IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/epplan/v36y2013i1p191-197.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Defining principles for good practice: Using case studies to inform health systems action on health inequalities

Author

Listed:
  • Simpson, Sarah
  • Kelly, Michael P.
  • Morgan, Antony

Abstract

This paper presents work using case studies as a source of data to see if we could extrapolate from the specific to the general particularly with regard to understanding what constitutes effective practice in taking action on SDHI and as a way of enabling policy makers to make better use of knowledge within the case studies and as a way of better understanding what works, in what context and why. Case studies are important to evaluators in that they are relatively straightforward to undertake and because those involved in implementing an intervention are usually keen to profile the intervention. A checklist described in this paper will enable policy advisers and evaluators to quickly review a case study and right away see if it contains enough information to assist in the development of policy options for reducing socially determined health inequalities.

Suggested Citation

  • Simpson, Sarah & Kelly, Michael P. & Morgan, Antony, 2013. "Defining principles for good practice: Using case studies to inform health systems action on health inequalities," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 191-197.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:36:y:2013:i:1:p:191-197
    DOI: 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2012.03.007
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0149718912000262
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2012.03.007?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
    ---><---

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

    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:eee:epplan:v:36:y:2013:i:1:p:191-197. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/evalprogplan .

    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.