Scott Shannon D, Rotter Thomas, Hartling Lisa, Chambers Thane, Bannar-Martin Katherine H
Faculty of Nursing, Level 3, Edmonton Clinic Health Academy, University of Alberta, 11405 87 Avenue, Edmonton, Alberta T6G 1C9, Canada.
Syst Rev. 2014 Dec 23;3:149. doi: 10.1186/2046-4053-3-149.
Experimental designs for evaluating knowledge translation (KT) interventions for professional behavior change can provide strong estimates of intervention effectiveness but offer limited insight how the intervention worked or not. Furthermore, trials provide little insight into the ways through which interventions lead to behavior change and how they are moderated by different facilitators and barriers. As a result, the ability to generalize the findings from one study to a different context, organization, or clinical problem is severely compromised. Consequently, researchers have started to explore the causal mechanisms in complementary studies (process evaluations) alongside experimental designs for evaluating KT interventions. This study focuses on improving process evaluations by synthesizing current evidence on process evaluations conducted alongside experimental designs for evaluating KT interventions.
METHODS/DESIGN: A medical research librarian will develop and implement search strategies designed to identify evidence that is relevant to process evaluations in health research. Studies will not be excluded based on design. Included studies must contain a process evaluation component aimed at understanding or evaluating a KT intervention targeting professional behavior change. Two reviewers will perform study selection, quality assessment, and data extraction using standard forms. Disagreements will be resolved through discussion or third party adjudication. Data to be collected include study design, details about data collection approaches and types, theoretical influences, approaches to evaluate intervention dose delivered, intervention dose received, intervention fidelity, intervention reach, data analysis, and study outcomes. This study is not registered with PROSPERO.
There is widespread acceptance that the generalizability of quantitative trials of KT interventions would be significantly enhanced to other contexts, health professional groups, and clinical conditions through complementary process evaluations alongside trials. This systematic review will serve as a 'state of the science' on methodological approaches to process evaluations and will allow us to: 1) take stock of current research approaches and 2) develop concrete recommendations for knowledge users (e.g., quality consultants and health services researchers) designing future KT process evaluations.
评估促进专业行为改变的知识转化（KT）干预措施的实验设计能够有力地估计干预效果，但对于干预措施如何发挥作用或未起作用的洞察有限。此外，试验对于干预措施导致行为改变的方式以及不同促进因素和障碍如何对其产生调节作用几乎没有提供任何见解。因此，将一项研究的结果推广到不同背景、组织或临床问题的能力会受到严重影响。因此，研究人员已开始在评估KT干预措施的实验设计之外，通过补充研究（过程评估）来探索因果机制。本研究聚焦于通过综合当前关于与评估KT干预措施的实验设计同时进行的过程评估的证据，来改进过程评估。
方法/设计：医学研究图书馆员将制定并实施检索策略，以识别与健康研究中的过程评估相关的证据。研究不会因设计而被排除。纳入的研究必须包含一个过程评估部分，旨在理解或评估针对专业行为改变的KT干预措施。两名评审员将使用标准表格进行研究筛选、质量评估和数据提取。分歧将通过讨论或第三方裁决解决。要收集的数据包括研究设计、关于数据收集方法和类型的详细信息、理论影响、评估所提供干预剂量的方法、所接受的干预剂量、干预保真度、干预覆盖范围、数据分析以及研究结果。本研究未在国际前瞻性系统评价注册库（PROSPERO）注册。
人们普遍认为，通过在试验之外进行补充过程评估，KT干预措施定量试验的可推广性将显著提高到其他背景、卫生专业群体和临床状况。这项系统评价将作为过程评估方法学的“科学现状”，并将使我们能够：1）评估当前的研究方法，以及2）为设计未来KT过程评估的知识使用者（如质量顾问和卫生服务研究人员）制定具体建议。
