parts of action research report

Linking Research to Action: A Simple Guide to Writing an Action Research Report

What Is Action Research, and Why Do We Do It?

Action research is any research into practice undertaken by those involved in that practice, with the primary goal of encouraging continued reflection and making improvement. It can be done in any professional field, including medicine, nursing, social work, psychology, and education. Action research is particularly popular in the field of education. When it comes to teaching, practitioners may be interested in trying out different teaching methods in the classroom, but are unsure of their effectiveness. Action research provides an opportunity to explore the effectiveness of a particular teaching practice, the development of a curriculum, or your students’ learning, hence making continual improvement possible. In other words, the use of an interactive action-and-research process enables practitioners to get an idea of what they and their learners really do inside of the classroom, not merely what they think they can do. By doing this, it is hoped that both the teaching and the learning occurring in the classroom can be better tailored to fit the learners’ needs.

You may be wondering how action research differs from traditional research. The term itself already suggests that it is concerned with both “action” and “research,” as well as the association between the two. Kurt Lewin (1890-1947), a famous psychologist who coined this term, believed that there was “no action without research; no research without action” (Marrow, 1969, p.163). It is certainly possible, and perhaps commonplace, for people to try to have one without the other, but the unique combination of the two is what distinguishes action research from most other forms of enquiry. Traditional research emphasizes the review of prior research, rigorous control of the research design, and generalizable and preferably statistically significant results, all of which help examine the theoretical significance of the issue. Action research, with its emphasis on the insider’s perspective and the practical significance of a current issue, may instead allow less representative sampling, looser procedures, and the presentation of raw data and statistically insignificant results.

What Should We Include in an Action Research Report?

The components put into an action research report largely coincide with the steps used in the action research process. This process usually starts with a question or an observation about a current problem. After identifying the problem area and narrowing it down to make it more manageable for research, the development process continues as you devise an action plan to investigate your question. This will involve gathering data and evidence to support your solution. Common data collection methods include observation of individual or group behavior, taking audio or video recordings, distributing questionnaires or surveys, conducting interviews, asking for peer observations and comments, taking field notes, writing journals, and studying the work samples of your own and your target participants. You may choose to use more than one of these data collection methods. After you have selected your method and are analyzing the data you have collected, you will also reflect upon your entire process of action research. You may have a better solution to your question now, due to the increase of your available evidence. You may also think about the steps you will try next, or decide that the practice needs to be observed again with modifications. If so, the whole action research process starts all over again.

In brief, action research is more like a cyclical process, with the reflection upon your action and research findings affecting changes in your practice, which may lead to extended questions and further action. This brings us back to the essential steps of action research: identifying the problem, devising an action plan, implementing the plan, and finally, observing and reflecting upon the process. Your action research report should comprise all of these essential steps. Feldman and Weiss (n.d.) summarized them as five structural elements, which do not have to be written in a particular order. Your report should:

• Describe the context where the action research takes place. This could be, for example, the school in which you teach. Both features of the school and the population associated with it (e.g., students and parents) would be illustrated as well.
• Contain a statement of your research focus. This would explain where your research questions come from, the problem you intend to investigate, and the goals you want to achieve. You may also mention prior research studies you have read that are related to your action research study.
• Detail the method(s) used. This part includes the procedures you used to collect data, types of data in your report, and justification of your used strategies.
• Highlight the research findings. This is the part in which you observe and reflect upon your practice. By analyzing the evidence you have gathered, you will come to understand whether the initial problem has been solved or not, and what research you have yet to accomplish.
• Suggest implications. You may discuss how the findings of your research will affect your future practice, or explain any new research plans you have that have been inspired by this report’s action research.

The overall structure of your paper will actually look more or less the same as what we commonly see in traditional research papers.

What Else Do We Need to Pay Attention to?

We discussed the major differences between action research and traditional research in the beginning of this article. Due to the difference in the focus of an action research report, the language style used may not be the same as what we normally see or use in a standard research report. Although both kinds of research, both action and traditional, can be published in academic journals, action research may also be published and delivered in brief reports or on websites for a broader, non-academic audience. Instead of using the formal style of scientific research, you may find it more suitable to write in the first person and use a narrative style while documenting your details of the research process.

However, this does not forbid using an academic writing style, which undeniably enhances the credibility of a report. According to Johnson (2002), even though personal thoughts and observations are valued and recorded along the way, an action research report should not be written in a highly subjective manner. A personal, reflective writing style does not necessarily mean that descriptions are unfair or dishonest, but statements with value judgments, highly charged language, and emotional buzzwords are best avoided.

Furthermore, documenting every detail used in the process of research does not necessitate writing a lengthy report. The purpose of giving sufficient details is to let other practitioners trace your train of thought, learn from your examples, and possibly be able to duplicate your steps of research. This is why writing a clear report that does not bore or confuse your readers is essential.

Lastly, You May Ask, Why Do We Bother to Even Write an Action Research Report?

It sounds paradoxical that while practitioners tend to have a great deal of knowledge at their disposal, often they do not communicate their insights to others. Take education as an example: It is both regrettable and regressive if every teacher, no matter how professional he or she might be, only teaches in the way they were taught and fails to understand what their peer teachers know about their practice. Writing an action research report provides you with the chance to reflect upon your own practice, make substantiated claims linking research to action, and document action and ideas as they take place. The results can then be kept, both for the sake of your own future reference, and to also make the most of your insights through the act of sharing with your professional peers.

Feldman, A., & Weiss, T. (n.d.). Suggestions for writing the action research report . Retrieved from http://people.umass.edu/~afeldman/ARreadingmaterials/WritingARReport.html

Johnson, A. P. (2002). A short guide to action research . Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

Marrow, A. J. (1969). The practical theorist: The life and work of Kurt Lewin . New York, NY: Basic Books.

Tiffany Ip is a lecturer at Hong Kong Baptist University. She gained a PhD in neurolinguistics after completing her Bachelor’s degree in psychology and linguistics. She strives to utilize her knowledge to translate brain research findings into practical classroom instruction.

• Skip to main content
• Skip to primary sidebar
• Skip to footer
• QuestionPro

• Solutions Industries Gaming Automotive Sports and events Education Government Travel & Hospitality Financial Services Healthcare Cannabis Technology Use Case NPS+ Communities Audience Contactless surveys Mobile LivePolls Member Experience GDPR Positive People Science 360 Feedback Surveys
• Resources Blog eBooks Survey Templates Case Studies Training Help center

Home Market Research Research Tools and Apps

Action Research: What it is, Stages & Examples

The best way to get things accomplished is to do it yourself. This statement is utilized in corporations, community projects, and national governments. These organizations are relying on action research to cope with their continuously changing and unstable environments as they function in a more interdependent world.

In practical educational contexts, this involves using systematic inquiry and reflective practice to address real-world challenges, improve teaching and learning, enhance student engagement, and drive positive changes within the educational system.

This post outlines the definition of action research, its stages, and some examples.

Content Index

What is action research?

Stages of action research, the steps to conducting action research, examples of action research, advantages and disadvantages of action research.

Action research is a strategy that tries to find realistic solutions to organizations’ difficulties and issues. It is similar to applied research.

Action research refers basically learning by doing. First, a problem is identified, then some actions are taken to address it, then how well the efforts worked are measured, and if the results are not satisfactory, the steps are applied again.

It can be put into three different groups:

• Positivist: This type of research is also called “classical action research.” It considers research a social experiment. This research is used to test theories in the actual world.
• Interpretive: This kind of research is called “contemporary action research.” It thinks that business reality is socially made, and when doing this research, it focuses on the details of local and organizational factors.
• Critical: This action research cycle takes a critical reflection approach to corporate systems and tries to enhance them.

All research is about learning new things. Collaborative action research contributes knowledge based on investigations in particular and frequently useful circumstances. It starts with identifying a problem. After that, the research process is followed by the below stages:

Stage 1: Plan

For an action research project to go well, the researcher needs to plan it well. After coming up with an educational research topic or question after a research study, the first step is to develop an action plan to guide the research process. The research design aims to address the study’s question. The research strategy outlines what to undertake, when, and how.

Stage 2: Act

The next step is implementing the plan and gathering data. At this point, the researcher must select how to collect and organize research data . The researcher also needs to examine all tools and equipment before collecting data to ensure they are relevant, valid, and comprehensive.

Stage 3: Observe

Data observation is vital to any investigation. The action researcher needs to review the project’s goals and expectations before data observation. This is the final step before drawing conclusions and taking action.

Different kinds of graphs, charts, and networks can be used to represent the data. It assists in making judgments or progressing to the next stage of observing.

Stage 4: Reflect

This step involves applying a prospective solution and observing the results. It’s essential to see if the possible solution found through research can really solve the problem being studied.

The researcher must explore alternative ideas when the action research project’s solutions fail to solve the problem.

Action research is a systematic approach researchers, educators, and practitioners use to identify and address problems or challenges within a specific context. It involves a cyclical process of planning, implementing, reflecting, and adjusting actions based on the data collected. Here are the general steps involved in conducting an action research process:

Identify the action research question or problem

Clearly define the issue or problem you want to address through your research. It should be specific, actionable, and relevant to your working context.

Review existing knowledge

Conduct a literature review to understand what research has already been done on the topic. This will help you gain insights, identify gaps, and inform your research design.

Plan the research

Develop a research plan outlining your study’s objectives, methods, data collection tools, and timeline. Determine the scope of your research and the participants or stakeholders involved.

Collect data

Implement your research plan by collecting relevant data. This can involve various methods such as surveys, interviews, observations, document analysis, or focus groups. Ensure that your data collection methods align with your research objectives and allow you to gather the necessary information.

Analyze the data

Once you have collected the data, analyze it using appropriate qualitative or quantitative techniques. Look for patterns, themes, or trends in the data that can help you understand the problem better.

Reflect on the findings

Reflect on the analyzed data and interpret the results in the context of your research question. Consider the implications and possible solutions that emerge from the data analysis. This reflection phase is crucial for generating insights and understanding the underlying factors contributing to the problem.

Develop an action plan

Based on your analysis and reflection, develop an action plan that outlines the steps you will take to address the identified problem. The plan should be specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time-bound (SMART goals). Consider involving relevant stakeholders in planning to ensure their buy-in and support.

Implement the action plan

Put your action plan into practice by implementing the identified strategies or interventions. This may involve making changes to existing practices, introducing new approaches, or testing alternative solutions. Document the implementation process and any modifications made along the way.

Evaluate and monitor progress

Continuously monitor and evaluate the impact of your actions. Collect additional data, assess the effectiveness of the interventions, and measure progress towards your goals. This evaluation will help you determine if your actions have the desired effects and inform any necessary adjustments.

Reflect and iterate

Reflect on the outcomes of your actions and the evaluation results. Consider what worked well, what did not, and why. Use this information to refine your approach, make necessary adjustments, and plan for the next cycle of action research if needed.

Remember that participatory action research is an iterative process, and multiple cycles may be required to achieve significant improvements or solutions to the identified problem. Each cycle builds on the insights gained from the previous one, fostering continuous learning and improvement.

Explore Insightfully Contextual Inquiry in Qualitative Research

Here are two real-life examples of action research.

Action research initiatives are frequently situation-specific. Still, other researchers can adapt the techniques. The example is from a researcher’s (Franklin, 1994) report about a project encouraging nature tourism in the Caribbean.

In 1991, this was launched to study how nature tourism may be implemented on the four Windward Islands in the Caribbean: St. Lucia, Grenada, Dominica, and St. Vincent.

For environmental protection, a government-led action study determined that the consultation process needs to involve numerous stakeholders, including commercial enterprises.

First, two researchers undertook the study and held search conferences on each island. The search conferences resulted in suggestions and action plans for local community nature tourism sub-projects.

Several islands formed advisory groups and launched national awareness and community projects. Regional project meetings were held to discuss experiences, self-evaluations, and strategies. Creating a documentary about a local initiative helped build community. And the study was a success, leading to a number of changes in the area.

Lau and Hayward (1997) employed action research to analyze Internet-based collaborative work groups.

Over two years, the researchers facilitated three action research problem -solving cycles with 15 teachers, project personnel, and 25 health practitioners from diverse areas. The goal was to see how Internet-based communications might affect their virtual workgroup.

First, expectations were defined, technology was provided, and a bespoke workgroup system was developed. Participants suggested shorter, more dispersed training sessions with project-specific instructions.

The second phase saw the system’s complete deployment. The final cycle witnessed system stability and virtual group formation. The key lesson was that the learning curve was poorly misjudged, with frustrations only marginally met by phone-based technical help. According to the researchers, the absence of high-quality online material about community healthcare was harmful.

Role clarity, connection building, knowledge sharing, resource assistance, and experiential learning are vital for virtual group growth. More study is required on how group support systems might assist groups in engaging with their external environment and boost group members’ learning. 

Action research has both good and bad points.

• It is very flexible, so researchers can change their analyses to fit their needs and make individual changes.
• It offers a quick and easy way to solve problems that have been going on for a long time instead of complicated, long-term solutions based on complex facts.
• If It is done right, it can be very powerful because it can lead to social change and give people the tools to make that change in ways that are important to their communities.

Disadvantages

• These studies have a hard time being generalized and are hard to repeat because they are so flexible. Because the researcher has the power to draw conclusions, they are often not thought to be theoretically sound.
• Setting up an action study in an ethical way can be hard. People may feel like they have to take part or take part in a certain way.
• It is prone to research errors like selection bias , social desirability bias, and other cognitive biases.

LEARN ABOUT: Self-Selection Bias

This post discusses how action research generates knowledge, its steps, and real-life examples. It is very applicable to the field of research and has a high level of relevance. We can only state that the purpose of this research is to comprehend an issue and find a solution to it.

At QuestionPro, we give researchers tools for collecting data, like our survey software, and a library of insights for any long-term study. Go to the Insight Hub if you want to see a demo or learn more about it.

LEARN MORE         FREE TRIAL

Frequently Asked Questions(FAQ’s)

Action research is a systematic approach to inquiry that involves identifying a problem or challenge in a practical context, implementing interventions or changes, collecting and analyzing data, and using the findings to inform decision-making and drive positive change.

Action research can be conducted by various individuals or groups, including teachers, administrators, researchers, and educational practitioners. It is often carried out by those directly involved in the educational setting where the research takes place.

The steps of action research typically include identifying a problem, reviewing relevant literature, designing interventions or changes, collecting and analyzing data, reflecting on findings, and implementing improvements based on the results.

MORE LIKE THIS

Data Information vs Insight: Essential differences

May 14, 2024

Pricing Analytics Software: Optimize Your Pricing Strategy

May 13, 2024

Relationship Marketing: What It Is, Examples & Top 7 Benefits

May 8, 2024

The Best Email Survey Tool to Boost Your Feedback Game

May 7, 2024

Other categories

• Academic Research
• Artificial Intelligence
• Assessments
• Brand Awareness
• Case Studies
• Communities
• Consumer Insights
• Customer effort score
• Customer Engagement
• Customer Experience
• Customer Loyalty
• Customer Research
• Customer Satisfaction
• Employee Benefits
• Employee Engagement
• Employee Retention
• Friday Five
• General Data Protection Regulation
• Insights Hub
• Life@QuestionPro
• Market Research
• Mobile diaries
• Mobile Surveys
• New Features
• Online Communities
• Question Types
• Questionnaire
• QuestionPro Products
• Release Notes
• Research Tools and Apps
• Revenue at Risk
• Survey Templates
• Training Tips
• Uncategorized
• Video Learning Series
• What’s Coming Up
• Workforce Intelligence

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, automatically generate references for free.

• Knowledge Base
• Methodology
• What Is Action Research? | Definition & Examples

What Is Action Research? | Definition & Examples

Published on 27 January 2023 by Tegan George . Revised on 21 April 2023.

Table of contents

Types of action research, action research models, examples of action research, action research vs. traditional research, advantages and disadvantages of action research, frequently asked questions about action research.

There are 2 common types of action research: participatory action research and practical action research.

• Participatory action research emphasises that participants should be members of the community being studied, empowering those directly affected by outcomes of said research. In this method, participants are effectively co-researchers, with their lived experiences considered formative to the research process.
• Practical action research focuses more on how research is conducted and is designed to address and solve specific issues.

Both types of action research are more focused on increasing the capacity and ability of future practitioners than contributing to a theoretical body of knowledge.

