Tools
ToolsMasterson-Algar, Patricia, Burton, Christopher R. and Rycroft-Malone, Jo (2016) Process evaluations in neurological rehabilitation:A mixed-evidence systematic review and recommendations for future research. BMJ Open, 6 (11). ISSN 2044-6055
Full text not available from this repository. (Request a copy)Abstract
Objective: To systematically review how process evaluations are currently designed, what methodologies are used and how are they developed alongside or within neurological rehabilitation trials. Methods: This mixed-methods systematic review had two evidence streams: stream I, studies reporting process evaluations alongside neurorehabilitation trials research and stream II, methodological guidance on process evaluation design and methodology. A search strategy was designed for each evidence stream. Data regarding process evaluation core concepts and design issues were extracted using a bespoke template. Evidence from both streams was analysed separately and then synthesised in a final overarching synthesis proposing a number of recommendations for future research. Results: A total of 124 process evaluation studies, reporting on 106 interventions, were included in stream I evidence. 30 studies were included as stream II evidence. Synthesis 1 produced 9 themes, and synthesis 2 identified a total of 8 recommendations for process evaluation research. The overall synthesis resulted in 57 'synthesis recommendations' about process evaluation methodology grouped into 9 research areas, including the use of theory, the investigation of context, intervention staff characteristics and the delivery of the trial intervention. Conclusions: There remains no consensus regarding process evaluation terminology within the neurological rehabilitation field. There is a need for process evaluations to address the nature and influence of context over time. Process evaluations should clearly describe what intervention staff bring to a trial, including skills and experience prior to joining the research. Process evaluations should monitor intervention staff's learning effects and the possible impact that these may have on trial outcomes.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | medicine(all) ,/dk/atira/pure/subjectarea/asjc/2700 |
| Faculty \ School: | Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences > School of Health Sciences |
| UEA Research Groups: | Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences > Research Centres > Public Health |
| Related URLs: | |
| Depositing User: | LivePure Connector |
| Date Deposited: | 20 Nov 2025 10:30 |
| Last Modified: | 20 Nov 2025 10:30 |
| URI: | https://ueaeprints.uea.ac.uk/id/eprint/101069 |
| DOI: | 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-013002 |
Actions (login required)
 |
View Item |