Social Innovation For Health Research: Development of the SIFHR Checklist.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Background
Social innovations in health are inclusive solutions to address the healthcare delivery gap that meet the needs of end users through a multi-stakeholder, community-engaged process. While social innovations for health have shown promise in closing the healthcare delivery gap, more research is needed to evaluate, scale up, and sustain social innovation. Research checklists can standardize and improve reporting of research findings, promote transparency, and increase replicability of study results and findings.Methods and findings
The research checklist was developed through a 3-step community-engaged process, including a global open call for ideas, a scoping review, and a 3-round modified Delphi process. The call for entries solicited checklists and related items and was open between November 27, 2019 and February 1, 2020. In addition to the open call submissions and scoping review findings, a 17-item Social Innovation For Health Research (SIFHR) Checklist was developed based on the Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) Checklist. The checklist was then refined during 3 rounds of Delphi surveys conducted between May and June 2020. The resulting checklist will facilitate more complete and transparent reporting, increase end-user engagement, and help assess social innovation projects. A limitation of the open call was requiring internet access, which likely discouraged participation of some subgroups.Conclusions
The SIFHR Checklist will strengthen the reporting of social innovation for health research studies. More research is needed on social innovation for health.
SUBMITTER: Kpokiri EE
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8475987 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:While social innovations in health have shown promise in closing the healthcare delivery gap, especially in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), more research is needed to evaluate, scale up, and sustain social innovations. Research checklists can standardize and improve reporting of research findings, promote transparency, and increase replicability of study results and findings. This article describes the development of a 17-item social innovation in health research checklist to assess and report social innovation projects and provides examples of good reporting. The checklist is adapted from the TIDieR checklist and will facilitate more complete and transparent reporting and increase end user engagement.Summary pointsWhile many social innovations have been developed and shown promise in closing the healthcare delivery gap, more research is needed to evaluate social innovationThe Social Innovation in Health Research Checklist, the first of its kind, is a 17-item checklist to improve reporting completeness and promote transparency in the development, implementation, and evaluation of social innovations in healthThe research checklist was developed through a three-step process, including a global open call for ideas, a scoping review, and a three-round modified Delphi processUse of this research checklist will enable researchers, innovators and partners to learn more about the process and results of social innovation in health research.
| S-EPMC7654927 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Identifying social innovation in health initiatives, promoting quality of life through them, and transforming current health conditions demand the knowledge, comprehension and appropriation of the theoretical and methodological developments of this concept. Academic developments in social innovation have mainly occurred in and been documented for English-speaking countries, although relevant experiences have been implemented in Latin America. In this article, we describe and analyze how social innovation in health is being approached and understood in this region. MAIN TEXT:To identify the theoretical and methodological developments of social innovation in health between 2013 and 2018, a scoping review with a mixed approach was carried out. Eighty texts in English, Spanish and Portuguese were selected for a process of reflexive analysis of intra and intertextual reading. The approaches identified in the studied initiatives were complementary. The most applied approaches were innovation in health, technological innovation in health and social innovation, each with twelve publications, and social innovation in health and ecohealth with ten and seven publications respectively. The approaches showed a general interest in reaching the goals of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), the Alma Ata Declaration and the Ottawa Letter. CONCLUSIONS:The social innovation in health approach in Latin America adopts educational strategies, identifies risk factors, optimizes resources, promotes interculturality, participation, community empowerment, and enhances intersectorality and interdisciplinarity. As an approach, process, program or solution, social innovation in health is a conceptual category under construction. This research provides a baseline for other systematic reviews on the subject.
| S-EPMC7175528 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The European Union (EU) initiative on the Digital Transformation of Health and Care (Digicare) aims to provide the conditions necessary for building a secure, flexible, and decentralized digital health infrastructure. Creating a European Health Research and Innovation Cloud (HRIC) within this environment should enable data sharing and analysis for health research across the EU, in compliance with data protection legislation while preserving the full trust of the participants. Such a HRIC should learn from and build on existing data infrastructures, integrate best practices, and focus on the concrete needs of the community in terms of technologies, governance, management, regulation, and ethics requirements. Here, we describe the vision and expected benefits of digital data sharing in health research activities and present a roadmap that fosters the opportunities while answering the challenges of implementing a HRIC. For this, we put forward five specific recommendations and action points to ensure that a European HRIC: i) is built on established standards and guidelines, providing cloud technologies through an open and decentralized infrastructure; ii) is developed and certified to the highest standards of interoperability and data security that can be trusted by all stakeholders; iii) is supported by a robust ethical and legal framework that is compliant with the EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR); iv) establishes a proper environment for the training of new generations of data and medical scientists; and v) stimulates research and innovation in transnational collaborations through public and private initiatives and partnerships funded by the EU through Horizon 2020 and Horizon Europe.
