Recommendations for Addressing Structural Racism in Implementation Science: A Call to the Field

Universal substance use care for adolescents with chronic medical conditions: a protocol to examine equitable implementation determinants and strategies for SBIRT at a pediatric hospital

BACKGROUND

Adolescents with chronic medical conditions (CMC) use alcohol and marijuana at levels equal to or even greater than their peers without CMC and are more likely to initiate substance use at 14 years or younger. Approximately 33% of adolescents with CMC binge drink alcohol and 20% use marijuana. When using substances, adolescents with CMC are at elevated risk for problem use and adverse consequences given their medical conditions. Although there has recently been progress integrating substance use services into adult hospitals, there has been almost no implementation of standardized substance use services into pediatric hospitals for adolescents with CMC. Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT) for adolescents is an evidence-based, public health approach to promote the early detection and intervention of risky alcohol use in high-risk youth. This paper describes a study protocol combining two leading implementation science frameworks, the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) and the Health Equity Implementation framework (HEIF), to engage pediatric hospital partners (hospital staff and clinicians, patients with CMC, and caregivers) to identify and specify contextual determinants of SBIRT implementation, which can be used to derive implementation strategies to optimize SBIRT adoption, reach, and fidelity.

METHOD

This study will use semi-structured interviews and focus groups with pediatric hospital partners (e.g., hospital staff and clinicians, adolescent patients, and caregivers) to identify SBIRT implementation determinants, using semi-structured interview and focus group guides that integrate CFIR and HEIF dimensions.

DISCUSSION

Understanding implementation determinants is one of the first steps in the implementation science process. The use of two determinant frameworks highlighting a comprehensive set of determinants including health equity and justice will enable identification of barriers and facilitators that will then map on to strategies that address these factors. This study will serve as an essential precursor to further work evaluating the feasibility of and the degree of engagement with SBIRT among this vulnerable pediatric population.

Never Felt at Home: A Qualitative Study of the Experiences of Faculty From Underrepresented Groups in Family Medicine and Strategies for Empowerment

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Increasing diversity among medical educators is a vital step toward diversifying the physician workforce. This study examined how gender, race, and other attributes affect family medicine department chairs' experiences with sponsoring, mentoring, and coaching (SMC). We identified strategies at multiple levels to enhance SMC for faculty from underrepresented groups (URGs).

METHODS

Our qualitative study employed semistructured interviews with the chairs of departments of family medicine in the United States. We used inductive and deductive thematic analysis approaches to describe the experience and name usable strategies organized along the social-ecological model.

RESULTS

We interviewed 20 family medicine department chairs between December 2020 and May 2021. Many participants continued to be alarmed that leaders and role models from URGs have been rare. Participants described incidents of aggression in White- and male-dominated atmospheres. Such experiences left some feeling not at home. Some White male leaders appeared oblivious to the experiences of URG faculty, many of whom were burdened with a minority tax. For some URGs, surviving meant moving to a more supportive institution. Building spaces for resiliency and connecting with others to combat discrimination gave meaning to some participants. Participant responses helped identify multilevel strategies for empowerment and support for URG faculty.

CONCLUSIONS

Understanding the experiences of URG faculty is paramount to improving the environment in academic medicine-paving the way to enhancing diversity in the health care sector. Institutions and individuals need to develop multilevel strategies for empowerment and support to actively make diverse faculty feel at home.

Bridging the Gap: Reducing Health Inequities in Access to Preventive Health Care Services in Rural Communities in the Philippines

INTRODUCTION

We used an implementation science framework to investigate perceived health inequities in preventive health care initiatives in rural communities in the Philippines. We also identified health equity-focused quality improvement strategies.

METHODS

Three health care providers and 12 barangay clinic patients were interviewed.

RESULTS

Patient interviews showed that social determinants of health, respect, and attitudes toward health care providers affected patient empowerment to engage in self-management for noncommunicable diseases (NCDs). Health care providers identified six challenges in managing NCDs: (a) inefficient work processes; (b) staffing shortages; (c) insufficient access to low-cost medications; (d) inadequate primary preventive health education from the schools; (e) health care not considered a priority; and (f) lack of local government support.

DISCUSSION

Inadequate preventive health care and education intensify health access and resource inequities in rural communities in the Philippines. A multi-sectoral plan may improve rural health infrastructure and education toward improving health care access and decreasing care disparities.

Implementing group care in Dutch and Surinamese maternity and child care services: the vital importance of addressing outer context barriers

BACKGROUND

By addressing physical and psychosocial needs, group care (GC) improves health-related behaviours, peer support, parent-provider interactions and may improve birth outcomes. Hence, global implementation of GC is encouraged. Context analyses prior to implementation are vital to elucidate which local factors may support or hinder implementation.

METHODS

Contextual analyses conducted in the Netherlands and Suriname were compared to identify the factors relevant to the implementability of GC as perceived by healthcare professionals (HCPs). 32 semi-structured interviews were conducted with Dutch and Surinamese healthcare professionals. Audio recordings were transcribed verbatim and coded using the Framework approach. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research guided the development of the interview guide and of the coding tree.

RESULTS

Outer setting: Concerns regarding funding surfaced in both countries. Due to limited health insurance coverage, additional fees would limit accessibility in Suriname. In the Netherlands, midwives dreaded lower revenue due to reimbursement policies that favour one-on-one care. Inner setting: Appropriate space for GC was absent in one Dutch and three Surinamese facilities. Role division regarding GC implementation was clearer in the Netherlands than in Suriname.

INNOVATION

HCPs from both countries expected increased social support, health knowledge among women, and continuity of care(r). Individuals/innovation deliverers: Self-efficacy and motivation emerged as intertwined determinants to GC implementation in both countries. Individuals/innovation recipients: Competing demands can potentially lower acceptability of GC in both countries. While Dutch HCPs prioritised an open dialogue with mothers, Surinamese HCPs encouraged the inclusion of partners.

PROCESS

Campaigns to raise awareness of GC were proposed. Language barriers were a concern for Dutch but not for Surinamese HCPs.

CONCLUSIONS

While the most striking differences between both countries were found in the outer setting, they trickle down and affect all layers of context. Ultimately, at a later stage, the process evaluation will show if those outer setting barriers we identified prior to implementation actually hindered GC implementation. Changes to the health care systems would ensure sustained implementation in both countries, and this conclusion feeds into a more general discussion: how to proceed when contextual analyses reveal barriers that cannot be addressed with the time and resources available.

Evolution of community outreach and engagement at National Cancer Institute-Designated Cancer Centers, an evolving journey

Cancer mortality rates have declined during the last 28 years, but that process is not equitably shared. Disparities in cancer outcomes by race, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, sexual orientation and gender identity, and geographic location persist across the cancer care continuum. Consequently, community outreach and engagement (COE) efforts within National Cancer Institute-Designated Cancer Center (NCI-DCC) catchment areas have intensified during the last 10 years as has the emphasis on COE and catchment areas in NCI's Cancer Center Support Grant applications. This review article attempts to provide a historic perspective of COE within NCI-DCCs. Improving COE has long been an important initiative for the NCI, but it was not until 2012 and 2016 that NCI-DCCs were required to define their catchment areas rigorously and to provide specific descriptions of COE interventions, respectively. NCI-DCCs had previously lacked adequate focus on the inclusion of historically marginalized patients in cancer innovation efforts. Integrating COE efforts throughout the research and operational aspects of the cancer centers, at both the patient and community levels, will expand the footprint of COE efforts within NCI-DCCs. Achieving this change requires sustained commitment by the centers to adjust their activities and improve access and outcomes for historically marginalized communities.

