The SSCR is commissioning expert reviews on research methods in the field:
End-of-life care research methods
Claire Goodman (University of Hertfordshire), Katherine Froggatt (Lancaster University), Elspeth Mathie (University of Hertfordshire)
The majority of end-of-life care research is based in health care settings and/or is led by health professionals or health based researchers. This review is informed by that work. It is a guide for researchers undertaking projects on end of life care when it is provided in residential and long term care settings, people's homes and community settings.
These are locations where, alongside health care services, social care is involved in providing support to people who are dying. The aim of the review is to provide an overview of the range of research methods that have been commonly used in end of life care research, their relative advantages and disadvantages and a discussion of the particular ethical challenges and logistical issues that can arise when undertaking research in this area.
Read the full review| (PDF)
Research with Black and Ethnic Minority people using social services
Tom Vickers (Durham University), Gary Craig (Durham University), Karl Atkin (University of York)
This review is an exploratory survey of the literature, addressing recent developments in research theory and practice with Black and Minority Ethnic (BME) populations in adult social care in England. The review identifies key issues in the field; current leading contributors to knowledge and practice; and useful resources. Whilst focusing primarily on the literature from social care in England, insights are also included from the broader health, social work and social policy literatures, and from several key studies outside England, where these offer relevant insights not evident in the English literature.
The review also aims to provide an up-to-date bibliography for experienced researchers; to act as an accessible introduction for students and researchers in the early stages of their careers; and a starting point for further study.
Read the full review| (PDF)
Observational methods
Professor Jim Mansell (University of Kent)
This review focuses on observational research, primarily in services for people with learning disabilities. Observational research is particularly useful where people using services are unable to answer interviews or questionnaires about their experience, and where proxy respondents may not be sufficiently accurate sources of data. The review deals with the question of what to observe and how to define it so that the information gathered is valid and reliable.
It deals with sampling (how often to observe and for how long) in order to obtain representative information. It considers the practical steps that have to be take in order to make observations in services.
Using examples from the research literature, it shows how to analyse and present observational data. Finally the review illustrates the use of observational data in assessing and improving the quality of services.
Read the full review| (PDF)
Research with d/Deaf people
Alys Young, Ros Hunt (University of Manchester)
This review specifically concerns research that is carried out with d/Deaf people. It addresses key background knowledge concerning the diversity of what it is to be deaf including the essentially contested nature of the term 'deaf' and its implications; how the special or additional considerations surrounding what it is to be deaf influence research design (including what happens when these are ignored); specific issues of innovative or adaptive research practice in research with d/Deaf people or in deaf contexts; ethical considerations in carrying out research with deaf people; criteria by which the validity of research concerning deaf people might be considered.
Read the full review| (PDF)
Care homes
Rebekah Luff (University of Surrey), Zara Ferreira (City University), Julienne Meyer (City University)
This review is an evidence-based guide for researchers new to the field, focusing on three broad social research methodologies: Qualitative, (e.g. interviews and observations); quantitative (e.g. structured instruments and controlled trials); participative (e.g. action research). The review draws on illustrative examples from a range of larger and smaller scale studies and broadly follows the structure of the research process.
It aims to enable researchers' understanding of the specific issues relating to research in a care home setting, at each stage of the process. This review builds on previous learning and provides both a practical and ethical guide to undertaking care homes research which supports and protects care homes, their staff, residents and visitors, as well as the research staff.
Read the full review| (PDF)
Mathematical modelling and its application to social care
Hazel Squires and Paul Tappenden (University of Sheffield), SSCR Methods Review 7, NIHR School for Social Care Research, London
This review summarises key mathematical modelling methods, with a focus upon thosemethods currently applied within healthcare modelling, and suggests previous and potential applications of these methods within the field of social care. A summary is offered of the model development process, including the use of problem structuring methods, literature reviewing, elicitation and uncertainty analysis. Specific modelling methods such as decision trees, state transition models and discrete event simulation are described, with an outline of their strengths and limitations. Current approaches for quantifying outcomes within health economic evaluation are also briefly discussed. The review highlights particular issues which may need to be considered when applying these modelling methods to social care.
