Collective health research assessment: developing a tool to measure the impact of multistakeholder research initiatives

Background

The need to more collaboratively measure the impact of health research and to do so from multidimensional perspectives has been acknowledged. A scorecard was developed as part of the Collective Research Impact Framework (CRIF), to engage stakeholders in the assessment of the impacts of health research and innovations. The purpose of this study was to describe the developmental process of the MULTI-ACT Master Scorecard (MSC) and how it can be used as a workable tool for collectively assessing future responsible research and innovation measures.

Methods

An extensive review of the health research impact literature and of multistakeholder initiatives resulted in a database of 1556 impact indicators. The MSC was then cocreated by engaging key stakeholders and conducting semi-structured interviews of experts in the field.

Results

The MSC consists of five accountability dimensions: excellence, efficacy, economic, social and patient-reported outcomes. The tool contains 125 potential indicators, classified into 53 impact measurement aspects that are considered the most relevant topics for multistakeholder research and innovation initiatives when assessing their impact on the basis of their mission and their stakeholders’ interests. The scorecard allows the strategic management of multistakeholder research initiatives to demonstrate their impact on people and society. The value of the tool is that it is comprehensive, customizable and easy to use.

Conclusions

The MSC is an example of how the views of society can be taken into account when research impacts are assessed in a more sustainable and balanced way. The engagement of patients and other stakeholders is an integral part of the CRIF, facilitating collaborative decision-making in the design of policies and research agendas. In policy making, the collective approach allows the evaluation perspective to be extended to the needs of society and towards responsible research and innovation. Multidimensionality makes research and innovations more responsive to systemic challenges, and developing more equitable and sustainable health services.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12961-022-00856-9.

Value for all? Dynamics of partnership formation in occupational healthcare collaboration

Interorganizational relationships take advantages of surrounding networks to create value. However, there is little processual understanding of how cooperative partnerships ‘work’ in healthcare collaboration. From the value creation perspective, their mobilization, management and maintenance are challenging. To understand the value of cooperative partnerships, we explore the dynamics of partnership formation in occupational healthcare collaboration. The empirical data is based on a two-year qualitative case study examining e-value co-creation in healthcare. The research data was obtained through a participatory action research method. We facilitated and followed up a developmental process of the partnership between an occupational health service company and its customer organization. This partnership aimed to add strategic value through the co-creation method to improve the well-being of employees and to promote eHealth solutions. In analyzing the data, we adopted a process orientation that allowed us to explore dynamics in partnership formation and its e-value co-creation. We used Ring and Van de Ven’s [1] framework to examine how cooperative interorganizational relationship develops through the stages of negotiation, commitment and execution. Our longitudinal case study analysis reveals how interaction, mutual sensemaking and institutional logics affect partnership and its value creation. The results show that the formation of a cooperative partnership is a challenging inter-organizational learning process. Our study demonstrates three tensions characterizing the dynamics of partnership: asymmetrical roles and positions between partners (customer and service provider) in co-creation, exploitation of institutionalized practices versus the exploration of new methods for collaboration, and tradeoffs between the operational logic and the co-creation logic. To create value for all in cooperative partnership, we emphasize the necessity of dialogue, mutual trust, interorganizational learning and processual feedback of accomplishments. At its best, cooperative partnership in healthcare collaboration can challenge existing practices of service provision and develop new concepts, roles and tools to promote health and well-being at workplaces through co-creation as a working method in occupational health collaboration.

Value-based healthcare logics and their implications for Nordic health policies

Value-based healthcare (VBHC) is a widely approved logic for financing services, using innovative care models and evaluating healthcare outcomes. It is consistent with the Triple Aim framework of simultaneously improving population health, patient experience and the costs of care. In Nordic countries, VBHC has been mainly implemented as a strategic concept in developing hospitals. Despite the evident interest in VBHC as a management trend in healthcare organisations, the studies concerning the implications of VBHC logics on health policies have been scant. This study aimed to fill this gap by building a conceptual bridge between national health policy and value-based care. Through the Triple Aim framework, we explored how VBHC goals have evolved in Finnish Government Programmes from 1995 to 2015 by using qualitative document analysis and interviews. The study addresses the evolution and national impacts of VBHC. Our results show that the goals of Triple Aim gradually become evident at the Finnish health policies. All three Triple Aim goals were present, though the equal prioritisation of these goals only emerged in 2015, also highlighting patient experience. We argue that VBHC logics have indeed affected Nordic welfare policies, not only at the organisational level but also concerning performance measurement and care delivery. This may imply that the diffusion of VBHC logics evolves from healthcare organisations to policymaking instead of top-down. Particularly in publicly financed systems, VBHC indicates a transformation to a new public governance ideology, accelerating policy goals that promote customer responsiveness and value creation for citizens.

Value-based healthcare measurement as a context for organizational learning

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to shed light on the potential of organizational learning for developing effectiveness of care. Value-based healthcare measurement recognizes patient value as a driver for improving health outcomes at the societal and individual levels. By using the action learning method, this paper examines the phases of organizational learning in a private healthcare organization that has developed a novel Big Data screening tool for the treatment of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM2). Design/methodology/approach Relying on triple-loop learning as a conceptual framework and by applying the action learning method to case study design, this paper illustrates the phases of organizational learning and efforts to utilize value-based measurement in healthcare. Findings The case organization was able to identify patients at risk and to improve their care balance. Although the results for the measurement of patient outcomes led to questioning of previous care processes and practices in the organization, increasing value for all stakeholders by incorporating social needs to business opportunities remains under process. Originality/value With the focus on organizational learning and organizational value creation processes, this paper demonstrates incorporation of measuring patient outcomes in re-structuring care processes, enhancing organizational performance and improving effectiveness as well as quality of care.