1
|
Smith NR, Levy DE, Falbe J, Purtle J, Chriqui JF. Design considerations for developing measures of policy implementation in quantitative evaluations of public health policy. FRONTIERS IN HEALTH SERVICES 2024; 4:1322702. [PMID: 39076770 PMCID: PMC11285065 DOI: 10.3389/frhs.2024.1322702] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/16/2023] [Accepted: 06/20/2024] [Indexed: 07/31/2024]
Abstract
Typical quantitative evaluations of public policies treat policies as a binary condition, without further attention to how policies are implemented. However, policy implementation plays an important role in how the policy impacts behavioral and health outcomes. The field of policy-focused implementation science is beginning to consider how policy implementation may be conceptualized in quantitative analyses (e.g., as a mediator or moderator), but less work has considered how to measure policy implementation for inclusion in quantitative work. To help address this gap, we discuss four design considerations for researchers interested in developing or identifying measures of policy implementation using three independent NIH-funded research projects studying e-cigarette, food, and mental health policies. Mini case studies of these considerations were developed via group discussions; we used the implementation research logic model to structure our discussions. Design considerations include (1) clearly specifying the implementation logic of the policy under study, (2) developing an interdisciplinary team consisting of policy practitioners and researchers with expertise in quantitative methods, public policy and law, implementation science, and subject matter knowledge, (3) using mixed methods to identify, measure, and analyze relevant policy implementation determinants and processes, and (4) building flexibility into project timelines to manage delays and challenges due to the real-world nature of policy. By applying these considerations in their own work, researchers can better identify or develop measures of policy implementation that fit their needs. The experiences of the three projects highlighted in this paper reinforce the need for high-quality and transferrable measures of policy implementation, an area where collaboration between implementation scientists and policy experts could be particularly fruitful. These measurement practices provide a foundation for the field to build on as attention to incorporating measures of policy implementation into quantitative evaluations grows and will help ensure that researchers are developing a more complete understanding of how policies impact health outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Natalie Riva Smith
- Department of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Harvard TH Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA, United States
| | - Douglas E. Levy
- Mongan Institute Health Policy Research Center, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, United States
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States
| | - Jennifer Falbe
- Human Development and Family Studies Program, Department of Human Ecology, University of California, Davis, CA, United States
| | - Jonathan Purtle
- Department of Public Health Policy & Management, Global Center for Implementation Science, New York University School of Global Public Health, New York, NY, United States
| | - Jamie F. Chriqui
- Institute for Health Research and Policy, University of Illinois Chicago, Chicago, IL, United States
- Department of Health Policy and Administration, School of Public Health, University of Illinois Chicago, Chicago, IL, United States
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Oluwoye O, Lissau A, Stokes S, Selloni AT, James N, Amiri S, McDonell MG, Anglin DM. Study protocol for a multi-level cross-sectional study on the equitable reach and implementation of coordinated specialty care for early psychosis. Implement Sci Commun 2023; 4:90. [PMID: 37553719 PMCID: PMC10410783 DOI: 10.1186/s43058-023-00476-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/30/2023] [Accepted: 07/25/2023] [Indexed: 08/10/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Approximately 115,000 young adults will experience their first episode of psychosis (FEP) each year in the USA. Coordinated specialty care (CSC) for early psychosis is an evidence-based early intervention model that has demonstrated effectiveness by improving quality of life and reducing psychiatric symptoms for many individuals. Over the last decade, there has significant increase in the implementation of CSC programs throughout the USA. However, prior research has revealed difficulties among individuals and their family members accessing CSC. Research has also shown that CSC programs often report the limited reach of their program to underserved populations and communities (e.g., ethnoracial minorities, rural and low socioeconomic neighborhoods). Dissemination and implementation research focused on the equitable reach and implementation of CSC is needed to address disparities at the individual level. METHODS The proposed study will create a novel integrative multi-level geospatial database of CSC programs implemented throughout the USA that will include program-level data (e.g., geocoded location, capacity, setting, role availability), provider-level data (race, ethnicity, professional credentials), and neighborhood-level census data (e.g., residential segregation, ethnic density, area deprivation, rural-urban continua, public transit time). This database will be used to characterize variations in CSC programs by geographical location and examine the overall reach CSC programs to specific communities. The quantitative data will be combined with qualitative data from state administrators, providers, and service users that will inform the development of dissemination tools, such as an interactive dashboard, that can aid decision making. DISCUSSION Findings from this study will highlight the impact of outer contextual determinants on implementation and reach of mental health services, and will serve to inform the future implementation of CSC programs with a primary focus on equity.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Oladunni Oluwoye
- Department of Community and Behavioral Health, Elson S. Floyd College of Medicine, Washington State University, 412 E. Spokane Falls Blvd, Spokane, WA, 99210-1495, USA.
