2016
DOI: 10.3310/hta20760
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Models and applications for measuring the impact of health research: update of a systematic review for the Health Technology Assessment programme

Abstract: BackgroundThis report reviews approaches and tools for measuring the impact of research programmes, building on, and extending, a 2007 review.Objectives(1) To identify the range of theoretical models and empirical approaches for measuring the impact of health research programmes; (2) to develop a taxonomy of models and approaches; (3) to summarise the evidence on the application and use of these models; and (4) to evaluate the different options for the Health Technology Assessment (HTA) programme.Data sourcesW… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
85
0
3

Year Published

2017
2017
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
4
2

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 66 publications
(88 citation statements)
references
References 302 publications
0
85
0
3
Order By: Relevance
“…In 20 of the 36 studies, the various methods used were organised according to a named conceptual framework (see Hanney et al [6] and Raftery et al [9] for a summary of all these frameworks); 16 of the 36 studies drew partly or wholly on the Payback Framework [15]. A series of existing named frameworks each informed one of the 36 studies, and included the Research Impact Framework [24], applied by Caddell et al [37]; the Canadian Academy of Health Sciences framework [10], applied by Adam et al [32]; the Banzi Research Impact model [11], applied by Milat et al [53]; and the Becker Medical Library model [67], applied by Sainty [59].…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 4 more Smart Citations
“…In 20 of the 36 studies, the various methods used were organised according to a named conceptual framework (see Hanney et al [6] and Raftery et al [9] for a summary of all these frameworks); 16 of the 36 studies drew partly or wholly on the Payback Framework [15]. A series of existing named frameworks each informed one of the 36 studies, and included the Research Impact Framework [24], applied by Caddell et al [37]; the Canadian Academy of Health Sciences framework [10], applied by Adam et al [32]; the Banzi Research Impact model [11], applied by Milat et al [53]; and the Becker Medical Library model [67], applied by Sainty [59].…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The methods used to conduct the two previous reviews on which this study is based [6, 9] are described in Box 1.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 3 more Smart Citations