Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37768486›Full record

ArticleAdministration and policy in mental health2024

The Connections Matter: Bi-Directional Learning in Program Evaluation and Practice-Oriented Research.

Susan Douglas, Andrew C Page, Christian Moltu, Michael Kyron, Tim Satterthwaite

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Administration and policy in mental health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

5 authors.

Susan DouglasDepartment of Leadership, Policy and Organizations, Vanderbilt University, Peabody College, 230 Appleton Place PMB #414, Nashville, TN, 37203-5721, USA. susan.douglas@vanderbilt.edu.ORCID 0000-0002-5239-4828
Andrew C PageSchool of Psychological Science and WA Mental Health Research Centre, University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-3133-2844
Christian MoltuDistrict General Hospital of Førde, Førde, Norway.ORCID 0000-0003-3269-6383
Michael KyronSchool of Psychological Science and WA Mental Health Research Centre, University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-4862-1047
Tim SatterthwaiteThe Wond'ry, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Intended for researchers and clinical leaders, this article suggests that embedded program evaluation is a good fit with the desired features of practice-oriented research. The systematic nature of evaluation that is built into the operational workflow of a practice setting may increase the diversity of methods available to explore processes and outcomes of interest. We propose a novel conceptual framework that uses a human-centered systems lens to foster such embedded evaluation in clinical routine. This approach emphasizes the evaluator-practitioner partnership to build confidence in the bi-directional learning of practice-based evidence with evidence-based practice. The iterative cycles inherent to design thinking are aimed at developing better evaluation questions. The attention to structure and context inherent to systems thinking is intended to support meaningful perspectives in the naturally complex world of health care. Importantly, the combined human-centered systems lens can create greater awareness of the influence of individual and systemic biases that exist in any endeavor or institution that involves people. Recommended tools and strategies include systems mapping, program theory development, and visual facilitation using a logic model to represent the complexity of mental health treatment for communication, shared understanding, and connection to the broader evidence base. To illustrate elements of the proposed conceptual framework, two case examples are drawn from routine outcome monitoring (ROM) and progress feedback. We conclude with questions for future collaboration and research that may strengthen the partnership of evaluators and practitioners as a community of learners in service of local and system-level improvement.

Indexed as

Evidence-Based PracticeProgram EvaluationHealth Services ResearchHumansLearningMental Health ServicesSystems TheoryEmbedded evaluationHuman-centered designPractice-oriented researchProgram evaluationProgress feedbackRoutine outcome monitoringSystems thinking

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.