Suppr超能文献

“立足现状展开研究”:一项关于实施策略保真度评估与报告的障碍及实用解决方案的定性研究

"We start where we are": a qualitative study of barriers and pragmatic solutions to the assessment and reporting of implementation strategy fidelity.

作者信息

Akiba Christopher F, Powell Byron J, Pence Brian W, Muessig Kate, Golin Carol E, Go Vivian

机构信息

RTI International, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA.

Center for Mental Health Services Research, Brown School, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, USA.

出版信息

Implement Sci Commun. 2022 Oct 29;3(1):117. doi: 10.1186/s43058-022-00365-4.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Fidelity measurement of implementation strategies is underdeveloped and underreported, and the level of reporting is decreasing over time. Failing to properly measure the factors that affect the delivery of an implementation strategy may obscure the link between a strategy and its outcomes. Barriers to assessing and reporting implementation strategy fidelity among researchers are not well understood. The aims of this qualitative study were to identify barriers to fidelity measurement and pragmatic pathways towards improvement.

METHODS

We conducted in-depth interviews among researchers conducting implementation trials. We utilized a theory-informed interview approach to elicit the barriers and possible solutions to implementation strategy fidelity assessment and reporting. Reflexive-thematic analysis guided coding and memo-writing to determine key themes regarding barriers and solutions.

RESULTS

Twenty-two implementation researchers were interviewed. Participants agreed that implementation strategy fidelity was an essential element of implementation trials and that its assessment and reporting should improve. Key thematic barriers focused on (1) a current lack of validated fidelity tools with the need to assess fidelity in the short term, (2) the complex nature of some implementation strategies, (3) conceptual complications when assessing fidelity within mechanisms-focused implementation research, and (4) structural issues related to funding and publishing. Researchers also suggested pragmatic solutions to overcome each barrier. Respondents reported using specification and tracking data in the short term until validated tools become available. Participants suggested that researchers with strategy-specific content expertise lead the way in identifying core components and setting fidelity requirements for them. Addressing the third barrier, participants provided examples of what pragmatic prospective and retrospective fidelity assessments might look like along a mechanistic pathway. Finally, researchers described approaches to minimize costs of data collection, as well as more structural accountability like adopting and enforcing reporting guidelines or changing the structure of funding opportunities.

DISCUSSION

We propose short- and long-term priorities for improving the assessment and reporting of implementation strategy fidelity and the quality of implementation research.

CONCLUSIONS

A better understanding of the barriers to implementation strategy fidelity assessment may pave the way towards pragmatic solutions.

摘要

背景

实施策略的保真度测量尚不完善且报道不足,并且随着时间的推移,报道水平在下降。未能正确测量影响实施策略交付的因素可能会模糊策略与其结果之间的联系。研究人员在评估和报告实施策略保真度方面存在的障碍尚未得到充分理解。这项定性研究的目的是确定保真度测量的障碍以及改进的实用途径。

方法

我们对进行实施试验的研究人员进行了深入访谈。我们采用基于理论的访谈方法,以引出实施策略保真度评估和报告的障碍及可能的解决方案。反思性主题分析指导编码和撰写备忘录,以确定有关障碍和解决方案的关键主题。

结果

采访了22名实施研究人员。参与者一致认为,实施策略保真度是实施试验的一个基本要素,其评估和报告应该得到改进。关键的主题障碍集中在:(1)目前缺乏经过验证的保真度工具,且需要在短期内评估保真度;(2)一些实施策略的复杂性;(3)在以机制为重点的实施研究中评估保真度时的概念复杂性;(4)与资金和出版相关的结构性问题。研究人员还提出了克服每个障碍的实用解决方案。受访者报告称,在短期使用规范和跟踪数据,直到有经过验证的工具可用。参与者建议,具有特定策略内容专业知识的研究人员应率先确定核心组成部分并为其设定保真度要求。针对第三个障碍,参与者提供了沿着机制途径进行实用的前瞻性和回顾性保真度评估可能是什么样的示例。最后,研究人员描述了尽量减少数据收集成本的方法,以及更多的结构性问责制,如采用和执行报告指南或改变资金机会的结构。

讨论

我们提出了改进实施策略保真度评估和报告以及实施研究质量的短期和长期优先事项。

结论

更好地理解实施策略保真度评估的障碍可能为实用解决方案铺平道路。

相似文献

2
The future of Cochrane Neonatal.
Early Hum Dev. 2020 Nov;150:105191. doi: 10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2020.105191. Epub 2020 Sep 12.
3
The case for prioritizing implementation strategy fidelity measurement: benefits and challenges.
Transl Behav Med. 2022 Feb 16;12(2):335-342. doi: 10.1093/tbm/ibab138.
8

引用本文的文献

3
A conceptual framework for assessing implementation strategy integrity.
Implement Res Pract. 2024 Dec 5;5:26334895241297278. doi: 10.1177/26334895241297278. eCollection 2024 Jan-Dec.
4
A research agenda to advance the study of implementation mechanisms.
Implement Sci Commun. 2024 Sep 16;5(1):98. doi: 10.1186/s43058-024-00633-5.
6
Rethinking Barriers and Enablers in Qualitative Health Research: Limitations, Alternatives, and Enhancements.
Qual Health Res. 2024 Dec;34(14):1371-1383. doi: 10.1177/10497323241230890. Epub 2024 Mar 9.
8
Fidelity to the ACT SMART Toolkit: an instrumental case study of implementation strategy fidelity.
Implement Sci Commun. 2023 May 16;4(1):52. doi: 10.1186/s43058-023-00434-2.

本文引用的文献

2
Mechanism mapping to advance research on implementation strategies.
PLoS Med. 2022 Feb 8;19(2):e1003918. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1003918. eCollection 2022 Feb.
3
The case for prioritizing implementation strategy fidelity measurement: benefits and challenges.
Transl Behav Med. 2022 Feb 16;12(2):335-342. doi: 10.1093/tbm/ibab138.
5
Strengthening methods for tracking adaptations and modifications to implementation strategies.
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2021 Jun 26;21(1):133. doi: 10.1186/s12874-021-01326-6.
6
The FRAME-IS: a framework for documenting modifications to implementation strategies in healthcare.
Implement Sci. 2021 Apr 7;16(1):36. doi: 10.1186/s13012-021-01105-3.
7
Examining the Effects of a Brief, Group-Based Motivational Implementation Strategy on Mechanisms of Teacher Behavior Change.
Prev Sci. 2021 Aug;22(6):722-736. doi: 10.1007/s11121-020-01191-7. Epub 2020 Nov 23.
8
A systematic review of empirical studies examining mechanisms of implementation in health.
Implement Sci. 2020 Apr 16;15(1):21. doi: 10.1186/s13012-020-00983-3.

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