Journals Library

An error occurred retrieving content to display, please try again.

Page not found (404)

Sorry - the page you requested could not be found.

Please choose a page from the navigation or try a website search above to find the information you need.

This study developed tools and resources to provide a coherent evidence-informed framework for designing, operationalising and managing embedded research initiatives to enhance knowledge co-production in the NHS.

{{author}}{{author}}{{($index < metadata.AuthorsAndEtalArray.length-1) ? ',' : '.'}}

Martin Marshall 1,*, Huw Davies 2, Vicky Ward 2, Justin Waring 3, Naomi J Fulop 4, Liz Mear 5, Breid O’Brien 6, Richard Parnell 7, Katherine Kirk 3, Benet Reid 2, Tricia Tooman 2

1 Research Department of Primary Care and Population Health, Medical School, University College London, London, UK
2 School of Management, University of St Andrews, St Andrews, UK
3 Health Services Management Centre, School of Social Policy, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
4 Department of Applied Health Research, University College London, London, UK
5 Leeds Academic Health Partnership, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
6 Health Innovation Network, London, UK
7 Independent patient and public involvement lead, Havant, UK
* Corresponding author Email: martin.marshall@ucl.ac.uk

Declared competing interests of authors: Martin Marshall is the chairperson of the Royal College of General Practitioners. Naomi J Fulop co-led one of the embedded research initiatives that is described and analysed in Chapters 4 and 5. Liz Mear has been employed as the chief executive of the Innovation Agency (the Academic Health Science Network for the North West Coast) throughout the duration of the Embedded Project. Richard Parnell sat on the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation (EME) funding committee and the NIHR EME strategy group (2016–20).

Funding: {{metadata.Funding}}

{{metadata.Journal}} Volume: {{metadata.Volume}}, Issue: {{metadata.Issue}}, Published in {{metadata.PublicationDate | date:'MMMM yyyy'}}

https://doi.org/{{metadata.DOI}}

Citation: {{author}}{{ (($index < metadata.AuthorsArray.length-1) && ($index <=6)) ? ', ' : '' }}{{(metadata.AuthorsArray.length <= 6) ? '.' : '' }} {{(metadata.AuthorsArray.length > 6) ? 'et al.' : ''}} . {{metadata.JournalShortName}} {{metadata.PublicationDate | date:'yyyy'}};{{metadata.Volume}}({{metadata.Issue}})

Crossmark status check

Report Content

The full text of this issue is available as a PDF document from the Toolkit section on this page.

The full text of this issue is available as a PDF document from the Toolkit section on this page.

If you would like to receive a notification when this project publishes in the NIHR Journals Library, please submit your email address below.

 

Responses to this report

No responses have been published.

 

If you would like to submit a response to this publication, please do so using the form below:

Comments submitted to the NIHR Journals Library are electronic letters to the editor. They enable our readers to debate issues raised in research reports published in the Journals Library. We aim to post within 14 working days all responses that contribute substantially to the topic investigated, as determined by the Editors.  Non-relevant comments will be deleted.

Your name and affiliations will be published with your comment.

Once published, you will not have the right to remove or edit your response. The Editors may add, remove, or edit comments at their absolute discretion.

By submitting your response, you are stating that you agree to the terms & conditions