Curran Geoffrey M, Landes Sara J, McBain Sacha A, Pyne Jeffrey M, Smith Justin D, Fernandez Maria E, Chambers David A, Mittman Brian S
Department of Pharmacy Practice, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Little Rock, AR, United States.
Center for Mental Health Outcomes Research, Central Arkansas Veterans Healthcare System, North Little Rock, AR, United States.
Front Health Serv. 2022 Dec 8;2:1053496. doi: 10.3389/frhs.2022.1053496. eCollection 2022.
This article provides new reflections and recommendations from authors of the initial effectiveness-implementation hybrid study manuscript and additional experts in their conceptualization and application. Given the widespread and continued use of hybrid studies, critical appraisals are necessary. The article offers reflections across five conceptual and methodological areas. It begins with the recommendation to replace the term "design" in favor of "study." The use of the term "design" and the explicit focus on trial methodology in the original paper created confusion. The essence of hybrid studies is combining research questions concerning intervention effectiveness and implementation within the same study, and this can and should be achieved by applying a full range of research designs. Supporting this recommendation, the article then offers guidance on selecting a hybrid study type based on evidentiary and contextual information and stakeholder concerns/preferences. A series of questions are presented that have been designed to help investigators select the most appropriate hybrid type for their study situation. The article also provides a critique on the hybrid 1-2-3 typology and offers reflections on when and how to use the typology moving forward. Further, the article offers recommendations on research designs that align with each hybrid study type. Lastly, the article offers thoughts on how to integrate costs analyses into hybrid studies.
本文提供了初始有效性-实施混合研究手稿的作者以及其他在概念化和应用方面的专家的新思考和建议。鉴于混合研究的广泛且持续使用，进行批判性评价很有必要。本文在五个概念和方法领域展开了思考。首先建议用“研究”一词取代“设计”。原始论文中“设计”一词的使用以及对试验方法的明确关注造成了混淆。混合研究的本质是在同一研究中结合关于干预有效性和实施的研究问题，这可以且应该通过应用一系列研究设计来实现。为支持这一建议，本文接着基于证据和背景信息以及利益相关者的关注/偏好，提供了选择混合研究类型的指导。提出了一系列问题，旨在帮助研究者为其研究情境选择最合适的混合类型。本文还对混合1-2-3类型学进行了批判，并对未来何时以及如何使用该类型学进行了思考。此外，本文针对与每种混合研究类型相匹配的研究设计提出了建议。最后，本文就如何将成本分析纳入混合研究给出了思考。