Read the full review| (PDF).
Overview of outcome measurement for adults using social care services and support
Ann Netten (University of Kent), SSCR Methods Review 6, NIHR School for Social Care Research
What is meant by outcome inevitably varies depending on the context and scope of what is under consideration. This review discusses the measurement of outcome for individuals and their carers for research purposes, particularly the type of research which evaluates the effectiveness and cost effectiveness of social care for adults and which has implications for social care practice. The review discusses what is meant by outcome in social care, presenting a model that describes different 'types' of outcome and how these are related to one another. Ultimately the objective is improving people's quality of life, and the review defines 'social care related quality of life' as key to reflecting the impact of services. Some of the important challenges in measuring outcome in social care are identified: attribution, adaptation, reflecting the relative importance of the diverse aspects of quality of life and mental capacity and communication difficulties. The review then briefly describes practical approaches to measurement and concludes by making a number of recommendations for measuring outcomes in practice and the need for further methodological development.
Read the full review| (PDF).
The use of 'large-scale datasets' in UK social Care research
Shereen Hussein (King's College London) SSCR Methods Review 5, NIHR School for Social Care Research, London.
This methods review sets out knowledge about current uses and applications of large datasets for research in adult social care practice. Built on a wide-ranging search of the literature, this review discusses examples of the use of different large datasets such as the General Social Care Council, the Census, the Labour Force Survey, governmental and hospital records, as well as others in health and social care research. It focuses on the methods adopted to extract and use data from different large datasets to enable quantitative and statistical examination of the research questions considered. It discusses the challenges associated with using large data records, which in some cases are not originally designed for specific quantitative data analysis or to answer a pre-defined research question, and illustrates various approaches adopted by researchers to extract, validate, refine and interpret results based on such data. The review discusses the strengths and limitations of a number of large datasets currently used in research on social care in England, with examples from adult safeguarding and other areas relevant to adult social care practice.
Read the full review| (PDF).
Research governance and ethics for adult social care research: procedures, practices and challenges
John Woolham (Coventry University). SSCR Methods Review 4, NIHR School for Social Care Research, London
The introduction of the Research Governance Framework for Health and Social Care by the Department of Health in 2001 extended the reach of research governance from the NHS, where reviewing arrangements were already well established, into universities and local authorities, who were requested, in the guidance, to introduce arrangements to ensure appropriate levels of ethical and methodological review.
This paper describes the different structures and processes used by the NHS, universities and local authorities to meet the expectations of the Department of Health, and offers a critical analysis of some of the consequences – both problems and opportunities - that have resulted.
Read the full review| (PDF).
A brief guide to carrying out research about adult social care services for visually impaired people
Nigel Charles (Plymouth University), SSCR Methods Review 3, NIHR School for Social Care Research, London
This methods review explores issues relevant to social care and visual impairment (VI) identifying the socio-demographic characteristics of the VI population; social care and related needs; services; measuring the impact of services; sampling VI people and service providers; practical steps in carrying out fieldwork with VI people; and organisations who can provide advice and guidance on carrying out VI research. Selected examples of academic and grey literature will be used to identify and discuss the problems, challenges and solutions to carrying out social care research in the visual impairment field.
This will cover examples of good methodological practice, as well as the practical steps required when carrying out research with and about a population that is largely older and who might have other disabilities as well as visual ones.
Read the full review| (PDF).
LGBT sexualities in social care research
Elizabeth Price (University of Hull), SSCR Methods Review 3, NIHR School for Social Care Research, London
This review charts the development of sexualities research and provides an overview of associated methodological approaches and perspectives; particularly those that have a specific social care focus.
