Comprendre la recherche de mise en oeuvre

1. See: Massive open online course (MOOC) on implementation research. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2017 (https://tdr.who.int/home/our-work/strengthening-research-capacity/massive-open-online-course-(mooc)-on-implementation-research, accessed 19 October 2017).
2. Les problèmes de RMO comprennent les questions concernant l’accès à une intervention, l’adoption d’une politique, les mécanismes de mise en place, la diffusion d’une stratégie dans le système de santé, etc.
3. Peters D.H. et al. Implementation research: what it is and how to do it. British Medical Journal. BMJ. 2014; 347:f6753.
4. Le « résultat » (en anglais « outome ») est défini comme l’effet d’actions délibérées et intentionnelles visant à mettre en œuvre de nouveaux traitements, pratiques et / ou services, ou bien comme l’effet de l’adoption de stratégies innovantes pour atteindre les populations avec des outils efficaces.
5. Proctor E. et al. Outcomes for implementation research: Conceptual distinctions, measurement challenges, and research agenda. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research. 2011; 38(2):65–76.
6. Institute of Medicine (IOM). Crossing the quality chasm: A new health system for the 21st Century. Washington DC: National Academy Press; 2001.
7. Implementation research in health: a practical guide. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2014 (http://www.who.int/alliance-hpsr/resources/implementationresearchguide/en/, accessed 16 October 2017).
8. Fixsen D. L. et al. Implementation research: A synthesis of the literature (FMHI Publication #231). Tampa: University of South Florida/Louis de la Parte Florida Mental Health Institute/The National Implementation Research Network; 2005.
9. De Savigny D. and Kuepfer I. Phase IV studies. In: Field trials of health interventions: A toolbox. 3rd Edition. Eds. Smith P.G., Morrow R.H., Ross D.A. (Chapter 22). Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2015.
10. Thailand Millennium Development Goals Report 2009. Bangkok: United Nations Development Programme (UNDP); 2009 (http://www.th.undp.org/content/thailand/en/home/library/mdg/ThaiMDGRpt09.html, accessed 16 October 2017).
11. Patcharanarumol W. et al. Why and how did Thailand achieve good health at low cost? In: Good health at low cost. Balabanova D., McKee M. and Mills A. (eds). Good health at low cost? 25 years on. What makes a successful health system? Chapter 7. London: The London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine; 2011.
12. Designing and conducting health systems research projects (Volume 2). Geneva: World Health Organisation/International Development Research Centre; 1993.
13. Omorodion F.I. (1993). The socio-cultural context of health behaviour among Esan communities, Edo State, Nigeria. Health Transition Review. 1993; 3(2):125–136.
14. Lessons learned in home management of malaria: Implementation research in four African countries. Geneva: World Health Organization/The Special Programme for Research and Training in Tropical Diseases; 2007.
15. Rao, K.D. et al. An implementation research approach to evaluating health insurance programs: insights from India. International Journal of Health Policy and Management. 2016; 5.5:295.
16. Varvasovszky Z. and Brugha R. A stakeholder analysis. Health policy and planning. 2000; 15.3:338–345.
17. Brugha, R. and Varvasovszky Z. Stakeholder analysis: a review. Health policy and planning 15.3: 239-246.
18. Hyder A. et al. Stakeholder analysis for health research: case studies from low-and middle-income countries. Public health. 2010; 124.3:159–166.
19. Bedregal P. and Ewan F. Evidence based primary care? A multi-tier, multiple stakeholder perspective from Chile. The International Journal of Health Planning and Management. 2001; 16(1): 47–60.
20. Impoinvil D.E. et al. Comparison of mosquito control programs in seven urban sites in Africa, the Middle East, and the Americas. Health Policy 2007; 83.2:196–212.
21. Adapted from: Corlien V.M., Pathmanathan I. and Brownlee A.T. Designing and conducting health systems research projects (Volume 2). Ottawa: International Development Resource Centre; 1993.
22. Craig, P. et al. Developing and evaluating complex interventions: the new Medical Research Council guidance. Bmj. 2008; 337:a1655.
23. Rogers P.J. Using programme theory for complicated and complex programmes. Evaluation. 2008; 14.1: 29-48.
24. Leykum L.K., et al. Organizational interventions employing principles of complexity science have improved outcomes for patients with Type II diabetes. Implementation Science. 2007; 2(1):1.
25. Adapted from: Paina, L.A. Understanding pathways for scaling up health services through the lens of complex adaptive systems. Health Policy and Planning. 2012; 27(5):365–373.
26. Principles of community engagement (1st ed.). Atlanta: CDC/ATSDR Committee on Community Engagement, Centre for Disease Control and Prevention; 1997.
27. Punch, M. (1994). Politics and ethics in qualitative research. In: Handbook of qualitative research. Denzin N.K. and Lincoln Y.S. (Eds). London: Sage Publishing; 2017.
28. Hutton J.L., Eccles M.P. and Grimshaw J.M. Ethical issues in implementation research: A discussion of the problems in achieving informed consent. Implementation Science. 2008; 3(1): 1.
29. Stuart R., Muula A.S. and Westreich D. Male circumcision and HIV prevention: ethical, medical and public health trade-offs in low-income countries. Journal of Medical Ethics. 2007; 33(6):357–361.
30. Doherty T. et al. Improving the coverage of the PMTCT programme through a participatory quality improvement intervention in South Africa. BMC Public Health. 2009; 9(1):1.

Lectures supplémentaires

• Bhattacharyya, Onil, Scott Reeves, and Merrick Zwarenstein. “What is implementation research? Rationale, concepts, and practices.” Research on Social Work Practice 19.5 (2009): 491-502.
• Edwards, Nancy, and Pierre M. Barker. “The importance of context in implementation research.” J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr 67.Suppl 2 (2014): S157-162.
• Goodman, Catherine, William Brieger, Alasdair Unwin, Anne Mills, Sylvia Meek, and George Greer. “Medicine sellers and malaria treatment in sub-Saharan Africa: what do they do and how can their practice be improved?.” The American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene 77, no. 6 Suppl (2007): 203.
• Kengeya-Kayondo, J., M. A. Gonzalez Block, and I. Bochorisvili. “Implementation Research for the Control of Diseases of Poverty: Strengthening the Evidence Base for Access to New and Improved Tools, Strategies and Interventions.” Geneva: World Health Organization and Special Programme for Research and Training in Tropical Diseases (2011).
• Lucas, H. and Zwarenstein M. A Practical Guide to Implementation Research on Health Systems. Future Health Systems (2016) http://www.ids.ac.uk/publication/a-practical-guide-to-implementation-research-on-health-systems.
• Sanders, David, and Andy Haines. “Implementation research is needed to achieve international health goals.” PLoS Med 3.6 (2006): e186.
• Tindana, Paulina O., et al. “Grand challenges in global health: community engagement in research in developing countries.” PLoS Med 4.9 (2007): e273.
• UNICEF, and World Health Organization. “Framework for operations and implementation research in health and disease control programs.” (2008).
• Verkevisser, M. C., Indra Pathmanathan, and Ann Brownlee. “Designing and Conducting Health System Research Projects: Proposal Development and Field Work.” Health Serv Res 1 (2003).