Walton Holly, Crellin Nadia E, Sidhu Manbinder S, Sherlaw-Johnson Chris, Herlitz Lauren, Litchfield Ian, Georghiou Theo, Tomini Sonila M, Massou Efthalia, Ellins Jo, Sussex Jon, Fulop Naomi J
Department of Applied Health Research, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
Research and Policy, The Nuffield Trust, London, United Kingdom.
Front Sociol. 2023 Feb 13;8:982946. doi: 10.3389/fsoc.2023.982946. eCollection 2023.
Rapid evaluations can offer evidence on innovations in health and social care that can be used to inform fast-moving policy and practise, and support their scale-up according to previous research. However, there are few comprehensive accounts of how to plan and conduct large-scale rapid evaluations, ensure scientific rigour, and achieve stakeholder engagement within compressed timeframes.
Using a case study of a national mixed-methods rapid evaluation of COVID-19 remote home monitoring services in England, conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic, this manuscript examines the process of conducting a large-scale rapid evaluation from design to dissemination and impact, and reflects on the key lessons for conducting future large-scale rapid evaluations. In this manuscript, we describe each stage of the rapid evaluation: convening the team (study team and external collaborators), design and planning (scoping, designing protocols, study set up), data collection and analysis, and dissemination.
We reflect on why certain decisions were made and highlight facilitators and challenges. The manuscript concludes with 12 key lessons for conducting large-scale mixed-methods rapid evaluations of healthcare services. We propose that rapid study teams need to: (1) find ways of quickly building trust with external stakeholders, including evidence-users; (2) consider the needs of the rapid evaluation and resources needed; (3) use scoping to ensure the study is highly focused; (4) carefully consider what cannot be completed within a designated timeframe; (5) use structured processes to ensure consistency and rigour; (6) be flexible and responsive to changing needs and circumstances; (7) consider the risks associated with new data collection approaches of quantitative data (and their usability); (8) consider whether it is possible to use aggregated quantitative data, and what that would mean when presenting results, (9) consider using structured processes & layered analysis approaches to rapidly synthesise qualitative findings, (10) consider the balance between speed and the size and skills of the team, (11) ensure all team members know roles and responsibilities and can communicate quickly and clearly; and (12) consider how best to share findings, in discussion with evidence-users, for rapid understanding and use.
These 12 lessons can be used to inform the development and conduct of future rapid evaluations in a range of contexts and settings.
快速评估可为卫生与社会护理领域的创新提供证据，这些证据可用于为快速变化的政策和实践提供参考，并根据以往研究支持其扩大规模。然而，关于如何规划和开展大规模快速评估、确保科学严谨性以及在压缩的时间框架内实现利益相关者参与的全面阐述却很少。
本文通过对在新冠疫情期间对英格兰新冠病毒远程居家监测服务进行的一项全国性混合方法快速评估的案例研究，审视了从设计到传播及影响的大规模快速评估过程，并反思了开展未来大规模快速评估的关键经验教训。在本文中，我们描述了快速评估的每个阶段：组建团队（研究团队和外部合作者）、设计与规划（范围界定、设计方案、研究设置）、数据收集与分析以及传播。
我们反思了做出某些决策的原因，并突出了促进因素和挑战。本文最后总结了开展医疗服务大规模混合方法快速评估的12条关键经验教训。我们建议快速研究团队需要：（1）找到与包括证据使用者在内的外部利益相关者迅速建立信任的方法；（2）考虑快速评估的需求和所需资源；（3）利用范围界定确保研究高度聚焦；（4）仔细考虑在指定时间范围内无法完成的事项；（5）使用结构化流程确保一致性和严谨性；（6）灵活并能应对不断变化的需求和情况；（7）考虑与新的定量数据收集方法相关的风险（及其可用性）；（8）考虑是否有可能使用汇总的定量数据，以及呈现结果时这意味着什么；（9）考虑使用结构化流程和分层分析方法快速综合定性研究结果；（10）考虑速度与团队规模和技能之间的平衡；（11）确保所有团队成员都清楚自己的角色和职责，并能快速清晰地沟通；以及（12）与证据使用者讨论如何以最佳方式分享研究结果，以便快速理解和使用。
这12条经验教训可用于为未来在一系列背景和环境下开展快速评估提供指导。