| S-EPMC7029532 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPersonas, based on customer or population data, are widely used to inform design decisions in the commercial sector. The variety of methods available means that personas can be produced from projects of different types and scale.ObjectiveThis study aims to experiment with the use of personas that bring together data from a survey, household air measurements and electricity usage sensors, and an interview within a research and innovation project, with the aim of supporting eHealth and eWell-being product, process, and service development through broadening the engagement with and understanding of the data about the local community.MethodsThe project participants were social housing residents (adults only) living in central Cornwall, a rural unitary authority in the United Kingdom. A total of 329 households were recruited between September 2017 and November 2018, with 235 (71.4%) providing complete baseline survey data on demographics, socioeconomic position, household composition, home environment, technology ownership, pet ownership, smoking, social cohesion, volunteering, caring, mental well-being, physical and mental health-related quality of life, and activity. K-prototype cluster analysis was used to identify 8 clusters among the baseline survey responses. The sensor and interview data were subsequently analyzed by cluster and the insights from all 3 data sources were brought together to produce the personas, known as the Smartline Archetypes.ResultsThe Smartline Archetypes proved to be an engaging way of presenting data, accessible to a broader group of stakeholders than those who accessed the raw anonymized data, thereby providing a vehicle for greater research engagement, innovation, and impact.ConclusionsThrough the adoption of a tool widely used in practice, research projects could generate greater policy and practical impact, while also becoming more transparent and open to the public.
| S-EPMC7925145 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Multi-stakeholder platforms (MSPs) are seen as a promising vehicle to achieve agricultural development impacts. By increasing collaboration, exchange of knowledge and influence mediation among farmers, researchers and other stakeholders, MSPs supposedly enhance their 'capacity to innovate' and contribute to the 'scaling of innovations'. The objective of this paper is to explore the capacity to innovate and scaling potential of three MSPs in Burundi, Rwanda and the South Kivu province located in the eastern part of Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). In order to do this, we apply Social Network Analysis and Exponential Random Graph Modelling (ERGM) to investigate the structural properties of the collaborative, knowledge exchange and influence networks of these MSPs and compared them against value propositions derived from the innovation network literature. Results demonstrate a number of mismatches between collaboration, knowledge exchange and influence networks for effective innovation and scaling processes in all three countries: NGOs and private sector are respectively over- and under-represented in the MSP networks. Linkages between local and higher levels are weak, and influential organisations (e.g., high-level government actors) are often not part of the MSP or are not actively linked to by other organisations. Organisations with a central position in the knowledge network are more sought out for collaboration. The scaling of innovations is primarily between the same type of organisations across different administrative levels, but not between different types of organisations. The results illustrate the potential of Social Network Analysis and ERGMs to identify the strengths and limitations of MSPs in terms of achieving development impacts.
| S-EPMC5293196 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionMethodological studies (ie, studies that evaluate the design, conduct, analysis or reporting of other studies in health research) address various facets of health research including, for instance, data collection techniques, differences in approaches to analyses, reporting quality, adherence to guidelines or publication bias. As a result, methodological studies can help to identify knowledge gaps in the methodology of health research and strategies for improvement in research practices. Differences in methodological study names and a lack of reporting guidance contribute to lack of comparability across studies and difficulties in identifying relevant previous methodological studies. This paper outlines the methods we will use to develop an evidence-based tool-the MethodologIcal STudy reportIng Checklist-to harmonise naming conventions and improve the reporting of methodological studies.Methods and analysisWe will search for methodological studies in the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Cochrane Library, Embase, MEDLINE, Web of Science, check reference lists and contact experts in the field. We will extract and summarise data on the study names, design and reporting features of the included methodological studies. Consensus on study terms and recommended reporting items will be achieved via video conference meetings with a panel of experts including researchers who have published methodological studies.Ethics and disseminationThe consensus study has been exempt from ethics review by the Hamilton Integrated Research Ethics Board. The results of the review and the reporting guideline will be disseminated in stakeholder meetings, conferences, peer-reviewed publications, in requests to journal editors (to endorse or make the guideline a requirement for authors), and on the Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research (EQUATOR) Network and reporting guideline websites.RegistrationWe have registered the development of the reporting guideline with the EQUATOR Network and publicly posted this project on the Open Science Framework (www.osf.io/9hgbq).