| | - Ari Lissau
- Department of Community and Behavioral Health, Elson S. Floyd College of Medicine, Washington State University, 412 E. Spokane Falls Blvd, Spokane, WA, 99210-1495, USA
| | - Sheldon Stokes
- Department of Community and Behavioral Health, Elson S. Floyd College of Medicine, Washington State University, 412 E. Spokane Falls Blvd, Spokane, WA, 99210-1495, USA
| | - Alexandria T Selloni
- Department of Psychology, City College of New York, City University of New York, New York, USA
| | - Najé James
- Department of Psychology, City College of New York, City University of New York, New York, USA
| | - Solmaz Amiri
- Department of Medical Education and Clinical Sciences, Elson S. Floyd College of Medicine, Washington State University, Spokane, WA, USA
- Institute for Research and Education to Advance Community Health, Washington State University, 1100 Olive Way, Ste 1200, Seattle, WA, 98101, USA
| | - Michael G McDonell
- Department of Community and Behavioral Health, Elson S. Floyd College of Medicine, Washington State University, 412 E. Spokane Falls Blvd, Spokane, WA, 99210-1495, USA
| | - Deidre M Anglin
- Department of Psychology, City College of New York, City University of New York, New York, USA
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Purtle J, Stadnick NA, Wynecoop M, Bruns EJ, Crane ME, Aarons G. A policy implementation study of earmarked taxes for mental health services: study protocol. Implement Sci Commun 2023; 4:37. [PMID: 37004117 PMCID: PMC10067193 DOI: 10.1186/s43058-023-00408-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/27/2023] [Accepted: 03/05/2023] [Indexed: 04/03/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Insufficient funding is frequently identified as a critical barrier to the implementation and sustainment of evidence-based practices (EBPs). Thus, increasing access to funding is recognized as an implementation strategy. Policies that create earmarked taxes-defined as taxes for which revenue can only be spent on specific activities-are an increasingly common mental health financing strategy that could improve the reach of EBPs. This project's specific aims are to (1) identify all jurisdictions in the USA that have implemented earmarked taxes for mental health and catalogue information about tax design; (2) characterize experiences implementing earmarked taxes among local (e.g., county, city) mental health agency leaders and other government and community organization officials and assess their perceptions of the acceptability and feasibility of different types of policy implementation strategies; and (3) develop a framework to guide effect earmarked tax designs, inform the selection of implementation strategies, and disseminate the framework to policy audiences. METHODS The project uses the Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, Sustainment (EPIS) framework to inform data collection about the determinants and processes of tax implementation and Leeman's typology of implementation strategies to examine the acceptability and feasibility strategies which could support earmarked tax policy implementation. A legal mapping will be conducted to achieve aim 1. To achieve aim 2, a survey will be conducted of 300 local mental health agency leaders and other government and community organization officials involved with the implementation of earmarked taxes for mental health. The survey will be followed by approximately 50 interviews with these officials. To achieve aim 3, quantitative and qualitative data will be integrated through a systematic framework development and dissemination process. DISCUSSION This exploratory policy implementation process study will build the evidence base for outer-context implementation determinants and strategies by focusing on policies that earmarked taxes for mental health services.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jonathan Purtle
- Department of Public Health Policy & Management, Global Center for Implementation Science, New York University School of Global Public Health, 708, Broadway, New York, NY, 10003, USA.
