Search results

The European funded project ADLIFE focuses on the application of digitally enabled integrated care for people with advanced chronic diseases. The implementation of the ADLIFE intervention required a robust practical tool that would be common to all pilot sites while allowing flexibility for local variations as well as the ability to adapt to unanticipated changes and problems.

The ADLIFE project combined the concepts of implementation research and formative evaluation with the standardized operating procedures (SOP) methodology. The ADLIFE project significantly modified the SOP approach and used it as a means to not only to define and organize the tasks that needed to be performed in preparing and implementing the ADLIFE intervention but also to create a deeper understanding of the unique challenges faced in each site, as well as a method for achieving a consensus.

The ADLIFE SOPs were developed by a dedicated working group, and they encompassed the preparatory phase leading up to implementation of the intervention. The SOP was also the basis for monitoring the implementation, and this created a structure for the dynamic ongoing tactical and even strategic changes necessitated by local diversity as well as many unanticipated changes.

The SOP methodology was useful in supporting the development of the ADLIFE SOP, which was a consensus-based approach to guide for managing the implementation process, both at project and local levels. It has supported continuous improvement and learning throughout the project. Both the process and the SOP produced by the process can be readily adapted and used in other similar projects.

To ensure that more people will benefit from integrated care initiatives, scaling-up of successful initiatives is the way forward. However, new challenges present themselves as knowledge on how to achieve successful large-scale implementation is scarce. The EU-funded project SCIROCCO uses a step-based scaling-up strategy to explore what to scale-up, and how to scale-up integrated care initiatives by matching the complementary strengths and weaknesses of five European regions involved in integrated care. The purpose of this paper is to describe a multi-method evaluation protocol designed to understand what factors influence the implementation of the SCIROCCO strategy to support the scaling-up of integrated care.

The first part of the protocol focuses on the assessment of the implementation fidelity of the SCIROCCO step-based strategy. The objective is to gain insight in whether the step-based strategy is implemented as it was designed to explore what works and does not work when implementing the scaling-up strategy. The second part concerns a realist evaluation to examine what it is about the SCIROCCO’s strategy that works for whom, why, how and in which circumstances when scaling-up integrated care.

The intended study will provide valuable information on the implementation of the scaling-up strategy which will help to explain for what specific reasons the implementation succeeds and will facilitate further improvement of project outcomes.

The expected insights could be useful to guide the development, implementation and evaluation of future scaling-up strategies to advance the change towards more sustainable health and care systems.

The study aims to shed light on the historical and contemporary trends of biodiversity accounting literature, while simultaneously offering insights into the future of research in this sector. The paper also aims to raise awareness among accounting researchers about their role in preserving biodiversity and informing improvements in policy and practice in this area.

The Bibliometrix R-package is used to carry out an algorithmic historiography. The reference publication year spectroscopy (RPYS) methodology is implemented. It is a unique approach to bibliometric analysis that allows researchers to identify and examine historical patterns in scientific literature.

The work provides a distinct and comprehensive discussion of the four distinct periods demarcating the progression of scientific discourse regarding biodiversity accounting. These periods are identified as Origins (1767–1864), Awareness (1865–1961), Consolidation (1962–1995) and Acceleration (1996–2021). The study offers an insightful analysis of the main thematic advancements, interpretative paradigm shifts and theoretical developments that occurred during these periods.

The paper offers a significant contribution to the existing academic debate on the prospects for accounting scholars to concentrate their research efforts on biodiversity and thereby promote advancements in policy and practice in this sector.

The article represents the first example of using an algorithmic historiography approach to examine the corpus of literature dealing with biodiversity accounting. The value of this study comes from the fusion of historical methodology and perspective. To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is also the first scientific investigation applying RPYS in the accounting sector.