Purpose Seeks to examine three empirical studies carried out in Canada, the UK and Europe with comparisons drawn on their approach and findings. Design/methodology/approach The studies were compared using a framework, developed by the authors, along four central elements and two influencing drivers. Findings Little measurement consistency or output value was evident. The current focus on isolated studies, carried out at a macro level, is discouraged. Practical implications Future studies need greater rigour, and consequently might be of more value to academics and practitioners. Originality/value The lack of research consistency is highlighted. Recommendations are made for stronger adhesion with other disciplines to develop a robust research agenda.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Wright et al. (2006) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 2 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: