Suppr超能文献

开发多准则决策分析工具以支持采用循证儿童虐待预防方案。

Developing a Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis Tool to Support the Adoption of Evidence-Based Child Maltreatment Prevention Programs.

机构信息

Oregon Social Learning Center, Eugene, OR, USA.

Department of Health Policy and Management, Gillings School of Public Health, University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.

出版信息

Prev Sci. 2020 Nov;21(8):1059-1064. doi: 10.1007/s11121-020-01174-8. Epub 2020 Oct 11.

Abstract

Decision-makers need to consider a range of factors when selecting evidence-based programs (EBPs) for implementation, which can be especially challenging when addressing complex issues such as child maltreatment prevention. Multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) frameworks and tools are useful for evaluating such complex decisions. We describe the development and testing of the first MCDA tool to compare EBPs for child neglect prevention. To develop the tool, we engaged stakeholders (n = 8) to define the problem and identify 13 criteria and associated weights. In a pilot study, we tested the MCDA tool with decision-makers (n = 11) who were asked to rank three evidence-based child neglect prevention interventions both with and without the tool. The MCDA's weighted sum intervention ranking differed from the ranking without the tool in the majority of the sample (55%). Decision-makers provided guidance on criteria that should be clarified or added, resulting in 16 criteria in an iterated tool. The most frequent criterion suggestions related to community acceptance of the intervention, health equity, implementation supports, and sustainability. Decision-maker feedback guided user interface refinements. The MCDA tool was generally well accepted by decision-makers due to their trust in the stakeholder engagement process. More research is needed to understand the acceptability of MCDA approaches in additional contexts and whether EBPs adopted with decision support have different population health impacts compared with EBPs adopted without support. MCDA tools could facilitate evidence-based responses to federal policy and funding opportunities such as the Families First Preventive Services Act.

摘要

决策者在选择实施循证方案 (EBP) 时需要考虑一系列因素,而在解决儿童虐待预防等复杂问题时,这可能特别具有挑战性。多准则决策分析 (MCDA) 框架和工具可用于评估此类复杂决策。我们描述了开发和测试用于比较儿童忽视预防循证方案的第一个 MCDA 工具的过程。为了开发该工具,我们让利益相关者(n=8)参与其中,以定义问题并确定 13 个标准及其相关权重。在一项试点研究中,我们让决策者(n=11)使用该 MCDA 工具对三种预防儿童忽视的循证干预措施进行排名,其中一种有工具,另一种没有工具。在大多数样本中(55%),MCDA 的加权总和干预排名与没有工具的排名不同。决策者就应明确或添加的标准提供了指导,从而在迭代工具中增加了 16 个标准。最常见的标准建议涉及干预措施的社区接受度、健康公平性、实施支持和可持续性。决策者的反馈指导了用户界面的改进。决策者对该 MCDA 工具的总体接受度较高,因为他们信任利益相关者的参与过程。需要开展更多研究以了解在其他环境中 MCDA 方法的可接受性,以及在有决策支持的情况下采用的循证方案与没有支持的情况下采用的循证方案是否对人口健康产生不同影响。MCDA 工具可以促进对联邦政策和资金机会(例如《家庭第一预防服务法案》)的循证应对。

相似文献

4
Guidance toward the implementation of multicriteria decision analysis framework in developing countries.发展中国家多标准决策分析框架实施指南。
Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2018 Dec;18(6):585-592. doi: 10.1080/14737167.2018.1508345. Epub 2018 Aug 24.
6
Stakeholder involvement in Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis.利益相关者参与多标准决策分析。
Cost Eff Resour Alloc. 2018 Nov 9;16(Suppl 1):0. doi: 10.1186/s12962-018-0120-0. eCollection 2018.

引用本文的文献

本文引用的文献

5
Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases.《不确定性下的判断:启发式与偏差》
Science. 1974 Sep 27;185(4157):1124-31. doi: 10.1126/science.185.4157.1124.

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