Prevent plagiarism, run a free check.

Action research is often reflected in 3 action research models: operational (sometimes called technical), collaboration, and critical reflection.

• Operational (or technical) action research is usually visualised like a spiral following a series of steps, such as “planning → acting → observing → reflecting.”
• Collaboration action research is more community-based, focused on building a network of similar individuals (e.g., college professors in a given geographic area) and compiling learnings from iterated feedback cycles.
• Critical reflection action research serves to contextualise systemic processes that are already ongoing (e.g., working retroactively to analyse existing school systems by questioning why certain practices were put into place and developed the way they did).

Action research is often used in fields like education because of its iterative and flexible style.

After the information was collected, the students were asked where they thought ramps or other accessibility measures would be best utilised, and the suggestions were sent to school administrators. Example: Practical action research Science teachers at your city’s high school have been witnessing a year-over-year decline in standardised test scores in chemistry. In seeking the source of this issue, they studied how concepts are taught in depth, focusing on the methods, tools, and approaches used by each teacher.

Action research differs sharply from other types of research in that it seeks to produce actionable processes over the course of the research rather than contributing to existing knowledge or drawing conclusions from datasets. In this way, action research is formative , not summative , and is conducted in an ongoing, iterative way.

As such, action research is different in purpose, context, and significance and is a good fit for those seeking to implement systemic change.

Action research comes with advantages and disadvantages.

• Action research is highly adaptable , allowing researchers to mould their analysis to their individual needs and implement practical individual-level changes.
• Action research provides an immediate and actionable path forward for solving entrenched issues, rather than suggesting complicated, longer-term solutions rooted in complex data.
• Done correctly, action research can be very empowering , informing social change and allowing participants to effect that change in ways meaningful to their communities.

Disadvantages

• Due to their flexibility, action research studies are plagued by very limited generalisability  and are very difficult to replicate . They are often not considered theoretically rigorous due to the power the researcher holds in drawing conclusions.
• Action research can be complicated to structure in an ethical manner . Participants may feel pressured to participate or to participate in a certain way.
• Action research is at high risk for research biases such as selection bias , social desirability bias , or other types of cognitive biases .

Action research is conducted in order to solve a particular issue immediately, while case studies are often conducted over a longer period of time and focus more on observing and analyzing a particular ongoing phenomenon.

Action research is focused on solving a problem or informing individual and community-based knowledge in a way that impacts teaching, learning, and other related processes. It is less focused on contributing theoretical input, instead producing actionable input.

Action research is particularly popular with educators as a form of systematic inquiry because it prioritizes reflection and bridges the gap between theory and practice. Educators are able to simultaneously investigate an issue as they solve it, and the method is very iterative and flexible.

A cycle of inquiry is another name for action research . It is usually visualized in a spiral shape following a series of steps, such as “planning → acting → observing → reflecting.”

Sources for this article

We strongly encourage students to use sources in their work. You can cite our article (APA Style) or take a deep dive into the articles below.

George, T. (2023, April 21). What Is Action Research? | Definition & Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved 14 May 2024, from https://www.scribbr.co.uk/research-methods/action-research-cycle/

Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2017). Research methods in education (8th edition). Routledge.

Naughton, G. M. (2001).  Action research (1st edition). Routledge.

Is this article helpful?

Tegan George

Other students also liked, primary research | definition, types, & examples, a quick guide to experimental design | 5 steps & examples, what is an observational study | guide & examples.

• Technical Support
• Find My Rep

You are here

Action Research Improving Schools and Empowering Educators

• Craig A. Mertler - Barry University, USA
• Description

See what’s new to this edition by selecting the Features tab on this page. Should you need additional information or have questions regarding the HEOA information provided for this title, including what is new to this edition, please email [email protected] . Please include your name, contact information, and the name of the title for which you would like more information. For information on the HEOA, please go to http://ed.gov/policy/highered/leg/hea08/index.html .

For assistance with your order: Please email us at [email protected] or connect with your SAGE representative.

SAGE 2455 Teller Road Thousand Oaks, CA 91320 www.sagepub.com

"This is by far the finest textbook on this topic available."

"Excellent. Well organized and easy to follow. Students can use this book to learn and professors can use it to set up their courses."

• The Seventh Edition introduces a new Action Research Case Study in each chapter , focusing on an educator coping with the shift to virtual instruction during COVID-19.
• Discussion of COVID-19 , its effects on the classroom, including remote learning, and new and developing research help place the methods in a contemporary and practical context.
• Expanded introductory content helps students more easily grasp the scope and purpose of action research.
• Alternative strategies for the dissemination of action research results such as social media, personal websites, videos, blogs, vlogs, and podcasts help students make their research more accessible.
• Throughout, but especially in Chapter 8: Writing an Action Research Report, the book has been updated to the APA 7th Edition Publication Manual .
• A discussion of the importance of the alignment between research topics, problems, questions, data, and analysis (TPQDA) helps ensure a smoother research process and usable results.
• Two new and more current examples of educator-conducted action research in Appendix A and Appendix B more fully demonstrate the relevance and particulars of action research to students.
• The text is organized by sequentially mirroring an action research study , presenting the process of designing and conducting an action research study. However, it is important to note that action research proceeds through this process in a cyclical manner.
• Three Action Research Case Studies provide detailed scenarios of action research and extend throughout each chapter. In each chapter, the case study discussions continue from the previous section, highlighting the application of content as integrated into three practically based action research studies.
• Numerous, detailed examples throughout the book , including examples provided by the author and from published action research studies, support students' understanding and bring content to life .
• A helpful visual organizer for the main contents is found on the first page of each chapter , providing students with clear guidelines of what to anticipate.
• A final Questions and Activities section found in every chapter can be used to extend student knowledge, understanding, and application.
• Other pedagogical features include a bulleted summary in each chapter of its main points, a complete glossary of terms, a list of references, as well as a comprehensive subject and author index.
• Three appendices include complete written reports of teacher-conducted action research projects, as well as developmental templates to guide the novice action researcher.

For instructors

Select a purchasing option, related products.

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

1 What is Action Research for Classroom Teachers?

ESSENTIAL QUESTIONS

• What is the nature of action research?
• How does action research develop in the classroom?
• What models of action research work best for your classroom?
• What are the epistemological, ontological, theoretical underpinnings of action research?

Educational research provides a vast landscape of knowledge on topics related to teaching and learning, curriculum and assessment, students’ cognitive and affective needs, cultural and socio-economic factors of schools, and many other factors considered viable to improving schools. Educational stakeholders rely on research to make informed decisions that ultimately affect the quality of schooling for their students. Accordingly, the purpose of educational research is to engage in disciplined inquiry to generate knowledge on topics significant to the students, teachers, administrators, schools, and other educational stakeholders. Just as the topics of educational research vary, so do the approaches to conducting educational research in the classroom. Your approach to research will be shaped by your context, your professional identity, and paradigm (set of beliefs and assumptions that guide your inquiry). These will all be key factors in how you generate knowledge related to your work as an educator.

Action research is an approach to educational research that is commonly used by educational practitioners and professionals to examine, and ultimately improve, their pedagogy and practice. In this way, action research represents an extension of the reflection and critical self-reflection that an educator employs on a daily basis in their classroom. When students are actively engaged in learning, the classroom can be dynamic and uncertain, demanding the constant attention of the educator. Considering these demands, educators are often only able to engage in reflection that is fleeting, and for the purpose of accommodation, modification, or formative assessment. Action research offers one path to more deliberate, substantial, and critical reflection that can be documented and analyzed to improve an educator’s practice.

Purpose of Action Research

As one of many approaches to educational research, it is important to distinguish the potential purposes of action research in the classroom. This book focuses on action research as a method to enable and support educators in pursuing effective pedagogical practices by transforming the quality of teaching decisions and actions, to subsequently enhance student engagement and learning. Being mindful of this purpose, the following aspects of action research are important to consider as you contemplate and engage with action research methodology in your classroom:

• Action research is a process for improving educational practice. Its methods involve action, evaluation, and reflection. It is a process to gather evidence to implement change in practices.
• Action research is participative and collaborative. It is undertaken by individuals with a common purpose.
• Action research is situation and context-based.
• Action research develops reflection practices based on the interpretations made by participants.
• Knowledge is created through action and application.
• Action research can be based in problem-solving, if the solution to the problem results in the improvement of practice.
• Action research is iterative; plans are created, implemented, revised, then implemented, lending itself to an ongoing process of reflection and revision.
• In action research, findings emerge as action develops and takes place; however, they are not conclusive or absolute, but ongoing (Koshy, 2010, pgs. 1-2).

In thinking about the purpose of action research, it is helpful to situate action research as a distinct paradigm of educational research. I like to think about action research as part of the larger concept of living knowledge. Living knowledge has been characterized as “a quest for life, to understand life and to create… knowledge which is valid for the people with whom I work and for myself” (Swantz, in Reason & Bradbury, 2001, pg. 1). Why should educators care about living knowledge as part of educational research? As mentioned above, action research is meant “to produce practical knowledge that is useful to people in the everyday conduct of their lives and to see that action research is about working towards practical outcomes” (Koshy, 2010, pg. 2). However, it is also about:

creating new forms of understanding, since action without reflection and understanding is blind, just as theory without action is meaningless. The participatory nature of action research makes it only possible with, for and by persons and communities, ideally involving all stakeholders both in the questioning and sense making that informs the research, and in the action, which is its focus. (Reason & Bradbury, 2001, pg. 2)

In an effort to further situate action research as living knowledge, Jean McNiff reminds us that “there is no such ‘thing’ as ‘action research’” (2013, pg. 24). In other words, action research is not static or finished, it defines itself as it proceeds. McNiff’s reminder characterizes action research as action-oriented, and a process that individuals go through to make their learning public to explain how it informs their practice. Action research does not derive its meaning from an abstract idea, or a self-contained discovery – action research’s meaning stems from the way educators negotiate the problems and successes of living and working in the classroom, school, and community.

While we can debate the idea of action research, there are people who are action researchers, and they use the idea of action research to develop principles and theories to guide their practice. Action research, then, refers to an organization of principles that guide action researchers as they act on shared beliefs, commitments, and expectations in their inquiry.

Reflection and the Process of Action Research

When an individual engages in reflection on their actions or experiences, it is typically for the purpose of better understanding those experiences, or the consequences of those actions to improve related action and experiences in the future. Reflection in this way develops knowledge around these actions and experiences to help us better regulate those actions in the future. The reflective process generates new knowledge regularly for classroom teachers and informs their classroom actions.

Unfortunately, the knowledge generated by educators through the reflective process is not always prioritized among the other sources of knowledge educators are expected to utilize in the classroom. Educators are expected to draw upon formal types of knowledge, such as textbooks, content standards, teaching standards, district curriculum and behavioral programs, etc., to gain new knowledge and make decisions in the classroom. While these forms of knowledge are important, the reflective knowledge that educators generate through their pedagogy is the amalgamation of these types of knowledge enacted in the classroom. Therefore, reflective knowledge is uniquely developed based on the action and implementation of an educator’s pedagogy in the classroom. Action research offers a way to formalize the knowledge generated by educators so that it can be utilized and disseminated throughout the teaching profession.

Research is concerned with the generation of knowledge, and typically creating knowledge related to a concept, idea, phenomenon, or topic. Action research generates knowledge around inquiry in practical educational contexts. Action research allows educators to learn through their actions with the purpose of developing personally or professionally. Due to its participatory nature, the process of action research is also distinct in educational research. There are many models for how the action research process takes shape. I will share a few of those here. Each model utilizes the following processes to some extent:

• Plan a change;
• Take action to enact the change;
• Observe the process and consequences of the change;
• Reflect on the process and consequences;
• Act, observe, & reflect again and so on.

Figure 1.1 Basic action research cycle

There are many other models that supplement the basic process of action research with other aspects of the research process to consider. For example, figure 1.2 illustrates a spiral model of action research proposed by Kemmis and McTaggart (2004). The spiral model emphasizes the cyclical process that moves beyond the initial plan for change. The spiral model also emphasizes revisiting the initial plan and revising based on the initial cycle of research:

Figure 1.2 Interpretation of action research spiral, Kemmis and McTaggart (2004, p. 595)

Other models of action research reorganize the process to emphasize the distinct ways knowledge takes shape in the reflection process. O’Leary’s (2004, p. 141) model, for example, recognizes that the research may take shape in the classroom as knowledge emerges from the teacher’s observations. O’Leary highlights the need for action research to be focused on situational understanding and implementation of action, initiated organically from real-time issues:

Figure 1.3 Interpretation of O’Leary’s cycles of research, O’Leary (2000, p. 141)

Lastly, Macintyre’s (2000, p. 1) model, offers a different characterization of the action research process. Macintyre emphasizes a messier process of research with the initial reflections and conclusions as the benchmarks for guiding the research process. Macintyre emphasizes the flexibility in planning, acting, and observing stages to allow the process to be naturalistic. Our interpretation of Macintyre process is below:

Figure 1.4 Interpretation of the action research cycle, Macintyre (2000, p. 1)

We believe it is important to prioritize the flexibility of the process, and encourage you to only use these models as basic guides for your process. Your process may look similar, or you may diverge from these models as you better understand your students, context, and data.

Definitions of Action Research and Examples

At this point, it may be helpful for readers to have a working definition of action research and some examples to illustrate the methodology in the classroom. Bassey (1998, p. 93) offers a very practical definition and describes “action research as an inquiry which is carried out in order to understand, to evaluate and then to change, in order to improve educational practice.” Cohen and Manion (1994, p. 192) situate action research differently, and describe action research as emergent, writing:

essentially an on-the-spot procedure designed to deal with a concrete problem located in an immediate situation. This means that ideally, the step-by-step process is constantly monitored over varying periods of time and by a variety of mechanisms (questionnaires, diaries, interviews and case studies, for example) so that the ensuing feedback may be translated into modifications, adjustment, directional changes, redefinitions, as necessary, so as to bring about lasting benefit to the ongoing process itself rather than to some future occasion.

Lastly, Koshy (2010, p. 9) describes action research as:

a constructive inquiry, during which the researcher constructs his or her knowledge of specific issues through planning, acting, evaluating, refining and learning from the experience. It is a continuous learning process in which the researcher learns and also shares the newly generated knowledge with those who may benefit from it.

These definitions highlight the distinct features of action research and emphasize the purposeful intent of action researchers to improve, refine, reform, and problem-solve issues in their educational context. To better understand the distinctness of action research, these are some examples of action research topics:

Examples of Action Research Topics

• Flexible seating in 4th grade classroom to increase effective collaborative learning.
• Structured homework protocols for increasing student achievement.
• Developing a system of formative feedback for 8th grade writing.
• Using music to stimulate creative writing.
• Weekly brown bag lunch sessions to improve responses to PD from staff.
• Using exercise balls as chairs for better classroom management.

Action Research in Theory

Action research-based inquiry in educational contexts and classrooms involves distinct participants – students, teachers, and other educational stakeholders within the system. All of these participants are engaged in activities to benefit the students, and subsequently society as a whole. Action research contributes to these activities and potentially enhances the participants’ roles in the education system. Participants’ roles are enhanced based on two underlying principles:

• communities, schools, and classrooms are sites of socially mediated actions, and action research provides a greater understanding of self and new knowledge of how to negotiate these socially mediated environments;
• communities, schools, and classrooms are part of social systems in which humans interact with many cultural tools, and action research provides a basis to construct and analyze these interactions.

In our quest for knowledge and understanding, we have consistently analyzed human experience over time and have distinguished between types of reality. Humans have constantly sought “facts” and “truth” about reality that can be empirically demonstrated or observed.

Social systems are based on beliefs, and generally, beliefs about what will benefit the greatest amount of people in that society. Beliefs, and more specifically the rationale or support for beliefs, are not always easy to demonstrate or observe as part of our reality. Take the example of an English Language Arts teacher who prioritizes argumentative writing in her class. She believes that argumentative writing demonstrates the mechanics of writing best among types of writing, while also providing students a skill they will need as citizens and professionals. While we can observe the students writing, and we can assess their ability to develop a written argument, it is difficult to observe the students’ understanding of argumentative writing and its purpose in their future. This relates to the teacher’s beliefs about argumentative writing; we cannot observe the real value of the teaching of argumentative writing. The teacher’s rationale and beliefs about teaching argumentative writing are bound to the social system and the skills their students will need to be active parts of that system. Therefore, our goal through action research is to demonstrate the best ways to teach argumentative writing to help all participants understand its value as part of a social system.