| | - Nicole A Stadnick
- Department of Psychiatry, Dissemination and Implementation Science Center, Altman Clinical and Translational Research Institute, University of California San Diego, 9500 Gilman Drive, La Jolla, CA, 92093, USA
| | - Megan Wynecoop
- Department of Public Health Policy & Management, Global Center for Implementation Science, New York University School of Global Public Health, 708, Broadway, New York, NY, 10003, USA
| | - Eric J Bruns
- Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Washington School of Medicine, 6200 NE 74Th St, Building 29, Suite 110, Seattle, WA, 98115, USA
| | - Margaret E Crane
- Department of Psychology, Temple University, Weiss Hall, 1701 N 13Th St, Philadelphia, PA, 19122, USA
- Department of Psychiatry, New York Presbyterian-Weill Cornell Medicine, 425 E 61St St, New York, NY, 10065, USA
| | - Gregory Aarons
- Department of Psychiatry, Dissemination and Implementation Science Center, Altman Clinical and Translational Research Institute, University of California San Diego, 9500 Gilman Drive, La Jolla, CA, 92093, USA
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Crable EL, Grogan CM, Purtle J, Roesch SC, Aarons GA. Tailoring dissemination strategies to increase evidence-informed policymaking for opioid use disorder treatment: study protocol. Implement Sci Commun 2023; 4:16. [PMID: 36797794 PMCID: PMC9936679 DOI: 10.1186/s43058-023-00396-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/27/2022] [Accepted: 01/30/2023] [Indexed: 02/18/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Policy is a powerful tool for systematically altering healthcare access and quality, but the research to policy gap impedes translating evidence-based practices into public policy and limits widespread improvements in service and population health outcomes. The US opioid epidemic disproportionately impacts Medicaid members who rely on publicly funded benefits to access evidence-based treatment including medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD). A myriad of misaligned policies and evidence-use behaviors by policymakers across federal agencies, state Medicaid agencies, and managed care organizations limit coverage of and access to MOUD for Medicaid members. Dissemination strategies that improve policymakers' use of current evidence are critical to improving MOUD benefits and reducing health disparities. However, no research describes key determinants of Medicaid policymakers' evidence use behaviors or preferences, and few studies have examined data-driven approaches to developing dissemination strategies to enhance evidence-informed policymaking. This study aims to identify determinants and intermediaries that influence policymakers' evidence use behaviors, then develop and test data-driven tailored dissemination strategies that promote MOUD coverage in benefit arrays. METHODS Guided by the Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, and Sustainment (EPIS) framework, we will conduct a national survey of state Medicaid agency and managed care organization policymakers to identify determinants and intermediaries that influence how they seek, receive, and use research in their decision-making processes. We will use latent class methods to empirically identify subgroups of agencies with distinct evidence use behaviors. A 10-step dissemination strategy development and specification process will be used to tailor strategies to significant predictors identified for each latent class. Tailored dissemination strategies will be deployed to each class of policymakers and assessed for their acceptability, appropriateness, and feasibility for delivering evidence about MOUD benefit design. DISCUSSION This study will illuminate key determinants and intermediaries that influence policymakers' evidence use behaviors when designing benefits for MOUD. This study will produce a critically needed set of data-driven, tailored policy dissemination strategies. Study results will inform a subsequent multi-site trial measuring the effectiveness of tailored dissemination strategies on MOUD benefit design and implementation. Lessons from dissemination strategy development will inform future research about policymakers' evidence use preferences and offer a replicable process for tailoring dissemination strategies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Erika L Crable
- Department of Psychiatry, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA, USA. .,Child and Adolescent Services Research Center, San Diego, CA, USA. .,University of California, San Diego Altman Clinical and Translational Research Institute Dissemination and Implementation Science Center, La Jolla, CA, USA.
| | - Colleen M Grogan
- Crown Family School of Social Work, Policy, and Practice, The University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA
| | - Jonathan Purtle
- Department of Public Health Policy and Management, New York University School of Global Public Health, New York City, NY, USA.,Global Center for Implementation Science, New York University School of Global Public Health, New York City, NY, USA
| | - Scott C Roesch
- Child and Adolescent Services Research Center, San Diego, CA, USA.,Department of Psychology, San Diego State University, San Diego, CA, USA
| | - Gregory A Aarons
- Department of Psychiatry, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA, USA.,Child and Adolescent Services Research Center, San Diego, CA, USA.,University of California, San Diego Altman Clinical and Translational Research Institute Dissemination and Implementation Science Center, La Jolla, CA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Crable EL, Lengnick-Hall R, Stadnick NA, Moullin JC, Aarons GA. Where is "policy" in dissemination and implementation science? Recommendations to advance theories, models, and frameworks: EPIS as a case example. Implement Sci 2022; 17:80. [PMID: 36503520 PMCID: PMC9742035 DOI: 10.1186/s13012-022-01256-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 34] [Impact Index Per Article: 17.