Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25312005›Full record

Trial reportImplementation science : IS2014

Evaluation of two implementation strategies in 51 child county public service systems in two states: results of a cluster randomized head-to-head implementation trial.

C Hendricks Brown, Patricia Chamberlain, Lisa Saldana, Courtenay Padgett, Wei Wang, Gracelyn Cruden

Registry-linked trialAbstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Implementation science : IS, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT00880126 (Community Development Teams to Scale-Up MTFC in California), which is not on this map. Cited by 54 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
54citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT00880126 phase2 / phase3unknown statusnot on this map

Community Development Teams to Scale-Up MTFC in California

TypeinterventionalSponsorCenter for Research to PracticeRan2006 to 2011Enrolled350ConditionsBehavior ProblemsArmsCommunity Development Teams
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

54 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

C Hendricks BrownDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, 750 North Lake Shore Dr, 10th Floor, Chicago, IL, 60611, USA. hendricks.brown@northwestern.edu.
Patricia ChamberlainOregon Social Learning Center, 10 Shelton Mcmurphey Blvd, Eugene, OR, 97401, USA. pattic@oslc.org.
Lisa SaldanaOregon Social Learning Center, 10 Shelton Mcmurphey Blvd, Eugene, OR, 97401, USA. lisas@oslc.org.
Courtenay PadgettOregon Social Learning Center, 10 Shelton Mcmurphey Blvd, Eugene, OR, 97401, USA. courtp@oslc.org.
Wei WangUniversity of South Florida, 13201 Bruce B Downs MDC 56, Office 2130, Tampa, FL, 33612, USA. wwang@health.usf.edu.
Gracelyn CrudenDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, 750 North Lake Shore Dr, 10th Floor, Chicago, IL, 60611, USA. gracelyn.cruden@northwestern.edu.

Funding

INNOVATIVE IMPLEMENTATION RESEARCH METHODS COREP30DA027828 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI SCHOOL OF MEDICINE · PI BROWN, C. HENDRICKS · 2011 to 2020
$11.4M
Translational Drug Abuse Prevention CenterP50DA035763 · NIDA · OREGON SOCIAL LEARNING CENTER, INC. · PI CHAMBERLAIN, PATRICIA, FISHER, PHILIP A · 2013 to 2017
$9.5M
Center for Drug Abuse Prevention in the Child Welfare SystemP30DA023920 · NIDA · OREGON SOCIAL LEARNING CENTER, INC. · PI CHAMBERLAIN, PATRICIA · 2008 to 2012
$6.3M
Community Development Teams to Scale-Up MTFC in CaliforniaR01MH076158 · NIMH · CENTER FOR RESEARCH TO PRACTICE, INC. · PI CHAMBERLAIN, PATRICIA · 2006 to 2011
$5.7M
The Stages of Implementation Completion for Evidence-Based PracticeR01MH097748 · NIMH · OREGON SOCIAL LEARNING CENTER, INC. · PI SALDANA, LISA · 2013 to 2016
$2.0M
Integrating Interventions for Maternal Substance Abuse and Child Neglect K23DA021603 · NIDA · OSLC COMMUNITY PROGRAMS · PI SALDANA, LISA · 2007 to 2011
$848k
NIDA NIH HHS K23 DA021603NIDA NIH HHS P30 DA023920NIDA NIH HHS P30 DA027828NIDA NIH HHS P50 DA035763NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH076158NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH076158-05S1NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH097748NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH0977748
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMuch is to be learned about what implementation strategies are the most beneficial to communities attempting to adopt evidence-based practices. This paper presents outcomes from a randomized implementation trial of Multidimensional Treatment Foster Care (MTFC) in child public service systems in California and Ohio, including child welfare, juvenile justice, and mental health.

methodsFifty-one counties were assigned randomly to one of two different implementation strategies (Community Development Teams (CDT) or independent county implementation strategy (IND)) across four cohorts after being matched on county characteristics. We compared these two strategies on implementation process, quality, and milestone achievements using the Stages of Implementation Completion (SIC) (Implement Sci 6(1):1-8, 2011).

resultsA composite score for each county, combining the final implementation stage attained, the number of families served, and quality of implementation, was used as the primary outcome. No significant difference between CDT and IND was found for the composite measure. Additional analyses showed that there was no evidence that CDT increased the proportion of counties that started-up programs (i.e., placed at least one family in MTFC). For counties that did implement MTFC, those in the CDT condition served over twice as many youth during the study period as did IND. Of the counties that successfully achieved program start-up, those in the CDT condition completed the implementation process more thoroughly, as measured by the SIC. We found no significant differences by implementation condition on the time it took for first placement, achieving competency, or number of stages completed.

conclusionsThis trial did not lead to higher rates of implementation or faster implementation but did provide evidence for more robust implementation in the CDT condition compared to IND implementation once the first family received MTFC services. This trial was successful from a design perspective in that no counties dropped out, even though this study took place during an economic recession. We believe that this methodologic approach of measurement utilizing the SIC, which is comprised of the three dimensions of quality, quantity, and timing, is appropriate for a wide range of implementation and translational studies.

trial registrationTrial ID: NCT00880126 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Indexed as

CaliforniaChildChild WelfareClinical CompetenceCluster AnalysisCommunity Health ServicesDelivery of Health CareFoster Home CareHealth Plan ImplementationHumansOhioOutcome Assessment, Health CarePatient Care Team

Identifiers

PMID25312005
PMCPMC4201704

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.