How should we evaluate the impacts of policy? The case of Payment by Results and the 18 Week Patient Pathway in English hospitals

Wright, JSF; Dempster, PG; Keen, J; Allen, P; Hutchings, A

How should we evaluate the impacts of policy? The case of Payment by Results and the 18 Week Patient Pathway in English hospitals

Wright, JSF Dempster, PG Keen, J Allen, P Hutchings, A

Permalink

Publication Type:: Journal Article
Citation:: Policy Studies, 2014, 35 (1), pp. 59 - 78
Issue Date:: 2014-01-01

Closed Access

	Filename	Description	Size
	How should we evaluate the impacts of policy The case of Payment by Results and the 18 Week Patient Pathway in English hospitals.pdf	Published Version	374.46 kB	Adobe PDF	View/Open

Copyright Clearance Process

Recently Added
In Progress
Closed Access

This item is closed access and not available.

Full metadata record

Field	Value	Language
dc.contributor.author	Wright, JSF	en_US
dc.contributor.author	Dempster, PG	en_US
dc.contributor.author	Keen, J	en_US
dc.contributor.author	Allen, P	en_US
dc.contributor.author	Hutchings, A	en_US
dc.date.issued	2014-01-01	en_US
dc.identifier.citation	Policy Studies, 2014, 35 (1), pp. 59 - 78	en_US
dc.identifier.issn	0144-2872	en_US
dc.identifier.uri	http://hdl.handle.net/10453/119016
dc.description.abstract	Today, qualitative researchers are framing the relationship between qualitative case studies and quantitative evaluation research in positivist terms, seeking dialogue with quantitative researchers on the basis that qualitative case studies hold the potential to develop theory for evaluation programmes and to improve the quality of quantitative research. In the UK health policy literature, however, recent evaluations of major government programmes of reform have been conducted under largely quantitative and econometric strategies involving baskets of indicators, or routinely collected hospital statistics, set against the central stated aims of the programme: namely, to improve quality, efficiency, responsiveness, output and equity. For the wider evaluation literature, we detail the results of a qualitative case study of the impact of two key reforms, the 18 Week Patient Pathway and Payment by Results, on four English hospitals, demonstrating the value of the positivist frame to evaluation research based on its capacity to improve understandings of cause and effect and to direct quantitative researchers towards better measures and data sets. For the UK health policy literature, we demonstrate the value of qualitative case studies to the policy process in terms of their potential to reduce the risks for serious policy mistakes. © 2014 © 2014 Taylor & Francis.	en_US
dc.relation.ispartof	Policy Studies	en_US
dc.relation.isbasedon	10.1080/01442872.2013.875139	en_US
dc.subject.classification	Political Science & Public Administration	en_US
dc.title	How should we evaluate the impacts of policy? The case of Payment by Results and the 18 Week Patient Pathway in English hospitals	en_US
dc.type	Journal Article
utslib.citation.volume	1	en_US
utslib.citation.volume	35	en_US
utslib.for	1605 Policy and Administration	en_US
utslib.for	1402 Applied Economics	en_US
utslib.for	1606 Political Science	en_US
pubs.embargo.period	Not known	en_US
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/DVC (Research)
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/DVC (Research)/lnstitute for Public Policy and Governance
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Strength - IPPG - Institute for Public Policy and Governance
utslib.copyright.status	closed_access
pubs.issue	1	en_US
pubs.publication-status	Published	en_US
pubs.volume	35	en_US

Abstract:

Today, qualitative researchers are framing the relationship between qualitative case studies and quantitative evaluation research in positivist terms, seeking dialogue with quantitative researchers on the basis that qualitative case studies hold the potential to develop theory for evaluation programmes and to improve the quality of quantitative research. In the UK health policy literature, however, recent evaluations of major government programmes of reform have been conducted under largely quantitative and econometric strategies involving baskets of indicators, or routinely collected hospital statistics, set against the central stated aims of the programme: namely, to improve quality, efficiency, responsiveness, output and equity. For the wider evaluation literature, we detail the results of a qualitative case study of the impact of two key reforms, the 18 Week Patient Pathway and Payment by Results, on four English hospitals, demonstrating the value of the positivist frame to evaluation research based on its capacity to improve understandings of cause and effect and to direct quantitative researchers towards better measures and data sets. For the UK health policy literature, we demonstrate the value of qualitative case studies to the policy process in terms of their potential to reduce the risks for serious policy mistakes. © 2014 © 2014 Taylor & Francis.

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:

http://hdl.handle.net/10453/119016