Hanna Catherine R, Boyd Kathleen A, Jones Robert J
CRUK Clinical Trials Unit, Institute of Cancer Sciences, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom.
Health Economics and Health Technology Assessment, Institute of Health and Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom.
Health Res Policy Syst. 2021 Mar 11;19(1):36. doi: 10.1186/s12961-020-00658-x.
Performing cancer research relies on substantial financial investment, and contributions in time and effort from patients. It is therefore important that this research has real life impacts which are properly evaluated. The optimal approach to cancer research impact evaluation is not clear. The aim of this study was to undertake a systematic review of review articles that describe approaches to impact assessment, and to identify examples of cancer research impact evaluation within these reviews.
In total, 11 publication databases and the grey literature were searched to identify review articles addressing the topic of approaches to research impact assessment. Information was extracted on methods for data collection and analysis, impact categories and frameworks used for the purposes of evaluation. Empirical examples of impact assessments of cancer research were identified from these literature reviews. Approaches used in these examples were appraised, with a reflection on which methods would be suited to cancer research impact evaluation going forward.
In total, 40 literature reviews were identified. Important methods to collect and analyse data for impact assessments were surveys, interviews and documentary analysis. Key categories of impact spanning the reviews were summarised, and a list of frameworks commonly used for impact assessment was generated. The Payback Framework was most often described. Fourteen examples of impact evaluation for cancer research were identified. They ranged from those assessing the impact of a national, charity-funded portfolio of cancer research to the clinical practice impact of a single trial. A set of recommendations for approaching cancer research impact assessment was generated.
Impact evaluation can demonstrate if and why conducting cancer research is worthwhile. Using a mixed methods, multi-category assessment organised within a framework, will provide a robust evaluation, but the ability to perform this type of assessment may be constrained by time and resources. Whichever approach is used, easily measured, but inappropriate metrics should be avoided. Going forward, dissemination of the results of cancer research impact assessments will allow the cancer research community to learn how to conduct these evaluations.
开展癌症研究需要大量资金投入以及患者付出时间和精力。因此，确保这项研究产生实际影响并得到恰当评估至关重要。目前尚不清楚癌症研究影响评估的最佳方法。本研究旨在对描述影响评估方法的综述文章进行系统评价，并在这些综述中识别癌症研究影响评估的实例。
共检索了11个出版物数据库和灰色文献，以识别涉及研究影响评估方法主题的综述文章。提取了有关数据收集和分析方法、影响类别以及用于评估目的的框架的信息。从这些文献综述中识别出癌症研究影响评估的实证例子。对这些例子中使用的方法进行了评估，并思考哪些方法适用于未来的癌症研究影响评估。
共识别出40篇文献综述。影响评估数据收集和分析的重要方法包括调查、访谈和文献分析。总结了各综述中关键的影响类别，并生成了一份常用于影响评估的框架列表。其中最常被描述的是回报框架。识别出14个癌症研究影响评估的例子。它们涵盖了从评估国家慈善资助的癌症研究项目组合的影响到单个试验的临床实践影响等范围。针对癌症研究影响评估提出了一系列建议。
影响评估可以证明开展癌症研究是否值得以及原因。采用在框架内组织的混合方法、多类别评估将提供有力的评估，但进行此类评估的能力可能受到时间和资源的限制。无论使用哪种方法，都应避免使用易于衡量但不恰当的指标。展望未来，传播癌症研究影响评估的结果将使癌症研究界了解如何进行这些评估。
