Taxes are the "retirement time bomb," according to one tax expert. Here's what you can do now.

Courteney Cox, 59, wears these Adidas slides, and they're down to $15 at Amazon

Snag a pair of superstar-approved sandals for 50% off — just in time for summer.

2024 Fantasy football tight end rankings

The Yahoo Fantasy football analysts reveal their first tight end rankings for the 2024 NFL season.

Julia Louis-Dreyfus explains why she took a 'leap of faith' to star in tear-jerking new movie 'Tuesday'

In the film, Death arrives in the form of a talking bird at the home shared by a mother and her sick daughter.

A case study in the challenges facing health care

In 2023, the top six health insurers collectively earned over one trillion dollars in revenue, a staggering figure that has raised questions about whether the current healthcare dynamic is sustainable and serving all stakeholders effectively.

There's no question that health insurance provides a valuable service to millions of Americans. But when that much money winds up concentrated in such few hands, things are probably not working within the healthcare marketplace as they should. At a time when many hospitals are struggling to stay afloat and private health insurance premiums have  reached a record high , such strong financial numbers from insurers suggest an imbalance that requires attention. 

In a well-functioning insurance market, premiums paid should maintain a reasonable proportion to claims reimbursed. However, if this equilibrium becomes skewed -- as appears to be the case today -- it can lead to negative consequences for Americans of all stripes. A solution is needed for this pressing issue.

One of the major causes contributing to these challenges has been what appears to be a singular focus by health insurers to enhance their pricing power. This issue, which emerged as a concern in the wake of the  passage of the Affordable Care Act  has now turned into a full-blown crisis as some health insurance companies continue to vertically integrate their operations. 

This is not to say that all vertical integration, including that of healthcare systems, is not without promise. As someone who has worked within several such systems, both public and private, I have seen how the care of patients can be improved through tighter integration of various points along the healthcare value chain. It can serve to lower barriers to clinician communication, incentivize high quality practice patterns, and reduce inefficiencies in an extremely complicated and expensive delivery system. But this is only the case when the most important of all stakeholders is the patient. 

Conversely, recent restructuring efforts by insurers, which appear geared to further consolidate their control over rate-setting and skirt federal rules that cap how much they can retain in premiums for administrative costs and profits seem to go beyond this. It has not only garnered the attention of the Department of Justice (DoJ) but has also jeopardized resiliency in the healthcare system more broadly.

The recent scrutiny surrounding UnitedHealthcare, the largest health insurer in America, illustrates this point. Reports indicate that the DoJ has  launched an investigation  into the company for a range of anticompetitive practices stemming from its acquisition of Optum Health, a division that now controls a network of providers including 90,000 physicians, as well as surgery centers, health data and technology units, and a pharmacy-benefit manager. Investigators have expressed concerns that this network has been used to prevent rival physicians from accessing beneficial payment arrangements and to unfairly disadvantage health insurers that compete with UnitedHealthcare, among other things, demonstrating how such efforts to shift operations have allowed insurers to increase their profit margins and limit competition. 

The recent cyberattack on UnitedHealth's Change Health subsidiary further highlights the additional risks of concentrated market power. The company -- which was acquired by UnitedHealth in 2022  over DoJ objections – is the nation’s largest health care payment system and handles billions of transactions annually. Labeled “ the most significant cyberattack on the U.S. health care system in American history ,” the ensuing service disruptions have  caused financial chaos  for a broad spectrum of providers and demonstrate the hazards of vertically integrating such an array of services under one potential point of failure such as a health insurer like UnitedHealth.

Such incidents show how concentrating too many parts of the healthcare supply chain under one company can wreak havoc on the entire system. Unfortunately, these issues are not unique to UnitedHealth or any one insurer but reflect broader dynamics that are worthy of examination, especially against the backdrop of  nearly 200 rural hospital closures  since 2005 and major affordability issues for patients. 

