Dataset Information

Operational research capacity building through the Structured Operational Research Training Initiative (SORT-IT) in China: implementation, outcomes and challenges.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention (China CDC) introduced the Structured Operational Research Training Initiative (SORT IT) into China to build a special capacity and equip public health professionals with an effective tool to support developing countries in strengthening their operational research. The paper aims to investigate and analyze the implementation, outcomes and challenges of the first cycle of SORT IT in China.

Main text

As a result of the successful implementation, SORT IT China, Cycle 1 has demonstrated fruitful outputs as exemplified by the 18-month follow-up to the post-training initiatives of the twelve participants, who all achieved the four milestones required by SORT IT. Eleven of twelve (92%) manuscripts generated that focused on the prevention and control of malaria, influenza, HIV/AIDS, hepatitis B, schistosomiasis, tuberculosis and Japanese encephalitis were published by peer-reviewed international journals with the impact factor ranging from 2.6 to 4.8. The most up-to-date citation count on February 19, 2021 was 53 times out of which 31 times were cited by Science Citation Index papers with 94.827 impact factor in total. Six senior professionals from China CDC also facilitated the whole SORT IT training scheme as co-mentors under the guidance of SORT IT mentors. The twelve participants who gained familiarity with the SORT IT courses and training principles are likely become potential mentors for future SORT IT, but they as the non-first language speakers/users of English also faced the challenge in thoroughly understanding the modules delivered in English and writing English academically to draft the manuscripts.

Conclusion

The outcomes from the first cycle of SORT IT in China have led to studies contributing to narrowing the knowledge gap among numerous public health challenges nationally and internationally. It is believed the researchers who participated will continue to apply the skills learned within their domain and help build the training capacity for future operational research courses both in China and in developing countries with similar needs.

SUBMITTER: Feng N

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8170796 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Operational research (OR) is the discipline of using models, either quantitative or qualitative, to aid decision-making in complex implementation problems. The methods of OR have been used in healthcare since the 1950s in diverse areas such as emergency medicine and the interface between acute and community care; hospital performance; scheduling and management of patient home visits; scheduling of patient appointments; and many other complex implementation problems of an operational or logistical nature.To date, there has been limited debate about the role that operational research should take within implementation science. I detail three such roles for OR all grounded in upfront system thinking: structuring implementation problems, prospective evaluation of improvement interventions, and strategic reconfiguration. Case studies from mental health, emergency medicine, and stroke care are used to illustrate each role. I then describe the challenges for applied OR within implementation science at the organisational, interventional, and disciplinary levels. Two key challenges include the difficulty faced in achieving a position of mutual understanding between implementation scientists and research users and a stark lack of evaluation of OR interventions. To address these challenges, I propose a research agenda to evaluate applied OR through the lens of implementation science, the liberation of OR from the specialist research and consultancy environment, and co-design of models with service users. Operational research is a mature discipline that has developed a significant volume of methodology to improve health services. OR offers implementation scientists the opportunity to do more upfront system thinking before committing resources or taking risks. OR has three roles within implementation science: structuring an implementation problem, prospective evaluation of implementation problems, and a tool for strategic reconfiguration of health services. Challenges facing OR as implementation science include limited evidence and evaluation of impact, limited service user involvement, a lack of managerial awareness, effective communication between research users and OR modellers, and availability of healthcare data. To progress the science, a focus is needed in three key areas: evaluation of OR interventions, embedding the knowledge of OR in health services, and educating OR modellers about the aims and benefits of service user involvement.

Project description:Background: In Brazil, secondary data for epidemiology are largely available. However, they are insufficiently prepared for use in research, even when it comes to structured data since they were often designed for other purposes. To date, few publications focus on the process of preparing secondary data. The present findings can help in orienting future research projects that are based on secondary data. Objective: Describe the steps in the process of ensuring the adequacy of a secondary data set for a specific use and to identify the challenges of this process. Methods: The present study is qualitative and reports methodological issues about secondary data use. The study material was comprised of 6,059,454 live births and 73,735 infant death records from 2004 to 2013 of children whose mothers resided in the State of São Paulo - Brazil. The challenges and description of the procedures to ensure data adequacy were undertaken in 6 steps: (1) problem understanding, (2) resource planning, (3) data understanding, (4) data preparation, (5) data validation and (6) data distribution. For each step, procedures, and challenges encountered, and the actions to cope with them and partial results were described. To identify the most labor-intensive tasks in this process, the steps were assessed by adding the number of procedures, challenges, and coping actions. The highest values were assumed to indicate the most critical steps. Results: In total, 22 procedures and 23 actions were needed to deal with the 27 challenges encountered along the process of ensuring the adequacy of the study material for the intended use. The final product was an organized database for a historical cohort study suitable for the intended use. Data understanding and data preparation were identified as the most critical steps, accounting for about 70% of the challenges observed for data using. Conclusion: Significant challenges were encountered in the process of ensuring the adequacy of secondary health data for research use, mainly in the data understanding and data preparation steps. The use of the described steps to approach structured secondary data and the knowledge of the potential challenges along the process may contribute to planning health research.

