Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37993840›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2023

Proactively tailoring implementation: the case of shared decision-making for lung cancer screening across the VA New England Healthcare Network.

Abigail N Herbst, Megan B McCullough, Renda Soylemez Wiener, Anna M Barker, Elizabeth M Maguire, Gemmae M Fix

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. 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

6 authors.

Abigail N HerbstCenter for Healthcare Organization & Implementation Research, VA Bedford Healthcare System, 200 Springs Road (152), Bedford, MA, 01730, USA.
Megan B McCulloughCenter for Healthcare Organization & Implementation Research, VA Bedford Healthcare System, 200 Springs Road (152), Bedford, MA, 01730, USA.
Renda Soylemez WienerCenter for Healthcare Organization & Implementation Research, VA Bedford Healthcare System, 200 Springs Road (152), Bedford, MA, 01730, USA.
Anna M BarkerCenter for Healthcare Organization & Implementation Research, VA Bedford Healthcare System, 200 Springs Road (152), Bedford, MA, 01730, USA.
Elizabeth M MaguireCenter for Healthcare Organization & Implementation Research, VA Bedford Healthcare System, 200 Springs Road (152), Bedford, MA, 01730, USA.
Gemmae M FixCenter for Healthcare Organization & Implementation Research, VA Bedford Healthcare System, 200 Springs Road (152), Bedford, MA, 01730, USA. Gemmae.Fix@va.gov.

Funding

The US Department of Veterans Affairs, Health Services Research & Development RVR 19-491
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundShared Decision-Making to discuss how the benefits and harms of lung cancer screening align with patient values is required by the US Centers for Medicare and Medicaid and recommended by multiple organizations. Barriers at organizational, clinician, clinical encounter, and patient levels prevent SDM from meeting quality standards in routine practice. We developed an implementation plan, using the socio-ecological model, for Shared Decision-Making for lung cancer screening for the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) New England Healthcare System. Because understanding the local context is critical to implementation success, we sought to proactively tailor our original implementation plan, to address barriers to achieving guideline-concordant lung cancer screening.

methodsWe conducted a formative evaluation using an ethnographic approach to proactively identify barriers to Shared Decision-Making and tailor our implementation plan. Data consisted of qualitative interviews with leadership and clinicians from seven VA New England medical centers, regional meeting notes, and Shared Decision-Making scripts and documents used by providers. Tailoring was guided by the Framework for Reporting Adaptations and Modifications to Evidence-based Implementation Strategies (FRAME-IS).

resultsWe tailored the original implementation plan to address barriers we identified at the organizational, clinician, clinical encounter, and patient levels. Overall, we removed two implementation strategies, added five strategies, and modified the content of two strategies. For example, at the clinician level, we learned that past personal and clinical experiences predisposed clinicians to focus on the benefits of lung cancer screening. To address this barrier, we modified the content of our original implementation strategy Make Training Dynamic to prompt providers to self-reflect about their screening beliefs and values, encouraging them to discuss both the benefits and potential harms of lung cancer screening.

conclusionsFormative evaluations can be used to proactively tailor implementation strategies to fit local contexts. We tailored our implementation plan to address unique barriers we identified, with the goal of improving implementation success. The FRAME-IS aided our team in thoughtfully addressing and modifying our original implementation plan. Others seeking to maximize the effectiveness of complex interventions may consider using a similar approach.

Indexed as

Early Detection of CancerLung NeoplasmsAgedDecision MakingDelivery of Health CareHumansMedicareNew EnglandUnited StatesEthnographic Research MethodsImplementation ModificationsImplementation ScienceLung Cancer ScreeningPatient-centered CareShared Decision-Making

Identifiers

PMID37993840
PMCPMC10664378

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.