Skip to main content

Advertisement

Table 2 Activities associated with each step of the case study process (modified from Molnar et al. [5])

From: How and why do win–win strategies work in engaging policy-makers to implement Health in All Policies? A multiple-case study of six state- and national-level governments

ActivitiesDescription
Collect and synthesise data within each case and generate single case study reports
 Consult literatureWe collected literature on HiAP for each case by undertaking a systematic search for peer-reviewed, government and grey literature that was relevant for the testing of hypotheses
 Conduct key informant interviews with Health in All Policies (HiAP) expertsWe identified HiAP experts with substantial experience in working on HiAP by undertaking a search for prominent authors of reports on the case as well as by snowball sampling. Expertise and experience were confirmed through screening potential interviewees and, within each case, we interviewed 10–15 individuals representing civil servants from various sectors, politicians and researchers; we inquired about evidence related to the hypotheses using a semi-structured interview guide (the hypotheses as such were not mentioned) and transcribed the interviews for the systematic coding of the data
 Code literature and interview transcripts for evidence on hypothesesWe coded and summarised all interview transcripts and literature for evidence of the hypotheses, specifically looking for data on context–mechanism–outcome (CMO) configurations; within each CMO, we indicated whether they directly confirmed or refuted the hypothesis, or whether they served as counterfactual evidence; in particular, we considered how and why certain actions and activities were effective in convincing stakeholders to participate in HiAP initiatives, paying considerable attention to contextual factors that conditioned the mechanisms at play
 Summarise findingsThick interview/literature CMOs (i.e. those with clear links between a mechanism and an outcome) were summarised by a hypothesis; thin interview/literature CMOs (i.e. unclear links between a mechanism and an outcome) were used as supporting evidence
 Assess for quality and strength of evidenceWe described evidence according to triangulation (i.e. whether the mechanism was supported by both interview and literature sources)
 Write case reportsOur end-product for case-specific analyses was a case report
Analyse data across cases
 Synthesise findings for each hypothesis across single case study reports to draw cross-case conclusionsUse results on support for hypothesis from single case studies to (1) categorise cases as literal replications or theoretical replications for each hypothesis and (2) synthesise findings for each hypothesis across cases to draw cross-case conclusions; undertake member checking by sharing findings with advisory group