NDLI: The impact on healthcare, policy and practice from 36 multi-project research programmes: findings from two reviews

Content Provider	Springer Nature : BioMed Central
Author	Hanney, Steve Greenhalgh, Trisha Blatch-Jones, Amanda Glover, Matthew Raftery, James
Abstract	Background We sought to analyse the impacts found, and the methods used, in a series of assessments of programmes and portfolios of health research consisting of multiple projects. Methods We analysed a sample of 36 impact studies of multi-project research programmes, selected from a wider sample of impact studies included in two narrative systematic reviews published in 2007 and 2016. We included impact studies in which the individual projects in a programme had been assessed for wider impact, especially on policy or practice, and where findings had been described in such a way that allowed them to be collated and compared. Results Included programmes were highly diverse in terms of location (11 different countries plus two multi-country ones), number of component projects (8 to 178), nature of the programme, research field, mode of funding, time between completion and impact assessment, methods used to assess impact, and level of impact identified. Thirty-one studies reported on policy impact, 17 on clinician behaviour or informing clinical practice, three on a combined category such as policy and clinician impact, and 12 on wider elements of impact (health gain, patient benefit, improved care or other benefits to the healthcare system). In those multi-programme projects that assessed the respective categories, the percentage of projects that reported some impact was policy 35% (range 5–100%), practice 32% (10–69%), combined category 64% (60–67%), and health gain/health services 27% (6–48%). Variations in levels of impact achieved partly reflected differences in the types of programme, levels of collaboration with users, and methods and timing of impact assessment. Most commonly, principal investigators were surveyed; some studies involved desk research and some interviews with investigators and/or stakeholders. Most studies used a conceptual framework such as the Payback Framework. One study attempted to assess the monetary value of a research programme’s health gain. Conclusion The widespread impact reported for some multi-project programmes, including needs-led and collaborative ones, could potentially be used to promote further research funding. Moves towards greater standardisation of assessment methods could address existing inconsistencies and better inform strategic decisions about research investment; however, unresolved issues about such moves remain.
Related Links	https://health-policy-systems.biomedcentral.com/counter/pdf/10.1186/s12961-017-0191-y.pdf
Ending Page	21
Page Count	21
Starting Page	1
File Format	HTM / HTML
ISSN	14784505
DOI	10.1186/s12961-017-0191-y
Journal	Health Research Policy and Systems
Issue Number	1
Volume Number	15
Language	English
Publisher	BioMed Central
Publisher Date	2017-03-28
Access Restriction	Open
Subject Keyword	Health Administration R & D Technology Policy Medicine Public Health Health Services Research Health Policy Research impact Multi-project programmes Policy impact Practice impact Health gains Monetisation Payback Framework Health technology assessment World Health Report Global Observatory R & D/Technology Policy Medicine/Public Health
Content Type	Text
Resource Type	Article
Subject	Health Policy
Journal Impact Factor	3.6/2023
5-Year Journal Impact Factor	4.3/2023

Sl.	Authority	Responsibilities	Communication Details
1	Ministry of Education (GoI), Department of Higher Education	Sanctioning Authority	https://www.education.gov.in/ict-initiatives
2	Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	Host Institute of the Project: The host institute of the project is responsible for providing infrastructure support and hosting the project	https://www.iitkgp.ac.in
3	National Digital Library of India Office, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	The administrative and infrastructural headquarters of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in
4	Project PI / Joint PI	Principal Investigator and Joint Principal Investigators of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in Prof. Saswat Chakrabarti will be added soon
5	Website/Portal (Helpdesk)	Queries regarding NDLI and its services	support@ndl.gov.in
6	Contents and Copyright Issues	Queries related to content curation and copyright issues	content@ndl.gov.in
7	National Digital Library of India Club (NDLI Club)	Queries related to NDLI Club formation, support, user awareness program, seminar/symposium, collaboration, social media, promotion, and outreach	clubsupport@ndl.gov.in
8	Digital Preservation Centre (DPC)	Assistance with digitizing and archiving copyright-free printed books	dpc@ndl.gov.in
9	IDR Setup or Support	Queries related to establishment and support of Institutional Digital Repository (IDR) and IDR workshops	idr@ndl.gov.in

Measuring research impact: a large cancer research funding programme in Australia

Pathways to research impact in primary healthcare: What do Australian primary healthcare researchers believe works best to facilitate the use of their research findings?

Author's response to reviews Title : The impact on healthcare , policy and practice from thirty-six multi-project research programmes : findings from two reviews

An assessment of health research impact in Iran

Impact assessment of Iran’s health technology assessment programme

Research impact: a narrative review

The feasibility of determining the impact of primary health care research projects using the Payback Framework

Four centuries on from Bacon: progress in building health research systems to improve health systems?

Systematic review of methods for evaluating healthcare research economic impact

The impact on healthcare, policy and practice from 36 multi-project research programmes: findings from two reviews

Similar Documents

Measuring research impact: a large cancer research funding programme in Australia

Pathways to research impact in primary healthcare: What do Australian primary healthcare researchers believe works best to facilitate the use of their research findings?

Author's response to reviews Title : The impact on healthcare , policy and practice from thirty-six multi-project research programmes : findings from two reviews

An assessment of health research impact in Iran

Impact assessment of Iran’s health technology assessment programme

Research impact: a narrative review

The feasibility of determining the impact of primary health care research projects using the Payback Framework

Four centuries on from Bacon: progress in building health research systems to improve health systems?

Systematic review of methods for evaluating healthcare research economic impact

The impact on healthcare, policy and practice from 36 multi-project research programmes: findings from two reviews