Examining research systems and models for local government: a systematic review

IF 1.8 3区 社会学 Q2 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY Evidence & Policy Pub Date : 2023-10-18 DOI:10.1332/17442648y2023d000000002
Emma S. Hock, Alison Scope, Andrew Booth
{"title":"Examining research systems and models for local government: a systematic review","authors":"Emma S. Hock, Alison Scope, Andrew Booth","doi":"10.1332/17442648y2023d000000002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Local authorities (LA) are key in improving population health, and LA public health decision makers need support from appropriately organised research capacity; however, few models of LA research systems are known to exist. Aims and objectives: To explore potential and existing models of LA-based research systems. Methods: This mapping review and time-constrained systematic review synthesises conceptual and empirical literature from 12 health and social science databases, grey literature and reference/citation tracking. Three reviewers screened titles, abstracts and full texts of retrieved records, and extracted key data from included papers. Evidence was synthesised based on characteristics of research systems and quality-assessed for relevance, rigour and richness. Findings: Nine models were examined in depth. From these, we developed a typology of research systems. Few models were specifically designed for LA research activity; as a Whole System approach, the Local Authority Champions of Research model offers a potential blueprint. Useful lessons may be learned from UK Collaborations for Leadership in Applied Health Research, Academic Collaborative Centres in the Netherlands, local Research and Development units in Sweden, and generic University-Community partnerships. Discussion and conclusions: An optimal research system requires the coexistence of multiple systems including Centre, Partnership, Collaboration, Network and Community types. The review is UK-focused, but the models appear to have wider relevance. Our classification offers those planning an LA research system the opportunity to choose an approach that meets their requirements and resources. A Whole System approach is optimal, with egalitarian input from the LA and academia.","PeriodicalId":51652,"journal":{"name":"Evidence & Policy","volume":"163 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Evidence & Policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1332/17442648y2023d000000002","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Local authorities (LA) are key in improving population health, and LA public health decision makers need support from appropriately organised research capacity; however, few models of LA research systems are known to exist. Aims and objectives: To explore potential and existing models of LA-based research systems. Methods: This mapping review and time-constrained systematic review synthesises conceptual and empirical literature from 12 health and social science databases, grey literature and reference/citation tracking. Three reviewers screened titles, abstracts and full texts of retrieved records, and extracted key data from included papers. Evidence was synthesised based on characteristics of research systems and quality-assessed for relevance, rigour and richness. Findings: Nine models were examined in depth. From these, we developed a typology of research systems. Few models were specifically designed for LA research activity; as a Whole System approach, the Local Authority Champions of Research model offers a potential blueprint. Useful lessons may be learned from UK Collaborations for Leadership in Applied Health Research, Academic Collaborative Centres in the Netherlands, local Research and Development units in Sweden, and generic University-Community partnerships. Discussion and conclusions: An optimal research system requires the coexistence of multiple systems including Centre, Partnership, Collaboration, Network and Community types. The review is UK-focused, but the models appear to have wider relevance. Our classification offers those planning an LA research system the opportunity to choose an approach that meets their requirements and resources. A Whole System approach is optimal, with egalitarian input from the LA and academia.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
检视地方政府研究体系与模式:系统回顾
背景:地方当局是改善人口健康的关键,地方公共卫生决策者需要得到适当组织的研究能力的支持;然而,已知存在的LA研究系统模型很少。目的和目标:探索潜在的和现有的基于洛杉矶的研究系统模式。方法:通过对12个健康和社会科学数据库、灰色文献和参考文献/引文跟踪的概念文献和实证文献进行综合分析。三位审稿人筛选检索记录的标题、摘要和全文,并从纳入的论文中提取关键数据。证据是根据研究系统的特点综合的,并对相关性、严谨性和丰富性进行了质量评估。结果:对9个模型进行了深入研究。从这些,我们开发了一个类型学的研究系统。很少有模型是专门为洛杉矶研究活动设计的;作为一种整体系统方法,地方当局研究冠军模式提供了一个潜在的蓝图。可以从联合王国应用卫生研究领导合作、荷兰学术合作中心、瑞典地方研究和发展单位以及一般大学-社区伙伴关系中吸取有益的教训。讨论与结论:一个最优的研究系统需要多个系统共存,包括中心、伙伴关系、协作、网络和社区类型。这篇综述以英国为重点,但这些模型似乎具有更广泛的相关性。我们的分类为那些规划LA研究系统的人提供了选择符合他们需求和资源的方法的机会。一个整体系统的方法是最理想的,从洛杉矶和学术界平等的投入。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Evidence & Policy
Evidence & Policy SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
14.30%
发文量
53
期刊最新文献
Breaking the Overton Window: on the need for adversarial co-production Examining research systems and models for local government: a systematic review Experiences and perceptions of evidence use among senior health service decision makers in Ireland: a qualitative study The critical factors in producing high quality and policy-relevant research: insights from international behavioural science units Understanding brokers, intermediaries, and boundary spanners: a multi-sectoral review of strategies, skills, and outcomes
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1