The knowledge that is conveyed in a classroom is bound to, and justified by, a social system. A postmodernist approach to understanding our world seeks knowledge within a social system, which is directly opposed to the empirical or positivist approach which demands evidence based on logic or science as rationale for beliefs. Action research does not rely on a positivist viewpoint to develop evidence and conclusions as part of the research process. Action research offers a postmodernist stance to epistemology (theory of knowledge) and supports developing questions and new inquiries during the research process. In this way action research is an emergent process that allows beliefs and decisions to be negotiated as reality and meaning are being constructed in the socially mediated space of the classroom.

Theorizing Action Research for the Classroom

All research, at its core, is for the purpose of generating new knowledge and contributing to the knowledge base of educational research. Action researchers in the classroom want to explore methods of improving their pedagogy and practice. The starting place of their inquiry stems from their pedagogy and practice, so by nature the knowledge created from their inquiry is often contextually specific to their classroom, school, or community. Therefore, we should examine the theoretical underpinnings of action research for the classroom. It is important to connect action research conceptually to experience; for example, Levin and Greenwood (2001, p. 105) make these connections:

• Action research is context bound and addresses real life problems.
• Action research is inquiry where participants and researchers cogenerate knowledge through collaborative communicative processes in which all participants’ contributions are taken seriously.
• The meanings constructed in the inquiry process lead to social action or these reflections and action lead to the construction of new meanings.
• The credibility/validity of action research knowledge is measured according to whether the actions that arise from it solve problems (workability) and increase participants’ control over their own situation.

Educators who engage in action research will generate new knowledge and beliefs based on their experiences in the classroom. Let us emphasize that these are all important to you and your work, as both an educator and researcher. It is these experiences, beliefs, and theories that are often discounted when more official forms of knowledge (e.g., textbooks, curriculum standards, districts standards) are prioritized. These beliefs and theories based on experiences should be valued and explored further, and this is one of the primary purposes of action research in the classroom. These beliefs and theories should be valued because they were meaningful aspects of knowledge constructed from teachers’ experiences. Developing meaning and knowledge in this way forms the basis of constructivist ideology, just as teachers often try to get their students to construct their own meanings and understandings when experiencing new ideas.  

Classroom Teachers Constructing their Own Knowledge

Most of you are probably at least minimally familiar with constructivism, or the process of constructing knowledge. However, what is constructivism precisely, for the purposes of action research? Many scholars have theorized constructivism and have identified two key attributes (Koshy, 2010; von Glasersfeld, 1987):

• Knowledge is not passively received, but actively developed through an individual’s cognition;
• Human cognition is adaptive and finds purpose in organizing the new experiences of the world, instead of settling for absolute or objective truth.

Considering these two attributes, constructivism is distinct from conventional knowledge formation because people can develop a theory of knowledge that orders and organizes the world based on their experiences, instead of an objective or neutral reality. When individuals construct knowledge, there are interactions between an individual and their environment where communication, negotiation and meaning-making are collectively developing knowledge. For most educators, constructivism may be a natural inclination of their pedagogy. Action researchers have a similar relationship to constructivism because they are actively engaged in a process of constructing knowledge. However, their constructions may be more formal and based on the data they collect in the research process. Action researchers also are engaged in the meaning making process, making interpretations from their data. These aspects of the action research process situate them in the constructivist ideology. Just like constructivist educators, action researchers’ constructions of knowledge will be affected by their individual and professional ideas and values, as well as the ecological context in which they work (Biesta & Tedder, 2006). The relations between constructivist inquiry and action research is important, as Lincoln (2001, p. 130) states:

much of the epistemological, ontological, and axiological belief systems are the same or similar, and methodologically, constructivists and action researchers work in similar ways, relying on qualitative methods in face-to-face work, while buttressing information, data and background with quantitative method work when necessary or useful.

While there are many links between action research and educators in the classroom, constructivism offers the most familiar and practical threads to bind the beliefs of educators and action researchers.  

Epistemology, Ontology, and Action Research

It is also important for educators to consider the philosophical stances related to action research to better situate it with their beliefs and reality. When researchers make decisions about the methodology they intend to use, they will consider their ontological and epistemological stances. It is vital that researchers clearly distinguish their philosophical stances and understand the implications of their stance in the research process, especially when collecting and analyzing their data. In what follows, we will discuss ontological and epistemological stances in relation to action research methodology.

Ontology, or the theory of being, is concerned with the claims or assumptions we make about ourselves within our social reality – what do we think exists, what does it look like, what entities are involved and how do these entities interact with each other (Blaikie, 2007). In relation to the discussion of constructivism, generally action researchers would consider their educational reality as socially constructed. Social construction of reality happens when individuals interact in a social system. Meaningful construction of concepts and representations of reality develop through an individual’s interpretations of others’ actions. These interpretations become agreed upon by members of a social system and become part of social fabric, reproduced as knowledge and beliefs to develop assumptions about reality. Researchers develop meaningful constructions based on their experiences and through communication. Educators as action researchers will be examining the socially constructed reality of schools. In the United States, many of our concepts, knowledge, and beliefs about schooling have been socially constructed over the last hundred years. For example, a group of teachers may look at why fewer female students enroll in upper-level science courses at their school. This question deals directly with the social construction of gender and specifically what careers females have been conditioned to pursue. We know this is a social construction in some school social systems because in other parts of the world, or even the United States, there are schools that have more females enrolled in upper level science courses than male students. Therefore, the educators conducting the research have to recognize the socially constructed reality of their school and consider this reality throughout the research process. Action researchers will use methods of data collection that support their ontological stance and clarify their theoretical stance throughout the research process.

Koshy (2010, p. 23-24) offers another example of addressing the ontological challenges in the classroom:

A teacher who was concerned with increasing her pupils’ motivation and enthusiasm for learning decided to introduce learning diaries which the children could take home. They were invited to record their reactions to the day’s lessons and what they had learnt. The teacher reported in her field diary that the learning diaries stimulated the children’s interest in her lessons, increased their capacity to learn, and generally improved their level of participation in lessons. The challenge for the teacher here is in the analysis and interpretation of the multiplicity of factors accompanying the use of diaries. The diaries were taken home so the entries may have been influenced by discussions with parents. Another possibility is that children felt the need to please their teacher. Another possible influence was that their increased motivation was as a result of the difference in style of teaching which included more discussions in the classroom based on the entries in the dairies.

Here you can see the challenge for the action researcher is working in a social context with multiple factors, values, and experiences that were outside of the teacher’s control. The teacher was only responsible for introducing the diaries as a new style of learning. The students’ engagement and interactions with this new style of learning were all based upon their socially constructed notions of learning inside and outside of the classroom. A researcher with a positivist ontological stance would not consider these factors, and instead might simply conclude that the dairies increased motivation and interest in the topic, as a result of introducing the diaries as a learning strategy.

Epistemology, or the theory of knowledge, signifies a philosophical view of what counts as knowledge – it justifies what is possible to be known and what criteria distinguishes knowledge from beliefs (Blaikie, 1993). Positivist researchers, for example, consider knowledge to be certain and discovered through scientific processes. Action researchers collect data that is more subjective and examine personal experience, insights, and beliefs.

Action researchers utilize interpretation as a means for knowledge creation. Action researchers have many epistemologies to choose from as means of situating the types of knowledge they will generate by interpreting the data from their research. For example, Koro-Ljungberg et al., (2009) identified several common epistemologies in their article that examined epistemological awareness in qualitative educational research, such as: objectivism, subjectivism, constructionism, contextualism, social epistemology, feminist epistemology, idealism, naturalized epistemology, externalism, relativism, skepticism, and pluralism. All of these epistemological stances have implications for the research process, especially data collection and analysis. Please see the table on pages 689-90, linked below for a sketch of these potential implications:

Again, Koshy (2010, p. 24) provides an excellent example to illustrate the epistemological challenges within action research:

A teacher of 11-year-old children decided to carry out an action research project which involved a change in style in teaching mathematics. Instead of giving children mathematical tasks displaying the subject as abstract principles, she made links with other subjects which she believed would encourage children to see mathematics as a discipline that could improve their understanding of the environment and historic events. At the conclusion of the project, the teacher reported that applicable mathematics generated greater enthusiasm and understanding of the subject.

The educator/researcher engaged in action research-based inquiry to improve an aspect of her pedagogy. She generated knowledge that indicated she had improved her students’ understanding of mathematics by integrating it with other subjects – specifically in the social and ecological context of her classroom, school, and community. She valued constructivism and students generating their own understanding of mathematics based on related topics in other subjects. Action researchers working in a social context do not generate certain knowledge, but knowledge that emerges and can be observed and researched again, building upon their knowledge each time.

Researcher Positionality in Action Research

In this first chapter, we have discussed a lot about the role of experiences in sparking the research process in the classroom. Your experiences as an educator will shape how you approach action research in your classroom. Your experiences as a person in general will also shape how you create knowledge from your research process. In particular, your experiences will shape how you make meaning from your findings. It is important to be clear about your experiences when developing your methodology too. This is referred to as researcher positionality. Maher and Tetreault (1993, p. 118) define positionality as:

Gender, race, class, and other aspects of our identities are markers of relational positions rather than essential qualities. Knowledge is valid when it includes an acknowledgment of the knower’s specific position in any context, because changing contextual and relational factors are crucial for defining identities and our knowledge in any given situation.

By presenting your positionality in the research process, you are signifying the type of socially constructed, and other types of, knowledge you will be using to make sense of the data. As Maher and Tetreault explain, this increases the trustworthiness of your conclusions about the data. This would not be possible with a positivist ontology. We will discuss positionality more in chapter 6, but we wanted to connect it to the overall theoretical underpinnings of action research.

Advantages of Engaging in Action Research in the Classroom

In the following chapters, we will discuss how action research takes shape in your classroom, and we wanted to briefly summarize the key advantages to action research methodology over other types of research methodology. As Koshy (2010, p. 25) notes, action research provides useful methodology for school and classroom research because:

Advantages of Action Research for the Classroom

• research can be set within a specific context or situation;
• researchers can be participants – they don’t have to be distant and detached from the situation;
• it involves continuous evaluation and modifications can be made easily as the project progresses;
• there are opportunities for theory to emerge from the research rather than always follow a previously formulated theory;
• the study can lead to open-ended outcomes;
• through action research, a researcher can bring a story to life.

Action Research Copyright © by J. Spencer Clark; Suzanne Porath; Julie Thiele; and Morgan Jobe is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

• Lesson Plans
• Presentations
• Test Questions
• Privacy Policy

Parts of an Action Research and How to Conduct

What action research is and is not, the action research process.

INITIAL STEPS

IN CONDUCTING AN

ACTION RESEARCH

STEP 1: MAKING THE COMMITMENT TO INQUIRY

• A professional stance
• A way of learning about your classroom
• A way of learning about yourself as a teacher
• Using the 5whQ
• Possible questions:

Why do the boys in my class….?

What happens when I …..?

I wonder what happens when  I …..?

Starting points to identify an issue you would like to research (Caro-Bruce, 2000):

Sometimes it helps to use a variety of questions such as:

I would like to improve ____________________________________

I am perplexed by________________________________________

I am really curious about __________________________________

Something I think would really make a difference is ___________

Something I would like to change is _______________________

What happens to student learning in my classroom when I _____?

How can I implement ____________________________________?

How can I improve ______________________________________?

Step 2:   Read , Research, Reflect

• Framing a good question

Avoid yes or no questions

Avoid questions to which you already know the answer

• A good question is

free of educational jargons,

use simple everyday words ,

do not prejudge the result

Characteristics of Good Research Questions

A good classroom action research question should:

• Be meaningful, compelling, and important to you as a teacher-researcher.
• Be manageable and within your sphere of influence.
• Be important for learners.
• Benefits your students by informing your teaching and the curriculum, by providing new insights about students and their learning , by broadening and deepening your perspectives, or by improving practice.
• Lead to taking an action
• What happens to the quality of student writing when I implement peer editing in my English classes?
• How does the use of computers affect the student writing process in my class?
• What happens to student understanding of specific geometrical concepts when I incorporate exploratory exercises into the teaching of geometry in my classroom?
• What happens to students’ academic performance in the classrooms when the school observes the heterogeneous system during cooperative learning activities?

Conducting a Literature Review (Holly, Arhar, and Kasten ,2005)

• Read broadly and generally, at first, then read more narrowly.
• When you are researching a novel topic that seems to have few resources, look for related topics and then synthesize them.
• Consult primary resources as possible.
• Ask for help.
• Read enough to get started, but not so much that you become too exhausted to conduct your study .
• Read with a critical eye.

Step 3: Make changes or try a new idea   

What are you going to do?

How will you measure the result?

Identifying Data Sources

• Why are we collecting the data?
• How are the data related to the research question?
• What kind of data will yield the best information? What counts as data?
• What data will we collect? How much data will we collect? Will data be easy or difficult to collect?
• Who will be using the data?
• What data sources will we use to collect information?
• How will the data be collected and analyzed? How systematic will data collection be?
• How will the data be organized? How will the data be displayed?
• What criteria will be used to analyze the data?
• How will the data be recorded and shared?

Step 4:  Evaluate and Reflect

How can you be sure that your conclusions are fair and accurate?

Step 5: Improve or amend your practice

How will I do things differently?

What have you learned from the project?

Have your questions been answered?

How will you share the results?

Could they be useful to others in your school/ community?

Context and Rationale of the Study

• Cite Literature review
• What is the general situation/circumstance that makes you develop your research proposal?
• Why is this situation/ circumstance important?
• What do you intend to do?
• This is the aim of your study. This should also be embedded in your main arguments.
• The significance of your research
• Why is your study important?
• Who or what industry will benefit? Why?
• What would be the potential contribution or insight of my research?

ACTION RESEARCH QUESTIONS

Reflect on your experiences and identify the most critical problem that affects your students’ learning

PROPOSED INTERVENTION, INNOVATION, STRATEGY

• Explain the intervention and cite literature that supports /validate the strategy to be used
• The teacher-researchers will develop an M.A.D (Modified Awareness Design) Tool : Contextualized and Localized Instructional Learning Material with seven (7) lessons where its objectives are based on the least mastered skills. The development of the IM anchors the simplified process of ADDIE Model which follows: Phase I – Preparation, Phase II – Development, Phase III – Validation, Phase IV – Try-Out.

Methodology

* PARTICIPANTS – All Grade 8 OHSP learners will serve as the respondents of this study.

* SOURCES OF DATA/ INFORMATION – The following are the data collection tools which will be utilized this study:

• Research constructed questionnaire
• Pretest/ post-test
• Summative test scores

* DATA GATHERING METHODS

• In developing the instructional learning material, the concept of ADDIE will utilize where:
• Phase I- The preparation stage involves administering the pretest using the teacher-made test validated by the Grade 8 teachers. It will use to determine the least mastered skills of the Grade 8 OHSP learners. The contents and components of the MAD Tool: Contextualized and Localized IM will base on the result of the pretest.
• Phase II – The development stage involves the following phases; deciding on the format of the module, the process of writing the module and the initial revisions needed to improve the first draft of the module.
• Phase III – In the validation stage, English teachers (peers and experts) will ask to assess the module in terms of its objectives

Plans for Dissemination and Utilization

• The results of the study will be presented and disseminated during learning action cells , teacher’s quality circle , conference after the study and will be presented through infographics which will be part of the initiatives of the school administrators and the subject area teachers.

  Teachers must continue to give frequent positive feedback that supports pupil’s beliefs that they can do well; ensure opportunities for student’s success by assigning tasks that are either too easy nor too difficult; help students find personal meaning and value of the material; and help students feel that they are valued members of a learning community.

Sample of Reflection

As I reflect on my first journey as a teacher-researcher, I breathe a sigh of relief. The light at the end of this long, winding tunnel is finally in sight. I found the process of conducting an action research project very complex and often overwhelming. However, at the same time, I found it to be extremely enlightening and rewarding.

It is self-perception about the study.

Best, J.W., & Kahn, J.V. (1998). Research in education (8th ed.). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon.

Borg, W. (1981). Applying educational research: A practical guide for teachers. New York: Longman.