Project description:BackgroundWhile dissemination and implementation (D&I) science has grown rapidly, there is an ongoing need to understand how to build and sustain capacity in individuals and institutions conducting research. There are three inter-related domains for capacity building: people, settings, and activities. Since 2008, Washington University in St. Louis has dedicated significant attention and resources toward building D&I research capacity. This paper describes our process, challenges, and lessons with the goal of informing others who may have similar aims at their own institution.ActivitiesAn informal collaborative, the Washington University Network for Dissemination and Implementation Research (WUNDIR), began with a small group and now has 49 regular members. Attendees represent a wide variety of settings and content areas and meet every 6 weeks for half-day sessions. A logic model organizes WUNDIR inputs, activities, and outcomes. A mixed-methods evaluation showed that the network has led to new professional connections and enhanced skills (e.g., grant and publication development). As one of four, ongoing, formal programs, the Dissemination and Implementation Research Core (DIRC) was our first major component of D&I infrastructure. DIRC's mission is to accelerate the public health impact of clinical and health services research by increasing the engagement of investigators in later stages of translational research. The aims of DIRC are to advance D&I science and to develop and equip researchers with tools for D&I research. As a second formal component, the Washington University Institute for Public Health has provided significant support for D&I research through pilot projects and a small grants program. In a third set of formal programs, two R25 training grants (one in mental health and one in cancer) support post-doctoral scholars for intensive training and mentoring in D&I science. Finally, our team coordinates closely with D&I functions within research centers across the university. We share a series of challenges and potential solutions.ConclusionOur experience in developing D&I research at Washington University in St. Louis shows how significant capacity can be built in a relatively short period of time. Many of our ideas and ingredients for success can be replicated, tailored, and improved upon by others.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Implementation research is increasingly being recognised as an important discipline seeking to maximise the benefits of evidence-based interventions. Although capacity-building efforts are ongoing, there has been limited attention on the contextual and health system peculiarities in low- and middle-income countries. Moreover, given the challenges encountered during the implementation of health interventions, the field of implementation research requires a creative attempt to build expertise for health researchers and practitioners simultaneously. With support from the Special Programme for Research and Training in Tropical Diseases, we have developed an implementation research short course that targets both researchers and practitioners. This paper seeks to explain the course development processes and report on training evaluations, highlighting its relevance for inter-institutional and inter-regional capacity strengthening. METHODS:The development of the implementation research course curriculum was categorised into four phases, namely the formation of a core curriculum development team, course content development, internal reviews and pilot, and external reviews and evaluations. Five modules were developed covering Introduction to implementation research, Methods in implementation research, Ethics and quality management in implementation research, Community and stakeholder engagement, and Dissemination in implementation research. Course evaluations were conducted using developed tools measuring participants' reactions and learning. RESULTS:From 2016 to 2018, the IR curriculum has been used to train a total of 165 researchers and practitioners predominantly from African countries, the majority of whom are males (57%) and researchers/academics (79.4%). Participants generally gave positive ratings (e.g. integration of concepts) for their reactions to the training. Under 'learnings', participants indicated improvement in their knowledge in areas such as identification of implementation research problems and questions. CONCLUSION:The approach for training both researchers and practitioners offers a dynamic opportunity for the acquisition and sharing of knowledge for both categories of learners. This approach was crucial in demonstrating a key characteristic of implementation research (e.g. multidisciplinary) practically evident during the training sessions. Using such a model to effectively train participants from various low- and middle-income countries shows the opportunities this training curriculum offers as a capacity-building tool.

Project description:BackgroundTo ensure the provision of high-quality safety and cost-effective health and welfare services, managers and professionals are required to introduce and ensure the routine use of clinical guidelines and other evidence-based interventions. Despite this, they often lack training and support in implementation. This project aims to investigate how a team training intervention, with the goal to build implementation capacity, influences participants' implementation knowledge and skills, as well as how it influences implementation activities and implementation capacity within participating health and welfare organizations. Furthermore, the aim is to investigate how the organizations' contexts influence the intervention outcomes.MethodsThe building implementation capacity (BIC) intervention builds on the behavior change wheel, which considers implementation as a matter of behavior change. The intervention will be provided to teams of managers and professionals working in health and welfare organizations and seeking support to implement a guideline- or evidence-based intervention. The intervention consists of a series of interactive workshops that provides the participating teams with the knowledge and skills to apply a systematic implementation model. A longitudinal mixed-methods evaluation, including interviews, surveys, and document analysis, will be applied over 24 months. The normalization process theory measure will be used to assess how the intervention influences implementation activities in practice and implementation capacity in the teams and the wider organizations.DiscussionThis project has an ambition to add to the knowledge concerning how to promote the uptake of research findings into health care by building implementation capacity through team training in implementation. The project's uniqueness is that it is designed to move beyond individual-level outcomes and evaluate implementation activities and implementation capacity in participating organizations. Further, the intervention will be evaluated over 24 months to investigate long-term outcomes of implementation training.