推进实施机制研究的研究议程。

Cara C Lewis, Hannah E Frank, Gracelyn Cruden, Bo Kim, Aubyn C Stahmer, Aaron R Lyon, Bianca Albers, Gregory A Aarons, Rinad S Beidas, Brian S Mittman, Bryan J Weiner, Nate J Williams, Byron J Powell
{"title":"推进实施机制研究的研究议程。","authors":"Cara C Lewis, Hannah E Frank, Gracelyn Cruden, Bo Kim, Aubyn C Stahmer, Aaron R Lyon, Bianca Albers, Gregory A Aarons, Rinad S Beidas, Brian S Mittman, Bryan J Weiner, Nate J Williams, Byron J Powell","doi":"10.1186/s43058-024-00633-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Implementation science scholars have made significant progress identifying factors that enable or obstruct the implementation of evidence-based interventions, and testing strategies that may modify those factors. However, little research sheds light on how or why strategies work, in what contexts, and for whom. Studying implementation mechanisms-the processes responsible for change-is crucial for advancing the field of implementation science and enhancing its value in facilitating equitable policy and practice change. The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality funded a conference series to achieve two aims: (1) develop a research agenda on implementation mechanisms, and (2) actively disseminate the research agenda to research, policy, and practice audiences. This article presents the resulting research agenda, including priorities and actions to encourage its execution.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Building on prior concept mapping work, in a semi-structured, 3-day, in-person working meeting, 23 US-based researchers used a modified nominal group process to generate priorities and actions for addressing challenges to studying implementation mechanisms. During each of the three 120-min sessions, small groups responded to the prompt: \"What actions need to be taken to move this research forward?\" The groups brainstormed actions, which were then shared with the full group and discussed with the support of facilitators trained in structured group processes. Facilitators grouped critical and novel ideas into themes. Attendees voted on six themes they prioritized to discuss in a fourth, 120-min session, during which small groups operationalized prioritized actions. Subsequently, all ideas were collated, combined, and revised for clarity by a subset of the authorship team.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>From this multistep process, 150 actions emerged across 10 priority areas, which together constitute the research agenda. Actions included discrete activities, projects, or products, and ways to shift how research is conducted to strengthen the study of implementation mechanisms.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This research agenda elevates actions to guide the selection, design, and evaluation of implementation mechanisms. By delineating recommended actions to address the challenges of studying implementation mechanisms, this research agenda facilitates expanding the field of implementation science, beyond studying what works to how and why strategies work, in what contexts, for whom, and with which interventions.</p>","PeriodicalId":73355,"journal":{"name":"Implementation science communications","volume":"5 1","pages":"98"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11403843/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A research agenda to advance the study of implementation mechanisms.\",\"authors\":\"Cara C Lewis, Hannah E Frank, Gracelyn Cruden, Bo Kim, Aubyn C Stahmer, Aaron R Lyon, Bianca Albers, Gregory A Aarons, Rinad S Beidas, Brian S Mittman, Bryan J Weiner, Nate J Williams, Byron J Powell\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s43058-024-00633-5\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Implementation science scholars have made significant progress identifying factors that enable or obstruct the implementation of evidence-based interventions, and testing strategies that may modify those factors. However, little research sheds light on how or why strategies work, in what contexts, and for whom. Studying implementation mechanisms-the processes responsible for change-is crucial for advancing the field of implementation science and enhancing its value in facilitating equitable policy and practice change. The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality funded a conference series to achieve two aims: (1) develop a research agenda on implementation mechanisms, and (2) actively disseminate the research agenda to research, policy, and practice audiences. This article presents the resulting research agenda, including priorities and actions to encourage its execution.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Building on prior concept mapping work, in a semi-structured, 3-day, in-person working meeting, 23 US-based researchers used a modified nominal group process to generate priorities and actions for addressing challenges to studying implementation mechanisms. During each of the three 120-min sessions, small groups responded to the prompt: \\\"What actions need to be taken to move this research forward?\\\" The groups brainstormed actions, which were then shared with the full group and discussed with the support of facilitators trained in structured group processes. Facilitators grouped critical and novel ideas into themes. Attendees voted on six themes they prioritized to discuss in a fourth, 120-min session, during which small groups operationalized prioritized actions. Subsequently, all ideas were collated, combined, and revised for clarity by a subset of the authorship team.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>From this multistep process, 150 actions emerged across 10 priority areas, which together constitute the research agenda. Actions included discrete activities, projects, or products, and ways to shift how research is conducted to strengthen the study of implementation mechanisms.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This research agenda elevates actions to guide the selection, design, and evaluation of implementation mechanisms. By delineating recommended actions to address the challenges of studying implementation mechanisms, this research agenda facilitates expanding the field of implementation science, beyond studying what works to how and why strategies work, in what contexts, for whom, and with which interventions.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":73355,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Implementation science communications\",\"volume\":\"5 1\",\"pages\":\"98\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11403843/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Implementation science communications\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s43058-024-00633-5\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Implementation science communications","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s43058-024-00633-5","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:实施科学学者在确定促进或阻碍循证干预措施实施的因素以及测试可能改变这些因素的策略方面取得了重大进展。然而,很少有研究能揭示这些策略是如何或为什么起作用的,在什么情况下起作用,对谁起作用。研究实施机制--负责变革的过程--对于推动实施科学领域的发展以及提高其在促进公平政策和实践变革方面的价值至关重要。医疗保健研究与质量机构资助了一系列会议,以实现两个目标:(1)制定有关实施机制的研究议程;(2)积极向研究、政策和实践受众传播研究议程。本文介绍了由此产生的研究议程,包括鼓励执行该议程的优先事项和行动:方法:在先前概念绘图工作的基础上,23 位美国研究人员在一次为期 3 天的半结构化现场工作会议上,采用修改后的名义小组流程,提出了应对实施机制研究挑战的优先事项和行动。在三次 120 分钟的会议中,每个小组都对提示做出了回应:"需要采取哪些行动来推进这项研究?各小组集思广益,然后与全组成员分享,并在接受过结构化小组进程培训的主持人的支持下进行讨论。主持人将关键和新颖的想法按主题分组。与会者投票选出他们优先考虑的六个主题,在第四次 120 分钟的会议上进行讨论,在此期间,各小组将优先考虑的行动付诸实施。随后,作者团队的一个子集对所有想法进行了整理、合并和修改,使其更加清晰:从这一多步骤过程中,产生了 150 项行动,涉及 10 个优先领域,共同构成了研究议程。行动包括独立的活动、项目或产品,以及改变研究方式以加强实施机制研究的方法:本研究议程提出了指导实施机制的选择、设计和评估的行动。本研究议程提出了应对实施机制研究挑战的建议行动,从而促进实施科学领域的扩展,从研究什么有效扩展到研究在什么情况下、对谁、用什么干预措施,战略如何以及为什么有效。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
A research agenda to advance the study of implementation mechanisms.