Brennan, M., & Williamson, P. (1981). Investigating learning in schools. Victoria, Australia: Deakin University Press.

Calhoun, E.F. (1994). How to use action research in the self-renewing school. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S.L. (Eds.). (1993). Inside/outside: Teacher research and knowledge. New York: Teachers College Press.

Corey, S.M. (1953). Action research to improve school practices. New York: Teachers College Press.

Johnson, B.M. (1995, Fall). Why conduct action research? Teaching and Change,1, 90-105.

source: SDO Las Pinas

RELATED ARTICLES MORE FROM AUTHOR

Senators press DepEd to Resume Face-to-face Classes

Globe prepares Top Achievers Private School Inc. for the new normal of digital learning

Duterte: No opening of classes without vaccine in the midst of pandemic

Navotas Mayor requested the Department of Education (DepEd) to pass all students for the school year amid the coronavirus outbreak

Early Registration for SY 2020-2021 has been moved to February 1

Brief History of the Philippines Folk Dances

Useful articles, list of passers: teachers board exam (let) march 2017 results.

DepEd K to 12 Curriculum Guides Free Complete Downloads

CS Form No. 212 Revised Personal Data Sheet Latest

Sample Application Letter /Resume /CV for Teachers

2017 Palarong Pambansa Organization, General Information and Technical Guidelines

• Privacy Policy

Home » Research Report – Example, Writing Guide and Types

Research Report – Example, Writing Guide and Types

Table of Contents

Research Report

Definition:

Research Report is a written document that presents the results of a research project or study, including the research question, methodology, results, and conclusions, in a clear and objective manner.

The purpose of a research report is to communicate the findings of the research to the intended audience, which could be other researchers, stakeholders, or the general public.

Components of Research Report

Components of Research Report are as follows:

Introduction

The introduction sets the stage for the research report and provides a brief overview of the research question or problem being investigated. It should include a clear statement of the purpose of the study and its significance or relevance to the field of research. It may also provide background information or a literature review to help contextualize the research.

Literature Review

The literature review provides a critical analysis and synthesis of the existing research and scholarship relevant to the research question or problem. It should identify the gaps, inconsistencies, and contradictions in the literature and show how the current study addresses these issues. The literature review also establishes the theoretical framework or conceptual model that guides the research.

Methodology

The methodology section describes the research design, methods, and procedures used to collect and analyze data. It should include information on the sample or participants, data collection instruments, data collection procedures, and data analysis techniques. The methodology should be clear and detailed enough to allow other researchers to replicate the study.

The results section presents the findings of the study in a clear and objective manner. It should provide a detailed description of the data and statistics used to answer the research question or test the hypothesis. Tables, graphs, and figures may be included to help visualize the data and illustrate the key findings.

The discussion section interprets the results of the study and explains their significance or relevance to the research question or problem. It should also compare the current findings with those of previous studies and identify the implications for future research or practice. The discussion should be based on the results presented in the previous section and should avoid speculation or unfounded conclusions.

The conclusion summarizes the key findings of the study and restates the main argument or thesis presented in the introduction. It should also provide a brief overview of the contributions of the study to the field of research and the implications for practice or policy.

The references section lists all the sources cited in the research report, following a specific citation style, such as APA or MLA.

The appendices section includes any additional material, such as data tables, figures, or instruments used in the study, that could not be included in the main text due to space limitations.

Types of Research Report

Types of Research Report are as follows:

Thesis is a type of research report. A thesis is a long-form research document that presents the findings and conclusions of an original research study conducted by a student as part of a graduate or postgraduate program. It is typically written by a student pursuing a higher degree, such as a Master’s or Doctoral degree, although it can also be written by researchers or scholars in other fields.

Research Paper

Research paper is a type of research report. A research paper is a document that presents the results of a research study or investigation. Research papers can be written in a variety of fields, including science, social science, humanities, and business. They typically follow a standard format that includes an introduction, literature review, methodology, results, discussion, and conclusion sections.

Technical Report

A technical report is a detailed report that provides information about a specific technical or scientific problem or project. Technical reports are often used in engineering, science, and other technical fields to document research and development work.

Progress Report

A progress report provides an update on the progress of a research project or program over a specific period of time. Progress reports are typically used to communicate the status of a project to stakeholders, funders, or project managers.

Feasibility Report

A feasibility report assesses the feasibility of a proposed project or plan, providing an analysis of the potential risks, benefits, and costs associated with the project. Feasibility reports are often used in business, engineering, and other fields to determine the viability of a project before it is undertaken.

Field Report

A field report documents observations and findings from fieldwork, which is research conducted in the natural environment or setting. Field reports are often used in anthropology, ecology, and other social and natural sciences.

Experimental Report

An experimental report documents the results of a scientific experiment, including the hypothesis, methods, results, and conclusions. Experimental reports are often used in biology, chemistry, and other sciences to communicate the results of laboratory experiments.

Case Study Report

A case study report provides an in-depth analysis of a specific case or situation, often used in psychology, social work, and other fields to document and understand complex cases or phenomena.

Literature Review Report

A literature review report synthesizes and summarizes existing research on a specific topic, providing an overview of the current state of knowledge on the subject. Literature review reports are often used in social sciences, education, and other fields to identify gaps in the literature and guide future research.

Research Report Example

Following is a Research Report Example sample for Students:

Title: The Impact of Social Media on Academic Performance among High School Students

This study aims to investigate the relationship between social media use and academic performance among high school students. The study utilized a quantitative research design, which involved a survey questionnaire administered to a sample of 200 high school students. The findings indicate that there is a negative correlation between social media use and academic performance, suggesting that excessive social media use can lead to poor academic performance among high school students. The results of this study have important implications for educators, parents, and policymakers, as they highlight the need for strategies that can help students balance their social media use and academic responsibilities.

Introduction:

Social media has become an integral part of the lives of high school students. With the widespread use of social media platforms such as Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and Snapchat, students can connect with friends, share photos and videos, and engage in discussions on a range of topics. While social media offers many benefits, concerns have been raised about its impact on academic performance. Many studies have found a negative correlation between social media use and academic performance among high school students (Kirschner & Karpinski, 2010; Paul, Baker, & Cochran, 2012).

Given the growing importance of social media in the lives of high school students, it is important to investigate its impact on academic performance. This study aims to address this gap by examining the relationship between social media use and academic performance among high school students.

Methodology:

The study utilized a quantitative research design, which involved a survey questionnaire administered to a sample of 200 high school students. The questionnaire was developed based on previous studies and was designed to measure the frequency and duration of social media use, as well as academic performance.

The participants were selected using a convenience sampling technique, and the survey questionnaire was distributed in the classroom during regular school hours. The data collected were analyzed using descriptive statistics and correlation analysis.

The findings indicate that the majority of high school students use social media platforms on a daily basis, with Facebook being the most popular platform. The results also show a negative correlation between social media use and academic performance, suggesting that excessive social media use can lead to poor academic performance among high school students.

Discussion:

The results of this study have important implications for educators, parents, and policymakers. The negative correlation between social media use and academic performance suggests that strategies should be put in place to help students balance their social media use and academic responsibilities. For example, educators could incorporate social media into their teaching strategies to engage students and enhance learning. Parents could limit their children’s social media use and encourage them to prioritize their academic responsibilities. Policymakers could develop guidelines and policies to regulate social media use among high school students.

Conclusion:

In conclusion, this study provides evidence of the negative impact of social media on academic performance among high school students. The findings highlight the need for strategies that can help students balance their social media use and academic responsibilities. Further research is needed to explore the specific mechanisms by which social media use affects academic performance and to develop effective strategies for addressing this issue.

Limitations:

One limitation of this study is the use of convenience sampling, which limits the generalizability of the findings to other populations. Future studies should use random sampling techniques to increase the representativeness of the sample. Another limitation is the use of self-reported measures, which may be subject to social desirability bias. Future studies could use objective measures of social media use and academic performance, such as tracking software and school records.

Implications:

The findings of this study have important implications for educators, parents, and policymakers. Educators could incorporate social media into their teaching strategies to engage students and enhance learning. For example, teachers could use social media platforms to share relevant educational resources and facilitate online discussions. Parents could limit their children’s social media use and encourage them to prioritize their academic responsibilities. They could also engage in open communication with their children to understand their social media use and its impact on their academic performance. Policymakers could develop guidelines and policies to regulate social media use among high school students. For example, schools could implement social media policies that restrict access during class time and encourage responsible use.

References:

• Kirschner, P. A., & Karpinski, A. C. (2010). Facebook® and academic performance. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(6), 1237-1245.
• Paul, J. A., Baker, H. M., & Cochran, J. D. (2012). Effect of online social networking on student academic performance. Journal of the Research Center for Educational Technology, 8(1), 1-19.
• Pantic, I. (2014). Online social networking and mental health. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 17(10), 652-657.
• Rosen, L. D., Carrier, L. M., & Cheever, N. A. (2013). Facebook and texting made me do it: Media-induced task-switching while studying. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(3), 948-958.

Note*: Above mention, Example is just a sample for the students’ guide. Do not directly copy and paste as your College or University assignment. Kindly do some research and Write your own.

Applications of Research Report

Research reports have many applications, including:

• Communicating research findings: The primary application of a research report is to communicate the results of a study to other researchers, stakeholders, or the general public. The report serves as a way to share new knowledge, insights, and discoveries with others in the field.
• Informing policy and practice : Research reports can inform policy and practice by providing evidence-based recommendations for decision-makers. For example, a research report on the effectiveness of a new drug could inform regulatory agencies in their decision-making process.
• Supporting further research: Research reports can provide a foundation for further research in a particular area. Other researchers may use the findings and methodology of a report to develop new research questions or to build on existing research.
• Evaluating programs and interventions : Research reports can be used to evaluate the effectiveness of programs and interventions in achieving their intended outcomes. For example, a research report on a new educational program could provide evidence of its impact on student performance.
• Demonstrating impact : Research reports can be used to demonstrate the impact of research funding or to evaluate the success of research projects. By presenting the findings and outcomes of a study, research reports can show the value of research to funders and stakeholders.
• Enhancing professional development : Research reports can be used to enhance professional development by providing a source of information and learning for researchers and practitioners in a particular field. For example, a research report on a new teaching methodology could provide insights and ideas for educators to incorporate into their own practice.

How to write Research Report

Here are some steps you can follow to write a research report:

• Identify the research question: The first step in writing a research report is to identify your research question. This will help you focus your research and organize your findings.
• Conduct research : Once you have identified your research question, you will need to conduct research to gather relevant data and information. This can involve conducting experiments, reviewing literature, or analyzing data.
• Organize your findings: Once you have gathered all of your data, you will need to organize your findings in a way that is clear and understandable. This can involve creating tables, graphs, or charts to illustrate your results.
• Write the report: Once you have organized your findings, you can begin writing the report. Start with an introduction that provides background information and explains the purpose of your research. Next, provide a detailed description of your research methods and findings. Finally, summarize your results and draw conclusions based on your findings.
• Proofread and edit: After you have written your report, be sure to proofread and edit it carefully. Check for grammar and spelling errors, and make sure that your report is well-organized and easy to read.
• Include a reference list: Be sure to include a list of references that you used in your research. This will give credit to your sources and allow readers to further explore the topic if they choose.
• Format your report: Finally, format your report according to the guidelines provided by your instructor or organization. This may include formatting requirements for headings, margins, fonts, and spacing.

Purpose of Research Report

The purpose of a research report is to communicate the results of a research study to a specific audience, such as peers in the same field, stakeholders, or the general public. The report provides a detailed description of the research methods, findings, and conclusions.

Some common purposes of a research report include:

• Sharing knowledge: A research report allows researchers to share their findings and knowledge with others in their field. This helps to advance the field and improve the understanding of a particular topic.
• Identifying trends: A research report can identify trends and patterns in data, which can help guide future research and inform decision-making.
• Addressing problems: A research report can provide insights into problems or issues and suggest solutions or recommendations for addressing them.
• Evaluating programs or interventions : A research report can evaluate the effectiveness of programs or interventions, which can inform decision-making about whether to continue, modify, or discontinue them.
• Meeting regulatory requirements: In some fields, research reports are required to meet regulatory requirements, such as in the case of drug trials or environmental impact studies.

When to Write Research Report

A research report should be written after completing the research study. This includes collecting data, analyzing the results, and drawing conclusions based on the findings. Once the research is complete, the report should be written in a timely manner while the information is still fresh in the researcher’s mind.

In academic settings, research reports are often required as part of coursework or as part of a thesis or dissertation. In this case, the report should be written according to the guidelines provided by the instructor or institution.

In other settings, such as in industry or government, research reports may be required to inform decision-making or to comply with regulatory requirements. In these cases, the report should be written as soon as possible after the research is completed in order to inform decision-making in a timely manner.

Overall, the timing of when to write a research report depends on the purpose of the research, the expectations of the audience, and any regulatory requirements that need to be met. However, it is important to complete the report in a timely manner while the information is still fresh in the researcher’s mind.

Characteristics of Research Report

There are several characteristics of a research report that distinguish it from other types of writing. These characteristics include:

• Objective: A research report should be written in an objective and unbiased manner. It should present the facts and findings of the research study without any personal opinions or biases.
• Systematic: A research report should be written in a systematic manner. It should follow a clear and logical structure, and the information should be presented in a way that is easy to understand and follow.
• Detailed: A research report should be detailed and comprehensive. It should provide a thorough description of the research methods, results, and conclusions.
• Accurate : A research report should be accurate and based on sound research methods. The findings and conclusions should be supported by data and evidence.
• Organized: A research report should be well-organized. It should include headings and subheadings to help the reader navigate the report and understand the main points.
• Clear and concise: A research report should be written in clear and concise language. The information should be presented in a way that is easy to understand, and unnecessary jargon should be avoided.
• Citations and references: A research report should include citations and references to support the findings and conclusions. This helps to give credit to other researchers and to provide readers with the opportunity to further explore the topic.

Advantages of Research Report

Research reports have several advantages, including:

• Communicating research findings: Research reports allow researchers to communicate their findings to a wider audience, including other researchers, stakeholders, and the general public. This helps to disseminate knowledge and advance the understanding of a particular topic.
• Providing evidence for decision-making : Research reports can provide evidence to inform decision-making, such as in the case of policy-making, program planning, or product development. The findings and conclusions can help guide decisions and improve outcomes.
• Supporting further research: Research reports can provide a foundation for further research on a particular topic. Other researchers can build on the findings and conclusions of the report, which can lead to further discoveries and advancements in the field.
• Demonstrating expertise: Research reports can demonstrate the expertise of the researchers and their ability to conduct rigorous and high-quality research. This can be important for securing funding, promotions, and other professional opportunities.
• Meeting regulatory requirements: In some fields, research reports are required to meet regulatory requirements, such as in the case of drug trials or environmental impact studies. Producing a high-quality research report can help ensure compliance with these requirements.

Limitations of Research Report

Despite their advantages, research reports also have some limitations, including:

• Time-consuming: Conducting research and writing a report can be a time-consuming process, particularly for large-scale studies. This can limit the frequency and speed of producing research reports.
• Expensive: Conducting research and producing a report can be expensive, particularly for studies that require specialized equipment, personnel, or data. This can limit the scope and feasibility of some research studies.
• Limited generalizability: Research studies often focus on a specific population or context, which can limit the generalizability of the findings to other populations or contexts.
• Potential bias : Researchers may have biases or conflicts of interest that can influence the findings and conclusions of the research study. Additionally, participants may also have biases or may not be representative of the larger population, which can limit the validity and reliability of the findings.
• Accessibility: Research reports may be written in technical or academic language, which can limit their accessibility to a wider audience. Additionally, some research may be behind paywalls or require specialized access, which can limit the ability of others to read and use the findings.

About the author

Muhammad Hassan

Researcher, Academic Writer, Web developer

You may also like

Data Collection – Methods Types and Examples

Delimitations in Research – Types, Examples and...

Research Process – Steps, Examples and Tips

Research Design – Types, Methods and Examples

Institutional Review Board – Application Sample...

Evaluating Research – Process, Examples and...

