Dissemination and implementation of comparative effectiveness evidence: key informant interviews with Clinical and Translational Science Award institutions.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Morrato EH
PROVIDER: S-EPMC3961460 | biostudies-literature | 2013 Mar
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Dissemination and implementation of comparative effectiveness evidence: key informant interviews with Clinical and Translational Science Award institutions.
Morrato Elaine H EH Concannon Thomas W TW Meissner Paul P Shah Nilay D ND Turner Barbara J BJ
Journal of comparative effectiveness research 20130301 2
<h4>Aim</h4>To identify ongoing practices and opportunities for improving national comparative effectiveness research (CER) translation through dissemination and implementation (D&I) via NIH-funded Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) institutions.<h4>Materials & methods</h4>Key informant interviews were conducted with 18 CTSA grantees sampled to represent a range of D&I efforts.<h4>Results & conclusions</h4>The institutional representatives endorsed fostering CER translation national ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:PurposeIn 2000, the National Center for Research Resources mandated that general research centers create a research subject advocate (RSA) position. In 2008, the Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) consortium endorsed a new advocacy model based on four RSA Best Practice Functions. The authors surveyed CTSA centers to learn about their implementation of programs to fulfill the RSA functions.MethodIn 2010, the RSA taskforce developed a two-part online survey to examine leadership, organizational structure, governance, scope, collaboration and integration, and funding and evaluation of RSA activities implemented at CTSA centers.ResultsRespondents from 45 RSA programs at 43 CTSA centers completed the survey. Senior university or CTSA officials led all programs. Ninety-six percent (43/45) of programs were funded by a CTSA core. Eighty percent (36/45) designated an individual "RSA." Ninety-eight percent (44/45) provided diverse services either in collaboration with or complementary to other departments, including development of data and safety monitoring plans (16/45; 36%), informed consent observation (10/45; 22%), training responsive to audit findings (12/45; 27%), and direct advocacy services to participants (11/45; 24%). Eighty-six percent (24/28) reported qualitative evaluation methods for these activities.ConclusionsRSA programs conduct both collaborative and unique research protection activities. This survey, an initial step in developing a more robust mechanism for evaluating RSA programs, collected valuable feedback. The authors recommend defining and developing outcome-based evaluation measures that take the heterogeneity of the individual RSA programs into account while advancing their value and effectiveness in protecting human research subject participants.
| S-EPMC3529179 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeTo respond to increased public and programmatic demand to address underenrollment of clinical translational research studies, the authors examined participant recruitment practices at Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) sites and make recommendations for performance metrics and accountability.MethodThe CTSA Recruitment and Retention taskforce in 2010 invited representatives at 46 CTSAs to complete an online 48-question survey querying accrual and recruitment outcomes, practices, evaluation methods, policies, and perceived gaps in related knowledge/practice. Descriptive statistical and thematic analyses were conducted.ResultsForty-six respondents representing 44 CTSAs completed the survey. Recruitment conducted by study teams was the most common practice reported (78%-91%, by study type); 39% reported their institution offered recruitment services to investigators. Respondents valued study feasibility assessment as a successful practice (39%); desired additional resources included feasibility assessments (49%) and participant registries (44%). None reported their institution systematically required justification of feasibility; some indicated relevant information was considered prior to institutional review board (IRB) review (30%) or contract approval (22%). All respondents' IRBs tracked study progress, but only 10% of respondents could report outcome data for timely accrual. Few reported written policies addressing poor accrual or provided data to support recruitment practice effectiveness.ConclusionsMany CTSAs lack the necessary frame work to support study accrual. Recom men dations to enhance accrual include articulating institutional expectations and policy for routine recruitment plan ning; providing recruitment expertise to inform feasibility assessment and recruit ment planning; and developing interdepartmental coordination and integrated informatics infrastructure to drive the conduct, evaluation, and improvement of recruitment practices.
