Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > A worked example of initial theory-building

Electronic data

  • Gwernan-Jones et al. 2019 accepted manuscript

    Rights statement: The final, definitive version of this article has been published in the Journal, Evaluation, 26 (1), 2020, © SAGE Publications Ltd, 2020 by SAGE Publications Ltd at the Evaluation page: https://journals.sagepub.com/home/evi on SAGE Journals Online: http://journals.sagepub.com/

    Accepted author manuscript, 934 KB, PDF document

    Available under license: CC BY-NC: Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License

Links

Text available via DOI:

View graph of relations

A worked example of initial theory-building: PARTNERS2 collaborative care for people who have experienced psychosis in England

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal article

Published
  • R. Gwernan-Jones
  • N. Britten
  • J. Allard
  • E. Baker
  • L. Gill
  • H. Lloyd
  • T. Rawcliffe
  • R. Sayers
  • H. Plappert
  • J. Gibson
  • M. Clark
  • M. Birchwood
  • V. Pinfold
  • S. Reilly
  • L. Gask
  • R. Byng
Close
<mark>Journal publication date</mark>1/01/2020
<mark>Journal</mark>Evaluation
Issue number1
Volume26
Number of pages21
Pages (from-to)6-26
Publication StatusPublished
Early online date26/05/19
<mark>Original language</mark>English

Abstract

In this article, we present an exemplar of the initial theory-building phase of theory-driven evaluation for the PARTNERS2 project, a collaborative care intervention for people with experience of psychosis in England. Initial theory-building involved analysis of the literature, interviews with key leaders and focus groups with service users. The initial programme theory was developed from these sources in an iterative process between researchers and stakeholders (service users, practitioners, commissioners) involving four activities: articulation of 442 explanatory statements systematically developed using realist methods; debate and consensus; communication; and interrogation. We refute two criticisms of theory-driven evaluation of complex interventions. We demonstrate how the process of initial theory-building made a meaningful contribution to our complex intervention in five ways. Although time-consuming, it allowed us to develop an internally coherent and well-documented intervention. This study and the lessons learnt provide a detailed resource for other researchers wishing to build theory for theory-driven evaluation.

Bibliographic note

The final, definitive version of this article has been published in the Journal, Evaluation, 26 (1), 2020, © SAGE Publications Ltd, 2020 by SAGE Publications Ltd at the Evaluation page: https://journals.sagepub.com/home/evi on SAGE Journals Online: http://journals.sagepub.com/