Stakeholder perspectives on digital behavioral health applications targeting adolescent depression and suicidality: Policymaker, provider, and community insights.

Ana Radovic, Afton Kirk-Johnson, Morgan Coren, Brandie George-Milford, David Kolko
{"title":"Stakeholder perspectives on digital behavioral health applications targeting adolescent depression and suicidality: Policymaker, provider, and community insights.","authors":"Ana Radovic,&nbsp;Afton Kirk-Johnson,&nbsp;Morgan Coren,&nbsp;Brandie George-Milford,&nbsp;David Kolko","doi":"10.1177/26334895221120796","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>With adolescent depression and suicidality increasing, technology-based interventions may help address mental health needs. The Enhancing Treatment and Utilization for Depression and Emergent Suicidality (ETUDES) Center supports development of technology interventions to help primary care providers target these problems. To successfully develop and integrate such interventions into primary care, iterative engagement of stakeholders is necessary. This paper outlines our stakeholder engagement process, a qualitative analysis of feedback and outcomes, and how feedback was incorporated to develop Center interventions.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Stakeholder panels represented key end-users of ETUDES Center interventions (adolescents, young adults, parents, and healthcare providers) and their advocates at the organizational/policy level. Meetings were held throughout intervention development and at annual retreats. Detailed meeting notes were collected and summarized by the stakeholder engagement team in real time, after which action items were generated and reviewed by the full research team. Using a content analysis approach, all stakeholder feedback summaries were coded using a prespecified codebook organized by recurring topics. Codes were organized under the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Anonymous stakeholder feedback surveys assessed relevance of topics, meeting effectiveness, and stakeholder involvement.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Stakeholder meetings provided feedback on topics such as representation, language, access to care, and stigma. Relevant feedback and recommendations were incorporated into subsequent iterations of the interventions and their implementation. Mean stakeholder ratings of meeting proceedings on a 0-3 Likert scale ranged from 1.70 (<i>SD</i>  =  0.10) for participation to 2.43 (<i>SD</i>  =  0.08) for effectiveness in addressing meeting agenda.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The iterative engagement approach yielded practical feedback from stakeholders about ETUDES Center interventions. The team organized feedback to identify barriers and facilitators to using Center interventions and to generate action items, which were transposed onto components of an implementation strategy, supplemented by the CFIR-ERIC Implementation Strategy Matching Tool. Stakeholder feedback will direct the future development of an integrated intervention and guide further stakeholder engagement in developing technologies for adolescent mental health.<b>Plain Language Summary:</b> Depression and suicide in teens have been on the rise for the past several years. Primary care may be an ideal place to address these concerns because most teens have a primary care provider (PCP) who can offer a confidential place for both teens and their caregivers. Our Center develops technology-based interventions to help PCPs address teen depression and suicidality. Multiple barriers may hinder PCPs in addressing teen depression and suicidality. This paper describes how we engaged multiple types of stakeholders-or individuals with an interest in adolescent mental health-to ask for their feedback over a series of meetings, to help us improve the fit of our interventions to this population. Stakeholders included providers, community members like parents and mental health advocates, youth, and policymakers. We learned what was most important to them-including concerns about equitable access (e.g., providing broadband internet to families who do not have it so they can still participate) and legal risks or failures for the technology to identify suicidality. In this paper, we describe our process for not only recruiting and engaging stakeholders but also for planning action based on their feedback. Similar processes could be used by other researchers and clinical organizations seeking to incorporate technology into mental health interventions.</p>","PeriodicalId":73354,"journal":{"name":"Implementation research and practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/2f/52/10.1177_26334895221120796.PMC9924270.pdf","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Implementation research and practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/26334895221120796","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Background: With adolescent depression and suicidality increasing, technology-based interventions may help address mental health needs. The Enhancing Treatment and Utilization for Depression and Emergent Suicidality (ETUDES) Center supports development of technology interventions to help primary care providers target these problems. To successfully develop and integrate such interventions into primary care, iterative engagement of stakeholders is necessary. This paper outlines our stakeholder engagement process, a qualitative analysis of feedback and outcomes, and how feedback was incorporated to develop Center interventions.

Methods: Stakeholder panels represented key end-users of ETUDES Center interventions (adolescents, young adults, parents, and healthcare providers) and their advocates at the organizational/policy level. Meetings were held throughout intervention development and at annual retreats. Detailed meeting notes were collected and summarized by the stakeholder engagement team in real time, after which action items were generated and reviewed by the full research team. Using a content analysis approach, all stakeholder feedback summaries were coded using a prespecified codebook organized by recurring topics. Codes were organized under the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Anonymous stakeholder feedback surveys assessed relevance of topics, meeting effectiveness, and stakeholder involvement.

Results: Stakeholder meetings provided feedback on topics such as representation, language, access to care, and stigma. Relevant feedback and recommendations were incorporated into subsequent iterations of the interventions and their implementation. Mean stakeholder ratings of meeting proceedings on a 0-3 Likert scale ranged from 1.70 (SD  =  0.10) for participation to 2.43 (SD  =  0.08) for effectiveness in addressing meeting agenda.

