Partnership approaches to the evaluation of complex policy initiatives: Qualitative research as key to building effective relationships

Turner-Halliday, F., Welch, V., Bryce, G., Forde, M., Cotmore, R., Wilson, P., Fitzpatrick, B., Watson, N. and Minnis, H. (2018) Partnership approaches to the evaluation of complex policy initiatives: Qualitative research as key to building effective relationships. International Journal of Social Welfare, 27(4), pp. 381-387. (doi: 10.1111/ijsw.12326)

Full text not currently available from Enlighten.

Abstract

We argue that major health and social care policy initiatives are not too complex for randomised controlled trial (RCT) methodology and illustrate this using the example of the Best Services Trial (BeST?): a RCT of an infant mental health intervention for maltreated children. We suggest that qualitative research, as a core part of the trial process from conception and development through to implementation and evaluation, is crucial in building, understanding and strengthening the partnership required to drive such a complex trial. Data pertinent to trial implementation demonstrate the iterative nature of the process whereby stakeholders are consulted and their views influence the conduct of the trial. Here we reflect on the bi‐directional relationship between qualitative data collection and partnership‐working in a trial. For very complex trials to be possible, significant resource needs to be available for the qualitative component.

Item Type:Articles
Status:Published
Refereed:Yes
Glasgow Author(s) Enlighten ID:Minnis, Professor Helen and Turner, Ms Fiona
Authors: Turner-Halliday, F., Welch, V., Bryce, G., Forde, M., Cotmore, R., Wilson, P., Fitzpatrick, B., Watson, N., and Minnis, H.
College/School:College of Medical Veterinary and Life Sciences > School of Health & Wellbeing > Mental Health and Wellbeing
Journal Name:International Journal of Social Welfare
Publisher:Wiley
ISSN:1369-6866
ISSN (Online):1468-2397
Published Online:19 July 2018

University Staff: Request a correction | Enlighten Editors: Update this record