Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38031194›Full record

ArticleImplementation science communications2023

Assessing the fidelity of a behavioural intervention involving academic detailing in general practice: a sub-study of the 'Implementing work-related Mental health guidelines in general PRacticE' (IMPRovE) trial.

Vera Camões-Costa, Samantha Chakraborty, Fatima Mozaffari, Alexander Collie, Justin Kenardy, Bianca Brijnath, Duncan Mortimer, Joanne Enticott, Michael Kidd, Lyndal Trevena and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Implementation science communications, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

12 authors.

Vera Camões-Costa *Department of General Practice, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia. vera.costa@monash.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0305-0575
Samantha Chakraborty *Department of General Practice, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.
Fatima MozaffariDepartment of General Practice, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.
Alexander CollieHealthy Working Lives Research Group, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Melbourne, Australia.
Justin KenardyUniversity of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.
Bianca BrijnathNational Ageing Research Institute, Parkville, Australia.
Duncan MortimerCentre for Health Economics, Monash Business School, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.
Joanne EnticottMonash Centre for Health Research and Implementation, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.
Michael KiddCollege of Health and Medicine, Australian National University, Canberra, Australia.
Lyndal TrevenaFaculty of Medicine and Health, School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Camperdown, Australia.
Sharon ReidSpecialty of Addiction Medicine, Central Clinical School, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Camperdown, Australia.
Danielle MazzaDepartment of General Practice, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAssessing the fidelity of intervention components enables researchers to make informed judgements about the influence of those components on the observed outcome. The 'Implementing work-related Mental health guidelines in general PRacticE' (IMPRovE) trial is a hybrid III trial aiming to increase adherence to the 'Clinical Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of work-related mental health conditions in general practice'. IMPRovE is a multifaceted intervention, with one of the central components being academic detailing (AD). This study describes the fidelity to the protocol for the AD component of the IMPRovE intervention.

methodAll AD sessions for the trial were audio-recorded and a sample of 22% were randomly selected for fidelity assessment. Fidelity was assessed using a tailored proforma based on the Modified Conceptual Framework for fidelity assessment, measuring duration, coverage, frequency and content. A descriptive analysis was used to quantify fidelity to the protocol and a content analysis was used to elucidate qualitative aspects of fidelity.

resultsA total of eight AD sessions were included in the fidelity assessment. The average fidelity score was 89.2%, ranging from 80 to 100% across the eight sessions. The sessions were on average 47 min long and addressed all of the ten chapters in the guideline. Of the guideline chapters, 9 were frequently discussed. The least frequently discussed chapter related to management of comorbid conditions. Most general practitioner (GP) participants used the AD sessions to discuss challenges with managing secondary mental conditions. In line with the protocol, opinion leaders who delivered the AD sessions largely offered evidence-based strategies aligning with the clinical guideline recommendations. CONCLUSIONS/IMPLICATIONS: The IMPRovE AD intervention component was delivered to high fidelity. The sessions adhered to the intended duration, coverage, frequency, and content allowing participating GPs to comprehend the implementation of the guideline in their own practice. This study also demonstrates that the Modified Conceptual Fidelity Framework with a mixed methods approach can support the assessment of implementation fidelity of a behavioural intervention in general practice. The findings enhance the trustworthiness of reported outcomes from IMPRovE and show that assessing fidelity is amenable for AD and should be incorporated in other studies using AD.

trial registrationAustralian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN 12620001163998, November 2020.

Indexed as

Academic detailingAssessmentConceptual frameworkGeneral practiceImplementation fidelity

Identifiers

PMID38031194
PMCPMC10687810

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.