Research & evaluation partners
The product has to earn confidence through a comparison that includes the whole job and can expose failure.
In development · Intended scope and questions for evaluation
The organisation.
The people around it.
A faster draft can be less useful after checking and correction. A fair evaluation includes those tasks, plus implementation and support where applicable.
The people involved
Academic and applied research teams, evaluation specialists and appropriately qualified independent reviewers.
The dependencies
Qualified clinical, operational and economic reviewers, participating organisations, data owners, patient and public contributors and applicable study governance.
What to examine
Evidence fidelity, useful programme proposals, total review effort, implementation cost, missingness, adverse effects and reasons to reject the approach.
An illustrative set of programme relationships. The actual participants, authority, funding and permissions must be established for the defined setting. Explore every organisation perspective.
The decision worth examining.
What study would establish whether the proposed workflow adds value over competent existing practice?
A faster draft can be less useful after checking and correction. A fair evaluation includes those tasks, plus implementation and support where applicable.
Develop the programme around the setting.
Begin with the local need, relevant evidence, existing work and an agreed comparison. A proposed programme needs clear activities, alternatives, resources and reasons to revise or reject it.
Evidence fidelity, useful programme proposals, total review effort, implementation cost, missingness, adverse effects and reasons to reject the approach.
Give each participant a workable role.
Qualified clinical, operational and economic reviewers, participating organisations, data owners, patient and public contributors and applicable study governance.
The overall case and the position of each necessary participant deserve separate examination. Staff time, cash timing, capacity, access, commitments and full costs can change which arrangement is practical.
Make the evaluation useful to a decision.
Identify an accountable sponsor, the current process, the permitted information and what a worthwhile finding would allow the organisation to decide. Include preparation, checking, correction, implementation and support in the comparison.
PHARMORIS is in development. This page describes intended scope and a possible evaluation conversation; it does not establish customers, operational deployment, clinical validation or realised benefit.
Bring the question
your organisation
needs to move.
Tell us where the programme gets stuck, who is affected and what a worthwhile evaluation would help you decide.
Discuss a PHARMORIS evaluationAn initial conversation should describe the organisational question. Agree the purpose and information requirements before sharing records.