Epidemiology, health systems research, and statistics/data systems / report of an ADAMHA workgroup.

  • United States. Alcohol, Drug Abuse, and Mental Health Administration.
Date:
1978
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: Epidemiology, health systems research, and statistics/data systems / report of an ADAMHA workgroup. Source: Wellcome Collection.

    6/104 (page 4)
    Comments on the preliminary report underscored the need for a more explicit conceptual framework to organize the Workgroup's findings and recommendations. This need was particularly evident regarding health services research, an area whose diffuse organization within ADAMHA reflected, in part, the poorly defined boundaries of an emerging research field. Hence, we identified a health systems research framework within the context of both the larger field of health services research and the contributing fields of epidemiology and health statistics/data systems. This framework, as diagrammed on pp. 15-17, has enabled us to focus on research directed at the broad public health policy issues addressed by the Workgroup. It also provides a schema for defining and improving ADAMHA programs in other fundamental areas of health care research: program evaluation, treatment assessment, technology assessment, and health behavior research. The power of this conceptual approach, how- ever, will be determined by its utility in facilitating a more func- tional linkage of research professionals and a clear administrative delegation of responsibility for developing comprehensive and integrated research programs in these areas. Within this framework, the Workgroup has documented ADAMHA's current investment in these three study areas, describing the major attendant problems and issues, and recommending appropriate steps for obtaining information to improve the U.S. health care delivery system's ADM services. Appropriate budgetary and administrative recommendations are included to assure that implementation is feasible. An undertaking of this magnitude requires major contributions of time and energy from many Workgroup participants and staff which are im- possible to acknowledge adequately. The expert opinions provided by our consultants were particularly stimulating, considerably increasing our sensitivity to the perspectives of the larger ADM health care research community. Likewise, the ADAMHA Workgroup representatives provided a wide range of program perspectives, attended numerous subgroup meetings, and wrote multiple drafts of their collected material. The collection, presentation, and analysis of so large a mass of information inevitably disrupts the ongoing and often understaffed program activities of the three Institutes. However, the activities associated with this Work- group were readily and conscientiously undertaken by all members. In the process, new working relationships were forged across Institutes and a better understanding of each program area's unique problems was ob- tained. In this sense, the implementation of recommendations for im- proved coordination across Institutes has already begun.