• Open access
• Published: 16 May 2024

Drawing up the public national Rational Pharmacotherapy Action Plan as part of social and health services reform in Finland: a bottom-up approach involving stakeholders

• Heidi Tahvanainen   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-1315-0457 1 , 2 , 5 ,
• Liisa-Maria Voipio-Pulkki 2 ,
• Katri Hämeen-Anttila   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-3515-0792 3 , 6 ,
• Ulla Närhi 2 , 4 ,
• Taina Mäntyranta 2 ,
• Anna-Riia Holmström   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-3908-5430 5 &
• Marja Airaksinen   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-6077-5671 5  

BMC Health Services Research volume  24 , Article number:  631 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

Metrics details

Ensuring equal access to medicines and their appropriate and safe use at reasonable costs are core functions of health systems. Despite that, few descriptions of national medicines policies' development processes and implementation strategies have been published. This study aimed to describe the government program-based development of the Rational Pharmacotherapy Action Plan in Finland as a part of the undergoing major health and social service system reform, also covering the implementation of rational pharmacotherapy in the reformed system and processes.

The data of this qualitative study consisted of public reports and Steering Group meeting memos related to the development of the national Rational Pharmacotherapy Action Plan that the Ministry of Social Affairs and Health coordinated. Qualitative content analysis applying systems theory and the conceptual framework of integrated services as theoretical frameworks was used as an analysis method.

The national Rational Pharmacotherapy Action Plan covering 2018–2022 was created in a bottom-up development process involving a wide range of stakeholders. Rational pharmacotherapy was redefined by adding equality as the fifth pillar to complement the previously defined pillars of being effective, safe, high-quality, and cost-effective. The Action Plan formed a normative framework for long-term development, with a vision and principles focusing on people-centeredness, better coordination and management of the medication use processes, the continuity of treatment paths and the flow of patient and medicines information through partnerships, and evidence-informed policies and practices.

Through intensive stakeholder participation, the bottom-up approach created a national vision and principles of rational pharmacotherapy along with strong commitment to implementing the goals and measures. The concern lies in ensuring the continuity of the Action Plan implementation and achieving a balanced long-term development aligned with the integrated and reformed national social and health services system. The development of the pharmaceutical system has several national and EU-level dependencies requiring political long-term commitment. While the Action Plan differs from the national medicines policy, it forms a good basis for long-term development covering important parts of medicine policy at the micro, meso, and macro levels of the service system.

Peer Review reports

National health systems may have several goals, but the ultimate is improving population health and well-being [ 1 ]. According to the World Health Organization (WHO), an effective health service system should meet these goals by providing equal access to affordable and high-quality services, including care and healing services, health promotion, prevention, and rehabilitation for the entire population [ 1 , 2 ]. Access to medicines is essential to a well-functioning health system and is necessary to achieve public health goals [ 1 , 3 ]. When successful, pharmacotherapy can save lives, maintain, or improve functional capacity, and mitigate or even prevent diseases or their symptoms, thus improving quality of life. The demand for and spending on pharmaceuticals are expected to grow due to aging populations, rising income levels, increasing costs of developing new technologies, and increased patient expectations [ 4 ]. Consequently, pharmaceuticals constitute a substantial portion of healthcare spending in Europe and globally. In Finland, pharmaceuticals accounted for 14–15% of the total social and health services costs in 2021 [ 5 ].

Many countries have experienced challenges in meeting all health service demands. Health inequalities, limited availability and access to services, safety, and productivity are the main shared concerns [ 6 , 7 , 8 ]. In the last decade, a major social and health services reform has been prepared in Finland, aiming to improve the coordination, integration, and equality of access to services while balancing continuously growing health and social services costs [ 9 , 10 ]. In many countries, including Finland, the government or another third party pays a significant part of pharmaceutical costs. Therefore, effective means are required to monitor and guide the safe and appropriate use of medicines and their cost-effectiveness. Pharmacotherapy can be considered inappropriate if it does not meet the conditions and core components of rationality defined by the WHO [ 11 , 12 ]. According to the WHO, rational use of medicines occurs when patients receive medications appropriate to their clinical needs, in doses that meet their own individual requirements, for an adequate period, and at the lowest cost to them and their community [ 11 ]. Due to the complex interrelationships of pharmaceutical and health system governance, countries have been recommended to find ways to harmonize better and align their pharmaceutical policy activities with national health policies and systems [ 1 , 13 ].

As part of a national policymaking, the need for rational pharmacotherapy programs has been recognized in several countries [ 4 , 14 , 15 ]. Few detailed descriptions of national medicines policies (NMP), development processes, and implementation strategies are available. However, such descriptions would benefit other countries in compiling their own policies [ 14 , 16 ] and developing international policy recommendations [ 3 , 4 ]. According to WHO, a NMP serves as both a commitment to a defined objective and a strategic roadmap for actionable steps [ 13 ]. This national comprehensive framework articulates and prioritizes the government's medium- to long-term goals for the pharmaceutical sector and use of medicines, outlining key strategies to achieve these objectives. For example, NMP has guided development activities in Australia since 2000 [ 16 ]. The overarching goal of the Australian’s NMP has been to optimize health outcomes through a collaborative partnership with key stakeholders. A similar target has been set for the NMP implementation in New Zealand [ 17 ]. In 2022, the updated Australian’s NMP has emerged as a coordinating framework that sets out a vision, common aim and intended outcomes, for all partners to work towards quality use of medicines and medicines safety by focusing on the current and future health needs of people in Australia [ 18 ].

In Finland, the development of the pharmaceutical system has been guided by the NMP since 2003 [ 19 ]. The NMP was originally drafted to evaluate the development needs of the pharmaceutical system in a situation where medicine legislation had not been comprehensively assessed for an extended period. Moreover, Finland had joined the European Union (EU) in 1995, resulting in the harmonization of national legislation with EU regulations. The purpose of the NMP was to bring predictability in the operating environment to several stakeholders in the medicines sector. In the 2011 NMP update, Finland implemented the WHO's recommendation to commit various key stakeholders to NMP goals by involving them in an open, systematic consultation process when preparing the NMP [ 13 , 20 ]. By doing so, Finland’s goal has been to develop the pharmaceutical sector and service system aligned with the health policy goals to meet the needs of the social and health services [ 21 ]. However, rapidly rising pharmaceutical costs, an aging population, and medication safety risks, especially among older adults, a fragmented operating system and culture, as well as pressures to promote the digitalization of healthcare formed complex challenges to be solved as part of the social and health services reform [ 22 , 23 , 24 ]. Therefore, the Ministry of Social Affairs and Health (MSAH) initiated in 2016 the preparation of the targeted Action Plan promoting rational pharmacotherapy based on the government mandate [ 25 ].

The aims of this study were to 1) describe the collaborative and bottom-up development process of the national long-term Rational Pharmacotherapy Action Plan during 2016–2017 and the key process outcomes, and 2) to analyze the content of the Action Plan in the conceptual framework of integrated care.

Context of the study

Finland has a population of 5.6 million, of which 1.7 million (30%) live in the metropolitan area of Helsinki [ 26 ]. Life expectancy at birth is one of the highest in the world, with 84.5 years for women and 79.2 years for men in 2021 [ 27 ]. GDP per capita was about 47,991 euros in 2022 [ 26 ]. Social security and access to health services are considered universal residents’ rights according to the Constitution of Finland [ 28 ].

Finland has a public healthcare system, complemented by private and occupational healthcare services [ 9 , 29 ]. The ongoing reform restructures the organization of public healthcare and social welfare systems, and rescue systems [ 10 ]. The aim of the new legislation is to ensure equal, interoperable, and cost-effective healthcare and social welfare services throughout the country. Additionally, the objective is to strengthen basic-level services and ensure better support for those who require a variety of social and healthcare services. In Finland care for the older people and substance abuse services are part of social welfare services unlike some other countries. Thus, integration and coordination of healthcare and social welfare services are essential and pharmacotherapy is part of this integration. In January 2023, the responsibilities of primary and secondary care were transferred from municipalities and hospital districts to the well-being services counties ( n  = 21) [ 10 , 29 ]. In addition, the City of Helsinki (the largest city) became responsible for services in its own area. The District of Helsinki and Uusimaa is responsible for specialized healthcare in the metropolitan area. Finland is divided into five collaborative areas for tertiary care, each with a university hospital [ 9 ]. The well-being services counties may either provide services, act in cooperation, or purchase services from private service providers [ 10 ]. The well-being services counties receive state funding according to the criteria set in legislation and supplement their finances with service fees, highest amounts of which are set in the legislation. They do not have the right to collect taxes to cover social and healthcare costs [ 10 ].

Pharmacotherapies conducted during hospital care are included in patient service fees, financed by the well-being service counties. In contrast, medication use in outpatient care is mainly covered by the public social insurance funded jointly by the government and the insured individuals (covering equally all permanent residents in Finland) [ 9 ]. Medicines for outpatient care are dispensed from community pharmacies and are partially or fully reimbursed by public social insurance, covering equally the entire population [ 9 , 30 ]. The reimbursement scheme for pharmacotherapy is disease-based and offers relatively high deductibles for long-term medicine users of chronic diseases [ 9 ].

In accordance with health service legislation in Finland, all operations are grounded in evidence-based practices [ 31 ]. The responsibilities related to informing decision-making through Health Technology Assessment (HTA) are decentralized among various organizations. In particular, the assessment and decision-making for outpatient care medicines fall under the jurisdiction of the Pharmaceutical Pricing Board [ 32 ], while new medicines for inpatient care are evaluated by the Finnish Medicines Agency (Fimea). Recommendations to introduce medicines in inpatient care are provided by the Council for Choices in Health Care [ 33 ]. Also, indication extensions of medicines are subject to HTA, coordinated by the Finnish Coordinating Center for Health Technology Assessment, with assessments conducted on a hospital level [ 34 ]. Furthermore, the decision-making has been informed by research conducted by several stakeholders: universities, state research institutes, agencies and institutions of various administrative branches, and advocacy organizations.

Since 2014, innovation activities in the medicines and health sector have been guided by the Health Sector Growth Strategy for Research and Innovation, along with its subsequent update, the Roadmap [ 35 ], prepared in cooperation with the Government and research and innovation funders and organizations in the health sector. The advancement of pharmaceutical innovations is crucial for treatment development and addressing unmet medical needs. Investing in innovation activities not only facilitates sector growth but also has the potential to boost health sector exports, a significant aspect of research, innovation, and industrial policy, particularly in Finland, where a considerable portion of medicines is imported [ 35 ]. The overarching focus of health sector policy and innovations in Finland has primarily centered on enhancing the ecosystem for personalized medicine [ 36 ].

Medicine use in outpatient care

In Finland, community pharmacies have remained the sole source of prescription and non-prescription medicines to outpatients with the exemption of nicotine replacement therapies released to open sale in 2006 [ 37 ]. Pharmacy operations are subject to licensing; a pharmacy owner must have at least a MSc (Pharm) degree, sufficient experience in pharmacy operations, prerequisites for running a pharmacy business and not been declared bankrupt or legally incompetent [ 38 ]. Community pharmacies are legally obligated to maintain an adequate supply of medicines that address the population’s needs within their operational area. Additionally, they must maintain adequate pharmaceutical personnel to fulfill certain duties, e.g., medication dispensing and counseling for both over-the-counter (OTC) and prescription medicines.

The retail prices of all medicines and the wholesale prices of medicines included in the reimbursement scheme are regulated [ 38 , 39 , 40 ]. The objective of regulating medicines price is to establish fair and equitable prices that benefit both medicine users and society at large. Furthermore, this regulatory framework sustains competition within the market for interchangeable medicines and shifts the focus of competition among community pharmacies primarily towards quality of customer service rather than pricing strategies. Price regulation ensures that community pharmacies of varying sizes can procure wholesale medicines at uniform rates, thereby enhancing vertical transparency in the distribution chain. Generic substitution was implemented in 2003, a reference price system in 2009, and the automatic substitution of biologics will be gradually implemented in the beginning of 2024 in outpatient care to enhance price competition and reduce medicines costs [ 41 , 42 ]. Since 2022, price regulation has made it possible to give discounts on the retail prices of OTC medicines [ 43 ]. Finland largely depends on imported medicines since there is no strong domestic pharmaceutical industry [ 44 ].

Since 2017, all outpatient prescriptions have been issued and dispensed electronically via a national electronic health record system, Kanta, maintained by the National Social Insurance Institution Kela [ 45 ]. Kanta is an entity of national patient information depository and data management services used by citizens, social and health service providers, and pharmacies [ 45 ]. It allows centralized use, storage, and maintenance of electronic patient data, and data exchange for cross-border purposes [ 46 , 47 ]. Citizens have adopted the use of Kanta services well and can browse their own medical records and prescriptions and, e.g., order repeat prescriptions through the online service [ 47 ]. The development and interoperability of national information management services and information management systems in social services and healthcare are guided and coordinated nationally [ 48 ].

Origins of the Rational Pharmacotherapy Action Plan

The prevention and mitigation of inequality, improving the availability, access, and continuity of care, and cost growth management have become increasingly important guiding principles in Finnish health policymaking during recent decades, reflected also in the NMP [ 10 , 20 , 29 ]. According to the NMP published in 2011, rational pharmacotherapy and good medication safety enhance people's well-being, improve public health, and decrease healthcare expenditures [ 20 ]. However, achieving the NMP goals had become more challenging, especially due to rapidly increasing medicines costs [ 23 ], the unequal and uncontrolled introduction of new pharmaceutical products [ 49 ] and medication safety risks, especially in the vulnerable population groups such as older adults [ 22 , 24 ]. Thus, the government program for 2015–2019 mandated the MSAH to establish a Rational Pharmacotherapy Action Plan (RPAP) [ 25 ]. The goals set for the Action Plan by the Government were to improve comprehensive patient care, improve people's functional capacity, and create conditions for cost-effective pharmacotherapy from the perspectives of the patient and society [ 50 ]. At the same time as the Action Plan was drawn up, social and health services reform was being prepared, which also covered the development of the pharmaceutical system aligned with the renewed social and health service system. It is to be noted that during the development of the Action Plan, no policy guidelines or legislation for restructuring the pharmaceutical system were available.

Theoretical framework of this study

System theory, also known as systems thinking, provides a holistic approach to understanding and evaluating complex phenomena, e.g., within social and health systems [ 1 , 51 ]. According to the system theory, all interventions tend to generate effects at the system level [ 51 ]. Different systems interact with each other but retain their autonomy due to the structures and processes of the system [ 1 , 3 , 51 ].

Integrated health systems are considered as a solution to maintaining accessibility, quality, and continuity of services [ 52 , 53 , 54 ]. System integration requires a tailor-made combination of structures, processes, and techniques to meet the service needs of people and population [ 54 ]. For example, functional integration includes mechanisms that establish connections between services through funding, information, and management. Normative integration consists of informal coordination mechanisms of mission, vision, values, and culture, which promote integration, if these have been successfully shared as a common set of goals at all levels of the system [ 54 ]. Different functions and processes at the system’s levels: the macro (system), the meso (organizational and professional) and the micro (clinical), complement each other to achieve integration goals [ 54 ].

In this study, the system theory [ 51 ] guided interpretations of the interaction between different parts of the pharmaceutical and health service systems. At the same time, the conceptual framework of integrated care [ 54 ] was applied to analyzing integration of functions between different actors in the medication use process at macro, meso and micro levels.

Study design and methods

This study is based on qualitative content analysis of the final report of the Rational Pharmacotherapy Action Plan (RPAP) [ 50 ] and the meeting memos of the Steering Group responsible for the development of the RPAP under the leadership of MSAH [ 55 , 56 , 57 ]. All reports published during the development process of RPAP were utilized in the analysis to verify the interpretations of the content analysis (Documents no. 3–13, Table s 1 in Additional File 1). The interpretation was also influenced by approved legislation of the national social and health services reform [ 58 ], the national programs that preceded the RPAP such as NMP 2020 [ 20 ], National recommendation for multidisciplinary cooperation in optimizing pharmacotherapy in older adults [ 24 ], Medicines information strategy 2020 [ 59 ] and Government resolution of patient and client safety strategy 2017–2021 [ 60 ]. In addition, recent developments under the initiative of the European Health Union [ 61 ] influenced the interpretation, e.g., the implementation of the European Pharmaceutical Strategy since 2020 [ 62 ], the Regulation on Health Technology Assessment [ 63 ], the proposal of the European Health Data Space including data and information development for cross-border healthcare and prescription development [ 64 ], and changes in the responsibilities and processes of the various EU Agencies [ 65 ]. Above mentioned reports describing the development of the operating environment were reviewed alongside the analysis to understand connections and dependencies.