Advancing the Science and Application of Implementation Science to Promote Health Equity: Commentary on the Symposium

There has been an increasing focus on making health equity a more explicit and foundational aspect of the research being conducted in public health and implementation science. This commentary provides an overview of five reviews in this Annual Review of Public Health symposium on Implementation Science and Health Equity. These articles reflect on and advance the application of core implementation science principles and concepts, with a focus on promoting health equity across a diverse range of public health and health care settings. Taken together, the symposium articles highlight critical conceptual, methodological, and empirical advances in the study designs, frameworks, and approaches that can help address equity considerations in the use of implementation science in both domestic and global contexts. Finally, this commentary highlights how work featured in this symposium can help inform future directions for rapidly taking public health to scale, particularly among systemically marginalized populations and communities.

Implementation Science and Practice-Oriented Research: Convergence and Complementarity

Implementation science is the scientific study of methods to promote the uptake of research findings and other evidence-based practices in routine care, with the goal of improving the quality and effectiveness of health services (Bauer et al., 2015). In addition to this common goal, practice-oriented psychotherapy research (and researchers) and implementation science (and scientists) share a common focus on the people and the places where treatment happens. Thus, there exists strong potential for combining these two approaches. In this article, we provide a primer on implementation science for psychotherapy researchers and highlight important areas and examples of convergence and complementarity between implementation science and practice-oriented psychotherapy research. Specifically, we (a) define and describe the core features of implementation science; (b) discuss similarities and areas of complementarity between implementation science and practice-oriented psychotherapy research; (c) discuss a case example that exemplifies the integration of implementation science and practice-oriented research; and (d) propose directions for future research and collaborations that leverage both implementation science and practice-oriented research.

Community Health workers United to Reduce Colorectal cancer and cardiovascular disease among people at Higher risk (CHURCH): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second most lethal cancer in the United States (U.S.) with the highest incidence and mortality rates among African Americans (AAs) compared to other racial groups. Despite these disparities, AAs are the least likely to undergo CRC screening, have precancerous colorectal polyps removed, and have CRC detected at stages early enough for curative excision. In addition, compelling evidence links inflammatory dietary patterns to increased CRC and cardiovascular disease risk. Studies show that AA churches can successfully engage in health promotion activities including those related to cancer control. The current study seeks to leverage church-placed Community Health Workers (CHWs) to increase CRC screening and reduce CRC risk.

DESIGN AND METHODS

We aim to (1) increase guideline concordant CRC screening uptake using church-placed CHWs trained in screening with a validated instrument, Brief Intervention using Motivational Interviewing, and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT); and (2) reduce dietary risk factors (inflammatory dietary patterns) linked to CRC. The latter will be addressed by culturally adapting an existing, web-based lifestyle program called Alive!. Using a Hybrid Type 1 Implementation-Effectiveness cluster randomized design, we will randomize 22 AA churches into either the dual intervention arm (CHW-led SBIRT intervention plus Alive!) or a usual care arm comprised of CRC prevention educational pamphlets and a list of CRC screening sites. We will recruit 440 subjects and evaluate the effects of both arms on screening uptake (colonoscopy, fecal DNA) (primary outcome) and dietary inflammation score (secondary outcome) at 6-month follow-up, and Life Simple7 (LS7)-a cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk score-at 6 months and 1 year (secondary outcome). Finally, guided by a racism-conscious adaptation of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), we will conduct a mixed-methods process evaluation with key stakeholders to understand multi-level influences on CRC screening and CVD risk behaviors.

DISCUSSION

Church-placed CHWs are trusted influential connectors between communities and health systems. Studies have shown that these CHWs can successfully implement health prevention protocols in churches, including those related to cancer control, making them potentially important community mediators of CRC screening uptake and CRC/CVD risk reduction.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT05174286; clinicaltrials.gov; August 31st, 2023.

Integrating the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) into a Culturally Responsive Evaluation (CRE) Approach to Conduct Mixed-Method Evaluations of Diabetes Prevention and Management Programs Reaching Underresourced Populations and Communities

Diabetes is a significant population health threat. Evidence-based interventions, such as the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's National Diabetes Prevention Program and diabetes self-management education and support programs, can help prevent, delay, or manage the disease. However, participation is suboptimal, especially among populations who are at an increased risk of developing diabetes. Evaluations of programs reaching populations who are medically underserved or people with lower incomes can help elucidate how best to tailor evidence-based interventions, but it is also important for evaluations to account for cultural and contextual factors. Culturally responsive evaluation (CRE) is a framework for centering an evaluation in the culture of the programs being evaluated. We integrated CRE with implementation and outcome constructs from the Adapted Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) to ensure that the evaluation produced useful evidence for putting evidence-based diabetes interventions to use in real-world settings, reaching populations who are at an increased risk of developing diabetes. The paper provides an overview of how we integrated CRE and CFIR approaches to conduct mixed-methods evaluations of evidence-based diabetes interventions.

Strategies to improve delivery of equitable and evidence-informed care for pregnant and birthing people with a substance use disorder in acute care settings: A scoping review protocol

This protocol outlines a proposed scoping review to characterize evidence on implementation and quality improvement (QI) strategies that aim to improve equitable, evidence-informed care delivery for pregnant and birthing people with substance use disorder (SUD) in acute care. Untreated SUD during pregnancy is associated with an increased risk of overdose and severe maternal morbidity. Acute care settings are one important place to deliver equitable, evidence-informed clinical care. While clinical practice guidelines for substance use treatment and care of pregnant and birthing people with SUD exist, there are gaps in implementation. Our population of interest is pregnant and birthing people with SUD in an acute care setting. We will include US-based studies that describe or evaluate implementation or QI strategies, including experimental, observational, and descriptive studies published from 2016 to 2023. The proposed scoping review will be conducted in accordance with JBI methodology for scoping reviews and registered at OSF (registration number: BC4VZ). We will search MEDLINE (PubMed), CINAHL Complete (EBSCO), Scopus (Elsevier), and APA PsychInfo (Ovid) for published studies. Conference proceedings and Perinatal Quality Collaborative websites will be searched for grey literature. Two reviewers will independently screen then extract studies that meet inclusion criteria using a data extraction tool. The completion of this scoping review will help illuminate strengths and gaps in research and practice that aim to inform substance use treatment and care in acute care settings for pregnant and birthing people with SUD.

Racial and ethnic disparities in psychological care for individuals with FASD: a dis/ability studies and critical race theory perspective toward improving prevention, assessment/diagnosis, and intervention

Fetal alcohol spectrum disorders (FASD) are among the most common neurodevelopmental disorders and substantially impact public health. FASD can affect people of all races and ethnicities; however, there are important racial and ethnic disparities in alcohol-exposed pregnancy prevention, assessment and diagnosis of FASD, and interventions to support individuals with FASD and their families. In this article we use the Dis/Ability Studies and Critical Race Theory (Dis/Crit) framework to structure the exploration of disparities and possible solutions within these three areas (prevention, diagnosis, intervention). Dis/Crit provides a guide to understanding the intersection of dis/ability and race, while framing both as social constructs. Following the Dis/Crit framework, the systemic, historical, and contemporary racism and ableism present in psychological care is further discussed. We aim to elucidate these racial and ethnic disparities within the fields of psychology and neuropsychology through the Dis/Crit framework and provide potential points of action to reduce these disparities.

Situating implementation science (IS) in res(IS)tance: a conceptual frame toward the integration of scholarship from the black radical tradition

This manuscript undertakes a disciplinary self-critique of the field of implementation science, a field which attempts to bridge the gap between evidence-based interventions and their practical application. Despite the heightened emphasis on health equity and racial disparities, the field's current discourse is limited by key epistemic shortcomings. First, even though prevalence of implementation gaps between racialized groups in the United States necessitates a comprehensive understanding of the systems perpetuating these disparities, the field does not operate with a general explanation for disparities not as a failure of systems, but a system historically and structural designed to produce disparities. Second, the field has attempted to address disparities without adequate dialog with a broad tradition of anti-racist and anti-colonial sociology, history and epistemology, and therefore risks a decontextualized analysis of disparities and under-informed approaches to achieving equity. Fortunately, scholarship from the Black radical tradition (BRT), such as the Public Health Critical Race Praxis (PHCRP), Critical Race Theory (CRT), and more broadly conceptual frameworks from post-modern, anti-colonial, Black feminist studies and social epistemology can offer to implementation science frameworks that center power dynamics and racialized oppression. This epistemic re-alignment of implementation research to "center at the margins" can enable the field of implementation science to more critically examine and dismantle systems that perpetuate racial inequalities in access to and utilization of health interventions. For example, normalization and dynamic fit, which are thought to be key mechanisms of implementation, are revealed in the light of this tradition of scholarship to be potentially problematic acquiescence to oppressive systems. Drawing from the concept of resistance anchored in the scholarship of the Black radical tradition as well as contemporary social epistemology such as the work of José Medina and Maria Fricker about epistemic justice, the authors further advance that implementation science could make more substantial contributions to the dismantling of racialized systems and actively work toward health justice through the transdisciplinary lens of resistance. This is a call to action for integrating implementation science with critical philosophical and theoretical perspectives rooted in Black studies and related insights, which have been acquired through the struggle for social justice, to inform the design of implementation strategies and research projects that improve health services and health outcomes for health disparity populations.

Effectiveness of Cultural Sensitivity Training on Undergraduate Students' Knowledge, Self-Efficacy, and Ethnocultural Empathy

ABSTRACT

Institutional racism and systemic bias must be addressed in health care education with embedded cultural sensitivity training. We report the results of remote training on culturally sensitive care to increase knowledge, self-efficacy, and empathy in undergraduate nursing students ( n = 16). The training included four weekly remote sessions (~90 minutes). A pre-post survey indicated knowledge and self-efficacy increased ( p < .01); empathy increased but not significantly, likely because of ceiling effects ( p > .11). Compliance (94%) and satisfaction were excellent. This pilot study demonstrates a flexible, effective training model for nurse educators to implement within or alongside undergraduate nursing curricula.

Supporting implementation science and health equity in cancer prevention and control through research networks

The Cancer Prevention and Control Research Network (CPCRN) is a national network of academic, public health, and community organizational partners across multiple geographic sites who collaborate to reduce the cancer burden in diverse communities. Given key recommendations that suggest the need for cross-disciplinary collaboration in cancer prevention and control, we sought to explore the historical and contemporary evolution of health equity and disparities research as an area of focus within the CPCRN over time. We conducted 22 in-depth interviews with former and current leaders, co-investigators, and other members of the network. Several key themes emerged from data that were analyzed and interpreted using a constructivist, reflexive, thematic analysis approach. Nearly all participants reported a strong focus on studying health disparities since the inception of the CPCRN, which offered the network a distinct advantage in recent years for incorporating an intentional focus on health equity. Recent law enforcement injustices and the inequities observed during the COVID-19 pandemic have further invigorated network activities around health equity, such as development of a health equity-focused workgroup toolkit, among other cross-center activities. Several participants noted that, in terms of deep, meaningful, and impactful health equity-oriented research, there are still great strides for the network to make, while also acknowledging CPCRN as well-aligned with the national dialogue led by federal agency partners around health equity. Finally, several future directions were mentioned by the participants, including a focus on supporting a diverse workforce and engaging organizational partners and community members in equity-focused research. Findings from these interviews provide direction for the network in advancing the science in cancer prevention and control, with a strengthened focus on health equity.

Advancing healthcare equity through dissemination and implementation science

OBJECTIVE

To provide guiding principles and recommendations for how approaches from the field of dissemination and implementation (D&I) science can advance healthcare equity.

DATA SOURCES AND STUDY SETTING

This article, part of a special issue sponsored by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), is based on an outline drafted to support proceedings of the 2022 AHRQ Health Equity Summit and further revised to reflect input from Summit attendees.

STUDY DESIGN

This is a narrative review of the current and potential applications of D&I approaches for understanding and advancing healthcare equity, followed by discussion and feedback with Summit attendees.

DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS

We identified major themes in narrative and systematic reviews related to D&I science, healthcare equity, and their intersections. Based on our expertise, and supported by synthesis of published studies, we propose recommendations for how D&I science is relevant for advancing healthcare equity. We used iterative discussions internally and at the Summit to refine preliminary findings and recommendations.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

We identified four guiding principles and three D&I science domains with strong promise for accelerating progress toward healthcare equity. We present eight recommendations and more than 60 opportunities for action by practitioners, healthcare leaders, policy makers, and researchers.

CONCLUSIONS

Promising areas for D&I science to impact healthcare equity include the following: attention to equity in the development and delivery of evidence-based interventions; the science of adaptation; de-implementation of low-value care; monitoring equity markers; organizational policies for healthcare equity; improving the economic evaluation of implementation; policy and dissemination research; and capacity building.

Improving adult behavioural weight management services for diverse UK Black Caribbean and Black African ethnic groups: a qualitative study of insights from potential service users and service providers

Background

A significantly higher proportion of UK Black ethnic adults live with overweight or obesity, compared to their White British counterparts. The role of obesity in excess infection rates and mortality from COVID-19 has increased the need to understand if weight management interventions are appropriate and effective for Black ethnic groups. There is a paucity of existing research on weight management services in Black populations, and whether anticipated or experienced institutional and interpersonal racism in the healthcare and more widely affects engagement in these services. Understanding the lived experience of target populations and views of service providers delivering programmes is essential for timely service improvement.

Methods

A qualitative study using semi-structured interviews was conducted in June-October 2021 among 18 Black African and Black Caribbean men and women interested in losing weight and 10 weight management service providers.

Results

The results highlighted a positive view of life in the United Kingdom (UK), whether born in the UK or born abroad, but one which was marred by racism. Weight gain was attributed by participants to unhealthy behaviours and the environment, with improving appearance and preventing ill health key motivators for weight loss. Participants relied on self-help to address their overweight, with the role of primary care in weight management contested as a source of support. Anticipated or previously experienced racism in the health care system and more widely, accounted for some of the lack of engagement with services. Participants and service providers agreed on the lack of relevance of existing services to Black populations, including limited culturally tailored resources. Community based, ethnically matched, and flexibly delivered weight management services were suggested as ideal, and could form the basis of a set of recommendations for research and practice.

Conclusion

Cultural tailoring of existing services and new programmes, and cultural competency training are needed. These actions are required within systemic changes, such as interventions to address discrimination. Our qualitative insights form the basis for advancing further work and research to improve existing services to address the weight-related inequality faced by UK Black ethnic groups.

Cardiovascular-Kidney-Metabolic Health: A Presidential Advisory From the American Heart Association

Cardiovascular-kidney-metabolic health reflects the interplay among metabolic risk factors, chronic kidney disease, and the cardiovascular system and has profound impacts on morbidity and mortality. There are multisystem consequences of poor cardiovascular-kidney-metabolic health, with the most significant clinical impact being the high associated incidence of cardiovascular disease events and cardiovascular mortality. There is a high prevalence of poor cardiovascular-kidney-metabolic health in the population, with a disproportionate burden seen among those with adverse social determinants of health. However, there is also a growing number of therapeutic options that favorably affect metabolic risk factors, kidney function, or both that also have cardioprotective effects. To improve cardiovascular-kidney-metabolic health and related outcomes in the population, there is a critical need for (1) more clarity on the definition of cardiovascular-kidney-metabolic syndrome; (2) an approach to cardiovascular-kidney-metabolic staging that promotes prevention across the life course; (3) prediction algorithms that include the exposures and outcomes most relevant to cardiovascular-kidney-metabolic health; and (4) strategies for the prevention and management of cardiovascular disease in relation to cardiovascular-kidney-metabolic health that reflect harmonization across major subspecialty guidelines and emerging scientific evidence. It is also critical to incorporate considerations of social determinants of health into care models for cardiovascular-kidney-metabolic syndrome and to reduce care fragmentation by facilitating approaches for patient-centered interdisciplinary care. This presidential advisory provides guidance on the definition, staging, prediction paradigms, and holistic approaches to care for patients with cardiovascular-kidney-metabolic syndrome and details a multicomponent vision for effectively and equitably enhancing cardiovascular-kidney-metabolic health in the population.

