scholarly journals Informing the research agenda for optimizing audit and feedback interventions: results of a prioritization exercise

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Heather L. Colquhoun ◽  
Kelly Carroll ◽  
Kevin W. Eva ◽  
Jeremy M. Grimshaw ◽  
Noah Ivers ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Audit and feedback (A&F) interventions are one of the most common approaches for implementing evidence-based practices. A key barrier to more effective A&F interventions is the lack of a theory-guided approach to the accumulation of evidence. Recent interviews with theory experts identified 313 theory-informed hypotheses, spread across 30 themes, about how to create more effective A&F interventions. In the current survey, we sought to elicit from stakeholders which hypotheses were most likely to advance the field if studied further. Methods From the list of 313, three members of the research team identified 216 that were clear and distinguishable enough for prioritization. A web-based survey was then sent to 211 A&F intervention stakeholders asking them to choose up to 50 ‘priority’ hypotheses following the header “A&F interventions will be more effective if…”. Analyses included frequencies of endorsement of the individual hypotheses and themes into which they were grouped. Results 68 of the 211 invited participants responded to the survey. Seven hypotheses were chosen by > 50% of respondents, including A&F interventions will be more effective… “if feedback is provided by a trusted source”; “if recipients are involved in the design/development of the feedback intervention”; “if recommendations related to the feedback are based on good quality evidence”; “if the behaviour is under the control of the recipient”; “if it addresses barriers and facilitators (drivers) to behaviour change”; “if it suggests clear action plans”; and “if target/goal/optimal rates are clear and explicit”. The most endorsed theme was Recipient Priorities (four hypotheses were chosen 92 times as a ‘priority’ hypotheses). Conclusions This work determined a set of hypotheses thought by respondents to be to be most likely to advance the field through future A&F intervention research. This work can inform a coordinated research agenda that may more efficiently lead to more effective A&F interventions.

In this first edition book, editors Jolly and Jarvis have compiled a range of important, contemporary gifted education topics. Key areas of concern focus on evidence-based practices and research findings from Australia and New Zealand. Other contributors include 14 gifted education experts from leading Australian and New Zealand Universities and organisations. Exploring Gifted Education: Australian and New Zealand Perspectives, introduced by the editors, is well organised. Jolly and Jarvis’s central thesis in their introduction is to acknowledge the disparity between policy, funding and practice in Australia and New Zealand. Specifically, in relation to Australia, they note that a coordinated, national research agenda is absent, despite recommendations published by the Australian Senate Inquiry almost 20 years ago.


2018 ◽  
Vol 34 (1) ◽  
pp. 97-114 ◽  
Author(s):  
Faye S. Taxman

The evidence-based practices literature has defined a core set of practices and treatments that are effective, at least in empirical studies. Implementing these evidence-based practices and treatments requires a different set of empirical studies to understand the operational issues that affects client-driven outcomes. In this article, we review the following three areas: (a) use of a standardized risk and need assessment tool, (b) use of cognitive-behavioral programs to address criminogenic needs, and (c) use of swift and certain responses to shape behavior. The review focuses on the unanswered questions regarding implementation and organizational change strategies to increase receptivity for the evidence-based practices, lay the foundation for improving effectiveness of “evidence-based practices and treatments,” and provide a work environment that supports evidence-based practices and treatments. This article outlines a research agenda to build implementation knowledge that can further the use of evidence-based practices and treatments.


2018 ◽  
Vol 69 (3) ◽  
pp. 286-292 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ramaris E. German ◽  
Abby Adler ◽  
Sarah A. Frankel ◽  
Shannon Wiltsey Stirman ◽  
Paola Pinedo ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 188 (11) ◽  
pp. 1620-1633
Author(s):  
María José Rodrigo ◽  
María Luisa Máiquez ◽  
Victoria Hidalgo ◽  
Juan Carlos Martín Quintana ◽  
Raquel-Amaya Martínez-González ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 25 ◽  
pp. 100242
Author(s):  
M.K. Cira ◽  
R. Tesfay ◽  
J.A. Zujewski ◽  
D.T. Sinulingga ◽  
S. Aung ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Glynis H. Murphy ◽  
Peter McGill

Challenging behavior is not a diagnosis. It is behaviour of such an intensity, frequency or duration as to threaten the quality of life and/or the physical safety of the individual or others and is likely to lead to responses that are restrictive, aversive or result in exclusion. This definition is less pejorative, makes fewer assumptions about causality and reminds us that such behaviour is a challenge to services. Challenging behavior is more prevalent in those with an intellectual disability than those without with overall prevalence figures of 10–15% in those known to services. A number of long term high risk factors have been identified and evidence based interventions have included parent training and behavioural interventions. Positive Behavioural Support (PBS) is an intervention technology based on social, behavioural, educational, and biomedical science that combines evidence-based practices with formal systems change strategies, focused on both improving the valued lifestyle options available for an individual and reducing problem behaviours.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document