A qualitative synthesis of data

The first part of the study was an inductive content analysis of the Steering Group meeting memos and the final report of the RPAP (Documents no. 1–2, Table s 1 in Additional File 1). The analysis focused on describing the development process of the Action Plan and the outcomes of the development process. The second part was a deductive content analysis of the key contents of the Action Plan based on the final report of the RPAP and Steering Group meeting memos. The system theory guided the analysis and thinking concerning how the structures and processes of the pharmaceutical system interacts as part of the social and health service system at the micro, meso and macro levels [ 51 ]. The conceptual framework of integrated care guided the analysis related to the medication use process [ 54 ].

First, the main themes of the final RPAP report and Steering Group memos, as well as the concept of rational pharmacotherapy were reviewed and refined to draw connections between NMP and broader social and health policies in the context of long-term development [ 10 , 20 , 21 , 58 , 59 , 66 ]. Then, the prioritized actions and principles to promote rational pharmacotherapy were identified. The prioritized actions were classified into the following functional integration categories of integration framework: funding (F), information (I), and management (M), depending on how the implementation of the prioritized action can be promoted. Working Group (WG) and expert reports published during the RPAP development process were utilized to verify the interpretations (Documents no. 3–13, Table s 1 in Additional File 1, Table s3 in Additional File 6). The classified actions were cross-tabulated with the key principles outlined by the Steering Group and presented in the RPAP and the different interacting levels of the system, i.e., micro, meso, and macro levels [ 51 , 54 ]. The long-term development visions for the system’s micro, meso, and macro levels were condensed based on the abstraction of prioritized actions and principles [ 51 , 54 ]. The EU level was considered at the system levels as the development of EU policy strongly influences the national development priorities of each Member State [ 62 , 63 , 64 , 65 ].

One researcher (HT) was responsible for the analysis, and other co-authors who were involved in the development process of RPAP (MA, KHA, UN, LMVP, TM) verified the validity of the analysis [ 57 ]. Author (UN), working in the MSAH at that time, launched the development project of the RPAP together with the chairman of the Steering Group, author (LMVP), who served at that time as director general in the MSAH. Author (HT), working in the MSAH at that time, coordinated the development of the RPAP and the compilation of the final report during 2017–2018. Author (KHA), working at that time in the Fimea, served as secretary of the Steering Group during 2016–2018 and was responsible for preparing the final report. Author (MA), professor at the Helsinki University, represented researchers to bring scientific evidence to the development process, served as chairman of the Research Working Group (WG) and member of the Steering Group, and author (TM), senior ministerial adviser in MSAH, brought information about the progress of social and health services reform to the development process of the RPAP, and served as chairman of the WG1 Prescribing, Dispensing and Use of medicines (Fig.  1 ).

Organization of the Rational Pharmacotherapy Action Plan development. MSAH = Ministry of Social Affairs and Health, HTA = Health Technology Assessment, WG = Working Group

Research ethics

Good scientific practices were followed throughout the research process [ 67 ]. Only reports available from open sources were used. The meeting memos were made available through a formal information request to the MSAH.

Description of the development process of the Rational Pharmacotherapy Action Plan

In January 2016, MSAH appointed a Steering Group to coordinate the RPAP development process, which consisted of four phases (Fig.  2 ). The aim was to create a long-term RPAP for national implementation using a bottom-up approach in cooperation with a wide range of stakeholders involved in the planning, policymaking, and implementation of social and health services.

Progression of the Rational Pharmacotherapy Action Plan development. MSAH = Ministry of Social Affairs and Health, RPAP = Rational Pharmacotherapy Action Plan, WG = Working Group

In the first phase, the Steering Group identified Finland’s current state and major challenges in rational pharmacotherapy. It established the following six WGs accordingly: WG1 Prescribing, dispensing and use of medicines, WG2 Pharmaceutical services as part of the social and health services system, WG3 Health Technology Assessment (HTA), WG4 Research, focusing on the ongoing and needed research in rational pharmacotherapy, WG5 Pharmaceutical innovations, and WG6 Data and information management (Fig.  1 ). The development needs of data and information management (WG 6) were derived from the work of each of the five WGs. The Steering Group set concrete goals for the WGs and guided the work by analyzing the current situation in regular follow-up meetings. An interim report was prepared by the Steering Group (Fig.  2 ).

A total of 40 stakeholder organizations and approximately 100 representatives participated in the development process. A diverse group of health and pharmaceutical experts and managers, authorities, and researchers were identified and invited by the MSAH to participate in the development work and WGs over two years. The following national umbrella organizations and stakeholders were involved in the Steering Group and WGs: public administrations, the major public third-party payor and government funding bodies, HTA bodies, civil servants working on the national preparation of the social and health care reform, organizations responsible for primary and secondary care (hospital districts), professional organizations and scientific societies, organizations representing pharmaceutical industry and community pharmacies, physicians, nurses, universities, hospital pharmacies, patient organizations and associations and representatives of the pensioners.

The work was based on a bottom-up activity that aimed to consider the interests of the various stakeholders in the field, even those with conflicting ones. The interaction with those involved in preparing the national social and health services reform progressing in parallel was regular and intensive. Similarly, the utilization of research results was a consistent practice. WG 4 mapped the ongoing research promoting rational pharmacotherapy, the researchers and research groups conducting the research, their view on future research needs and the need to improve research prerequisites and cooperation. The WGs used workshops, interactive seminars, invited experts for hearings, and extensive comment rounds of the draft documents in preparation. The overarching objective was to increase participation and commitment.

In the second phase, the WGs defined development measures based on assessments of the current state of rational pharmacotherapy, including administrative processes, strategies on patient safety [ 60 ] and medicines information [ 59 ], evidence of recent national development projects [ 24 ] and academic and non-academic literature (Fig.  2 ). The activities of the WG 4 supported the work of other WGs and enabled intensive utilization of research results. In addition, the following investigation reports were commissioned by the MSAH to inform the RPAP development: 1) The effects of EU legislation on national pharmaceutical system (not published), 2) The effects of social and health services reform on hospital pharmacy operations, 3) Steering for rational prescribing in selected countries, 4) Description of the regional organization and tasks of pharmaceutical working groups in Sweden, and 5) The patient-specific optimization of pharmacotherapies and the possibilities of information systems to support different phases of the medication management process (Reports no. 9–13, Table s 1 in Additional File 1). The regular interaction with the preparation of the national social and health services reform progressing in parallel guided the work of WGs 1, 2, and 3.

In the third phase, each WG compiled a separate report on action proposals to promote rational pharmacotherapy (Fig.  2 ). The development needs for data and information management was also compiled in a separate report based on the findings of each WG. A total of 13 reports were compiled to guide the development and promote rational pharmacotherapy at different levels of the service system (Table s 1 in Additional File 1). In the reports, comprehensive information was collected on national topics of rational pharmacotherapy, such as HTA operations and the utilization of its results in decision-making, as well as operating models and information needs of medicine users and different professionals in the different phases of the medication use process (e.g., the practices of collaborative medication review and optimization of pharmacotherapy, as well as the monitoring and documentation of the outcomes, as well as the division of work between different professionals). The existing national research evidence was used extensively to inform the work of different WGs, especially concerning the operation models and practices of safe and appropriate pharmacotherapy. Examples of rational pharmacotherapy steering methods were compiled from the sources described in the reports.

In the fourth phase, the secretariat of the Steering Group, the Chairpersons of each WG, and the coordinator of the RPAP program compiled the final report of the RPAP (Fig.  2 ). The writing process was contributed by constant discussion and reflection between the secretariat of the Steering Group (KHA), coordinator of the RPAP (HT), and the Chairpersons of each WG to grasp multiple perspectives and views of the stakeholders participating in the development work. One part of this phase was to redefine the concept of rational pharmacotherapy and legitimize it on the national level.

Outcomes and core contents of the Rational Pharmacotherapy Action Plan development process

The final report [ 50 ] of the RPAP was published in March 2018, and it was planned to cover a period until the end of the next government term, 2022. The main content of the Action Plan was visualized as a house, where the structures and governance of the service system and evidence form the foundation for the people-centered services and partnerships in the medication use process and management of the medication regimen (Additional File 2). In the RPAP, the roles of different professionals and medicine users in the medication use process were defined and described for the first time in a national document to illustrate the complexity and vulnerability of the flow of information in the medication use process in outpatient care (Additional File 3). During the preparation of the RPAP it was found that professionals need support in optimizing and managing pharmacotherapy in dialogue with the medicine users. Therefore, a set of questions was created to support the discussion of rational pharmacotherapy with medicine users on a partnership basis (Additional File 4).

Based on the RPAP final report [ 50 ] and national policy documents [ 10 , 20 , 21 , 59 ], the recognized main themes of long-term medicines policy development to promote rational pharmacotherapy were the management of the medication use process, pharmaceutical services, evidence-informed decision-making, research, and innovations (Fig.  3 ). In the Action Plan, rational pharmacotherapy was redefined through five dimensions (Fig.  3 ). Equality was added to rational pharmacotherapy to complement the four previous elements: effective, safe, high-quality, and cost-effective. Based on the Steering Group memos, the goals of effectiveness and equality were especially emphasized. The dimension of environmental awareness was not included in the RPAP definition of rational pharmacotherapy although it was noticed by the measures aiming to reduce waste in the medication use process.

The rational pharmacotherapy concept and long-term policy themes [ 20 , 50 ]. * Italic used to mark dimension not included in the definition of rational pharmacotherapy in RPAP. NMP = National Medicines Policy, RPAP = Rational Pharmacotherapy Action Plan

Based on the Steering Group memos, RPAP aimed to respond to identified challenges in the coordination, appropriateness, and continuity of pharmacotherapy by emphasizing people-centeredness, partnership, equality, and improved management of the medication use process and patient-specific medication regimen. The crystallized long-term normative development visions based on the RPAP final report [ 50 ] for the different levels of the service system were 1) micro: comprehensive medication management based on people-centered interventions and interprofessional collaboration, 2) meso: management of the medication use process and governance of the pharmaceutical services as a unified entity, and 3) macro: evidence-informed steering and decision-making on pharmacotherapy and pharmaceutical services (Fig.  4 ).

Long-term normative vision and principles to promote rational pharmacotherapy under the conceptual framework of integrated care [ 54 ]. EU = European Union

Based on the RPAP final report [ 50 ] and the WG reports (reports no. 3–13, Table s 1 in Additional File 1), the visions and principles of the Action Plan aimed at improving the coordination and management of the medication use, the continuity of treatment paths, the flow of patient and medicines information and the effective use of knowledge resources (Table s2 in Additional File 5). At the micro level, this requires a review of the tasks and responsibilities of medication users and different professionals in the people-centered, partnership-based medication use process. The development on the micro level emphasizes ensuring continuity of pharmacotherapy, improving the management and monitoring of the medication regimen, and enhancing the clinical decision-making based on comprehensive patient and medicines information as part of the development of treatment paths and information systems.

For the service organizers, currently the well-being service counties, the Action Plan set several goals for governance, coordinating the medication use process, and creating conditions for clinical work that utilizes the expertise of different professionals. Coordinated and integrated service production, as well as research and development activities utilizing information of national and local registers aim to support the continuous development of clinical and medication safety practice and targeting of pharmacotherapy and clinical pharmacy services to those who benefit the most (Table s2 in Additional File 5). According to the Action Plan well-being services counties should establish effective means and structures for service production steering, control, and continuity of care also considering community pharmacy services and resources to ensure rational use of medicines and the implementation of national guidance. Evidence-informed steering and decision-making require successful development of regional information systems, utilization of information and interoperability with national data repositories and information management services. The simultaneity and mutual understanding of meso and macro level development was noteworthy in the Action Plan.

The need to improve governance and steering was also emphasized at the macro level, where several authorities related to pharmacotherapy operate. Also, the need for developing the division of work and the roles of different authorities was identified in the Action Plan. At the macro level, it was noted that the development of the harmonization and exchange of information and the overall administration of the pharmaceutical system extend to the EU level. However, considering the competence of each Member State (Fig.  4 , Table s2 in Additional File 5). It was found that implementing the prioritized actions of the RPAP would require purposeful development at different levels of the system. This entails further development focusing on enhancing the functional integration of social and health services and the pharmaceutical system, utilizing funding, information, and management resources effectively.

Implementation

Based on the Steering Group memos, the implementation of the Action Plan was aimed to support in various ways to create awareness of the redefinition of the rational pharmacotherapy and the set development goals. This aimed to get the development started both by different stakeholders and at different levels of the system. MSAH allocated quite a lot of time and resources for establishing an awareness campaign held in two phases, first targeted to social and health professionals and then to the public. The campaign messages and materials were designed in cooperation with the RPAP Steering Group and stakeholders. Implementation was carried out jointly with Fimea. In addition, MSAH launched a dedicated rational pharmacotherapy website rich in content in early 2018 [ 68 ].

Drafting the RPAP was an intensive, time-consuming, but fruitful national process in Finland. It enabled a comprehensive review of the current pharmacotherapy practices and, based on that, the creation of the long-term vision of rational pharmacotherapy as part of the planned social and health services reform. Although final legal decisions on the future of the social and health services system and the structures of the pharmaceutical system integrated into it were missing during the planning phase of the RPAP, it was possible to define guiding visions and principles for the promotion of rational pharmacotherapy in the micro, meso and macro levels of the service system (Fig.  4 ).

A variety of authorities and stakeholders participated in the development of the RPAP. This bottom-up and co-creation process was chosen because of the good experience gained from preparing the NMP 2020 [ 20 ]. This approach has been recommended by the WHO [ 13 ], and later used to support EU pharmaceutical decision-making [ 62 ]. The chosen development process of the Action Plan has proved to be important for the stakeholder commitment and enabled consensus of the visions and principles that still carry the development. This reinforces the earlier finding that the policy process is just as important as the policy document since the process must create a mechanism to bring different views together and achieve a sense of shared ownership of the outcome [ 14 ]. For example, the rational pharmacotherapy website continues to be actively managed by MSAH. Plenty of practical tools developed to promote rational pharmacotherapy in everyday clinical practice have been identified and shared through coordination with Fimea [ 69 ] and national medication safety development network [ 70 ]. In addition, Fimea has integrated the RPAP communication campaign into Pharmacotherapy Day’s annual campaign week, which is now organized in collaboration with different stakeholders [ 71 ].

During the development of the Action Plan, there was a thorough discussion about the definition of rational pharmacotherapy which led to the extension of the concept towards equity. That reflected the national principal value base of equal rights, which had become threatened by rapidly increasing healthcare and pharmacotherapy costs. Consequently, in the 2000s, Finnish pharmaceutical policy and decision-making on pharmaceuticals revolved around how to curb the ever-increasing costs. To control costs, changes have been made, e.g., to the public medicines reimbursement system and pricing, which have led to relatively high deductibles for long-term medicine users [ 9 ] and may have led to a decline in the adherence to chronic diseases [ 72 ]. However, the entire medication use process which extends across the borders of several different organizations, had not been evaluated to ensure effective, appropriate, and cost-effective pharmacotherapy. The RPAP provided an opportunity for this comprehensive review and the identification of various development measures (Table s2 in Additional File 5).

Most of the medicines are used in outpatient care, so the measures of the Action Plan are largely focused there and are especially aimed at optimizing pharmacotherapy for chronic diseases and self-managing at home. However, the Action Plan’s goals were unrelated to the operational environment. The evolution of pharmaceutical services within inpatient care has been intensive after the launch of the RPAP. Traditionally, hospital pharmacy services have focused primarily on logistical functions, with only limited integration into clinical practices. The development of the information flow, task definitions, and responsibilities in the medication use process, as well as to defining consistent operating models for medication optimization and management have progressed quickly in inpatient care [ 73 , 74 ]. The number of ward and clinical pharmacy staff has remarkably increased between 2017 and 2022 in Finland, and services have extended widely, focusing on system-based medication safety work and the development of comprehensive medication management [ 74 ]. However, there is a lot of regional variation in development and the goals of the Action Plan are still relevant. Especially in outpatient care, pharmaceutical services except for dispensing, counseling, and automated dose dispensing, are not well integrated into daily clinical practice [ 75 ]. The community pharmacies are willing to develop their services improving medication safety and supporting rational pharmacotherapy [ 76 ], but non-formed legislation and incentives have hampered the progression. The challenges of the legislation and delays in achieving the goals set in the Action Plan are partially explained by the national social and health services reform, the implementation of which has finally created the conditions for the beginning of legislation development of the pharmaceutical system.

