44 research outputs found
Most important barriers and facilitators of HTA usage in decision-making in Europe
This is an Accepted Manuscript of an article published by Taylor & Francis in Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research on 05 Jan 2018, available online: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/14737167.2018.1421459.Erasmu
Costs of the 'Hartslag Limburg' community heart health intervention
BACKGROUND: Little is known about the costs of community programmes to prevent cardiovascular diseases. The present study calculated the economic costs of all interventions within a Dutch community programme called Hartslag Limburg, in such a way as to facilitate generalisation to other countries. It also calculated the difference between the economic costs and the costs incurred by the coordinating institution. METHODS: Hartslag Limburg was a large-scale community programme that consisted of many interventions to prevent cardiovascular diseases. The target population consisted of all inhabitants of the region (n = 180.000). Special attention was paid to reach persons with a low socio-economic status. Costs were calculated using the guidelines for economic evaluation in health care. An overview of the material and staffing input involved was drawn up for every single intervention, and volume components were attached to each intervention component. These data were gathered during to the implementation of the intervention. Finally, the input was valued, using Dutch price levels for 2004. RESULTS: The economic costs of the interventions that were implemented within the five-year community programme (n = 180,000) were calculated to be about €900,000. €555,000 was spent on interventions to change people's exercise patterns, €250,000 on improving nutrition, €50,000 on smoking cessation, and €45,000 on lifestyle in general. The coordinating agency contributed about 10% to the costs of the interventions. Other institutions that were part of the programme's network and external subsidy providers contributed the other 90% of the costs. CONCLUSION: The current study calculated the costs of a community programme in a detailed and systematic way, allowing the costs to be easily adapted to other countries and regions. The study further showed that the difference between economic costs and the costs incurred by the coordinating agency can be very large. Cost sharing was facilitated by the unique approach used in the Hartslag Limburg programme
How to engage stakeholders in research: design principles to support improvement
Abstract
Background: Closing the gap between research production and research use is a key challenge for the health
research system. Stakeholder engagement is being increasingly promoted across the board by health research
funding organisations, and indeed by many researchers themselves, as an important pathway to achieving impact.
This opinion piece draws on a study of stakeholder engagement in research and a systematic literature search
conducted as part of the study.
Main body: This paper provides a short conceptualisation of stakeholder engagement, followed by ‘design principles’
that we put forward based on a combination of existing literature and new empirical insights from our recently
completed longitudinal study of stakeholder engagement. The design principles for stakeholder engagement are
organised into three groups, namely organisational, values and practices. The organisational principles are to clarify the
objectives of stakeholder engagement; embed stakeholder engagement in a framework or model of research use;
identify the necessary resources for stakeholder engagement; put in place plans for organisational learning and rewarding
of effective stakeholder engagement; and to recognise that some stakeholders have the potential to play a key role. The
principles relating to values are to foster shared commitment to the values and objectives of stakeholder engagement in
the project team; share understanding that stakeholder engagement is often about more than individuals; encourage
individual stakeholders and their organisations to value engagement; recognise potential tension between productivity
and inclusion; and to generate a shared commitment to sustained and continuous stakeholder engagement. Finally, in
terms of practices, the principles suggest that it is important to plan stakeholder engagement activity as part of the
research programme of work; build flexibility within the research process to accommodate engagement and the
outcomes of engagement; consider how input from stakeholders can be gathered systematically to meet objectives;
consider how input from stakeholders can be collated, analysed and used; and to recognise that identification and
involvement of stakeholders is an iterative and ongoing process.
Conclusion: It is anticipated that the principles will be useful in planning stakeholder engagement activity within
research programmes and in monitoring and evaluating stakeholder engagement. A next step will be to address the
remaining gap in the stakeholder engagement literature concerned with how we assess the impact of stakeholder
engagement on research us