| S-EPMC7747548 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThere is an established body of evidence linking systems of social protection to health systems and health outcomes. The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) provide further emphasis on this linkage as necessary to achieving health and non-health goals. Existing literature on social protection and health has focused primarily on cash transfers. We sought to identify potential research priorities concerning social protection and health in low and middle-income countries, from multiple perspectives.MethodsPriority research questions were identified through two sources: 1) research reviews on social protection interventions and health, 2) interviews with 54 policy makers from Ministries of Health, multi-lateral or bilateral organizations, and NGOs. Data was collated and summarized using a framework analysis approach. The final refining and ranking of the questions was completed by researchers from around the globe through an online platform.ResultsThe overview of reviews identified 5 main categories of social protection interventions: cash transfers; financial incentives and other demand side financing interventions; food aid and nutritional interventions; parental leave; and livelihood/social welfare interventions. Policy-makers focused on the implementation and practice of social protection and health, how social protection programs could be integrated with other sectors, and how they should be monitored/evaluated. A collated list resulted in 31 priority research questions. Scale and sustainability of social protection programs ranked highest. The top 10 research questions focused heavily on design, implementation, and context, with a range of interventions that included cash transfers, social insurance, and labor market interventions.ConclusionsThere is potentially a rich field of enquiry into the linkages between health systems and social protection programs, but research within this field has focused on a few relatively narrowly defined areas. The SDGs provide an impetus to the expansion of research of this nature, with priority setting exercises such as this helping to align funder investment with researcher effort and policy-maker evidence needs.
| S-EPMC6161373 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Bridging social capital is defined as the connections between individuals who are dissimilar with respect to socioeconomic and other characteristics. There is an important gap in the literature related to its measurement. We describe the development and validation of a questionnaire to measure bridging social capital. We focused the development of the questionnaire to be suitable for use in Latino immigrant populations in the U.S. The structure of the questionnaire comprised the following: Socialization in the job place (5 items); Membership in community activities (16 items); Participation in community activities (5 items); Contact with similar/different people (7 items); Assistance (17 items); Trust of institutions, corporations and other people(14 items); and Trust of intimate people (3 items). First, we used focus groups (N=17 participants) to establish content validity with an inductive thematic analysis to identify themes and subthemes. Changes were made to the questionnaire based on difficulty, redundancy, length and semantic equivalence. Second, we analyzed the questionnaire's psychometric properties (N=138). We tested internal consistency with Cronbach alpha and construct validity with a Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) for each sub-scale to test theoretical unity; discriminant validity to observe differences between participants from high and low SES backgrounds and different language; and content validity with an independent expert panel. Cronbach alphas ranged from 0.80 (Assistance) to 0.92 (Trust). CFA results indicated that CFI and TLI were higher than 0.90 in almost all the scales, with high factor loadings. The Wilcoxon tests indicated that there were statistically significant mean differences between SES and language groups (p<0.00). The independent expert panel determined that the questionnaire had good content validity. This is the first demonstration of a psychometrically validated questionnaire to measure bridging social capital in an immigrant population in the United States. Our questionnaire may be suitable for further refinement and adaptation to other immigrant groups in different countries.
| S-EPMC5757980 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Health research priority setting processes assist researchers and policymakers in effectively targeting research that has the greatest potential public health benefit. Many different approaches to health research prioritization exist, but there is no agreement on what might constitute best practice. Moreover, because of the many different contexts for which priorities can be set, attempting to produce one best practice is in fact not appropriate, as the optimal approach varies per exercise. Therefore, following a literature review and an analysis of health research priority setting exercises that were organized or coordinated by the World Health Organization since 2005, we propose a checklist for health research priority setting that allows for informed choices on different approaches and outlines nine common themes of good practice. It is intended to provide generic assistance for planning health research prioritization processes. The checklist explains what needs to be clarified in order to establish the context for which priorities are set; it reviews available approaches to health research priority setting; it offers discussions on stakeholder participation and information gathering; it sets out options for use of criteria and different methods for deciding upon priorities; and it emphasizes the importance of well-planned implementation, evaluation and transparency.
| S-EPMC3018439 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionDespite advances in the co-creation of clinical research involving consumers in the last few decades, consumer engagement in health services research generally remains inconsistent and is too often treated as a perfunctory exercise.ObjectiveDrawing on a health services study on diagnostic test result management, communication and follow-up, we: (1) outline practical strategies used to enhance the contribution of health consumer representatives across all stages of health services research, including active involvement in prioritising objectives for data analysis and participating in data analysis and the dissemination of findings; and (2) describe the impact of continued engagement of consumers on the programme of research, the interpretation of findings and their translational potential.Key innovationsKey enabling innovations for engagement included: (1) planned opportunities for long-term consumer involvement across all stages of the research process from conception to dissemination; (2) enhanced consumer engagement capacity; (3) purposeful recruitment of appropriately trained consumers; (4) provision of support structures for active consumer involvement in research design, analysis and write-up; and (5) financial support for consumer involvement.Impact/conclusionEnhancing consumer contribution and establishing inclusive research design requires a negotiated, interactive, meaningful and transparent process. As a collaborative approach, consumer-driven research involvement offers opportunities for new, often unexpected or unexplored perspectives to feature across the whole research process. In a move away from tokenistic consumer involvement, consumers and researchers who participated in this novel and immersive research project identified inclusive research as a powerful tool to enhance health services research and its translation into effective policy.
| S-EPMC6936998 | biostudies-literature