ArticleImplementation science : IS2022
Comparing output from two methods of participatory design for developing implementation strategies: traditional contextual inquiry vs. rapid crowd sourcing.
Article in Implementation science : IS, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Results from a cluster-randomized, stepped-wedge trial testing a deliberative engagement intervention to increase guideline adherence among U.S. oral health providers.Scientific reports · 2025Trial
- Participatory approaches for tailoring implementation strategies in healthcare settings: a scoping review of contemporary literature (2019-2024).Implementation science communications · 2026Review
- Application of Innovation Tournament methodology to inform de-implementation strategies: lessons learned in addressing mammography overscreening in older women.Implementation science communications · 2026Article
- Article
- Crowdsourcing Ideas for the Implementation of Long-Acting Injectable PrEP among Sexual Minority Men in Chicago through an Innovation Tournament.Implementation science communications · 2025Article
- Co-designing strategies to implement long-acting injectable PrEP for sexual minority men in Chicago: a study protocol for an innovation tournament and implementation mapping.Implementation science communications · 2024Article
- Patient- and Team-Level Characteristics Associated with Handoff Protocol Fidelity in a Hybrid Implementation Study: Results from a Qualitative Comparative Analysis.Joint Commission journal on quality and patient safety · 2023Article
- Comparison of methods to engage diverse stakeholder populations in prioritizing PrEP implementation strategies for testing in resource-limited settings: a cross-sectional study.Implementation science communications · 2023Article
- Conceptual tensions and practical trade-offs in tailoring implementation interventions.Frontiers in health services · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundParticipatory design methods are a key component of designing tailored implementation strategies. These methods vary in the resources required to execute and analyze their outputs. No work to date has examined the extent to which the output obtained from different approaches to participatory design varies.
methodsWe concurrently used two separate participatory design methods: (1) field observations and qualitative interviews (i.e., traditional contextual inquiry) and (2) rapid crowd sourcing (an innovation tournament). Our goal was to generate and compare information to tailor implementation strategies to increase the use of evidence-based data collection practices among one-to-one aides working with children with autism. Each method was executed and analyzed by study team members blinded to the output of the other method. We estimated the personnel time and monetary costs associated with each method to further facilitate comparison.
resultsObservations and interviews generated nearly double the number of implementation strategies (n = 26) than did the innovation tournament (n = 14). When strategies were classified into implementation strategies from the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) taxonomy, there was considerable overlap in the content of identified strategies. However, strategies derived from observations and interviews were more specific than those from the innovation tournament. Five strategies (13%) reflected content unique to observations and interviews and 3 (8%) strategies were unique to the innovation tournament. Only observations and interviews identified implementation strategies related to adapting and tailoring to context; only the innovation tournament identified implementation strategies that used incentives. Observations and interviews required more than three times the personnel hours than the innovation tournament, but the innovation tournament was more costly overall due to the technological platform used.
conclusionsThere was substantial overlap in content derived from observations and interviews and the innovation tournament, although there was greater specificity in the findings from observations and interviews. However, the innovation tournament yielded unique information. To select the best participatory design approach to inform implementation strategy design for a particular context, researchers should carefully consider unique advantages of each method and weigh the resources available to invest in the process.
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.