Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25475025›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2014

Ethnographic process evaluation in primary care: explaining the complexity of implementation.

Arwen E Bunce, Rachel Gold, James V Davis, Carmit K McMullen, Victoria Jaworski, MaryBeth Mercer, Christine Nelson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed, 1 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

30 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Integrating stakeholder feedback in translational genomics research: an ethnographic analysis of a study protocol's evolution.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2020
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  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

7 authors.

Arwen E BunceKaiser Permanente Center for Health Research, 3800 N. Interstate Ave., Portland, OR, 97227, USA. Arwen.E.Bunce@kpchr.org.
Rachel GoldKaiser Permanente Center for Health Research, 3800 N. Interstate Ave., Portland, OR, 97227, USA. Rachel.Gold@kpchr.org.
James V DavisKaiser Permanente Center for Health Research, 3800 N. Interstate Ave., Portland, OR, 97227, USA. James.V.Davis@kpchr.org.
Carmit K McMullenKaiser Permanente Center for Health Research, 3800 N. Interstate Ave., Portland, OR, 97227, USA. Carmit.McMullen@kpchr.org.
Victoria JaworskiMultnomah County Health Department, 426 SW Stark St., Portland, OR, 97204, USA. victoria.c.jaworski@multco.us.
MaryBeth MercerVirginia Garcia Memorial Health Center, PO Box 568, Cornelius, OR, 97113, USA. mmercer@vgmhc.org.
Christine NelsonOCHIN, Inc., 1881 SW Naito Parkway, Portland, OR, 97201, USA. nelsonc@ochin.org.

Funding

Dissemination of CVD risk factor treatment among diabetic patients in FQHCsR18HL095481 · NHLBI · KAISER FOUNDATION RESEARCH INSTITUTE · PI GOLD, RACHEL · 2010 to 2014
$3.1M
NHLBI NIH HHS R18 HL095481NHLBI NIH HHS R18HL095481
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe recent growth of implementation research in care delivery systems has led to a renewed interest in methodological approaches that deliver not only intervention outcome data but also deep understanding of the complex dynamics underlying the implementation process. We suggest that an ethnographic approach to process evaluation, when informed by and integrated with quantitative data, can provide this nuanced insight into intervention outcomes. The specific methods used in such ethnographic process evaluations are rarely presented in detail; our objective is to stimulate a conversation around the successes and challenges of specific data collection methods in health care settings. We use the example of a translational clinical trial among 11 community clinics in Portland, OR that are implementing an evidence-based, health-information technology (HIT)-based intervention focused on patients with diabetes. DISCUSSION: Our ethnographic process evaluation employed weekly diaries by clinic-based study employees, observation, informal and formal interviews, document review, surveys, and group discussions to identify barriers and facilitators to implementation success, provide insight into the quantitative study outcomes, and uncover lessons potentially transferable to other implementation projects. These methods captured the depth and breadth of factors contributing to intervention uptake, while minimizing disruption to clinic work and supporting mid-stream shifts in implementation strategies. A major challenge is the amount of dedicated researcher time required. The deep understanding of the 'how' and 'why' behind intervention outcomes that can be gained through an ethnographic approach improves the credibility and transferability of study findings. We encourage others to share their own experiences with ethnography in implementation evaluation and health services research, and to consider adapting the methods and tools described here for their own research.

Indexed as

Anthropology, CulturalHealth Services ResearchPrimary Health CareProcess Assessment, Health CareHumansInterviews as TopicMedical InformaticsOutcome Assessment, Health CareQualitative ResearchSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID25475025
PMCPMC4265455

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.