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/25/2022] [Accepted: 12/01/2022] [Indexed: 12/14/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Implementation science aims to accelerate the public health impact of evidence-based interventions. However, implementation science has had too little focus on the role of health policy - and its inseparable politics, polity structures, and policymakers - in the implementation and sustainment of evidence-based healthcare. Policies can serve as determinants, implementation strategies, the evidence-based "thing" to be implemented, or another variable in the causal pathway to healthcare access, quality, and patient outcomes. Research describing the roles of policy in dissemination and implementation (D&I) efforts is needed to resolve persistent knowledge gaps about policymakers' evidence use, how evidence-based policies are implemented and sustained, and methods to de-implement policies that are ineffective or cause harm. Few D&I theories, models, or frameworks (TMF) explicitly guide researchers in conceptualizing where, how, and when policy should be empirically investigated. We conducted and reflected on the results of a scoping review to identify gaps of existing Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, and Sustainment (EPIS) framework-guided policy D&I studies. We argue that rather than creating new TMF, researchers should optimize existing TMF to examine policy's role in D&I. We describe six recommendations to help researchers optimize existing D&I TMF. Recommendations are applied to EPIS, as one example for advancing TMF for policy D&I. RECOMMENDATIONS (1) Specify dimensions of a policy's function (policy goals, type, contexts, capital exchanged). (2) Specify dimensions of a policy's form (origin, structure, dynamism, outcomes). (3) Identify and define the nonlinear phases of policy D&I across outer and inner contexts. (4) Describe the temporal roles that stakeholders play in policy D&I over time. (5) Consider policy-relevant outer and inner context adaptations. (6) Identify and describe bridging factors necessary for policy D&I success. CONCLUSION Researchers should use TMF to meaningfully conceptualize policy's role in D&I efforts to accelerate the public health impact of evidence-based policies or practices and de-implement ineffective and harmful policies. Applying these six recommendations to existing D&I TMF advances existing theoretical knowledge, especially EPIS application, rather than introducing new models. Using these recommendations will sensitize researchers to help them investigate the multifaceted roles policy can play within a causal pathway leading to D&I success.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Erika L Crable
- Department of Psychiatry, University of California, La Jolla, San Diego, CA, 92093, USA.
- Child and Adolescent Services Research Center, San Diego, CA, USA.
- UC San Diego Altman Clinical and Translational Research Institute Dissemination and Implementation Science Center, La Jolla, San Diego, CA, USA.
| | | | - Nicole A Stadnick
- Department of Psychiatry, University of California, La Jolla, San Diego, CA, 92093, USA
- Child and Adolescent Services Research Center, San Diego, CA, USA
- UC San Diego Altman Clinical and Translational Research Institute Dissemination and Implementation Science Center, La Jolla, San Diego, CA, USA
| | - Joanna C Moullin
- Faculty of Health Sciences, enAble Institute, Curtin University, Perth, WA, Australia
| | - Gregory A Aarons
- Department of Psychiatry, University of California, La Jolla, San Diego, CA, 92093, USA
- Child and Adolescent Services Research Center, San Diego, CA, USA
- UC San Diego Altman Clinical and Translational Research Institute Dissemination and Implementation Science Center, La Jolla, San Diego, CA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Dopp AR, Hunter SB, Godley MD, Pham C, Han B, Smart R, Cantor J, Kilmer B, Hindmarch G, González I, Passetti LL, Wright KL, Aarons GA, Purtle J. Comparing two federal financing strategies on penetration and sustainment of the adolescent community reinforcement approach for substance use disorders: protocol for a mixed-method study. Implement Sci Commun 2022; 3:51. [PMID: 35562836 PMCID: PMC9099033 DOI: 10.1186/s43058-022-00298-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/28/2022] [Accepted: 04/21/2022] [Indexed: 01/09/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Sustained, widespread availability of evidence-based practices (EBPs) is essential to address the public health and societal impacts of adolescent substance use disorders (SUD). There remains a particularly significant need to identify effective financing strategies, which secure and direct financial resources to support the costs associated with EBP implementation and sustainment. This protocol describes a new project comparing two types of U.S. federal grant mechanisms (i.e., a type of financing strategy), which supported the implementation of the Adolescent Community Reinforcement Approach (A-CRA) EBP for SUD, through either organization-focused or state-focused granting of funds. The Exploration-Preparation-Implementation-Sustainment (EPIS) framework will guide our study aims, hypotheses, and selection of measures. METHOD We will employ a longitudinal, mixed-method (i.e., web surveys, semi-structured interviews, document review, focus groups, administrative data), quasi-experimental design to compare the grant types' outcomes and examine theoretically informed mediators and moderators. Aim 1 will examine the proportion of eligible clinicians certified in A-CRA with adequate fidelity levels (i.e., penetration outcomes) at the end of grant funding. Aim 2 will examine the sustainment of A-CRA up to 5 years post-funding, using a 10-element composite measure of treatment delivery and supervision activities. We will integrate the new data collected from state-focused grant recipients (~85 organizations in 19 states) with previously collected data from organization-focused grant recipients (Hunter et al., Implement Sci 9:104, 2014) (82 organizations in 26 states) for analysis. We will also use sensitivity analyses to characterize the effects of observed and unobserved secular trends in our quasi-experimental design. Finally, aim 3 will use comparative case study methods (integrating diverse quantitative and qualitative measures) to identify and disseminate policy implications about the roles of state- and organization-focused federal grants in efforts to promote adolescent SUD EBP implementation and sustainment. DISCUSSION The proposed research will have direct, practical implications for behavioral health administrators, policymakers, implementation experts, and the public. It will offer new knowledge that can directly inform financing strategies to support large-scale, sustained EBP delivery in behavioral health-while advancing implementation science through the use of novel methods to study financing strategies and sustainment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alex R Dopp
- RAND Corporation, 1776 Main Street, Santa Monica, CA, 90401, USA.
