IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/srbeha/v37y2020i2p211-222.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Models of evaluation under ceteris imparibus: System dynamics and the example of emergency care

Author

Listed:
  • Susan McAvoy
  • Andrew Staib
  • Stephen Birch

Abstract

Traditional and current approaches to modelling the impacts of health care interventions have focused on detail complexity and been ceteris paribus dependent and thereby ignored the wider system impacts. In this study, we have demonstrated that system dynamics (SD) offers theoretical and practical advantages over conventional methodologies and the qualitative assessment tools that have informed the business of emergency care. We translate the key findings of qualitative research, existing literature reviews and studies of the use of simulation and economic evaluation models into a value proposition for using SD tools. We conclude that there is growing evidence of a strong value proposition for the use of SD tools to investigate interventions targeting improved emergency care access. SD models can incorporate dynamic and organizational complexity and fill a gap beyond the microscope of the conventional methodologies informing health care. This potential to strengthen health care systems warrants further investigation.

Suggested Citation

  • Susan McAvoy & Andrew Staib & Stephen Birch, 2020. "Models of evaluation under ceteris imparibus: System dynamics and the example of emergency care," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(2), pages 211-222, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:srbeha:v:37:y:2020:i:2:p:211-222
    DOI: 10.1002/sres.2615
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/sres.2615
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/sres.2615?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:srbeha:v:37:y:2020:i:2:p:211-222. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1111/1092-7026 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.