Conclusions: The iterative engagement approach yielded practical feedback from stakeholders about ETUDES Center interventions. The team organized feedback to identify barriers and facilitators to using Center interventions and to generate action items, which were transposed onto components of an implementation strategy, supplemented by the CFIR-ERIC Implementation Strategy Matching Tool. Stakeholder feedback will direct the future development of an integrated intervention and guide further stakeholder engagement in developing technologies for adolescent mental health.Plain Language Summary: Depression and suicide in teens have been on the rise for the past several years. Primary care may be an ideal place to address these concerns because most teens have a primary care provider (PCP) who can offer a confidential place for both teens and their caregivers. Our Center develops technology-based interventions to help PCPs address teen depression and suicidality. Multiple barriers may hinder PCPs in addressing teen depression and suicidality. This paper describes how we engaged multiple types of stakeholders-or individuals with an interest in adolescent mental health-to ask for their feedback over a series of meetings, to help us improve the fit of our interventions to this population. Stakeholders included providers, community members like parents and mental health advocates, youth, and policymakers. We learned what was most important to them-including concerns about equitable access (e.g., providing broadband internet to families who do not have it so they can still participate) and legal risks or failures for the technology to identify suicidality. In this paper, we describe our process for not only recruiting and engaging stakeholders but also for planning action based on their feedback. Similar processes could be used by other researchers and clinical organizations seeking to incorporate technology into mental health interventions.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

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
利益相关者对针对青少年抑郁和自杀的数字行为健康应用的观点:决策者、提供者和社区见解。
背景:随着青少年抑郁和自杀倾向的增加,基于技术的干预措施可能有助于解决心理健康需求。加强抑郁症和突发自杀的治疗和利用(ETUDES)中心支持技术干预的发展,以帮助初级保健提供者针对这些问题。为了成功地开发并将此类干预措施纳入初级保健,利益攸关方必须不断参与。本文概述了我们的利益相关者参与过程,反馈和结果的定性分析,以及如何将反馈纳入中心的干预措施。方法:利益相关者小组代表了ETUDES中心干预措施的主要最终用户(青少年、年轻人、父母和医疗保健提供者)及其在组织/政策层面的倡导者。在整个干预措施发展过程和年度务静会期间举行了会议。利益相关者参与团队实时收集和总结详细的会议记录,然后由整个研究团队生成和审查行动项目。使用内容分析方法,所有涉众反馈摘要都使用由重复主题组织的预先指定的代码本进行编码。守则是在实施研究综合框架(CFIR)下编制的。匿名涉众反馈调查评估了主题的相关性、会议有效性和涉众参与。结果:利益相关者会议提供了关于代表性、语言、获得护理和耻辱等主题的反馈。相关的反馈和建议被纳入后续的干预措施及其实施。在0-3李克特量表上,利益相关者对会议程序的平均评分范围从参与的1.70 (SD = 0.10)到解决会议议程的有效性的2.43 (SD = 0.08)。结论:迭代参与方法从利益相关者那里获得了关于ETUDES中心干预措施的实际反馈。该团队组织了反馈,以确定使用中心干预措施的障碍和促进因素,并生成行动项目,这些项目被转换为实施战略的组成部分,并由cfr - eric实施战略匹配工具补充。利益攸关方的反馈将指导综合干预措施的未来发展,并指导利益攸关方进一步参与开发青少年心理健康技术。在过去的几年里,青少年的抑郁和自杀呈上升趋势。初级保健可能是解决这些问题的理想场所,因为大多数青少年都有初级保健提供者(PCP),他们可以为青少年和他们的照顾者提供一个保密的地方。我们的中心开发了基于技术的干预措施来帮助pcp解决青少年抑郁和自杀问题。多重障碍可能阻碍pcp解决青少年抑郁和自杀问题。这篇论文描述了我们如何与多种类型的利益相关者(或对青少年心理健康感兴趣的个人)进行接触,并通过一系列会议征求他们的反馈,以帮助我们改善对这一人群的干预。利益相关者包括提供者、社区成员(如父母和精神卫生倡导者)、青年和政策制定者。我们了解到对他们来说最重要的是什么——包括对公平接入的关注(例如,为没有宽带互联网的家庭提供宽带互联网,以便他们仍然可以参与),以及识别自杀行为的技术的法律风险或失败。在本文中,我们不仅描述了招募和吸引利益相关者的过程,还描述了根据他们的反馈计划行动的过程。其他研究人员和临床组织也可以采用类似的方法,寻求将技术纳入心理健康干预措施。
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
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
18 weeks
期刊最新文献
Calculating power for multilevel implementation trials in mental health: Meaningful effect sizes, intraclass correlation coefficients, and proportions of variance explained by covariates. Preparation for implementation of evidence-based practices in urban schools: A shared process with implementing partners. Are we being equitable enough? Lessons learned from sites lost in an implementation trial. Examining implementation determinants of a culturally grounded, school-based prevention curriculum in rural Hawai'i: A test development and validation study. Applying the resource management principle to achieve community engagement and experimental rigor in the multiphase optimization strategy framework.
×
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