The implementation of medical revalidation: an assessment using normalisation process theory
Background Medical revalidation is the process by which all licensed doctors are legally required to demonstrate that they are up to date and fit to practise in order to maintain their licence. Revalidation was introduced in the United Kingdom (UK) in 2012, constituting significant change in the reg...
Uložené v:
| Vydané v: | BMC health services research Ročník 17; číslo 1; s. 749 - 14 |
|---|---|
| Hlavní autori: | , , , , , , , |
| Médium: | Journal Article |
| Jazyk: | English |
| Vydavateľské údaje: |
London
BioMed Central
21.11.2017
BioMed Central Ltd Springer Nature B.V BMC |
| Predmet: | |
| ISSN: | 1472-6963, 1472-6963 |
| On-line prístup: | Získať plný text |
| Tagy: |
Pridať tag
Žiadne tagy, Buďte prvý, kto otaguje tento záznam!
|
| Abstract | Background
Medical revalidation is the process by which all licensed doctors are legally required to demonstrate that they are up to date and fit to practise in order to maintain their licence. Revalidation was introduced in the United Kingdom (UK) in 2012, constituting significant change in the regulation of doctors. The governing body, the General Medical Council (GMC), envisages that revalidation will improve patient care and safety. This potential however is, in part, dependent upon how successfully revalidation is embedded into routine practice. The aim of this study was to use Normalisation Process Theory (NPT) to explore issues contributing to or impeding the implementation of revalidation in practice.
Methods
We conducted seventy-one interviews with sixty UK policymakers and senior leaders at different points during the development and implementation of revalidation: in 2011 (
n
= 31), 2013 (
n
= 26) and 2015 (
n
= 14). We selected interviewees using purposeful sampling. NPT was used as a framework to enable systematic analysis across the interview sets.
Results
Initial lack of consensus over revalidation’s purpose, and scepticism about its value, decreased over time as participants recognised the benefits it brought to their practice (coherence category of NPT). Though acceptance increased across time, revalidation was not seen as a legitimate part of their role by all doctors. Key individuals, notably the Responsible Officer (RO), were vital for the successful implementation of revalidation in organisations (cognitive participation category). The ease with which revalidation could be integrated into working practices varied greatly depending on the type of role a doctor held and the organisation they work for and the provision of resources was a significant variable in this (collective action category). Formal evaluation of revalidation in organisations was lacking but informal evaluation was taking place. Revalidation had not yet reached the stage where feedback was being used for improvement (reflexive monitoring category).
Conclusions
Requiring all organisations to use the same revalidation model made revalidation easy to integrate into existing work for some but problematic for others. In order for revalidation to be fully embedded and successful, impeding factors, such as a lack of resources, need to be addressed. |
|---|---|
| AbstractList | Abstract Background Medical revalidation is the process by which all licensed doctors are legally required to demonstrate that they are up to date and fit to practise in order to maintain their licence. Revalidation was introduced in the United Kingdom (UK) in 2012, constituting significant change in the regulation of doctors. The governing body, the General Medical Council (GMC), envisages that revalidation will improve patient care and safety. This potential however is, in part, dependent upon how successfully revalidation is embedded into routine practice. The aim of this study was to use Normalisation Process Theory (NPT) to explore issues contributing to or impeding the implementation of revalidation in practice. Methods We conducted seventy-one interviews with sixty UK policymakers and senior leaders at different points during the development and implementation of revalidation: in 2011 (n = 31), 2013 (n = 26) and 2015 (n = 14). We selected interviewees using purposeful sampling. NPT was used as a framework to enable systematic analysis across the interview sets. Results Initial lack of consensus over revalidation’s purpose, and scepticism about its value, decreased over time as participants recognised the benefits it brought to their practice (coherence category of NPT). Though acceptance increased across time, revalidation was not seen as a legitimate part of their role by all doctors. Key individuals, notably the Responsible Officer (RO), were vital for the successful implementation of revalidation in organisations (cognitive participation category). The ease with which revalidation could be integrated into working practices varied greatly depending on the type of role a doctor held and the organisation they work for and the provision of resources was a significant variable in this (collective action category). Formal evaluation of revalidation in organisations was lacking but informal evaluation was taking place. Revalidation had not yet reached the stage where feedback was being used for improvement (reflexive monitoring category). Conclusions Requiring all organisations to use the same revalidation model made revalidation easy to integrate into existing work for some but problematic for others. In order for revalidation to be fully embedded and successful, impeding factors, such as a lack of resources, need to be addressed. Medical revalidation is the process by which all licensed doctors are legally required to demonstrate that they are up to date and fit to practise in order to maintain their licence. Revalidation was introduced in the United Kingdom (UK) in 2012, constituting significant change in the regulation of doctors. The governing body, the General Medical Council (GMC), envisages that revalidation will improve patient care and safety. This potential however is, in part, dependent upon how successfully revalidation is embedded into routine practice. The aim of this study was