Participatory research meets validated outcome measures: tensions in the co-production of social care evaluation

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Standard

Harvard

APA

Vancouver

Author

Bibtex

@article{d0c3c763639f4dbba72035d3f02e8576,
title = "Participatory research meets validated outcome measures: tensions in the co-production of social care evaluation",
abstract = "Funding for care service research is increasingly subject to the satisfaction of two requirements: public involvement; and adoption of validated outcome tools. This study identifies competing paradigms within these requirements and reveals significant challenges faced by researchers who seek to satisfy them. The focus here is on a study co-produced between academic researchers and people with experience of adult social care services. It examines to what extent research studies can conduct high quality public involvement and genuine co-production of knowledge, whilst attempting to produce quantifiable outcome scores. Findings add to debate around how to incorporate diverse perspectives in research which may draw on incommensurate accounts of validity and reliability. Findings also highlight constructive attempts by academic and co-researchers to make the combination of approaches work in the field. These small scale acts of researcher agency indicate some scope to combine the two approaches in future research studies. However conclusions foreground the importance of broader awareness of how tensions and power imbalances related to this combination of approaches play out in social policy research practice. ",
keywords = "co-production, co-research, evaluation, outcome measures, social care",
author = "Kerry Allen and Catherine Needham and Kelly Hall and Denise Tanner",
year = "2019",
month = mar,
day = "1",
doi = "10.1111/spol.12468",
language = "English",
volume = "53",
pages = "311--325",
journal = "Social Policy and Administration",
issn = "0144-5596",
publisher = "Wiley",
number = "2",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Participatory research meets validated outcome measures

T2 - tensions in the co-production of social care evaluation

AU - Allen, Kerry

AU - Needham, Catherine

AU - Hall, Kelly

AU - Tanner, Denise

PY - 2019/3/1

Y1 - 2019/3/1

N2 - Funding for care service research is increasingly subject to the satisfaction of two requirements: public involvement; and adoption of validated outcome tools. This study identifies competing paradigms within these requirements and reveals significant challenges faced by researchers who seek to satisfy them. The focus here is on a study co-produced between academic researchers and people with experience of adult social care services. It examines to what extent research studies can conduct high quality public involvement and genuine co-production of knowledge, whilst attempting to produce quantifiable outcome scores. Findings add to debate around how to incorporate diverse perspectives in research which may draw on incommensurate accounts of validity and reliability. Findings also highlight constructive attempts by academic and co-researchers to make the combination of approaches work in the field. These small scale acts of researcher agency indicate some scope to combine the two approaches in future research studies. However conclusions foreground the importance of broader awareness of how tensions and power imbalances related to this combination of approaches play out in social policy research practice.

AB - Funding for care service research is increasingly subject to the satisfaction of two requirements: public involvement; and adoption of validated outcome tools. This study identifies competing paradigms within these requirements and reveals significant challenges faced by researchers who seek to satisfy them. The focus here is on a study co-produced between academic researchers and people with experience of adult social care services. It examines to what extent research studies can conduct high quality public involvement and genuine co-production of knowledge, whilst attempting to produce quantifiable outcome scores. Findings add to debate around how to incorporate diverse perspectives in research which may draw on incommensurate accounts of validity and reliability. Findings also highlight constructive attempts by academic and co-researchers to make the combination of approaches work in the field. These small scale acts of researcher agency indicate some scope to combine the two approaches in future research studies. However conclusions foreground the importance of broader awareness of how tensions and power imbalances related to this combination of approaches play out in social policy research practice.

KW - co-production

KW - co-research

KW - evaluation

KW - outcome measures

KW - social care

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85056172460&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/spol.12468

DO - 10.1111/spol.12468

M3 - Article

VL - 53

SP - 311

EP - 325

JO - Social Policy and Administration

JF - Social Policy and Administration

SN - 0144-5596

IS - 2

ER -