Hi Katheryn
It may be something like (without knowing about the subject area!):
1. When the whole team values standardized communication (C1), they will see value the standardized platform and so will be motivated to use it (M1), potentially resulting in a reduction in variability in patient care (O1).
2. Where the team doesn't value standardized communication (C2), they won't see value in the standardized platform and so will be less likely to use it (M1), with the result that there is no impact on (O2).
I think in general when looking at technology use one of the first things that you need to think about is what leads people to use it (or not) - as in your examples. You could then take it a step back to think about what the contextual factors that lead to a team valuing standardized communication. And then, if we assuming that they are using it, what contextual factors mean that they use it in a way that provides the desired benefits.
Best wishes
Rebecca
Dr Rebecca Randell
Lecturer
School of Healthcare
Baines Wing (room G.16a – please note change of room)
University of Leeds
Leeds LS2 9UT
Tel: +44 (0) 113 343 1337
Email: [log in to unmask]
-----Original Message-----
From: Realist and Meta-narrative Evidence Synthesis: Evolving Standards [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Katheryn Courville
Sent: 17 September 2015 19:12
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Contingency CMO configurations
Hi Dr. Randell,
Thank you for responding. I’m sorry to bother you again, but I'm still a little fuzzy. So, I’d like to take just one of my CMOs and break it down. This is the one you first commented on:
Background: The App developer touts that using a “standardized communication platform/protocol…reduces variability in patient care…which will improve STEMI communications” (on the App promotional website)
The resource is the standardized platform/protocol. So then, the mechanism is the response to the resource? Such that:
Does that sound right?
|