to use Normalisation Process Theory (NPT) to explore issues contributing to or impeding the implementation of revalidation in practice. We conducted seventy-one interviews with sixty UK policymakers and senior leaders at different points during the development and implementation of revalidation: in 2011 (n = 31), 2013 (n = 26) and 2015 (n = 14). We selected interviewees using purposeful sampling. NPT was used as a framework to enable systematic analysis across the interview sets. Initial lack of consensus over revalidation's purpose, and scepticism about its value, decreased over time as participants recognised the benefits it brought to their practice (coherence category of NPT). Though acceptance increased across time, revalidation was not seen as a legitimate part of their role by all doctors. Key individuals, notably the Responsible Officer (RO), were vital for the successful implementation of revalidation in organisations (cognitive participation category). The ease with which revalidation could be integrated into working practices varied greatly depending on the type of role a doctor held and the organisation they work for and the provision of resources was a significant variable in this (collective action category). Formal evaluation of revalidation in organisations was lacking but informal evaluation was taking place. Revalidation had not yet reached the stage where feedback was being used for improvement (reflexive monitoring category). Requiring all organisations to use the same revalidation model made revalidation easy to integrate into existing work for some but problematic for others. In order for revalidation to be fully embedded and successful, impeding factors, such as a lack of resources, need to be addressed. Background Medical revalidation is the process by which all licensed doctors are legally required to demonstrate that they are up to date and fit to practise in order to maintain their licence. Revalidation was introduced in the United Kingdom (UK) in 2012, constituting significant change in the regulation of doctors. The governing body, the General Medical Council (GMC), envisages that revalidation will improve patient care and safety. This potential however is, in part, dependent upon how successfully revalidation is embedded into routine practice. The aim of this study was to use Normalisation Process Theory (NPT) to explore issues contributing to or impeding the implementation of revalidation in practice. Methods We conducted seventy-one interviews with sixty UK policymakers and senior leaders at different points during the development and implementation of revalidation: in 2011 ( n = 31), 2013 ( n = 26) and 2015 ( n = 14). We selected interviewees using purposeful sampling. NPT was used as a framework to enable systematic analysis across the interview sets. Results Initial lack of consensus over revalidation’s purpose, and scepticism about its value, decreased over time as participants recognised the benefits it brought to their practice (coherence category of NPT). Though acceptance increased across time, revalidation was not seen as a legitimate part of their role by all doctors. Key individuals, notably the Responsible Officer (RO), were vital for the successful implementation of revalidation in organisations (cognitive participation category). The ease with which revalidation could be integrated into working practices varied greatly depending on the type of role a doctor held and the organisation they work for and the provision of resources was a significant variable in this (collective action category). Formal evaluation of revalidation in organisations was lacking but informal evaluation was taking place. Revalidation had not yet reached the stage where feedback was being used for improvement (reflexive monitoring category). Conclusions Requiring all organisations to use the same revalidation model made revalidation easy to integrate into existing work for some but problematic for others. In order for revalidation to be fully embedded and successful, impeding factors, such as a lack of resources, need to be addressed. Background Medical revalidation is the process by which all licensed doctors are legally required to demonstrate that they are up to date and fit to practise in order to maintain their licence. Revalidation was introduced in the United Kingdom (UK) in 2012, constituting significant change in the regulation of doctors. The governing body, the General Medical Council (GMC), envisages that revalidation will improve patient care and safety. This potential however is, in part, dependent upon how successfully revalidation is embedded into routine practice. The aim of this study was to use Normalisation Process Theory (NPT) to explore issues contributing to or impeding the implementation of revalidation in practice. Methods We conducted seventy-one interviews with sixty UK policymakers and senior leaders at different points during the development and implementation of revalidation: in 2011 (n = 31), 2013 (n = 26) and 2015 (n = 14). We selected interviewees using purposeful sampling. NPT was used as a framework to enable systematic analysis across the interview sets. Results Initial lack of consensus over revalidation’s purpose, and scepticism about its value, decreased over time as participants recognised the benefits it brought to their practice (coherence category of NPT). Though acceptance increased across time, revalidation was not seen as a legitimate part of their role by all doctors. Key individuals, notably the Responsible Officer (RO), were vital for the successful implementation of revalidation in organisations (cognitive participation category). The ease with which revalidation could be integrated into working practices varied greatly depending on the type of role a doctor held and the organisation they work for and the provision of resources was a significant variable in this (collective action category). Formal evaluation of revalidation in organisations was lacking but informal evaluation was taking place. Revalidation had not yet reached the stage where feedback was being used for improvement (reflexive monitoring category). Conclusions