| | - Sarah B Hunter
- RAND Corporation, 1776 Main Street, Santa Monica, CA, 90401, USA
| | - Mark D Godley
- Chestnut Health Systems, 448 Wylie Drive, Normal, IL, 61761, USA
| | - Chau Pham
- RAND Corporation, 1776 Main Street, Santa Monica, CA, 90401, USA
| | - Bing Han
- Department of Research and Evaluation, Division of Biostatistics Research, Kaiser Permanente Southern California, 100 South Los Robles Avenue 2nd Floor, Pasadena, CA, 91101, USA
| | - Rosanna Smart
- RAND Corporation, 1776 Main Street, Santa Monica, CA, 90401, USA
| | - Jonathan Cantor
- RAND Corporation, 1776 Main Street, Santa Monica, CA, 90401, USA
| | - Beau Kilmer
- RAND Corporation, 1776 Main Street, Santa Monica, CA, 90401, USA
| | - Grace Hindmarch
- RAND Corporation, 1776 Main Street, Santa Monica, CA, 90401, USA
| | - Isabelle González
- RAND Corporation, 1200 South Hayes Street, Arlington, VA, 22202, USA
| | - Lora L Passetti
- Chestnut Health Systems, 448 Wylie Drive, Normal, IL, 61761, USA
| | - Kelli L Wright
- Chestnut Health Systems, 448 Wylie Drive, Normal, IL, 61761, USA
| | - Gregory A Aarons
- Department of Psychiatry, 9500 Gilman Dr. (0812), University of California San Diego, La Jolla, CA, 92093, USA
- UC San Diego Altman Clinical and Translational Research Institute Dissemination and Implementation Science Center, La Jolla, CA, 92093, USA
| | - Jonathan Purtle
- Department of Public Health Policy & Management and Global Center for Implementation Science, New York University School of Global Public Health, 708 Broadway, New York, NY, 10003, USA
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Mckay V, Vogel M, Combs T, Brossart L, Endrizal A, Andersen S, Poor T, Mahoney M, Luke D. Tailoring dissemination of evidence to preferences of tobacco control partners: results from an academic-community partnership. Subst Abuse Treat Prev Policy 2022; 17:29. [PMID: 35459197 PMCID: PMC9034543 DOI: 10.1186/s13011-022-00450-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 03/04/2022] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Tobacco control program leaders and their partners, who often present evidence to policymakers, can increase the use of evidence in program and policy development. However, up-to-date evidence from the scientific community about what works is slow to reach leaders. We describe efforts to understand and utilize tobacco control leaders' preferences for receiving evidence and report on resulting dissemination strategies, translational products, and outcomes. METHODS This work is part of the Advancing Science and Practice in the Retail Environment (ASPiRE) Center, an interdisciplinary research center focused on understanding and evaluating tobacco retail policy. Participants were members of the ASPiRE Community Advisory Board (CAB), comprised of tobacco control leaders from 30 metropolitan areas representing all regions of the US plus nine representatives from leading national tobacco control organizations (N = 39). During meetings in February 2019 and October 2020, all CAB members were invited to participate in live polls consisting of six survey questions each. Questions addressed preferences for receiving scientific evidence and their anticipated use of ASPiRE translational products. Responses were analyzed descriptively and informed translational product development and communications with ASPiRE contact list members (N = 125). ASPiRE email and website interactions were tracked from March 2019 to May 2021 as a complementary indication of content use. RESULTS Response rates for 2019 and 2020 CAB meetings were 66% (n = 26) and 59% (n = 23), respectively. CAB members indicated preferences for email communication (33%) and webinars (31%), communications once per month (46%), and short-format documents (28%). In response, the team developed translational short-format products including case studies, fact sheets, and research briefs. On average, 52% (SD = 14%) of recipients opened the newsletter and 17% (SD = 9%) clicked a link within the newsletter. Overall, 95% of responding CAB members found the products useful and all responding CAB members reported using them to communicate evidence to policymakers, staff, and coalition members. CONCLUSIONS Our successful dissemination approach to making evidence more accessible and useable for tobacco control leaders could be adapted by researchers working with community partners to assess and respond to stakeholders' preferences for receiving evidence in other areas of health policy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Virginia Mckay
- Center for Public Health Systems Science, Brown School, Washington University in St. Louis, 1 Brookings Drive, Campus, Box 1196, St. Louis, MO, 63130, USA.
