Suppr超能文献

对预防性干预措施的变化进行分类:应用适应分类法。

Classifying Changes to Preventive Interventions: Applying Adaptation Taxonomies.

作者信息

Roscoe Joseph N, Shapiro Valerie B, Whitaker Kelly, Kim B K Elizabeth

机构信息

Center for Prevention Research in Social Welfare, University of California Berkeley School of Social Welfare, 120 Haviland Hall, Berkeley, CA, 94720, USA.

School Mental Health Assessment, Research, and Training (SMART) Center, Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Washington, 6200 NE 74th Street, Suite 100, Seattle, WA, 98115, USA.

出版信息

J Prim Prev. 2019 Feb;40(1):89-109. doi: 10.1007/s10935-018-00531-2.

Abstract

High-quality implementation is important for preventive intervention effectiveness. Although this implies fidelity to a practice model, some adaptation may be inevitable or even advantageous in routine practice settings. In order to organize the study of adaptation and its effect on intervention outcomes, scholars have proposed various adaptation taxonomies. This paper examines how four published taxonomies retrospectively classify adaptations: the Ecological Validity Framework (EVF; Bernal et al. in J Abnorm Child Psychol 23(1):67-82, 1995), the Hybrid Prevention Program Model (HPPM; Castro et al. in Prev Sci 5(1):41-45, 2004. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:PREV.0000013980.12412.cd ), the Moore et al. (J Prim Prev 34(3):147-161, 2013. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10935-013-0303-6 ) taxonomy, and the Stirman et al. (Implement Sci 8:65, 2013. https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-8-65 ) taxonomy. We used these taxonomies to classify teacher-reported adaptations made during the implementation of TOOLBOX™, a social emotional learning program implemented in 11 elementary schools during the 2014-2015 academic year. Post-implementation, 271 teachers and staff responded to an online survey that included questions about adaptation, yielding 98 adaptation descriptions provided by 42 respondents. Four raters used each taxonomy to try to classify these descriptions. We assessed the extent to which raters agreed they could classify the descriptions using each taxonomy (coverage), as well as the extent to which raters agreed on the subcategory they assigned (clarity). Results indicated variance among taxonomies, and tensions between the ideals of coverage and clarity emerged. Further studies of adaptation taxonomies as coding instruments may improve their performance, helping scholars more consistently assess adaptations and their effects on preventive intervention outcomes.

摘要

高质量的实施对于预防性干预的效果至关重要。虽然这意味着要忠实于一种实践模式,但在常规实践环境中,一些调整可能是不可避免的,甚至是有益的。为了组织对调整及其对干预结果影响的研究,学者们提出了各种调整分类法。本文考察了四种已发表的分类法如何对调整进行回顾性分类:生态效度框架(EVF;贝尔纳尔等人,《异常儿童心理学杂志》,第23卷第1期,第67 - 82页,1995年)、混合预防计划模型(HPPM;卡斯特罗等人,《预防科学》,第5卷第1期,第41 - 45页,2004年。https://doi.org/10.1023/B:PREV.0000013980.12412.cd )、摩尔等人(《初级预防杂志》,第34卷第3期,第147 - 161页,2013年。https://doi.org/10.1007/s10935-013-0303-6 )的分类法以及斯特曼等人(《实施科学》,第8卷,第65页,2013年。https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-8-65 )的分类法。我们使用这些分类法对教师报告的在2014 - 2015学年在11所小学实施的社会情感学习项目TOOLBOX™过程中所做的调整进行分类。实施后,271名教师和工作人员对一项在线调查做出了回应,该调查包括关于调整的问题,42名受访者提供了98条调整描述。四名评分者使用每种分类法对这些描述进行分类。我们评估了评分者在多大程度上同意他们能够使用每种分类法对描述进行分类(覆盖范围),以及评分者在他们所分配的子类别上的一致程度(清晰度)。结果表明不同分类法之间存在差异,并且在覆盖范围和清晰度的理想状态之间出现了矛盾。作为编码工具的调整分类法的进一步研究可能会提高它们的性能,帮助学者更一致地评估调整及其对预防性干预结果的影响。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验