Revisiting the policy ecology framework for implementation of evidence-based practices in mental health settings

BACKGROUND

Over the past three decades, policy actors and actions have been highly influential in supporting the implementation of evidence-based practices (EBPs) in mental health settings. An early examination of these actions resulted in the Policy Ecology Framework (PEF), which was originally developed as a tactical primer for state and local mental health regulators in the field of child mental health. However, the policy landscape for implementation has evolved significantly since the original PEF was published. An interrogation of the strategies originally proposed in the PEF is necessary to provide an updated menu of strategies to improve our understanding of the mechanisms of policy action and promote system improvement.

OBJECTIVES

This paper builds upon the original PEF to address changes in the policy landscape for the implementation of mental health EBPs between 2009 and 2022. We review the current state of policy strategies that support the implementation of EBPs in mental health care and outline key areas for policy-oriented implementation research. Our review identifies policy strategies at federal, state, agency, and organizational levels, and highlights developments in the social context in which EBPs are implemented. Furthermore, our review is organized around some key changes that occurred across each PEF domain that span organizational, agency, political, and social contexts along with subdomains within each area.

DISCUSSION

We present an updated menu of policy strategies to support the implementation of EBPs in mental health settings. This updated menu of strategies considers the broad range of conceptual developments and changes in the policy landscape. These developments have occurred across the organizational, agency, political, and social contexts and are important for policymakers to consider in the context of supporting the implementation of EBPs. The updated PEF expands and enhances the specification of policy levers currently available, and identifies policy targets that are underdeveloped (e.g., de-implementation and sustainment) but are becoming visible opportunities for policy to support system improvement. The updated PEF clarifies current policy efforts within the field of implementation science in health to conceptualize and better operationalize the role of policy in the implementation of EBPs.

A scoping review of equity-focused implementation theories, models and frameworks in healthcare and their application in addressing ethnicity-related health inequities

BACKGROUND

Inequities in implementation contribute to the unequal benefit of health interventions between groups of people with differing levels of advantage in society. Implementation science theories, models and frameworks (TMFs) provide a theoretical basis for understanding the multi-level factors that influence implementation outcomes and are used to guide implementation processes. This study aimed to identify and analyse TMFs that have an equity focus or have been used to implement interventions in populations who experience ethnicity or 'race'-related health inequities.

METHODS

A scoping review was conducted to identify the relevant literature published from January 2011 to April 2022 by searching electronic databases (MEDLINE and CINAHL), the Dissemination and Implementation model database, hand-searching key journals and searching the reference lists and citations of studies that met the inclusion criteria. Titles, abstracts and full-text articles were screened independently by at least two researchers. Data were extracted from studies meeting the inclusion criteria, including the study characteristics, TMF description and operationalisation. TMFs were categorised as determinant frameworks, classic theories, implementation theories, process models and evaluation frameworks according to their overarching aim and described with respect to how equity and system-level factors influencing implementation were incorporated.

RESULTS

Database searches yielded 610 results, 70 of which were eligible for full-text review, and 18 met the inclusion criteria. A further eight publications were identified from additional sources. In total, 26 papers describing 15 TMFs and their operationalisation were included. Categorisation resulted in four determinant frameworks, one implementation theory, six process models and three evaluation frameworks. One framework included elements of determinant, process and evaluation TMFs and was therefore classified as a 'hybrid' framework. TMFs varied in their equity and systems focus. Twelve TMFs had an equity focus and three were established TMFs applied in an equity context. All TMFs at least partially considered systems-level factors, with five fully considering macro-, meso- and micro-level influences on equity and implementation.

CONCLUSIONS

This scoping review identifies and summarises the implementation science TMFs available to support equity-focused implementation. This review may be used as a resource to guide TMF selection and illustrate how TMFs have been utilised in equity-focused implementation activities.

Integrating a focus on health equity in implementation science: Case examples from the national cancer institute's implementation science in cancer control centers (ISC3) network

Background

A Health Equity Task Force (HETF) of members from seven Centers funded by the National Cancer Institute's (NCI) Implementation Science in Cancer Control Centers (ISC3) network sought to identify case examples of how Centers were applying a focus on health equity in implementation science to inform future research and capacity-building efforts.

Methods

HETF members at each ISC3 collected information on how health equity was conceptualized, operationalized, and addressed in initial research and capacity-building efforts across the seven ISC3 Centers funded in 2019-2020. Each Center completed a questionnaire assessing five health equity domains central to implementation science (e.g., community engagement; implementation science theories, models, and frameworks (TMFs); and engaging underrepresented scholars). Data generated illustrative examples from these five domains.

Results

Centers reported a range of approaches focusing on health equity in implementation research and capacity-building efforts, including (1) engaging diverse community partners/settings in making decisions about research priorities and projects; (2) applying health equity within a single TMF applied across projects or various TMFs used in specific projects; (3) evaluating health equity in operationalizing and measuring health and implementation outcomes; (4) building capacity for health equity-focused implementation science among trainees, early career scholars, and partnering organizations; and (5) leveraging varying levels of institutional resources and efforts to engage, include, and support underrepresented scholars.

Conclusions

Examples of approaches to integrating health equity across the ISC3 network can inform other investigators and centers' efforts to build capacity and infrastructure to support growth and expansion of health equity-focused implementation science.

Making the connection between health equity and sustainability

Sustainability and health inequities are key challenges in public health and healthcare. Research suggests that only about half of evidence-based interventions (EBIs) are sustained over time, and settings and populations experiencing systemic and structural barriers to health (e.g., poverty, racism, stigma, and discrimination) experience even greater challenges to sustainability. In this article, we argue that an enhanced focus on sustainability in the field of implementation science is critical in order to maximize the long-term health benefits and broader societal impacts of EBIs for all populations and settings. From an equity perspective, a focus on sustainability is particularly critical to prioritize among population sub-groups that have not historically received the benefits of health-related EBIs. We discuss how a health equity framing is essential to sustaining EBIs in under-resourced communities, and requires moving away from a deficit mindset that focuses on why EBIs are challenging to sustain, to one that focuses more on identifying and nurturing existing assets within individuals and communities to increase the likelihood that EBIs are sustained. We conclude with a discussion of future directions as well as recommendations and resources (e.g., frameworks, tools) to advance and make progress toward sustainability from a health equity mindset, including: (1) Actively planning early for sustainability alongside key partners; (2) Tracking progress toward enhancing sustainability and being accountable in doing so equitably for all settings and populations; and (3) Focusing on both equity and engagement early and often throughout the research process and all implementation phases.

The iPRISM webtool: an interactive tool to pragmatically guide the iterative use of the Practical, Robust Implementation and Sustainability Model in public health and clinical settings

BACKGROUND

To increase uptake of implementation science (IS) methods by researchers and implementers, many have called for ways to make it more accessible and intuitive. The purpose of this paper is to describe the iPRISM webtool (Iterative, Practical, Robust Implementation and Sustainability Model) and how this interactive tool operationalizes PRISM to assess and guide a program's (a) alignment with context, (b) progress on pragmatic outcomes, (c) potential adaptations, and (d) future sustainability across the stages of the implementation lifecycle.

METHODS

We used an iterative human-centered design process to develop the iPRISM webtool.

