The role of scientific evidence in decisions to adopt complex innovations in cancer care settings: a multiple case study in Nova Scotia, Canada
Abstract Background Health care delivery and outcomes can be improved by using innovations (i.e., new ideas, technologies, and practices) supported by scientific evidence. However, scientific evidence may not be the foremost factor in adoption decisions and is rarely sufficient. The objective of thi...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
BMC
2019-02-01
|
| Series: | Implementation Science |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s13012-019-0859-5 |
| _version_ | 1818897096805187584 |
|---|---|
| author | R. Urquhart C. Kendell L. Geldenhuys A. Ross M. Rajaraman A. Folkes L. L. Madden V. Sullivan D. Rayson G. A. Porter |
| author_facet | R. Urquhart C. Kendell L. Geldenhuys A. Ross M. Rajaraman A. Folkes L. L. Madden V. Sullivan D. Rayson G. A. Porter |
| author_sort | R. Urquhart |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Abstract Background Health care delivery and outcomes can be improved by using innovations (i.e., new ideas, technologies, and practices) supported by scientific evidence. However, scientific evidence may not be the foremost factor in adoption decisions and is rarely sufficient. The objective of this study was to examine the role of scientific evidence in decisions to adopt complex innovations in cancer care. Methods Using an explanatory, multiple case study design, we examined the adoption of complex innovations in five purposively sampled cases in Nova Scotia, Canada. Data were collected via documents and key informant interviews. Data analysis involved an in-depth analysis of each case, followed by a cross-case analysis to develop theoretically informed, generalizable knowledge on the role of scientific evidence in innovation adoption that may be applied to similar settings and contexts. Results The analyses identified key concepts alongside important caveats and considerations. Key concepts were (1) scientific evidence underpinned the adoption process, (2) evidence from multiple sources informed decision-making, (3) decision-makers considered three key issues when making decisions, and (4) champions were essential to eventual adoption. Caveats and considerations related to the presence of urgent problems and short-term financial pressures and minimizing risk. Conclusions The findings revealed the different types of issues decision-makers consider while making these decisions and why different sources of evidence are needed in these processes. Future research should examine how different types of evidence are legitimized and why some types are prioritized over others. |
| first_indexed | 2024-12-19T19:10:45Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-c63d374e05064f3586910edf9ffaa678 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1748-5908 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-12-19T19:10:45Z |
| publishDate | 2019-02-01 |
| publisher | BMC |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Implementation Science |
| spelling | doaj.art-c63d374e05064f3586910edf9ffaa6782022-12-21T20:09:18ZengBMCImplementation Science1748-59082019-02-0114111210.1186/s13012-019-0859-5The role of scientific evidence in decisions to adopt complex innovations in cancer care settings: a multiple case study in Nova Scotia, CanadaR. Urquhart0C. Kendell1L. Geldenhuys2A. Ross3M. Rajaraman4A. Folkes5L. L. Madden6V. Sullivan7D. Rayson8G. A. Porter9Department of Surgery, Dalhousie UniversityDepartment of Surgery, Dalhousie UniversityNova Scotia Health AuthorityNova Scotia Health AuthorityNova Scotia Health AuthorityNova Scotia Health AuthorityDepartment of Surgery, Dalhousie UniversityNova Scotia Health AuthorityNova Scotia Health AuthorityDepartment of Surgery, Dalhousie UniversityAbstract Background Health care delivery and outcomes can be improved by using innovations (i.e., new ideas, technologies, and practices) supported by scientific evidence. However, scientific evidence may not be the foremost factor in adoption decisions and is rarely sufficient. The objective of this study was to examine the role of scientific evidence in decisions to adopt complex innovations in cancer care. Methods Using an explanatory, multiple case study design, we examined the adoption of complex innovations in five purposively sampled cases in Nova Scotia, Canada. Data were collected via documents and key informant interviews. Data analysis involved an in-depth analysis of each case, followed by a cross-case analysis to develop theoretically informed, generalizable knowledge on the role of scientific evidence in innovation adoption that may be applied to similar settings and contexts. Results The analyses identified key concepts alongside important caveats and considerations. Key concepts were (1) scientific evidence underpinned