McCourt Christine A, Morgan Philip A, Youll Penny
Faculty of Health and Human Sciences, Thames Valley University, 32-38 Uxbridge Road, London W5 2BS, UK.
Health Res Policy Syst. 2006 Oct 18;4:9. doi: 10.1186/1478-4505-4-9.
The objective of this study was to evaluate the implementation of a 'virtual' (computer-mediated) approach to health research commissioning. This had been introduced experimentally in a DOH programme--the 'Health of Londoners Programme'--in order to assess whether is could enhance the accessibility, transparency and effectiveness of commissioning health research. The study described here was commissioned to evaluate this novel approach, addressing these key questions.
A naturalistic-experimental approach was combined with principles of action research. The different commissioning groups within the programme were randomly allocated to either the traditional face-to-face mode or the novel 'virtual' mode. Mainly qualitative data were gathered including observation of all (virtual and face-to-face) commissioning meetings; semi-structured interviews with a purposive sample of participants (n = 32/66); structured questionnaires and interviews with lead researchers of early commissioned projects. All members of the commissioning groups were invited to participate in collaborative enquiry groups which participated actively in the analysis process.
The virtual process functioned as intended, reaching timely and relatively transparent decisions that participants had confidence in. Despite the potential for greater access using a virtual approach, few differences were found in practice. Key advantages included physical access, a more flexible and extended time period for discussion, reflection and information gathering and a more transparent decision-making process. Key challenges were the reduction of social cues available in a computer-mediated medium that require novel ways of ensuring appropriate dialogue, feedback and interaction. However, in both modes, the process was influenced by a range of factors and was not technology driven.
There is potential for using computer-mediated communication within the research commissioning process. This may enhance access, effectiveness and transparency of decision-making but further development is needed for this to be fully realised, including attention to process as well as the computer-mediated medium.
本研究的目的是评估一种“虚拟”(计算机介导)的健康研究委托方法的实施情况。该方法已在英国卫生部的一个项目——“伦敦人健康项目”中进行了试验,以评估其是否能提高健康研究委托的可及性、透明度和有效性。此处描述的研究旨在评估这种新方法,并解决这些关键问题。
将自然主义实验方法与行动研究原则相结合。该项目中的不同委托小组被随机分配到传统的面对面模式或新的“虚拟”模式。主要收集定性数据,包括观察所有(虚拟和面对面)委托会议;对有目的抽样的参与者(n = 32/66)进行半结构化访谈;对早期委托项目的首席研究员进行结构化问卷调查和访谈。邀请委托小组的所有成员参加协作探究小组,这些小组积极参与分析过程。
虚拟流程按预期运行,做出了及时且相对透明的决策,参与者对此有信心。尽管虚拟方法可能有更大的可及性,但在实践中发现差异不大。主要优点包括可及性、讨论、思考和信息收集的时间更灵活且延长,以及决策过程更透明。关键挑战是在计算机介导的媒介中社交线索减少,这需要新的方式来确保适当的对话、反馈和互动。然而,在两种模式下,该过程都受到一系列因素的影响,并非由技术驱动。
在研究委托过程中使用计算机介导的沟通有潜力。这可能会提高决策的可及性、有效性和透明度,但要充分实现这一点还需要进一步发展,包括关注过程以及计算机介导的媒介。