Background: Implementation science scholars have made significant progress identifying factors that enable or obstruct the implementation of evidence-based interventions, and testing strategies that may modify those factors. However, little research sheds light on how or why strategies work, in what contexts, and for whom. Studying implementation mechanisms-the processes responsible for change-is crucial for advancing the field of implementation science and enhancing its value in facilitating equitable policy and practice change. The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality funded a conference series to achieve two aims: (1) develop a research agenda on implementation mechanisms, and (2) actively disseminate the research agenda to research, policy, and practice audiences. This article presents the resulting research agenda, including priorities and actions to encourage its execution.

Method: Building on prior concept mapping work, in a semi-structured, 3-day, in-person working meeting, 23 US-based researchers used a modified nominal group process to generate priorities and actions for addressing challenges to studying implementation mechanisms. During each of the three 120-min sessions, small groups responded to the prompt: "What actions need to be taken to move this research forward?" The groups brainstormed actions, which were then shared with the full group and discussed with the support of facilitators trained in structured group processes. Facilitators grouped critical and novel ideas into themes. Attendees voted on six themes they prioritized to discuss in a fourth, 120-min session, during which small groups operationalized prioritized actions. Subsequently, all ideas were collated, combined, and revised for clarity by a subset of the authorship team.

Results: From this multistep process, 150 actions emerged across 10 priority areas, which together constitute the research agenda. Actions included discrete activities, projects, or products, and ways to shift how research is conducted to strengthen the study of implementation mechanisms.

Conclusions: This research agenda elevates actions to guide the selection, design, and evaluation of implementation mechanisms. By delineating recommended actions to address the challenges of studying implementation mechanisms, this research agenda facilitates expanding the field of implementation science, beyond studying what works to how and why strategies work, in what contexts, for whom, and with which interventions.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 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
Audit and feedback is an effective implementation strategy to increase fidelity to a multi-component labor induction protocol designed to reduce obstetric inequities. Development of an implementation intervention to promote adoption of the COMFORT clinical practice guideline for peripartum pain management: a qualitative study. The system can change: a feasibility study of a doula-clinician collaborative at a large tertiary hospital in the United States. Development and evaluation of an implementation strategy to increase HPV vaccination among underserved youth across Texas: a protocol paper. Impact of learning health systems on cross-system collaboration between youth legal and community mental health systems: a type II hybrid effectiveness-implementation trial.
×
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