scholarly journals Applying the Lessons of Implementation Science to Maximize Feasibility and Usability in Team Science Intervention Development

Author(s):  
Betsy Rolland ◽  
Felice Resnik ◽  
Sarah D. Hohl ◽  
LaKaija J. Johnson ◽  
Mondira Saha-Muldowney ◽  
...  
2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Miya L. Barnett ◽  
Nicole A. Stadnick ◽  
Enola K. Proctor ◽  
Alex R. Dopp ◽  
Lisa Saldana

Abstract Background Understanding the costs and economic benefits of implementation has been identified by policymakers and researchers as critical to increase the uptake and sustainment of evidence-based practices, but this topic remains relatively understudied. Conducting team science with health economists has been proposed as a solution to increase economic evaluation in implementation science; however, these recommendations ignore the differences in goals and perspectives in these two fields. Our recent qualitative research identified that implementation researchers predominantly approach health economists to examine costs, whereas the majority of health economists expressed limited interest in conducting economic evaluations and a desire to be more integrated within implementation science initiatives. These interviews pointed to challenges in establishing fruitful partnerships when health economists are relegated to the “Third Aim” (i.e., lowest-priority research objective) in implementation science projects by their research partners. Discussion In this debate paper, we argue that implementation researchers and health economists need to focus on team science research principles to expand capacity to address pressing research questions that cut across the two fields. Specifically, we use the four-phase model of transdisciplinary research to outline the goals and processes needed to build capacity in this area (Hall et al., Transl Behav Med 2:415–30, 2012). The first phase focuses on the development of transdisciplinary research teams, including identifying appropriate partners (e.g., considering policy or public health researchers in addition to health economists) and building trust. The conceptual phase focuses on strategies to consider when developing joint research questions and methodology across fields. In the implementation phase, we outline the effective processes for conducting research projects, such as team learning. Finally, in the translation phase, we highlight how a transdisciplinary approach between health economists and implementation researchers can impact real-world practice and policy. Summary The importance of investigating the economic impact of evidence-based practice implementation is widely recognized, but efforts have been limited due to the challenges in conducting team science across disciplines. Training in team science can help advance transdisciplinary efforts, which has the potential to increase the rigor and impact of economic evaluations in implementation science while expanding the roles taken by health economists.


Author(s):  
Howard Goldstein ◽  
Arnold Olszewski

PurposeThis article describes the process of developing and implementing a supplemental early literacy curriculum designed for preschoolers demonstrating delays in literacy development.MethodIntervention research and implementation research have traditionally been viewed as sequential processes. This article illustrates a process of intervention development that was paralleled by a focus on implementation in early childhood settings. The exploration, preparation, implementation, sustainment framework is used to describe factors that need to be considered during a progression through these 4 phases of implementation. A post hoc analysis provides insight into a rather nonlinear progression of intervention development and highlights considerations and activities that have facilitated implementation.ConclusionsThe guiding principles of the exploration, preparation, implementation, sustainment implementation science framework highlight the important considerations in developing effective and practical interventions. Considering implementation and sustainment during the intervention development process and using data-based decision making has the potential to expand the availability of user-friendly evidence-based practices in communication sciences and disorders and encourage a bridging of the researcher–clinician gap.


2019 ◽  
Vol 42 (4) ◽  
pp. 204-216 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lisa M. Hagermoser Sanetti ◽  
Hao-Jan Luh

Decades of research and billions of dollars have been spent to develop and evaluate evidence-based interventions and develop multitiered systems of support (MTSS) toward the goal of more effectively delivering interventions and improving student outcomes. Available evidence, however, suggests interventions are often adopted slowly and delivered with poor fidelity, resulting in uninspiring outcomes for students. The field of implementation science has emerged to address the science-to-practice gap in human service sectors (e.g., education) as a way of improving service recipient (e.g., student) outcomes. For the considerable investment in school-based intervention development and evaluation to have a significant public health impact for students, educators must integrate key findings from implementation science into their practice and research. Toward this end, the purpose of this article is four-fold. First, it overviews implementation science and implementation theories, models, and frameworks. Second, it discusses the relevance of implementation science and fidelity to both the systems-level implementation of MTSS and individual-level implementation of interventions to students with learning disability (LD). Third, it reviews the unique legal aspects related to service implementation for students with LD and the gap between state-level mandates and available science. Finally, it provides additional resources and recommendations for readers.


2019 ◽  
Vol 42 (4) ◽  
pp. 192-203 ◽  
Author(s):  
Keith Smolkowski ◽  
Lindy Crawford ◽  
John R. Seeley ◽  
Jonathan Rochelle

In this overview of implementation science and implementation fidelity in the field of learning disabilities, authors provide a brief summary of current research related to implementation science followed by an introduction of the articles in this special series. Authors emphasize the relationship between the effectiveness of interventions and the difficulty of their implementation, highlighting the importance of considering both when adopting new interventions in the field of learning disabilities. The authors then turn their attention to the need for implementation science and implementation fidelity to be considered at all stages of research from program or intervention development to efficacy and effectiveness trials through large-scale implementation in real-world settings. An overview of active implementation frameworks as proposed by the National Implementation Research Network as well as a discussion on the importance of research–practice partnerships when implementing programs and interventions in the field of learning disabilities are also included.


2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 525-525
Author(s):  
Janet Bettger ◽  
Janet Prvu Bettger

Abstract Translation of evidence refers to widespread dissemination, adoption and implementation of interventions that can have a significant effect on population health. However, effective translation has been slow; significant lags and inconsistent uptake impede intended benefits for older adults. In response, interest and investments in implementation science as the study of methods to promote the adoption and integration of evidence into real-world settings have rapidly increased. By definition, the methodology applies to evidence-based practices, interventions, and policies. But the process of evidence generation can still be prolonged. This paper introduces a framework being tested at the Duke Roybal Center that integrates a model for behavioral intervention development and testing with principles of implementation science in order to accelerate translation across all phases of behavioral research. Attendees will first learn about the NIH Stage Model supported by NIA that guides researchers to identify, define, and clarify an array of activities across six stages of behavioral intervention development. These stages define components of intervention generation, pilot and then efficacy testing, effectiveness research and ultimately implementation of potent theory-driven interventions that improve health and well-being. With this foundation, the Duke framework will be presented to illustrate how concepts of several common implementation science frameworks and models can be integrated within the different stages. Interactive case studies will be used to illustrate application of this new integrated framework for evidence generation, accelerated implementation and scale-up, and pathways for translation. Integrating the Stage Model with principles from implementation science can accelerate translation.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document