RESULTS

We conducted user-testing with 28 potential individual and team-based users who were English and Spanish speaking from diverse settings in various stages of implementing different types of programs. Users provided input on all aspects of the webtool including its purpose, content, assessment items, visual feedback displays, navigation, and potential application. Participants generally expressed interest in using the webtool and high likelihood of recommending it to others. The iPRISM webtool guides English and Spanish-speaking users through the process of iteratively applying PRISM across the lifecycle of a program to facilitate systematic assessment and alignment with context. The webtool summarizes assessment responses in graphical and tabular displays and then guides users to develop feasible and impactful adaptations and corresponding action plans. Equity considerations are integrated throughout.

CONCLUSIONS

The iPRISM webtool can intuitively guide individuals and teams from diverse settings through the process of using IS methods to iteratively assess and adapt different types of programs to align with the context across the implementation lifecycle. Future research and application will continue to develop and evaluate this IS resource.

Four very basic ways to think about policy in implementation science

BACKGROUND

Policy is receiving increasing attention in the field of implementation science. However, there remains a lack of clear, concise guidance about how policy can be conceptualized in implementation science research. Building on Curran's article "Implementation science made too simple"-which defines "the thing" as the intervention, practice, or innovation in need of implementation support-we offer a typology of four very basic ways to conceptualize policy in implementation science research. We provide examples of studies that have conceptualized policy in these different ways and connect aspects of the typology to established frameworks in the field. The typology simplifies and refines related typologies in the field. Four very basic ways to think about policy in implementation science research. 1) Policy as something to adopt: an evidence-supported policy proposal is conceptualized as "the thing" and the goal of research is to understand how policymaking processes can be modified to increase adoption, and thus reach, of the evidence-supported policy. Policy-focused dissemination research is well-suited to achieve this goal. 2) Policy as something to implement: a policy, evidence-supported or not, is conceptualized as "the thing" and the goal of research is to generate knowledge about how policy rollout (or policy de-implementation) can be optimized to maximize benefits for population health and health equity. Policy-focused implementation research is well-suited to achieve this goal. 3) Policy as context to understand: an evidence-supported intervention is "the thing" and policies are conceptualized as a fixed determinant of implementation outcomes. The goal of research is to understand the mechanisms through which policies affect implementation of the evidence-supported intervention. 4) Policy as strategy to use: an evidence-supported intervention is "the thing" and policy is conceptualized as a strategy to affect implementation outcomes. The goal of research is to understand, and ideally test, how policy strategies affect implementation outcomes related to the evidence-supported intervention.

CONCLUSION

Policy can be conceptualized in multiple, non-mutually exclusive ways in implementation science. Clear conceptualizations of these distinctions are important to advancing the field of policy-focused implementation science and promoting the integration of policy into the field more broadly.

Applying hybrid effectiveness-implementation studies in equity-centered policy implementation science

Policy implementation science (IS) is complex, dynamic, and fraught with unique study challenges that set it apart from biomedical or clinical research. One important consideration is the ways in which policy interacts with local contexts, such as power and social disadvantage (e.g., based on ability, race, class, sexual identity, geography). The complex nature of policy IS and the need for more intentional integration of equity principles into study approaches calls for creative adaptations to existing implementation science knowledge and guidance. Effectiveness-implementation hybrid studies were developed to enhance translation of clinical research by addressing research questions around the effectiveness of an intervention and its implementation in the same study. The original work on hybrid designs mainly focused on clinical experimental trials; however, over the last decade, researchers have applied it to a wide range of initiatives and contexts, including more widespread application in community-based studies. This perspectives article demonstrates how effectiveness-implementation hybrid studies can be adapted for and applied to equity-centered policy IS research. We draw upon principles of targeted universalism and Equity in Implementation Research frameworks to guide adaptations to hybrid study typologies, and suggest research and engagement activities to enhance equity considerations; for example, in the design and testing of implementing strategies. We also provide examples of equity-centered policy IS studies. As the field of policy IS rapidly evolves, these adapted hybrid type studies are offered to researchers as a starting guide.

Power Redistribution and Upending White Supremacy in Implementation Research and Practice in Community Mental Health

This Open Forum explores how implementation research and practice may sustain White supremacist ideas, perpetuate unequal power dynamics, and maintain mental health care inequities. The following questions were considered: What information is valued and considered evidence? and How do power differentials within implementation research and practice manifest? The implementation of evidence-based interventions within community mental health clinics is used as an example to explore these questions. Recommendations are provided to envision a future that centers collaboratively developed and community-led approaches to foster equity in mental health care.

A pilot study of experiencing racial microaggressions, obsessive-compulsive symptoms, and the role of psychological flexibility

BACKGROUND

Experiencing racial microaggressions has clear effects on physical and psychological health, including obsessive-compulsive disorder symptoms (OCS). More research is needed to examine this link. Psychological flexibility is an important process to examine in this work.

AIMS

This study aimed to examine if, while controlling for depression and anxiety, experiences of microaggressions and psychological flexibility helped explain OCD symptoms within a university-affiliated sample (undergraduate, graduate and law students). This was a pilot exploration of the relationships across themes.

METHOD

Initial baseline data from a longitudinal study of psychological flexibility, OCD symptoms, depression, anxiety and experience of microaggressions was utilized. Correlations and regressions were utilized to examine which OCD symptom dimensions were associated with experiencing racial microaggressions in addition to anxiety and depression, and the added role of psychological flexibility was examined.

RESULTS

OCD symptoms, experiences of microaggressions and psychological flexibility were correlated. Experiences of racial microaggressions explained responsibility for harm and contamination OCD symptoms above and beyond psychological distress. Exploratory results support the relevance of psychological flexibility.

CONCLUSION

Results support other work that experiences of racial microaggressions help explain OCS and they add some support for psychological flexibility as a relevant risk or protective factor for mental health in marginalized populations. These topics should be studied longitudinally with continued consideration of all OCD themes, larger sample sizes, intersecting identities, clinical samples, and continued exploration of psychological flexibility and mindfulness and values-based treatments.

Participatory logic modeling in a multi-site initiative to advance implementation science

BACKGROUND

Logic models map the short-term and long-term outcomes that are expected to occur with a program, and thus are an essential tool for evaluation. Funding agencies, especially in the United States (US), have encouraged the use of logic models among their grantees. They also use logic models to clarify expectations for their own funding initiatives. It is increasingly recognized that logic models should be developed through a participatory approach which allows input from those who carry out the program being evaluated. While there are many positive examples of participatory logic modeling, funders have generally not engaged grantees in developing the logic model associated with their own initiatives. This article describes an instance where a US funder of a multi-site initiative fully engaged the funded organizations in developing the initiative logic model. The focus of the case study is Implementation Science Centers in Cancer Control (ISC3), a multi-year initiative funded by the National Cancer Institute.

METHODS

The reflective case study was collectively constructed by representatives of the seven centers funded under ISC3. Members of the Cross-Center Evaluation (CCE) Work Group jointly articulated the process through which the logic model was developed and refined. Individual Work Group members contributed descriptions of how their respective centers reviewed and used the logic model. Cross-cutting themes and lessons emerged through CCE Work Group meetings and the writing process.

RESULTS

The initial logic model for ISC3 changed in significant ways as a result of the input of the funded groups. Authentic participation in the development of the logic model led to strong buy-in among the centers, as evidenced by their utilization. The centers shifted both their evaluation design and their programmatic strategy to better accommodate the expectations reflected in the initiative logic model.

CONCLUSIONS

The ISC3 case study demonstrates how participatory logic modeling can be mutually beneficial to funders, grantees and evaluators of multi-site initiatives. Funded groups have important insights about what is feasible and what will be required to achieve the initiative's stated objectives. They can also help identify the contextual factors that either inhibit or facilitate success, which can then be incorporated into both the logic model and the evaluation design. In addition, when grantees co-develop the logic model, they have a better understanding and appreciation of the funder's expectations and thus are better positioned to meet those expectations.