| S-EPMC4116452 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionThe focus on social determinants of health (SDOH) and their impact on health outcomes is evident in U.S. federal actions by Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services and Office of National Coordinator for Health Information Technology. The disproportionate impact of COVID-19 on minorities and communities of color heightened awareness of health inequities and the need for more robust SDOH data collection. Four Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) hubs comprising the Texas Regional CTSA Consortium (TRCC) undertook an inventory to understand what contextual-level SDOH datasets are offered centrally and which individual-level SDOH are collected in structured fields in each electronic health record (EHR) system potentially for all patients.MethodsHub teams identified American Community Survey (ACS) datasets available via their enterprise data warehouses for research. Each hub's EHR analyst team identified structured fields available in their EHR for SDOH using a collection instrument based on a 2021 PCORnet survey and conducted an SDOH field completion rate analysis.ResultsOne hub offered ACS datasets centrally. All hubs collected eleven SDOH elements in structured EHR fields. Two collected Homeless and Veteran statuses. Completeness at four hubs was 80%-98%: Ethnicity, Race; < 10%: Education, Financial Strain, Food Insecurity, Housing Security/Stability, Interpersonal Violence, Social Isolation, Stress, Transportation.ConclusionCompleteness levels for SDOH data in EHR at TRCC hubs varied and were low for most measures. Multiple system-level discussions may be necessary to increase standardized SDOH EHR-based data collection and harmonization to drive effective value-based care, health disparities research, translational interventions, and evidence-based policy.
| S-EPMC10880009 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionIn the last decade, there has been increased global policy and program momentum to promote early childhood development. The Care for Child Development (CCD) package, developed by UNICEF and the WHO, is a key tool responding to the global demand. The CCD package comprises two age-specific evidence-based recommendations for caregivers to 1) play and communicate and 2) responsively interact with their children (0-5 years) and was designed to be integrated within existing services to strengthen nurturing care for child development. The aim of this report was to provide an up-to-date global review of the implementation and evaluation of the CCD package.MethodsIn addition to a systematic review of 55 reports, we interviewed 23 key informants (including UNICEF and WHO personnel) to better understand the implementation of CCD.ResultsThe CCD package has been or is being implemented in 54 low- and middle-income countries and territories, and it has been integrated into government services across the health, social, and education sectors in 26 countries. Across these contexts, CCD has been adapted in three primary ways: 1) translations of CCD materials (mostly counseling cards) into local language(s), 2) adaptations of CCD materials for the local context, vulnerable children, or a humanitarian/emergency setting (e.g., including local play activities, using activities that are better suited to children with visual impairments), and 3) substantive modifications to the content of CCD materials (e.g., expansion of play and communication activities, addition of new themes, creation of a structured curriculum). While there is promising evidence and examples of good implementation practice, there has been mixed experience about implementation of CCD with respect to adaptation, training, supervision, integration into existing services, and monitoring implementation fidelity and quality. For example, many users of CCD found difficulties with training the workforce, garnering buy-in from governments, and ensuring benefits for families, among others.DiscussionAdditional knowledge on how to improve the effectiveness, implementation fidelity and quality, and acceptance of CCD is needed. Based on the findings of the review we make recommendations for future efforts to implement CCD at-scale.
| S-EPMC9978394 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Consequent upon rapid development in Abu Dhabi, there has been a rise in chronic disease, the susceptibilities to which are influenced by events occurring in early life. Hence, maternal and infant health are key areas in public health policy. Following a study of maternal and infant health in a cohort of mothers in Abu Dhabi between 2002 and 2004, seven key informant interviews were undertaken to elucidate the study findings through the impressions of Emirati women in positions within the healthcare area-including ministries, hospitals, and universities in Abu Dhabi. Semi-structured interviews were based on five key questions that covered the cultural responsiveness of the maternal health services-breastfeeding, health education, and physical and recreational activity. The responses were analysed using a thematic content technique and indicated that the status of women, cultural beliefs and practices, limited health knowledge, and language differences between the local population, healthcare providers, and health promoting materials were important themes. The study highlighted areas for future research and policy, including the communication gaps between healthcare professionals and women, the influences of advertising and the media on health issues, heath education, and ways to increase women's participation in physical exercise. It is vital to consider non-medical determinants of health alongside biomedical determinants, to help develop culturally appropriate health strategies for this population.