the adoption process, (2) evidence from multiple sources informed decision-making, (3) decision-makers considered three key issues when making decisions, and (4) champions were essential to eventual adoption. Caveats and considerations related to the presence of urgent problems and short-term financial pressures and minimizing risk. Conclusions The findings revealed the different types of issues decision-makers consider while making these decisions and why different sources of evidence are needed in these processes. Future research should examine how different types of evidence are legitimized and why some types are prioritized over others.http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s13012-019-0859-5AdoptionInnovationEvidenceCase study methods |
| spellingShingle | R. Urquhart C. Kendell L. Geldenhuys A. Ross M. Rajaraman A. Folkes L. L. Madden V. Sullivan D. Rayson G. A. Porter The role of scientific evidence in decisions to adopt complex innovations in cancer care settings: a multiple case study in Nova Scotia, Canada Implementation Science Adoption Innovation Evidence Case study methods |
| title | The role of scientific evidence in decisions to adopt complex innovations in cancer care settings: a multiple case study in Nova Scotia, Canada |
| title_full | The role of scientific evidence in decisions to adopt complex innovations in cancer care settings: a multiple case study in Nova Scotia, Canada |
| title_fullStr | The role of scientific evidence in decisions to adopt complex innovations in cancer care settings: a multiple case study in Nova Scotia, Canada |
| title_full_unstemmed | The role of scientific evidence in decisions to adopt complex innovations in cancer care settings: a multiple case study in Nova Scotia, Canada |
| title_short | The role of scientific evidence in decisions to adopt complex innovations in cancer care settings: a multiple case study in Nova Scotia, Canada |
| title_sort | role of scientific evidence in decisions to adopt complex innovations in cancer care settings a multiple case study in nova scotia canada |
| topic | Adoption Innovation Evidence Case study methods |
| url | http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s13012-019-0859-5 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT rurquhart theroleofscientificevidenceindecisionstoadoptcomplexinnovationsincancercaresettingsamultiplecasestudyinnovascotiacanada AT ckendell theroleofscientificevidenceindecisionstoadoptcomplexinnovationsincancercaresettingsamultiplecasestudyinnovascotiacanada AT lgeldenhuys theroleofscientificevidenceindecisionstoadoptcomplexinnovationsincancercaresettingsamultiplecasestudyinnovascotiacanada AT aross theroleofscientificevidenceindecisionstoadoptcomplexinnovationsincancercaresettingsamultiplecasestudyinnovascotiacanada AT mrajaraman theroleofscientificevidenceindecisionstoadoptcomplexinnovationsincancercaresettingsamultiplecasestudyinnovascotiacanada AT afolkes theroleofscientificevidenceindecisionstoadoptcomplexinnovationsincancercaresettingsamultiplecasestudyinnovascotiacanada AT llmadden theroleofscientificevidenceindecisionstoadoptcomplexinnovationsincancercaresettingsamultiplecasestudyinnovascotiacanada AT vsullivan theroleofscientificevidenceindecisionstoadoptcomplexinnovationsincancercaresettingsamultiplecasestudyinnovascotiacanada AT drayson theroleofscientificevidenceindecisionstoadoptcomplexinnovationsincancercaresettingsamultiplecasestudyinnovascotiacanada AT gaporter theroleofscientificevidenceindecisionstoadoptcomplexinnovationsincancercaresettingsamultiplecasestudyinnovascotiacanada AT rurquhart roleofscientificevidenceindecisionstoadoptcomplexinnovationsincancercaresettingsamultiplecasestudyinnovascotiacanada AT ckendell roleofscientificevidenceindecisionstoadoptcomplexinnovationsincancercaresettingsamultiplecasestudyinnovascotiacanada AT lgeldenhuys roleofscientificevidenceindecisionstoadoptcomplexinnovationsincancercaresettingsamultiplecasestudyinnovascotiacanada AT aross roleofscientificevidenceindecisionstoadoptcomplexinnovationsincancercaresettingsamultiplecasestudyinnovascotiacanada AT mrajaraman roleofscientificevidenceindecisionstoadoptcomplexinnovationsincancercaresettingsamultiplecasestudyinnovascotiacanada AT afolkes roleofscientificevidenceindecisionstoadoptcomplexinnovationsincancercaresettingsamultiplecasestudyinnovascotiacanada AT llmadden roleofscientificevidenceindecisionstoadoptcomplexinnovationsincancercaresettingsamultiplecasestudyinnovascotiacanada AT vsullivan roleofscientificevidenceindecisionstoadoptcomplexinnovationsincancercaresettingsamultiplecasestudyinnovascotiacanada AT drayson roleofscientificevidenceindecisionstoadoptcomplexinnovationsincancercaresettingsamultiplecasestudyinnovascotiacanada AT gaporter roleofscientificevidenceindecisionstoadoptcomplexinnovationsincancercaresettingsamultiplecasestudyinnovascotiacanada |