| | - Mia Vogel
- Center for Public Health Systems Science, Brown School, Washington University in St. Louis, 1 Brookings Drive, Campus, Box 1196, St. Louis, MO, 63130, USA
| | - Todd Combs
- Center for Public Health Systems Science, Brown School, Washington University in St. Louis, 1 Brookings Drive, Campus, Box 1196, St. Louis, MO, 63130, USA
| | - Laura Brossart
- Center for Public Health Systems Science, Brown School, Washington University in St. Louis, 1 Brookings Drive, Campus, Box 1196, St. Louis, MO, 63130, USA
| | - Amy Endrizal
- Center for Public Health Systems Science, Brown School, Washington University in St. Louis, 1 Brookings Drive, Campus, Box 1196, St. Louis, MO, 63130, USA
| | - Stephanie Andersen
- Center for Public Health Systems Science, Brown School, Washington University in St. Louis, 1 Brookings Drive, Campus, Box 1196, St. Louis, MO, 63130, USA
| | - Timothy Poor
- Health Communication Research Laboratory, Brown School, Washington University in St. Louis, 1 Brookings Drive, Campus, Box 1196, St. Louis, MO, 63130, USA
| | | | - Douglas Luke
- Center for Public Health Systems Science, Brown School, Washington University in St. Louis, 1 Brookings Drive, Campus, Box 1196, St. Louis, MO, 63130, USA
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Dopp AR, Gilbert M, Silovsky J, Ringel JS, Schmidt S, Funderburk B, Jorgensen A, Powell BJ, Luke DA, Mandell D, Edwards D, Blythe M, Hagele D. Coordination of sustainable financing for evidence-based youth mental health treatments: protocol for development and evaluation of the fiscal mapping process. Implement Sci Commun 2022; 3:1. [PMID: 34983689 PMCID: PMC8724666 DOI: 10.1186/s43058-021-00234-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/07/2021] [Accepted: 11/01/2021] [Indexed: 11/30/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Sustained delivery of evidence-based treatments (EBTs) is essential to addressing the public health and economic impacts of youth mental health problems, but is complicated by the limited and fragmented funding available to youth mental health service agencies (hereafter, "service agencies"). Strategic planning tools are needed that can guide these service agencies in their coordination of sustainable funding for EBTs. This protocol describes a mixed-methods research project designed to (1) develop and (2) evaluate our novel fiscal mapping process that guides strategic planning efforts to finance the sustainment of EBTs in youth mental health services. METHOD Participants will be 48 expert stakeholder participants, including representatives from ten service agencies and their partners from funding agencies (various public and private sources) and intermediary organizations (which provide guidance and support on the delivery of specific EBTs). Aim 1 is to develop the fiscal mapping process: a multi-step, structured tool that guides service agencies in selecting the optimal combination of strategies for financing their EBT sustainment efforts. We will adapt the fiscal mapping process from an established intervention mapping process and will incorporate an existing compilation of 23 financing strategies. We will then engage participants in a modified Delphi exercise to achieve consensus on the fiscal mapping process steps and gather information that can inform the selection of strategies. Aim 2 is to evaluate preliminary impacts of the fiscal mapping process on service agencies' EBT sustainment capacities (i.e., structures and processes that support sustainment) and outcomes (e.g., intentions to sustain). The ten agencies will pilot test the fiscal mapping process. We will evaluate how the fiscal mapping process impacts EBT sustainment capacities and outcomes using a comparative case study approach, incorporating data from focus groups and document review. After pilot testing, the stakeholder participants will conceptualize the process and outcomes of fiscal mapping in a participatory modeling exercise to help inform future use and evaluation of the tool. DISCUSSION This project will generate the fiscal mapping process, which will facilitate the coordination of an array of financing strategies to sustain EBTs in community youth mental health services. This tool will promote the sustainment of youth-focused EBTs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alex R Dopp
- Department of Behavioral and Policy Sciences, RAND Corporation, 1776 Main Street, Santa Monica, CA, 90401, USA.