| S-EPMC6747237 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe updated World Health Organization (WHO) guideline recommends immediate kangaroo mother care (KMC) for all infants, particularly those born preterm. However, its uptake and sustainability have been unsatisfactory. Therefore, we aimed to gain deeper insight into factors influencing the uptake of KMC practice in our setting, and thereby identify possible solutions for the development of relevant interventions to improve its adoption and make KMC a routine practice for all infants.MethodsUsing the Triandis model of social behaviour as our framework, we conducted key informant interviews with parents and healthcare providers. Trained interviewers conducted interviews with nine parents, recruited via purposive sampling. These parents were parents of preterm infants who had been introduced to KMC. Data was transcribed and analysed based on Triandis' Theory of Interpersonal Behaviour. This paper only reports the results of the parent interviews.ResultsMajor findings were how positive feelings like warmth and contentment, the sense of parenthood with KMC, the benefits of KMC for their infant and parents being enablers for KMC uptake. Conversely, the lack of KMC awareness, the initial negative feelings such as fear, uncertainty and embarrassment, the prioritization of time for milk expression, overcrowding in the ward, lack of space and privacy, limited visiting hours, lack of support and poor communication resulting in misapprehension about KMC were major barriers.ConclusionA deeper understanding of the factors influencing the uptake of KMC using the Triandis behavioural model provided a way forward to help improve its uptake and sustainability in our settings.Trial registrationThis study was registered with the National Medical Research Registry (NMRR-17-2984-39191).
| S-EPMC10548712 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Health Technology Reassessment (HTR) is a structured, evidence-based assessment of the clinical, social, ethical and economic effects of a technology currently used in the health care system, to inform optimal use of that technology in comparison to its alternatives. Little is known about current international HTR practices. The objective of this research was to summarize experience-based information gathered from international experts on the development, initiation and implementation of a HTR program.A mixed methods approach, using a survey and in-depth interviews, was adopted. The survey covered 8 concepts: prioritization/identification of potentially obsolete technologies; program development; implementation; mitigation; program championing; stakeholder engagement; monitoring; and reinvestment. Members of Health Technology Assessment International (HTAi) and the International Network of Agencies for Health Technology Assessment (INAHTA) formed the sampling frame. Participation was solicited via email and the survey was administered online using SurveyMonkey. Survey results were analyzed using descriptive statistics. To gather more in-depth knowledge, semi-structured interviews were conducted among organizations with active HTR programs. Interview questions were developed using the same 8 concepts. The hour-long interviews were recorded, transcribed and analyzed using constant comparative analysis.Ninety-five individuals responded to the survey: 49 were not discussing HTR, 21 were beginning to discuss HTR, nine were imminently developing a program, and 16 participants had programs and were completing reassessments. The survey results revealed that methods vary widely and that although HTR is a powerful tool, it is currently not being used to its full potential. Of the 16 with active programs, nine agreed to participate in follow-up interviews. Interview participants identified early and extensive stakeholder engagement as the most important factors for success. A lack of top-down support and financial and human resources are inhibiting program development.HTR is in its infancy. Although HTRs are being conducted, there are no standardized approaches. However, much can be learned from current international work. Future work should focus on developing a comprehensive methodology, reporting the processes of reassessments and sharing successes and challenges in a common platform.
| S-EPMC3542085 | biostudies-other
Project description:The Accrual to Clinical Trials (ACT) network is a federated network of sites from the National Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) Consortium that has been created to significantly increase participant accrual to multi-site clinical trials. The ACT network represents an unprecedented collaboration among diverse CTSA sites. The network has created governance and regulatory frameworks and a common data model to harmonize electronic health record (EHR) data, and deployed a set of Informatics for Integrating Biology and the Bedside (i2b2) data repositories that are linked by the Shared Health Research Information Network (SHRINE) platform. It provides investigators the ability to query the network in real time and to obtain aggregate counts of patients who meet clinical trial inclusion and exclusion criteria from sites across the United States. The ACT network infrastructure provides a basis for cohort discovery and for developing new informatics tools to identify and recruit participants for multi-site clinical trials.
