Integrating health economics and implementation science: a call to action.

IF 3.7 3区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Lane Meredith, Helen Skouteris, Sarah Alderson, Mamta Bajre, Ruth E Barker, Paul Bird, Caroline S Clarke, Graeme Currie, Robbie Foy, Samuel Frempong, Clare Glover-Wright, Robert Heggie, Agnieszka Latuszynska, Hugh McLeod, Seyran Naghdi, Siyabonga Ndwandwe, Emily Rowe, Carlos Sillero-Rejon, Sophie Staniszewska, Michael Sykes, Davide Tebaldi, Mehdi Yousefi, Mandana Zanganeh, Amy L Grove, Alisa M Higgins
{"title":"Integrating health economics and implementation science: a call to action.","authors":"Lane Meredith, Helen Skouteris, Sarah Alderson, Mamta Bajre, Ruth E Barker, Paul Bird, Caroline S Clarke, Graeme Currie, Robbie Foy, Samuel Frempong, Clare Glover-Wright, Robert Heggie, Agnieszka Latuszynska, Hugh McLeod, Seyran Naghdi, Siyabonga Ndwandwe, Emily Rowe, Carlos Sillero-Rejon, Sophie Staniszewska, Michael Sykes, Davide Tebaldi, Mehdi Yousefi, Mandana Zanganeh, Amy L Grove, Alisa M Higgins","doi":"10.1186/s12874-026-02933-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Health economics and implementation science play a critical role in the uptake of evidence-based practice but have largely sat siloed.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This paper summarises findings from a 3-day workshop on health economics and implementation science. Workshop attendees included 30 health economists, implementation scientists, patient contributors, and patient and public involvement and engagement researchers from Australia and the United Kingdom. A shared vision for moving from siloed to synergistic disciplinary approaches was derived through consensus.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>This article outlines to researchers and methodologists what synergistic disciplinary approaches could look like. We highlight opportunities for health economics and implementation science to integrate along the innovation pathway, from the development and evaluation of innovation to eventual uptake and spread.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Greater collaboration between implementation scientists and health economists has the potential to optimise implementation strategies, provide robust evidence for value for money and ultimately improve care delivery. Stronger integration of health economics and implementation science may also shed more light on the equity impacts of implementation strategies and guide their further design to promote more equitable care and outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":9114,"journal":{"name":"BMC Medical Research Methodology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2026-07-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13466652/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Medical Research Methodology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-026-02933-x","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Health economics and implementation science play a critical role in the uptake of evidence-based practice but have largely sat siloed.

Methods: This paper summarises findings from a 3-day workshop on health economics and implementation science. Workshop attendees included 30 health economists, implementation scientists, patient contributors, and patient and public involvement and engagement researchers from Australia and the United Kingdom. A shared vision for moving from siloed to synergistic disciplinary approaches was derived through consensus.

Results: This article outlines to researchers and methodologists what synergistic disciplinary approaches could look like. We highlight opportunities for health economics and implementation science to integrate along the innovation pathway, from the development and evaluation of innovation to eventual uptake and spread.

Conclusions: Greater collaboration between implementation scientists and health economists has the potential to optimise implementation strategies, provide robust evidence for value for money and ultimately improve care delivery. Stronger integration of health economics and implementation science may also shed more light on the equity impacts of implementation strategies and guide their further design to promote more equitable care and outcomes.

整合卫生经济学和实施科学:行动呼吁。
背景:卫生经济学和实施科学在接受循证实践方面发挥着关键作用,但在很大程度上是孤立的。方法:本文总结了为期3天的卫生经济学和实施科学研讨会的研究成果。讲习班与会者包括来自澳大利亚和联合王国的30名卫生经济学家、实施科学家、患者贡献者以及患者和公众参与和参与研究人员。通过协商一致得出了从孤立的学科方法转向协同的学科方法的共同愿景。结果:这篇文章概述了研究人员和方法学家什么协同学科方法可能看起来像。我们强调了卫生经济学和实施科学沿着创新路径整合的机会,从创新的发展和评估到最终的吸收和推广。结论:实施科学家和卫生经济学家之间更大的合作有可能优化实施战略,为物有所值提供有力的证据,并最终改善医疗服务。将卫生经济学和实施科学更有力地结合起来,还可以更清楚地了解实施战略的公平影响,并指导其进一步设计,以促进更公平的护理和结果。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
BMC Medical Research Methodology
BMC Medical Research Methodology 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
2.50%
发文量
298
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: BMC Medical Research Methodology is an open access journal publishing original peer-reviewed research articles in methodological approaches to healthcare research. Articles on the methodology of epidemiological research, clinical trials and meta-analysis/systematic review are particularly encouraged, as are empirical studies of the associations between choice of methodology and study outcomes. BMC Medical Research Methodology does not aim to publish articles describing scientific methods or techniques: these should be directed to the BMC journal covering the relevant biomedical subject area.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书