Dataset Information

Toward the data-driven dissemination of findings from psychological science.

ABSTRACT: The public health impact of psychological science is maximized when it is disseminated clearly and compellingly to audiences who can act on it. Dissemination research can generate knowledge to help achieve this, but dissemination is understudied in the field of implementation science. As a consequence, the designs of dissemination strategies are typically driven by anecdote, not evidence, and are often ineffective. We address this issue by synthesizing key theory and findings from consumer psychology and detailing a novel research approach for "data-driven dissemination." The approach has 3 parts: (a) formative audience research, which characterizes an audience's awareness about, adoption of, and attitudes toward an intervention, as well as preferences for receiving information about it; (b) audience segmentation research, which identifies meaningful subgroups within an audience to inform the tailoring of dissemination strategies; and (c) dissemination effectiveness research, which determines the strategies that are most effective. This approach is then illustrated using the dissemination of the American Psychological Association's (APA, 2017) Clinical Practice Guideline for the Treatment of Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) in Adults as a case study. Data are presented from a 2018-2019 survey of licensed APA-member psychologists who treat adults with PTSD (n = 407, response rate = 29.8%). We present survey findings on awareness about, attitudes toward, and adoption of the guideline and find significant differences across these domains between psychologists who do and do not regularly use clinical practice guidelines. We conclude by discussing future directions to advance dissemination research and practice. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

SUBMITTER: Purtle J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8182894 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

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.

Dataset Information

Toward the data-driven dissemination of findings from psychological science.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets