Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37486174›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of physical and rehabilitation medicine2023

Measuring the determinants of implementation behavior in multiprofessional rehabilitation.

Maija Paukkunen, Leena Ala-Mursula, Birgitta Öberg, Jaro Karppinen, Tuulikki Sjögren, Heidi Riska, Riku Nikander, Allan Abbott

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of physical and rehabilitation medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

8 authors.

Maija PaukkunenInstitution for Health, Medicine and Caring Sciences, University of Linköping, Linköping, Sweden - maija.paukkunen@oulu.fi.
Leena Ala-MursulaResearch Unit of Population Health, University of Oulu, Oulu, Finland.
Birgitta ÖbergInstitution for Health, Medicine and Caring Sciences, University of Linköping, Linköping, Sweden.
Jaro KarppinenResearch Unit of Health Sciences and Technology, University of Oulu, Oulu, Finland.
Tuulikki SjögrenFaculty of Sport and Health Sciences, University of Jyväskylä, Jyväskylä, Finland.
Heidi RiskaFaculty of Sport and Health Sciences, University of Jyväskylä, Jyväskylä, Finland.
Riku NikanderFaculty of Sport and Health Sciences, University of Jyväskylä, Jyväskylä, Finland.
Allan AbbottInstitution for Health, Medicine and Caring Sciences, University of Linköping, Linköping, Sweden.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe Determinants of Implementation Behavior Questionnaire (DIBQ) measures facilitators or barriers of healthcare professionals' implementation behaviors based on the current implementation research on practice and policy. The DIBQ covers 18 domains of the Theoretical Domains Framework and consists of 93 items. A previously tailored version (DIBQ-t) covering 10 domains and 28 items focuses on implementing best-practice low back pain care.

aimTo tailor a shortened version of DIBQ to multiprofessional rehabilitation context with cross-cultural adaptation to Finnish language.

designA two-round Delphi study.

settingNational-level online survey. POPULATION: Purposively recruited experts in multiprofessional rehabilitation (N.=25).

methodsCross-cultural translation of DIBQ to Finnish was followed by a two-round Delphi survey involving diverse experts in rehabilitation (physicians, physiotherapists, occupational therapists, psychologists, nursing scientists, social scientists). In total, 25 experts in Round 1, and 21 in Round 2 evaluated the importance of DIBQ items in changing professionals' implementation behavior by rating on a 5-point Likert Scale (1 = Strongly Disagree, 5 = Strongly Agree) of including each item in the final scale. Consensus to include an item was defined as a mean score of ≥4 by ≥75% of Delphi participants. Open comments were analyzed using inductive content analysis. Items with agreement of ≤74% were either directly excluded or reconsidered and modified depending on qualitative judgements, amended with experts' suggestions. After completing an analogous second-round, a comparison with DIBQ-t was performed. Lastly, the relevance of each item was indexed using content validity index on item-level (I-CVI) and scale-level (S-CVI/Ave).

resultsAfter Round 1, 17 items were included and 48 excluded by consensus whereas 28 items were reconsidered, and 20 items added for Round 2. The open comments were categorized as: 1) "modifying"; 2) "supportive"; and 3) "critical". After Round 2, consensus was reached regarding all items, to include 21 items. After comparison with DIBQ-t, the final multiprofessional DIBQ (DIBQ-mp) covers 11 TDF domains and 21 items with I-CVIs of ≥0.78 and S-CVI/Ave of 0.93.

conclusionsA Delphi study condensed a DIBQ-mp with excellent content validity for multiprofessional rehabilitation context. CLINICAL REHABILITATION IMPACT: A potential tool for evaluating determinants in implementing evidence-based multiprofessional rehabilitation interventions.

Indexed as

Brain DiseasesHealth PersonnelAllied Health PersonnelDelphi TechniqueHumansLanguageSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID37486174
PMCPMC10548477

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.