ArticlePrevention science : the official journal of the Society for Prevention Research2020
Developing a Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis Tool to Support the Adoption of Evidence-Based Child Maltreatment Prevention Programs.
Article in Prevention science : the official journal of the Society for Prevention Research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06375551 (Refining and Pilot Testing a Decision Support Intervention to Facilitate Adoption of Evidence-Based Programs to Improve Parent and Child Mental Health), which is not on this map. Cited by 9 papers.
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.
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.
Refining and Pilot Testing a Decision Support Intervention to Facilitate Adoption of Evidence-Based Programs to Improve Parent and Child Mental Health
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Development and usability testing of a tool to estimate the budget impact of implementing a smoking cessation intervention for cancer patients.Cancer causes & control : CCC · 2025Article
- Leveraging group model building to operationalize implementation strategies across implementation phases: an exemplar related to child maltreatment intervention selection.Implementation science communications · 2024Article
- Operational and organizational variation in determinants of policy implementation success: the case of policies that earmark taxes for behavioral health services.Implementation science : IS · 2024Article
- Human factors methods in the design of digital decision support systems for population health: a scoping review.BMC public health · 2024Article
- Revisiting the policy ecology framework for implementation of evidence-based practices in mental health settings.Implementation science : IS · 2023Review
- Who's "in the room where it happens"? A taxonomy and five-step methodology for identifying and characterizing policy actors.Implementation science communications · 2023Article
- The relative value of Pre-Implementation stages for successful implementation of evidence-informed programs.Implementation science : IS · 2023Article
- Using decision analysis to support implementation planning in research and practice.Implementation science communications · 2022Article
- Integrating Decision Science and Implementation Science to Inform Policy Decision Making.MDM policy & practiceReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Decision-makers need to consider a range of factors when selecting evidence-based programs (EBPs) for implementation, which can be especially challenging when addressing complex issues such as child maltreatment prevention. Multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) frameworks and tools are useful for evaluating such complex decisions. We describe the development and testing of the first MCDA tool to compare EBPs for child neglect prevention. To develop the tool, we engaged stakeholders (n = 8) to define the problem and identify 13 criteria and associated weights. In a pilot study, we tested the MCDA tool with decision-makers (n = 11) who were asked to rank three evidence-based child neglect prevention interventions both with and without the tool. The MCDA's weighted sum intervention ranking differed from the ranking without the tool in the majority of the sample (55%). Decision-makers provided guidance on criteria that should be clarified or added, resulting in 16 criteria in an iterated tool. The most frequent criterion suggestions related to community acceptance of the intervention, health equity, implementation supports, and sustainability. Decision-maker feedback guided user interface refinements. The MCDA tool was generally well accepted by decision-makers due to their trust in the stakeholder engagement process. More research is needed to understand the acceptability of MCDA approaches in additional contexts and whether EBPs adopted with decision support have different population health impacts compared with EBPs adopted without support. MCDA tools could facilitate evidence-based responses to federal policy and funding opportunities such as the Families First Preventive Services Act.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.