Structural Racism, Workforce Diversity, and Mental Health Disparities: A Critical Review

OBJECTIVE

Racial workforce diversity has been suggested as a critical pathway to address persistent racial mental health disparities. However, structural racism has been noted to diminish such workforce diversity efforts. The purpose of this critical review is to identify the mechanisms through which structural racism operates in organizations, including mental health organizations, to undermine workforce diversity efforts and reinforce inequities.

METHODS

Using the theories of racialized organizations, the current review critically draws on literature underscoring the racial character of organizations as mezzo-level racialized structures that may systematically activate and uphold white privilege in the mental health workplace.

RESULTS

Findings suggest that in the context of institutionalized white dominance, workers of color within mental health organizations may experience race-based cultural exclusion, identity threat, and racialized workplace emotional expression, and be burdened by racialized tasks. The workers of color may also become the means for organizations to attract communities of color due to their diverse characteristics, yet workers' effects to address disparities in mental health are minimized due to potential racialized organizational forces, including the whiteness of organizational leadership and color-blindness.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Structural racism may create resistance to the efforts and effects of a racially diverse workforce within mental health organizations. This review calls for a race-conscious framework that drastically shifts the traditional organizational structure to an inverted hierarchy (i.e., client-centered management) to maximize diversity efforts in the mental health organizational workforce to address racial disparities in mental health.

Community and partner engagement in dissemination and implementation research at the National Institutes of Health: an analysis of recently funded studies and opportunities to advance the field

BACKGROUND

As the focus has grown in recent years on both engaged research and dissemination and implementation (D&I) research, so too has federal funding to support these areas. The purpose of this analysis is to provide an overall perspective about the range of practices and approaches being used to engage partners in D&I research, with special attention to disparities-relevant research, and to identify gaps and opportunities in research funded by the US National Institutes of Health (NIH) in this space.

METHODS

This analysis examined a portfolio of active D&I research grants funded in fiscal years 2020 and 2021 across the NIH. Grant applications were deductively coded and summary statistics were calculated. Cross-tabulations were used to identify trends by engagement and disparities foci.

RESULTS

There were 103 grants included in the portfolio, of which 87% contained some form of community or partner engagement, and 50% of engaged grants were relevant to health disparities. Engagement was planned across the research continuum with each study engaging on average 2.5 different partner types. Consultation was the most common level of engagement (56%) while partnership was the least common (3%). On average, each study used 2.2 engagement strategies. Only 16% of grants indicated formally measuring engagement. Compared to non-disparities studies, disparities-relevant studies were about twice as likely to engage partners at the higher levels of partnership or collaboration (19% vs. 11%) and were also more likely to be conducted in community settings (26% vs. 5%).

CONCLUSIONS

Based on this portfolio analysis, D&I research appears to regularly integrate engagement approaches and strategies, though opportunities to deepen engagement and diversify who is engaged remain. This manuscript outlines several gaps in the portfolio and describes opportunities for increasing engagement to improve the quality of D&I research and application to advancing health equity. In addition, opportunities for leveraging the consistent and systematic application of engagement approaches and strategies to advance the science of engagement are discussed.

Pre-intervention child maltreatment risks, intervention engagement, and effects on child maltreatment risk within an RCT of MHealth and parenting intervention

Introduction

Evidence-based mental health and parenting support services for mothers postpartum can reduce risk for child maltreatment. However, women suffering economic and cultural stressors disproportionately shoulder the burden of infant caregiving while experiencing profound barriers to accessing mental health and parenting services. This article reports on an MHealth and parenting intervention targeting maternal mood and positive parent practices within a randomized controlled trial, which provided a unique opportunity to view pre-intervention child maltreatment risk, its relationship to subsequent intervention engagement, and intervention engagement effects on pre-post child maltreatment risk reduction.

Method

Principal component factor analysis was conducted to identify a modifiable pre-intervention child maltreatment risk construct within a combined MHealth and parenting intervention sample of 184 primarily Black mothers and their infants. An independent t-test was conducted to compare pre-intervention child maltreatment risk levels between mothers who went on to complete at least two-thirds of the intervention and those who did not. A GLM repeated measures analysis of variance was conducted to determine effects of intervention engagement on child maltreatment risk reduction.

Results

Pre-intervention child maltreatment risk did not differentiate subsequent maternal intervention completion patterns. Mothers who completed two-thirds of the intervention, compared to those who did not, demonstrated significant reductions in pre-post child maltreatment risk.

Discussion

Findings underscore the potential of MHealth parenting interventions to reduce substantial child maltreatment risk through service delivery addressing a range of positive parenting and behavioral health needs postpartum, a particularly vulnerable developmental period for maternal depression and child maltreatment risk.

A new measure for multi-professional medical team communication: design and methodology for multilingual measurement development

Background

As implementation science in global health continues to evolve, there is a need for valid and reliable measures that consider diverse linguistic and cultural contexts. A standardized, reproducible process for multilingual measure development may improve accessibility and validity by participants in global health settings. To address this need, we propose a rigorous methodology for multilingual measurement development. We use the example of a novel measure of multi-professional team communication quality, a determinant of implementation efforts.

Methods

The development and translation of this novel bilingual measure is comprised of seven steps. In this paper, we describe a measure developed in English and Spanish, however, this approach is not language specific. Participants are engaged throughout the process: first, an interprofessional panel of experts and second, through cognitive interviewing for measure refinement. The steps of measure development included: (1) literature review to identify previous measures of team communication; (2) development of an initial measure by the expert panel; (3) cognitive interviewing in a phased approach with the first language (English); (4): formal, forward-backward translation process with attention to colloquialisms and regional differences in languages; (5) cognitive interviewing repeated in the second language (Spanish); (6) language synthesis to refine both instruments and unify feedback; and (7) final review of the refined measure by the expert panel.

Results

A draft measure to assess quality of multi-professional team communication was developed in Spanish and English, consisting of 52 questions in 7 domains. This measure is now ready for psychometric testing.

Conclusions

This seven-step, rigorous process of multilingual measure development can be used in a variety of linguistic and resource settings. This method ensures development of valid and reliable tools to collect data from a wide range of participants, including those who have historically been excluded due to language barriers. Use of this method will increase both rigor and accessibility of measurement in implementation science and advance equity in research and practice.

Evidence-Based Quality Improvement (EBQI) in the pre-implementation phase: key steps and activities

Background

Evidence-Based Quality Improvement (EBQI) involves researchers and local partners working collaboratively to support the uptake of an evidence-based intervention (EBI). To date, EBQI has not been consistently included in community-engaged dissemination and implementation literature. The purpose of this paper is to illustrate the steps, activities, and outputs of EBQI in the pre-implementation phase.

Methods

The research team applied comparative case study methods to describe key steps, activities, and outputs of EBQI across seven projects. Our approach included: (1) specification of research questions, (2) selection of cases, (3) construction of a case codebook, (4) coding of cases using the codebook, and (5) comparison of cases.

Results

The cases selected included five distinct settings (e.g., correction facilities, community pharmacies), seven EBIs (e.g., nutrition promotion curriculum, cognitive processing therapy) and five unique lead authors. Case examples include both community-embedded and clinically-oriented projects. Key steps in the EBQI process included: (1) forming a local team of partners and experts, (2) prioritizing implementation determinants based on existing literature/data, (3) selecting strategies and/or adaptations in the context of key determinants, (4) specifying selected strategies/adaptations, and (5) refining strategies/adaptations. Examples of activities are included to illustrate how each step was achieved. Outputs included prioritized determinants, EBI adaptations, and implementation strategies.

Conclusions

A primary contribution of our comparative case study is the delineation of various steps and activities of EBQI, which may contribute to the replicability of the EBQI process across other implementation research projects.