Requiring all organisations to use the same revalidation model made revalidation easy to integrate into existing work for some but problematic for others. In order for revalidation to be fully embedded and successful, impeding factors, such as a lack of resources, need to be addressed. Medical revalidation is the process by which all licensed doctors are legally required to demonstrate that they are up to date and fit to practise in order to maintain their licence. Revalidation was introduced in the United Kingdom (UK) in 2012, constituting significant change in the regulation of doctors. The governing body, the General Medical Council (GMC), envisages that revalidation will improve patient care and safety. This potential however is, in part, dependent upon how successfully revalidation is embedded into routine practice. The aim of this study was to use Normalisation Process Theory (NPT) to explore issues contributing to or impeding the implementation of revalidation in practice.BACKGROUNDMedical revalidation is the process by which all licensed doctors are legally required to demonstrate that they are up to date and fit to practise in order to maintain their licence. Revalidation was introduced in the United Kingdom (UK) in 2012, constituting significant change in the regulation of doctors. The governing body, the General Medical Council (GMC), envisages that revalidation will improve patient care and safety. This potential however is, in part, dependent upon how successfully revalidation is embedded into routine practice. The aim of this study was to use Normalisation Process Theory (NPT) to explore issues contributing to or impeding the implementation of revalidation in practice.We conducted seventy-one interviews with sixty UK policymakers and senior leaders at different points during the development and implementation of revalidation: in 2011 (n = 31), 2013 (n = 26) and 2015 (n = 14). We selected interviewees using purposeful sampling. NPT was used as a framework to enable systematic analysis across the interview sets.METHODSWe conducted seventy-one interviews with sixty UK policymakers and senior leaders at different points during the development and implementation of revalidation: in 2011 (n = 31), 2013 (n = 26) and 2015 (n = 14). We selected interviewees using purposeful sampling. NPT was used as a framework to enable systematic analysis across the interview sets.Initial lack of consensus over revalidation's purpose, and scepticism about its value, decreased over time as participants recognised the benefits it brought to their practice (coherence category of NPT). Though acceptance increased across time, revalidation was not seen as a legitimate part of their role by all doctors. Key individuals, notably the Responsible Officer (RO), were vital for the successful implementation of revalidation in organisations (cognitive participation category). The ease with which revalidation could be integrated into working practices varied greatly depending on the type of role a doctor held and the organisation they work for and the provision of resources was a significant variable in this (collective action category). Formal evaluation of revalidation in organisations was lacking but informal evaluation was taking place. Revalidation had not yet reached the stage where feedback was being used for improvement (reflexive monitoring category).RESULTSInitial lack of consensus over revalidation's purpose, and scepticism about its value, decreased over time as participants recognised the benefits it brought to their practice (coherence category of NPT). Though acceptance increased across time, revalidation was not seen as a legitimate part of their role by all doctors. Key individuals, notably the Responsible Officer (RO), were vital for the successful implementation of revalidation in organisations (cognitive participation category). The ease with which revalidation could be integrated into working practices varied greatly depending on the type of role a doctor held and the organisation they work for and the provision of resources was a significant variable in this (collective action category). Formal evaluation of revalidation in organisations was lacking but informal evaluation was taking place. Revalidation had not yet reached the stage where feedback was being used for improvement (reflexive monitoring category).Requiring all organisations to use the same revalidation model made revalidation easy to integrate into existing work for some but problematic for others. In order for revalidation to be fully embedded and successful, impeding factors, such as a lack of resources, need to be addressed.CONCLUSIONSRequiring all organisations to use the same revalidation model made revalidation easy to integrate into existing work for some but problematic for others. In order for revalidation to be fully embedded and successful, impeding factors, such as a lack of resources, need to be addressed. Medical revalidation is the process by which all licensed doctors are legally required to demonstrate that they are up to date and fit to practise in order to maintain their licence. Revalidation was introduced in the United Kingdom (UK) in 2012, constituting significant change in the regulation of doctors. The governing body, the General Medical Council (GMC), envisages that revalidation will improve patient care and safety. This potential however is, in part, dependent upon how successfully revalidation is embedded into routine practice. The aim of this study was to use Normalisation Process Theory (NPT) to explore issues contributing to or impeding the implementation of revalidation in practice. We conducted seventy-one interviews with sixty UK policymakers and senior leaders at different points during the development and implementation of revalidation: in 2011 (n = 31), 2013 (n = 26) and 2015 (n = 14). We selected interviewees using purposeful sampling. NPT was used as a framework to enable systematic analysis across the interview sets. Initial lack of consensus over revalidation's purpose, and scepticism about its value, decreased over time as participants recognised the benefits it brought to their practice (coherence category of NPT). Though acceptance increased across time, revalidation was not seen as a legitimate part of their role by all doctors. Key individuals, notably the Responsible Officer (RO), were vital for the successful implementation of revalidation in organisations (cognitive participation category). The ease with which revalidation could be integrated into working practices varied greatly depending on the type of role a doctor held and the organisation they work for and the provision of resources was a significant variable in this (collective action category). Formal evaluation of revalidation in organisations was lacking but informal evaluation was taking place. Revalidation had not yet reached the stage where feedback was being used for improvement (reflexive monitoring category). Requiring all organisations to use the same revalidation model made revalidation easy to integrate into existing work for some but problematic for others. In order for revalidation to be fully embedded and successful, impeding factors, such as a lack of resources, need to be addressed. Background Medical revalidation is the process by which all licensed doctors are legally required to demonstrate that they are up to date and fit to practise in order to maintain their licence. Revalidation was introduced in the United Kingdom (UK) in 2012, constituting significant change in the regulation of doctors. The governing body, the General Medical Council (GMC), envisages that revalidation will improve patient care and safety. This potential however is, in part, dependent upon how successfully revalidation is embedded into routine practice. The aim of this study was to use Normalisation Process Theory (NPT) to explore issues contributing to or impeding the implementation of revalidation in practice. Methods We conducted seventy-one interviews with sixty UK policymakers and senior leaders at different points during the development and implementation of revalidation: in 2011 (n = 31), 2013 (n = 26) and 2015 (n = 14). We selected interviewees using purposeful sampling. NPT was used as a framework to enable systematic analysis across the interview sets. Results Initial lack of consensus over revalidation's purpose, and scepticism about its value, decreased over time as participants recognised the benefits it brought to their practice (coherence category of NPT). Though acceptance increased across time, revalidation was not seen as a legitimate part of their role by all doctors. Key individuals, notably the Responsible Officer (RO), were vital for the successful implementation of revalidation in organisations (cognitive participation category). The ease with which revalidation could be integrated into working practices varied greatly depending on the type of role a doctor held and the organisation they work for and the provision of resources was a significant variable in this (collective action category). Formal evaluation of revalidation in organisations was lacking but informal evaluation was taking place. Revalidation had not yet reached the stage where feedback was being used for improvement (reflexive monitoring category). Conclusions Requiring all organisations to use the same revalidation model made revalidation easy to integrate into existing work for some but problematic for others. In order for revalidation to be fully embedded and successful, impeding factors, such as a lack of resources, need to be addressed. Keywords: Revalidation, Medical regulation, Policy implementation, Normalisation process theory |
| ArticleNumber | 749 |
| Audience | Academic |
| Author | Archer, Julian Ferguson, Jane de Bere, Sam Regan Boyd, Alan Walshe, Kieran Hillier, Charlotte Tazzyman, Abigail Tredinnick-Rowe, John |
| Author_xml | – sequence: 1 givenname: Abigail orcidid: 0000-0003-3441-241X surname: Tazzyman fullname: Tazzyman, Abigail email: abigail.tazzyman@manchester.ac.uk organization: Alliance Manchester Business School, The University of Manchester – sequence: 2 givenname: Jane surname: Ferguson fullname: Ferguson, Jane organization: Alliance Manchester Business School, The University of Manchester – sequence: 3 givenname: Charlotte surname: Hillier fullname: Hillier, Charlotte organization: Alliance Manchester Business School, The University of Manchester, Plymouth University – sequence: 4 givenname: Alan surname: Boyd fullname: Boyd, Alan organization: Alliance Manchester Business School, The University of Manchester – sequence: 5 givenname: John surname: Tredinnick-Rowe fullname: Tredinnick-Rowe, John organization: Plymouth University – sequence: 6 givenname: Julian surname: Archer fullname: Archer, Julian organization: Plymouth University – sequence: 7 givenname: Sam Regan surname: de Bere fullname: de Bere, Sam Regan organization: Plymouth University – sequence: 8 givenname: Kieran surname: Walshe fullname: Walshe, Kieran organization: Alliance Manchester Business School, The University of Manchester |
| BackLink | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29157254$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed |
| BookMark | eNp9kktr3DAUhU1JaR7tD-imGLrpxqkkW68uCiH0EQh0k-4KQpavZzTY0lTyBPLvcx2nSSa0xQsb6Tvn-lzOcXEQYoCieEvJKaVKfMyUaVpXhMqKSUoq_qI4oo1kldCiPnjyfVgc57whCComXxWHKOOS8eao-HW1htKP2wFGCJOdfAxl7MsROu_sUCa4toPv7s4_lTaUNmfIeWbLXfZhVYaYRkTyIt2m6PC-nNYQ083r4mVvhwxv7t8nxc-vX67Ov1eXP75dnJ9dVk6Qeqqk1KqTVDjesK6F1llLegfaaS1YV9Ou7_qWCUkc1ZhG9Uq7VvSqZi2n3Nn6pLhYfLtoN2ab_GjTjYnWm7uDmFbGpsm7AQyhlDBFLDrJximwhHQgwHFQBJxq0Ovz4rXdtbgFh0mTHfZM92-CX5tVvDZcaElUjQYf7g1S_L2DPJnRZwfDYAPEXTY4WWitGsURff8M3cRdCrgqwxhidOYeqZXFAD70Eee62dSc8UawhstGIHX6FwqfDkbvsDe9x_M9wbunQR8S_ukGAnQBXIo5J-gfEErM3D-z9A93Ks3cPzMnks80zi-twr_xw3-VbFFmnBJWkB538W_RLY617qY |
