The 2018 James Lind alliance adult social work priority setting partnership report
Its use and engagement
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 21721552 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Chloe Waterman (0000-0002-5064-095X, NIHR Health and Social Care Workforce Research Unit, The Policy Institute, King's College London, London, UK, corresponding author), Jill Manthorpe (0000-0001-9006-1410, King's College London) |
| Year | 2024 |
| Volume | 24 |
| Issue | 5 |
| Pages | 705-718 |
| Publication date | 2024-09-01 |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Journal of Social Work (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 1468-0173 • E-ISSN: 1741-296X |
| Publisher | SAGE Publications (PUBLISHER • US) |
| DOI | 10.1177/14680173241258924 |
| OpenAlex | W4401276367 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 10 |
The James Lind Alliance (JLA) is a nonprofit United Kingdom (UK) organization that builds a set of research priorities for any given topic through the systematic involvement of practitioners, service users, carers, and stakeholders. In 2021/2022, we reviewed the impact of the JLA priority setting partnership (PSP) on adult social work research (2018). Our research question was “How has social work research responded to and changed since the 2018 JLA priority setting report; and where do we need to focus now?” We searched for research which aligned with the published priorities. We then interviewed 23 social work researchers to learn if/how they had engaged with the JLA PSP and what might be needed for future PSP exercises and research. Findings We discuss our findings with reference to other reviews of JLA PSPs. We conclude that the JLA PSP for adult social work was uniquely suited to the field given the history of person-centered practices, and this may account for some of the positive reviews of the report. The JLA process and ethos were respected and the report potentially raised the profile of adult social work research, while highlighting unaddressed questions. Applications Though there are many JLA PSP reviews, this study is one of the few to consider impact, we propose a review process could be applied to PSP exercises more regularly
Alliance · Ethos · General partnership · Political science · Public relations · Sociology · Engineering · Healthcare innovation and challenges · Homelessness and Social Issues · Law · Mental Health and Patient Involvement · Psychology · Social Work
| Highly cited | No |
|---|