Improving cancer prevention and control through implementing academic-local public health department partnerships - protocol for a cluster-randomized implementation trial using a positive deviance approach.

Stephanie Mazzucca-Ragan, Peg Allen, Kathleen Amos, Abigail R Barker, Madisen Brewer, Paul C Erwin, Jessica Gannon, Feng Gao, Rebekah R Jacob, Rebecca Lengnick-Hall, Ross C Brownson
{"title":"Improving cancer prevention and control through implementing academic-local public health department partnerships - protocol for a cluster-randomized implementation trial using a positive deviance approach.","authors":"Stephanie Mazzucca-Ragan, Peg Allen, Kathleen Amos, Abigail R Barker, Madisen Brewer, Paul C Erwin, Jessica Gannon, Feng Gao, Rebekah R Jacob, Rebecca Lengnick-Hall, Ross C Brownson","doi":"10.1186/s43058-025-00706-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Local public health departments in the United States are responsible for implementing cancer-related programs and policies in their communities; however, many staff have not been trained to use evidence-based processes, and the organizational climate may be unsupportive of evidence-based processes. A promising approach to address these gaps is through academic-public health department (AHD) partnerships, in which practitioners and academics collaborate to improve public health practice and education through joint research projects and educational opportunities. Prior research has demonstrated the benefits of AHD partnerships to public health practice and education. However, knowledge about how AHD partnerships should be structured to support implementation of programs and policies is sparse.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This is a mixed methods, two-phase study, guided by the Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, and Sustainment (EPIS) Framework, in which AHD partnerships are a relational type of bridging factor. A positive deviance approach will be used to understand how AHD partnerships are best structured and supported. In the formative phase, we will survey academics and local health department staff (n = 500) to characterize AHD partnerships and understand contextual influences. We will conduct in-depth interviews with eight AHD partnerships (four high and four low engagement), to identify differences between high and low engagement partnerships. The second, experimental phase will be a paired group randomized trial with 28 AHD partnerships (n = 14 randomized to implementation arm and n = 14 to the control arm). A menu of strategies will be refined through survey and interview findings, literature, and our team's previous work. The trial will assess whether these strategies can be used to strengthen partnerships and improve adoption of cancer prevention and control programs and policies. We will evaluate changes in AHD partnership engagement and implementation of evidence-based programs and policies.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>This first-of-its-kind study will focus on collaborations that leverage complementary expertise of health department staff and academics to improve public health practice. Our results can impact the field by identifying new, sustainable models for how public health practitioners and academics can work together to meet common goals, increase the use of evidence-based programs and policies, and expand our understanding of bridging factors within the EPIS framework.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>Prospective registered on 9/17/2024 at clinicaltrials.gov no. NCT06605196 ( https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT06605196 ).</p>","PeriodicalId":73355,"journal":{"name":"Implementation science communications","volume":"6 1","pages":"20"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11852556/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Implementation science communications","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s43058-025-00706-z","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Local public health departments in the United States are responsible for implementing cancer-related programs and policies in their communities; however, many staff have not been trained to use evidence-based processes, and the organizational climate may be unsupportive of evidence-based processes. A promising approach to address these gaps is through academic-public health department (AHD) partnerships, in which practitioners and academics collaborate to improve public health practice and education through joint research projects and educational opportunities. Prior research has demonstrated the benefits of AHD partnerships to public health practice and education. However, knowledge about how AHD partnerships should be structured to support implementation of programs and policies is sparse.

Methods: This is a mixed methods, two-phase study, guided by the Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, and Sustainment (EPIS) Framework, in which AHD partnerships are a relational type of bridging factor. A positive deviance approach will be used to understand how AHD partnerships are best structured and supported. In the formative phase, we will survey academics and local health department staff (n = 500) to characterize AHD partnerships and understand contextual influences. We will conduct in-depth interviews with eight AHD partnerships (four high and four low engagement), to identify differences between high and low engagement partnerships. The second, experimental phase will be a paired group randomized trial with 28 AHD partnerships (n = 14 randomized to implementation arm and n = 14 to the control arm). A menu of strategies will be refined through survey and interview findings, literature, and our team's previous work. The trial will assess whether these strategies can be used to strengthen partnerships and improve adoption of cancer prevention and control programs and policies. We will evaluate changes in AHD partnership engagement and implementation of evidence-based programs and policies.

Discussion: This first-of-its-kind study will focus on collaborations that leverage complementary expertise of health department staff and academics to improve public health practice. Our results can impact the field by identifying new, sustainable models for how public health practitioners and academics can work together to meet common goals, increase the use of evidence-based programs and policies, and expand our understanding of bridging factors within the EPIS framework.

Trial registration: Prospective registered on 9/17/2024 at clinicaltrials.gov no. NCT06605196 ( https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT06605196 ).

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
背景:美国的地方公共卫生部门负责在其社区内实施与癌症相关的计划和政策;然而,许多工作人员并未接受过使用循证流程的培训,组织氛围也可能不支持循证流程。学术界与公共卫生部门(AHD)的合作是解决这些差距的一个可行方法,在这种合作中,从业人员和学术界通过联合研究项目和教育机会,共同改善公共卫生实践和教育。先前的研究已经证明了学术-公共卫生部门伙伴关系对公共卫生实践和教育的益处。然而,有关如何构建 AHD 伙伴关系以支持计划和政策实施的知识却很少:本研究采用混合方法,分两个阶段进行,以探索、准备、实施和维持(EPIS)框架为指导,在该框架中,AHD 伙伴关系是一种关系型桥梁因素。我们将采用积极偏差法来了解如何以最佳方式构建和支持排雷行动伙伴关系。在形成阶段,我们将对学术界和地方卫生部门的工作人员(n = 500)进行调查,以了解儿童保健发展合作关系的特点,并了解背景影响因素。我们将对八家儿童保健发展合作机构(四家参与度高,四家参与度低)进行深入访谈,以确定参与度高和参与度低的合作机构之间的差异。第二阶段为实验阶段,我们将对 28 个保健发展合作伙伴进行配对随机试验(n = 14 个被随机分配到实施组,n = 14 个被分配到对照组)。将通过调查和访谈结果、文献以及我们团队以前的工作来完善策略菜单。该试验将评估这些策略是否可用于加强合作关系并改善癌症预防和控制计划及政策的采用情况。我们将评估卫生防疫合作关系的变化以及循证计划和政策的实施情况:这项首创性研究将重点关注利用卫生部门工作人员和学者互补的专业知识来改善公共卫生实践的合作。我们的研究结果将对该领域产生影响,为公共卫生从业人员和学术界如何合作以实现共同目标、增加循证计划和政策的使用,以及扩大我们对 EPIS 框架内衔接因素的理解,确定新的、可持续的模式:前瞻性试验于 2024 年 9 月 17 日在 clinicaltrials.gov 注册,编号为 nct06605196 ( )。NCT06605196 ( https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT06605196 ).
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
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
24 weeks
期刊最新文献
Combined use of the integrated-Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (i-PARIHS) framework with other implementation frameworks: a systematic review. Applying the major system change framework to evaluate implementation of rapid healthcare system change: a case study of COVID-19 remote home monitoring services. Evaluation of a notes-based rapid qualitative analysis method to facilitate implementation. Development of a method for qualitative data integration to advance implementation science within research consortia. The "good enough" facilitator: elucidating the role of working alliance in the mechanism of facilitation.
×
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