A scoping review of outer context constructs in dissemination and implementation science theories, models, and frameworks

Many studies have explored organizational factors that facilitate implementation. However, there is still a limited understanding of determinants external to the implementing organization and their effects on evidence-based intervention (EBI) adoption, implementation, and outcomes. The purpose of this scoping review was to assess definitions of context and identify salient determinants of outer context found in dissemination and implementation theories, models, and frameworks. We employed a compilation of dissemination and implementation frameworks from two reviews as the data source. We abstracted the following information: type of article, outcomes of the framework, presence of a context definition, presence of any outer setting definition and the definition, number and domains of outer setting mentioned, definitions of outer context constructs, and any quantitative measures of outer setting. We identified 19 definitions of outer context. Forty-seven (49%) frameworks reported one or more specific constructs of the outer setting. While the outer context domains described in the frameworks varied, the most common domains were policy (n = 24), community (n = 20), partnerships (n = 13), and communications (n = 12). Based on our review of the frameworks, more conceptualization and measurement development for outer context domains are needed. Few measures were found and definitions of domains varied across frameworks. Expanding outer context construct definitions would advance measure development for important factors external to the organizations related to EBI implementation.

Protocol for a scoping review of health equity frameworks and models applied in empirical studies of chronic disease prevention and control

BACKGROUND

Chronic diseases, such as cancers and cardiovascular diseases, present the greatest burden of morbidity and mortality worldwide. This burden disproportionately affects historically marginalized populations. Health equity is rapidly gaining increased attention in public health, health services, and implementation research, though many health inequities persist. Health equity frameworks and models (FM) have been called upon to guide equity-focused chronic disease and implementation research. However, there is no clear synthesis of the health equity FM used in chronic disease research or how these are applied in empirical studies. This scoping review seeks to fill this gap by identifying and characterizing health equity FM applied in empirical studies along the chronic disease prevention and control continuum, describing how these FM are used, and exploring potential applications to the field of implementation science.

METHODS

We follow established guidance for conducting scoping reviews, which includes six stages: (1) identify the research question; (2) identify relevant studies; (3) select studies for inclusion; (4) data extraction; (5) collating, summarizing, and reporting the results; and (6) consultation. This protocol presents the iterative, collaborative approach taken to conceptualize this study and develop the search strategy. We describe the criteria for inclusion in this review, methods for conducting two phases of screening (title and abstract, full text), data extraction procedures, and quality assurance approaches taken throughout the project.

DISCUSSION

The findings from this review will inform health-equity focused chronic disease prevention and control research. FM identified through this review will be added to an existing website summarizing dissemination and implementation science frameworks, and we will offer case examples and recommendations for utilizing a health equity FM in empirical studies. Our search strategy and review methodology may serve as an example for scholars seeking to conduct reviews of health equity FM in other health disciplines.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

Open Science Framework Registration https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/SFVE6.

Principles to operationalize equity in cancer research and health outcomes: lessons learned from the cancer prevention and control research network

Reflecting their commitment to advancing health equity, the Cancer Prevention and Control Research Network (CPCRN) established a Health Equity Workgroup to identify and distill guiding principles rooted in health equity, community-engaged participatory research (CBPR), social determinants of health, and racial equity frameworks to guide its collective work. The Health Equity Workgroup utilized a multi-phase, participatory consensus-building approach to: (1) identify recurrent themes in health and racial equity frameworks; (2) capture perspectives on and experiences with health equity research among CPCRN members through an online survey; (3) engage in activities to discuss and refine the guiding principles; and (4) collect case examples of operationalizing equity principles in cancer research. Representatives from all CPCRN centers endorsed nine core principles to guide the Network's strategic plan: (1) Engage in power-sharing and capacity building with partners; (2) Address community priorities through community engagement and co-creation of research; (3) Explore and address the systems and structural root causes of cancer disparities; (4) Build a system of accountability between research and community partners; (5) Establish transparent relationships with community partners; (6) Prioritize the sustainability of research benefits for community partners; (7) Center racial equity in cancer prevention and control research; (8) Engage in equitable data collection, analysis, interpretation, and dissemination practices; and (9) Integrate knowledge translation, implementation, and dissemination into research plans. Dissemination products, such as toolkits and technical assistance workshops, reflecting these principles will foster knowledge transfer to intentionally integrate health and racial equity principles in cancer prevention and control research.

Opportunities to advance implementation science and nutrition research: a commentary on the Strategic Plan for NIH Nutrition Research

Despite population-wide recommendations by the U.S. Dietary Guidelines for Americans and others to encourage health-promoting dietary patterns, the proportion of Americans following dietary recommendations remains low. The gaps in the adoption and integration of evidence-based dietary interventions, practices, programs, and policies (EBIs) into community and clinical settings signal the need to strengthen efforts in implementation science (IS) in nutrition research to understand and alleviate barriers to adopting and sustaining healthy dietary behaviors and practices. Equally important is the translation of this research into practice in a variety of settings and across the diversity of populations. Recognizing this need, the U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH) 2020-2030 Strategic Plan for NIH Nutrition Research calls for the expansion of IS as a key opportunity to advancing nutrition research. This commentary highlights three scientific opportunities to stimulate IS in nutrition research and provides examples for each opportunity. These include: (a) Advance consideration of implementation and dissemination early in the design of interventions to facilitate opportunities for equitable scale-up and sustainability of EBIs, (b) Develop and test strategies for equitable implementation of nutrition and diet EBIs in health care and community settings, and (c) Build and strengthen the infrastructure, capacity, and expertise needed to increase use of IS in clinical and community nutrition research to swiftly move the research into practice. By advancing the three opportunities identified in this commentary, the scientific community has the potential to advance the field of nutrition research and IS with the ultimate goal of improving public health.

Study designs, measures and indexes used in studying the structural racism as a social determinant of health in high income countries from 2000-2022: evidence from a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Globally, structural racism has been well documented as an important social determinant of health (SODH) resulting in racial inequality related to health. Although studies on structural racism have increased over the years, the selection of appropriate designs, measures, and indexes of measurement that respond to SODH has not been comprehensively documented. Therefore, the lack of evidence seems to exist. This scoping review was conducted to map and summarize global evidence on the use of various designs, measures, and indexes of measurement when studying structural racism as a social determinant of health.

METHODS

We performed a scoping review of global evidence from 2000 to 2022 published in 5 databases: PubMed, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), PsycInfo, Web of Science, ProQuest, and relevant grey literature on structural racism. We conducted a systematic search using keywords and subject headings around 3 concepts. We included peer reviewed original research/review articles which conceived the framework of social determinants of health (SODH) and studied structural racism.

RESULTS

Our review identified 1793 bibliographic citations for screening and 54 articles for final review. Articles reported 19 types of study design, 87 measures of exposure and 58 measures of health outcomes related to structural racism. 73 indexes or scales of measurement were used to assess health impacts of structural racism. Majority of articles were primary research (n = 43/54 articles; 79.6%), used quantitative research method (n = 32/54 articles; 59.3%) and predominantly conducted in the United States (n = 46/54 articles; 85.2.6%). Cross-sectional study design was the most used design (n = 17/54 articles; 31.5%) followed by systematic review (n = 7/54 articles; 13.0%) and narrative review (n = 6/54 articles; 11.1%). Housing and residential segregation was the largest cluster of exposure with the highest impact in infant health outcome.

CONCLUSIONS

Our review found several key gaps and research priorities on structural racism such as lack of longitudinal studies and availability of structural or ecological data, lack of consensus on the use of consolidated appropriate measures, indexes of measurement and appropriate study designs that can capture complex interactions of exposure and outcomes related to structural racism holistically.

