美国两个州的外部实施支持活动轨迹:一项描述性研究。

Implementation research and practice Pub Date : 2023-06-21 eCollection Date: 2023-01-01 DOI:10.1177/26334895231154285
William A Aldridge, Rebecca H Roppolo, Shannon D Chaplo, Ariel B Everett, Sherra N Lawrence, Christina I DiSalvo, Devon R Minch, Jessica J Reed, Renée I Boothroyd
{"title":"美国两个州的外部实施支持活动轨迹:一项描述性研究。","authors":"William A Aldridge, Rebecca H Roppolo, Shannon D Chaplo, Ariel B Everett, Sherra N Lawrence, Christina I DiSalvo, Devon R Minch, Jessica J Reed, Renée I Boothroyd","doi":"10.1177/26334895231154285","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Reporting on strategies to advance implementation outcomes is imperative. The current study reports descriptive information about external implementation support (EIS) provided over 5 years to 13 regions in North Carolina and South Carolina scaling an evidence-based system of parenting and family supports. Regional support teams operating through the Implementation Capacity for Triple P (ICTP) projects employed core practice components (CPCs) for EIS as proposed by Aldridge et al. and further operationalized by members of The Impact Center at FPG Child Development Institute, UNC-Chapel Hill.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Practice activities associated with CPCs were developed and iteratively refined across the study period. ICTP regional support teams systematically tracked their use of CPCs and related activities following each substantive support interaction. Tracking included the duration of time a CPC was employed and the use of specific practice activities associated with that CPC. Data were aggregated by month of the relationship to account for differential start dates across regions.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>From November 2016 through December 2021, ICTP support teams tracked 749 support interactions with Triple P regions in North Carolina and South Carolina. Monthly support decreased year over year, though dose varied considerably. Patterns of CPC use indicated a high dose of \"foundational\" and \"co-design\" CPCs early, followed by a blended and more diverse use thereafter, with some notable trends. Practice activities considered essential to influencing intended practice outcomes were characterized by higher rates of use. Like CPCs, practice activities were used dynamically across the study period.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This descriptive study offers a case study for how EIS might be operationalized, tracked, and employed. Findings suggest several interpretations that might refine our understanding and use of EIS. Although the nature of this practical report precludes generalizability of findings, directions for future research and practice are discussed.</p>","PeriodicalId":73354,"journal":{"name":"Implementation research and practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10293536/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Trajectory of external implementation support activities across two states in the United States: A descriptive study.\",\"authors\":\"William A Aldridge, Rebecca H Roppolo, Shannon D Chaplo, Ariel B Everett, Sherra N Lawrence, Christina I DiSalvo, Devon R Minch, Jessica J Reed, Renée I Boothroyd\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/26334895231154285\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Reporting on strategies to advance implementation outcomes is imperative. The current study reports descriptive information about external implementation support (EIS) provided over 5 years to 13 regions in North Carolina and South Carolina scaling an evidence-based system of parenting and family supports. Regional support teams operating through the Implementation Capacity for Triple P (ICTP) projects employed core practice components (CPCs) for EIS as proposed by Aldridge et al. and further operationalized by members of The Impact Center at FPG Child Development Institute, UNC-Chapel Hill.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Practice activities associated with CPCs were developed and iteratively refined across the study period. ICTP regional support teams systematically tracked their use of CPCs and related activities following each substantive support interaction. Tracking included the duration of time a CPC was employed and the use of specific practice activities associated with that CPC. Data were aggregated by month of the relationship to account for differential start dates across regions.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>From November 2016 through December 2021, ICTP support teams tracked 749 support interactions with Triple P regions in North Carolina and South Carolina. Monthly support decreased year over year, though dose varied considerably. Patterns of CPC use indicated a high dose of \\\"foundational\\\" and \\\"co-design\\\" CPCs early, followed by a blended and more diverse use thereafter, with some notable trends. Practice activities considered essential to influencing intended practice outcomes were characterized by higher rates of use. Like CPCs, practice activities were used dynamically across the study period.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This descriptive study offers a case study for how EIS might be operationalized, tracked, and employed. Findings suggest several interpretations that might refine our understanding and use of EIS. Although the nature of this practical report precludes generalizability of findings, directions for future research and practice are discussed.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":73354,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Implementation research and practice\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10293536/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Implementation research and practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/26334895231154285\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Implementation research and practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/26334895231154285","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:必须报告推进执行成果的战略。目前的研究报告了5年来向北卡罗来纳州和南卡罗来纳州的13个地区提供的关于外部实施支持(EIS)的描述性信息,该信息扩展了基于证据的育儿和家庭支持系统。通过三重P(ICTP)项目实施能力运作的区域支持团队采用了Aldridge等人提出的EIS核心实践组成部分(CPC),并由FPG儿童发展研究所影响中心的成员进一步运作,北卡罗来纳大学教堂山分校。方法:在整个研究期间,开发并反复完善与CPCs相关的实践活动。信通技术方案各区域支助小组在每次实质性支助互动之后,系统地跟踪了它们对核心方案和相关活动的使用情况。跟踪包括CPC的使用时间以及与该CPC相关的具体实践活动的使用情况。数据是按关系的月份汇总的,以说明不同地区的不同开始日期。结果:从2016年11月到2021年12月,ICTP支持团队追踪了749次与北卡罗来纳州和南卡罗来纳州Triple P地区的支持互动。尽管剂量差异很大,但每月的支持率逐年下降。CPC的使用模式表明,早期出现了高剂量的“基础”和“共同设计”CPC,随后出现了混合和更多样的使用,并出现了一些显著的趋势。被认为对影响预期实践结果至关重要的实践活动的特点是使用率较高。与CPCs一样,实践活动在整个研究期间都是动态使用的。结论:这项描述性研究为如何操作、跟踪和使用EIS提供了一个案例研究。研究结果提出了几种可能完善我们对环境影响报告书的理解和使用的解释。尽管本实用报告的性质排除了研究结果的普遍性,但对未来研究和实践的方向进行了讨论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

摘要图片

摘要图片

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
Trajectory of external implementation support activities across two states in the United States: A descriptive study.

Background: Reporting on strategies to advance implementation outcomes is imperative. The current study reports descriptive information about external implementation support (EIS) provided over 5 years to 13 regions in North Carolina and South Carolina scaling an evidence-based system of parenting and family supports. Regional support teams operating through the Implementation Capacity for Triple P (ICTP) projects employed core practice components (CPCs) for EIS as proposed by Aldridge et al. and further operationalized by members of The Impact Center at FPG Child Development Institute, UNC-Chapel Hill.

Method: Practice activities associated with CPCs were developed and iteratively refined across the study period. ICTP regional support teams systematically tracked their use of CPCs and related activities following each substantive support interaction. Tracking included the duration of time a CPC was employed and the use of specific practice activities associated with that CPC. Data were aggregated by month of the relationship to account for differential start dates across regions.

Results: From November 2016 through December 2021, ICTP support teams tracked 749 support interactions with Triple P regions in North Carolina and South Carolina. Monthly support decreased year over year, though dose varied considerably. Patterns of CPC use indicated a high dose of "foundational" and "co-design" CPCs early, followed by a blended and more diverse use thereafter, with some notable trends. Practice activities considered essential to influencing intended practice outcomes were characterized by higher rates of use. Like CPCs, practice activities were used dynamically across the study period.

Conclusions: This descriptive study offers a case study for how EIS might be operationalized, tracked, and employed. Findings suggest several interpretations that might refine our understanding and use of EIS. Although the nature of this practical report precludes generalizability of findings, directions for future research and practice are discussed.

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
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