Final Research Report
View this project's final research report.
Related Journal Citations
Peer review of PCORI-funded research helps make sure the report presents complete, balanced, and useful information about the research. It also assesses how the project addressed PCORI’s Methodology Standards. During peer review, experts read a draft report of the research and provide comments about the report. These experts may include a scientist focused on the research topic, a specialist in research methods, a patient or caregiver, and a healthcare professional. These reviewers cannot have conflicts of interest with the study.
The peer reviewers point out where the draft report may need revision. For example, they may suggest ways to improve descriptions of the conduct of the study or to clarify the connection between results and conclusions. Sometimes, awardees revise their draft reports twice or more to address all of the reviewers’ comments.
Peer reviewers commented and the researchers made changes or provided responses. Those comments and responses included the following:
- The reviewers pointed out that the study did not appear to address its specific aims, which were to understand the transition experiences of learning health networks and how these networks interacted with other entities. The researcher explained that as a qualitative project, the original aims were considered provisional and likely to change over the course of the study. She revised the report’s specific aims to explain how the aims evolved as data were collected and that in the end, the major contribution of this research is the development of a social theory of learning health networks.
- The reviewers critiqued the report for minimizing patient and stakeholder concerns and asked the researcher to describe how her research addressed the major issues identified by learning health network members. The researcher explained that she had originally planned to focus even attention to the different stakeholder groups in a learning health network, including patients, clinicians, program managers, and other groups. During the course of the study which partly took place during the COVID-19 pandemic, the researcher had limited success in obtaining interviews with patients or in observing patient and family groups to understand their concerns. The researcher noted that she plans to use what she did learn in this study in her future research and in her approach to patients and family members.
- The reviewers questioned the generalizability of this research to learning health systems given that the researcher primarily focused on one such network. The researcher stated that she had some data from several learning health networks but the deepest analyses were based on a single network. She revised her report to focused on these most detailed analyses and reframed the focus of this report to be about collaborative learning health systems specifically.
Conflict of Interest Disclosures
- Has Results