| CitedBy_id | crossref_primary_10_1016_j_jpedsurg_2024_04_021 crossref_primary_10_1111_hex_14156 crossref_primary_10_1108_JICA_11_2018_0072 crossref_primary_10_1080_15332985_2025_2522730 crossref_primary_10_1186_s12875_020_01107_y crossref_primary_10_1186_s41077_023_00259_y crossref_primary_10_1111_medu_14678 crossref_primary_10_1186_s12913_023_10360_7 crossref_primary_10_1097_CEH_0000000000000312 crossref_primary_10_1186_s13012_018_0758_1 crossref_primary_10_1111_rego_12237 crossref_primary_10_1186_s12913_021_06438_9 crossref_primary_10_1111_hex_12999 crossref_primary_10_1186_s12913_020_05306_2 crossref_primary_10_1177_1355819619848017 crossref_primary_10_1186_s12961_024_01191_x crossref_primary_10_1371_journal_pone_0279651 crossref_primary_10_1186_s12913_021_06818_1 crossref_primary_10_1371_journal_pone_0275045 crossref_primary_10_1186_s12913_018_2973_5 crossref_primary_10_3389_fdgth_2020_575951 crossref_primary_10_1177_0141076819877539 |
| Cites_doi | 10.1016/S0140-6736(03)14546-1 10.2307/j.ctt1t89hns 10.1136/bmj.328.7441.684 10.1097/ACM.0000000000000464 10.1108/09670731011060270 10.1186/1748-5908-8-1 10.1093/jamia/ocv097 10.1186/s12911-016-0285-4 10.1186/1748-5908-9-2 10.1370/afm.1249 10.1111/hex.12237 10.1136/bmj.320.7227.114 10.1186/1472-6963-11-245 10.1001/jama.2009.1620 10.1111/j.1468-0408.2005.00213.x 10.1016/j.socscimed.2006.01.034 10.1186/1748-5908-8-43 |
| ContentType | Journal Article |
| Copyright | The Author(s). 2017 COPYRIGHT 2017 BioMed Central Ltd. 2017. This work is licensed under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License. |
| Copyright_xml | – notice: The Author(s). 2017 – notice: COPYRIGHT 2017 BioMed Central Ltd. – notice: 2017. This work is licensed under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License. |
| DBID | C6C AAYXX CITATION CGR CUY CVF ECM EIF NPM 3V. 7RV 7WY 7WZ 7X7 7XB 87Z 88C 88E 8FI 8FJ 8FK 8FL ABUWG AFKRA AZQEC BENPR BEZIV CCPQU DWQXO FRNLG FYUFA F~G GHDGH K60 K6~ K9. KB0 L.- M0C M0S M0T M1P NAPCQ PHGZM PHGZT PIMPY PJZUB PKEHL PPXIY PQBIZ PQBZA PQEST PQQKQ PQUKI PRINS Q9U 7X8 5PM DOA |
| DOI | 10.1186/s12913-017-2710-5 |
| DatabaseName | Springer Nature OA Free Journals CrossRef Medline MEDLINE MEDLINE (Ovid) MEDLINE MEDLINE PubMed ProQuest Central (Corporate) Nursing & Allied Health Database ABI/INFORM Collection ABI/INFORM Global (PDF only) Health & Medical Collection ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016) ABI/INFORM Collection Healthcare Administration Database (Alumni) Medical Database (Alumni Edition) ProQuest Hospital Collection Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition) ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016) ABI/INFORM Collection (Alumni) ProQuest Central (Alumni) ProQuest Central UK/Ireland ProQuest Central Essentials - QC Proquest Business Premium Collection ProQuest One ProQuest Central Business Premium Collection (Alumni) Proquest Health Research Premium Collection ABI/INFORM Global (Corporate) Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni) ProQuest Business Collection (Alumni Edition) ProQuest Business Collection ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni) Nursing & Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition) ABI/INFORM Professional Advanced ABI/INFORM Global ProQuest Health & Medical Collection Healthcare Administration Database (ProQuest) Medical Database Nursing & Allied Health Premium ProQuest Central Premium ProQuest One Academic (New) Publicly Available Content Database ProQuest Health & Medical Research Collection ProQuest One Academic Middle East (New) One Health & Nursing ProQuest One Business ProQuest One Business (Alumni) ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE) ProQuest One Academic (retired) ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition ProQuest Central China ProQuest Central Basic MEDLINE - Academic PubMed Central (Full Participant titles) DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals |
| DatabaseTitle | CrossRef MEDLINE Medline Complete MEDLINE with Full Text PubMed MEDLINE (Ovid) Publicly Available Content Database ABI/INFORM Global (Corporate) ProQuest Business Collection (Alumni Edition) ProQuest One Business ProQuest One Academic Middle East (New) ProQuest Central Essentials ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni) ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition) ProQuest One Community College ProQuest One Health & Nursing ProQuest Central China ABI/INFORM Complete ProQuest Central ABI/INFORM Professional Advanced ProQuest Health & Medical Research Collection Health Research Premium Collection Health and Medicine Complete (Alumni Edition) ProQuest Central Korea Health & Medical Research Collection ProQuest Central (New) ProQuest Medical Library (Alumni) ABI/INFORM Complete (Alumni Edition) Business Premium Collection ABI/INFORM Global ABI/INFORM Global (Alumni Edition) ProQuest Central Basic ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition ProQuest Health Management ProQuest Nursing & Allied Health Source ProQuest Hospital Collection Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni) ProQuest Business Collection ProQuest Hospital Collection (Alumni) Nursing & Allied Health Premium ProQuest Health & Medical Complete ProQuest Medical Library ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition ProQuest Health Management (Alumni Edition) ProQuest One Business (Alumni) ProQuest Nursing & Allied Health Source (Alumni) ProQuest One Academic ProQuest One Academic (New) ProQuest Central (Alumni) Business Premium Collection (Alumni) MEDLINE - Academic |
| DatabaseTitleList | Publicly Available Content Database MEDLINE - Academic MEDLINE |
| Database_xml | – sequence: 1 dbid: DOA name: DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals url: https://www.doaj.org/ sourceTypes: Open Website – sequence: 2 dbid: NPM name: PubMed url: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed sourceTypes: Index Database – sequence: 3 dbid: 7RV name: Nursing & Allied Health Database url: https://search.proquest.com/nahs sourceTypes: Aggregation Database |
| DeliveryMethod | fulltext_linktorsrc |
| Discipline | Medicine Public Health |
| EISSN | 1472-6963 |
| EndPage | 14 |
| ExternalDocumentID | oai_doaj_org_article_0110280a19674c8ea00de6ec5e80ec84 PMC5697083 A546245746 29157254 10_1186_s12913_017_2710_5 |
| Genre | Journal Article |
| GeographicLocations | United Kingdom--UK |
| GeographicLocations_xml | – name: United Kingdom--UK |