Determinants of Pre-exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP) Implementation in Transgender Populations: A Qualitative Scoping Review

We conducted a scoping review of contextual factors impeding uptake and adherence to pre-exposure prophylaxis in transgender communities as an in-depth analysis of the transgender population within a previously published systematic review. Using a machine learning screening process, title and abstract screening, and full-text review, the initial systematic review identified 353 articles for analysis. These articles were peer-reviewed, implementation-related studies of PrEP in the U.S. published after 2000. Twenty-two articles were identified in this search as transgender related. An additional eleven articles were identified through citations of these twenty-two articles, resulting in thirty-three articles in the current analysis. These thirty-three articles were qualitatively coded in NVivo using adapted constructs from the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research as individual codes. Codes were thematically assessed. We point to barriers of implementing PrEP, including lack of intentional dissemination efforts and patience assistance, structural factors, including sex work, racism, and access to gender affirming health care, and lack of provider training. Finally, over 60% of articles lumped cisgender men who have sex with men with trans women. Such articles included sub-samples of transgender individuals that were not representative. We point to areas of growth for the field in this regard.

Strategic Directions in Preventive Intervention Research to Advance Health Equity

As commissioned by the Society for Prevention Research, this paper describes and illustrates strategic approaches for reducing health inequities and advancing health equity when adopting an equity-focused approach for applying prevention science evidence-based theory, methodologies, and practices. We introduce an ecosystemic framework as a guide for analyzing, designing, and planning innovative equity-focused evidence-based preventive interventions designed to attain intended health equity outcomes. To advance this process, we introduce a health equity statement for conducting integrative analyses of ecosystemic framework pathways, by describing the role of social determinants, mechanisms, and interventions as factors directly linked to specific health equity outcomes. As background, we present health equity constructs, theories, and research evidence which can inform the design and development of equity-focused intervention approaches. We also describe multi-level interventions that when coordinated can produce synergistic intervention effects across macro, meso, and micro ecological levels. Under this approach, we encourage prevention and implementation scientists to apply and extend these strategic directions in future research to increase our evidence-based knowledge and theory building. A general goal is to apply prevention science knowledge to design, widely disseminate, and implement culturally grounded interventions that incrementally attain specific HE outcomes and an intended HE goal. We conclude with recommendations for conducting equity-focused prevention science research, interventions, and training.

The updated Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research based on user feedback

BACKGROUND

Many implementation efforts fail, even with highly developed plans for execution, because contextual factors can be powerful forces working against implementation in the real world. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) is one of the most commonly used determinant frameworks to assess these contextual factors; however, it has been over 10 years since publication and there is a need for updates. The purpose of this project was to elicit feedback from experienced CFIR users to inform updates to the framework.

METHODS

User feedback was obtained from two sources: (1) a literature review with a systematic search; and (2) a survey of authors who used the CFIR in a published study. Data were combined across both sources and reviewed to identify themes; a consensus approach was used to finalize all CFIR updates. The VA Ann Arbor Healthcare System IRB declared this study exempt from the requirements of 38 CFR 16 based on category 2.

RESULTS

The systematic search yielded 376 articles that contained the CFIR in the title and/or abstract and 334 unique authors with contact information; 59 articles included feedback on the CFIR. Forty percent (n = 134/334) of authors completed the survey. The CFIR received positive ratings on most framework sensibility items (e.g., applicability, usability), but respondents also provided recommendations for changes. Overall, updates to the CFIR include revisions to existing domains and constructs as well as the addition, removal, or relocation of constructs. These changes address important critiques of the CFIR, including better centering innovation recipients and adding determinants to equity in implementation.

CONCLUSION

The updates in the CFIR reflect feedback from a growing community of CFIR users. Although there are many updates, constructs can be mapped back to the original CFIR to ensure longitudinal consistency. We encourage users to continue critiquing the CFIR, facilitating the evolution of the framework as implementation science advances.

Behavioral Parent Training for Families With Young Deaf or Hard of Hearing Children Followed in Hearing Health Care

PURPOSE

It is well established that individuals with a communication disability, including being deaf or hard of hearing (DHH), experience inequities in health services and outcomes. These inequities extend to DHH children's access to psychosocial evidence-based interventions (EBIs). Behavioral parent training is an EBI that can be used to improve caregiver and child outcomes. Despite being supported by decades of effectiveness research, this EBI is rarely accessed by, or studied with, caregivers of DHH children. The purpose of this article is to describe a program of stakeholder-engaged research adapting and assessing behavioral parent training with caregivers of young DHH children followed in hearing health care, aimed at reducing inequities in access to this EBI.

METHOD

The first section briefly summarizes the literature on disruptive behavior problems in young children, with a focus on preschool-age DHH children. The evidence base for behavioral parent training is described. Next, the gaps in knowledge and practice regarding disruptive behaviors among DHH children are highlighted, and the potential integration of behavioral parent training into the standard of care for this population is proposed.

CONCLUSIONS

Young DHH children who use hearing aids and/or cochlear implants experience disruptive behavior problems at rates at least as high as typically hearing children, but their access to EBIs is limited, and behavioral parent training programs tailored to this population have not been rigorously tested. Caregivers and hearing health care service providers affirm the potential benefits of behavioral parent training and were partners in adapting this EBI. This research highlights several principles and approaches essential for reducing inequities and improving the quality of life not only for DHH children and their families but also for individuals with communication disabilities more broadly: engagement of key stakeholders in research, collaboration across disciplines, and using implementation science methods and models to design for implementation, dissemination, and sustainment. Presentation Video: https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.21215900.

Centering the contributions, perspectives, and experiences of Black school psychologists: Commentary on Proctor (2022)

This commentary offers a reflection on Proctor's (2022) contribution to the special issue. In particular, it focuses on three primary threads: (a) centering Black voices in school psychology's history; b) applying an anti-racist lens to recruitment and retention research and practices; and c) recognizing the role of historically Black colleges and universities (HBCUs) in advancing school psychology. Future directions for school psychology research and practice are discussed.

Implementation Science: Increasing the Public Health Impact of Audiology Research

PURPOSE

Implementation science aims to facilitate the use of evidence-based programs, practices, and policies in routine care settings. In audiology, as in other health disciplines, there is a persistent research-to-practice gap. Improving the adoption, reach, implementation, and sustainment of effective interventions in audiology would increase their public health impact, ensuring that all individuals needing hearing health care services could benefit from innovations and evidence-based best practices. This tutorial provides an introductory overview of implementation science relevant to the field of audiology, including Internet-based practices and interventions.

METHOD

Major concepts and themes of implementation science are presented, including implementation outcomes, implementation science frameworks, implementation strategies, current topics in implementation science, and study design considerations. Recent publications in audiology are highlighted to illustrate implementation science concepts and themes. The relevance of each topic to the use of evidence-based programs, practices, and policies in audiology is highlighted with reference to recent research in the field.

CONCLUSIONS

Challenges in the widespread delivery of evidence-based audiological practices and interventions limit their public health impact. The application of implementation science principles and methods in audiology research, as demonstrated in other areas of health research, can increase our focus on ensuring that effective practices are widely available, accessible, equitable, and sustainable to improve the lives of those who need them.

Research and Scholarly Methods: Implementation Science Studies

Traditional research focuses on efficacy or effectiveness of interventions but lacks evaluation of strategies needed for equitable uptake, scalable implementation, and sustainable evidence-based practice transformation. The purpose of this introductory review is to describe key implementation science (IS) concepts as they apply to medication management and pharmacy practice, and to provide guidance on literature review with an IS lens. There are five key ingredients of IS, including: (1) evidence-based intervention; (2) implementation strategies; (3) IS theory, model, or framework; (4) IS outcomes and measures; and (5) stakeholder engagement, which is key to a successful implementation. These key ingredients apply across the three stages of IS research: (1) pre-implementation; (2) implementation; and (3) sustainment. A case example using a combination of IS models, PRISM (Practical, Robust Implementation and Sustainability model) and RE-AIM (Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, Maintenance), is included to describe how an IS study is designed and conducted. This case is a cluster randomized trial comparing two clinical decision support tools to improve guideline-concordant prescribing for patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction. The review also includes information on the Standards for Reporting Implementation Studies (StaRI), which is used for literature review and reporting of IS studies,as well as IS-related learning resources.