Thoughtful solutions will be needed to lower the cost of health insurance to protect patient access to care and to ensure fair reimbursement for providers, and insurance companies, policymakers, and regulators should all have a shared interest in building a more balanced, resilient, and equitable healthcare system. There will also be a role to play for patient advocate groups, some of which including Arnold Ventures and Power to the Patients, have been vocal in Washington in opposition to necessary hospital mergers but have been curiously silent to date on the issue of consolidation in the health insurance industry.

Ultimately, the path to a better healthcare future starts with open and honest conversations. By acknowledging both the challenges and the opportunities before us, we can begin to bridge divides and find workable solutions. It will take creativity, compromise and a willingness to adapt -- but a healthcare system that delivers quality, affordable care to all Americans is possible if we work together in good faith. The time to start is now.

Dr. William Strimel, DO, is the Founder of Tulio Health, a specialty medical practice that provides a proactive approach to health and wellness for men, and the former President of a regional physicians network.

Image: UnitedHealthcare

The Unique Burial of a Child of Early Scythian Time at the Cemetery of Saryg-Bulun (Tuva)

<< Previous page

Pages:  379-406

In 1988, the Tuvan Archaeological Expedition (led by M. E. Kilunovskaya and V. A. Semenov) discovered a unique burial of the early Iron Age at Saryg-Bulun in Central Tuva. There are two burial mounds of the Aldy-Bel culture dated by 7th century BC. Within the barrows, which adjoined one another, forming a figure-of-eight, there were discovered 7 burials, from which a representative collection of artifacts was recovered. Burial 5 was the most unique, it was found in a coffin made of a larch trunk, with a tightly closed lid. Due to the preservative properties of larch and lack of air access, the coffin contained a well-preserved mummy of a child with an accompanying set of grave goods. The interred individual retained the skin on his face and had a leather headdress painted with red pigment and a coat, sewn from jerboa fur. The coat was belted with a leather belt with bronze ornaments and buckles. Besides that, a leather quiver with arrows with the shafts decorated with painted ornaments, fully preserved battle pick and a bow were buried in the coffin. Unexpectedly, the full-genomic analysis, showed that the individual was female. This fact opens a new aspect in the study of the social history of the Scythian society and perhaps brings us back to the myth of the Amazons, discussed by Herodotus. Of course, this discovery is unique in its preservation for the Scythian culture of Tuva and requires careful study and conservation.

Keywords: Tuva, Early Iron Age, early Scythian period, Aldy-Bel culture, barrow, burial in the coffin, mummy, full genome sequencing, aDNA

Information about authors: Marina Kilunovskaya (Saint Petersburg, Russian Federation). Candidate of Historical Sciences. Institute for the History of Material Culture of the Russian Academy of Sciences. Dvortsovaya Emb., 18, Saint Petersburg, 191186, Russian Federation E-mail: [email protected] Vladimir Semenov (Saint Petersburg, Russian Federation). Candidate of Historical Sciences. Institute for the History of Material Culture of the Russian Academy of Sciences. Dvortsovaya Emb., 18, Saint Petersburg, 191186, Russian Federation E-mail: [email protected] Varvara Busova  (Moscow, Russian Federation).  (Saint Petersburg, Russian Federation). Institute for the History of Material Culture of the Russian Academy of Sciences.  Dvortsovaya Emb., 18, Saint Petersburg, 191186, Russian Federation E-mail:  [email protected] Kharis Mustafin  (Moscow, Russian Federation). Candidate of Technical Sciences. Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology.  Institutsky Lane, 9, Dolgoprudny, 141701, Moscow Oblast, Russian Federation E-mail:  [email protected] Irina Alborova  (Moscow, Russian Federation). Candidate of Biological Sciences. Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology.  Institutsky Lane, 9, Dolgoprudny, 141701, Moscow Oblast, Russian Federation E-mail:  [email protected] Alina Matzvai  (Moscow, Russian Federation). Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology.  Institutsky Lane, 9, Dolgoprudny, 141701, Moscow Oblast, Russian Federation E-mail:  [email protected]

Shopping Cart Items: 0 Cart Total: 0,00 € place your order

Price pdf version

student - 2,75 € individual - 3,00 € institutional - 7,00 €

Copyright В© 1999-2022. Stratum Publishing House