Validity Evidence for an Observational Fidelity Measure to Inform Scale-Up of Evidence-Based Interventions

IF 3 4区 社会学 Q1 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY Evaluation Review Pub Date : 2024-04-30 DOI:10.1177/0193841x241248864
Pamela R. Buckley, Katie Massey Combs, Karen M. Drewelow, Brittany L. Hubler, Marion Amanda Lain
{"title":"Validity Evidence for an Observational Fidelity Measure to Inform Scale-Up of Evidence-Based Interventions","authors":"Pamela R. Buckley, Katie Massey Combs, Karen M. Drewelow, Brittany L. Hubler, Marion Amanda Lain","doi":"10.1177/0193841x241248864","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"As evidence-based interventions are scaled, fidelity of implementation, and thus effectiveness, often wanes. Validated fidelity measures can improve researchers’ ability to attribute outcomes to the intervention and help practitioners feel more confident in implementing the intervention as intended. We aim to provide a model for the validation of fidelity observation protocols to guide future research studying evidence-based interventions scaled-up under real-world conditions. We describe a process to build evidence of validity for items within the Session Review Form, an observational tool measuring fidelity to interactive drug prevention programs such as the Botvin LifeSkills Training program. Following Kane’s (2006) assumptions framework requiring that validity evidence be built across four areas (scoring, generalizability, extrapolation, and decision), confirmatory factor analysis supported the hypothesized two-factor structure measuring quality of delivery (seven items assessing how well the material is implemented) and participant responsiveness (three items evaluating how well the intervention is received), and measurement invariance tests suggested the structure held across grade level and schools serving different student populations. These findings provide some evidence supporting the extrapolation assumption, though additional research is warranted since a more complete overall depiction of the validity argument is needed to evaluate fidelity measures.","PeriodicalId":47533,"journal":{"name":"Evaluation Review","volume":"11 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Evaluation Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0193841x241248864","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

As evidence-based interventions are scaled, fidelity of implementation, and thus effectiveness, often wanes. Validated fidelity measures can improve researchers’ ability to attribute outcomes to the intervention and help practitioners feel more confident in implementing the intervention as intended. We aim to provide a model for the validation of fidelity observation protocols to guide future research studying evidence-based interventions scaled-up under real-world conditions. We describe a process to build evidence of validity for items within the Session Review Form, an observational tool measuring fidelity to interactive drug prevention programs such as the Botvin LifeSkills Training program. Following Kane’s (2006) assumptions framework requiring that validity evidence be built across four areas (scoring, generalizability, extrapolation, and decision), confirmatory factor analysis supported the hypothesized two-factor structure measuring quality of delivery (seven items assessing how well the material is implemented) and participant responsiveness (three items evaluating how well the intervention is received), and measurement invariance tests suggested the structure held across grade level and schools serving different student populations. These findings provide some evidence supporting the extrapolation assumption, though additional research is warranted since a more complete overall depiction of the validity argument is needed to evaluate fidelity measures.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
观察保真度测量的有效性证据,为循证干预措施的推广提供依据
随着循证干预措施规模的扩大,实施的忠实度以及有效性往往会减弱。经过验证的忠实度测量方法可以提高研究人员将结果归因于干预措施的能力,并帮助实践者更有信心地按照预期实施干预措施。我们的目标是为忠实性观察协议的验证提供一个模型,以指导未来在真实世界条件下对基于证据的干预措施进行推广的研究。我们描述了为会话审查表中的项目建立有效性证据的过程,会话审查表是衡量互动式毒品预防项目(如博文生活技能培训项目)忠实性的观察工具。根据凯恩(2006 年)的假设框架,需要在四个方面(评分、可推广性、外推和决策)建立有效性证据,确认性因素分析支持假设的双因素结构,即测量交付质量(七个项目评估材料的实施情况)和参与者响应性(三个项目评估干预措施的接受情况),测量不变性测试表明该结构在不同年级和服务于不同学生群体的学校中保持不变。这些研究结果提供了一些支持外推法假设的证据,但还需要进行更多的研究,因为需要对有效性论证进行更全面的整体描述,以评估忠实性测量。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Evaluation Review
Evaluation Review SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
11.10%
发文量
80
期刊介绍: Evaluation Review is the forum for researchers, planners, and policy makers engaged in the development, implementation, and utilization of studies aimed at the betterment of the human condition. The Editors invite submission of papers reporting the findings of evaluation studies in such fields as child development, health, education, income security, manpower, mental health, criminal justice, and the physical and social environments. In addition, Evaluation Review will contain articles on methodological developments, discussions of the state of the art, and commentaries on issues related to the application of research results. Special features will include periodic review essays, "research briefs", and "craft reports".
期刊最新文献
Effects of Behaviour Change Communication on Knowledge and Prevention of Malaria Among Women in Ghana. When Who Matters: Interviewer Effects and Survey Modality. Calibrating Items Using an Unfolding Model of Item Response Theory: The Case of the Trait Personality Questionnaire 5 (TPQue5). Cluster Randomized Trials Designed to Support Generalizable Inferences. Multistage Supply Chain Channel Principal-Agent Model in the Context of e-Commerce With Fairness Preference.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1