| | - Marylou Gilbert
- Department of Behavioral and Policy Sciences, RAND Corporation, 1776 Main Street, Santa Monica, CA, 90401, USA
| | - Jane Silovsky
- Department of Pediatrics, Division of Developmental and Behavioral Pediatrics, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, 940 NE 13th Street Suite 4900, Oklahoma City, OK, 73104, USA
| | - Jeanne S Ringel
- Department of Economics, Sociology, and Statistics, RAND Corporation, 1776 Main Street, Santa Monica, CA, 90401, USA
| | - Susan Schmidt
- Department of Pediatrics, Division of Developmental and Behavioral Pediatrics, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, 940 NE 13th Street Suite 4900, Oklahoma City, OK, 73104, USA
| | - Beverly Funderburk
- Department of Pediatrics, Division of Developmental and Behavioral Pediatrics, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, 940 NE 13th Street Suite 4900, Oklahoma City, OK, 73104, USA
| | - Ashley Jorgensen
- Department of Pediatrics, Division of Developmental and Behavioral Pediatrics, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, 940 NE 13th Street Suite 4900, Oklahoma City, OK, 73104, USA
| | - Byron J Powell
- Center for Mental Health Services Research, Brown School and School of Medicine, Washington University, Campus Box 1196, One Brookings Drive, St. Louis, MO, 63130, USA
| | - Douglas A Luke
- Brown School, Washington University, Campus Box 1196, One Brookings Drive, St. Louis, MO, 63130, USA
| | - David Mandell
- Department of Psychiatry, University of Pennsylvania, 3535 Market Street, 3rd Fl., Philadelphia, PA, 19104, USA
| | - Daniel Edwards
- Evidence-Based Associates, 1311 Delaware Ave, Suite 637, Washington, DC, 20024, USA
| | - Mellicent Blythe
- NC Child Treatment Program c/o Center for Child and Family Health, 1121 W, Chapel Hill St. Ste. 100, Durham, NC, 27701, USA
| | - Dana Hagele
- NC Child Treatment Program c/o Center for Child and Family Health, 1121 W, Chapel Hill St. Ste. 100, Durham, NC, 27701, USA
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Determinants of using children's mental health research in policymaking: variation by type of research use and phase of policy process. Implement Sci 2021; 16:13. [PMID: 33468166 PMCID: PMC7815190 DOI: 10.1186/s13012-021-01081-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/18/2020] [Accepted: 01/07/2021] [Indexed: 01/24/2023] Open
Abstract
Background Research use in policymaking is multi-faceted and has been the focus of extensive study. However, virtually no quantitative studies have examined whether the determinants of research use vary according to the type of research use or phase of policy process. Understanding such variation is important for selecting the targets of implementation strategies that aim to increase the frequency of research use in policymaking. Methods A web-based survey of US state agency officials involved with children’s mental health policymaking was conducted between December 2019 and February 2020 (n = 224, response rate = 33.7%, 49 states responding (98%), median respondents per state = 4). The dependent variables were composite scores of the frequency of using children’s mental health research in general, specific types of research use (i.e., conceptual, instrumental, tactical, imposed), and during different phases of the policy process (i.e., agenda setting, policy development, policy implementation). The independent variables were four composite scores of determinants of research use: agency leadership for research use, agency barriers to research use, research use skills, and dissemination barriers (e.g., lack of actionable messages/recommendations in research summaries, lack of interaction/collaboration with researchers). Separate multiple linear regression models estimated associations between determinant and frequency of research use scores. Results Determinants of research use varied significantly by type of research use and phase of policy process. For example, agency leadership for research use was the only determinant significantly associated with imposed research use (β = 0.31, p < 0.001). Skills for research use were the only determinant associated with tactical research use (β = 0.17, p = 0.03) and were only associated with research use in the agenda-setting phase (β = 0.16, p = 0.04). Dissemination barriers were the most universal determinants of research use, as they were significantly and inversely associated with frequency of conceptual (β = −0.21, p = 0.01) and instrumental (β = −0.22, p = 0.01) research use and during all three phases of policy process. Conclusions Decisions about the determinants to target with policy-focused implementation strategies—and the strategies that are selected to affect these targets—should reflect the specific types of research use that these strategies aim to influence. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13012-021-01081-8.
