IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/rseval/v32y2023i3p603-621..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Theory of systems change: An initial, middle-range theory of public health research impact

Author

Listed:
  • Melinda Craike
  • Bojana Klepac
  • Amy Mowle
  • Therese Riley

Abstract

There is increasing attention on evidencing research impact and applying a systems thinking perspective in public health. However, there is limited understanding of the extent to which and how public health research that applies a systems thinking perspective contributes to changes in system behaviour and improved population health outcomes. This paper addresses the theoretical limitations of research impact, theory-based evaluation and systems thinking, by drawing on their respective literature to develop an initial, middle-range Theory of Systems Change, focused on the contribution of public health research that takes a systems perspective on population health outcomes. The Theory of Systems Change was developed through four phases: (1) Preliminary activities, (2) Theory development, (3) Scripting into images, and (4) Examining against Merton’s criteria. The primary propositions are: that well-functioning systems create the conditions for improved population health outcomes; the inter-related properties of, and practices within, well-functioning systems include adaptation, alignment, collaboration and evidence-driven action and learning; and public health research contributes to population health outcomes by embedding capacity in the system. The Theory of Systems Change can guide researchers in developing project-specific theories of change and creates the theoretical architecture for the accumulation of learning. The Theory of Systems Change is necessarily incomplete and an initial attempt to develop a theory to be scrutinized and tested. Ultimately, it seeks to advance theory and provide evidence-based guidance to maximize the contribution of research. We provide examples of how we have applied the Theory of Systems Change to Pathways in Place.

