Shoba Ramanadhan, Jennifer L Cruz, Maggie Weese, Shinelle Kirk, Madison K Rivard, Arthur Eisenkraft, Karen Peterson, Judi Kirk, Albert Whitaker, Chinyere Nwamuo, Scott R Rosas
{"title":"社区组织从业人员和学者对实施循证干预技能的不同概念图:多维缩放比较。","authors":"Shoba Ramanadhan, Jennifer L Cruz, Maggie Weese, Shinelle Kirk, Madison K Rivard, Arthur Eisenkraft, Karen Peterson, Judi Kirk, Albert Whitaker, Chinyere Nwamuo, Scott R Rosas","doi":"10.1093/tbm/ibae051","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Community-based organizations (CBOs) are critical for delivering evidence-based interventions (EBIs) to address cancer inequities. However, a lack of consensus on the core skills needed for this work often hinders capacity-building strategies to support EBI implementation. The disconnect is partly due to differing views of EBIs and related skills held by those typically receiving versus developing capacity-building interventions (here, practitioners and academics, respectively). Our team of implementation scientists and practice-based advisors used group concept mapping to engage 34 CBO practitioners and 30 academics with experience addressing cervical cancer inequities implementing EBIs. We created group-specific maps of skills using multidimensional scaling and hierarchical cluster analysis, then compared them using Procrustes comparison permutations. The 98 skills were sorted into six clusters by CBO practitioners and five by academics. The groups generated maps with statistically comparable underlying structures but also statistically significant divergence. Some skill clusters had high concordance across the two maps, e.g. \"managing funding and external resources.\" Other skill clusters, e.g. \"adapting EBIs\" from the CBO practitioner map and \"selecting and adapting EBIs\" from the academic map, did not overlap as much. Across groups, key clusters of skills included connecting with community members, understanding the selected EBI and community context, adapting EBIs, building diverse and equitable partnerships, using data and evaluation, and managing funding and external resources. There is a significant opportunity to combine CBO practitioners' systems/community frames with the EBI-focused frame of academics to promote EBI utilization and address cancer and other health inequities.</p>","PeriodicalId":48679,"journal":{"name":"Translational Behavioral Medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Differing conceptual maps of skills for implementing evidence-based interventions held by community-based organization practitioners and academics: A multidimensional scaling comparison.\",\"authors\":\"Shoba Ramanadhan, Jennifer L Cruz, Maggie Weese, Shinelle Kirk, Madison K Rivard, Arthur Eisenkraft, Karen Peterson, Judi Kirk, Albert Whitaker, Chinyere Nwamuo, Scott R Rosas\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/tbm/ibae051\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Community-based organizations (CBOs) are critical for delivering evidence-based interventions (EBIs) to address cancer inequities. However, a lack of consensus on the core skills needed for this work often hinders capacity-building strategies to support EBI implementation. The disconnect is partly due to differing views of EBIs and related skills held by those typically receiving versus developing capacity-building interventions (here, practitioners and academics, respectively). Our team of implementation scientists and practice-based advisors used group concept mapping to engage 34 CBO practitioners and 30 academics with experience addressing cervical cancer inequities implementing EBIs. We created group-specific maps of skills using multidimensional scaling and hierarchical cluster analysis, then compared them using Procrustes comparison permutations. The 98 skills were sorted into six clusters by CBO practitioners and five by academics. The groups generated maps with statistically comparable underlying structures but also statistically significant divergence. Some skill clusters had high concordance across the two maps, e.g. \\\"managing funding and external resources.\\\" Other skill clusters, e.g. \\\"adapting EBIs\\\" from the CBO practitioner map and \\\"selecting and adapting EBIs\\\" from the academic map, did not overlap as much. Across groups, key clusters of skills included connecting with community members, understanding the selected EBI and community context, adapting EBIs, building diverse and equitable partnerships, using data and evaluation, and managing funding and external resources. There is a significant opportunity to combine CBO practitioners' systems/community frames with the EBI-focused frame of academics to promote EBI utilization and address cancer and other health inequities.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48679,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Translational Behavioral Medicine\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Translational Behavioral Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/tbm/ibae051\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Translational Behavioral Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/tbm/ibae051","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
Differing conceptual maps of skills for implementing evidence-based interventions held by community-based organization practitioners and academics: A multidimensional scaling comparison.
Community-based organizations (CBOs) are critical for delivering evidence-based interventions (EBIs) to address cancer inequities. However, a lack of consensus on the core skills needed for this work often hinders capacity-building strategies to support EBI implementation. The disconnect is partly due to differing views of EBIs and related skills held by those typically receiving versus developing capacity-building interventions (here, practitioners and academics, respectively). Our team of implementation scientists and practice-based advisors used group concept mapping to engage 34 CBO practitioners and 30 academics with experience addressing cervical cancer inequities implementing EBIs. We created group-specific maps of skills using multidimensional scaling and hierarchical cluster analysis, then compared them using Procrustes comparison permutations. The 98 skills were sorted into six clusters by CBO practitioners and five by academics. The groups generated maps with statistically comparable underlying structures but also statistically significant divergence. Some skill clusters had high concordance across the two maps, e.g. "managing funding and external resources." Other skill clusters, e.g. "adapting EBIs" from the CBO practitioner map and "selecting and adapting EBIs" from the academic map, did not overlap as much. Across groups, key clusters of skills included connecting with community members, understanding the selected EBI and community context, adapting EBIs, building diverse and equitable partnerships, using data and evaluation, and managing funding and external resources. There is a significant opportunity to combine CBO practitioners' systems/community frames with the EBI-focused frame of academics to promote EBI utilization and address cancer and other health inequities.
期刊介绍:
Translational Behavioral Medicine publishes content that engages, informs, and catalyzes dialogue about behavioral medicine among the research, practice, and policy communities. TBM began receiving an Impact Factor in 2015 and currently holds an Impact Factor of 2.989.
TBM is one of two journals published by the Society of Behavioral Medicine. The Society of Behavioral Medicine is a multidisciplinary organization of clinicians, educators, and scientists dedicated to promoting the study of the interactions of behavior with biology and the environment, and then applying that knowledge to improve the health and well-being of individuals, families, communities, and populations.