Background: Accreditation has become ubiquitous across the international health care landscape. Award of full accreditation status in health care is viewed, as it is in other sectors, as a valid indicator of high quality organisational performance. However, few studies have empirically demonstrated this assertion. The value of accreditation, therefore, remains uncertain, and this persists as a central legitimacy problem for accreditation providers, policymakers and researchers. The question arises as to how best to research the validity, impact and value of accreditation processes in health care. Most health care organisations participate in some sort of accreditation process and thus it is not possible to study its merits using a randomised controlled strategy. Further, tools and processes for accreditation and organisational performance are multifaceted.Methods/design: To understand the relationship between them a multi-method research approach is required which incorporates both quantitative and qualitative data. The generic nature of accreditation standard development and inspection within different sectors enhances the extent to which the findings of in-depth study of accreditation process in one industry can be generalised to other industries. This paper presents a research design which comprises a prospective, multi-method, multi-level, multi-disciplinary approach to assess the validity, impact and value of accreditation.Discussion: The accreditation program which assesses over 1,000 health services in Australia is used as an exemplar for testing this design. The paper proposes this design as a framework suitable for application to future international research into accreditation. Our aim is to stimulate debate on the role of accreditation and how to research it.

Sport as a mechanism to build relationships across cultural boundaries and to build positive interactions among young people has often been promoted in the literature. However, robust evaluation of sport-for-development program impacts is limited. This study reports on an impact evaluation of a sport-for-development program in Australia, Football United®.

Background: Arts‐based methodologies and methods (ABM) can elicit rich and meaningful data with seldom‐heard groups and empower participants in research. Young people with complex psychosocial needs could be better engaged in research using arts‐based approaches to overcome communication and literacy issues as well as distrust of those with power, including researchers. A critical review of the use and impact of ABM among this population is timely. The purpose of this review is to synthesize and examine the experience and use of ABM with young people with complex psychosocial needs.Methods: A systematic narrative literature review was conducted with a search of the literature from 2009 to 2021. All abstracts were reviewed independently by two authors and full papers were screened for eligibility against inclusion and exclusion criteria. Data synthesis focused on a descriptive numerical summary and a thematic analysis focused on key patterns across papers relating to the review objectives.Results and Discussion: A total of 25 papers were included. The most common issues of focus were mental health (n = 10) and homelessness (n = 11) and methods using Photovoice (n = 12) and Body Mapping (n = 5). Individual interview data (n = 20) were the most commonly analysed, followed by created works (n = 19). Less than half the studies involved young people in the interpretation of the data collected. Knowledge translation was not described in almost half the studies, with public exhibits (n = 7) and forums with service providers (n = 4) being the most common activities. Key themes across the studies were valued over traditional methods in eliciting data, ABM as an approach to engage these young people in research and the impact of the use of ABM on participants and on key stakeholders through knowledge translation.Conclusions: The growing field of ABM presents opportunities to enhance research with young people with complex psychosocial needs by promoting meaningful exploration of experiences, engaging participants in research and strengthening knowledge translation. The involvement of young people in the interpretation of data and ensuring that knowledge translation occurs are key areas for future attention.Patient or Public Contribution: The findings of this review will inform future research to improve the engagement of young people with complex psychosocial needs in research and promote power sharing between researchers and research participants.

This paper draws together critical learnings from diverse qualitative health research projects in Australia that sought to shift power and focus on the strengths and expertise of people with lived experience who are involved as co-researchers. These projects have included exploring and challenging identities, understanding experiences in treatment programs, critiquing and designing/re-designing services, and sharing experiences with the wider community in novel and innovative ways. Lived experiences included alcohol and other drug dependency, mental health, domestic, family or sexual violence, and living with HIV. This paper provides important learnings and actions about partnering with co-researchers with lived experience. In this paper we draw on a process of reflective discussions that occurred over six months with fortnightly online meetings between co-researchers, including co-authors with lived experience external to academia and university-based researchers, some of whom also have lived-experience that intersects with their research. From this, we distilled key learnings across seven themes: (1) the ethics of ethics, which highlights a need for constant reflection on the ethical issues in co-research; (2) recruiting co-researchers, which focuses on ensuring and integrating a diversity of voices; (3) creating safety for all, which must be a priority of engagement and support self-determination; (4) supporting different ways of partnering, which emphasises the need for diverse roles and ways to contribute on research teams; (5) capacity building and training, which requires ongoing evaluation of needs and tailored responses; (6) positioning, which highlights the need to transition from the idea of vulnerability to a strengths-based perspective of lived experience; and (7) power plays, reflecting the need to disrupt the dynamics and established hierarchies of privileging certain forms of knowledge and expertise. The paper includes recommendations for action against these seven themes.

Seeking achievement of health equity has underpinned national government and global health policies for decades. However, major difficulties and challenges faced in the practice of achieving ‘Health for All’ has led to a recognition of the need to broaden the focus of efforts to improve health equity. Civil society groups have been identified as key stakeholders in attempts to achieve health equity, and the importance of strengthening their capacity to influence relevant government policy and practice has been highlighted. This paper presents the results of a qualitative study which examined the role of organizations outside government in advocating for health equity, and the capacities and conditions that were related to their success. In-depth, unstructured interviews were conducted with 26 non-government organizations (NGOs) who were active in three important health policy debates in Australia. The grounded theory method was used to direct data collection and analysis, and member checking was employed to ensure soundness and build ownership of the findings. Effective advocacy was found to be a dynamic process characterized by flexibility and opportunism within a framework of longer term goals. Two key ways of working were identified—in partnership and in conflict with government, with shifts in emphasis in response to organizational strengths and a changing environment. A number of domains of capacity, which together are termed ‘capacity for advocacy’, were also identified. It is clear that NGOs can learn a great deal from each other, but there needs to be investment by governments, international agencies and NGOs themselves if advocacy for health equity is to be strengthened.