1. Process evaluation of the ABC national maternity safety improvement programme
The process evaluation of the Avoiding Brain Injury in childbirth (ABC) national maternity safety improvement programme was commissioned by the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RCOG), with funding from Department of Health & Social Care. Further information about the programme here.
The process evaluation, led by RAND Europe, using mixed methods (including interviews, observations and surveys), focused on delivery of training, adoption fidelity and on the changes in clinical practice required by the programme. I was asked to support the team, on a freelance basis, by analysing the different waves of qualitative interviews and observations and writing descriptive summaries and contributing to reporting.
2. Wellcome – Collaborative evaluation of lived experience impact, learning and improvement in mental health science
Wellcome have funded an exciting collaborative project evaluating the impact of lived experience collaboration in their portfolio of mental health research.
This realist evaluation will:
- Explore how LE is being embedded meaningfully in mental health projects funded by Wellcome
- Examine the multi-faceted impacts of LE collaborations
- Explore the contextual factors and causal pathways that lead to this impact
- Develop guidance for best practice in LE collaborations, including how to overcome key challenges and minimise harm
The team is a collaborative partnership including researchers with expertise in complex evaluations and mental health from Centre for Evidence and Implementation (CEI), lived experience experts from the Global Mental Health Peer Network, independent lived experience consultants with extensive backgrounds in participatory involvement and mental health research, and academic consultants from the Universities of Oxford and Hertfordshire with expertise in global mental health and equity, and patient and public involvement.
CEI’s Dr Katherine Young, lead for the evaluation, asked me to join the team as a Freelance Associate to support them with developing a Theory of Impact. This will involve qualitative synthesis of different evidence and data sources, hosting regular consultations with the team/sub-teams, and facilitating wider partner and advisor consultation workshops.
3. Athena Scientific Women’s Academic Network (SWAN) Silver Accreditation Application
The Athena SWAN (Scientific Women’s Academic Network) charter was established in 2005 by Advance HE in the UK to promote gender equality in higher education and research. It now covers all disciplines and broader aspects of equality, diversity, and inclusion (EDI) than only gender.
The University of Westminster’s Athena SWAN working group are supporting their application for silver accreditation through the design and implementation of a comprehensive data gathering strategy to understand gender and inclusion issues (e.g. culture, career opportunities, work-life balance, student experiences.
The evaluation involved conducting twenty-five individual depth interviews (15 conducted by me) and several focus groups will be conducted at a later stage by the team to shape recommendations staff and students have for University to advance gender equality and equality, diversity and inclusion more generally.
Professor Damien Ridge, lead for the evaluation, was keen to explore the possibility of using AI-assisted analysis, for this project, which was a first time using this approach for both of us. We trained in Atlas-ti, which has advanced features compared to some other software.
4. Rapid evidence review of cancer prehabilitation services
Prehabilitation is increasingly being considered as an important way of preparing people for cancer treatment. Key components of prehabilitation programmes might include exercise, nutritional management, and psychological support. Services are typically led and delivered by a range of Allied Health Professionals (AHPs). Macmillan sought to better understand services currently being delivered in Northern Ireland.
The rapid evidence review was carried out by me, as part of this evaluation, to describe the wider context and evidence related to cancer prehabilitation interventions within Northern Ireland and more broadly in the UK. I was asked to focus the review on: 1) The NI and UK wide policy context; 2) The impact of cancer prehabilitation on patients (positive, negative or no impact); 3) Impact on secondary care services and on wider healthcare systems; 4) costs of prehabilitation services.
Dr Rosaleen O'Brien 