Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29769096›Full record

ArticleImplementation science : IS2018

A methodology for generating a tailored implementation blueprint: an exemplar from a youth residential setting.

Cara C Lewis, Kelli Scott, Brigid R Marriott

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Implementation science : IS, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 77 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
77citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. COPD CARE Academy: Design of Purposeful Training Guided by Implementation Strategies.Federal practitioner : for the health care professionals of the VA, DoD, and PHS · 2025
    Article
  20. Article

17 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

3 authors.

Cara C LewisKaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, 1730 Minor Ave, Suite 1600, Seattle, WA, 98101, USA. lewis.cc@ghc.org.
Kelli ScottDepartment of Psychological and Brain Sciences, Indiana University, 1101 E. 10th St, Bloomington, IN, 47405, USA.
Brigid R MarriottDepartment of Psychological Sciences, University of Missouri, 315 Psychology Building, Columbia, MO, 65211, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTailored implementation approaches are touted as more likely to support the integration of evidence-based practices. However, to our knowledge, few methodologies for tailoring implementations exist. This manuscript will apply a model-driven, mixed methods approach to a needs assessment to identify the determinants of practice, and pilot a modified conjoint analysis method to generate an implementation blueprint using a case example of a cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) implementation in a youth residential center.

methodsOur proposed methodology contains five steps to address two goals: (1) identify the determinants of practice and (2) select and match implementation strategies to address the identified determinants (focusing on barriers). Participants in the case example included mental health therapists and operations staff in two programs of Wolverine Human Services. For step 1, the needs assessment, they completed surveys (clinician N = 10; operations staff N = 58; other N = 7) and participated in focus groups (clinician N = 15; operations staff N = 38) guided by the domains of the Framework for Diffusion [1]. For step 2, the research team conducted mixed methods analyses following the QUAN + QUAL structure for the purpose of convergence and expansion in a connecting process, revealing 76 unique barriers. Step 3 consisted of a modified conjoint analysis. For step 3a, agency administrators prioritized the identified barriers according to feasibility and importance. For step 3b, strategies were selected from a published compilation and rated for feasibility and likelihood of impacting CBT fidelity. For step 4, sociometric surveys informed implementation team member selection and a meeting was held to identify officers and clarify goals and responsibilities. For step 5, blueprints for each of pre-implementation, implementation, and sustainment phases were generated.

resultsForty-five unique strategies were prioritized across the 5 years and three phases representing all nine categories.

conclusionsOur novel methodology offers a relatively low burden collaborative approach to generating a plan for implementation that leverages advances in implementation science including measurement, models, strategy compilations, and methods from other fields.

Indexed as

Cognitive Behavioral TherapyEvidence-Based PracticeAdolescentChildCommunity Mental Health ServicesFocus GroupsHumansPrimary Health CareQualitative ResearchResearch ReportSurveys and QuestionnairesCommunity partnershipConjoint analysisMixed methodsTailored implementationYouth residential setting

Identifiers

PMID29769096
PMCPMC5956960

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.