Alberta Innovates- Health Solutions

APPLYING THE BUXTON/HANNEY MODEL TO AHFMR-FUNDED HSR RESULTS FROM THE CASE STUDIES

Conclusions from HSR Case Studies
Even from the limited amount of work put into these case studies, it is quite clear that, as expected, the Buxton/Hanney approach works in a comparable way in relation to these AHFMR HSR projects as to the UK DH projects for which it was developed. The case studies raised no new problems or specific difficulties. Much of the work on these case studies was undertaken by WLS, who was thus far unfamiliar with the approach. This acted as a reminder that, while others can readily use the approach, there is a learning process to gain familiarity with the categorization and stages involved. The case studies also remind us that the framework is not rigid, but needs to be used flexibly to accommodate the circumstances of particular projects. For example, as previously noted, interaction with funders and stakeholders may continue throughout the project, and the process of project specification may, as in some of the HTA examples, be an ongoing process throughout the project.

These case studies show that it is possible to go a considerable way to analyze a project in terms of the model using existing 'on file' sources of information, but that these typically leave some important gaps. The implication of this is that, if the AHFMR were to decide to undertake more routinely such ex post analyses of its funded research this could be facilitated by making researchers aware of this and by requesting that certain relevant information be clearly provided in annual or end of project reports. In the case of the latter, however, some of the information would not be available immediately at the end of the project, and there may be an argument for an 'after project' review report say two years after the end of the relevant funding. While this might be seen as an unnecessary and undesirable additional burden by some researchers, for those receiving, and expecting to receive, ongoing support from the AHFMR it might be recognized as a reasonable request. Attitudes may depend on the general climate as to whether it seems that such evidence is important in the ongoing process of justifying and funding research, and the observed policy of the AHFMR will be the main determinant of this climate of opinion locally.