Based on the results of this study, the ultimate goal of developing the pharmaceutical system should be to improve its integration into the social and health services system. In the Action Plan prioritized development activities can be promoted by renewing management, funding, and information sharing in the pharmaceutical, social and health services. During the implementation period of RPAP, the further planning for developing pharmacotherapy data and information management has progressed systematically at national level. MSAH has recently published the enterprise architecture of pharmacotherapy [ 48 ] and plans for the development of a centralized national information management services for pharmacotherapy [ 77 ] and medicinal data repository [ 78 ]. Community pharmacy system’s reform needs (e.g., tasks and operations) have been investigated in detail, also from the general public approach [ 79 ]. In the current legislative framework, where community pharmacies are regulated as a separate part of the social and health service system, it is not possible to develop the exchange of patient information, and the tasks of different professionals and organizations in the medication use process agilely as in inpatient care. In addition, the vision has matured that the national level decision-making processes to guide the use of medicines must be developed [ 80 , 81 ], and the data and information about pharmaceuticals and pharmacotherapy which accumulates in different registers must be utilized better than at present [ 81 , 82 ].

The Action Plan also highlighted the need for change in governance and funding, which require a new way of thinking to create incentives for various actors in the medication use process to promote rational pharmacotherapy. For example, community pharmacies currently make a profit primarily from the sale of medicines and the definition of profit margins rather than from services that optimize the use of medicines and monitor their effectiveness. The Action Plan set several goals for the regional well-being service counties for managing the medication use process, the governance of the services, and creating conditions for interprofessional and people-centered collaboration. The success of the several goals set for the well-being service counties may require the expansion of their operational mandate to the entire medication use process. Based on the restructuring of the social and health services, the well-being services counties should guide production more strongly than municipalities did before and pay special attention to those who use many services and may also use expensive medicines or several different medicines for their ailments [ 58 ]. However, the well-being services counties currently do not have a mandate, e.g., to guide or oblige community pharmacies to develop their services in the medication use process. To make pharmacotherapy more rational, the state and well-being services counties must succeed in integrating the region's community pharmacies into the service chains and by this enable better utilization of available knowledge and resources to medication use optimization and management. The well-being services counties play a central role in many prioritized actions in the Action Plan to promote rational pharmacotherapy. Therefore, they will be a significant player in medicines policy in the future.

The parallel development of the European-level pharmaceutical system increases the challenge of national development. The European Commission has recently published the proposal for the major EU pharmaceutical legislation reform [ 83 ]. The proposal complements the key previous changes and initiatives [ 63 , 64 ]. The goal is to make medicines more equally available, accessible, and affordable in the EU region, boost competitiveness, fight against antimicrobial resistance, and give rules to digital transformation. These phenomena and challenges have partly been identified at the national level during the development of the preceding NMP 2020 [ 20 ] and RPAP [ 50 ]. Recent global, EU and national level policymaking are more strongly interlinked than before, where e.g., environmental consciousness as a sixth dimension of rational pharmacotherapy is emphasized as a new theme [ 62 , 66 , 84 , 85 ].

The strength and uniqueness of the RPAP is the utilization of research in identifying the development needs. Research has not previously been utilized in preparing of medicines policy on the same scale in Finland, although the researchers were also involved in the preparation of the preceding NMP [ 20 ]. The importance of evidence-informed decision-making in implementing RPAP is reflected in the long-term research strategy and establishment of a research network to support the implementation of the RPAP [ 86 , 87 ]. The utilization of academic research could also have influenced the fact that the coverage of the RPAP was comparable to other international NMPs published in other countries [ 17 , 18 , 88 ]. That reflects similar pharmacotherapy challenges in the health systems globally.

The RPAP was the crystallization of NMP thinking as part of the broader social and health policy during one term of government [ 25 ]. Currently, there is no updated comprehensive NMP in Finland and the progress of the implementation of the RPAP has also yet to be evaluated. However, to ensure the long-term implementation of the RPAP, a commitment across political party lines has been sought. The officials of the MSAH have developed frameworks for the pharmaceutical system development, which the previous (2019–2022) and current (2023–2027) governments have included in their programs [ 85 , 89 ]. This commitment aims to ensure continuity and mutual support for long-term and predictable development, transcending different government periods. However, the key question is whether the subsequent governments will commit to a balanced policy that considers the different dimensions of rational pharmacotherapy supporting public health and national health policy goals. It would be appropriate to reform the structures of the pharmaceutical system in a controlled manner and create systemic conditions for implementing rational pharmacotherapy in Finland.

The study results are based on several publicly available documents published by the authorities (Table s 1 in Additional File 1) and are consistent with the theoretical framework of integrated care [ 54 ]. Only one researcher was responsible for the analyses which is a limitation of this study. However, the interpretations have been validated by authors who have been strongly involved in the RPAP development work and have long experience in national development and working at the interface of politics from different approaches. Each author's point of view in the RPAP development process has been different, enabling the adoption of different perspectives and views during different phases of the analysis, thus strengthening the consensus. However, as a typical limitation to document analysis [ 57 ], the documents selected for the analysis and the documents used to verify interpretations have affected the results, i.e., the accuracy and comprehensiveness of the observations made. For example, the development needs to be related to pharmaceutical innovation activities remained few in the results. On the other hand, the pharmaceutical innovation theme was paid less attention due to the more urgent needs to evaluate the effects of the ongoing social and health services reform. The research materials consisted of the central available materials describing the process and the final results of the RPAP. The expertise of authors with the subject of the study compensates for the limitations of document analysis. With the help of the author group, consisting of civil servants and academics, and theories that guided the analysis, it has been possible to strengthen the reliability of the results. The results represent a national case study and are, therefore, not transferable as such to other countries. As presented in this study, the national descriptions of medicines policy and system development holds potential to be useful in several other countries. The results provide an opportunity for cross-country benchmarking and learning.

The major ongoing changes in the domestic and international operational environment affecting the whole pharmaceutical system in Finland require further research. National research in the key areas of rational pharmacotherapy covering structures, processes, and outcomes should be continued, as well as monitoring the impact of the policy measures taken [ 86 ]. In addition, the impact of the RPAP on stakeholders’ and patients’ experiences should be investigated. Further research is needed to investigate the prerequisites for integrating community pharmacy services into regional service chains and creating incentives. Internationally, further research is needed on the effectiveness of NMP guidance, and the indicators defined for implementing the NMP.

Conclusions

Through intensive stakeholder participation, the bottom-up approach created a national vision and principles of rational pharmacotherapy and a strong commitment to implementing the goals and measures. The concern lies in ensuring the continuity of the Action Plan implementation and achieving a balanced long-term development aligned with the integrated national social and health system. The development of the pharmaceutical system has several national and EU-level dependencies requiring long-term political commitment. While the Action Plan differs from the national medicines policy it forms a good basis for long-term development covering important parts of medicine policy at the micro, meso and macro levels of the service system.

Availability of data and materials

Publicly available reports from open sources: https://julkaisut.valtioneuvosto.fi/ and https://stm.fi/rationaalinen-laakehoito/julkaisut were used. Meeting memos of the RPAP Steering Group were made available through a formal information request to the Ministry of Social Affairs and Health (VN/22279/2022). The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

Abbreviations

European Medicines Agency

European Union

Finnish Medicines Agency

Gross Domestic Product

Health Technology Assessment

Ministry of Social Affairs and Health

National Medicine Policy

Over the Counter (medicine)

Rational Pharmacotherapy Action Plan

Real-World Data

Working Group

World Health Organization

World Health Organization. Everybody’s business - strengthening health systems to improve health outcomes: WHO’s framework for action. 2007. https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/43918 . Accessed 20 Sep 2023.

Bigdeli M, Jacobs B, Tomson G, Laing R, Ghaffar A, Dujardin B, et al. Access to medicines from a health system perspective. Health Policy Plan. 2013. https://doi.org/10.1093/heapol/czs108 .

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Hafner T, Walkowiak H, Lee D, Aboagye-Nyame F. Defining pharmaceutical systems strengthening: concepts to enable measurement. Health Policy Plan. 2016. https://doi.org/10.1093/heapol/czw153 .

Article   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Cylus J, Wouters O, Kanavos P. Understanding the role of governance in the pharmaceutical sector: from laboratory to patient. In: Greer S, Wismar M, Figueras J, editors. Strengthening health system governance: better policies, stronger performance. Open University Press; 2016. p. 157–87.

Google Scholar  

Finnish Medicines statistics 2021. Fimea, Kela. 2022. https://urn.fi/URN:NBN:fi-fe2022121672023 . Accessed 26 May 2023.

Scholz N. Addressing health inequalities in the European Union: concepts, action, state of play. European Parliamentary Research Service. 2020. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/IDAN/2020/646182/EPRS_IDA(2020)646182_EN.pdf . Accessed 20 Sep 2023.

Canada GO. A Prescription for Canada: Achieving pharmacare for all. Final Report of the Advisory Council on the Implementation of National Pharmacare. Heath Canada. 2019. https://www.canada.ca/content/dam/hc-sc/images/corporate/about-health-canada/public-engagement/external-advisory-bodies/implementation-national-pharmacare/final-report/final-report.pdf . Accessed 20 Sep 2023.

World Health Organization. Global patient safety action plan 2021–2030 - Towards eliminating avoidable harm in health care. 2021. https://www.who.int/teams/integrated-health-services/patient-safety/policy/global-patient-safety-action-plan . Accessed 20 Sep 2023.

Keskimäki I, Tynkkynen LK, Reissell E, Koivusalo M, Syrjä V, Vuorenkoski L, et al. Finland Health system review. In: Health Systems in Transition. WHO Regional Office for Europe. 2019. https://iris.who.int/handle/10665/327538 . Accessed 20 Sep 2023.

Ministry of Social Affairs and Health. Health and social services reform. In: Reform webpages. https://soteuudistus.fi/en/frontpage . Accessed 7 Apr 2023.

World Health Organization. The Rational Use of Drugs: Review of Major Issues. In: Conference of Experts on the Rational Use of Drugs and World Health Organization. 1985. https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/62311 . Accessed 22 Jul 2023.

World Health Organization. Promoting rational use of medicines: core components. In: WHO Policy Perspectives on Medicines. 2002. https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/67438/WHO_EDM_2002.3.pdf . Accessed 22 Jul 2023.

World Health Organization. How to develop and implement a national drug policy. 2nd ed. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2001.

Hoebert JM, van Dijk L, Mantel-Teeuwisse AK, Leufkens HG, Laing RO. National medicines policies – a review of the evolution and development processes. J Pharm Policy Pract. 2013. https://doi.org/10.1186/2052-3211-6-5 .

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Carone G, Schwierz C, Xavier A. Cost-containment policies in public pharmaceutical spending in the EU. In: Directorate-General for Economic and Financial Affairs publications. European Commission. 2012. https://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/publications/economic_paper/2012/pdf/ecp_461_en.pdf . Accessed 20 Sep 2023.

McLachlan AJ. National Medicines Policy 2.0: a vision for the future. Aust Prescr. 2020. https://doi.org/10.18773/austprescr.2020.007 .

Ministry of Health. Implementing Medicines New Zealand 2015 to 2020. Wellington: Ministry of Health; 2015.

Australian Government. National Medicines Policy 2022. Department of Health and Aged Care. https://www.health.gov.au/sites/default/files/2022-12/national-medicines-policy.pdf . Accessed7 Feb 2024

Ministry of Social Affairs and Health. Medicine Policy 2010 (available only in Finnish). In: Reports and memorandums of the ministry of social affairs and health. 2003. http://urn.fi/URN:NBN:fi-fe201504225206 . Accessed 20 Sep 2023.

Ministry of Social Affairs and Health. Medicines policy 2020 - Towards efficient, safe, rational, and cost-effective use of medicines. In: Reports and Memorandums of the Ministry of Social Affairs and Health. 2011. http://urn.fi/URN:ISBN:978-952-00-3165-7 . Accessed 20 Sep 2023.

Ministry of Social Affairs and Health. Socially sustainable Finland 2020: Strategy for social and health policy. In: Publication of the ministry of social affairs and health. 2011. http://urn.fi/URN:ISBN:978-952-00-3136-7 . Accessed 20 Sep 2023.

Saastamoinen LK, Verho J. Register-based indicators for potentially inappropriate medication in high-cost patients with excessive polypharmacy. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2015. https://doi.org/10.1002/pds.3764 .

Saastamoinen LK, Verho J. Drug expenditure of high-cost patients and their characteristics in Finland. Eur J Health Econ. 2013. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10198-012-0393-8 .

Kumpusalo-Vauhkonen A, Järvensivu T, Mäntylä A. A multidisciplinary approach to promoting sensible pharmacotherapy among aged persons – a national assessment and recommendations (available only in Finnish). In: Serial publication Fimea develops, assesses and informs. 2016 https://www.fimea.fi/documents/160140/1153780/KAI+8_2016.pdf/7acaeff3-999e-4749-8a47-36fbcb4db8b7 . Accessed 20 Sep 2023.

State Council of Finland. Finland, a land of solutions: Strategic Programme of Prime Minister Juha Sipilä’s Government. In: Government publications. 2015. http://urn.fi/URN:ISBN:978-952-287-185-5 . Accessed 20 Sep 2023.

Statistics Finland. Finland in Figures 2023.In: Finland in numbers Publication. 2023. https://urn.fi/URN:ISBN:978-952-244-713-5 . Accessed 14 Jun 2023.

Statistics Finland. Average life expectancy. In: Official statistics of Finland. 2023. https://www.stat.fi/en/publication/cktveopuw1zye0b55anfmkkye . Accessed 14 Jun 2023.

Ministry of Justice. The Constitution of Finland. In: Finlex. Finland: Ministry of Justice; 1999. https://www.finlex.fi/fi/laki/kaannokset/1999/en19990731.pdf . Accessed 20 Sep 2023.

European Commission. Finland country health profile 2021. In: Country health profile series. 2021. https://health.ec.europa.eu/system/files/2021-12/2021_chp_fi_english.pdf . Accessed 20 Sep 2023.

Kela. Financing. In: Kela official websites. https://www.kela.fi/operations-funding . Accessed 7 Apr 2023.

Finlex. Healthcare act (available only in Finnish). In: Finlex. https://www.finlex.fi/fi/laki/ajantasa/2010/20101326 . Accessed 7 Feb 2024

Pharmaceutical pricing board operations and organisation. In: Pharmaceutical pricing board websites. https://www.hila.fi/en/operations-and-organisation/ . Accessed 7 Feb 2024

Finnish Medicines Agency. Assessment of pharmacotherapies (HTA). In: Finnish Medicines Agency websites. https://fimea.fi/en/development/therapeutic_and_economic_value_of_medicines . Accessed 7 Feb 2024

Oulu University Hospital. The national HTA coordination unit FinCCHTA. In: Oulu University hospital website. Available from: https://oys.fi/fincchta/en/fincchta/ . Accessed 7 Feb 2024

Finnish Government. Health sector growth strategy for research and innovation activities. Roadmap for 2020–2023. In: Government Publications. 2020. http://urn.fi/URN:ISBN:978-952-383-520-7 . Accessed 7 Feb 2024

Ministry of Social Affairs and Health. Personalized medicine. In: Ministry of Social Affairs and Health websites. https://stm.fi/en/personalized-medicine . Accessed 7 Feb 2024

Kurko T, Silvast A, Wahlroos H, Pietilä K, Airaksinen M. Is pharmaceutical policy evidence-informed? A case of the deregulation process of nicotine replacement therapy products in Finland. Health Policy. 2012. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthpol.2012.02.013 .

Finish Medicines Agency. Medicines Act, Unofficial translation. In: Finlex. https://www.fimea.fi/documents/160140/765540/18580_Laakelaki_englanniksi_paivitetty_5_2011.pdf . Accessed 7 Apr 2023.

