Skip to main content

Advertisement

Making research and evaluation more relevant and useful in the real world: favoured solutions and uncomfortable realities

Article metrics

There has been a recent upsurge of advocacy from trialists and policy ‘modernisers’ for far more use of RCTs as the basis for health and wider public policy. This is exemplified by the UK Cabinet Office’s report ‘Test, Learn, Adapt’ (2012). Mainstream policy makers are now being told that they should make policy by experimenting like scientists. Drawing on experience as an applied health services researcher and policy adviser in government, I will attempt to stimulate reflection on the following questions: how can we explain the timing of this phenomenon; how realistic and helpful is it; and where does it leave the contribution of evaluation in policy?

Author information

Correspondence to Nicholas Mays.

Rights and permissions

This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Mays, N. Making research and evaluation more relevant and useful in the real world: favoured solutions and uncomfortable realities. BMC Health Serv Res 14, O1 (2014) doi:10.1186/1472-6963-14-S2-O1

Download citation

Keywords

  • Public Health
  • Health Service
  • Real World
  • Policy Maker
  • Public Policy