Collapse
|
10
|
Purtle J, Nelson KL, Bruns EJ, Hoagwood KE. Dissemination Strategies to Accelerate the Policy Impact of Children's Mental Health Services Research. Psychiatr Serv 2020; 71:1170-1178. [PMID: 32517640 PMCID: PMC9721469 DOI: 10.1176/appi.ps.201900527] [Citation(s) in RCA: 40] [Impact Index Per Article: 10.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/30/2022]
Abstract
The United States is in the midst of a children's mental health crisis, with rates of depression, anxiety, and suicide increasing precipitously. Evidence produced by children's mental health services research can help address this crisis by informing public policy decisions about service delivery, system design, and investments in the social determinants of mental health. Unfortunately, the policy impact of children's mental health services research is limited because evidence often fails to reach policy makers, be responsive to their needs, resonate with their worldview, or reflect the contexts in which they make decisions. Dissemination strategies-defined as the development and targeted distribution of messages and materials about research evidence pertaining to a specific issue or intervention-can help address these challenges. Yet, limited integrated guidance exists to inform the design of such strategies. This article addresses this need by synthesizing the results of empirical studies to provide guidance about how to enhance the dissemination of children's mental health services research to policy makers. The article provides four recommendations about the content of policy maker-focused dissemination materials, discusses how strategic framing and message tailoring can increase the chances that evidence is persuasive to policy makers, and highlights strategies to ensure that evidence reaches policy makers.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jonathan Purtle
- Department of Health Management and Policy, Dornsife School of Public Health, Drexel University, Philadelphia (Purtle, Nelson); Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle (Bruns); Department of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, New York University Langone School of Medicine, New York (Hoagwood)
| | - Katherine L Nelson
- Department of Health Management and Policy, Dornsife School of Public Health, Drexel University, Philadelphia (Purtle, Nelson); Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle (Bruns); Department of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, New York University Langone School of Medicine, New York (Hoagwood)
| | - Eric J Bruns
- Department of Health Management and Policy, Dornsife School of Public Health, Drexel University, Philadelphia (Purtle, Nelson); Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle (Bruns); Department of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, New York University Langone School of Medicine, New York (Hoagwood)
| | - Kimberly E Hoagwood
- Department of Health Management and Policy, Dornsife School of Public Health, Drexel University, Philadelphia (Purtle, Nelson); Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle (Bruns); Department of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, New York University Langone School of Medicine, New York (Hoagwood)
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Fenwick KM, Palinkas LA, Hurlburt MS, Lengnick-Hall RD, Horwitz SM, Hoagwood KE. Acquisition of Information About Innovative Practices in Outpatient Mental Health Clinics. ADMINISTRATION AND POLICY IN MENTAL HEALTH AND MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH 2020; 47:752-763. [PMID: 32157474 PMCID: PMC7222893 DOI: 10.1007/s10488-020-01029-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/12/2022]
Abstract
This study uses qualitative interviews with leaders of 34 mental health clinics in the context of a statewide rollout of clinical and business innovations to explore how clinics first learn about innovations and which external sources of information they access. Clinic leaders reported accessing information about innovations mainly from government agencies, professional associations, peer organizations, and research literature. Leaders mentioned an average of two external sources of information. There was evidence of variation in how leaders accessed information and how information about innovations was communicated within clinics. Findings have implications for improving dissemination of information about innovations in mental health systems.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Karissa M Fenwick
- Center for the Study of Healthcare Innovation, Implementation and Policy (CSHIIP), VA Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System, 11301 Wilshire Blvd (206), Los Angeles, USA.
| | - Lawrence A Palinkas
- Suzanne Dworak-Peck School of Social Work, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Michael S Hurlburt
- Suzanne Dworak-Peck School of Social Work, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | | | - Sarah M Horwitz
- Department of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, New York University, New York, NY, USA
| | - Kimberly E Hoagwood
- Department of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, New York University, New York, NY, USA
| |
Collapse
|