| GrantInformation_xml | – fundername: Department of Health grantid: PR-R9-0114-11002 funderid: http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100000276 – fundername: Department of Health grantid: PR-R9-0114-11002 – fundername: Department of Health grantid: CDF-2011-04-004 – fundername: ; grantid: PR-R9-0114-11002 |
| GroupedDBID | --- 0R~ 23N 2WC 44B 53G 5VS 6J9 6PF 7RV 7WY 7X7 88E 8FI 8FJ 8FL AAFWJ AAJSJ AASML AAWTL ABDBF ABUWG ACGFO ACGFS ACIHN ACUHS ADBBV ADRAZ ADUKV AEAQA AENEX AFKRA AFPKN AHBYD AHMBA AHYZX ALMA_UNASSIGNED_HOLDINGS AMKLP AMTXH AOIJS BAPOH BAWUL BCNDV BENPR BEZIV BFQNJ BMC BPHCQ BVXVI C6C CCPQU CS3 DIK DU5 DWQXO E3Z EAD EAP EAS EBD EBLON EBS EJD EMB EMK EMOBN ESX F5P FRNLG FYUFA GROUPED_DOAJ GX1 H13 HMCUK HYE IAO IHR INH INR ITC K60 K6~ KQ8 M0C M0T M1P M48 M~E NAPCQ O5R O5S OK1 OVT P2P PGMZT PHGZM PHGZT PIMPY PJZUB PPXIY PQBIZ PQBZA PQQKQ PROAC PSQYO PUEGO RBZ RNS ROL RPM RSV SMD SOJ SV3 TR2 TUS UKHRP W2D WOQ WOW XSB AAYXX AFFHD CITATION ALIPV CGR CUY CVF ECM EIF NPM 3V. 7XB 8FK AHSBF AZQEC K9. L.- PKEHL PQEST PQUKI PRINS Q9U 7X8 5PM |
| ID | FETCH-LOGICAL-c603t-7798d716c542dbebcaa0fce9c9962d31dfdfb2670c196968f89cb6f832b515ca3 |
| IEDL.DBID | DOA |
| ISICitedReferencesCount | 23 |
| ISICitedReferencesURI | http://www.webofscience.com/api/gateway?GWVersion=2&SrcApp=Summon&SrcAuth=ProQuest&DestLinkType=CitingArticles&DestApp=WOS_CPL&KeyUT=000416044100004&url=https%3A%2F%2Fcvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com%2F%23%21%2Fsearch%3Fho%3Df%26include.ft.matches%3Dt%26l%3Dnull%26q%3D |
| ISSN | 1472-6963 |
| IngestDate | Mon Nov 10 04:26:26 EST 2025 Tue Nov 04 02:05:26 EST 2025 Wed Oct 01 14:10:04 EDT 2025 Tue Oct 07 05:28:41 EDT 2025 Tue Nov 11 10:29:29 EST 2025 Tue Nov 04 17:38:31 EST 2025 Mon Jul 21 06:04:09 EDT 2025 Tue Nov 18 22:34:21 EST 2025 Sat Nov 29 05:23:00 EST 2025 Sat Sep 06 07:30:32 EDT 2025 |
| IsDoiOpenAccess | true |
| IsOpenAccess | true |
| IsPeerReviewed | true |
| IsScholarly | true |
| Issue | 1 |
| Keywords | Normalisation process theory Medical regulation Revalidation Policy implementation |
| Language | English |
| License | Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. |
| LinkModel | DirectLink |
| MergedId | FETCHMERGED-LOGICAL-c603t-7798d716c542dbebcaa0fce9c9962d31dfdfb2670c196968f89cb6f832b515ca3 |
| Notes | ObjectType-Article-1 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-2 content type line 14 content type line 23 |
| ORCID | 0000-0003-3441-241X |
| OpenAccessLink | https://doaj.org/article/0110280a19674c8ea00de6ec5e80ec84 |
| PMID | 29157254 |
| PQID | 2296619984 |
| PQPubID | 44821 |
| PageCount | 14 |
| ParticipantIDs | doaj_primary_oai_doaj_org_article_0110280a19674c8ea00de6ec5e80ec84 pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_5697083 proquest_miscellaneous_1966998485 proquest_journals_2296619984 gale_infotracmisc_A546245746 gale_infotracacademiconefile_A546245746 pubmed_primary_29157254 crossref_primary_10_1186_s12913_017_2710_5 crossref_citationtrail_10_1186_s12913_017_2710_5 springer_journals_10_1186_s12913_017_2710_5 |
| PublicationCentury | 2000 |
| PublicationDate | 2017-11-21 |
| PublicationDateYYYYMMDD | 2017-11-21 |
| PublicationDate_xml | – month: 11 year: 2017 text: 2017-11-21 day: 21 |
| PublicationDecade | 2010 |
| PublicationPlace | London |
| PublicationPlace_xml | – name: London – name: England |
| PublicationSubtitle | BMC series – open, inclusive and trusted |
| PublicationTitle | BMC health services research |
| PublicationTitleAbbrev | BMC Health Serv Res |
| PublicationTitleAlternate | BMC Health Serv Res |
| PublicationYear | 2017 |
| Publisher | BioMed Central BioMed Central Ltd Springer Nature B.V BMC |
| Publisher_xml | – name: BioMed Central – name: BioMed Central Ltd – name: Springer Nature B.V – name: BMC |
| References | 2710_CR18 JM Chamberlain (2710_CR2) 2015 CR May (2710_CR16) 2011; 11 E Tierney (2710_CR27) 2016; 19 M Eaton (2710_CR14) 2010; 18 J Green (2710_CR21) 2013 K Jacobs (2710_CR7) 2005; 21 2710_CR3 T van Zwanenberg (2710_CR11) 2004; 328 2710_CR1 J Archer (2710_CR5) 2015; 90 DH Irvine (2710_CR4) 2003 S Rosenburg (2710_CR13) 2011; 15 TL Finch (2710_CR6) 2013; 8 R Grol (2710_CR12) 2003; 362 C Pope (2710_CR24) 2000; 320 C May (2710_CR19) 2013; 8 K Gallacher (2710_CR25) 2011; 9 2710_CR28 D Gardener (2710_CR15) 2002 P Degeling (2710_CR8) 2006; 63 JM Chamberlain (2710_CR10) 2009 K Shaw (2710_CR9) 2009; 302 R McEvoy (2710_CR20) 2014; 9 AM Devlin (2710_CR17) 2016; 23 2710_CR22 2710_CR23 2710_CR26 |
| References_xml | – volume: 362 start-page: 1225 issue: 9391 year: 2003 ident: 2710_CR12 publication-title: Lancet doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(03)14546-1 – volume-title: Medical regulation, fitness to practice and revalidation year: 2015 ident: 2710_CR2 doi: 10.2307/j.ctt1t89hns – volume: 328 start-page: 684 issue: 7441 year: 2004 ident: 2710_CR11 publication-title: BMJ doi: 10.1136/bmj.328.7441.684 – ident: 2710_CR18 – ident: 2710_CR28 – volume: 90 start-page: 88 issue: 1 year: 2015 ident: 2710_CR5 publication-title: Acad Med doi: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000000464 – volume: 18 start-page: 30 issue: 5 year: 2010 ident: 2710_CR14 publication-title: Hum Resour Manag Int Dig doi: 10.1108/09670731011060270 – volume-title: Qualitative methods for health research year: 2013 ident: 2710_CR21 – volume: 15 start-page: 139 issue: 3 year: 2011 ident: 2710_CR13 publication-title: Info Syst – volume: 8 start-page: 1 issue: 1 year: 2013 ident: 2710_CR19 publication-title: Implement Sci doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-8-1 – ident: 2710_CR22 – volume: 23 start-page: 48 issue: 1 year: 2016 ident: 2710_CR17 publication-title: J Am Med Inform Assoc doi: 10.1093/jamia/ocv097 – ident: 2710_CR26 doi: 10.1186/s12911-016-0285-4 – volume: 9 start-page: 1 issue: 1 year: 2014 ident: 2710_CR20 publication-title: Implement Sci doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-9-2 – volume: 9 start-page: 235 issue: 3 year: 2011 ident: 2710_CR25 publication-title: Ann Family Med doi: 10.1370/afm.1249 – volume: 19 start-page: 501 issue: 3 year: 2016 ident: 2710_CR27 publication-title: Health Expect doi: 10.1111/hex.12237 – volume: 320 start-page: 114 issue: 7227 year: 2000 ident: 2710_CR24 publication-title: BMJ doi: 10.1136/bmj.320.7227.114 – ident: 2710_CR3 – ident: 2710_CR1 – volume-title: Doctoring medical governance: medical self-regulation in transition year: 2009 ident: 2710_CR10 – volume-title: Management and organizational behavior: an integrated perspective year: 2002 ident: 2710_CR15 – volume: 11 start-page: 245 year: 2011 ident: 2710_CR16 publication-title: BMC Health Serv Res doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-11-245 – volume: 302 start-page: 2008 issue: 18 year: 2009 ident: 2710_CR9 publication-title: JAMA doi: 10.1001/jama.2009.1620 – volume-title: The doctor's tale: professionalism and public trust year: 2003 ident: 2710_CR4 – volume: 21 start-page: 135 issue: 2 year: 2005 ident: 2710_CR7 publication-title: Germany Italy Financ Account Manag doi: 10.1111/j.1468-0408.2005.00213.x – volume: 63 start-page: 757 issue: 3 year: 2006 ident: 2710_CR8 publication-title: Soc Sci Med doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2006.01.034 – volume: 8 start-page: 1 issue: 1 year: 2013 ident: 2710_CR6 publication-title: Implement Sci doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-8-43 – ident: 2710_CR23 |
| SSID | ssj0017827 |
| Score | 2.3251538 |
| Snippet | Background
Medical revalidation is the process by which all licensed doctors are legally required to demonstrate that they are up to date and fit to practise... Medical revalidation is the process by which all licensed doctors are legally required to demonstrate that they are up to date and fit to practise in order to... Background Medical revalidation is the process by which all licensed doctors are legally required to demonstrate that they are up to date and fit to practise... Abstract Background Medical revalidation is the process by which all licensed doctors are legally required to demonstrate that they are up to date and fit to... |
| SourceID | doaj pubmedcentral proquest gale pubmed crossref springer |
| SourceType | Open Website Open Access Repository Aggregation Database Index Database Enrichment Source Publisher |
| StartPage | 749 |
| SubjectTerms | Accreditation - methods Accreditation - statistics & numerical data Analysis Clinical Competence - standards Data analysis Data collection Design Ethics governance and law Health Administration Health care industry Health Informatics Health policy Health services Humans Intervention Interviews Laws, regulations and rules Medical practices Medical profession Medical regulation Medicine Medicine & Public Health Normalisation process theory Nursing Research Patient care Patient Care - standards Patient Safety - standards Physicians Physicians - standards Policy implementation Public Health Qualitative research reform Research Article Research ethics Revalidation United Kingdom Writers |
| SummonAdditionalLinks | – databaseName: ABI/INFORM Global dbid: M0C link: http://cvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwpV3NaxUxEA9aPQjit3a1SgRBUJbuZpNs1ovUYvFi8aDQgxCy-agP2t3Xt6-C_70zm7ytW7EXr5sEMjuTmUlm5jeEvEJYpyqUKuehNTlY6CpvAme59x4uG3UrWhebTdSHh-roqPmSHtyGlFa50Ymjona9xTfyXcbAMceCMP5-eZZj1yiMrqYWGtfJDfRsMKXvc7E_RRHA-tUpklkquTuAbcNeBqCXGRjWXMxs0QjZ_7di_sMyXc6avBQ6HS3Swd3_peUeuZN8UboXhec-uea7B-R2fMijsT7pIfkOgkQXp5s0c-Qj7QM9jQEeukK48EVszPSOmo6aCeqTYk79Me3QKz5JWUN0GQsT6FhA-esR-Xbw8ev-pzy1ZMitLKo1-OKNcnDFsoIz12IilSmC9Y2FaxNzVemCCy2TdWEj7E5QjW1lALXRguNkTfWYbHV957cJBd-tddZWpuSBc-caMJRSNdJVToDjZzJSbJijbcIrx7YZJ3q8tyipIz818FMjP7XIyJtpyTKCdVw1-QNyfJqIONvjh351rNOx1egdMVUYoKbmVnlTFM5Lb4VXhbeKZ-Q1yotGbQCbsyYVNQCJiKul9wSXjIuay4zszGbCKbbz4Y2o6KRFBn0hJxl5OQ3jSsyM63x_PmjYmcQZCgh6EgV0IgkoFjUTsLqeie6M5vlIt_gxYowL2dTgnWfk7UbIL7b1z1_69GoinpFbDA9fWeas3CFb69W5f05u2p_rxbB6MR7d30X3S6I priority: 102 providerName: ProQuest – databaseName: SpringerLink Contemporary Journals dbid: RSV link: http://cvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwnR1ra9UwNOgUEcTH1K06JYIgKGVtmqSp36Y4_OIQX-yDENI85oWtd9zeCf57z2nSaucD9OvNCTcnOc-eFyGPsa1TFUqV89CaHDR0lTeBs9x7D85G3YrWxWET9cGBOjxs3qY67n7Mdh9DkoOkHthayd0eNBNOIgCpykAt5uIiuQTaTuG8hnfvP02hA1B5dQpf_nbbTAENffp_lcY_qaPzqZLn4qWDGtq_8V8I3CTXk9VJ9yKZ3CIXfLdJrrxJcfVNci1-vaOxKOk2-QzUQxcnY245Ph5dBnoSozp0hT3CF3Ea03NqOmqm_p4UE-mPaIem8HFKFaKnsRqBDlWT3-6Qj_uvPrx8nac5DLmVRbUGA7xRDvwqKzhzLWZPmSJY31jwlZirShdcaJmsCxt77QTV2FYGkBUtWEvWVHfJRrfs_DahYLC1ztrKlDxw7lwD2lGqRrrKCbD2TEaK8XG0TU3KcVbGsR6cFSV1vEUNt6jxFrXIyNNpy2ns0PE34Bf44hMgNtcefliujnTiVY0mEVOFAWxqbpU3ReG89FZ4VXireEaeIL1oFAFwOGtSJQOgiM209J7gknFRc5mRnRkksK6dL48Up5Po6DVj4IFi5SP8z6NpGXdiOlznl2e9hpNJhFCA0FYk0AklwFjU4PZnpJ6R7gzn-Uq3-DI0FheyqcEkz8izkYB_HOuPV3rvn6Dvk6sMOaAsc1bukI316sw_IJft1_WiXz0cOPk7FzxESQ priority: 102 providerName: Springer Nature |
| Title | The implementation of medical revalidation: an assessment using normalisation process theory |
| URI | https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12913-017-2710-5 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29157254 https://www.proquest.com/docview/2296619984 https://www.proquest.com/docview/1966998485 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/PMC5697083 https://doaj.org/article/0110280a19674c8ea00de6ec5e80ec84 |
| Volume | 17 |
| WOSCitedRecordID | wos000416044100004&url=https%3A%2F%2Fcvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com%2F%23%21%2Fsearch%3Fho%3Df%26include.ft.matches%3Dt%26l%3Dnull%26q%3D |
| hasFullText | 1 |
| inHoldings | 1 |
| isFullTextHit | |
| isPrint | |
| journalDatabaseRights | – providerCode: PRVADU databaseName: BioMed Central Open Access Free customDbUrl: eissn: 1472-6963 dateEnd: 99991231 omitProxy: false ssIdentifier: ssj0017827 issn: 1472-6963 databaseCode: RBZ dateStart: 20010101 isFulltext: true titleUrlDefault: https://www.biomedcentral.com/search/ providerName: BioMedCentral – providerCode: PRVAON databaseName: DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals customDbUrl: eissn: 1472-6963 dateEnd: 99991231 omitProxy: false ssIdentifier: ssj0017827 issn: 1472-6963 databaseCode: DOA dateStart: 20010101 isFulltext: true titleUrlDefault: https://www.doaj.org/ providerName: Directory of Open Access Journals – providerCode: PRVHPJ databaseName: ROAD: Directory of Open Access Scholarly Resources customDbUrl: eissn: 1472-6963 dateEnd: 99991231 omitProxy: false ssIdentifier: ssj0017827 issn: 1472-6963 databaseCode: M~E dateStart: 20010101 isFulltext: true titleUrlDefault: https://road.issn.org providerName: ISSN International Centre – providerCode: PRVPQU databaseName: ABI/INFORM Collection customDbUrl: eissn: 1472-6963 dateEnd: 99991231 omitProxy: false ssIdentifier: ssj0017827 issn: 1472-6963 databaseCode: 7WY dateStart: 20090101 isFulltext: true titleUrlDefault: https://www.proquest.com/abicomplete providerName: ProQuest – providerCode: PRVPQU databaseName: ABI/INFORM Global customDbUrl: eissn: 1472-6963 dateEnd: 99991231 omitProxy: false ssIdentifier: ssj0017827 issn: 1472-6963 databaseCode: M0C dateStart: 20090101 isFulltext: true titleUrlDefault: https://search.proquest.com/abiglobal providerName: ProQuest – providerCode: PRVPQU databaseName: Health & Medical Collection customDbUrl: eissn: 1472-6963 dateEnd: 99991231 omitProxy: false ssIdentifier: ssj0017827 issn: 1472-6963 databaseCode: 7X7 dateStart: 20090101 isFulltext: true titleUrlDefault: https://search.proquest.com/healthcomplete providerName: ProQuest – providerCode: PRVPQU databaseName: Healthcare Administration Database (ProQuest) customDbUrl: eissn: 1472-6963 dateEnd: 99991231 omitProxy: false ssIdentifier: ssj0017827 issn: 1472-6963 databaseCode: M0T dateStart: 20090101 isFulltext: true titleUrlDefault: https://search.proquest.com/healthmanagement providerName: ProQuest – providerCode: PRVPQU databaseName: Nursing & Allied Health Database customDbUrl: eissn: 1472-6963 dateEnd: 99991231 omitProxy: false ssIdentifier: ssj0017827 issn: 1472-6963 databaseCode: 7RV dateStart: 20090101 isFulltext: true titleUrlDefault: https://search.proquest.com/nahs providerName: ProQuest – providerCode: PRVPQU databaseName: Proquest customDbUrl: eissn: 1472-6963 dateEnd: 99991231 omitProxy: false ssIdentifier: ssj0017827 issn: 1472-6963 databaseCode: BENPR dateStart: 20090101 isFulltext: true titleUrlDefault: https://www.proquest.com/central providerName: ProQuest – providerCode: PRVPQU databaseName: Publicly Available Content Database customDbUrl: eissn: 1472-6963 dateEnd: 99991231 omitProxy: false ssIdentifier: ssj0017827 issn: 1472-6963 databaseCode: PIMPY dateStart: 20090101 isFulltext: true titleUrlDefault: http://search.proquest.com/publiccontent providerName: ProQuest – providerCode: PRVAVX databaseName: SpringerLink Contemporary Journals customDbUrl: eissn: 1472-6963 dateEnd: 99991231 omitProxy: false ssIdentifier: ssj0017827 issn: 1472-6963 databaseCode: RSV dateStart: 20011201 isFulltext: true titleUrlDefault: https://link.springer.com/search?facet-content-type=%22Journal%22 providerName: Springer Nature |
| link | http://cvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwrV3db9MwED_B4AEJIT5HYFRGQkICRSROYju8bdMmeFhVlTGKhGQltgOVtnRqOyT-e-7sNCxDwAsv91A7qu27y93Fd78DeEGwTlmTqjhv6ipGC53FZZPz2DmHwYasi9qGZhNyPFazWTm51OqLcsICPHA4OGpUSrd_FUqKzI1yVZJYJ5wpnEqcUR4JNJHlJpjq7g_Q7snuDjNV4s0KrRp1McA3MkeTGhcDK-TB-n9_JV-ySVfzJa9cmnpbdHgX7nROJNsNi78H11x7H26HL3AsFBY9gC8oAWx-tskPJwawRcPOws0MWxLO9zx0VHrLqpZVPUYno2T4r6wld_a0S_dh56GigPnKxx8P4ePhwfH-u7jrpRAbkWRrdKJLZTE2MkXObU0ZUFXSGFcajHe4zVLb2KbmQiYm4OU0qjS1aFDfa_R4TJU9gq120brHwNDpqq0xWZXmTZ5bW6KFE6oUNrMFemxVBMnmbLXpgMap38Wp9gGHEjqwQyM7NLFDFxG86h85Dygbf5u8RwzrJxJAtv8BxUZ3YqP_JTYRvCR2a1JjXJypumoE3CIBYundIhc8L2QuItgZzET1M8PhjcDoTv1XmnOMIql6Ef_neT9MT1JKW-sWFyuNKxM0Q-GGtoN89VvCHRcSQ_cI5EDyBnsejrTzbx4cvBClRLc6gtcbGf21rD8e6ZP_caRP4RYnDUvTmKc7sLVeXrhncNN8X89XyxFcl9MTop8-E51JT9UIbuwdjCfTkddfpEfJvqfHODJ5fzSh2dMPJz8BEWJHQQ |
| linkProvider | Directory of Open Access Journals |
| linkToHtml | http://cvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMw1V1ba9RAFD7UKiiI90u06giKoIQmk8lkIojUamlpXXyo0AdhTGYmdaHNrrtbpX_K3-g5mSQ1FfvWB193ZpY5yXduOTeAZ9TWKaliFYqqLELU0EmYV4KHzjl0NrIyLa0fNpGNRmpvL_-0BL-6WhhKq-xkYiOo7cTQN_JVztEwp4Iw8Xb6PaSpURRd7UZoeFhsu-Of6LLN32y9x_f7nPOND7vrm2E7VSA0MkoWaE7myqKXYFLBbUm5QEVUGZcbtPy5TWJb2arkMouM7xxTqdyUskLkl6j7TZHg_16Ai0Ige1CqYLTeRy1Q22Zt5DRWcnWOupRmJ6Ae4KjIw3Sg-5oRAX8rgj804ekszVOh2kYDblz_357dDbjW2tpszTPHTVhy9S246j9UMl9_dRu-IKOw8WGXRk84ZZOKHfoAFptRO_SxHzz1mhU1K_pWpoxqBvZZTVb_QZsVxaa-8II1BaLHd-DzuRB4F5brSe3uA0PbtLTGJEUsKiGszdEQkCqXNrEpGrZFAFEHBm3afuw0FuRAN36ZktrjRyN-NOFHpwG87I9MfTOSsza_I4T1G6mPePPDZLavW7GkyfrjKiqQmkwY5Yoosk46kzoVOaNEAC8In5qkHV7OFG3RBpJIfcP0WiokF2kmZAArg50opcxwuYOmbqXkXJ_gMoCn_TKdpMy_2k2O5hpvJmmHQoLueYboSUKK04yneDobsMqA5uFKPf7W9FBPZZ6h9xHAq46pTq71z0f64GwinsDlzd2PO3pna7T9EK5wYvw4Dnm8AsuL2ZF7BJfMj8V4PnvciA0GX8-b134D08aqOA |
| linkToPdf | http://cvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwpV3ri9QwEA96yiGIj1PvVk-NIAhKuTZN0tRv52NR1OXAB_dBCG0e58Jdd9nuCf73zjRptecDxK-bhM0kM5mZzsxvCHmIsE65z1TCfV0loKHzpPScJc45cDaKWtQ2NJsoZjN1eFgexD6nbZ_t3ockQ00DojQ1672l9UHEldxrQUthVwJ4YRmoyEScJxc45tGju_7-0xBGAPVXxFDmb5eNlFGH2f_ry_yTajqbNnkmdtqppOnV_ybmGrkSrVG6H9jnOjnnmi2y-S7G27fI5fBVj4ZipRvkM3AVnZ_0Oed4qXTh6UmI9tAVYofPQ5emp7RqaDXgflJMsD-iDZrIxzGFiC5DlQLtqim_3SQfpy8_PH-VxP4MiZFpvgbDvFQW_C0jOLM1ZlVVqTeuNOBDMZtn1ltfM1mkJmDweFWaWnp4Q2qwokyV3yIbzaJxO4SCIVdbY_Iq455za0vQmlKV0uZWgBVYTUjaX5Q2Ebwce2gc686JUVKHU9RwihpPUYsJeTwsWQbkjr9Nfoa3P0xE0O3uh8XqSEcZ1mgqMZVWQE3BjXJVmlonnRFOpc4oPiGPkHc0Pg2wOVPFCgcgEUG29L7gknFRcDkhu6OZINJmPNxzn45PSqsZA88UKyLhfx4Mw7gS0-QatzhtNexM4gwFBG0HZh1IAopFwQSsLkZsPKJ5PNLMv3SA40KWBZjqE_KkZ-Yf2_rjkd7-p9n3yebBi6l--3r25g65xFAYsixh2S7ZWK9O3V1y0Xxdz9vVvU7AvwMvVlAR |
| openUrl | ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fsummon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=The+implementation+of+medical+revalidation%3A+an+assessment+using+normalisation+process+theory&rft.jtitle=BMC+health+services+research&rft.au=Abigail+Tazzyman&rft.au=Jane+Ferguson&rft.au=Charlotte+Hillier&rft.au=Alan+Boyd&rft.date=2017-11-21&rft.pub=BMC&rft.eissn=1472-6963&rft.volume=17&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=1&rft.epage=14&rft_id=info:doi/10.1186%2Fs12913-017-2710-5&rft.externalDBID=DOA&rft.externalDocID=oai_doaj_org_article_0110280a19674c8ea00de6ec5e80ec84 |
| thumbnail_l | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/lc.gif&issn=1472-6963&client=summon |
| thumbnail_m | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/mc.gif&issn=1472-6963&client=summon |
| thumbnail_s | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/sc.gif&issn=1472-6963&client=summon |