A theoretical framework to support research of health service innovation
Open accessAbstract
Objective: Health service managers and policy makers are increasingly concerned about the sustainability of innovations implemented in health care settings. The increasing demand on health services requires that innovations are both effective and sustainable; however, research in this field is limited, with multiple disciplines, approaches and paradigms influencing the field. These variations prevent a cohesive approach, and therefore the accumulation of research findings, in the development of a body of knowledge. The purpose of this paper is to provide a thorough examination of the research findings and provide an appropriate theoretical framework to examine sustainability of health service innovation. Methods: This paper presents an integrative review of the literature available in relation to sustainability of health service innovation and provides the development of a theoretical framework based on integration and synthesis of the literature. Results: A theoretical framework serves to guide research, determine variables, influence data analysis and is central to the quest for ongoing knowledge development. This research outlines the sustainability of innovation framework; a theoretical framework suitable for examining the sustainability of health service innovation. Conclusion: If left unaddressed, health services research will continue in an ad hoc manner, preventing full utilisation of outcomes, recommendations and knowledge for effective provision of health services. The sustainability of innovation theoretical framework provides an operational basis upon which reliable future research can be conducted. What is known about the topic?: Providers of health services are rapidly implementing innovations in an effort to provide effective health care. Little research has been conducted to evaluate the sustainability of these health service innovations. What does this paper add?: This paper aims presents an integration and synthesis of the current body of knowledge to provide a theoretical framework to evaluate the sustainability of health service innovation. What are the implications for the practitioner?: An improved body of knowledge surrounding the sustainability of health service innovations generated from research will consequently result in more appropriate use of resources and improved provision of health services.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Many approaches presented in this review recommend that they be used and evaluated further within other healthcare initiatives and settings to explore applicability and further development needed.
“Many approaches presented in this review recommend that they be used and evaluated further within other healthcare initiatives and settings to explore applicability and further development needed [11, 36, 56, 79].”
From Navigating the sustainability landscape: a systematic review of sustainability approaches in healthcare (2018) · cites this paper as [79]
Community health and public health areas tend to dominate this area of research.
“These areas tend to dominate this area of research”
From Navigating the sustainability landscape: a systematic review of sustainability approaches in healthcare (2018) · cites this paper as [79]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 33 · Cited by 43
- Authors
- Fox, A., Gardner, G., & Osborne, S.
- Affiliations
- Queensland University of Technology (AU)
- Corresponding author
- Fox, Amanda
- Venue
- Australian Health Review
- Publisher
- CSIRO Publishing
- Published
- 2014-12-17
- Volume
- 39
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 70-75
- ISSN
- 0156-5788 (ISSN-L)
- 1449-8944
- OpenAlex
- W1999551283
- Cited by
- 43
- References
- 33
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 1
- FWCI
- 0.11
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- eprints.qut.edu.au
- Locations
- Australian Health Review (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- QUT ePrints (Queensland University of Technology) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Policy Implementation Science
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Healthcare Quality and Management
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Services Management and Policy
- Keywords
- healthcare innovation, innovation sustainability, theoretical framework, knowledge synthesis, health services research, innovation evaluation
- MeSH terms
- Diffusion of Innovation, Health Services, Health Services Research, Models, Theoretical, Efficiency, Organizational
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review