Researching two Compassionate Cities: study protocol for a mixed-methods process and outcome evaluation.

Compassionate City complex intervention end-of-life mixed-methods palliative care study protocol

Journal

Palliative care and social practice
ISSN: 2632-3524
Titre abrégé: Palliat Care Soc Pract
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101754997

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
2022
Historique:
received: 24 06 2022
accepted: 14 10 2022
entrez: 1 12 2022
pubmed: 2 12 2022
medline: 2 12 2022
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Compassionate Cities are social ecology approaches that apply a set of actions, targeting a broad range of stakeholders, with the intention of renormalising caring, dying, loss and grieving in everyday life. While several initiatives have been described in the literature, a rigorous evaluation of their processes and outcomes is lacking. This article describes the protocol for a mixed-methods study to evaluate the development process and the outcomes of two Compassionate Cities in Flanders, Belgium. We will use a convergent multiphase mixed-methods design, in which a combination of qualitative and quantitative data collection methods will be triangulated in the data analysis stage to capture both development processes and outcomes. Our design includes a quasi-experimental component of a quantitative outcome evaluation in both Compassionate Cities and two comparable control cities with no formal Compassionate City programme. Both Compassionate Cities will be co-created in collaboration with local stakeholders. A critical realism lens will be applied to understand how and why certain processes manifest themselves. The creation of Compassionate Cities implies high levels of complexity, adaptivity, unpredictability and uncertainty. This requires various data collection methods that can be applied flexibly. A researcher taking on the role of active participant in the project's development has several advantages, such as access to scholarly information. Reflexivity in this role is paramount to questioning where the ownership of the project lies. By applying a critical realism lens, we remain cautious about our interpretations, and we test the homogeneity of our findings through other forms of data collection. This is the first published study protocol to describe both a process and outcome evaluation of a Compassionate City project. By transparently describing our aims and data collection methods, we try to maximise information exchange among researchers and to inform others who desire to implement and evaluate their own initiatives.

Sections du résumé

Background/Objectives UNASSIGNED
Compassionate Cities are social ecology approaches that apply a set of actions, targeting a broad range of stakeholders, with the intention of renormalising caring, dying, loss and grieving in everyday life. While several initiatives have been described in the literature, a rigorous evaluation of their processes and outcomes is lacking. This article describes the protocol for a mixed-methods study to evaluate the development process and the outcomes of two Compassionate Cities in Flanders, Belgium.
Methods and Analysis UNASSIGNED
We will use a convergent multiphase mixed-methods design, in which a combination of qualitative and quantitative data collection methods will be triangulated in the data analysis stage to capture both development processes and outcomes. Our design includes a quasi-experimental component of a quantitative outcome evaluation in both Compassionate Cities and two comparable control cities with no formal Compassionate City programme. Both Compassionate Cities will be co-created in collaboration with local stakeholders. A critical realism lens will be applied to understand how and why certain processes manifest themselves.
Discussion UNASSIGNED
The creation of Compassionate Cities implies high levels of complexity, adaptivity, unpredictability and uncertainty. This requires various data collection methods that can be applied flexibly. A researcher taking on the role of active participant in the project's development has several advantages, such as access to scholarly information. Reflexivity in this role is paramount to questioning where the ownership of the project lies. By applying a critical realism lens, we remain cautious about our interpretations, and we test the homogeneity of our findings through other forms of data collection.
Conclusion UNASSIGNED
This is the first published study protocol to describe both a process and outcome evaluation of a Compassionate City project. By transparently describing our aims and data collection methods, we try to maximise information exchange among researchers and to inform others who desire to implement and evaluate their own initiatives.

Identifiants

pubmed: 36452070
doi: 10.1177/26323524221137601
pii: 10.1177_26323524221137601
pmc: PMC9703481
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Pagination

26323524221137601

Informations de copyright

© The Author(s) 2022.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship and/or publication of this article.

Références

Prog Palliat Care. 2016 Jan 2;24(1):19-24
pubmed: 27134417
BMC Palliat Care. 2016 Jul 13;15:60
pubmed: 27412459
Palliat Med. 2017 Dec;31(10):932-945
pubmed: 28429629
BMJ Support Palliat Care. 2016 Mar;6(1):21-6
pubmed: 26832803
Soc Sci Med. 2010 May;70(10):1467-74
pubmed: 20207059
Palliat Care Soc Pract. 2021 Oct 6;15:26323524211032984
pubmed: 34647028
J Epidemiol Community Health. 2016 Jan;70(1):17-24
pubmed: 26202254
JMIR Res Protoc. 2018 Oct 12;7(10):e10515
pubmed: 30314960
Implement Sci. 2009 Aug 07;4:50
pubmed: 19664226
BMJ. 2013 Jan 08;346:e7586
pubmed: 23303884
Palliat Med. 2022 Mar;36(3):422-442
pubmed: 35354413
BMC Palliat Care. 2016 Oct 18;15(1):86
pubmed: 27756296
Palliat Med. 2022 Apr;36(4):625-651
pubmed: 35287517
BMC Palliat Care. 2015 Nov 24;14:65
pubmed: 26603516
JAMA. 2014 Dec 10;312(22):2401-2
pubmed: 25490331
Can Fam Physician. 1986 Nov;32:2366-8
pubmed: 21267217
Palliat Care Soc Pract. 2020 Jul 02;14:2632352420935130
pubmed: 32656530
Palliat Med. 2016 Mar;30(3):200-11
pubmed: 26269324

Auteurs

Bert Quintiens (B)

End-of-Life Care Research Group, Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB) and Ghent University, Laarbeeklaan 103, 1090 Brussels, Belgium.
Compassionate Communities Center of Expertise (COCO), Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB), Brussels, Belgium.

Tinne Smets (T)

End-of-Life Care Research Group, Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB) and Ghent University, Brussels, Belgium.
Compassionate Communities Center of Expertise (COCO), Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB), Brussels, Belgium.

Kenneth Chambaere (K)

End-of-Life Care Research Group, Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB) and Ghent University, Brussels, Belgium.
Compassionate Communities Center of Expertise (COCO), Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB), Brussels, Belgium.

Lieve Van Den Block (L)

End-of-Life Care Research Group, Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB) and Ghent University, Brussels, Belgium.

Luc Deliens (L)

End-of-Life Care Research Group, Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB) and Ghent University, Brussels, Belgium.
Compassionate Communities Center of Expertise (COCO), Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB), Brussels, Belgium.

Joachim Cohen (J)

End-of-Life Care Research Group, Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB) and Ghent University, Brussels, Belgium.
Compassionate Communities Center of Expertise (COCO), Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB), Brussels, Belgium.

Classifications MeSH