Finlex. Government Regulation on Medicines Tariff (available only in Finnish). In: Finlex. https://www.finlex.fi/fi/laki/ajantasa/2013/20130713?search%5Btype%5D=pika&search%5Bpika%5D=l%C3%A4%C3%A4ketaksa . Accessed 20 Sep 2023.

Finlex. Health Insurance Act. In: Finlex. https://www.finlex.fi/fi/laki/ajantasa/2004/20041224#O2L2P4 . Accessed Feb 8.

Nokelainen H, Lämsä E, Ahonen R, Timonen J. Reasons for allowing and refusing generic substitution and factors determining the choice of an interchangeable prescription medicine: a survey among pharmacy customers in Finland. BMC Health Serv Res. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-020-4894-3 .

State Council of Finland. The government’s proposal 314/2022 to parliament on amending the Medicines Act and the Health Insurance Act into laws (available only in Finnish). In: Parliament official website. 2022. https://www.eduskunta.fi/FI/vaski/KasittelytiedotValtiopaivaasia/Sivut/HE_314+2022.aspx . Accessed 20 Sep 2023.

State Council of Finland. Government proposal 107/2021 on Medicines Act (available only in Finnish). In: Parliament official website. 2021. https://www.eduskunta.fi/FI/vaski/KasittelytiedotValtiopaivaasia/Sivut/HE_107+2021.aspx . Accessed 20 Sep 2023.

Pharma Industry Finland. Pharmaceutical exports and imports. In: Statistics. 2022. https://www.pif.fi/newsroom/statistics.html . Accessed 7 Apr 2023.

Vehko T. E-health and e-welfare of Finland: Check Point 2022. In: Finnish institute for health and welfare. 2022. http://urn.fi/URN:ISBN:978-952-343-891-0 . Accessed 20 Sep 2023.

Kanta. MyKanta. In: Kanta official website.2023. https://www.kanta.fi/en/my-kanta-pages . Accessed 7 Apr 2023.

Jormanainen V. Large-scale implementation of the national Kanta service in Finland 2010–2018 with special focus on electronic prescription. Doctoral Dissertation. Helsinki: University of Helsinki; 2023.

Finnish institute for health and welfare. Enterprise architecture of Social and Health Services (available only in Finnish). In: Finnish institute for health and welfare official website. 2023. https://thl.fi/fi/web/tiedonhallinta-sosiaali-ja-terveysalalla/tiedonhallinnan-ohjaus/sote-kokonaisarkkitehtuuri . Accessed 7 Apr 2023.

Ollila E, Kataja V, Sailas L. A David and Goliath set-up: a qualitative study of the challenges of ensuring the introduction of cost-effective new cancer medicines in Finland. J Pharm Policy Pract. 2022. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40545-022-00449-5 .

Hämeen-Anttila K, Närhi U, Tahvanainen H. Rational Pharmacotherapy Action Plan. Final report. In: Reports and Memorandums of the Ministry of Social Affairs and Health. Ministry of Social Affairs and Health. 2018. http://urn.fi/URN:ISBN:978-952-00-3930-1 . Accessed 20 Sep 2023.

Von Bertalanffy L. General System Theory: Foundations, Development, Applications. New York: George Braziller Inc; 1969.

Armitage GD, Suter E, Oelke ND, Adair CE. Health systems integration: state of the evidence. Int J Integr Care. 2009. https://doi.org/10.5334/ijic.316 .

Suter E, Oelke ND, Adair CE, Armitage GD. Ten Key Principles for Successful Health Systems Integration. Healthcare Q. 2009. https://doi.org/10.12927/hcq.2009.21092 .

Article   Google Scholar  

Valentijn PP, Schepman SM, Opheij W, Bruijnzeels MA. Understanding integrated care: a comprehensive conceptual framework based on the integrative functions of primary care. Int J Integr Care. 2013. https://doi.org/10.5334/ijic.886 .

Elo S, Kyngäs H. The qualitative content analysis process. J Adv Nurs. 2008. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2007.04569.x .

Hsieh HF, Shannon SE. Three Approaches to Qualitative Content Analysis. Qual Health Res. 2005. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732305276687 .

Elo S, Kääriäinen M, Kanste O, Pölkki T, Utriainen K, Kyngäs H. Qualitative content analysis: A focus on trustworthiness. Sage Open; 2014. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244014522633 .

State Council of Finland. Government Proposal 241/2020 for legislation on establishing well-being services counties and reforming the organizing of health and social care services, and rescue services, and for issuing a notification in accordance with Articles 12 and 13 of the Charter of European Local Self-Government (available only in Finnish). In: Parliament official website. 2020. Accessed 20 Sep 2023. https://www.eduskunta.fi/FI/vaski/KasittelytiedotValtiopaivaasia/Sivut/HE_241+2020.aspx .

Finish Medicines Agency. Medicines information services: current state and strategy for 2020. In: Finnish Medicines Agency Fimea develops, assesses, and informs serial publication. 2012. https://urn.fi/URN:ISBN:978-952-5624-20-5 . Accessed 20 Sep 2023.

Ministry of Social Affairs and Health. Government resolution: Patient and client safety strategy 2017–2021. In: Publications of the Ministry of Social Affairs and Health. 2017. http://urn.fi/URN:ISBN:978-952-00-3958-5 . Accessed 20 Sep 2023.

European Commission. European Health Union. In: European Union official website. https://commission.europa.eu/strategy-and-policy/priorities-2019-2024/promoting-our-european-way-life/european-health-union_en . Accessed 4 Jun 2023.

European Commission. Pharmaceutical Strategy for Europe. In: EUR-Lex. European Commission; 2020. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:52020DC0761 . Accessed 20 Sep 2023.

European Commission. Regulation (EU) 2021/2282 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 December 2021 on health technology assessment and amending Directive 2011/24/EU. In: EUR-Lex. 2021. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2021/2282/oj . Accessed 20 Sep 2023.

European Commission. Proposal for a Regulation - The European Health Data Space. In: European Union official website. https://health.ec.europa.eu/publications/proposal-regulation-european-health-data-space_en . Accessed 20 Sep 2023.

European Commission. Introducing HERA, the European Health Emergency preparedness and Response Authority, the next step towards completing the European Health Union. In: EUR-Lex. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A52021DC0576 . Accessed 20 Sep 2023.

Kiviranta P, Hämeen-Anttila K. The medicine user at the Centre of Medicines Information – national medicines information strategy 2021‒2026. In: Finnish medicines agency Fimea serial publication Fimea develops, assesses, and informs. 2021. https://urn.fi/URN:ISBN:978-952-7299-16-6 . Accessed 20 Sep 2023.

Finnish Advisory Board On Research Integrity. Good scientific practice and handling of allegations of misconduct in Finland (available only in Finnish). In: Publications of the Finnish Advisory Board on Research Integrity. 2023. https://tenk.fi/sites/default/files/2023-03/HTK-ohje_2023.pdf . Accessed 14 Jun 2023.

Ministry of Social Affairs and Health: Rational Pharmacotherapy. In: Ministry of Social Affairs and Health websites. https://stm.fi/en/rational-pharmacotherapy . Accessed 5 Jun 2023.

Finish Medicines Agency. Materials of the Medicines Information Network. In: Finnish Medicines Agency websites. https://www.fimea.fi/web/en/development/medicines_information/high-quality-medicines-information . Accessed 11 Aug 2023.

Finnish Centre for Client and Patient Safety. Medication safety development network (available only in Finnish). In: Finnish Centre for Client and Patient Safety websites. https://asiakasjapotilasturvallisuuskeskus.fi/ammattilaisille-ja-opiskelijoille/kehittamis-ja-tutkimuslinjat/laakitysturvallisuus/ . Accessed 15 Sep 2023.

Finish Medicines Agency. Pharmacotherapy Day (available only in Finnish). In: Finnish Medicines Agency websites. https://www.fimea.fi/kehittaminen/laakeinformaation_kehittaminen/laakehoidon-paiva . Accessed 14 Sep 2023.

Lavikainen P, Aarnio E, Jalkanen K, Tirkkonen H, Rautiainen P, Laatikainen T, et al. Impact of co-payment level increase of antidiabetic medications on glycaemic control: an interrupted time-series study among Finnish patients with type 2 diabetes. BMC Health Serv Res. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-020-05952-6 .

Schepel L, Kuitunen S. Medication safety in hospitals (available only in Finnish). Duodecim. 2020;2:212–22.

Kunnola E. Ward and clinical pharmacy services in Finnish hospital pharmacies, medical dispensaries and other social welfare and health care organizations in 2022 (available only in Finnish). Master’s thesis. Helsinki: University of Helsinki; 2023.

Valve K. Development of pharmaceutical services in Finnish community pharmacies (available only in Finnish). Master’s Thesis. Helsinki: University of Helsinki; 2021.

Jokinen L. Health services or sales work: Strategic development of community pharmacy operations in a changing operating environment (available only in Finnish). Doctoral Dissertation. Helsinki: University of Helsinki; 2020.

Virkkunen H, Relander T, Malmivaara A, Hiltunen P, Jalonen M, Närvänen J. The concept of information management of pharmacotherapy (available only in Finnish). In: Publication of the Finnish institute for health and welfare. 2020. https://urn.fi/URN:NBN:fi-fe2020063046391 . Accessed 21 Sep 2023.

Rannanheimo P, Tahvanainen H, Kaskinen T, Vuokko R, Piispanen M, Tuominen J, et al. Solution description of the medicinal data repository. In: state administration co-working space (available only in Finnish). Ministry of Social Affairs and Health. 2022. https://yhteistyotilat.fi/wiki08/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=85474850 . Accessed 21 Sep 2023.

Ministry of Social Affairs and Health. Development of the pharmacy system Assessment of the current situation and proposals for further measures. In: Reports and Memorandums of the Ministry of Social Affairs and Health. 2023. http://urn.fi/URN:ISBN:978-952-00-5668-1 . Accessed 8 Apr 2023.

Ruskoaho H. Development of the medicine reimbursement scheme Examiner’s final report (available only in Finnish). In: Reports and memos of the Ministry of Social Affairs and Health. 2018. http://urn.fi/URN:ISBN:978-952-00-3933-2 . Accessed 8 Apr 2023.

Ministry of Social Affairs and Health. Steering and funding of pharmacotherapy Development guidelines (available only in Finnish). In: Reports and Memorandums of the Ministry of Social Affairs and Health. 2023. http://urn.fi/URN:ISBN:978-952-00-8361-8 . Accessed 21 Apr 2023.

Rannanheimo P, Kokko M, Piispanen M, Saarinen S, Nevalainen P, Tahvanainen H. Towards knowledge management in rational pharmacotherapy and pharmaceutical services — Report on the data-based guidance of pharmacotherapy and medicine use (available only in Finnish). In: Reports and Memorandums of the Ministry of Social Affairs and Health. 2023. http://urn.fi/URN:ISBN:978-952-00-6879-0 . Accessed 8 Apr 2023.

European Commission. Reform of the EU pharmaceutical legislation. In: European Union official website. https://health.ec.europa.eu/medicinal-products/pharmaceutical-strategy-europe/reform-eu-pharmaceutical-legislation_en . Accessed 6 May 2023.

United Nations. Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. In: United Nations websites. https://sdgs.un.org/publications/transforming-our-world-2030-agenda-sustainable-development-17981 . Accessed 7 Apr 2023.

State Council of Finland. Programme of Prime Minister Sanna Marin’s Government 10 December 2019: Inclusive and competent Finland - a socially, economically, and ecologically sustainable society. In: Publications of the Finnish Government. 2019. http://urn.fi/URN:ISBN:978-952-287-811-3 . Accessed 7 Apr 2023.

Ministry of Social Affairs and Health. Research for Evidence-Informed Decision-Making. In: Reports and Memorandums of the Ministry of Social Affairs and Health. 2018. http://urn.fi/URN:ISBN:978-952-00-3940-0 . Accessed 8 Apr 2023.

Finish Medicines Agency. Research Network for Rational Pharmacotherapy (RATTI). In: Finish Medicines Agency websites. https://www.fimea.fi/web/en/development/research/research-network-for-rational-pharmacotherapy-ratti- . Accessed 21 Sep 2023.

The Swedish Government, Swedish Association of Local Authorities. National pharmaceutical strategy 2020–2022. In: Swedish Medical Product Agency official website. https://www.lakemedelsverket.se/en/the-national-pharmaceutical-strategy . Accessed 21 Sep 2023.

State Council of Finland. A strong and committed Finland: Programme of Prime Minister Petteri Orpo’s Government. In: Publications of the Finnish Government. 2023. http://urn.fi/URN:ISBN:978-952-383-818-5 . Accessed 21 Sep 2023.

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank the civil servants of the Ministry of Social Affairs and Health and National Medicines Agency Fimea who served as chairmen of the Working Groups. In addition, the authors would like to thank all those stakeholders who participated in the development process of the Rational Pharmacotherapy Action Plan as Working Group members.

Open Access funding provided by University of Helsinki (including Helsinki University Central Hospital). No external funding was received for the study.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Drug Research Doctoral Programme, University of Helsinki, P.O. Box 56, 00014, Helsinki, Finland

Heidi Tahvanainen

Ministry of Social Affairs and Health, Meritullinkatu 8, 00170, Helsinki, Finland

Heidi Tahvanainen, Liisa-Maria Voipio-Pulkki, Ulla Närhi & Taina Mäntyranta

School of Pharmacy, University of Eastern Finland, Yliopistonranta 1, 70210, Kuopio, Finland

Katri Hämeen-Anttila

Health Emergency Preparedness and Response Authority (HERA), European Commission, Rue de La Loi 15, 1049, Brussels, Belgium

Clinical Pharmacy Group, Division of Pharmacology and Pharmacotherapy, Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Helsinki, Viikinkaari 5 E, P.O. Box 56, 00014, Helsinki, Finland

Heidi Tahvanainen, Anna-Riia Holmström & Marja Airaksinen

National Medicines Agency, Fimea, Mannerheimintie 166, 00300, Helsinki, Finland

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

Authors: Heidi Tahvanainen (HT), Katri Hämeen-Anttila (KHA), Marja Airaksinen (MA), Ulla Närhi (UN), Liisa-Maria Voipio-Pulkki (LMVP), Taina Mäntyranta (TM), Anna-Riia Holmström (ARH). Study concept and design: HT, MA. Acquisition and analysis or interpretation of data: HT, MA. Drafting of manuscript: HT, MA. Critical revision of manuscript for important intellectual content: HT, KHA, UN, LMVP, TM, ARH, MA. All authors have approved the final manuscript to be published.

Authors’ information

Ministry of Social affairs and Health, Meritullinkatu 8, 00170 Helsinki, Finland

Heidi Tahvanainen (HT), Ulla Närhi (UN), Liisa-Maria Voipio-Pulkki (LMVP), Taina Mäntyranta (TM)

National Medicines Agency, Fimea, Mannerheimintie 166, 00300 Helsinki, Finland

Katri Hämeen-Anttila (KHA)

HT, UN, and KHA have been appointed to new positions in other organizations.

Faculty of Pharmacy, Division of Pharmacology and Pharmacotherapy, Clinical Pharmacy Group, University of Helsinki, Viikinkaari 5 E, P.O. BOX 56, 00014, Helsinki, Finland

Heidi Tahvanainen (HT), Anna-Riia Holmström (ARH), Marja Airaksinen (MA)

All authors are female.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Heidi Tahvanainen .

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate.

The study was regarded as a development of policy practice. Therefore, no ethical approval was sought. Only publicly available material was used.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Supplementary material 1. , supplementary material 2. , supplementary material 3. , supplementary material 4. , supplementary material 5. , supplementary material 6. , supplementary material 7. , rights and permissions.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ . 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 in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Tahvanainen, H., Voipio-Pulkki, LM., Hämeen-Anttila, K. et al. Drawing up the public national Rational Pharmacotherapy Action Plan as part of social and health services reform in Finland: a bottom-up approach involving stakeholders. BMC Health Serv Res 24 , 631 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-024-11068-y

Download citation

Received : 27 September 2023

Accepted : 02 May 2024

Published : 16 May 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-024-11068-y

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Rational pharmacotherapy
• National medicines policy
• Pharmaceutical services
• Medication safety
• Community pharmacy
• Integration of services
• Social and health services reform
• People-centeredness
• Partnership
• Evidence-informed policy

BMC Health Services Research

ISSN: 1472-6963

• General enquiries: [email protected]