| S-EPMC6241502 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe existing grant review criteria do not consider unique methods and priorities of Dissemination and Implementation Science (DIS). The ImplemeNtation and Improvement Science Proposals Evaluation CriTeria (INSPECT) scoring system includes 10 criteria based on Proctor et al.'s "ten key ingredients" and was developed to support the assessment of DIS research proposals. We describe how we adapted INSPECT and used it in combination with the NIH scoring system to evaluate pilot DIS study proposals through our DIS Center.MethodsWe adapted INSPECT to broaden considerations for diverse DIS settings and concepts (e.g., explicitly including dissemination and implementation methods). Five PhD-level researchers with intermediate to advanced DIS knowledge were trained to conduct reviews of seven grant applications using both the INSPECT and NIH criteria. The INSPECT overall scores range from 0 to 30 (higher scores are better), and the NIH overall scores range from 1 to 9 (lower scores are better). Each grant was independently reviewed by two reviewers, then discussed in a group meeting to compare the experiences using both criteria to evaluate the proposal and to finalize scoring decisions. A follow-up survey was sent to grant reviewers to solicit further reflections on each scoring criterion.ResultsAveraged across reviewers, the INSPECT overall scores ranged from 13 to 24, while the NIH overall scores ranged from 2 to 5. Reviewer reflections highlighted the unique value and utility for each scoring criterion. The NIH criteria had a broad scientific purview and were better suited to evaluate more effectiveness-focused and pre-implementation proposals not testing implementation strategies. The INSPECT criteria were easier to rate in terms of the quality of integrating DIS considerations into the proposal and to assess the potential for generalizability, real-world feasibility, and impact. Overall, reviewers noted that INSPECT was a helpful tool to guide DIS research proposal writing.ConclusionsWe confirmed complementarity in using both scoring criteria in our pilot study grant proposal review and highlighted the utility of INSPECT as a potential DIS resource for training and capacity building. Possible refinements to INSPECT include more explicit reviewer guidance on assessing pre-implementation proposals, providing reviewers with the opportunity to submit written commentary with each numerical rating, and greater clarity on rating criteria with overlapping descriptions.
| S-EPMC9945623 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThere is pressing need to improve hospital-based addiction care. Various models for integrating substance use disorder care into hospital settings exist, but there is no framework for describing, selecting, or comparing models. We sought to fill that gap by constructing a taxonomy of hospital-based addiction care models based on scoping literature review and key informant interviews.MethodsMethods included a scoping review of the literature on US hospital-based addiction care models and interventions for adults, published between January 2000 and July 2021. We conducted semi-structured interviews with 15 key informants experienced in leading, implementing, evaluating, andpracticing hospital-based addiction care to explore model characteristics, including their perceived strengths, limitations, and implementation considerations. We synthesized findings from the literature review and interviews to construct a taxonomy of model types.ResultsSearches identified 2,849 unique abstracts. Of these, we reviewed 280 full text articles, of which 76 were included in the final review. We added 8 references from reference lists and informant interviews, and 4 gray literature sources. We identified six distinct hospital-based addiction care models. Those classified as addiction consult models include (1) interprofessional addiction consult services, (2) psychiatry consult liaison services, and (3) individual consultant models. Those classified as practice-based models, wherein general hospital staff integrate addiction care into usual practice, include (4) hospital-based opioid treatment and (5) hospital-based alcohol treatment. The final type was (6) community-based in-reach, wherein community providers deliver care. Models vary in their target patient population, staffing, and core clinical and systems change activities. Limitations include that some models have overlapping characteristics and variable ways of delivering core components.DiscussionA taxonomy provides hospital clinicians and administrators, researchers, and policy-makers with a framework to describe, compare, and select models for implementing hospital-based addiction care and measure outcomes.
| S-EPMC9411356 | biostudies-literature