Suggested Citation

  • Melinda Craike & Bojana Klepac & Amy Mowle & Therese Riley, 2023. "Theory of systems change: An initial, middle-range theory of public health research impact," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 32(3), pages 603-621.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:rseval:v:32:y:2023:i:3:p:603-621.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/reseval/rvad030
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Trickett, E.J. & Beehler, S. & Deutsch, C. & Green, L.W. & Hawe, P. & McLeroy, K. & Lin Miller, R. & Rapkin, B.D. & Schensul, J.J. & Schulz, A.J. & Trimble, J.E., 2011. "Advancing the science of community-level interventions," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 101(8), pages 1410-1419.
    2. Thornton, PK & Schuetz, T & Förch, W & Cramer, L & Abreu, D & Vermeulen, S & Campbell, BM, 2017. "Responding to global change: A theory of change approach to making agricultural research for development outcome-based," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 145-153.
    3. Stevie Upton & Paul Vallance & John Goddard, 2014. "From outcomes to process: evidence for a new approach to research impact assessment," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 23(4), pages 352-365.
    4. Thomas W. Valente & Rebecca L. Davis, 1999. "Accelerating the Diffusion of Innovations Using Opinion Leaders," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 566(1), pages 55-67, November.
    5. Midgley, G., 2006. "Systemic intervention for public health," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 96(3), pages 466-472.
    6. Maryam Razmgir & Sirous Panahi & Leila Ghalichi & Seyed Ali Javad Mousavi & Shahram Sedghi, 2021. "Exploring research impact models: A systematic scoping review [AsseCssment of the Impact of a Clinical and Health Services Research Call in Catalonia]," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 30(4), pages 443-457.
    7. Alis Oancea, 2019. "Research governance and the future(s) of research assessment," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 5(1), pages 1-12, December.
    8. Steven Hill, 2016. "Assessing (for) impact: future assessment of the societal impact of research," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 2(1), pages 1-7, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. repec:oup:rseval:v:32:y:2024:i:3:p:603-621. is not listed on IDEAS
    2. repec:oup:rseval:v:32:y:2024:i:2:p:273-285. is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Ohid Yaqub & Dmitry Malkov & Josh Siepel, 2023. "How unpredictable is research impact? Evidence from the UK’s Research Excellence Framework," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 32(2), pages 273-285.
    4. Dora M. Raymaker, 2016. "Intersections of Critical Systems Thinking and Community Based Participatory Research: A Learning Organization Example with the Autistic Community," Systemic Practice and Action Research, Springer, vol. 29(5), pages 405-423, October.
    5. Lam, Steven & Dodd, Warren & Wyngaarden, Sara & Skinner, Kelly & Papadopoulos, Andrew & Harper, Sherilee L., 2021. "How and why are Theory of Change and Realist Evaluation used in food security contexts? A scoping review," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    6. Scott C. Carvajal & Noelle Miesfeld & Jean Chang & Kerstin M. Reinschmidt & Jill Guernsey De Zapien & Maria L. Fernandez & Cecilia Rosales & Lisa K. Staten, 2013. "Evidence for Long-Term Impact of Pasos Adelante : Using a Community-Wide Survey to Evaluate Chronic Disease Risk Modification in Prior Program Participants," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-17, October.
    7. Sarah Chapman & Adiilah Boodhoo & Carren Duffy & Suki Goodman & Maria Michalopoulou, 2023. "Theory of Change in Complex Research for Development Programmes: Challenges and Solutions from the Global Challenges Research Fund," The European Journal of Development Research, Palgrave Macmillan;European Association of Development Research and Training Institutes (EADI), vol. 35(2), pages 298-322, April.
    8. Tina D. Beuchelt & Rafaël Schneider & Liliana Gamba, 2022. "Integrating the right to food in sustainability standards: A theory of change to move global supply chains from responsibilities to impacts," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 44(4), pages 1864-1889, December.
    9. Marina Apgar & Guillaume Fournie & Barbara Haesler & Grace Lyn Higdon & Leah Kenny & Annalena Oppel & Evelyn Pauls & Matthew Smith & Mieke Snijder & Daan Vink & Mazeda Hossain, 2023. "Revealing the Relational Mechanisms of Research for Development Through Social Network Analysis," The European Journal of Development Research, Palgrave Macmillan;European Association of Development Research and Training Institutes (EADI), vol. 35(2), pages 323-350, April.
    10. van Noordwijk, Meine, 2019. "Integrated natural resource management as pathway to poverty reduction: Innovating practices, institutions and policies," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 172(C), pages 60-71.
    11. Ozili, Peterson K, 2023. "Assessing global and local interest in eNaira CBDC and cryptocurrency information: implications for financial stability," MPRA Paper 116978, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    12. Peter Weißhuhn & Katharina Helming & Johanna Ferretti, 2018. "Research impact assessment in agriculture—A review of approaches and impact areas," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 27(1), pages 36-42.
    13. Therese Riley & Liza Hopkins & Maria Gomez & Seanna Davidson & Daniel Chamberlain & Jessica Jacob & Sonia Wutzke, 2021. "A Systems Thinking Methodology for Studying Prevention Efforts in Communities," Systemic Practice and Action Research, Springer, vol. 34(5), pages 555-573, October.
    14. Kerstin Schreiber & Bernard Soubry & Carley Dove-McFalls & Graham K. MacDonald, 2023. "Untangling the role of social relationships for overcoming challenges in local food systems: a case study of farmers in Québec, Canada," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 40(1), pages 141-156, March.
    15. Berkeley, Dina & Springett, Jane, 2006. "From rhetoric to reality: A systemic approach to understanding the constraints faced by Health For All initiatives in England," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 63(11), pages 2877-2889, December.
    16. Ioan Ianoş & Alexandru-Ionuţ Petrişor, 2020. "An Overview of the Dynamics of Relative Research Performance in Central-Eastern Europe Using a Ranking-Based Analysis Derived from SCImago Data," Publications, MDPI, vol. 8(3), pages 1-25, July.
    17. Martha Swamila & Damas Philip & Adam Meshack Akyoo & Stefan Sieber & Mateete Bekunda & Anthony Anderson Kimaro, 2020. "Gliricidia Agroforestry Technology Adoption Potential in Selected Dryland Areas of Dodoma Region, Tanzania," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-17, July.
    18. Chen, Huey T., 2016. "Interfacing theories of program with theories of evaluation for advancing evaluation practice: Reductionism, systems thinking, and pragmatic synthesis," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 109-118.
    19. Sadhvi Krishnamoorthy & Sharna Mathieu & Victoria Ross & Gregory Armstrong & Kairi Kõlves, 2022. "What Are Complex Interventions in Suicide Research? Definitions, Challenges, Opportunities, and the Way Forward," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(14), pages 1-10, July.
    20. Helka Kalliomäki & Sampo Ruoppila & Jenni Airaksinen, 2021. "It takes two to tango: Examining productive interactions in urban research collaboration [Generating Research Questions through Problematization]," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 30(4), pages 529-539.
    21. Molly Morgan Jones & Catriona Manville & Joanna Chataway, 2022. "Learning from the UK’s research impact assessment exercise: a case study of a retrospective impact assessment exercise and questions for the future," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 47(3), pages 722-746, June.
    22. Faure, Guy & Barret, Danielle & Blundo-Canto, Genowefa & Dabat, Marie-Hélène & Devaux-Spatarakis, Agathe & Le Guerroué, Jean Louis & Marquié, Catherine & Mathé, Syndhia & Temple, Ludovic & Toillier, A, 2018. "How different agricultural research models contribute to impacts: Evidence from 13 case studies in developing countries," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 128-136.

    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:oup:rseval:v:32:y:2023:i:3:p:603-621.. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/rev .

    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.