The review includes a critical appraisal of the strengths and limitations of the various approaches, and addresses a range of methodological challenges associated with work of this nature including the ethical context of research with vulnerable populations, the concept of 'insider status' and some of the problems associated with the use of uncritical definitions and measurements of sexual minorities and how these may be addressed in research that aims to be inclusive without running the risk of tokenism.
The aim of the review is to enable researchers, particularly those working in the field of adult social care, to recognize and acknowledge the diversity of human experience in their own work.
Read the full review| (PDF).
Qualitative Methods Overview
Dr Jo Moriarty (King's College London), SSCR Methods Review 1, NIHR School for Social Care Research, London
The social care evidence base reveals a distinct preference for qualitative methods and studies covering a broad range of social care topics can be identified.
This review provides an introduction to the different ways in which qualitative research has been used in social care and some of the reasons why it has been successful in identifying under-researched areas, in documenting the experiences of people using services, carers, and practitioners, and in evaluating new types of service or intervention.
Examples of completed research on a selection of topics are chosen to give an understanding of some of the differing underpinning approaches to qualitative research, including grounded theory, case studies, and ethnography. These are used to illustrate the advantages and disadvantages of the data collection methods used most frequently in qualitative research, including in-depth interviews, focus groups, and observation as well as issues such as sampling and data analysis.
The review ends with a discussion on how qualitative social care research might be improved in terms of its quality and in terms of extending the repertoire of research methodologies on which it draws.
Read the full review| (PDF).
Forthcoming
Chance-based designsChance-based designs
Ian Russell (University of Swansea), Bob Woods (Bangor University)
When there is little evidence about the relative effectiveness of two alternative approaches in social care, simple comparisons of the participants who happen to receive one approach with those who happen to receive the other are prone to bias arising from whatever social mechanism was responsible for these allocations.
Chance-based designs (CBDs) address this problem by allocating participants between approaches at random, thus maximising internal validity, and are now the dominant research design in health care research. CBDs are much less widely used in social care research in the UK. This review explores the uses of CBDs and how social care research can utilise these.
Cost-effectiveness
Martin Knapp (London School of Economics and Political Science)
There has always been a need to use resources efficiently. That need is especially stark today. Economists and others have developed various approaches to measure the relative efficiency of different practice arrangements, interventions or policies. A generic name for them is cost-effectiveness analysis.
The review describes how this type of analysis is conducted: how it conceptualises and measures costs and effects (outcomes), and then combines evidence on them to measure comparative efficiency, while also taking into consideration the distributional (or equity) implications.
The relevance of cost-effectiveness methods for social care is discussed. There are many unexploited opportunities to use cost-effectiveness evidence to support social care decision-making, but also pitfalls for the unwary.
Systematic reviews
Deborah Rutter (Social Care Institute for Excellence)
This paper aims to set out an overview of systematic review methodology (setting questions, searching, assessing the quality of evidence and synthesis of findings), summarising limitations, strengths, and challenges to the authority of systematic reviews from within the health and social care research community. It highlights the uses of systematic reviews in social science and social care, and identifies ways in which reviews might be made more receptive to the needs of researchers, policymakers and other stakeholders.
The paper introduces debates around the weighting of evidence, and the inclusion of qualitative studies. Topic selection, involvement of different stakeholders in review processes, and the proportionate use of this method are also discussed.
User-led research
Peter Beresford (Brunel University), Suzy Croft (St John's Hospice, London)
This review explores terminology in this field, paying particular attention to the use of terms 'user-led', 'user-controlled', 'survivor' and 'emancipatory disability' research, examining their interrelations and usage. It contextualises 'user-led' research, and looks at key characteristics associated with 'user-led' research and critiques that have developed around them.
The review focuses on the implications for research methods of 'user-led' research; and the development of qualitative, quantitative and mixed method research in 'user-led' research in adult social care research. The review explores the impact of 'user-led' and involvement research; considers the implications of 'user-led' research for the conduct and boundaries of social care research; and makes recommendations for the future use and practice of 'user-led' research in social care.