Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33392509›Full record

ArticleImplementation research and practice

A Longitudinal Mixed Method Approach for Assessing Implementation Context and Process Factors: Comparison of Three Sites from a Housing First Implementation Strategy Pilot.

Dennis P Watson, Nyssa Snow-Hill, Lisa Saldana, Angela L Walden, Monte Staton, Angela Kong, Geri Donenberg

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Implementation research and practice. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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.

Dennis P WatsonLighthouse Institute, Chestnut Health Systems.ORCID 0000-0001-7208-5160
Nyssa Snow-HillCenter for Dissemination and Implementation Science, University of Illinois at Chicago.
Lisa SaldanaOregon Social Learning Center, Eugene, OR, USA.
Angela L WaldenDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Illinois at Chicago.
Monte StatonCenter for Dissemination and Implementation Science, University of Illinois at Chicago.
Angela KongDepartment of Pharmacy Systems, Outcomes, & Policy, University of Illinois at Chicago.
Geri DonenbergCenter for Dissemination and Implementation Science, University of Illinois at Chicago.

Funding

Facilitating Sustainment Through Implementation Feedback: The SIC Coaching ModelR01DA044745 · NIDA · OREGON SOCIAL LEARNING CENTER, INC. · PI SALDANA, LISA · 2018 to 2022
$3.8M
Indiana Clinical and Translational Sciences InstituteKL2TR001106 · NCATS · INDIANA UNIVERSITY INDIANAPOLIS · PI DENNE, SCOTT C., SHEKHAR, ANANTHA · 2013 to 2017
$3.2M
Pilot Testing of an E-Learning Strategy for Housing First ImplementationR34DA036001 · NIDA · INDIANA UNIVERSITY INDIANAPOLIS · PI WATSON, DENNIS PAUL · 2014 to 2016
$633k
NCATS NIH HHS KL2 TR001106NIDA NIH HHS R01 DA044745NIDA NIH HHS R34 DA036001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundImplementation science's focus on establishing implementation strategy effectiveness has overshadowed the need to understand differential performance of such strategies under various conditions. Methods allowing for assessment between implementation context and process can help address this gap. This paper provides a detailed description of a mixed method procedure for assessing factors related to the implementation context and process intersection, which was developed as part of the pilot study of the Housing First Technical Assistance and Training (HFTAT) Program, a multifaceted strategy designed to support Housing First model implementation.

methodsThe HFTAT was pilot tested among a sample of three organizations. Our mixed method approach combines two tools often used in implementation research-the Stages of Implementation Completion and the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research-in a novel way. Several stages to analysis were completed, starting with a separate analysis of data pertaining to each measure and then two levels of mixed method analysis.

resultsThe approach provided a better understanding of the issues that impacted the implementation guided by the HFTAT, suggesting: (1) individual determinants seemed to have a bigger impact based on the number of SIC phases they affected, (2) implementation context and process were connected through climate-related factors in the inner setting that made the sites more or less responsive to addressing identified barriers, and (3) there is a need to better assess context factors to identify areas where implementation drivers should be better targeted to facilitate change, and this is supported by prior research.

conclusionsUnderstanding the underlying factors impacting a setting's performance related to a specific implementation strategy has potential to improve decision-making and optimize future implementation efforts. The approach likely be as successful combining the SIC with other determinant frameworks and should be utilized at the onset of an implementation project to maximize its usefulness.

Indexed as

Housing Firstimplementation contextimplementation processImplementation strategylongitudinal analysismixed methodsstages of implementation

Identifiers

PMID33392509
PMCPMC7774649

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.